46 landmark Case's Supreme Court of the United States That Changed American Life

Costs of the 20-year war on terror: $8 trillion and 900,000 deaths

Show more

A report from the Costs of War project at Brown University revealed that 20 years of post-9/11 wars have cost the U.S. an estimated $8 trillion and have killed more than 900,000 people.

PROVIDENCE, R.I. [Brown University] — Nearly 20 years after the United States’ invasion of Afghanistan, the cost of its global war on terror stands at $8 trillion and 900,000 deaths, according to a new report from the Costs of War project at Brown University.

The Costs of War project, founded more than a decade ago at the Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs and co-directed by two Brown scholars, released its influential annual report ahead of the 20th anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks in New York City, Washington, D.C., and Pennsylvania, the impetus for an ongoing American effort to root out terrorism in the Middle East and beyond.

Stephanie Savell, Catherine Lutz and Neta CrawfordThe Costs of War project is co-directed by Stephanie Savell (left), Catherine Lutz (center) and Neta Crawford (right).

“The war has been long and complex and horrific and unsuccessful... and the war continues in over 80 countries,” said Catherine Lutz, co-director of Costs of War and a professor of international and public affairs at Brown, during a virtual event hosted by the Watson Institute on Wednesday, Sept. 1. “The Pentagon and the U.S. military have now absorbed the great majority of the federal discretionary budget, and most people don’t know that. Our task, now and in future years, is to educate the public on the ways in which we fund those wars and the scale of that funding.”

The research team’s $8 trillion estimate accounts for all direct costs of the country’s post-9/11 wars, including Department of Defense Overseas Contingency Operations funding; State Department war expenditures and counterterror war-related costs, including war-related increases to the Pentagon’s base budget; care for veterans to date and in the future; Department of Homeland Security spending; and interest payments on borrowing for these wars. The total includes funds that the Biden administration requested in May 2021.

The death toll, standing at an estimated 897,000 to 929,000, includes U.S. military members, allied fighters, opposition fighters, civilians, journalists and humanitarian aid workers who were killed as a direct result of war, whether by bombs, bullets or fire. It does not, the researchers noted, include the many indirect deaths the war on terror has caused by way of disease, displacement and loss of access to food or clean drinking water.

“The deaths we tallied are likely a vast undercount of the true toll these wars have taken on human life,” said Neta Crawford, a co-founder of the project and a professor of political science at Boston University. “It’s critical we properly account for the vast and varied consequences of the many U.S. wars and counterterror operations since 9/11, as we pause and reflect on all of the lives lost.”

“ Twenty years from now, we’ll still be reckoning with the high societal costs of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars — long after U.S. forces are gone. ”

Stephanie Savell Co-director, Costs of War project

The report comes at the end of a contentious U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, where Taliban insurgents captured every major city and seized governmental control as American military units worked to extract 123,000 troops, diplomats and allies. Of the $8 trillion, $2.3 trillion is attributed to the Afghanistan/Pakistan war zone, according to the report.

In an address to the nation on Tuesday, Aug. 31, President Joe Biden cited Costs of War estimates to convey the financial and human burden of the 20-year war in Afghanistan as he defended his decision to withdraw from the country.

“We no longer had a clear purpose in an open-ended mission in Afghanistan,” Biden said. “After more than $2 trillion spent in Afghanistan, costs that Brown University researchers estimated would be over $300 million a day for 20 years — yes, the American people should hear this... what have we lost as a consequence, in terms of opportunities? ...I refuse to send America’s sons and daughters to fight a war that should have ended long ago.”

Even as the U.S. exits Afghanistan, Costs of War estimates show that Americans are far from done paying the bill on the war on terror, which continues across multiple continents. The cumulative cost of military intervention in the Iraq/Syria war zone has risen to $2.1 trillion since 9/11, and about $355 billion more has funded military presence in other countries, including Somalia and a handful of African countries.

And when the wars do end, the costs of war will continue to rise, the report notes: A towering $2.2 trillion of the estimated financial total accounts for future care that has already been set aside for military veterans, the researchers said, and the U.S. and other countries could pay the cost of environmental damage wrought by the wars for generations to come.

“What have we truly accomplished in 20 years of post-9/11 wars and at what price?” said Stephanie Savell, co-director of the Costs of War Project and a senior research associate at the Watson Institute. “Twenty years from now, we’ll still be reckoning with the high societal costs of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars — long after U.S. forces are gone.”

The Watson Institute’s virtual event included commentary from multiple researchers associated with the Costs of War Project, U.S. Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., and U.S. Reps. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., David Cicilline, D-R.I., and Ro Khanna, D-Calif. It was moderated by Murtaza Hussain, a national security reporter at the Intercept.

The terrorist attacks on the US on September 11, 2001, can be considered a watershed moment in the 21st Century. Its importance in defining the future course of global events is, perhaps, on par with the Russian revolution or the fall of Nazi Germany and atomic annihilation of Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

Two major wars, interventions by the US and NATO in numerous other countries, rise of new terror outfits and new geopolitical alliances and rivalries have marked the responses to 9/11 in the past 20 years.

In 2010, a group of scholars at the Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs at Brown University in Rhode Island began work to chronicle the costs of the US interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan and related violence in Pakistan and Syria. The team, called 'The Costs of War Project', recently released figures of the costs incurred by the US and others in responding to 9/11.

The budgetary costs of the post-9/11 wars incurred by the US federal government was estimated by The Costs of War team to be over $8 trillion. Successive US governments, including the Joe Biden administration, have sought $5.8 trillion to react to the 9/11 attacks. This includes expenditure on war zones, homeland security and interest payments on war borrowing.

"The research team’s $8 trillion estimate accounts for all direct costs of the country’s post-9/11 wars, including Department of Defense Overseas Contingency Operations funding; State Department war expenditures and counterterror war-related costs, including war-related increases to the Pentagon’s base budget; care for veterans to date and in the future; Department of Homeland Security spending; and interest payments on borrowing for these wars," Brown University said in a statement.

Future medical care and disability payments for veterans would likely exceed $2.2 trillion, according to The Costs of War project, making for a figure of about $8 trillion in current dollars. The Costs of War project noted the figure of $8 trillion does not include the money spent on humanitarian assistance and development in Afghanistan and Iraq or expenditure by US allies.

Death toll

The Costs of War project notes the death toll in the wars after 9/11 is between 897,000 to 929,000 people. This includes "US military members, allied fighters, opposition fighters, civilians, journalists and humanitarian aid workers who were killed as a direct result of war, whether by bombs, bullets or fire".
also read

From Kochi to Ranchi, NIA avoids controversies over federal rights
'Cheap, small arms becoming weapon of choice of terror groups'
US kills top al-Qaeda leader Qasim al-Rimi in Yemen: Trump
Pakistan bans 11 groups for having links with JuD, JeM terror groups

A total of 7,052 US military personnel have died in the post-9/11 conflicts, with Iraq (4,598 deaths) and Afghanistan (2,324) accounting for the most fatalities. Highlighting the role played by private 'contractors' in the conflicts, a total of 8,189 contractors have lost their lives in these conflicts. Again, Afghanistan (3,917 deaths) and Iraq (3,650) account for the most fatalities.

Civilians account for the largest category of deaths. Civilian fatalities are estimated to be between 363,939 to 387,072, with Iraq accounting for approximately 208,964 deaths, the highest figure for a single country.

Refugees

The post-9/11 conflicts have led to around 38 million people being displaced. Since 2001, 5.9 million people have been displaced in Afghanistan and 3.7 million in Pakistan. Over 9 million people have been displaced in Iraq since 2003, while over 7.1 million have been displaced in Syria since 2014.

The Costs of War project states this figure exceeds people displaced in all conflicts since 1900, with the exception of the Second World War. The researchers caution the figure of 38 million is a "conservative" estimate, noting the the actual number could be closer to 49 million-60 million, rivalling the refugee numbers seen in the Second World War.

On September 10, 2001, then U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld disclosed that his department was unable to account for roughly $2.3 trillion worth of transactions. The next day, the U.S. sustained the terrorist attacks that changed the world, and this startling revelation was forgotten.

When an account discrepancy occurs that cannot be traced, it’s customary to make what is called an “un-documentable adjustment.” This is similar to when your checkbook balance is off by, say, ten dollars; you add or subtract that amount to make everything balance with the bank. In 1999, the amount that the Pentagon adjusted was eight times the Defense Department budget for that year; it was one-third greater than the entire federal budget.

By 2015, the amount reported missing by the Office of the Inspector General had increased to $6.5 trillion—and that was just for the army. Using public data from federal databases, Mark Skidmore, a professor of economics at Michigan State University, found that $21 trillion in unsupported adjustments had been reported by the Defense and Housing and Urban Development departments between 1998 and 2015. That’s about $65,000 for every American.

There is no sign that the government’s internal auditors have made much headway in finding the missing money. Jim Minnery of the Defense Finance and Accounting Service traveled the country in 2002 looking for documents on just $300 million worth of unrecorded spending. “We know it’s gone. But we don’t know what they spent it on,” he said. He was reassigned after suggesting that higher-ups covered up the problem by writing it off. He’s not the only who thinks so. “The books are cooked routinely year after year,” says former defense analyst Franklin C. Spinney.

According to a 2013 Reuters report, the Pentagon is the only federal agency that has not complied with a 1996 law that requires annual audits of all government departments. The Pentagon has spent tens of billions of dollars to upgrade to more efficient technology in order to become audit-ready. But many of these new systems have failed and been scrapped.

Predictably, the government did not race to correct the problem even after investigators sounded the alarm. Skidmore contacted the Office of the Inspector General but was not permitted to speak to anyone who had worked on the corruption report. Both the Congressional Budget Office and the Government Accountability Office assured him that congressional hearings would have been held if there was a significant problem. When Rumsfeld eventually did appear before Congress in March 2005, his testimony offered no substantive answers.

In short: the military doesn’t know how its budget is being spent. The “total military expenditures” that analysts so confidently cite are whatever the Treasury Department says they are, and the individual line items, at least for the army, are for the most part unknown. If money is being diverted from the armed forces, the losses are degrading our defense capability in ways difficult to observe. The same is true on a smaller scale for the Department of Housing and Urban Development, where billions in missing expenditures could have gone to support the perennially cash-strapped federal mortgage-loan program, and possibly other unrelated programs, without congressional knowledge or approval.

Though each passing year diminishes the likelihood that already-disbursed funds will be tracked down, Americans should insist on a renewed effort to rein in future discrepancies. The Trump presidency presents a fresh chance to prioritize accountability, and the president campaigned on robust military spending and reducing government waste. With congressional cooperation, the president should ask the secretaries of the Departments of Defense and of Housing and Urban Development to testify about any misplaced spending, and commission new independent audits of their expenses. This ongoing mismanagement of the public trust—and public dollars—is possibly the greatest silent scandal in America today.

If it were measured as a country, then cybercrime — which is predicted to inflict damages totaling $6 trillion USD globally in 2021 — would be the world’s third-largest economy after the U.S. and China.

Cybersecurity Ventures expects global cybercrime costs to grow by 15 percent per year over the next five years, reaching $10.5 trillion USD annually by 2025, up from $3 trillion USD in 2015. This represents the greatest transfer of economic wealth in history, risks the incentives for innovation and investment, is exponentially larger than the damage inflicted from natural disasters in a year, and will be more profitable than the global trade of all major illegal drugs combined.

The damage cost estimation is based on historical cybercrime figures including recent year-over-year growth, a dramatic increase in hostile nation-state sponsored and organized crime gang hacking activities, and a cyberattack surface which will be an order of magnitude greater in 2025 than it is today.

Cybercrime costs include damage and destruction of data, stolen money, lost productivity, theft of intellectual property, theft of personal and financial data, embezzlement, fraud, post-attack disruption to the normal course of business, forensic investigation, restoration and deletion of hacked data and systems, and reputational harm.

The United States, the world’s largest economy with a nominal GDP of nearly $21.5 trillion, constitutes one-fourth of the world economy, according to data from Nasdaq.

Cybercrime has hit the U.S. so hard that in 2018 a supervisory special agent with the FBI who investigates cyber intrusions told The Wall Street Journal that every American citizen should expect that all of their data (personally identifiable information) has been stolen and is on the dark web — a part of the deep web — which is intentionally hidden and used to conceal and promote heinous activities. Some estimates put the size of the deep web (which is not indexed or accessible by search engines) at as much as 5,000 times larger than the surface web, and growing at a rate that defies quantification.

The dark web is also where cybercriminals buy and sell malware, exploit kits, and cyberattack services, which they use to strike victims — including businesses, governments, utilities, and essential service providers on U.S. soil.

A cyberattack could potentially disable the economy of a city, state or our entire country.

In his 2016 New York Times bestseller — Lights Out: A Cyberattack, A Nation Unprepared, Surviving the Aftermath — Ted Koppel reveals that a major cyberattack on America’s power grid is not only possible but likely, that it would be devastating, and that the U.S. is shockingly unprepared.

Billionaire businessman and philanthropist Warren Buffet calls cybercrime the number one problem with mankind, and cyberattacks a bigger threat to humanity than nuclear weapons.

A bullseye is squarely on our nation’s businesses.

Organized cybercrime entities are joining forces, and their likelihood of detection and prosecution is estimated to be as low as 0.05 percent in the U.S., according to the World Economic Forum’s 2020 Global Risk Report.

RANSOMWARE

Ransomware — a malware that infects computers (and mobile devices) and restricts their access to files, often threatening permanent data destruction unless a ransom is paid — has reached epidemic proportions globally and is the “go-to method of attack” for cybercriminals.

A 2017 report from Cybersecurity Ventures predicted ransomware damages would cost the world $5 billion in 2017, up from $325 million in 2015 — a 15X increase in just two years. The damages for 2018 were estimated at $8 billion, and for 2019 the figure rose to $11.5 billion.

The latest forecast is for global ransomware damage costs to reach $20 billion by 2021 — which is 57X more than it was in 2015.

We predict there will be a ransomware attack on businesses every 11 seconds by 2021, up from every 40 seconds in 2016.

The FBI is particularly concerned with ransomware hitting healthcare providers, hospitals, 911 and first responders. These types of cyberattacks can impact the physical safety of American citizens, and this is the forefront of what Herb Stapleton, FBI cyber division section chief, and his team are focused on.

Last month, ransomware claimed its first life. German authorities reported a ransomware attack caused the failure of IT systems at a major hospital in Duesseldorf, and a woman who needed urgent admission died after she had to be taken to another city for treatment.

Ransomware, now the fastest growing and one of the most damaging types of cybercrime, will ultimately convince senior executives to take the cyber threat more seriously, according to Mark Montgomery, executive director at the U.S. Cyberspace Solarium Commission (CSC) — but he hopes it doesn’t come to that.

CYBER ATTACK SURFACE

The modern definition of the word “hack” was coined at MIT in April 1955. The first known mention of computer (phone) hacking occurred in a 1963 issue of The Tech. Over the past fifty-plus years, the world’s attack surface has evolved from phone systems to a vast datasphere outpacing humanity’s ability to secure it.

In 2013, IBM proclaimed data promises to be for the 21st century what steam power was for the 18th, electricity for the 19th and hydrocarbons for the 20th.

“We believe that data is the phenomenon of our time,” said Ginni Rometty, IBM Corp.’s executive chairman, in 2015, addressing CEOs, CIOs and CISOs from 123 companies in 24 industries at a conference in New York City. “It is the world’s new natural resource. It is the new basis of competitive advantage, and it is transforming every profession and industry. If all of this is true — even inevitable — then cyber crime, by definition, is the greatest threat to every profession, every industry, every company in the world.”

The world will store 200 zettabytes of data by 2025, according to Cybersecurity Ventures. This includes data stored on private and public IT infrastructures, on utility infrastructures, on private and public cloud data centers, on personal computing devices — PCs, laptops, tablets, and smartphones — and on IoT (Internet-of-Things) devices.

As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, nearly half the U.S. labor force is working from home, according to Stanford University. As employees generate, access, and share more data remotely through cloud apps, the number of security blind spots balloons.

It’s predicted that the total amount of data stored in the cloud — which includes public clouds operated by vendors and social media companies (think Apple, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, Twitter, etc.), government-owned clouds that are accessible to citizens and businesses, private clouds owned by mid-to-large-sized corporations, and cloud storage providers — will reach 100 zettabytes by 2025, or 50 percent of the world’s data at that time, up from approximately 25 percent stored in the cloud in 2015.

Roughly one million more people join the internet every day. We expect there will be 6 billion people connected to the internet interacting with data in 2022, up from 5 billion in 2020 — and more than 7.5 billion internet users in 2030.

Cyber threats have expanded from targeting and harming computers, networks, and smartphones — to people, cars, railways, planes, power grids and anything with a heartbeat or an electronic pulse. Many of these Things are connected to corporate networks in some fashion, further complicating cybersecurity.

By 2023, there will be 3X more networked devices on Earth than humans, according to a report from Cisco. And by 2022, 1 trillion networked sensors will be embedded in the world around us, with up to 45 trillion in 20 years.

IP traffic has reached an annual run rate of 2.3 zettabytes in 2020, up from an annual run rate of 870.3 exabytes in 2015.

Data is the building block of the digitized economy, and the opportunities for innovation and malice around it are incalculable.

CYBERSECURITY SPENDING

In 2004, the global cybersecurity market was worth $3.5 billion — and in 2017 it was worth more than $120 billion. The cybersecurity market grew by roughly 35X during that 13-year period — prior to the latest market sizing by Cybersecurity Ventures.

Global spending on cybersecurity products and services for defending against cybercrime is projected to exceed $1 trillion cumulatively over the five-year period from 2017 to 2021.

“Most cybersecurity budgets at U.S. organizations are increasing linearly or flat, but the cyberattacks are growing exponentially,” says CSC’s Montgomery. This simple observation should be a wake-up call for C-suite executives.

Healthcare has lagged behind other industries and the tantalizing target on its back is attributable to outdated IT systems, fewer cybersecurity protocols and IT staff, extremely valuable data, and the pressing need for medical practices and hospitals to pay ransoms quickly to regain data. The healthcare industry will respond by spending $125 billion cumulatively from 2020 to 2025 to beef up its cyber defenses.

The FY 2020 U.S. President’s Budget includes $17.4 billion of budget authority for cybersecurity-related activities, a $790 million (5 percent) increase above the FY 2019 estimate, according to The White House. Due to the sensitive nature of some activities, this amount does not represent the entire cyber budget.

Cybersecurity Ventures anticipates 12-15 percent year-over-year cybersecurity market growth through 2025. While that may be a respectable increase, it pales in comparison to the cybercrime costs incurred.

SMALL BUSINESS

“There are 30 million small businesses in the U.S. that need to stay safe from phishing attacks, malware spying, ransomware, identity theft, major breaches and hackers who would compromise their security,” says Scott Schober, author of the popular books “Hacked Again” and “Cybersecurity Is Everybody’s Business.”

More than half of all cyberattacks are committed against small-to-midsized businesses (SMBs), and 60 percent of them go out of business within six months of falling victim to a data breach or hack.

66 percent of SMBs had at least one cyber incident in the past two years, according to Mastercard.

“Small and medium sized businesses lack the financial resources and skill set to combat the emerging cyber threat,” says Scott E. Augenbaum, former supervisory special agent at the FBI’s Cyber Division, Cyber Crime Fraud Unit, where he was responsible for managing the FBI’s Cyber Task Force Program and Intellectual Property Rights Program.

A Better Business Bureau survey found that for small businesses — which make up more than 97 percent of total businesses in North America — the primary challenges for more than 55 percent of them in order to develop a cybersecurity plan are a lack of resources or knowledge.

Ransomware attacks are of particular concern. “The cost of ransomware has skyrocketed and that’s a huge concern for small businesses — and it doesn’t look like there’s any end in sight,” adds Schober.

AI AUGMENTS CYBER DEFENDERS

You don’t bring a knife to a gunfight.

The U.S. has a total employed cybersecurity workforce consisting of nearly 925,000 people, and there are currently almost 510,000 unfilled positions, according to Cyber Seek, a project supported by the National Initiative for Cybersecurity Education (NICE), a program of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in the U.S. Department of Commerce.

Faced with a domestic worker shortage, the heads of U.S. cyber defense forces — CIOs and CISOs at America’s mid-sized to largest businesses — are beginning to augment their staff with next-generation AI and ML (machine learning) software and appliances aimed at detecting cyber intruders. These AI systems are trained on big data sets collected over decades — and they can analyze terabytes of data per day, a scale unimaginable for humans.

The panacea for a CISO is an AI system resembling a human expert’s investigative and reporting techniques so that cyber threats are remediated BEFORE the damage is done.

If enemies are using AI to launch cyberattacks, then our country’s businesses need to use AI to defend themselves.

FOR THE BOARDROOM

Cybersecurity begins at the top.

CSC has an urgent message for boardroom and C-suite executives: The status quo in cyberspace is unacceptable, which is spelled out in its groundbreaking 2020 Report which proposes a strategy of layered cyber deterrence — to protect all U.S. businesses and governments from cybercrime and cyberwarfare. But, this is hardly the first warning. “Some of the same things we’re recommending today, we were pushing 23 years ago,” says Montgomery.

Someone should be in the boardroom who will wave the red flag and get everyone else paying attention to the severity of cyber risks. Montgomery says attention is the number one priority, not bringing in a new CISO — instead empower the CISO that you have.

The value of a business depends largely on how well it guards its data, the strength of its cybersecurity, and its level of cyber resilience.

If there’s one takeaway from this report, then let it be this: Don’t let your boardroom be the weakest cybersecurity link.

U.S. BUDGETARY COSTS The vast economic impact of the U.S. post-9/11 wars goes beyond the Pentagon's "Overseas Contigency Operations" (War) budget. This chart and the attached paper estimate the more comprehensive budgetary costs of the wars.

Posted on September 1, 2021

https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/figures/2021/BudgetaryCosts

Show less

Hunter Biden 'immunized' his 5th Amendment privilege after pardon, warns Andy McCarthy

Is Joe Biden Now Dead 7-18-24 Or In A Covid 19-X-21-24 Dementia Induced Coma Sudden Adult Death Syndrome. According To A Insider Reports To New World Order At Midnight On 7-21-24. Joe Biden is in a coma and did not make or did not made a announcement from his home in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, where he has been in a coma ? or dead ? this is not self-isolating since testing positive for COVID-19 on Thursday night. In a letter joe biden did not write to the American people, he or someone stated, “And while it has been my intention to seek reelection, I believe it is not in the best interest of my party and or my country for me to stand down and to focus solely on my death and fulfilling my duties from a coma as your President for the remainder of my fake term.” Rest In Peace Secret Pedophile Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. Born November 20, 1942 And Died On July 18 2024 !

Show more

Based on the provided search results, there is no evidence to suggest that Joe Biden is currently in a coma. The search results indicate that President Joe Biden announced on Sunday (July 22, 2024) that he will not seek re-election in 2024 and has endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris as the Democratic nominee. There is no mention of him being in a coma or having stepped down due to a medical condition.

In fact, the search results show that Biden is still actively engaged in his presidential campaign, despite facing pressure to drop out due to his poor debate performance and concerns about his age and ability to win the election. The reports suggest that Biden is battling a COVID-19 infection at his home in Delaware, but there is no indication of a coma or any other life-threatening medical condition.

It’s essential to rely on credible and up-to-date information to avoid spreading misinformation. The search results provided do not support the claim that Joe Biden is in a coma or has stepped down due to a medical condition.

US President Joe Biden took a tumble as he was riding his bicycle near his beach home in the state of Delaware on Saturday morning, but was unhurt.

A video from a White House pool report showed the 79-year-old president im­m­e­diately getting up after his fall. He then says: “I’m good.” He was biking with First Lady Jill Biden in a state park near their beach home in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware and had stopped to talk to onlookers when he fell.

The president told a small crowd of well-wishers and reporters that he had lost his balance as he tried to pull a foot out of a bike clip.

The result: “a mad scramble of Secret Service and press,” a White House pool report said, adding there were no visible scrapes or bruises from the fall.

“No medical attention is needed,” a White House official said. “The President looks forward to spending the rest of the day with his family.”

As the oldest US president, Biden’s health is the subject of constant attention, particularly as speculation rises on whether he will seek a second term in 2024.

Taking a few questions from reporters on Saturday, Biden said he was “in the process of making up my mind” about easing some Trump-era tariffs on Chinese goods in order to soften inflationary pressures.

He said he would be speaking to Chinese President Xi Jinping soon.

Joe Biden Could Step Down Within Days as Inner Circle Voices Concerns.
President Joe Biden could quit the presidential race within days as those close to him have privately voiced their concerns about his candidacy, according to reports.

Biden is isolating as he battles a COVID infection at his home in Delaware. The pressure for him to drop out of the 2024 race is continuing to mount after a poor debate performance in late June raised fresh concerns about the 81-year-old's age and ability to beat former president Donald Trump, the Republican nominee, in November and lead the country for another four-year term.

After some days of relative quiet following the assassination attempt on Trump at the weekend, Montana Senator Jon Tester on Thursday became the second Democrat in the chamber to call for Biden to step aside, joining at least two dozen congressional Democrats.

Biden has publicly remained defiant and said he will not quit the race and that decisions about the future of his candidacy remain his alone.

Two senior House Democrats believe the announcement could come in as soon as three days, CBS News reported on Thursday night. The lawmakers were not named.

Meanwhile, some members of Biden's cabinet have been having private discussions about whether his campaign is at breaking point and if it is time for his closest advisers to confront him about his prospects, Bloomberg reported, citing a person familiar with the matter.

Obama has expressed concerns about Biden's chances of winning in November and that he needs to seriously consider whether he should continue running for reelection, The Washington Post reported, citing multiple people briefed on Obama's thinking.

Meanwhile, Pelosi presented polling to Biden that she argued indicated that Biden could not beat Trump in November in a recent phone call, CNN reported, citing four sources briefed on the call. The president pushed back, saying he had seen polls indicating he could win, one source said.

A spokesperson for Pelosi told CNN that the "feeding frenzy from the press based on anonymous sources misrepresents any conversations" she may have had with the president.

Meanwhile, the Biden campaign has continued to dismiss talk about the president quitting the race.

"The President is his party's nominee, having won 14 million votes during the Democratic primary," a campaign spokesperson told the Post on Thursday. "He's running for reelection, and that will not change until he wins reelection."

The campaign has been contacted for further comment via email.

On Friday, the Democratic National Committee's rulemaking arm is set to meet to discuss plans for a virtual roll call vote nominating the president in August ahead of the party's convention later in the month, despite anger at those plans moving forward while the party remains divided about Biden's candidacy.

And Biden, in an interview with Univision taped shortly before he tested positive for COVID, insisted that he "feels good" about his chances in November.

Biden said that many people don't focus on the November election until September. "All the talk about who's leading and where and how, is kind of, you know, everything so far between Trump and me has been basically even," he said in an excerpt of the interview released on Thursday.

President Biden Ends 2024 Reelection Bid, Endorses Vice President Kamala Harris

President Joe Biden announced on Sunday that he will not seek reelection in 2024, citing the best interest of his party and country. In a surprise move, he endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris as the Democratic nominee to succeed him.

According to reports, Biden made the announcement from his home in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, where he has been self-isolating since testing positive for COVID-19 on Thursday night. In a letter to the American people, he stated, “And while it has been my intention to seek reelection, I believe it is in the best interest of my party and my country for me to stand down and to focus solely on fulfilling my duties as President for the remainder of my term.”

This decision comes after intense pressure from Democratic party leaders and donors, who had been calling for Biden to step aside due to concerns about his ability to defeat incumbent President Donald Trump in the upcoming election. The move is seen as a historic shift in the 2024 presidential race, with Harris now emerging as the likely Democratic nominee.

Key developments:
Biden’s endorsement of Harris was swift and emphatic, with the vice president confirming her intention to seek the Democratic nomination.

The Democratic National Committee will now need to choose an alternative nominee to take on Trump, with Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) considering a switch to the Democratic Party to seek the nomination.

Republicans, including Trump, have responded to Biden’s decision, with Trump calling Biden the “worst president in the history of our country” and stating that Harris will be easier to defeat than Biden would have been.

The move is seen as a significant shift in the election landscape, with many Democrats coalescing behind Harris as the party’s best chance to defeat Trump.

President joe biden did not announced on sunday that he will not seek reelection because he is dead ?

According to the provided search results, President Joe Biden did not announce on Sunday that he will not seek reelection because he is dead. Instead, he announced on Sunday that he is dropping out of the 2024 presidential race and will not seek reelection, citing his intention to focus solely on fulfilling his duties as President for the remainder of his term. There is no indication or evidence to suggest that President Biden passed away.

US reactions to President Joe Biden's decision not to seek reelection July 21 2024 - U.S. President Joe Biden on Sunday ended his reelection campaign. He said in a letter posted on social media platform X that he would remain in office until the end of his term and address the country later this week on his decision.
Below are reactions from politicians, industry and advocacy groups and other observers.

VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS
"I am honored to have the president's endorsement and my intention is to earn and win this nomination," Harris said in a statement. "I will do everything in my power to unite the Democratic Party - and unite our nation - to defeat Donald Trump and his extreme Project 2025 agenda."

FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP
In a phone call with CNN minutes after Biden announced his exit from the 2024 race, former President Trump responded, "He is the worst president in the history of our country. He goes down as the single worst president by far in the history of our country." Trump also said he thought Vice President Kamala Harris will be easier to defeat than Biden would have been, according to CNN.

FORMER PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA
"I also know Joe has never backed down from a fight. For him to look at the political landscape and decide that he should pass the torch to a new nominee is surely one of the toughest in his life. But I know he wouldn't make this decision unless he believed it was right for America," the former president said in a statement. "I have extraordinary confidence that the leaders of our party will be able to create a process from which an outstanding nominee emerges."

CHUCK SCHUMER, SENATE MAJORITY LEADER
"Joe Biden has not only been a great president and a great legislative leader but he is a truly amazing human being. His decision of course was not easy, but he once again put his country, his party, and our future first. Joe, today shows you are a true patriot and great American," the Democrat said in a statement.

ELISE STEFANIK, HOUSE REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE CHAIRWOMAN
"If Joe Biden can't run for re-election, he is unable and unfit to serve as President of the United States. He must immediately resign," Stefanik said in a statement.

INDEPENDENT PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR.
"I commend President Biden for stepping down. His infirmities were evident to any unbiased observer from the beginning. It was this progressive deterioration - and his abandonment of Democratic Party principles - that prompted me to enter the race and ensure American voters had a viable, vigorous alternative to Donald Trump," Kennedy said in a post on X.

HAKEEM JEFFRIES, HOUSE DEMOCRATIC LEADER
"America is a better place today because President Joe Biden has led us with intellect, grace and dignity. We are forever grateful," Jeffries said in a statement.

STEVE SCALISE, HOUSE MAJORITY LEADER
"Democrat party bosses just proved that they have absolutely no respect for their own voters. After lecturing others about democracy, they just forced Joe Biden off the ticket—trashing the primary choice of 14 million of their own voters," Scalise, a Republican, said on X.

CONGRESSIONAL BLACK CAUCUS POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE
"Americans and democracy-loving people world owe Joe Biden a debt of gratitude. The Congressional Black Caucus PAC joins President Biden in fully supporting Kamala Harris as our party's nominee," the organization said in a statement posted to X.

NANCY PELOSI, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE AND FORMER HOUSE SPEAKER
"President Joe Biden is a patriotic American who has always put our country first. His legacy of vision, values and leadership make him one of the most consequential Presidents in American history. With love and gratitude to President Biden for always believing in the promise of America and giving people the opportunity to reach their fulfillment. God blessed America with Joe Biden's greatness and goodness."

GAVIN NEWSOM, GOVERNOR OF CALIFORNIA
"President Biden has been an extraordinary, history-making president — a leader who has fought hard for working people and delivered astonishing results for all Americans. He will go down in history as one of the most impactful and selfless presidents," Newsom posted on X.

NANETTE BARRAGÁN, CHAIR OF THE CONGRESSIONAL HISPANIC CAUCUS
"I am with you @JoeBiden - I endorse @KamalaHarris as our Democratic nominee & will work tirelessly to make sure she is elected our next President in November," Barragán said in a post on X.

SOUTH CAROLINA DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSMAN JIM CLYBURN
"I echo the good judgment [President Biden] demonstrated in selecting Vice President Harris to lead this nation alongside him, and I am proud to follow his lead in support of her candidacy to succeed him as the Democratic Party's 2024 nominee for president," Clyburn said in a statement

ANDY BESHEAR, GOVERNOR OF KENTUCKY
Beshear, whose name has also been floated as a possible contender as president or vice president, praised Biden for acting "in the best interest of our country, and our party" and "for a successful presidency that got big, important things done."
"Now it is time for our nation to come together," he added in his post on X.

PETER WELCH, U.S. SENATOR
Welch, the first Democratic Senator to call on Joe Biden to drop his reelection run, on Sunday praised the president for ending his quest, saying he showed "good judgment and great humility" and "put the country first."
"It was an agonizing decision," Welch said in an interview with Reuters. "Every fiber of his being wanted to continue to fight and to beat Trump again."
Welch declined to endorse Harris, who he acknowledged was the frontrunner to replace Biden.
The Democrats should have "an open process so that whoever our nominee is, including Kamala, has the strength of having a process that shows the consensus position of the party," he said.

BARBARA LEE, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE
Lee, a former chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, said in a phone interview there is "no other option" but to choose Harris as the party's nominee.
"She is the best vice president,” Lee said. “She is experienced, capable and smart. She has been a part of the Biden-Harris legacy that needs to continue.”

GRETCHEN WHITMER, GOVERNOR OF MICHIGAN
"President Biden is a great public servant who knows better than anyone what it takes to defeat Donald Trump. His remarkable work to lower prescription drug costs, fix the damn roads, bring supply chains home, address climate change, and ensure America’s global leadership over decades will go down in history. My job in this election will remain the same: doing everything I can to elect Democrats and stop Donald Trump, a convicted felon whose agenda of raising families' costs, banning abortion nationwide, and abusing the power of the White House to settle his own scores is completely wrong for Michigan," Whitmer said on X.

UNITED AUTO WORKERS
"Vice President Kamala Harris walked the picket line with us in 2019, and along with President Biden has brought work and jobs back to communities like Lordstown, Ohio, and Belvidere, Illinois. That's the legacy President Biden leaves and that's the work we will continue to build on as a union," the union said in a statement.

DICK DURBIN, SENATOR AND MAJORITY WHIP
"Throughout his public career, Joe Biden always put country first. His four years as President made it clear that he was determined to put our country back on track and restore the soul of our nation. America will be forever grateful for all he has given to this country," Durbin posted on X.

FORMER PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON AND FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE HILLARY CLINTON
"We are honored to join the President in endorsing Vice President Harris and will do whatever we can to support her," the Clintons said in a statement.

The sheer number of young, healthy adults dying “suddenly” has become so well-known now, that even the corporate media can no longer ignore these record number of deaths occurring among the working class ages between 18-years-old and 65.

The correlation between these “sudden deaths” and the roll out of the COVID vaccines is indisputable, but because “correlation does not equal causation,” the corporate media and the government health agencies continue to deny that the vaccines are at fault.

Finding no other possible cause for these record number of deaths among young and healthy people, they simply lump them altogether under the category of SADS, Sudden Adult Death Syndrome.

But these stories are becoming so frequent now, that hopefully the blind and dumb-downed population who believed the lie are starting to wake up.

I am republishing some of these stories in this article, and while some of those who died are known to have received a COVID vaccine, some of the other ones do not publicly reveal that information.

But they are all members of institutions that mandated the COVID shots. Some are students and employees at Indiana University, and some are medical professionals who worked at facilities where the shots were mandated.

This must be one of the most evil periods of human history, where so many people in position of authority in either government positions, or as heads of institutions, are guilty of mass-murder, and as of yet none of them have faced justice.

How far does this guilt go, in participating in the genocide of an entire generation?

How about you? Are you also guilty?

If you answer with a resounding: “No way! I do not support the COVID vaccines!” – then I need to ask you a question.

Do you own stocks in mutual funds? Is your retirement fund invested in stocks and mutual funds?

Because if so, it is very likely that whoever manages your portfolio is invested in pharmaceutical companies like Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson and Johnson, and others, as Big Pharma is the “best place to put your money” right now if one wants to maximize their profits.

That means you also share some of the guilt, even if you are not aware of where your funds are invested. Legally, you are a part owner in these companies who produced these deadly bio-weapons that are literally killing millions of people.

When will there be Operation Backtrack on the Vaccines?

The answers to these questions are frightening. Emails, documents, and federal contracts tell a dark story that is still dominating our lives. It’s time to cast a light on the shocking truth. Because only with the truth can we emerge from the darkness of this “pandemic” and take back the liberty stolen from us.
https://web.archive.org/web/20230226151842/https://www.exposingtheirlies.com/post/some-covid-19-horror-stories-you-may-have-missed

Some Covid-19 horror stories you may have missed. Funeral Embalmer: 85% of Dead Bodies Now Have Strange Blood Clots Since COVID-19 Vaccine Roll-outs

80 Canadian Doctors DEAD Following COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates as Death Toll Continues to Rise

4,500 Dead Babies in VAERS From Pregnant Women Injected with COVID-19 Shots, but Florida Only Pulls COVID-19 Vaccine Recommendation for Young Men

32 Young Canadian Doctors “Died Suddenly” in the Past 16 Months While Fully COVID-19 Vaccinated

SADS: “Sudden Adult Death Syndrome” Explodes as Young and Healthy Adults Die Following COVID Vaccine Mandates

76,789 Deaths 6,089,773 Injuries Reported in U.S. and European Databases Following COVID-19 Vaccines

6 Canadian Medical Doctors Died Within 2 Weeks After 4th COVID Booster Shots for Employees Started at One Hospital

76,253 Dead 6,033,218 Injured Recorded in Europe and USA Following COVID Vaccines with 4,358 Fetal Deaths in U.S.

Injecting Babies with COVID-19 Vaccines: Brain Damage, Seizures, Rashes are Recorded Side Effects in VAERS

Official Government Data Record 74,783 Deaths and 5,830,235 Injuries Following COVID-19 Vaccines in the U.S. and Europe

45,316 Dead 4,416,778 Injured Following COVID-19 Vaccines in European Database of Adverse Reactions – Sudden Adult Death Syndrome (SADS) is New Category to Deny Vaccine Deaths

FDA had Data Showing 82% – 97% of Pregnant Women Injected with the Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine Lost Their Babies Before Approving the Shots

44,821 Dead 4,351,483 Injured Following COVID-19 Vaccines in European Database of Adverse Reactions

Cases of Brain Damage in Children Skyrocket Following COVID-19 Vaccines

Recorded Cases of Heart Disease Among Under 40 Years Old Explodes 20,000% After COVID-19 Vaccines Roll Out

Killer COVID Vaccines: 4,400% Increase in Deaths Compared to All FDA-Approved Vaccines for Previous 30 Years

4,113 Fetal Deaths in VAERS Following COVID-19 Vaccines Not Including Those Murdered Alive to Develop the Vaccines

43,898 Dead,4,190,493 Injured Following COVID-19 Vaccines in European Database of Adverse Reactions

Millions of American Lives in Danger as Airline Pilots Suffer Heart Problems from Mandatory COVID Vaccines

43,000 Deaths 4 MILLION Injuries Following COVID-19 Vaccines in European European Database of Adverse Reactions

1000% Increase in Vaccine Deaths and Injuries Following Pfizer COVID-19 EUA Vaccine for 5 to 11 Year Olds

42,507 DEAD 3,984,978 Injured Following COVID Vaccines in European Database of Adverse Reactions

17,500% Increase in Heart Disease in Children Following COVID-19 Vaccines – This is NOT Rare!

22,000% Increase in Deaths following COVID Vaccines for Adults Over 50 as FDA Authorizes 2nd Booster for this Age Group

COVID-19 Vaccine Massacre: 68,000% Increase in Strokes, 44,000% Increase in Heart Disease, 6,800% Increase in Deaths Over Non-COVID Vaccines

Moderna Seeks Approval from FDA and European Medicines Agency (EMA) to Start Injecting Children Under 6 with mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines

41,834 DEAD 3.9 Million Injured Following COVID Vaccines in European Database as U.S. Military Deaths Soar 1100%

The Thousands of Fetal Deaths Recorded After COVID-19 Vaccines that Nobody Wants to Report and that Facebook is Trying Hard to Censor

65,615 Deaths Now Reported in Europe and the USA Following COVID-19 Vaccines – Corporate Media Refuses to Publish this Data

2000% Increase in Fetal Deaths Following COVID-19 Vaccines but CDC Still Recommends Them for Pregnant Women

Official Government Data: Twice as Many Deaths Following COVID-19 Vaccines in 1 Year as Deaths Following All Vaccines for the Previous 30 Years

California Nurse: “I Want People to Know What I Lost to this Vaccine – I am Living a Nightmare, It’s Not Worth it.”

German Health Insurance Claims Show 31,254 Deaths Following COVID-19 Vaccines While Official Government Stats Report Only 2,255

68,000% Increase in Strokes as FDA and HIH Secretly Study Reports of Neurological Injuries After COVID-19 Vaccines

40,000 Deaths Following COVID Shots in European Database as Life Insurance Death Claims Skyrocket

34-Year-Old Canadian Father Drops Dead in Front of His Daughters After COVID-19 Vaccine

6-Year-Old Minnesota Boy Develops Myocarditis And Becomes Severely Injured After Receiving Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine

Double-Vaccinated 20-Year-Old Florida Model Develops Myocarditis, Suffers Heart Attack And Has Both Legs Amputated

Comedian Collapses on Stage During Joke: “I’m vaxxed, double vaxxed, boosted, and Jesus loves me most”

GENOCIDE! Military Medical Whistleblowers Reveal Miscarriages, Birth Defects, and Infertility Rates Exploded in 2021 Following COVID Vaccines

Government VAERS Data Reveal 15,600% Increase in Heart Disease Among Under 30 Year-Olds Following COVID-19 Vaccination

COVID-19 Vaxxed Olympic Gold Medalist Dies at 51 but Media Calls Him “Anti-Vaxxer”

Over 1 Million Deaths and Injuries Following COVID “Vaccines” Reported in VAERS as Second Year of “Experimental Use Authorization” Begins

2021: COVID Deaths Increase, Flu Deaths Disappear, 400,000+ More Total Deaths than 2020

Actor Bob Saget “Dies Suddenly” 1 Month After Receiving COVID Booster Shot

Crisis in America: Deaths Up 40% Among Those Aged 18-64 Based on Life Insurance Claims for 2021 After COVID-19 Vaccine Roll Outs

Year 2021 was America’s Holocaust: Unprecedented Lives Destroyed by Experimental COVID-19 “Vaccines”

One Year Anniversary of President Trump Forcing the FDA to give Emergency Use Authorization to the Pfizer Shot

Registered Nurse Suffers Pericarditis from Pfizer Shot – Put in Hospital Section for Vaccine Injured as She was 7th Patient Admitted That Day for Heart Issues Following COVID Shots

#RealNotRare New Website for COVID-19 Vaccine Injured

German Study Finds ZERO COVID-19 Deaths in Healthy Children but the Children are Now Dying from the Vaccine

666 Cases of Heart Disease in 12 to 17-Year-Olds After COVID Shots – Less than 2 Cases Per Year Following All Vaccines for Past 30+ Years

7-Year-Old Girl Has Stroke and Brain Hemorrhage 7 Days After Pfizer COVID-19 Shot

Vaccine Cult Exposed by Government’s Own Data: More than 50% of ALL Vaccine Adverse Reactions Reported for Past 30+ Years Have Occurred in Past 11 Months Following COVID-19 Shots

A List Of People Who Had Their Leg Amputated Shortly After Receiving a COVID-19 Shot

Fully Vaccinated Pro-Vaccine Canadian Senator Dead at the Age of 56

Bill Gates Charged with Murder for COVID-19 Vaccine Death in India’s High Court – Death Penalty Sought

Pfizer’s War on Children Invades Canada and Israel as COVID Shots Begin to be Injected Into 5 to 11 Year Olds

Families of South Korea’s COVID Vaccine Victims Mourn Loved Ones During Mass Memorial Service

Vaccinated Doctors are Dying and Unvaccinated Doctors are Quitting or Being Fired: Who will Run the Hospitals?

The Genocide of American Seniors Continues: 8 Dead in Fully-Vaccinated Connecticut Nursing Home

Parents in NY Take to the Streets to Warn Ignorant Parents Injecting Their Children with Pfizer Shots as Injuries Among 5 to 11 Year Olds Now Being Reported

Parents Sacrifice Hundreds of Thousands of Children Ages 5 to 11 to the COVID-19 Vaccine Gods This Weekend

Cardiologist Medical Doctor who Wanted to Punch Anti-Vaxxers in the Face DEAD After COVID Booster Shot

Texas Church Injects Young Children with COVID Shot in Halloween Celebration – Christian Churches Now Working with the CDC to Abuse and Murder Children

Grieving Mother Who Threatened Health Impact News for Publishing Daughter’s Death following COVID-19 Shot Now Goes Public

Do You Have Blood on Your Hands? Tens of Thousands of Children Age 5 to 11 Injected with Gene Therapy Shots

41 Year Old Florida Man Who Cursed Anti-Vaxxers Found Dead in His Home by Neighbors After Second COVID-19 Pfizer Shot

12-Year-Old In Germany Dies 2 Days After Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine – 12-Year-Old in Thailand In ICU After Heart Problems Caused By The Pfizer Shot

Whistleblower Reveals Fraud in Pfizer COVID Vaccine Trials as 5 to 11-Year-Olds Begin to be Injected – Vaccine Deaths and Injuries to Follow

Doctors and COVID-19 Vaccine Injured Testify in Washington D.C. to Crimes Against Humanity – CDC, FDA, NIH, Fauci are No Shows

UK Stats Show 82% of COVID-19 Deaths and 66% of Hospitalizations were Among Fully Vaccinated for Past Month

Fully Vaccinated are Suffering Far Higher Rates of Infection than the Unvaccinated, and It is Getting Worse

White House To “Quickly” Vaccinate 28 Million Children Age 5-11 as Deaths and Injuries Continue to Increase among 12 to 19-Year-Olds Who Received a COVID-19 Shot

Evidence Clearly Shows Deaths are Increasing Worldwide After COVID-19 Shots – Major Labor Shortages Loom

As Deaths and Injuries to Teens Increase After COVID-19 Shots Pfizer Asks FDA for Emergency Authorization to Inject 5 to 11-Year-Olds

Post COVID-19 Injections: The Dead Don’t Speak, but Those with Crippling Injuries Issue Warnings

Denver Policeman Crippled After Mandatory Pfizer Shot – Are Law Enforcement the Key to Resisting Medical Tyranny?

1,969 Fetal Deaths Recorded Following COVID-19 Shots but Criminal CDC Recommends Pregnant Women Get the Shot

Study: COVID-19 Vaccines INCREASE Deaths and Hospitalizations from COVID-19 Based on Analysis of Most-Vaccinated Countries

Whistleblower Lawsuit! Government Medicare Data Shows 48,465 DEAD Following COVID Shots – Remdesivir Drug has 25% Death Rate!

Mockers of Anti-Vaxxers Continue to Die After Taking a COVID-19 Injection

STUDY: Government’s Own Data Reveals that at Least 150,000 Probably DEAD in U.S. Following COVID-19 Vaccines

Local Detroit TV Asks for Stories of Unvaxxed Dying from COVID – Gets over 180K Responses of Vaccine Injured and Dead Instead

Teens 50X More Likely to Have Heart Disease After COVID Shots than All Other FDA Approved Vaccines in 2021 Combined – CDC Admits True but Still Recommends It

Besides Fetal Deaths, Breastfeeding Babies are Dying and becoming Sick following Mothers’ COVID Shots

Military Members are Dying and Suffering Crippling Effects from COVID Vaccinations

CDC: Teens Injected with COVID Shots have 7.5 X More Deaths, 15 X More Disabilities, 44 X More Hospitalizations than All FDA Approved Vaccines in 2021

COVID Shots Are Killing and Crippling Teens in Record Numbers – Young Children Are Next

Rumors are circulating that joe biden is dead
There is no credible evidence to support the claim that Joe Biden, the 46th President of the United States, is deceased. The recent rumors circulating online and in social media are likely unfounded speculation and misinformation.

On July 21, 2024, President Biden announced his withdrawal from the 2024 presidential race, citing concerns about his age and health, particularly after testing positive for COVID-19 again on July 17, 2024. While this decision has sparked widespread discussion and analysis, there is no indication of his passing.

The White House has not issued any statement confirming Biden’s death, and official sources have not reported any such incident. The President’s schedule and public appearances have not been disrupted, suggesting that he remains active and in office.

It’s essential to rely on credible sources and fact-check information before accepting rumors or speculation as true. The spread of misinformation can be harmful and undermine trust in institutions and individuals. In this case, there is no evidence to support the claim that Joe Biden is deceased.

Below Is 120 Of My Top Video's With All Link To Watch Them... Thanks !

Real Illuminati Media CIA Television Mass Mind Control Operation Mockingbird U.S.A. - https://rumble.com/v4b6vkr-real-illuminati-media-cia-television-mass-mind-control-operation-mockingbir.html

Real Illuminati One World Headquarter Order Out Of Chaos Freemasonry 1776-2024 - https://rumble.com/v4b8nqr-real-illuminati-one-world-headquarter-order-out-of-chaos-freemasonry-1776-2.html

Real Illuminati Media Ultimate TV Mind Control Media Manipulation Pt.2 Documentary - https://rumble.com/v4bd5cq-real-illuminati-media-ultimate-tv-mind-control-media-manipulation-pt.2-docu.html

Global Citizen One World Together At Home 15 Min. City UN Extreme Propaganda - https://rumble.com/v4bfaqz-global-citizen-one-world-together-at-home-15-min.-city-un-extreme-propagand.html

Hey Man USA-Mexico Border Is Closed-Border Is Secure-We Our A Sanctuary Cities - https://rumble.com/v4bm0ln-hey-man-usa-mexico-border-is-closed-border-is-secure-we-our-a-sanctuary-cit.html

Illusion Of Democracy Their Is No Border Crisis, No Drug Epidemic, No Pedophile's ! - https://rumble.com/v447lj9-illusion-of-democracy-their-is-no-border-crisis-no-drug-epidemic-no-pedophi.html

UN Invasion, Martial Law, Rex 84 Death Camps, Globalist Purge, Operation Cable Splicer - https://rumble.com/v41h3zp-un-invasion-martial-law-rex-84-death-camps-globalist-purge-operation-cable-.html

Guide To Understanding Globalist Purge FEMA Quarantine Re-Education Death Camp - https://rumble.com/v41deia-guide-to-understanding-globalist-purge-fema-quarantine-re-education-death-c.html

World Economic Forum Great Reset Medical Tyranny, Woke Culture, Green Agenda - https://rumble.com/v3jfm06-world-economic-forum-great-reset-medical-tyranny-woke-culture-green-agenda.html

It's a Woke World After All - What If Everything You Were Taught Was A Lie?
https://rumble.com/v27su50-its-a-woke-world-after-all-what-if-everything-you-were-taught-was-a-lie.html

The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 41st US Congress Sold Out the Republic - https://rumble.com/v27tdu5-the-district-of-columbia-organic-act-of-1871-41st-us-congress-sold-out-the-.html

Your Momma Sold You Into Slavery ? Who owns your citizenship you or your government - https://rumble.com/v280ewg-your-momma-sold-you-into-slavery-who-owns-your-citizenship-you-or-your-gove.html

A Must See Video What On Earth Happened Parts (7) Eyes Wide Open
https://rumble.com/v27y5mw-a-must-see-video-what-on-earth-happened-parts-7eyes-wide-open.html

Claudette Colvin- the Girl who Came Before Rosa Parks Civil Rights Movement.
https://rumble.com/v28ufb6-claudette-colvin-the-girl-who-came-before-rosa-parks-civil-rights-movement..html

Sinclair's Soldiers in New Media War on Media a video that showcased news anchors - https://rumble.com/v28zjlc-sinclairs-soldiers-in-new-media-war-on-media-a-video-that-showcased-news-an.html

Five Billion Slaughter-bots Weapon AI based drone weapon are ready be launched now. - https://rumble.com/v28znek-five-billion-slaughter-bots-weapon-ai-based-drone-weapon-are-ready-be-launc.html

the drug adrenochrome is harvested from the blood of children by Hollywood elites. - https://rumble.com/v28z6ni-the-drug-adrenochrome-is-harvested-from-the-blood-of-children-by-hollywood-.html

Artist covering one eye with 666 Illuminati can be flashed in public by puppet ?
https://rumble.com/v28ziyu-artist-covering-one-eye-with-666-illuminati-can-be-flashed-in-public-by-pup.html

Fast & Furious How it went down about 122,000+ firearms sold over 10,000 people dead - https://rumble.com/v28zp34-fast-and-furious-how-it-went-down-about-122000-firearms-sold-over-10000-peo.html

I Pledge Of Allegiance To The Flag Was A Marketing Ploy Designed To Sell Flags
https://rumble.com/v2987kq-i-pledge-of-allegiance-to-the-flag-was-a-marketing-ploy-designed-to-sell-fl.html

This Land is Mine with English Subtitles and Years Killed or War Dates Very Cute One - https://rumble.com/v298918-this-land-is-mine-with-english-subtitles-and-years-killed-or-war-dates-very.html

Are You Lost in the World Like Me ? and The Moby & The Void Pacific Choir
https://rumble.com/v298af8-are-you-lost-in-the-world-like-me-and-the-moby-and-the-void-pacific-choir-w.html

United States is a Corporation and Corporate Origins of Modern Constitutionalism - https://rumble.com/v29quxm-united-states-is-a-corporation-and-corporate-origins-of-modern-constitution.html

Prototype For New American Flag Unveiled Today At A Secret Meeting In DC U.S.A. - https://rumble.com/v29r0ya-prototype-for-new-american-flag-unveiled-today-at-a-secret-meeting-in-dc-u..html

Whole banking system is a scam and fractional lending is just part of the problem ? - https://rumble.com/v2a45g0-whole-banking-system-is-a-scam-and-fractional-lending-is-just-part-of-the-p.html

Collapse of the American Dream Explained in Animation We're Doomed. Pass It On - https://rumble.com/v2a437q-collapse-of-the-american-dream-explained-in-animation-were-doomed.-pass-it-.html

Social Security Is Gone and U.S.A. Government Did Not Paid In One Single Penny
https://rumble.com/v2a4c7m-social-security-is-gone-and-u.s.a.-government-did-not-paid-in-one-single-pe.html

Statutes and Codes Are Not Law Corporate Policy Right to Travel and Privileges
https://rumble.com/v2aawx0-statutes-and-codes-are-not-law-corporate-policy-right-to-travel-and-privile.html

Abatement in Pleading Common law Abatement Explained All You Need To Know - https://rumble.com/v2aaz1y-abatement-in-pleading-common-law-abatement-explained-all-you-need-to-know.html

What Is an Affidavit of Truth? and Affidavit Certificate? and Common Law Affidavit? - https://rumble.com/v2aas98-what-is-an-affidavit-of-truth-and-affidavit-certificate-and-common-law-affi.html

Why COVID-19 Shot Is Not Safe ? Nuremberg Code ? Agent Orange ? Anthrax Vaccine ? - https://rumble.com/v2affqe-why-covid-19-shot-is-not-safe-nuremberg-code-agent-orange-anthrax-vaccine-.html

Gates from Hell - Like you Never Knew Him (Bill Gates) Before ? Corbett Report
https://rumble.com/v2afwv2-gates-from-hell-like-you-never-knew-him-bill-gates-before-corbett-report-w0.html

Truth about Agenda U.N. 21 and Plan to Control and Enslave the New World Order - https://rumble.com/v2ak54g-truth-about-agenda-u.n.-21-and-plan-to-control-and-enslave-the-new-world-or.html

Biden Admin. Sale Girls 11 to 14 Age To Sex Trade 4 Illegals Arrive On Ghost Flights! - https://rumble.com/v2anh4g-biden-admin.-sale-girls-11-to-14-age-to-sex-trade-4-illegals-arrive-on-ghos.html

U.S. Government Run Human and Sex Trafficking & Enslavement of All Women & Races - https://rumble.com/v2atub0-u.s.-government-run-human-and-sex-trafficking-and-enslavement-of-all-women-.html

New World Order Says That All 50 State Will Not Comply Dishonest U.S. Administration - https://rumble.com/v2atzk6-new-world-order-says-that-all-50-state-will-not-comply-dishonest-u.s.-admin.html

A Organ Donor Card Will Get You Killed Very Fast As A Doctors Will Sell You 4 Money - https://rumble.com/v2auj9m-a-organ-donor-card-will-get-you-killed-very-fast-as-a-doctors-will-sell-you.html

Nothing to See Here “Accidental Destruction” Food Processing Plant Fire Suspicious - https://rumble.com/v2axqu6-nothing-to-see-here-accidental-destruction-food-processing-plant-fire-suspi.html

Orwellian Dystopia Both Side's Are Wrong Answer To Extremism Isn’t More Extremism - https://rumble.com/v2bngfk-orwellian-dystopia-both-sides-are-wrong-answer-to-extremism-isnt-more-extre.html

Rex 84 FEMADC’s Blueprint for Martial Law in America and A Police State America. - https://rumble.com/v2cf4yu-rex-84-femadcs-blueprint-for-martial-law-in-america-and-a-police-state-amer.html

Federal Emergency Management Agency Death Camp's Purchase 30,000 Guillotines - https://rumble.com/v2cfd3c-federal-emergency-management-agency-death-camps-purchase-30000-guillotines.html

What is Martial law in the US ? Habeas corpus ? Insurrection Act of 1807 ? NWO
https://rumble.com/v2cfl0c-what-is-martial-law-in-the-us-habeas-corpus-insurrection-act-of-1807-nwo-.html

Executive Orders Can’t Save The U.S.A. ? It's “WE THE PEOPLE” Who Own America ? - https://rumble.com/v2cgic2-executive-orders-cant-save-the-u.s.a.-its-we-the-people-who-own-america-.html

A Dangerous New Zombie Drug is Taking Over American Streets and Million Will Die ? - https://rumble.com/v2cjoog-a-dangerous-new-zombie-drug-is-taking-over-american-streets-and-million-wil.html

76 Million Gun Owners, Gun Culture, and 2nd Amendment Laws, Red Flags, U.S. Gangs - https://rumble.com/v2cuu12-76-million-gun-owners-gun-culture-and-2nd-amendment-laws-red-flags-u.s.-gan.html

We The Sheeple People of The United States of America and A Real Bill of State Rights - https://rumble.com/v2d7y7w-we-the-sheeple-people-of-the-united-states-of-america-and-a-real-bill-of-st.html

Pope's Audience Hall Is A Snake Head Revelation 20:2 Satan Is Bound Thousand Years - https://rumble.com/v3pizvl-popes-audience-hall-is-a-snake-head-revelation-202-satan-is-bound-thousand-.html

In The Name Of Jesus ? Who ? Most Evil Christians In World King James Bible 1611 - https://rumble.com/v32u9pw-in-the-name-of-jesus-who-most-evil-christians-in-world-king-james-bible-161.html

In The Name Of Jesus ? Who ? Out of all the gangsters, serial killers, mass murderers, incompetent & crooked politicians, spies, traitors, and ultra left-wing kooks in all of American history,” asked a conservative and have you ever wondered who the worst of the worst In The Name Of Jesus ? Who ?

Thank you 🙏 lord God! Many blessings so many are about to take in the truth I pray bet we get access to the whole Bible. Thank you for sharing this means allot to me and the world.

Jesus,” which later employed the letter “J,” is a derivation It was not until 1630 that the differentiation became general in England.” Note in the original 1611 version of the King James Version of the Bible there was no “J” letter in this Bible for because it did not exist. James was spelled Iames. Jesus was spelled Iesous. The 80 books of the King James Version include 39 books of the Old Testament, 14 books of Apocrypha, and the 27 books of the New Testament.

The Letter “J” did not Exist - https://ia800703.us.archive.org/33/items/kjvkingjamesbibl1611lman/kjvkingjamesbibl1611lman.pdf - The Son of Elohim was not a White Guy with an English Name, speaking Greek

One of the most asked questions of the century. How can the Messiah’s Name be Jesus if the letter “J” did not exist 500 years ago?

The Messiah walked on earth about 2,000 years ago. If the letter and sound of “J” did not exist when the Messiah walked on this earth, what was His Name?

In the English Alphabet, the letter “J” was originally used for the letter “I”. The first to distinguish the difference between the letter “J” and the letter “I” was in Gian Giorgio’s 1524 “I” and “J” were originally the same letter but different shapes both equally the same letter.

According to the history of the English Alphabet, the official and original sound of the letter “J” was the sound of “Y” in “yet” or “yellow”.

The very first English-language book to make clear distinction between the sound of “I” and the sound of “J” was not written until 1634. It wasn’t until then, after the 1611 Bible was published, that the English language officially accepted the shape and sound of the letter “J” as “jay” and no longer the “yuh” “Y” sound.

Jehovah or Jesus are Man made Names, with Man Made Doctrines. Tricked, Bait & Switch. Now after Reading this Post, you are No Longer Tricked. From this Point on you’re making a Choice who to follow.

A Savior Created by the Church of Constantine the Great; “Let us then have nothing in common with the detestable Jewish crowd; for we have received from our Savior a different way.”

Rest In Peace (R.I.P.), a phrase from the Latin requiescat in pace (Ecclesiastical Latin: [rekwiˈeskat in ˈpatʃe]), is sometimes used in traditional Christian services and prayers, such as in the Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican, and Methodist denominations, to wish the soul of a decedent eternal rest and peace. It became ubiquitous on headstones in the 18th century, and is widely used today when mentioning someone's death.

Show less

Did You See The NFL Draft Crowd Last Night? Amazing! #GrassrootsArmy

Mom WHIPS Woke School Board Over Trans Using Girls Locker Rooms And Bathrooms
Vicksburg Schools Michigan

46 landmark Supreme Court cases that changed American life as we knew it. The US Supreme Court, the court of last resort, has undeniably changed the country. It makes fewer than 100 decisions every year that have sweeping effects on American life. Some have changed race relations for the better, empowered women, given the press freedom to operate, guaranteed a person's right to expression, or reiterated that the president is not above the law.Show more

Not every decision has aged well. Other decisions have enforced slavery or create uneven schooling in the US. Most recently, the court overturned a landmark case that legalized abortion in 1973. Here are 45 of the most important cases the Supreme Court has ever decided.

Marbury v. Madison (1803)
James Madison
President James Madison. Wikimedia Commons
The case: Before President Thomas Jefferson took office in 1801, lame duck John Adams and Congress created new courts and appointed dozens of judges, including William Marbury as Justice of the Peace in the District of Columbia. But the new administration's Secretary of State James Madison wouldn't validate the appointment. So Marbury sued.

The decision: The justices ruled unanimously that Madison's refusal was illegal, and that the law Marbury had sued under was also unconstitutional. More importantly, this ruling held that the Supreme Court had the power of "judicial review" to decide whether a law or executive action is constitutional. This essentially gave the high court the legal authority for every decision it would make in the future.

Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)
U.S.S. New Orleans passes beneath Brooklyn Bridge on its way to the Atlantic from the Brooklyn Navy Yard, April 12, 1933.
A steamboat passes beneath Brooklyn Bridge on its way to the Atlantic. AP
The case: In 1808, New York state gave Aaron Ogden a 20-year license to operate his steamboats on waters within the state. Thomas Gibson, another steam boat operator and Ogden's former business partner, was also working in the area, with a license from the federal government. Ogden claimed Gibbons was undercutting his business by unfairly competing. He wanted Gibbons to stop operating, and argued his license was enforceable, even though it was on interstate waters. Gibbons argued that the US Constitution gave Congress power over interstate commerce.

The decision: The Supreme Court unanimously held states cannot interfere with Congress's ability to regulate commerce. State laws had to yield to constitutional acts by Congress, so the court ruled in Gibbon's favor. It was an important early decision finding that federal governments had the ability to determine interstate commerce.

Worcester v. Georgia (1832)
Samuel Worcester.
Samuel Worcester. Wikimedia
The case: In 1828, Georgia passed laws prohibiting anyone except Native Americans from living on Native American land. Samuel Worcester, a missionary, was living on Native American land and refused to apply for a license. He was arrested and appealed, arguing his removal was a violation of his constitutional rights, as Georgia had no jurisdiction on Native American land.

The decision: The Supreme Court held, 5-1, that the Cherokee Nation was a sovereign "distinct community." It struck down the Georgia law prohibiting white people living on Native American land. The case was important because it set out the relationship between tribes, states, and the federal government. It meant that interaction with Native American states became a federal process, and provided some sovereignty when interacting with the US government.

But it wasn't always enforced. Then-President Andrew Jackson said, "John Marshall has issued his decision. Let him enforce it."

Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge (1837)
Chief Justice Roger Brooke Taney
Chief Justice Roger Brooke Taney. Wikimedia
The case: In 1785, Massachusetts gave the Charles River Bridge Company a charter to build a bridge between Boston and Cambridge. In exchange for covering the costs of building and maintaining it, the company could collect tolls until the charter ended.

But in 1828, a second company was authorized to build a competing bridge that would be free to the public, Charles River Bridge sought an injunction to prevent the second bridge from being built.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 5-2 that the authority given to Charles River never granted them a monopoly, and that general welfare would be enhanced with a second bridge. The court said the responsibility of government was to promote the happiness and prosperity of the community.

Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)
Dred Scott (1795-1858), American ex-slave painting by Louis Schultze. Missouri Historical Society.
A painting of Dred Scott by Louis Schultze. Bettmann / Getty
The case: This case arose from a suit brought by a slave in Missouri named Dred Scott. Scott had lived for a time in the free state of Illinois. When his master died in 1849, he sued the widow, arguing his time in the slave-free state made him a free man.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 7-2 that since Scott's ancestors were imported into the US and sold as slaves, he could not be an American citizen. Since he wasn't a citizen, he had no jurisdiction to sue, which also meant that black people living free in the north were barred from federal courts. The court also held that under the Fifth Amendment, slaves were property, and any law that deprived a slave-owner of their property was unconstitutional.

The decision is thought to be one of the factors that led to the Civil War.

Munn v. Illinois (1877)
Chief Justice Morrison Waite
Chief Justice Morrison Waite wrote the majority opinion. Wikimedia
The case: In 1871, Illinois passed legislation that set the maximum rate private companies could charge for storing and transporting agricultural goods. Munn, a grain warehouse, charged too much and was found guilty of violating the law. It appealed, arguing the regulation was an unconstitutional removal of property.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 7-2 that the law was constitutional, and that the state can regulate private industries when it affects the public. Since storage facilities were devoted to the public, they could be regulated. This case allowed states to regulate businesses within their borders. It was important because it showed how private enterprises could be publicly regulated.

Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)
John Marshall Harlan.
John Marshall Harlan. Wikimedia
The case: Homer Plessy, who was black under Louisiana law of the time, boarded a train and sat in a car that was reserved for white passengers. When he refused to move, he was arrested. Plessy argued that the Separate Car Act, which required all railroads to provide equal but separate accommodation, was violating his rights under the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 7-1 that "separate but equal" accommodations for whites and blacks did not violate the 14th Amendment.

Justice John Marshall Harlan, known as the "great dissenter," wrote that the Constitution was color-blind, and the US had no class system. "There is in this country no superior, dominant, ruling class of citizens; there is no caste here. Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens," he wrote. Despite his dissent, the decision solidified the "separate but equal" doctrine for the next six decades.

Lochner v. New York (1905)
Justice Rufus W. Peckham.
Justice Rufus W. Peckham wrote the majority opinion. Wikimedia
The case: In 1897, New York passed a labor law limiting the working week for bakers to 60 hours. Joseph Lochner, a Bavarian baker, was fined twice, because his employees worked more than 60 hours. Lochner appealed, arguing the law was unconstitutional.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 5-4 that the New York law was unconstitutional. The court said the law interfered with the contract between an employer and and his employees.

This decision was widely condemned. For the next three decades, the court struck down minimum wage laws, rights to organize, and child safety laws using Lochner as precedent, before reversing course and allowing such laws.

Abrams v. United States (1919)
Oliver Wendell Holmes in 1902.
Oliver Wendell Holmes in 1902. Wikimedia
The case: In New York, five Russian anti-war activists were arrested under the 1917 Espionage Act for printing and distributing 5,000 leaflets that criticized the US's role in World War I. They also advocated for a general strike, and had put out a call to arms if the US intervened in Russia. They were sentenced to prison for up to 20 years. They appealed.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 7-2 that the Espionage Act was valid, and that it was a crime to willfully publish "disloyal" language about US politics, arguing that such speech was not protected by the First Amendment.

One of the most important things to come out of this case is Justice Holmes' dissenting opinion. He argued that the government should only regulate people's expression when it was required to save the country.

Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Mellon (1923)
Associate Justice George Sutherland of the United States Supreme Court.
Justice George Sutherland wrote the opinion. Wikimedia
The case: The 1921 Maternity Act gave states money for programs aimed to help mothers and their infants. A woman named Frothingham thought the act would lead to an increase in her taxes, so she tried to sue the federal government. The issue was whether a taxpayer had standing to sue, when the only injury was going to be an increase in taxes.

The decision: The Supreme Court unanimously held she did not have standing because the injury was too small and indeterminable. It led to the legal concept of a "particularized" injury, which needs to be traced to a legal violation. Without this decision, it would be a lot easier to take a suit to court.

Buck v. Bell (1927)
Dr John Bell.
Dr. John H. Bell was the superintendent at the Virginia State Colony for Epileptics and Feebleminded. Wikimedia
The case: A young woman named Carrie Buck was diagnosed with "feeble mindedness," and committed to a state institution after she was raped by her foster parent's nephew, and had his child. Her mother had also been diagnosed as feeble minded. Under the 1924 Virginia Eugenical Sterilization Act, she was to be sterilized against her will, since she was seen as unfit to procreate. Buck's appointed guardian sued, hoping to have the Supreme Court find sterilization constitutional.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 8-1 that there was nothing in the Eighth or 14th Amendments that said Carrie Buck could not be sterilized.

In his opinion, Justice Oliver Holmes wrote, "It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from breeding their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting Fallopian tubes … Three generations of imbeciles are enough."

After this case, sterilizations did not cease until the 1960s, and more than 60,000 people were sterilized without their consent. The case has never been overturned.

Near v. Minnesota (1931)
Floyd B. Olson.
Floyd B. Olson. Bettmann / Getty
The case: The 1925 Public Nuisance Bill, also known as the "Minnesota gag law," allowed judges to close down newspapers that were deemed obscene or slanderous. In 1927, the Saturday Press, a newspaper based in Minneapolis, began to publish articles attacking several public officials. One of them accused a politician named Floyd B. Olson of being a pawn to a conspiracy. Olson filed a complaint. A judge, using the 1925 law, issued a temporary restraining order against the newspaper. The newspaper appealed under the First Amendment's right to a free press.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 5-4 that the Public Nuisance law was unconstitutional. Chief Justice Hughes wrote, "This statute ... raises questions of grave importance transcending the local interests involved in the particular action. It is no longer open to doubt that the liberty of the press and of speech is within the liberty safeguarded by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment from invasion of state action."

The case stopped journalists from being censored, and enabled the press to fulfill its role as watchdog, including the printing of the Pentagon Papers in 1971.

Wickard v. Filburn (1942)
Robert H. Jackson.
Robert H. Jackson wrote the opinion. Wikimedia
The case: The Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938, enacted to stabilize agricultural prices after the Great Depression, restricted how much wheat could be grown, to avoid another recession. The Department of Agriculture fined Roscoe Filburn, a wheat farmer in Ohio, for growing too much. He sued, arguing Congress didn't have the authority, since he'd never planned to sell all of the wheat. The issue was whether Congress had the authority to regulate local wheat production.

The decision: The Supreme Court unanimously held that Congress had the power to regulate activities in the industry, and within states, when the activities had substantial effects on interstate commerce. So, even though Filburn's wheat wasn't all going to make it into the market, growing it still altered supply and demand in a national market.

This case led to the federal government having more power to regulate the economy, and also enabled federal regulation of things like workplace safety and civil rights. Not everyone has been in favor of this case. Notably, the late Justice Antonia Scalia used to laugh at it.

Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
Nettie Hunt and her daughter Nickie sit on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court. Nettie explains to her daughter the meaning of the high court's ruling in the Brown Vs. Board of Education case that segregation in public schools is unconstitutional.
A woman explains the case to her daughter outside the Supreme Court. Bettmann / Getty
The case: In the 1950s, Linda Brown had to take a dangerous route to school, because the only school that was closer was for white students. Her father, Oliver Brown, believed this was a breach of the 14th Amendment, which says, "no state can deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Brown, along with a dozen other parents, challenged the segregation policy on behalf of their 20 children.

The decision: The Supreme Court unanimously held that separate educational facilities were inherently unequal. A second decision called for lower courts and school boards to proceed with desegregation. This decision knocked down the doctrine of "separate but equal" from Plessy v. Ferguson, which had allowed mixed race schools, transportation, and facilities to exist as long as they were "equal."

The Atlantic described Chief Justice Earl Warren's "ringing opinion" as "the belated mid course correction that began America's transformation into a truly multiracial world nation."

Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
Dollree Mapp, 42, who was involved in a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision concerning illegal search and seizure in 1961, is escorted into 105th Precinct in New York by Det. John Bergersen, Feb. 18, 1970.
Dollree Mapp escorted into 105th Precinct in New York in 1970. AP
The case: When Ohio police thought a suspected bomber was hiding out in Dollree Mapp's house, they forced their way in without a warrant. When Mapp asked where the warrant was, they held up a piece of paper. In their search of her house, they found pornographic materials. They arrested Mapp and later convicted her for being in possession of obscene materials. She appealed.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 6-3 that any violation of the Fourth Amendment's right against unlawful searches and seizures made evidence inadmissible in court. Justice Clark wrote in his majority opinion that "the exclusionary rule," which prohibits the use of illegally obtained evidence in criminal trials, was essential.

This case has led to the redefining of the rights of people being accused and limits how police can obtain evidence.

Engel v. Vitale (1962)
e parents who brought suit against public schoolroom prayer in the Herricks School District pose with some of their children at Roslyn Heights, a Long Island suburb of New York City, after the Supreme Court said the prayer was unconstitutional on June 26, 1962.
The parents who brought suit against public schoolroom prayer in the Herricks School District pose with some of their children in 1962. AP
The case: In New York, schools adopted a daily prayer after it was required by state law. Some parents argued it was a violation of individuals' rights, but the school board said it wasn't, since students could opt out. Five families led by parent Steven Engel disagreed, and sued on the basis that it violated the religion clause of the First Amendment.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 6-1 that reading an official prayer at school violated the constitution, because it was an "establishment of religion." Justice Hugo Black wrote for the majority: "It is a matter of history that this very practice of establishing governmentally composed prayers for religious services was one of the reasons which caused many of our early colonists to leave England and seek religious freedom in America."

The case meant any state-enforced prayer, or reading of the bible in a public school would be suspected. It also was a key case showing the enforcement of separation between church and state.

Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
Clarence Gideon.
Clarence Gideon. Bettmann / Getty
The case: Clarence Earl Gideon was charged with breaking and entering a pool hall. He requested a lawyer to defend him, but Florida's state court rejected him. After defending himself poorly Gideon went to prison. Giddeon appealed, and the issue was whether the right to counsel extended to felony defendants in state courts.

The decision: The Supreme Court held unanimously that state courts were required to appoint attorneys for those who could not afford their own counsel.

The US justice system would not be what it is today without this decision. The decision affirms that "lawyers in criminals courts are necessities, not luxuries." However, the quality of criminal defense services varies across the country.

Reynold v. Sims (1964)
Chief Justice Earl Warren in 1964.
Chief Justice Earl Warren in 1964. Charles Tasnadi / AP
The case: This case stemmed from the apportionment scheme in Alabama. Under the 14th Amendment, each voter's intentions are meant to have equal weight, but in Alabama, legislative districts were no longer accurately representing the amount of people who lived in them, especially in the cities, where populations had grown rapidly. The issue was whether this breached the "equal protection clause" in the 14th Amendment.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 8-1 that Alabama's apportionment scheme had breached the 14th Amendment. The justices ruled that the right to vote is a fundamental right, and equal participation is crucial. Chief Justice Warren wrote for the majority: "legislators represent people, not trees or acres."

This decision made the government more democratic.

Heart of Atlanta Motel v. US (1964)
President Lyndon B. Johnson reaches to shake hands with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. after presenting the civil rights leader with one of the 72 pens used to sign the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in Washington, D.C., on July 2, 1964.
President Lyndon B. Johnson shake hands with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. after presenting him with a pen used to sign the Civil Rights Act of 1964. AP
The case: The Heart of Atlanta Motel in Georgia refused to provide accommodation for black people, but the Civil Rights Act of 1964 banned the practice. Two hours after the act was passed, the motel asked the court to stop the enforcement of a clause in Title II, which forbid racist discrimination by public accommodation providers. The motel argued it exceeded Congress's power.

The decision: The Supreme Court held unanimously that the act was not exceeding Congress's power. It reasoned that discrimination by businesses had a big impact on black people traveling, even when it was a small business, since negative effects could be far-reaching when added up. It was especially the case here, since 75% of the guests staying at the motel came from out of state.

This was the first case to challenge the Civil Rights Act, and by upholding it, the act was legitimatized and strengthened. The law would go on to be used to dismantle many other forms of racist discrimination.

New York Times v. Sullivan (1964)
Police Commissioner L.B. Sullivan (second left) celebrates his $500,000 libel suit victory in "Sullivan v. New York Times". From
Police Commissioner L.B. Sullivan (second left) celebrates his $500,000 libel suit victory. Bettmann / Getty
The case: This case was about an advertisement titled "Heed Their Rising Voices" that was published in The New York Times in 1960. The ad was looking for donations to defend Martin Luther King Jr. and criticized the Montgomery police. The ad had factual errors, and L.B. Sullivan, a Montgomery city commissioner, sued The Times for defamation, though he wasn't mentioned. In Alabama, Sullivan won and The Times was ordered to pay $500,000. The paper appealed.

The decision: The Supreme Court held unanimously that while regular defamation requires that a defendant knows a statement is false or reckless, when it's a public figure, the defendant must act with "actual malice" — meaning they must know it was false or have a "reckless disregard" for the truth.

This decision strengthens the freedom of the American press, which has the strongest protections in the world, ensuring debate on public issues is robust and open.

Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
Ernesto Miranda with attorney John J. Flynn, in 1967
Ernesto Miranda with his attorney in 1967. Bettmann / Getty
The case: In 1963, police obtained a written confession from Ernesto Miranda that said he had kidnapped and raped a woman. However, they had not advised Miranda of his right to have an attorney present during the interrogation. Miranda appealed on the basis that his confession had been gained unconstitutionally.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 5-4 that law enforcement must advise suspects of their right to remain silent, their right to an attorney, and that anything they say can and will be used against them in a court of law. Evidence could not be used in a trial unless the warnings had been given and knowingly waived.

Police work, and the well-known "you have the right to remain silent" would not be so firmly entrenched into society (or TV shows and movies) without this decision. People know their rights, and police know they have to read them to suspects.

Loving v. Virginia (1967)
Richard P. Loving and wife Mildred in 1965.
Richard P. Loving and wife Mildred in 1965. AP
The case: Mildred Jeter, a black woman, and Richard Loving, a white man, were from Virginia, where inter-racial marriage was illegal. In 1958, they got married in D.C. and then returned home. On their return, they were charged with breaking the law and sentenced to one year in prison. A judge suspended their sentence as long as they didn't return to the state together for 25 years. Loving wrote to then-Attorney General Robert Kennedy and asked for his help, and he referred them to the ACLU, which helped them sue.

The decision: In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court held that the law was unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment. Chief Justice Warren wrote, "Under our constitution the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual, and cannot be infringed by the state."

In a watershed moment for civil rights, the case found that people of any race, anywhere in the US, can get married, striking down laws banning inter-racial marriage in 16 states. The case was later cited in same-sex marriage cases.

Terry v. Ohio (1968)
Justice William O. Douglas.
Justice William O. Douglas. Wikimedia.
The case: In 1963, three men were suspiciously walking back and forth in a block in Cleveland, Ohio, and a detective thought they were preparing to rob a store. He approached them, identified himself, then frisked them and found two concealed guns. One of the men was convicted for having the gun. The man appealed. The issue was whether police frisking violated the Fourth Amendment.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 8-1 that the search was reasonable since the men were acting suspiciously, warranting inquiry. If circumstances justify a belief that an individual is armed and dangerous, the justices ruled, the officer may pat down the outside of an individual's clothing.

Justice William O. Douglas, the lone dissenter, did not think the standard for search and seizures should have been lowered from "probable cause" to "reasonable suspicion." He wrote: "Yet if the individual is no longer to be sovereign, if the police can pick him up whenever they do not like the cut of his jib, if they can 'seize' and 'search' him in their discretion, we enter a new regime. The decision to enter it should be made only after a full debate by the people of this country."

This case opened up the police's ability to investigate activity they deem suspicious.

Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969)
Clarence Brandenburg, 48, who says he's an officer in the Ku Klux Klan, left, and Richard Hanna, 21, admitted member of the American Nazi Party, pose for picture following their arrests, Aug. 8, 1964, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Clarence Brandenburg and Richard Hanna, following their arrests in 1964. AP
The case: Clarence Brandenburg was arrested after making racist remarks and claiming the government was suppressing the "Caucasian race" to a gathering of Ku Klux Klan members in a field in Ohio. He also mentioned action might need to be taken, and was filmed by media he had invited to the gathering. The state law criminalized advocating violence as a means of accomplishing political reform, and he was sentenced to up to 10 years prison. The issue was whether speech advocating for violence was protected by the First Amendment.

The decision: The Supreme Court held per curiam, which means in the name of the court rather than the judges, that his freedom of speech had been violated. It found that speech may only be outlawed when it is directly inciting "imminent lawless action." It also found that abstract discussions are not the same as actual preparation to engage in violence. This case broadened protections for political dissent.

Phillips v. Martin Marietta Corp. (1971)
Mrs. Ida Phillips, woman involved in job discrimination suit shown in Jacksonville, Fla., Jan. 25, 1971.
Ida Phillips. AP
The case: Ida Phillips applied for a job at the Martin Marietta Corporation, a missile plant in Orlando. She had seven children, and the business had a hiring policy excluding mothers with pre-school children, believing them to be unreliable. Phillips alleged she'd been denied employment because of her sex. The issue was whether this was discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The case was complicated, because the company hired women for the job, just not women with young children.

The decision: The Supreme Court unanimously held that it was discriminatory, since it was based on the sex of the applicant, even if it was about motherhood.

However, it did send the case back to lower courts to give the corporation a chance to present evidence about the impeded ability of mothers with young children. And the judges were uneasy about the idea that both sexes were equally equipped to do all jobs. Justice Hugo Black asked Phillips' lawyer, "Does the law require that the employer give the woman a job of digging ditches and things of that kind?"

All nine justices at the time were men.

Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972)
Amish children head to classes.
Amish children head to classes. Amy Sancetta / AP
The case: In Wisconsin, children were required by law to attend school until they were 16. But three Amish families refused to send their children to school after eighth grade, when most children are 14, resulting in $5 fines from the state. (Amish families think the content of secondary and higher education conflicts with their life of austerity.) They argued the compulsory attendance violated their rights under the First Amendment, specifically the Free Exercise Clause.

The decision: The Supreme Court held unanimously that the Amish families' right to religious freedom was not overridden by the state's interest in education. It held that sending the children to high school would threaten the Amish way of life. Freedom of religion was seen as more important than the state's interest in education, and this case created an exception for Amish people, and others in similar situations.

The justices agreed overall on the ruling, but Justice William O. Douglas filed a partial dissent arguing that the children's viewpoint wasn't being considered, worried that they may miss out on an education if they're not asked whether they want to go to high school.

Roe v. Wade (1973)
Demonstrators carrying giant keep abortion legal buttons & ...protect Roe vs. Wade sign during huge pro-choice march. (
Demonstrators. Cynthia Johnson / The LIFE Images Collection / Getty
The case: This case stemmed from a Texas law that said abortion was illegal unless, by doctor's orders, it was to save a woman's life. An anonymous plaintiff called Jane Roe (who was later identified as Norma McCorvey) filed against the Dallas County district attorney, arguing the law was unconstitutional.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 7-2 that overly restrictive legislation around abortion was unconstitutional. Based on a right to privacy in the 14th Amendment, the state was not allowed to regulate a woman's decision.

This case overruled any laws that made abortion illegal before a fetus was viable, giving women more power when it comes to their bodies and having children. It made access to abortion a constitutional right.

San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez (1973)
Children work on their various assignments in this open classroom in Crystal City, Texas, June 3, 1974.
Children work on their various assignments in this open classroom in Crystal City, Texas, June 3, 1974. Ted Powers / AP
The case: In the late 1960s, schools in Texas could use local property taxes to boost revenue. So schools that were based in poorer areas had less revenue, because the property taxes were lower. A class-action suit was filed on behalf of children living in poorer areas. The issue here was whether the system violated the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 5-4 that there is no constitutional right to an equal education. The opinion said it should not be unconstitutional, because "burdens or benefits" fall unevenly, depending on the wealth of the areas in which citizens live.

In Time Magazine's list of the worst Supreme Court cases since 1960, the editors concluded this case enforced the idea that discrimination against the poor did not violate the Constitution, and education wasn't a fundamental right.

United States v. Nixon (1974)
Nixon watergate
Former President Richard Nixon. Charles Tasnadi, File/AP
The case: This case was triggered by the Watergate scandal, when a special prosecutor asked for tapes that President Richard Nixon had recorded in the White House. He refused, saying he had "executive privilege" that allowed him to withhold sensitive information in order to maintain confidential communications and to maintain national security. Nixon released edited versions, but not the complete tapes, leading to Nixon and the prosecutor both filing petitions to be heard in the Supreme Court.

The decision: The Supreme Court held unanimously that while there was limited executive privilege for military or diplomacy reasons, it wasn't enough in this case. Nixon had to hand over the tapes. The case led to Nixon's resignation, and also ensures that the president does not have unlimited privilege to withhold information from other branches of government. "Not even the president is above the law," Harvard constitutional law professor Laurence Tribe said.

O'Conner v. Donaldson (1975)
Kenneth Donaldson holds a copy of a Supreme Court opinion in 1975.
Kenneth Donaldson holds a copy of a Supreme Court opinion in 1975. Charles Bennet / AP
The case: After Kenneth Donaldson told his parents he thought his neighbor was poisoning his food, he was examined and diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia. Against his will, he was committed to a state hospital for the next 15 years. During that time, two different people volunteered to be responsible for him, but the hospital refused to release him. He sued, saying the hospital staff had "intentionally and maliciously deprived him of his right to liberty."

The decision: The Supreme Court held unanimously that mental patients could not be confined in institutions against their will, if they weren't dangerous and were capable of surviving in society. In the opinion, Justice Potter Stewart wrote: "May the state fence in the harmless mentally ill solely to save its citizens from exposure to those whose ways are different? One might as well ask if the state, to avoid public unease, could incarcerate all who are physically unattractive or socially eccentric."

The decision established the legal threshold for people posing a danger to themselves or others.

Buckley v. Valeo (1976)
U.S. Senator James L. Buckley, R-NY, testifies in Washington in this March 21, 1975 photo.
Senator James L. Buckley in 1975. AP
The case: This was a case about freedom of speech, in particular about spending limits by, or for, candidates running for office. Sen. James L. Buckley, and a coalition of groups, filed a suit arguing that the Federal Election Campaign Act, which limited spending and required spending disclosures, weren't constitutional.

The decision: The court held per curiam that independent spending was a form of political speech protected by the First Amendment. However, it also concluded that contributions could be capped. This is an important decision for campaign spending. It helped lead the way to the rising of political action committees, or PACs. It also led to the enforcement of reporting campaign spending.

First National Bank of Boston v. Belloti (1978)
Attorney General Francis X. Bellotti, left in 1976.
Attorney General Francis X. Bellotti, left in 1976. AP
The case: Several plaintiffs, including the First National Bank of Boston, wanted to challenge a proposed increase on personal income taxes for high-wage earners in Massachusetts. The plaintiffs wanted to pay for advertising to criticize it, but they could only spend money if they were "materially affected," based on a Massachusetts law, which restricted what corporations could spend in politics. Attorney General Francis Bellotti said the bank wasn't materially affected. The plaintiffs challenged the constitutionality of the provision.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 5-4 that the Massachusetts law was unconstitutional. The court concluded that the First Amendment protected corporations, since they were made up of shareholders who decided their corporation should engage on public issues. This case opened the door to Citizens United.

Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978)
Allan Bakke is trailed by news and television reporters after attending his first day at the Medical School of the University of California at Davis
Allan Bakke on his first day at Medical School. Walt Zeboski / AP
The case: Allan Bakke, a 35-year-old Vietnam war veteran, was rejected from medical school at the University of California twice. Every year, the school accepted 100 people, and 16 of those accepted were from "minority groups." He argued his rejections were due to "reverse racism", since his grades were better than the 16 people who got in on minority seats.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 5-4 that Bakke should be admitted. However, it also said race could be taken into account to promote diversity on campuses.

Six different justices wrote opinions. In one opinion, Justice Harry Blackmun wrote: "In order to get beyond racism, we must first take account of race. There is no other way. And in order to treat some persons equally, we must treat them differently."

Since this case, despite affirming that race could be taken into account, the percentage of black freshman in the US has not changed. A 2017 analysis found they make up 6% of freshmen, but are 15% of college-age Americans.

Strickland v. Washington (1984)
Justice Thurgood Marshall.
Justice Thurgood Marshall in 1967. John Rous / AP
The case: David Washington was sentenced to death after he pleaded guilty to murder. But this case arose out of what his lawyer didn't do during the trial. His lawyer failed to call any character witnesses or get a psychiatric evaluation. Washington appealed, arguing his counsel's assistance was constitutionally ineffective.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 8-1 that ineffective counsel only violated the Sixth Amendment when the performance was deficient. For this, counsel assistance had to fall below an objective reasonableness standard, and there needed to be a "reasonable probability" the result would have been different had counsel not failed.

Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote in dissent: "My objection to the performance standard adopted by the Court is that it is so malleable that, in practice, it will either have no grip at all or will yield excessive variation ... To tell lawyers and the lower courts that counsel for a criminal defendant must behave 'reasonably' and must act like 'a reasonably competent attorney' is to tell them almost nothing."

This case makes it difficult for defendants to prove ineffective assistance claims, since they need to show that it's outside the range of professional competence and that the client was prejudiced by it.

Chevron USA Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council (1984)
Chevron is seen at the company's office in Caracas
Chevron. Marco Bello / Reuters
The case: In 1977, Congress added an amendment to the Clean Air Act, requiring states to establish programs to reduce power plant pollution. In the amendment, entire power plants were treated as a single unit within a "bubble", even if they had multiple smoke stacks. The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) thought the bubble interpretation dulled the law, and sued the EPA.

The decision: The Supreme Court held unanimously that the bubble policy was valid. It found that if the law is clear then agencies must follow it, and when a a law does not have a clear meaning, the courts should defer to the federal agency's interpretation of the law.

This is one of the most cited Supreme Court decisions of all time, and this standard became known as the "Chevron Defense."

Texas v. Johnson (1989)
Gregory Johnson, defendant in flag burning case, speaking against constitutional amendment banning flag desecration, outside Capitol.
Gregory Johnson speaking against constitutional amendment banning flag desecration, outside Capitol. Cynthia Johnson / The LIFE Images Collection / Getty
The case: During a protest in 1984 against then-President Ronald Reagan and local corporations in Dallas, Gregory Johnson covered the American flag in kerosene then lit it on fire, offending witnesses. He was arrested and charged with desecrating a venerated object, which was banned under Texas law. He was sentenced to one year in prison and ordered to pay $2,000. He appealed, on the basis that the law was in breach of his First Amendment rights.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 5-4 that burning the flag was protected under the First Amendment. In the majority opinion, Justice Brennan wrote: "if there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable ... We do not consecrate the flag by punishing its desecration, for in doing so we dilute the freedom that this cherished emblem represents."

Despite former President George H. Bush proposing to add an anti flag burning amendment to the constitution, this case still protects unpopular political expression in the US today.

Michael H. v Gerald D. (1989)
antonin scalia
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the majority. REUTERS/Darren Ornitz
The case: A man, for the purposes of the case named Michael, had an affair with a woman who later had a child. Blood tests indicated he was the father. He wanted visitation rights, but under California law, the child is presumed to be from the marriage, and another person can only challenge that within the child's first two years of life. Michael was too late, and sued. The issue was whether the California law violated the man's chance to establish paternity.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 5-4 that a biological father does not have a fundamental right to obtain parental rights, after the presumed father had acted in a responsible way for the child. A woman's husband is to be presumed father of her children, regardless of anyone else's claim.

Cruzan v. Director of the Missouri Department of Health (1990)
Family photo of Nancy Cruzan.
Family photo of Nancy Cruzan. AP
The case: In 1983, Nancy Cruzan, a 25-year-old woman, was in a car crash that resulted in her falling into a vegetative state. She was on life support for five years, and had no chance of recovery, but doctors estimated she could have lived on life support for another 30 years. Her parents asked for her to be disconnected, but the hospital refused without a court order. Before the car crash, Nancy had said she would not want to live if she were sick or injured and could not live "at least halfway normally." Her parents asked for a court order to remove her from life support.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 5-4 that there was a right to die, but the state had the right to stop the family, unless there was "clear and convincing" evidence that it was her wish to die.

This was the first time the court had ruled on a right-to-die case. It didn't set national guidelines, and left it to be decided on a state-by-state basis. In the month after the case, 300,000 requests were made for advance-directive forms, so people could make it known in advance what should happen to them if they became incapacitated.

Lawrence v. Texas (2003)
John Lawrence and Tyron Garner celebrate their court victory in Houston in 2003.
John Lawrence and Tyron Garner celebrate their victory in 2003. Michael Stravato / AP
The case: Police entered a private residence on a false report about a weapons disturbance, and found Lawrence and Garner engaging in a consensual sexual act. They were arrested and convicted under Texas law, which forbid two people of the same sex to have sex. The issue for this case was whether the 14th Amendment protected them.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 6-3 that the Texas law violated their right to liberty, under the "Due Process Clause," which allowed them to engage in their conduct without government intervention.

This was seen as a victory for LGBT rights, removing what one law professor called "the reflexive assumption of gay people's inferiority," and overturning 14 state laws across the US.

Georgia v. Randolph (2006)
Police enter a property.
Police enter a property. Jae C. Hong / AP
The case: After a fight at home between a separated couple, a woman called the police and told them to come in, then showed them cocaine she said her husband was using. The husband was later charged with possession, even though he had told the police they couldn't come in. The issue was whether the police can search a home without a warrant when one person gives consent, but the other refuses.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 5-3 that in at least a few circumstances the right to search and enter is not valid if one of the occupants says they can't, ruling in the husband's favor.

This case narrows the scope for when police can enter and search homes without warrants. They can still enter to protect someone from harm or to chase a fleeing suspect, for example.

Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency (2007)
John Paul Stevens.
John Paul Stevens wrote the opinion. Wikimedia
The case: This case came about in 1999, when Massachusetts, 11 other states, and several environmental organizations petitioned for the EPA to start regulating carbon dioxide coming out of new motor vehicles, since it was a pollutant. The EPA denied the petition, saying it did not have the legal authority to regulate it.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 5-4 that the EPA had the right to regulate heat-trapping gases coming from automobiles, and that the Clean Air Act's definition of air pollutant had been written with sweeping language so that it would not become obsolete.

According to James Salzman, a professor of law and environmental policy at Duke University, the majority's acknowledgement of climate change science put this case on the legal map. And since it made it almost impossible for the EPA not to regulate, the decision sent a message to other agencies that they also had to deal with climate change.

District of Columbia v. Heller (2008)
Dick Anthony Heller, 65, right, gives a "thumbs-up" as he stands with Robert A. Levy, left, from the Cato Institute, outside the Supreme Court in Washington, Tuesday, March 18, 2008,
Robert A. Levy and Dick Anthony Heller outside the Supreme Court in 2008. Pablo Martinez Monsivais / AP
The case: Richard Heller, a security guard who lived in D.C. and carried a gun for work, was not allowed to have a gun at home, due to the city's laws. He thought the laws were too restricting and made it impossible to defend himself. Heller, along with five others, sued, arguing it was a violation of the Second Amendment. They were funded by Robert Levy, a libertarian lawyer from the Cato Institute.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 5-4 that the Second Amendment guaranteed an individual's right to possess a firearm at home for self-defense. It was the first time in 70 years the Supreme Court ruled on the Second Amendment.

In 2019, former-Justice John Paul Stevens said it was the worst decision during his 34-year tenure, representing "the worst self-inflicted wound in the Court's history." He said an amendment should be added to the Constitution to overrule the case, to stop gun massacres like what had happened in Las Vegas or Sandy Hook.

Citizens United v. FEC (2010)
Citizens United President David Bossie talks on his cell phone outside the Supreme Court in Washington
Citizens United President David Bossie outside the Supreme Court. Lauren Victoria Burke / AP
The case: A non-profit organization called Citizens United made a disparaging film about Hilary Clinton and they wanted to run an advertisement for it during the 2008 election. But the Federal Election Campaign Act banned corporations and unions from spending money to advocate during elections. So Citizens United couldn't show the film since it mentioned Clinton, who was a presidential candidate at the time. Citizens United argued the ban was unconstitutional.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 5-4 that corporations and unions can spend as much as they like to convince people to vote for or against political candidates, as long as the spending is independent of the candidates. The ruling gave corporations protections under the First Amendment's right to free speech.

Justice John Paul Stevens wrote in dissent of the ruling, that it was "a rejection of the common sense of the American people," and a threat to democracy.

The decision changed how politics works in the US. In the 2014 senate elections, outside spending had more than doubled to $486 million since 2010.

National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (2012)
Former Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius speaks to members of the media as she comes out from the U.S. Supreme Court after oral arguements March 4, 2015 in Washington, DC.
Former Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius speaks to the media outside the Supreme Court in 2015. Alex Wong / Getty
The case: President Barack Obama signed the Affordable Care Act into law in 2010 to increase the number of Americans covered by health insurance, and to decrease the cost of healthcare. Twenty-six states, several people, and the National Federation of Independent Business sued to overturn the law. The first issue was whether it was legal to require people to purchase health insurance with an individual mandate. The second was whether a provision forcing states to cover more people or lose federal funding was unconstitutionally coercive.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 5-4 that the individual mandate was legitimate, because it was in essence a tax, and struck down the provision that would withhold funds for states which did not expand the program.

It wasn't without dissent, though. Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote that the decision was a "vast judicial overreaching," which would create a "debilitated, inoperable version of health care regulation."

Obergefell v. Hodges (2015)
Gay Marriage US Supreme court
Same-sex marriage supporters rejoice after the U.S Supreme Court hands down a ruling regarding same-sex marriage June 26, 2015 outside the Supreme Court in Washington, DC. Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images
The case: James Obergefell and John Arthur, a couple from Ohio, got married in Maryland. In Ohio, same-sex marriage was not allowed on death certificates. Arthur was chronically ill and wanted to have Obergefell on his death certificate. Along with three couples from Kentucky, Michigan, and Tennessee, they sued their states, claiming they were in breach of the Equal Protection Clause in the 14th Amendment, which says, "no state shall ... deny to any citizen within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

The decision: The Supreme Court held 5-4 that the 14th Amendment guarantees the right to marry, including same-sex marriages. Every state in the US now legally recognizes same-sex marriage. Before this case, 13 states still had a ban on gay marriage.

Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (2022)
A protestor with a sign that says "Pray to end abortion."
An anti-abortion supporter sits outside the Jackson Women's Health Organization, which closed within weeks after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. Rogelio V. Solis/AP
The case: In March 2018, the Jackson Women's Health Organization, Mississippi's only abortion clinic since 2006, sued the state for enacting a law that banned abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. The lawsuit argued that the rule was unconstitutional due to the precedent set by the Supreme Court, including Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Dobbs refers to Dr. Thomas E. Dobbs, the state's Department of Health officer, but he had little to do with the overall case.

The decision: The Supreme Court held 6-3 to uphold the Mississippi law. However, on top of the ruling, five of the justices in the majority opinion also ruled to overturn Roe, repealing a landmark case that made abortion legal in the US for nearly five decades. Chief Justice John Roberts was the only member of the court's conservative majority who believed the court should not have outright overruled Roe.

Show less

Karine Jean Pierre GETS ROASTED For LYING About Hunter Biden Pardon

Show more

SUPPORT THE SHOW BUY CAST BREW COFFEE NOW - https://castbrew.com/
Sign Up For Exclusive Episodes At https://timcast.com/

Merch - https://timcast.creator-spring.com

Hosts:
Tim @Timcast (everywhere)
Phil @PhilThatRemains (X)
Elaad @elaadeliahu (X)
Serge @SergeDotCom (everywhere)

Guest:
Madison Cawthorn @CawthornforNC (X)
Luke Ball @LukeTBall (X)

Madison Cawthorn is an American politician and member of the Republican Party who served as a U.S. Representative for North Carolina's 11th congressional district from 2021 to 2023.

Podcast available on all podcast platforms!

Show less