Bill On Ohio Governor’s Desk Will Put Hemp Companies Out Of Business, Owners Say

Ohioans in the intoxicating hemp industry fear a bill heading to Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine’s (R) desk will put them out of business.

Ohio Senate Bill 56 is on its way to DeWine after Ohio Senate Republicans passed the bill Tuesday. The Ohio House passed the bill last month after it went to conference committee.

Ohio’s bill complies with recent federal changes by banning intoxicating hemp products from being sold outside of a licensed marijuana dispensary. If DeWine signs the bill into law before the new year, the ban could take effect as soon as March.

“This bill is going to put businesses like me and families like me out of business,” said Ahmad Khalil, one of the owners of Hippie Hut Smoke Shop, with locations in Ohio and Washington.

“Overnight, we’re going to see tens of thousands of people directly impacted, which will ripple effect into 50,000 of families that are also dependent on this person.”

Khalil has been in the hemp industry for nine years.

“This was my American dream, so to see it get taken away from you, kind of hurts,” he said.

Jason Friedman, owner of Ohio CBD Guy in Cincinnati, said this is extremely frustrating.

“My tentative plan will involve eventually closing my East Walnut Hills location resulting in less hours and likely loss of jobs for some of my employees,” he said.

Instead of a ban, Friedman wants regulations for the hemp industry such as age-gating, packaging restrictions, and testing requirements.

“For the state to say that they are changing their stance to banning from regulating because of what the federal government has done in banning intoxicating hemp in the recent spending bill, makes no sense because marijuana has been illegal federally the whole time,” he said.

Mark Fashian, president of hemp product wholesaler Midwest Analytical Solutions in Delaware, Ohio, said this will put him, and hundreds of others out of business, if this becomes law.

He works with more than 500 stores around Ohio that sell intoxicating hemp products.

Keep reading

Government Unchained: The Year The Constitution Lost Its Guardrails

“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”—Abraham Lincoln

We now live in a nation where constitutional rights exist in theory, not in practice.

Yet what good are rights on paper when every branch of government is allowed to ignore, circumvent, chip away at or hollow them out in practice?

Two hundred and thirty-four years after the ratification of the Bill of Rights on December 15, 1791, the safeguards meant to shield “We the people” from government abuse are barely recognizable.

In ways the Founders could scarcely have imagined—and would never have tolerated—the safeguards meant to restrain government overreach have become little more than empty platitudes.

America’s founders understood that power corrupts and absolute power—especially when it comes to power-hungry governments fixated on amassing institutional power at the expense of individual freedoms—corrupts absolutely. That’s why they insisted on binding down the government “with the chains of the Constitution.”

In 2025, those chains have been cut link by link.

These links were not severed in secret. They snapped under the weight of executive orders issued without congressional authority, judicial doctrines that shield misconduct from accountability, and a Congress that no longer defends its own constitutional prerogatives.

If Americans are finally learning the true significance of constitutional limits, it is because the government keeps violating them—and daring anyone to stop it. Time and again, the message is being drummed into our heads that constitutional limits no longer apply when they inconvenience those in power.

Any government that treats rights as privileges—contingent on economic status, citizenship, race, orientation, religious beliefs, or political alignment—has already abandoned the Bill of Rights.

And a government that does so with the courts’ blessing is not a constitutional republic.

When rights become privileges, what we are left with is a two-tier system of freedom: those afforded the privilege of enjoying their constitutional rights vs. those targeted for exercising those same rights.

The Bill of Rights was intended as a bulwark. Each amendment was drafted as a barrier against a specific form of tyranny.

In 2025, every one of those barriers buckled under the weight of government corruption, political expediency, partisan politics, and institutional neglect.

The following is what it looked like to live without the protections of the Bill of Rights in the American police state.

Keep reading

Criminalizing Bible Verses? Canadian Lawmakers Target Religious Expression With Proposed ‘Hate Speech’ Amendment

In a move that should alarm anyone who is pro-free speech, members of Canada’s Liberal Party have capitulated to pressure from Quebec’s ultra-secular separatist party by voting to strip away a longstanding religious exemption from the country’s hate-speech laws as part of the draconian Bill C-9, also known as the so-called Combating Hate Act.

Canada’s Criminal Code has long shielded good-faith religious expression with a clear exemption that speech is not hate propaganda “if, in good faith, the person expressed or attempted to establish by an argument an opinion on a religious subject or an opinion based on a belief in a religious text.”

On Tuesday evening, that protection was casually deleted at the Bloc Québécois insistence.

CBC has the details on what happened next:

Progress appeared to stall after an initial committee meeting to go over the bill was abruptly cancelled last week. Three sources speaking to CBC News said the bill was held up because Justice Minister Sean Fraser’s office brokered the deal with the Bloc without getting buy-in from the Prime Minister’s Office. Tuesday’s meeting was scheduled last-minute after last week’s cancellation. The Bloc has long sought to remove the religious exemption, saying religion could be used as a cover for promoting hate, such as homophobia and antisemitism. Blanchet said his party would not support the bill without the amendment.

Conservatives immediately sounded the alarm. Canadian Opposition Leader Pierre Poilievre warned on X that the amendment would “criminalize sections of the Bible, Qur’an, Torah and other sacred texts.”

Keep reading

Canada spent nearly $1M killing ostriches, but full cost remains hidden

The federal government has now admitted that the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and the RCMP spent over $900,000 on the agency’s mission to slaughter more than 300 healthy ostriches at Universal Ostrich Farms in Edgewood, B.C.

The numbers were revealed through an order paper question filed by Conservative MP Scott Anderson after months of stonewalling from Ottawa.

Despite Anderson pointedly requesting a complete accounting of all federal dollars spent, the amount the CFIA and RCMP did disclose is merely a glimpse into what was likely millions of tax dollars spent on lengthy court battles to avoid testing the birds to prove their health, and a nearly 50-day occupation of the farm with RCMP deployed at full force.

Nevertheless, for the farmers whose livelihoods and the healthy prehistoric creatures that were wiped out in the kill mission, the totals that have been revealed only add salt to the wounds.

The CFIA alone admits to $444,000, including $9,000 on feed that the farmers would have been happy to provide had they not been barred from caring for their birds weeks before the “cull.”

More than $72,000 was spent on portable toilets and hand-wash stations, and over $32,000 on unspecified “specialized equipment.”

It also paid $100,000 for private security at three of its offices.

Keep reading

House Lawmakers Unite in Moral Panic, Advancing 18 “Kids’ Online Safety” Bills That Expand Surveillance and Weaken Privacy

The House Energy & Commerce Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade spent its latest markup hearing on Thursday proving that if there’s one bipartisan passion left in Washington, it’s moral panic about the internet.

Eighteen separate bills on “kids’ online safety” were debated, amended, and then promptly advanced to the full committee. Not one was stopped.

Ranking Member Jan Schakowsky (D) set the tone early, describing the bills as “terribly inadequate” and announcing she was “furious.”

She complained that the package “leaves out the big issues that we are fighting for.” If it’s not clear, Schakowsky is complaining that the already-controversial bills don’t go far enough.

Eighteen bills now move forward, eight of which hinge on some form of age verification, which would likely require showing a government ID. Three: App Store Accountability (H.R. 3149), the SCREEN Act (H.R. 1623), and the Parents Over Platforms Act (H.R. 6333), would require it outright.

The other five rely on what lawmakers call the “actual knowledge” or “willful disregard” standards, which sound like legalese but function as a dare to platforms: either know everyone’s age, or risk a lawsuit.

The safest corporate response, of course, would be to treat everyone as a child until they’ve shown ID.

Keep reading

Missouri State Highway Patrol trooper in Troop G charged with rape

A Missouri State Highway Patrol trooper in Howell County is accused of raping a woman.

Ethan Minge pleaded not guilty to a second-degree rape charge. Minge serves Troop G based in Willow Springs.

Investigators say a woman claimed Minge went to her home in West Plains in July and pushed her on her back and had sex with her even after she told him no. Investigators say the victim claimed Minge apologized the next day. Investigators say she reported it months later.

Lieutenant Eric Brown with the Highway Patrol’s public information division sent KY3 a statement that reads, in part, “We are aware of the arrest of Trooper Minge. Trooper Minge is on administrative leave with no pay.”

Minge is scheduled to be in court later this month.

Keep reading

Duluth Police Officer Who Previously Shot an Unarmed Man, Accused of Sexually Assaulting Two Women

A Duluth police officer who the city once tried to fire for shooting an unarmed man through a door is now under investigation for sexually assaulting two women, authorities confirmed on Wednesday.

The St. Louis County Attorney’s Office earlier this year declined to file criminal charges against 33-year-old Tyler Leibfried, but the Duluth Police Department is continuing an internal investigation that could potentially result in discipline for any violations of city and department policies.

“We take allegations against our officers very seriously and investigate each complaint thoroughly,” Chief Mike Ceynowa said in a news release.

Redacted investigative documents released by the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension reveal that a woman first reported an alleged assault by Leibfried to Duluth police on Dec. 20, 2024. The agency then turned the case over to the BCA to investigate. A second woman later reported an incident that allegedly occurred several years earlier.

Leibfried was taken off duty as of Dec. 23, 2024, and remains on paid leave pending a resolution of the internal process.

Leibfried Accused of Sexually Assaulting an Intoxicated Woman Who Claims She ‘Blacked Out’ and Did Not Give Consent

The alleged victim, according to the documents obtained by the Duluth News Tribune, stated that she and Leibfried were among a group that had been drinking at two bars on the night of Nov. 21, 2024. She reported the officer had been buying the majority of the drinks, and a witness indicated he appeared to be trying to engage her in conversation.

Eventually, Leibfried and the woman, who was in a relationship, kissed outside a Lincoln Park bar and ended up in his truck, where they engaged in sexual intercourse.

The alleged victim reportedly told investigators she was “extremely intoxicated” and that she “blacked out” before she “came to” in the truck. She had no recollection of consenting to the act and said she did not believe she would have. Leibfried, however, maintained it was a consensual encounter.

Keep reading

Vatican Accepts Resignation of Jailed Bishop, Raising Questions About Religious Freedom in China

The Vatican replaced detained underground Bishop Joseph Zhang Weizhu in the Apostolic Prefecture of Xinxiang with Bishop Francis Li Jianlin in a December 5 ceremony, drawing praise from the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) but serious concern from China’s underground Catholic community.

Zhang, secretly ordained in 1991 with Vatican approval but never recognized by Beijing, has been detained since May 2021 and his whereabouts remain unknown. He was arrested just after recovering from cancer surgery, along with priests and seminarians, for allegedly violating regulations requiring clergy to register with the state. Chinese authorities barred him from attending his successor’s ordination.

China officially recognizes only five religions: Buddhism, Catholicism, Islam, Protestantism, and Taoism. These groups operate under state-sanctioned patriotic religious associations supervised by the United Front Work Department (UFWD), the CCP’s propaganda and influence arm. In 2018, the State Administration for Religious Affairs was absorbed into the UFWD, bringing all religious affairs under direct Party control.

The constitution protects only “normal religious activities,” without defining what “normal” means, and forbids religion from disrupting public order, impairing citizens’ health, or interfering with education. Clergy must support CCP leadership and adhere to the Sinicization of religion. Religious activity is restricted to approved premises, and the state maintains control over clergy appointments, publications, finances, and seminary enrollment. Minors are forbidden from entering places of worship, and pastors and imams have been instructed to emphasize socialist values in their teachings.

Under the Sinicization campaign, the Three-Self Patriotic Movement and the Chinese Christian Council drafted a five-year plan to retranslate the Old Testament and provide new commentary on the New Testament to align scripture with socialist ideology. A 2020 university textbook even rewrote the Gospel account of the woman caught in adultery, replacing Jesus’ mercy with a fabricated story in which he stones the woman and declares, “I am also a sinner.”

Across Henan province, officials forced Protestant churches to replace the Ten Commandments with Xi Jinping quotes. Authorities have ordered the removal of crosses and replaced images of Christ and the Virgin Mary with portraits of Xi. These campaigns censor religious texts, compel clergy to preach CCP ideology, and mandate the display of political slogans.

Keep reading

North Carolina Woman’s Lawsuit Gives SCOTUS a Chance to Establish National Reciprocity

In January 2021, Eva Marie Gardner was driving in Montgomery County, Maryland when her car was allegedly hit by an assailant who ran her off the road before exiting his vehicle and rushing towards her. Gardner says she first screamed at him to get away, but when he continued advancing she drew her pistol in self-defense, though she never fired a shot. 

When police arrived on scene, they ended up releasing the man who allegedly ran her off the road, but arrested Gardner for illegal possession of a firearm. Gardner, who now lives in North Carolina, had a valid concealed carry permit from Virginia, but Maryland doesn’t recognize carry permits from any other state and she was ultimately convicted despite raising a Second Amendment claim. 

Gardner appealed all the way to the Maryland Supreme Court without success, and in mid-October she took her case to the Supreme Court, filing a cert petition on her own behalf that asks the Court to decide several questions, including whether “Maryland’s prohibition on carrying a handgun without a state permit, as applied to an interstate traveler with a valid Virginia concealed carry permit who displayed a loaded firearm in self-defense against an assailant’s vehicular assault and physical advance, violate the Second Amendment under New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, by lacking a historical tradition of disarming law-abiding citizens in such circumstances.”

Gardner also brings a claim under the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, arguing that Maryland’s refusal to recognize out-of-state permits violates the Constitution and conflicts with the Firearms Owners Protection Act.

Ordinarily, a pro se petition has little chance of being granted cert by the Supreme Court, with one study finding just 84 cases since 1945. The good news for Gardner is that at least one justice has taken an interest in the case. After Maryland waived its right to respond to her cert petition, the Court requested the state provide one, and Maryland’s reply brief is now due on January 26, 2026. 

Second Amendment Foundation Director of Legal Research and Education Kostas Moros has discovered another new detail that could up the odds of SCOTUS hearing Gardner’s case next year. 

Keep reading

Berlin Approves New Expansion of Police Surveillance Powers

Berlin’s regional parliament has passed a far-reaching overhaul of its “security” law, giving police new authority to conduct both digital and physical surveillance.

The CDU-SPD coalition, supported by AfD votes, approved the reform of the General Security and Public Order Act (ASOG), changing the limits that once protected Berliners from intrusive policing.

Interior Senator Iris Spranger (SPD) argued that the legislation modernizes police work for an era of encrypted communication, terrorism, and cybercrime. But it undermines core civil liberties and reshapes the relationship between citizens and the state.

One of the most controversial elements is the expansion of police powers under paragraphs 26a and 26b. These allow investigators to hack into computers and smartphones under the banner of “source telecommunications surveillance” and “online searches.”

Police may now install state-developed spyware, known as trojans, on personal devices to intercept messages before or after encryption.

If the software cannot be deployed remotely, the law authorizes officers to secretly enter a person’s home to gain access.

This enables police to install surveillance programs directly on hardware without the occupant’s knowledge. Berlin had previously resisted such practices, but now joins other federal states that permit physical entry to install digital monitoring tools.

Keep reading