War in Iran, a possible regime collapse in Cuba, and Democratic protests against both, are the talk of the country. But no one is talking about four constitutional amendments in Virginia. Early voting has already started on one of them – the Virginia Redistricting Amendment. National Republicans ignore the Virginia redistricting fight at their own peril. And “low-propensity” Virginia voters sit this special election out at their own peril – and that of all other Virginians.

The Virginia Redistricting Amendment

The Virginia Redistricting Amendment is one of four the Democrat-controlled General Assembly allegedly passed on:

1. First reading a scant four days before Election Day 2025, and

2. Second reading on January 16, 2026, shortly after a new House of Delegates swore itself in. (This also took place under a new Governor, Democrat Abigail Spanberger.)

The text of the public question for this amendment reads:

Should the Constitution of Virginia be amended to allow the General Assembly to temporarily adopt new congressional districts to restore fairness in the upcoming elections, while ensuring Virginia's standard redistricting process resumes for all future redistricting after the 2030 census?

The official explanation of the text reads in relevant part:

The proposed amendment would give the General Assembly the authority to redraw one or more of Virginia's congressional districts before 2031 in limited circumstances. In the event that another state redraws its own congressional districts before 2031, without being ordered by a court to do so, the General Assembly would then be able to redraw Virginia's congressional districts. The General Assembly's power to do so would continue until October 31, 2030, and the Virginia Redistricting Commission would reassume the responsibility of drawing the congressional districts in 2031.

The proposed district map has been approved by the General Assembly and would take effect only if the constitutional amendment is approved by the voters.

A "yes" vote would allow the General Assembly to redraw Virginia's congressional districts, since other states have done so, in addition to giving effect to the proposed district map in time for the 2026 Congressional elections, and return the responsibility of drawing the congressional districts in 2031 to the Virginia Redistricting Commission.

A "no" vote would leave the authority to draw congressional districts with the Virginia Redistricting Commission once a decade and Virginia's current districts would remain in place.

While the explanation, by all accounts, follows the effect of the proposed amendment, the text could mean anything. More to the point, the General Assembly could, if it sees fit, draw districts twice more before October 31, 2030.

Some history is in order. In 2021, Virginians passed another constitutional amendment creating an independent redistricting commission to draw U.S. congressional districts. That commission, with equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans, deadlocked. So the Supreme Court of Virginia (SCOVA) appointed two Special Masters to draw the maps Virginia uses today. For the most part, Virginia’s eleven districts are compact and almost all nearly convex. Virginia’s House delegation consists of six Democrats and five Republicans. Presidential candidates Joseph R. Biden (2020) and Kamala Harris (2024) carried Virginia by similar margins.

But the State of Texas, at least, redrew its Congressional map earlier this season. It operated on the theory that populations had shifted, and an earlier legislature had drawn unfair maps.

What the new Virginia map would look like

Ballotpedia has an article showing the present map and the new map that Sen. (and Senate President pro tempore) L. Louse Lucas (D-Portsmouth) introduced and saw through to passage. The Virginia Public Access Project (VPAP) features both maps, each copyright by OpenStreetMap.org. OpenStreetMap maintains this page to explain their copyright and Open Document Licensure.

https://news.ballotpedia.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/Screenshot-2026-02-18-112046-1024x528.png

https://news.ballotpedia.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/Screenshot-2026-02-18-112032-1024x516.png

Full interactive versions of these maps are available at these links: 2021 and 2026.

As one can readily see, the overall partisanship of the Virginia House delegation would change from 6-5 Democrat to 10-1 Democrat. This represents a four-seat pickup. More to the point, this second map concentrates all voting power in a handful of Democratic strongholds. They include Fairfax, Loudoun, and Prince William Counties, and the Cities of Richmond, Roanoke, and Norfolk.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) reacted in anger on X:

https://x.com/tedcruz/status/2019835586178146587

Sen. Lucas obscenely retorted:

https://x.com/SenLouiseLucas/status/2019964970470109386

Another user promptly reminded Sen. Lucas about the shut-out of Republicans from Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island.

https://x.com/Rust_And_Decay/status/2020067335172944361

Some doubt remains about whether the Democrats would successfully “flip the House” with this new map. The United States Supreme Court has yet to rule on Louisiana v. Callais (Docket 24-109) and Press Robinson v. Callais (24-110). Those cases challenge “majority-minority” districts and the alleged mandate for them under the Voting Rights Act. If the Court strikes down that VRA provision, Republicans could gain 19 seats right away.

But that wouldn’t restore certain rights Virginians would lose.

How Virginians would lose under this plan

The most important thing Virginia voters would lose under this plan, is any sense that their representatives represent them. Ten of them would represent the Democratic Party of Virginia and presumably the Democratic strongholds named above. Four of those proposed districts each contain a slice of Fairfax County – enough to control each district. So Representatives might as well site their offices all in Fairfax County. What representation do residents of Hanover, Goochland, Louisa, and Buckingham Counties, to name four, have? None.

Are residents of those counties, who vote Democratic, really that incensed at President Donald J. Trump and the Republicans? Would they really sacrifice the convenience of being able to visit or call a more local Congress Member’s office? What do residents of Hanover County have in common with residents of, say, Spotsylvania County and the City of Fredericksburg? Or with those of Fairfax County and the town of Falls Church?

More to the point, constituent service matters. Your local Member of Congress and his staff do more than field your telephone calls on upcoming legislation. They write letters of recommendation to support applications for admission to the country’s military service academies. They intercede on constituents’ behalf with various federal agencies, including – notoriously – the Social Security Administration. Sometimes they agree to meet with constituents. Well! How will that work out for South Central Virginians, if their offices are all in Northern Virginia?

How did Virginia get to this pass?

The reason we have a Virginia redistricting amendment to contend with, is that Virginia Republicans tend not to vote. They vote in federal and especially Presidential elections. But, except for the famous Virginia Pre-Midterm of 2021, they do not vote in Virginia-only elections. Observe the result! In November 2025, Virginia Democrats got the trifecta.

Worse, they campaigned as moderates – but are governing to the left of Gov. Gavin Newsom, D-Calif., and his fellow Democrats in that State’s legislature. Never mind their own Congressional redistricting vote. Look at the exorbitant taxes, the Alphabet Soup agenda, and their abortion and illegal immigrant sanctuary policies. Gov. Spanberger and her fellow Democrats in Richmond are rapidly emulating every part of the California Craze.

Of course, that California East Craziness ought to make people angry enough to vote to stop this agenda. Early voting, as mentioned above, began last Friday. Local “unit” Republican committees are going all-out to encourage people to vote No. That also includes southwestern Virginia, where Republicans will lose one of the two Representatives they now have in that region.

Fighting Virginia redistricting – in court

To be fair, more national Republicans than Ted Cruz are fighting this plan. But they are fighting it in court. Their legal theories include:

1. The General Assembly held the First Reading in a special session, and passed their bill with four days remaining before Election Day. Early voting had almost wrapped up by then.

2. The second reading happened January 16. By the relevant section of the Code of Virginia, early voting should not have started until after April 16. That would be April 17, with Election Day to fall on June 2.

A circuit judge in Tazewell County (in that southwestern Virginia region) has already found in favor of these points. But SCOVA said the referendum should proceed while litigation is taking place. SCOVA must think that the plaintiffs:

• Will not suffer irreparable harm if the referendum continues, because the court can always set the vote aside, or:

• Are not likely to prevail on the merits.

More likely, SCOVA plans to rule against all challenges and accept the result of the vote – however it turns out. If the vote is No, they will declare those challenges moot.

Meanwhile, the Democratic National Committee is pouring 20 million dollars into a Yes campaign. Their pleas, which one can read straight off their campaign signs, read thus:

Level the playing field!

MAGA is rigging elections!

Former President Barack Obama echoed that refrain:

https://x.com/BarackObama/status/2029542802615341068

And Republicans? Aside from the court challenges, they consider Virginia already lost.

Is Virginia lost?

The Virginia redistricting referendum gives Virginians one last chance to save their State from forever Democratic rule. (And this time, the Democrats do not have the relatively benign machine of Harry Flood Byrd to lead them!) If that referendum passes, residents of the present Sixth and Ninth Districts might as well start looking for houses in neighboring West Virginia and Kentucky and possibly Tennessee. (In fact, some activists are looking to encourage West Virginia to annex all or most counties in those districts Think “Greater West Virginia,” similar to “Greater Idaho.”) Residents further east will likewise think about moving.

Residents of California are already moving. The billionaires are moving beyond the jurisdiction of the new “wealth tax” (a tax on net worth, not merely income). But The Los Angeles Times has to admit that “regular people” are also leaving. The U-Haul Truck Finder shows today that it costs almost twice as much to move out of California as to move into it. All this is part of the larger Great Sortation into “red areas and blue areas.”

How not to lose the Virginia redistricting battle

If rural Virginians don’t want the Democrats to chase them out of Virginia, they must vote No on this referendum. Then they must hold the line – while having the children who will outvote the Democrats, if present birth trends continue. Then perhaps they can enact measures like:

• A “SVVE” Act (Saving Virginian Voter Eligibility) to make sure only United States citizens vote in our elections – and only once, and

• New rules for drawing legislative maps and electing governors, lieutenant governors, and Attorneys General.

To review:

1. Delegates would be apportioned among units (counties and independent cities) according to population. Each unit would get at least one Delegate, and units (usually cities) having too many people in them, would get two Delegates, or three. But under no circumstances would Delegate district boundaries cross county lines or city limits.

2. U.S. Congressional district lines would not cross county lines or city limits, either. Districts would be compact, contiguous, and convex (or nearly so).

3. Each unit would get one Senator, which that unit’s City Council or Board of Supervisors would choose.

4. Each unit would get as many Gubernatorial Electors as the number of Delegates and Senators they send to the General Assembly.

A tall order? Yes. It would also require challenging and striking down Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533 (1964). That’s the “one person, one vote” precedent. So be it. “One person, one vote” got us to this present pass.

In sum

That’s for, one hopes, a future we can secure through local family-friendly policies. But the important thing Virginians should do now is: Vote No. The arguments by President Obama, Governor Spanberger, Senator Lucas, and others are worse than specious. Texas merely teased out five new seats in a delegation of more than fifty. Even that was likely a reversal of decades of shenanigans by Democrats when they controlled the Texas legislature. That’s not a good reason to deprive one’s neighbors of the convenience of being able to visit the local office of their local, and neighborly, Member of Congress.

Senator Lucas and Governor Spanberger forgot how Virginia organizes itself – its Commonwealth model in which counties stay separate from cities. President Obama wouldn’t know about things like that. Nor would he care. He made the national Democratic Party what it is today – a party of traitors and social wreckers. It ill befits a Virginian, high-ranking or low-, to make common cause with that sort of person.

It also ill befits a pastor or deacon to say, “We don’t talk politics in church.” No church should ever depend for its functioning on Democrat donors, anyway. One cannot be a Christian and a Democrat – not a Democrat like Barack Obama or Abigail Spanberger. (Or a Senator who uses unladylike language to reply to a United States Senator.)

In sum, it’s about time everyone talked to one’s neighbors, fellow church members, etc., about the issue that will decide what representation means. Vote No.

Link to:

The article:

https://cnav.news/2026/03/08/editorial/talk/virginia-redistricting-forgotten-theater/

Video:

Public question and explanation:

https://www.elections.virginia.gov/media/electionadministration/electionlaw/FINAL-APPROVED-explainer.pdf

Source material about the old and new district maps:

https://news.ballotpedia.org/2026/02/19/virginia-redistricting-constitutional-amendment-would-shift-four-republican-held-congressional-districts-towards-democrats-based-on-2025-gubernatorial-results/

https://www.vpap.org/

https://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright

https://www.vpap.org/redistricting/plan/us-house-of-representatives/

https://www.vpap.org/redistricting/2026/

Dialogue on platform X:

https://x.com/tedcruz/status/2019835586178146587

https://x.com/SenLouiseLucas/status/2019964970470109386

https://x.com/Rust_And_Decay/status/2020067335172944361

https://x.com/BarackObama/status/2029542802615341068

Supreme Courtr dockets on the VRA consolidated cases:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/24-109.html

https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/24-110.html

Home page of Rep. Rob Wittman (R-Va.-1st) illustrating constituent services:

https://wittman.house.gov/

The U-Haul Truck Finder:

https://www.uhaul.com/Truck-Rentals/

Previous articles:

The Virginia Pre-Midterm of 2021:

https://cnav.news/2021/11/04/news/glenn-youngkin-virginia-sweep/

Great Sortation:

https://cnav.news/2025/02/01/accountability/executive/great-sortation-turn-violent/

Generational change:

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

Model for drawing maps and electing governors:

https://cnav.news/2021/11/05/accountability/legislative/legislatures-model/

Reynolds v. Sims (1964):

https://cnav.news/2021/11/05/accountability/legislative/legislatures-model/

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/

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/