Early this morning, the United States acted, at last, to avenge itself for the sack of its embassy in Iran. American Naval and Air Forces staged out of Israel and attacked the Islamic Republic of Iran. They moved after President Donald J. Trump laid an ultimatum on the mullahs – an ultimatum they rejected. Cue the handwringing, and the libertarian look-what-you’ve-dones and what-have-you-dones. Also, cue the snarling and gnashing of teeth by the antisemitic “woke Reich.” But even a cursory review of the history of the Islamic State will show that they had this coming. Herewith, therefore, the Case Against Iran.

Preparing for the attack against Iran

The week before Thursday, the United States laid a three-part ultimatum on Iran, relating to its nuclear weapons development program:

1. Cease all uranium-enrichment activity,

2. Surrender their existing enriched-uranium stockpile, and

3. Accept strict limits on the kind of advanced centrifuge one can use to enrich uranium.

If Iran wanted to build nuclear power plants, as they said they did, then they would have to accept dilution of their enriched-uranium stocks to reactor-grade level.

Trump gave them a ten-day deadline, that would have expired tomorrow (March 1). The Iran government rejected all three points.

Yesterday Ambassador Mike Huckabee sent home all “non-essential” diplomatic personnel under his management. This includes personnel at the United States Embassy (formerly a consulate) in Jerusalem, and the former embassy in Tel Aviv.

https://x.com/usembassyjlm/status/2027312031133499902

He also strongly urged every American tourist and expatriate to leave Israel at once, while commercial air service remained available. The ambassador cited “terrorism,” “civil unrest,” and – more ominously still – armed conflict.

Witnesses on some of those “last planes out” took and shared video of a breathtaking lot of American air hardware. These included B-2 Spirit bombers, B-52 bombers, and KC-135 air tankers, all parked at David Ben-Gurion Airport, ready to fly.

In addition, China, the U.S., and 13 other countries urged all its citizens to leave Iran.

https://x.com/MarioNawfal/status/2027417190341689436

His Majesty’s Kingdom withdrew their entire embassy staff.

https://x.com/MarioNawfal/status/2027404218412188156

The evacuations should have provided enough warning – a warning Iran did not heed.

The attack comes

The first indication of any attack came at about 4:20 p.m. UTC yesterday. Witnesses described an explosion near Teheran, and speculated that Iran’s air defenses were the target.

https://x.com/TheIranWatcher/status/2027418554279018908

At 7:57 a.m. UTC this morning (2:57 a.m. EST), President Trump posted this video on the White House X and YouTube channels.

https://x.com/WhiteHouse/status/2027654336138924410

Journalist Laura Loomer confirmed, three and a half hours later, that this is a joint Israeli-American operation.

https://x.com/LauraLoomer/status/2027707304947097664

This means more than the U.S. Air Force staging out of David Ben-Gurion Airport, and USS Gerald R. Ford CVN-78 docking at an Israeli port. It refers to elements of the Israeli Defense and Air Forces playing their own active roles in the conflict.

Trump builds the case for war with Iran

Jim Hoft published this summary and transcript of the President’s eight-minute speech. Trump cited these specific provocations:

• The sacking of the U.S. Embassy in Teheran in 1979. Since then, the United States has never had direct diplomatic relations with that country.

• The Beirut Massacre in 1983. Lebanon’s Hizbollah (Party of God) carried that out. They have been a known proxy of Iran since their founding.

• A plethora of attacks by “iran-backed militias” against other American troops stationed throughout the Middle East. And last:

• Other attacks-by-proxy against American forces and commercial vessels in the region.

Trump mentioned Iran’s support of HAMAS (Harakah al-Muqāwamah al-Islāmiyyah, or Islamic Resistance Movement). They, of course, carried out the October 7 attack against Israel, during which they took several American citizens hostage. The atrocities HAMAS committed on that day merit the total annihilation of that force, to the last armed effective, regular or ir-. Israel, though antisemitic commentators have accused it of a “massacre,” has not carried its retaliation that far.

Trump announced the specific targets and objectives of this joint military operation:

• Destruction of all Iranian missiles and their missile I industry,

• Elimination of the Iranian navy,

• Breaking Iran’s capacity to support terrorist proxies, and

• Ensuring that Iran will never build or otherwise obtain a nuclear weapon.

Finally, Trump urged Iran’s civilian population to shelter in place during the strikes. But when the fighting ends, he urged:

When we are finished, take over your government. It will be yours to take. This will probably be your only chance for generations. For many years, you have asked for America’s help, but you never got it. No president was willing to do what I am willing to do tonight.

Now you have a president who is giving you what you want—so let’s see how you respond. America is backing you with overwhelming strength and devastating force.

Now is the time to seize control of your destiny and unleash the prosperous and glorious future that is close within your reach. This is the moment for action.

Do not let it pass. May God bless the brave men and women of America’s Armed Forces. May God bless the United States of America. May God bless you all.

Continued course of the war

Almost from the beginning, the senior leadership in Iran were among the first targets. An airstrike has definitely leveled the official residence of the Supreme Leader. But: he might not have been in residence. The Jerusalem Post, quoting Reuters, said Ayatollah Ali Khameini fled Teheran to “a secure location.” Of course that report comes from official sources, which puts their credibility in question. Nevertheless, CNAV cannot confirm from reliable sources that Ali Khomeini is dead, as rumor now has it. Therefore, bearing in mind Mark Twain’s famous disclaimer, we are treating reports of Khomeini’s death as unverified rumor. Accordingly, we are taking such reports with a grain of salt.

Fox News reported this morning that:

Several senior figures critical to the Iranian regime have … been eliminated.

https://x.com/FoxNews/status/2027772348393238631

But who they are, is anyone’s guess. An official source told the Associated Press that Khomeini remains alive “as far as I know.”

https://x.com/AP/status/2027772700249264422

Huh?

Iran has retaliated, not only against Israel, but also against:

• Bahrain (where a missile destroyed the headquarters of the U.S. Fifth Fleet),

• Qatar,

• The United Arab Emirates,

• Jordan, and

• Kuwait.

They have succeeded only in angering their Arab neighbors even more than they already were. Saudi Arabia sent a message of solidarity with the so-called Gulf States.

https://x.com/KSAMOFA/status/2027689326679597221

The Emirate of Qatar also condemned the strike on its territory.

https://x.com/MofaQatar_AR/status/2027693393669657066

This last is telling, considering the games Qatar played after the October 7 attack. Iran just literally bit at least one hand that had been feeding it.

The conflict spreads

The Iran Revolutionary Guards Corps boasts that they have blocked the Straits of Hormuz.

https://x.com/MyLordBebo/status/2027778062553657747

Obviously that can’t last, because Trump has already vowed to “eliminate” the Iranian Navy. Nevertheless, the U.S. Department of Transportation has warned all ships to stay away.

The Foreign Minister of Iran is still alive, and vowing that his country will fight on. NBC News somehow got an interview with him:

He has also protested in writing to the SecGen of the UN and the current President of the Security Council.

Reaction

Several influencers, among them Benny Johnson, report that ordinary Iranians are dancing in the sreets in celebration. Some are waving a flag that once flew when the Shah reigned.

In that last segment, Johnson shared footage of Reza Pahlavi, current Head of the Shah’s Royal House, rallying followers.

Tucker Carlson has been strangely silent since the war broke out. His last post mentioning Iran came out three days ago.

This is Israel’s last chance to blow up Iran with America’s military, so naturally the neocons have reached peak hysteria. Clayton Morris on what happens if they get their wish.

https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/2026844742332428541

But The Daily Mail shared an apparent interview with Carlson, in which he condemned Trump’s “disgusting and evil” acts.

https://x.com/DailyMail/status/2027784094109577700

Mark Levin reacted angrily and swiftly, promising more reaction to come.

I’ll deal with this deranged traitor, Tucker Carlson, more fully later. For now I’ll say he’s a disgusting Woke Reich lowlife. He trashes our country and president in the middle of a military campaign against an enemy that has murdered over 1000 Americans and maimed thousands more. This bum has pranced around the Middle East giving aid and comfort to our enemies. And today he’s stabbing the president in the back and smearing our nation. He lies and propagandizes, and spews his cancerous bigotry, antisemitism, and Cristian-trashing.  Even Qatar is condemning Iran. But not Carlson. He attacks his own country. You’ve every reason to despise him.

https://x.com/marklevinshow/status/2027813820815536595

Reaction in Washington is mixed, with hawks and doves in Congress quarreling openly. Surprisingly, Sen. John Fetterman, Democrat from Pennsylvania, supports Trump in this action. Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.) has also spoken in favor. Thus far the most prominent dissenting voice is that of Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) Regular readers of this space will remember his disturbing criticisms of Israel – and Jews generally – after October 7, 2023.

Analysis

First, does the United States have casus belli against Iran? Even before reaching that question, one can take confidence that the Iran regime deserves what it is getting. It has committed all four of the Rand Crimes that mark a regime as deserving of overthrow from without:

1. Execution without trial,

2. Detention without formal charge,

3. Forbidding or restricting emigration (that is, not letting people leave who want to leave), and

4. Censorship.

Just as the United States had the right to invade Nazi Germany, so she also has the right to invade Soviet Russia, or any other slave pen.

Ayn Rand

To deny this is to deny the right of a private citizen to intervene physically against a criminal attacking an innocent victim right in front of him.

Beyond that, the casus belli for Israel against Iran is undeniable. Two words suffice: “October Seventh.”

The casus belli for the United States, Trump laid out in his speech. Only the time element weakens that case to any extent – why didn’t the United States punish Iran at once after getting its embassy hostages out?

Reporter to former embassy worker: Do you plan ever to return to Iran?

Worker’s answer: Only in a B-52.

Well, B-52s are taking part in this operation, along with B-2s, KC-135s, and F-22s.

Who can apologize for Islamic Iran?

The spectacle of Americans and other outsiders apologizing for the Iranian regime is the most surreal part of this affair. The Gulf States and other Arab countries know that Iran has always posed a threat to them. True, the heirs to the Kingdom of the Parthians, and before then the Persian Empire, embraced Islam. But their brand of Islam puts them as the Destined Dictators of the world, not the Arabs. Arabs have always known this. That’s probably why an Arab, or Arabs, assassinated the Eleventh (and last) Shia Imam. To this day, Shia Muslims wait for the Twelfth Imam – who fled into the mountains at the age of five – to return from the dead and lead the world in a cathartic journey to Shia order. And all the Ayatollahs were “Twelvers.”

Two kinds of motives emerge among apologists for Iran today. First, the libertarians, who foolishly believe in “no enemies but what you make,” recognize no such thing as casus belli. Even Ayn Rand recognized the need to help people in an emergency. That’s why she composed her list of Four Crimes Against One’s Own People that condemn a regime as deserving of invasion.

Antisemitism

Second, we have antisemites, including:

1. “Covenant Theologians,” and

2. Those who believe – mistakenly – that modern Jews are not Jews, but Khazars.

Legend has it that the leader of Khazaria invited a Christian priest (probably Orthodox), a rabbi, and an imam to “sell” their religions to his people. The Khazars chose the rabbi and all converted to Judaism. Then Khazaria disappeared from the map, and the next inhabitants of the land were Kievan Rus’ in modern Ukraine.

Tucker Carlson asserted to Ambassador Huckabee in a recent interview that modern Jews all descend from these Khazars.

https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/2025357188424724509

Huckabee swiftly corrected him, citing definitive genealogical evidence showing that even the Ashkenazim (European Jews) have Middle Eastern roots. But apparently Carlson is unrepentant and defiant, even of Genesis 12:3:

I will bless them who bless thee, and anyone who curseth thee I will curse.

Perhaps the Iranian regime has today fallen victim to the Genesis 12:3 Curse.

Update

During preparation of this report, other posts surfaced on X claiming that IDF elements, sifting through the rubble of the Ayatollah’s palace, have recovered his remains.

https://x.com/BarakRavid/status/2027830773328302396

https://x.com/FoxNews/status/2027837865531458014

Reuters confirmed receiving a rumor to that effect. So did Axios. However, CNAV sticks with its original grain-of-salt stance.

Link to:

The article:

https://cnav.news/2026/02/28/editorial/talk/iran-war-begins/

Video:

U.S. Embassy X post and direct-linked message:

https://x.com/usembassyjlm/status/2027312031133499902

https://il.usembassy.gov/travel-advisory-february-27-2026/

Joe Hoft report: 15 countries tell citizens to leave Iran

https://x.com/MarioNawfal/status/2027417190341689436

https://x.com/MarioNawfal/status/2027404218412188156

https://joehoft.com/breaking-15-countries-tell-citizens-get-iran-now/

Indications of the attack:

https://x.com/TheIranWatcher/status/2027418554279018908

President Trump’s annoucement:

https://x.com/WhiteHouse/status/2027654336138924410

Laura Loomer’s quote:

https://x.com/LauraLoomer/status/2027707304947097664

Summary and transcript of Trump’s remarks, by Jim Hoft of TGP:

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2026/02/breaking-president-trump-releases-fiery-late-night-statement/

Reportage on the course of the war:

https://www.axios.com/2026/02/28/iran-attack-supreme-leader-ali-khamenei

https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-news/article-888251

https://x.com/FoxNews/status/2027772348393238631

https://x.com/AP/status/2027772700249264422

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2026/02/iran-launches-retaliatory-missile-strikes-israel-after-joint/

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2026/02/saudi-arabia-slams-brutal-iranian-aggression-against-bahrain/

https://x.com/KSAMOFA/status/2027689326679597221

https://x.com/MofaQatar_AR/status/2027693393669657066

https://x.com/MyLordBebo/status/2027778062553657747

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2026/02/iranian-foreign-minister-vows-continue-attacks-until-aggression/

https://en.irna.ir/news/86089741/Iran-will-continue-legitimate-self-defense-until-aggression-ceases

Reaction:

https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/2026844742332428541

https://x.com/DailyMail/status/2027784094109577700

https://x.com/marklevinshow/status/2027813820815536595

https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/2025357188424724509

Is Khomeini dead?

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2026/02/developing-netanyahu-says-ayatollah-ali-khamenei-is-gone/

https://x.com/BarakRavid/status/2027830773328302396

https://x.com/FoxNews/status/2027837865531458014

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/israel-us-launch-strikes-iran-2026-02-28/

https://www.axios.com/2026/02/28/iran-khamenei-killed-israel

Declarations of Truth:

https://x.com/DecTruth

Declarations of Truth Locals Community:

https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/

Conservative News and Views:

https://cnav.news/

Clixnet Media

https://clixnet.com/

Yesterday the United States Supreme Court, as conservative half expected, disappointed those wishing to Make America Great Again. In two key cases, the Court ruled against about a third of the tariffs President Donald Trump has recently employed. Specifically, they ruled that the specific authority he cited, was not sufficient to empower him as he thought. But already the President is working around that decision. Furthermore, that workaround recalls an almost two-hundred-year-old precedent, set not by a Chief Justice, but by a President.

The specific ruling against tariffs

Reportage about the ruling of the Court is too poor to rate mention. Therefore, CNAV turns directly to the Supreme Court itself, which provides the text of its recent decisions.

The Court actually issued one opinion governing two cases:

• Learning Resources, Inc., et al., v. Trump et al. (24-1287) (from the D. C. Circuit Court of Appeals), and

• Trump et al. v. VOS Solutions, Inc., et al. (25-250) (from the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals).

Trump had cited the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) as his authority to impose tariffs to deal with:

• Refusal of the governments of Canada and Mexico to deal effectively with drug smugglers, and

• Most other countries’ own tariff policy against American goods.

Lower courts in both cases (U.S. District Court for D.C. and Court of International Trade) found for two importers, Learning Resources and VOS Solutions. The convoluted trail of review petitions brought both cases before the Supreme Court, which heard argument last year.

Yesterday the Court held that the IEEPA does not empower a President to impose tariffs. Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the Court, basically held that:

• Tariffs are duties on imports,

• Congress and only Congress may “lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises,” and

• President Trump’s tariffs constituted a usurpation of the taxing power of Congress.

Reasoning, concurrences, and dissents

The Court then ruled that the D. C. Circuit Court of Appeals must dismiss the Learning Resources case for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. In short, tariffs, being an element of trade policy, rate challenge in the Court of International Trade, not the D. C. District Court. The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the Court of International Trade in the VOS Solutions case.

Roberts cobbled together a six-member majority, chiefly by recruiting Justice Amy Coney Barrett to his side. Justice Neil Gorsuch went along for the ride. (Originalist though he is, he is also a libertarian. As such he doesn’t think tariffs have any place in the government of a free society. Never mind that other governments impose tariffs; a libertarian stubbornly insists that tariff imposers cheat themselves alone. For further exposition on this point, see Robert W. Peck’s essay opposing tariffs.)

The Equitarians – Jackson, Kagan and Sotomayor JJ – uniformly concurred with Roberts. But Roberts invoked the “major questions doctrine” to say the IEEPA couldn’t grant tariff authority in any case. The Equitarians saw fit to read the IEEPA as specifically precluding such authority.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh flatly declared that his boss is crazy, and that he misreads both the Taxing Clause and the Act. Thomas and Alito JJ joined him. Similarly, Justice Thomas wrote his own dissent, saying the IEEPA does delegate regulatory authority to the President on foreign trade. Tariffs are part of such regulation – and the Constitution does permit such delegation as the IEEPA represents.

The workaround

Trump acted swiftly to reinstate the tariffs involved, or to impose others that would collect the same – or more – revenue. Alison Durkee reported only this morning in Forbes about Trump’s “backup plan.”

The Trump administration will find new ways to impose tariffs after the Supreme Court ruled against the president’s sweeping “Liberation Day” duties Friday, and while President Donald Trump announced “alternatives” Friday, including a 10% tariff he raised to 15% on Saturday, the new tariffs will likely have more restrictions than the ones the high court struck down.

This workaround does include a ten-percent tariff (now 15 percent) on all imports, from wherever. That levy is subject to a 150-day (five-month) deadline. Tellingly, his emergency declaration over a record trade deficit remains in force.

In fact, Justice Kavanaugh, in his dissent, specified the allowable workaround:

Although I firmly disagree with the Court's holding today, the decision might not substantially constrain a President's ability to order tariffs going forward. That is because numerous other federal statutes authorize the President to impose tariffs and might justify most (if not all) of the tariffs issued in this case...Those statutes include, for example, the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (Section 232); the Trade Act of 1974 (Sections 122, 201, and 301); and the Tariff Act of 1930 (Section 338).

Of course libertarians like Justice Gorsuch (and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky.) will object that trade deficits don’t matter. Peck (see above) blames trade deficits on the government budget deficit, and on Richard Nixon canceling the redemption of dollars with gold.

But say the United States restored full gold redemption today. Tomorrow gold would start flowing out of the country, to the point of emptying Fort Knox. Unless the country ceased to have a trade deficit and started having a trade surplus.

More saliently: Peck and others insist that “everybody wins,” and that the sum of economic outcomes need never be zero. But need never be does not equate to can never be or will never be. When Communist China builds an economy on slave labor, and undercuts American free labor, that way lies perpetual unemployment and eventual loss of political sovereignty. Recall China’s name for itself: The Middle Kingdom. To rule the world, that is.

Previous articles on tariffs

CNAV has discussed tariffs many times before. Rather than repeat everything it said before, CNAV prefers to link to those articles:

• Trump first uses tariffs against Canada, Mexico and China

• Details on how the U.S. government once financed itself

• Correcting misunderstandings about tariff policy and effects

• The Robert Peck piece,

• and our rebuttal.

How else Trump reacted

The President never minces words. Indeed he drops words like bombs, as everyone knows who has followed his life and career. After the Supreme Court issued its ruling, he came out in true form.

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116104407604484915

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116104410806971686

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116105594741987893

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116105691693335080

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116105858701679073

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116109104602937332

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116109447886304328

Here are the relevant excerpts:

To show you how ridiculous the opinion is, the Court said that I’m not allowed to charge even $1 DOLLAR to any Country under IEEPA, I assume to protect other Countries, not the United States which they should be interested in protecting — But I am allowed to cut off any and all Trade or Business with that same Country, even imposing a Foreign Country destroying embargo, and do anything else I want to do to them — How nonsensical is that? They are saying that I have the absolute right to license, but not the right to charge a license fee. What license has ever been issued without the right to charge a fee? But now the Court has given me the unquestioned right to ban all sorts of things from coming into our Country, a much more powerful Right than many people thought we had.

After quoting Justice Kavanaugh’s dissent, Trump continues:

In actuality, while I am sure they did not mean to do so, the Supreme Court’s decision today made a President’s ability to both regulate Trade, and impose TARIFFS, more powerful and crystal clear, rather than less. There will no longer be any doubt, and the Income coming in, and the protection of our Companies and Country, will actually increase because of this decision. Based on longstanding Law and Hundreds of Victories to the contrary, the Supreme Court did not overrule TARIFFS, they merely overruled a particular use of IEEPA TARIFFS. The ability to block, embargo, restrict, license, or impose any other condition on a Foreign Country’s ability to conduct Trade with the United States under IEEPA, has been fully confirmed by this decision. In order to protect our Country, a President can actually charge more TARIFFS than I was charging in the past under the various other TARIFF authorities, which have also been confirmed, and fully allowed.
 
Therefore, effective immediately, all National Security TARIFFS, Section 232 and existing Section 301 TARIFFS, remain in place, and in full force and effect. Today I will sign an Order to impose a 10% GLOBAL TARIFF, under Section 122, over and above our normal TARIFFS already being charged, and we are also initiating several Section 301 and other Investigations to protect our Country from unfair Trading practices. Thank you for your attention to this matter. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!
 
PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP

In the second Truth listed above, Trump made an electrifying accusation:

It is my opinion that the Court has been swayed by Foreign Interests, and a Political Movement that is far smaller than people would think — But obnoxious, ignorant, and loud!

Trump returned to this theme in his press conference after the decision. When reporters asked him for evidence of “foreign influence” on the Court, he coyly replied, “You’ll find out.” If Trump made a generic statement that the Court has allowed the idea of cheap imports to persuade it, he needs no evidence. That a tariff-free environment serves the interests of exporters, goes without saying. But perhaps Trump has direct evidence to implicate certain Members of the Court. If he has, then he might reveal it in his next State of the Union Address.

In subsequent Truths, he announced his ten-percent baseline tariff, which he later raised to fifteen percent. He also promised further “adjustments” to his policies, which, he promised, would rake in even more money. Trump also singled out Thomas and Kavanaugh JJ for special praise.

Where did this really come from?

Let’s not kid ourselves. Yes, Justice Kavanaugh named, and described in detail, the specific workaround on tariffs Trump used. But Trump still defied the spirit of John Roberts’ decision. (And it is Roberts’ decision. That, no one may doubt with any justice.)

Yesterday, John Roberts presumed to tell a President what to do and what not to do. Trump himself described how incongruous, inconsistent, and intellectually indefensible that decision is. But more to the point, in citing separation of powers, Roberts violated separation of powers.

This, along with his decision in Florida ex rel. Bondi v. Sebelius (the Obamacare legalization decision), leads to one conclusion only. John Roberts is imitating the infamous Earl Warren. Warren decided that the Constitution would mean whatever he said it meant, any time he said it. No wonder his fellow Justice as good as said he was crazy.

This leads to another question. Can the Supreme Court truly make law that everyone else must obey? This would scandalize Hamilton, Madison and Jay (The Federalist Papers) if they saw it happen.

Trump just answered the question – but not, as some will accuse, with an original, unprecedented action.

Andrew Jackson, the first nullifier

The precedent comes from President Andrew Jackson. After the Court overruled him in Worcester v. Georgia (a Native-American land-residency case), Jackson allegedly retorted,

John Marshall has made his decision. Now let him enforce it!

Jackson did decline to assist in the enforcement of a decision to release from prison a man convicted of unlawful residence on tribal lands. This arguably was the first instance of executive nullification of a judicial – or Justicial – decision.

Donald Trump has, in spirit, engaged in executive nullification. True, Justice Kavanaugh pointed out how Trump could do it with little risk of challenge or other sanction. But only someone with the boldness and stubbornness of a Trump would even think to do such a thing.

So: call this the Andrew Jackson Gambit. Jackson would be proud, for two reasons. First, no President since Jackson has done executive nullification like this. Second, Jackson presided over a government that self-financed through tariffs. So the subject matter of the case would impress Jackson at least as much as Trump’s technique.

But Trump might need to employ a more direct act of executive nullification. That would make an interesting challenge. And it might come sooner than anyone thinks, and on the subject of immigration, deportation, and removal.

For now, Trump just nullified a Supreme Court opinion on tariffs. He had to, because the alternative – giving the money back – is unthinkable. But Trump’s term will eventually test the limits of the Supreme Court’s power. The battle is joined, the horns locked – and the stakes high.

Link to:

The article:

https://cnav.news/2026/02/21/foundation/constitution/tariffs-supreme-court-andrew-jackson-nullification/

Video:

The ruling:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-1287_4gcj.pdf

Previous CNAV articles on tariffs:

https://cnav.news/2025/02/02/news/tariffs-counter-tariffs-civilization/

https://cnav.news/2025/04/03/news/tariffs-trade-taxes/

https://cnav.news/2025/04/13/news/tariffs-misunderstandings/

https://cnav.news/2025/05/10/accountability/executive/tariffs-and-trade-theres-no-free-lunch/

https://cnav.news/2025/05/17/foundation/constitution/tariffs-trade-hard-truth/

Trump Truths in reaction to the ruling:

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116104407604484915

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116104410806971686

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116105594741987893

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116105691693335080

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116105858701679073

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116109104602937332

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116109447886304328

Andrew Jackson’s quote and context:

https://doi.org/10.2307%2F2205966

Declarations of Truth:

https://x.com/DecTruth

Declarations of Truth Locals Community:

https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/

Conservative News and Views:

https://cnav.news/

Clixnet Media

https://clixnet.com/

American politics, now more than ever, is facing generational change. Leftists know it, though they might not be able to bring themselves to figure out why. But they surely realize that the next generations of American children will be ever more conservative than their generation. That scares them as badly as a hunter scares an animal by first wounding it, then cornering it. And that one fact makes the American left more dangerous than ever. Already the left is trying to settle the political debate the hard way – through physical violence. But if American patriots stand firm, they can defeat even that kind of campaign.

The engines of generational change – education

About a century ago, the American left sought to bring about generational change by capturing American education. This institutional capture applies to K-12 schooling and to college and university. It has always been the most powerful weapon at their disposal. (Capturing the mass media works only until their targets on the Right develop new media they can’t capture. Schools require a little thing called accreditation that makes institutional capture easier.)

Last year saw the centennial of the most important court case that relates to educational capture. That case was State of Tennessee v. John T. Scopes. Scopes, a biology teacher, introduced the theory of evolution, as Charles Darwin most thoroughly articulated it, into his classes. Authorities arrested him and haled him into court. Attorney Clarence Darrow famously defended him – by challenging the prosecutor, William Jennings Bryan, to a debate by hostile-witness examination. Bryan submitted to this examination – whereupon Darrow changed his plea from “Not Guilty” to “Guilty” to avoid examination by Bryan. The court imposed a trifling fine on Scopes, and the Tennessee Supreme Court invalidated the penalty on a technicality.

But the real damage was the introduction of the theory of evolution into education, and the total rejection of any lessons that might possibly rely upon the existence of God. Case after case followed that erased God from mention in school at all. And so began the training of children to be functional atheists – and, therefore, leftists.

Disclaimer

Not all atheists are leftists, but libertarian and especially conservative atheists have a problem. Their problem is that, without God, no objective reason remains to prefer a morality forbidding first use of force. The late Ayn Rand tried to assert such a reason, but in reality that becomes a mere personal preference.

Furthermore, the late Nathaniel Branden reported that Rand once betrayed a key weakness of her own philosophy. In “The Benefits and Hazards of the Philosophy of Ayn Rand,” he wrote:

[S]he became very quick on the draw in response to anything that even had the superficial appearance of irrationalism, by which I mean, of anything that did not fit her particular understanding of “the reasonable.” With regard to science, this led to an odd kind of scientific conservatism, a suspicion of novelty, an indifference -- this is only a slight exaggeration -- to anything more recent than the work of Sir Isaac Newton.

I remember being astonished to hear her say one day, “After all, the theory of evolution is only a hypothesis.”

I asked her, “You mean you seriously doubt that more complex life forms – including humans – evolved from less complex life forms?”

She shrugged and responded, “I’m really not prepared to say,” or words to that effect.

I do not mean to imply that she wanted to substitute for the theory of evolution the religious belief that we are all God's creation; but there was definitely something about the concept of evolution that made her uncomfortable.

That something was the notion that human beings had nonhuman – indeed, non-rational – ancestors. Her philosophy of Objectivism teaches human exceptionalism – a thing Darwin denied.

Leftists have no problem with denying human exceptionalism.

A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy.

Ingrid Newkirk, founder, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.

In fact they decry human beings as lower than the animals, and a blight on the Earth. But that has led them to the existential crisis they now face.

A more powerful engine of generational change: anti-natalism

Anti-natalism – the notion that the earth would be better off if no more children are born – is now the rage. It wasn’t always so obvious. The left couched it in terms that appealed to the shortsighted selfishness of young women. Feminism taught women that marriage and childbirth held them back. (In its most extreme articulation, it held that childbirth was a killer disease.) So leftist women began to have children later in life. Or – even more problematically – they waited too long to have children. A man can sire children well into senescence, though spermatogenesis does slow down. But oögenesis happens entirely before birth, after which a girl’s eggs start to die. (Doctors call this atresia.) Eventually the last egg dies, and menopause sets in.

So if a woman wants children, she’s under a deadline.

At least some on the left realized the implications. Francois Truffaut and Jean-Louis Richard, adapting Ray Bradbury’s novel Fahrenheit 451 to the screen, wrote dialog in which suburban women wondered idly about the human species dying out. (None of these women had children.) But no one seems to have paid attention.

Then the feminist movement made its worst mistake: plumping for abortion on demand. Sarah Weddington took to the Supreme Court the case of a Dallas, Texas woman who wanted an abortion. On January 22, 1973, feminists got their wish. But for forty-nine years, they didn’t realize that conservative women would keep having children.

What goes around, comes around

The 2021 Term of the United States Supreme Court, coming after the “election” of Joe Biden, shocked the Left. Reversal of abortion as the federal law of the land was bad enough. (So also was the invalidation of any “natural progression” of gun control.) But the Court also invalidated willful discrimination against religious institutions, and the disallowance of prayer on school grounds by faculty and staff. Those two cases will set precedents for even greater movements, moving forward.

But why the Court decided those cases as it did, should interest people more. In forty-nine years, the electorate underwent the beginning of a generational change. Liberals – especially women – who might have elected Al Gore instead of George W. Bush – and Hillary Clinton instead of Donald J. Trump – did not so vote because they did not exist. They literally had never been born. Their would-be mothers either aborted them away, or refused to conceive them to begin with. But conservative women did have the current generation of voters who – tellingly – elected Donald Trump in 2016.

So when Justice Antonin Scalia died (or was murdered), Donald Trump appointed another Originalist – Neil Gorsuch – to replace him. Likewise, Trump replaced one Institutionalist – Anthony Kennedy – with another, more consistent one – Brett Kavanaugh. Finally, Ruth Bader Ginsburg – an Equitarian – died, and Trump replaced her with an Institutionalist – Amy Coney Barrett. These three appointees joined with the two other Originalists to change the orientation of the Court.

But how?

Christian Heiens, who once called himself The Oracle of Virginia, explains.

https://x.com/ChristianHeiens/status/2018743494550880761

The math behind this is actually really fascinating, and it explains why the Left has to rely so much on institutional capture and mass migration to remain alive.

The children of Liberals adopt their worldview 89% of the time, while Conservatives see their kids adopt theirs 81% of the time.

But this advantage on the Left is dwarfed by the fact that they’re essentially an anti-[natalist] movement.

(Heiens posted his essay to X by smartphone, and that device’s “auto-correct” function somehow changed “natalist” to “catalyst.” In a subsequent post he explained that error.)

Heiens showed the anti-natalism of the Left, and its consequences, using an article from the Institute for Family Studies. Brian Wilcox and Grant Bailey published “The Left’s Family Problem: Marriage and Kids Cratering among Liberal Young Adults” last year. Wilcox and Bailey begin by citing multiple articles discouraging women from marrying or having children. Until recently, conservatives and liberals alike had fewer children. But beginning in the 1980s, conservatives, male and female alike, reported marrying more often, and younger, and having more children. These conservatives talk “family first,” and practice it. Liberals, in contrast, practice self first.

The statistics – to which Wilcox and Bailey turn next – show the result. Significantly more conservatives than liberals marry, and become parents. In fact, motherhood among conservative women is trending higher. Among liberal women, it is trending lower – much lower.

Wilcox and Bailey do report that the left is winning converts among young women. But these young women are avoiding childbearing as a result of that conversion.

Result: the children of the current child-bearing generation will be, on average, more conservative.

Generational change is one of two costs

Wilcox and Bailey report two costs of this mindset to liberals. First, they admit they’re lonely. Not only would it be nice to have the same adult to come home to, but it would also be nice to have a child in one’s life. Liberals who avoided marriage and childrearing “to get richer” missed out on both, and now they are admitting it.

But nearly a year and a half ago, Anastasia Berg, writing in The New York Times, sounded a more dire warning – for her side. First she admits how easy it is to dismiss low birth rates as strictly a conservative worry. But then she warns her side that, if they don’t have children, conservatives will.

We also have to realize that the possibility of a better future is conditioned on the possibility of having a future at all. That means, some people have to be having children. And if you want those children to share in the values that you yourself hold, you probably want some of those people [i.e., the mothers and fathers of those children] to be the kind of people that you yourself are.

In other words, if the children of the next generation are not yours, neither will their values be yours.

Heiens did cite some figures suggesting that value retention is less for conservatives than for liberals. But the liberal advantage in that regard is only slight. Furthermore, conservatives overcome that by having more children to begin with.

The TFR Advantage

Wilcox and Bailey cite another article from their Institute, clearly showing a Total Fertility Rate (TFR) advantage for conservatives. See Grant Bailey and Lyman Stone, “The Trump Bump: The Republican Fertility Advantage in 2024.” TFR went up in any given county, with the percent of the vote for Trump in that county in 2024.

Recall that TFR is the total number of children a woman can count on having in her lifetime. In a civilized country, the replacement level for TFR is 2.1. This is because:

1. A woman must replace herself and her husband, and

2. One in ten women must replace the child who never makes it to (or out of) puberty.

Lines of regression in scatter plots of TFR v. percent voting conservative have gotten steeper with every passing election from 2012 onwards. Furthermore, as a county swings conservative, its TFR rises.

But does it rise to replacement level? It might. Other studies have shown that TFR can rise as high as 2.4 among cohorts that all vote conservative. Furthermore, families with children are moving out of “blue” States into “red” States. They want the benefits of better education systems.

From Heiens:

If you ended all immigration and dismantled their dominance over education, the Left would be extinct in 20 years.

In fact Trump has caused a net emigration rate to hold in America today.

About education – and how generational change might work out

Dismantling the Department of Education, to remove the weapon Biden last wielded, is a good start. But conservatives who still have children in public schools, can and should “push the envelope” on what their children learn in school, just as Trump has “pushed the envelope” with what the law and Constitution let him do. In fact, many teachers are pushing against a mindset of explicit atheism. Coach Joe Kennedy, who famously won his right to pray on his high-school football field, has his imitators.

Private schools, thus far, can still teach religious values if they so choose. Their communities can cite the Carson case to end discrimination against them by State and local governments. But taking the public schools back to pre-1947 and even pre-1925 days would work even better.

CNAV can therefore predict the final result of this generational change. America’s population will decline, then bottom out as the current generation produces a more family-oriented one. They’ll vote for family-friendly policies – and conservative lessons. In another generation, the Supreme Court will have a majority that will see no harm – and indeed great good – in teaching a more Godly curriculum.

This will happen because the same value system that emphasized atheism, hedonism, and other ills, devalued the idea of having children. Liberals aren’t having children; conservatives are.

The leftist and secularist empire strikes back

This is why people on the left – both in office and in the rank and file – are fighting so hard. They actually are fighting to keep illegal aliens in the country, regardless of the additional crimes they might commit. The Minnesota Insurrection – which, sadly, is now spreading to other “blue cities” – is part of that.

But so also is the effort to:

1. Deny that anything untoward happened in the Election of 2020, and

2. Leave in place the policies and procedures that made those untoward things happen.

To that end, Senate Democrats vow never to pass the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility for America, or SAVE America, Act. “Jim Crow 2.0!” cries Sen. Charles M. Schumer (D-N.Y.), their Floor Leader. (Never mind that Jim Crow was a Democratic program, not a Republican.) SAVE America requires, among other things, that all States:

• Remove from their voter rolls, any voter registrant who is not a citizen of the United States,

• Ask for proof, not mere declaration, of citizenship from all voter registration applicants, and

• Require all unit election clerks to require photographic identification of anyone showing up to vote.

In addition to opposing these commonsense measures, the left demands that the Bureau of the Census continue to count illegal aliens for purposes of determining Congressional representation allocation among and within the several States. They also often violently oppose efforts to remove illegal aliens – even those who commit Big Four offenses. (Which are: murder, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault.)

Stand firm and secure the win

In the face of that, Americans must push back against movements that promote gender dysphoria, Alphabet Soup orientation, and atheism. Likewise, we must not rest until the Census Bureau stops counting illegal aliens. And of course we must advocate for the removal of illegal aliens so that no one can possibly count them.

The United States Supreme Court’s birthright citizenship case will come to oral argument on April 1, 2026. Birthright citizenship directly affects how quickly the generational change will occur. Globalists are bent on changing American culture by using mass migration as a weapon. They will turn to birth tourism if the removal campaign succeeds.

Beyond that, Americans must strive to take their school systems away from secular humanists and Alphabet Soup activists. They must also reevaluate their perception of the need for and utility of a college education. And if college is to have any benefit, a new kind of university must arise to replace those that have chosen to promote globalist, “woke” and Alphabet Soup values.

Link to:

The article:

https://cnav.news/2026/02/07/editorial/talk/generational-change-american-politics/

Video:

Branden N, “The Benefits and Hazards of the Philosophy of Ayn Rand”:

https://www.starways.net/lisa/essays/benefits1.html

Fahrenheit 451 (1966), dir. Francois Truffaut, on the Internet Movie Database:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0060390/

Previous CNAV articles in the order cited:

https://cnav.news/2022/07/01/foundation/constitution/supreme-court-2021-term/

https://cnav.news/2022/06/24/foundation/constitution/roe-v-wade-fallen/

https://cnav.news/2022/06/23/accountability/judicial/second-amendment-win/

https://cnav.news/2022/06/22/foundation/constitution/supreme-court-repudiates-blaine/

https://cnav.news/2022/06/27/accountability/judicial/prayer-wins-how-much/

https://cnav.news/2018/07/05/accountability/executive/antonin-scalia-murder/

https://cnav.news/2026/01/27/accountability/executive/minnesota-insurrection/

https://cnav.news/2026/02/01/accountability/executive/election-2020-case-breaking-wide-open/

https://cnav.news/2025/12/08/foundation/constitution/birthright-citizenship-headed-scotus-2/

https://cnav.news/2019/05/24/civilization/education/college-need/

Christian Heiens’ X post:

https://x.com/ChristianHeiens/status/2018743494550880761

From the Institute for Family Studies:

https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-lefts-family-problem-marriage-and-kids-cratering-among-liberal-young-adults

https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-trump-bump-the-republican-fertility-advantage-in-2024

Anastasia Berg’s warning:

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/16/opinion/anastasia-berg-falling-birth-rates-liberals.html

Declarations of Truth:

https://x.com/DecTruth

Declarations of Truth Locals Community:

https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/

Conservative News and Views:

https://cnav.news/

Clixnet Media

https://clixnet.com/