Don’t trust the mullahs, Mamdani’s ignorant – Latest News
Iran watch: Don’t Trust the Mullahs
“The two sides” in the US-Iran ceasefire “seem to have a dramatically different sense of what they just agreed upon,” frets National Review’s Jim Geraghty. Iran made a slate of “unrealistic demands” on uranium enrichment, control of Hormuz and sanctions aid; “a U.S. concession to just about any of them would represent a dreadful setback to American national security interests.” Remember, too: “The Iranian regime has broken just about every treaty it has ever signed.” “Trump may well believe that he can agree to a terrible deal with the Iranian regime and convince the American public that it is a great victory.” But “I wouldn’t count on that happening, either.”
Housing skilled: Zo’s Ignorant ‘Equity’ Plan
Zohran Mamdani’s administration has been busily “reviewing every single city service . . . through the lens of racial equity,” observes Howard Husock at The Free Press, and the metropolis’s new “racial equity plan” requires “drastic, race-related intervention in the city’s housing market.” Alas, it “overlooks the fact that New York already has more public, subsidized, and otherwise non-market housing than any other American city,” and that’s “made for a deeply constipated housing market.” Team Mamdani doesn’t “understand how development has worked throughout the city’s history,” when “private builders put up hundreds of thousands of brownstones, row houses, and bungalows.” Indeed, the mayor’s “equity” report “steamrolls” historical past “to advance a counterproductive and discriminatory agenda.” That ought to rightly appeal to “the attention of the Trump Justice Department.”
Media watch: The Latest Anti-Trump Hoax
Everyone remembers “little Liam Ramos, the 5-year-old migrant child pictured in ICE custody wearing a sky blue bunny hat,” who, alongside together with his father, was “taken to an ICE detention center,” writes Batya Ungar-Sargon on her Substack web page. To the “liberal media, they are now heroes,” and “a judge ordered them released,” claiming “they had a pending asylum case.” Yet final month, “an immigration court ruled their asylum invalid and ordered the Ramos family” deported. Liam’s mother Erika Ramos admitted “they aren’t asylum seekers.” It’s all simply the newest in “a long list of liberal media hoaxes surrounding the Trump administration’s immigration agenda.” “Liam’s parents are economic migrants who broke the law to come here. They need to go home.”
More From Post Editorial Board
Conservative: The Left Knew About Chavez
“Jeffrey Epstein is not the only sexual predator who was embraced by Democrats,” huffs Liz Peek at Fox News: There’s additionally “farmworkers union leader Cesar Chavez.” Groups throughout the United States “are tearing down statues of Chavez,” canceling “celebrations of the late labor leader” and renaming “schools that honored him.” “The speed with which progressive groups have tossed the Latino icon overboard is stunning,” which suggests “they knew.” Indeed, the lack of pushback on The New York Times’ allegations “about the horrific sexual abuse of girls as young as 13” and that he “routinely sexually abused other young women” are indicators they’ve long been conscious of the “allegations of sexual misconduct.” Democrats “pretend to care about women,” however their views on Chavez show them “profoundly hypocritical” on that.
Get opinions and commentary from our columnists
Subscribe to our day by day Post Opinion e-newsletter!
Thanks for signing up!
Libertarian: Trans Rights vs. Free Speech
In “a strikingly one-sided,” 8-1 resolution in Chiles v. Salazar, the Supreme Court “ruled against a Colorado law that prohibits mental health professionals from providing ‘conversion therapy’ to minors,” cheers Reason’s Damon Root. In the majority ruling, Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that the appeals courtroom “failed to apply sufficiently rigorous First Amendment scrutiny.” He ordered the courtroom to reexamine the Colorado law “under the far tougher strict scrutiny test, rather than the more lenient rational-basis test that it used” earlier. Even the Supremes’ liberal wing largely agreed, with Justice Elana Kagan discovering the ban “as applied to talk therapy” clashes with the First Amendment, “because it regulates speech based on viewpoint.” As Chiles v. Salazar exhibits, “even the most contentious issues do not always raise equally difficult legal questions for the Supreme Court to answer.”
— Compiled by The Post Editorial Board
