Authored by Sam Dorman via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The Supreme Court is set to consider a landmark case challenging President Donald Trump’s bid to limit birthright citizenship.

The Supreme Court in Washington on Feb. 21, 2026. Madalina Kilroy/The Epoch Times

The case, known as Trump v. Barbara, is set for oral argument on April 1.

Upon entering office, Trump signed an order barring the children of illegal immigrants born in the United States from securing citizenship. It also applies to mothers on temporary U.S. visas who give birth in the country.

The order has been blocked by local courts pending the high court’s decision.

The justices are expected to wrestle with the meaning of the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment. That part of the amendment reads, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

Here are some of the key questions in the case and how they’ve been debated.

What Does ‘Subject to the Jurisdiction Thereof’ Mean?

Much of the debate has focused on these five words from the amendment: “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”

The wording of the 14th Amendment indicates that merely being born within U.S. borders is not enough for citizenship. That’s partially why the Supreme Court, in a 19th-century decision, said the children of foreign diplomats and those born in Native American territory do not receive citizenship.

One of the main questions before the Supreme Court is why and how these groups of people might differ from the children of illegal immigrants.

The American Civil Liberties Union, which is representing children and their mothers, has argued that people are subject to U.S. jurisdiction if they are obligated to follow its laws. Diplomats and Native Americans are excluded because they belong to other sovereign nations.

The Justice Department has focused more on the concept of allegiance, namely that illegal immigrant parents lack allegiance to the United States and therefore aren’t fully subject to the country’s jurisdiction.

Buses drop off large groups of illegal immigrants in San Ysidro, Calif., on Feb. 29, 2024. The Supreme Court is set to consider a case challenging President Donald Trump’s effort to limit birthright citizenship for children of illegal immigrants born in the United States. John Fredricks/The Epoch Times

Did the Supreme Court Already Decide This Issue?

Last year, the Supreme Court issued a landmark decision lifting several blocks on Trump’s policy, but did so in a limited way. That decision, known as Trump v. CASA, only clarified how far judges could go in blocking the president.

The current case is inviting the justices to delve deeper into the 14th Amendment and one of its much older decisions from 1898. In United States v. Wong Kim Ark, the Supreme Court held that the 14th Amendment guaranteed birthright citizenship to a Chinese man whose parents were permanently domiciled in the United States.

Many federal judges have cited that decision to say that the Supreme Court already said the 14th Amendment granted citizenship to people born on U.S. soil—including those born to illegal immigrants.

When the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled on Trump’s policy, it pointed to a portion of the 1898 opinion that identified three exceptions: children of Native American tribes, those “born of aliens in hostile occupation,” and “children of diplomatic representatives of a foreign state.”

The Justice Department argued instead that the 19th-century decision applied only to children whose parents were domiciled, or residing with some kind of allegiance to the country.

It noted that the court repeatedly referred to domiciled status. For example, the majority opinion read, “Every citizen or subject of another country, while domiciled here, is within the allegiance and the protection, and consequently subject to the jurisdiction, of the United States.”

Another portion of the opinion said that Chinese persons owed allegiance to the United States and were entitled to its protection “so long as they are permitted by the United States to reside here.”

Chinese migrants settle at Willow Camp before being processed by Border Patrol agents in Jacumba, Calif., on Dec. 6, 2023. John Fredricks/The Epoch Times

It’s unclear how the six conservative justices will rule, but the three liberal justices have already said in an opinion last year that Trump’s policy was “unquestionably unconstitutional.”

What Did Congress Intend When It Proposed the 14th Amendment?

The 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868 against the backdrop of the Civil War and the Supreme Court’s decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford, which held that slaves were not citizens.

The Justice Department said the United States overturned that decision with the 14th Amendment and the Civil Rights Act of 1866. That law specified that persons born in the United States, “and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed” were citizens.

That law and statements from members of Congress will likely bear on the Supreme Court’s decision-making, as many of the justices have been viewed as originalists, or giving especially strong weight to the nation’s history.

The Justice Department pointed to, among other things, what Sen. James Wilson of Iowa said about the Civil Rights Act of 1866.

At the time, he said, “We must depend on the general law relating to subjects and citizens recognized by all nations for a definition, and that must lead us to the conclusion that every person born in the United States is a natural-born citizen of such States, except … children born on our soil to temporary sojourners or representatives of foreign Governments.”

A man holds a baby outside a coffee shop in Washington on March 11, 2026. Supreme Court justices are expected to weigh the meaning of the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause, including whether birth within U.S. borders alone is sufficient for citizenship. Madalina Kilroy/The Epoch Times

The ACLU said that Wilson’s comment was incorrect and conflicted with English common law, which has been cited in legal decisions such as Wong Kim Ark.

In a briefing to the Supreme Court, the ACLU cited English legal scholar William Blackstone. Writing in his “Commentaries on the Laws of England,” Blackstone said, “Natural allegiance is such as is due from all men born within the king’s dominions immediately upon their birth.”

Is Trump Violating Federal Law?

The ACLU and congressional Democrats have argued that outside of the 14th Amendment, Trump is also violating a federal law passed in the 20th Century.

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, and its predecessor, known as the Nationality Act of 1940, used the 14th Amendment’s phrasing. It states in part that “the following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth: a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”

A long list of congressional Democrats filed an amicus, or friend of the court, brief telling the Supreme Court that regardless of what the 14th Amendment meant, Congress interpreted it as giving citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants when it enacted the 1952 legislation.

Because that was the lawmakers’ intent when they passed the bills, Democrats argued, the 1952 law was an independent reason to reject Trump’s executive order.

People protest outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington on May 15, 2025. Justices are hearing oral arguments over Trump’s effort to broadly enforce an executive order restricting automatic birthright citizenship. Nathan Howard/File Photo/Reuters

The administration argued that because the laws were transplanting language from the 14th Amendment, the original meaning of the amendment—not how Congress interpreted it—should rule.

Legal scholar Ed Whelan speculated that the Supreme Court might focus on the Immigration and Nationality Act but refuse to rule on the meaning of the 14th Amendment.

“My guess is that the Chief will be part of a supermajority of the Court that rules that the [executive order] violates section 1401(a) and that declines to address the constitutional question,” he said in a post on X.

Neama Rahmani, a former federal prosecutor who worked on immigration issues, disagreed.

“Although courts, including the Supreme Court, avoid constitutional rulings when cases can be decided on narrower statutory grounds, the [Immigration and Nationality Act] mirrors the language of the 14th Amendment, so the justices are unlikely to rely on statutory authority alone,” he told The Epoch Times.

Omega-3s are an amazing family of fats that our bodies can’t make efficiently on their own. Long used for general heart and inflammation support, research shows that when formulated with a heavy emphasis on DHA plus targeted eye nutrients, they can support brain structure, cognitive performance, memory, attention, and eye/retinal health. 

Most people get very little DHA from their modern diet, especially with high intake of processed seed oils that compete with omega-3s. Studies suggest that boosting DHA intake with a targeted formula can support brain function in everyday healthy adults.

But before we get into the science…

We sell this unique Omega-3 formulation, so this is obviously an ad. As always, whether or not you buy from us – you should take note of what these studies have found when considering your daily supplement stack. 

Long story short, what we sell is a specialized 5:1 DHA-to-EPA ratio fish oil fortified with lutein and zeaxanthin (more on that below). It’s designed specifically for brain and eye support. Support yourself & support the site – buy some here. 

Actual product:

And now for the science

Most people think “omega-3 = fish oil = heart health.” That’s true for many standard formulas, but the type and ratio of omega-3s matter a lot when targeting the brain and eyes.

DHA (docosahexaenoic acid) is the dominant omega-3 actually built into brain cell membranes and retinal photoreceptors (making up ~50-60% of PUFAs in the retina and a major part of brain gray matter). It supports membrane fluidity, neural signaling, and visual processing. EPA is more involved in inflammation pathways. Standard cheap fish oils are often balanced or EPA-heavy. A DHA-dominant approach (like 5:1) better aligns with how the brain and eyes use these fats.

Brain Benefits in Healthy Adults

Studies on DHA-rich or high-DHA omega-3 supplementation in healthy (non-demented) adults have found:

Improvements in memory performance, including episodic memory, working memory, and delayed recall
Faster attention and quicker processing speed
Particularly noticeable memory gains in healthy older adults or those with lower dietary DHA intake
Benefits for cognitive function in people with suboptimal omega-3 status
Associations with better brain structure measures (e.g., larger hippocampal volumes, greater white matter volume, and entorhinal cortex thickness)
Modest but consistent effects across multiple randomized trials and meta-analyses

A 2025 dose-response meta-analysis of 58 studies (Nature) found that omega-3 supplementation was associated with modest but consistent improvements in attention, perceptual speed, language, primary memory, visuospatial function, and global cognition in adults. A 2013 randomized controlled trial showed that DHA supplementation improved episodic memory and reaction time of working memory tasks in healthy young adults with low dietary DHA intake (with some sex-specific effects).

The Eye Health Advantage: Lutein + Zeaxanthin

What really sets this formula apart is the addition of lutein and zeaxanthin – the only two carotenoids that accumulate in the macula (the central part of the retina responsible for sharp, detailed vision). 

They help:

Filter blue light
Reduce oxidative stress
Support visual performance in high-screen environments

This matters because the retina is not separate from the brain – it is an extension of it. DHA provides structural support to retinal cells, while lutein and zeaxanthin provide protective and performance-enhancing effects.

The landmark AREDS2 trial and its long-term follow-up showed that lutein and zeaxanthin can safely support eye health and may help slow progression toward advanced age-related macular degeneration in certain populations, particularly those with lower dietary intake.

Why This Isn’t “Regular” Omega-3

Cheap fish oils are inexpensive because they’re often EPA-focused or balanced for broad inflammation/cardio support. IQ Ultimate is intentionally engineered differently:

A much higher DHA-to-EPA ratio (5:1) to better match brain and retinal biology
Fortified with lutein + zeaxanthin for direct macular support – something most standard omega-3s completely lack

If you’re spending hours in front of screens, noticing subtle changes in focus or visual comfort as you age, or simply want to be proactive about long-term brain and eye resilience, this targeted formulation addresses needs that basic supermarket fish oil typically doesn’t.

Safety and Practical Takeaways

Omega-3 fatty acids in triglyceride form have a strong safety record at standard supplemental doses. High-purity products tested for contaminants (like this one) are preferred. Consult your doctor if you’re on blood thinners or have specific health conditions.

Cheap omega-3s are everywhere because they’re easy to manufacture. This one is different because it’s built for the two organs that run everything else in your life – your brain and your eyes.

We take it daily for that reason. If you’re ready to upgrade from generic fish oil to something more targeted, grab a bottle of IQ Ultimate Omega-3 here.

This is for informational purposes only and not medical advice. Consult your doctor before starting any supplement.

Submitted by Tsvetana Paraskova of OilPrice.com,

Coal is back with a bang in Asia’s power generation, as countries scramble to contain the LNG supply shortage due to the war in the Middle East.

Coal hasn’t really left most Asian economies, which rely on the fuel for much of their power generation. Amid the squeeze of natural gas supply due to the de facto closed Strait of Hormuz and the sky-rocketing LNG prices that few buyers in Asia can afford, nations are scrapping previous restraints to the use of coal-fired power generation.

Developed economies like Japan and South Korea are raising the use of coal-fired power generation, while developing nations China, India, Bangladesh, and most of Southeast Asia are leaning even more on coal as gas has become scarce and much more expensive.

Asian countries “are opening the tap on coal generation to help offset rising gas prices and supply risk,” Anthony Knutson, global head of coal at Wood Mackenzie, told the Financial Times.

Coal cannot fully replace the lost gas supply, but it creates a welcome buffer to help Asia go through the biggest supply disruption in energy markets, ever.

China, India, South Korea, Japan, and the whole of Southeast and South Asia are using the coal buffers they have created in recent years. Their insistence that diversification and energy security are more important than headline emission reductions is paying off as spot LNG prices in Asia surged by 70% to three-year highs that few countries in Asia Pacific can afford.

The current loss of gas supply, with Qatar’s LNG offline, could be immediately partly offset by higher coal use and coal will take market share from gas and LNG in the power sectors in Japan, South Korea, China, India, and Southeast Asia, analysts at Wood Mackenzie said during the first week of the now five-week-long war.

Ramping up renewables and increased focus on domestic gas production, where possible, could also mitigate the gas supply losses from the Middle East, but these are not immediate solutions, according to WoodMac.

So coal remains the immediate fuel to replace gas. Although coal prices have increased by 17% since the war began, the rise is small compared to the 70% jump in Asia’s spot LNG prices.

The transgender movement is widely regarded as a political insurgency rather than a civil rights movement, and for good reason.  Leftist activists often declare themselves to be “trans” as a political statement, even when they don’t actually suffer from gender dysphoria, a rare mental illness that has little to do with gay rights or “social justice”. 

Children, by extension, are easily manipulated by such activists in the form of parents and teachers, and they tend to declare they are trans in order to please the brainwashing lunatics in their lives.  

The idea that gender is an amorphous condition separate from biological sex is pure theory based on little or no scientific data.  In a non-political and truly scientific environment gender identity claims are treated as ideological, not tangible.  In other words, trans is a trend, not an inherent sexual identity group that needs to be protected from discrimination.

The purpose of the transgender movement is to further deconstruct western society and inject concepts of relativity.  It is designed to make us question concrete reality and abandon objective logic in favor of a perception-based society, a moral desert. 

Thankfully, nearly half of the states in the US are rejecting this madness and passing laws to prevent it from taking hold yet again.  It took ten years, but the idea of catering to transgenders is in swift retreat. 

Much to the chagrin of Democrats, Idaho has recently passed one of the strictest transgender bathroom laws in the U.S.  House Bill 752 requires people to use bathrooms, locker rooms, or changing rooms matching their biological sex, but that’s not all.

The new law applies to both government buildings and private businesses with facilities of public accommodation.  This means any public bathroom, locker room, changing room etc. in any business is subject to the law.  This helps to eliminate the corporate activism loophole, which has in the past allowed male-to-female transgenders to enter women’s spaces, putting women and young girls at risk.  

“Knowingly and willfully” entering a facility designated for the opposite sex is a misdemeanor with a potential for 1 year in jail for a first offense.  Repeat offenses are a felony with suspects facing up to 5 years in jail. The bill passed the legislature in late March 2026 and awaits the governor’s signature (with a veto-proof majority).

At least 19 states, including Idaho, already have laws barring transgender people from using bathrooms and changing rooms that align with their gender in schools and other public places.  Three other states (Florida, Kansas and Utah) have made it a criminal offense in some circumstances to violate similar bathroom laws. 

But, none of the other state laws apply as broadly to private businesses as the Idaho bill. The legislation includes nine exceptions for situations like performing janitorial work, responding to emergencies, helping children or cases when someone has “dire need” of a restroom (this would require proof that no other options were available). 

It’s unfortunate that these laws need to be considered at all and there are going to be critics who will argue that these measures violent private property rights, but the past decade has taught the American public that if you give leftists an inch, they will take a mile.  There’s far more at stake than the question of who gets to use which bathroom; this issue is about the right of some groups to have secure separation from other groups.  It’s about the fundamentals of civilization. 

A zero tolerance policy for transgender intrusions into normal and separate biological facilities is the only way to ensure that there is no room for activists to take advantage.  

At bottom, being “transgender” is an act of political disruption, a form of protest that crosses the line of protected free speech into the realm of degenerate intrusion that has no place in bathrooms and locker rooms.  Every man certainly has a right to access a bathroom, but he doesn’t have a right to access women’s bathrooms.  A man has the right to pretend he’s a woman, he just doesn’t have the right to force everyone else to pretend he’s a woman.   

The trans laws being implemented across the US are a fail-safe to protect the rights of the majority so they’re not forced in the future to conform to the demands of a mentally ill minority.  Felony charges and the potential for jail time is the only threat that activists seem to understand.     

Authored by Debra Heine via American Greatness,

In the span of nine months, nine top-level scientists in the United States have died or vanished without a trace.

Seven of them were connected to the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) or the institutions it directly funds.

AFRL develops and transitions the most sensitive aerospace technologies in the United States’ defense arsenal.

1) Monica Jacinto Reza vanished June 22, 2025 while hiking with friends in the Angeles National Forest in California.

She was last seen waving to a hiking companion approximately 30 feet behind the group. Despite an extensive search involving helicopters, drones, and canine units, only a beanie and lip balm were recovered, and her body was never found.

Reza, 60, was an aerospace engineer and Technical Fellow at Aerojet Rocketdyne who later moved to NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL)and co-inventor of Mondaloy.

Mondaloy is a family of nickel-based superalloys developed by Aerojet Rocketdyne to withstand oxygen-rich environments and extreme heat in rocket engines. Its unique achievement is balancing high oxygen compatibility with structural strength, solving a critical challenge where traditional oxygen-resistant alloys were too weak for use in high-pressure components like preburners and turbine rotors.

She worked closely with Retired Major General William Neil McCasland, who commanded the AFRL from 2011 to 2013 and oversaw the government funding for her alloy program. McCasland disappeared in February.

Dallas Hardwick, Reza’s mentor and co-inventor of Mondaloy, died on January 5, 2014, apparently of natural causes.

2) Melissa Casias has been missing since June 26, 2025, in Taos County, New Mexico.

She was last seen walking alone on Highway 518 near Talpa around 2:15 p.m., wearing a light-colored shirt, jeans, and tennis shoes, with a backpack containing personal items.

Casias, 53, was an administrative assistant at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), a facility known for nuclear weapons research and national security science.

Her job at LANL links her to McCasland, who worked closely with LANL on national security projects at Kirtland Air Force Base, according to the Daily Mail. She vanished just four days after Reza mysteriously disappeared.

3, 4, 5) Jacob Prichard, Jaymee Prichard, and 1st Lt. Jaime Gustitus all died on October 25, 2025.

Jacob Prichard, 34, was the Acquisition Project Manager in the AFRL Sensors Directorate at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Dayton, Ohio, specializing in technologies for air and space reconnaissance and surveillance.

Jacob’s wife, Jaymee Prichard, 33, was a finance specialist at the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center at Wright-Patterson. The couple had three children.

Gustitus, 25, was a U.S. Air Force Operations Analysis Officer who worked in a top secret capacity at the 711th Human Performance Wing at Wright-Patterson.

Jacob allegedly killed his wife Jaymee and placed her body in the trunk of their car, then drove to Sugarcreek Township, broke into Gustitus’s apartment and fatally shot her around 2 a.m.

He then drove to the West Milton Municipal Building, opened the trunk for police to discover Jaymee’s body, and at around 4:23 a.m., committed suicide by gunshot in the parking lot. The act was reportedly captured on security cameras.

6) Carl Grillmair, astrophysicist and astronomer at the Caltech Infrared Processing and Analysis Center (IPAC), was shot dead on the front porch of his home in Llano, California on February 16, 2026.

Grillmair was celebrated for his groundbreaking research in astronomy, including the discovery of dozens of stellar streams (remnants of ancient galactic collisions) and the first detection of water signatures in the atmospheres of exoplanets. For over nearly 30 years at IPAC, he worked on numerous projects including the NEOWISE Science Data Center, where he validated data pipelines for detecting asteroids and comets that could impact Earth.

Grillmair’s role involved testing new instrumentation and ensuring the NEO Surveyor’s instruments performed to specification to identify dark, cold objects against the black of space.

7) William Neil McCasland, former AFRL Commander, former research commander at Kirtland Air Force Base in New Mexico, vanished from his home in Albuquerque, New Mexico, on February 27, 2026.  A “Silver Alert” was issued after the 68-year-old disappeared.

He reportedly left his phone and glasses but took his wallet, boots, and a .38 revolver, with the FBI now assisting in his search.

McCasland held some of the most sensitive positions in the U.S. military, including Director of Special Programs at the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, giving him critical knowledge of the nation’s most classified programs.

He reportedly oversaw $4.4 billion in classified aerospace research and development, running the lab at Wright-Patterson and serving as the executive secretary of the Special Access Program Oversight Committee, the body with full purview of every SAP in the Department of Defense. His name appears in WikiLeaks emails coordinating a UAP disclosure meeting with the Clinton campaign and the head of Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works, according to the Sentinel Network.

McCasland’s association with UFO research and brief professional association with Tom DeLonge and the To The Stars Academy have drawn significant public and media attention to the case.

According to The Sentinel, these mysterious deaths and disappearances do not amount to  “a loose collection of people who happened to work in defense.”

This is one documented system, traceable through patent filings, congressional testimony, DTIC records, and federal contract databases.

Reza vanished in LA County. Grillmair was killed in LA County. Both in the shadow of the JPL/Caltech corridor where America’s planetary defense infrastructure is built. McCasland vanished in Albuquerque, home of Kirtland AFB and Sandia National Labs. The Wright-Patterson deaths were in Dayton. These are not random locations. They are the three geographic nodes of American defense aerospace research. Southern California. New Mexico. Ohio. The triangle where AFRL lives.

And at every node, the same institutional silence. JPL said nothing about Reza. NASA said nothing. The AIAA said nothing. Caltech’s statement about Grillmair said he “passed away suddenly” without using the word “shot.” Wright-Patterson offered counseling services. In every case, the institution that lost someone chose the minimum possible disclosure. The silence is its own pattern inside the pattern.

8) Nuno F. Gomes Loureiro, a prominent Portuguese plasma physicist, was fatally shot at his home in Brookline, Massachusetts, on December 15, 2025 and died from his injuries the following day.

Authorities connected his murder to Cláudio Manuel Neves Valente, who had committed a shooting at Brown University two days prior; both men were classmates at the Instituto Superior Técnico in Portugal.

Loureiro, 47, held joint appointments as a professor in MIT’s Department of Nuclear Science and Engineering and Department of Physics and director of MIT’s Plasma Science and Fusion Center.

He joined MIT in 2016 and was known for his work on nonlinear plasma dynamics, including the development of the Viriato simulation code and his research on solar flares and fusion confinement.

9) Jason Thomas, a chemical biologist, was reported missing on December 13, 2025, after leaving his home on the night of December 12 without his phone, wallet, or identification. He was found dead in Lake Quannapowitt in Wakefield, Massachusetts, on March 17, 2026.

Thomas, 45, was the assistant director at Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research with over 4,500 citations in chemical biology and chemoproteomics.  His work reportedly included active contracts with the Department of Defense.

Commenting on the string of deaths and disappearances, Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.) told podcaster Benny Johnson last week that “Something dark is going on.”

“I know these scientists and researchers. They have testified. We’ve got to get to the bottom of it,” he said.  “It’s just too much, too much is going on right now—and by the way, I’m not suicidal.”

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

U.S. health officials on March 30 informed hospitals they must provide patients with more nutritious food.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) stated in a memorandum to hospitals across the country that they must comply with certain conditions to receive federal funding, including making sure that menus and diets meet the nutritional needs of patients.

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in Washington on Jan. 29, 2026. Dimitrios Kambouris/Getty Images

Officials noted the January release of new dietary guidelines, which emphasize limiting ultra-processed foods, refined carbohydrates, and sugar-laden products in favor of whole foods such as whole milk and meat.

Hospitals “should review and revise food and nutrition service policies, standard menus, therapeutic diet protocols, and food procurement practices to align with the [guidelines], which support contemporary evidence on diet quality and health outcomes,” the letter stated.

A good diet for a patient might feature steel-cut oats with berries and nuts for breakfast, grilled salmon with quinoa and roasted vegetables for lunch, and a lentil-based entree with a side salad later in the day, according to the document.

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., at an event in Florida that was held in part to coincide with the memo, said that it was “essentially a federal mandate” that would help incentivize hospitals to serve better food.

“The food at hospitals is so uniformingly, appallingly bad that it is now a pejorative,” he said. “If you tell somebody that this tastes like hospital food, it’s not a compliment.”

CMS is a division of Kennedy’s Department of Health and Human Services.

Dr. Mehmet Oz, the administrator of CMS, said in a statement that “hospitals are meant to heal—but too often, the food they serve holds patients back.”

“It’s time for hospitals to prioritize real, nutrient-dense food, cut ultra-processed options, and align meals with evidence-based medical needs.”

Oz and Kennedy said that revamping menus would lead to faster recovery and lower readmission rates for patients.

The event also included the announcement that Nicklaus Children’s Hospital had committed to sourcing 5 percent of its food from local farmers in Florida.

The hospital will look to add 1 percent to that percentage each year moving forward.

“This means that kids getting cancer treatment will eat real protein, from the producers here in Florida,” said Hannah Anderson, director of the Healthy America campaign from the America First Policy Institute, which hosted the event.

“This means that kids getting treatment for debilitating diseases will get whole milk. And this means that the kids who are fighting infection are getting the vitamin C and vitamin A from food that’s grown right here in Florida.”

There’s a new wrinkle in the case against Tyler Robinson, the 22-year-old charged with assassinating conservative activist Charlie Kirk. Defense attorneys revealed last week that federal ballistic analysis cannot link the bullet that killed Kirk to the rifle prosecutors say Robinson used.

Robinson faces charges of aggravated murder, along with multiple felony counts, for the September 10, 2025, killing of Kirk at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah. Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty. The case seemed, from the outside, fairly straightforward: Robinson reportedly confessed to his father, who told a youth pastor with ties to the U.S. Marshals Service, and Robinson himself surrendered to the Washington County Sheriff’s Office the following night. 

Prosecutors say DNA consistent with Robinson’s was recovered from the trigger, the fired cartridge casing, and two unfired cartridges on the rifle found near the scene.

However, in a motion filed Friday, Robinson’s attorneys disclosed that they had received an ATF summary report with an unexpected finding. “Regarding the firearm evidence, the defense has been provided with an ATF summary report which indicates that the ATF was unable to identify the bullet recovered at autopsy to the rifle allegedly tied to Mr. Robinson,” the motion reads. The defense added, “Although the State has not indicated an intent to produce this report at the preliminary hearing, the defense may very well decide to offer the testimony of the ATF firearm analyst as exculpatory evidence.”

Authorities recovered an old German bolt-action Mauser Model 98 .30-06 caliber rifle used in both World Wars from a forested area near the shooting site. The FBI is conducting additional ballistic tests, but the results are still pending. Until they arrive, the defense is sitting on an ATF report that they believe actively undermines the state’s physical evidence narrative.

Here’s, by the way, what a .30-06 does:

DNA questions are also piling up alongside the ballistic ones. Defense attorneys point out that forensic reports show multiple people’s DNA on some items, which they argue demands more sophisticated analysis than a standard single-contributor examination. 

“As these cases indicate, determining the number of contributors to a DNA mixture, and determining whether the FBI and the ATF reliably applied validated and correct scientific procedures … is a complicated process which requires the assistance of various types of experts, including forensic biologists, geneticists, system engineers, and statisticians, all of whom must review and evaluate” several categories.

The defense has received roughly 20,000 files – 61,500 pages, 31 hours of audio, and more than 700 hours of video spread across 5,000-plus clips. Defense attorneys say it will take at least 60 days to make a first pass through the material, and are now asking the court to push the May 18 preliminary hearing back by at least six months.

The preliminary hearing itself is not a trial. It’s the moment prosecutors must demonstrate sufficient cause to proceed. That makes the ATF report strategically critical right now. If the defense can successfully use it to cast doubt on the state’s physical evidence package at this early stage, the downstream implications for a capital case are significant.

However, it’s debatable how crucial it really is. Prosecutors still have DNA evidence, an alleged text message in which Robinson reportedly told his romantic partner he targeted Kirk because he “had enough of his hatred,” and witness testimony from Robinson’s parents and roommate. The confession to his father remains a cornerstone of the state’s case.

The defense is also pushing for a televised trial, insisting that having the court proceedings “as public as possible helps to quell and contradict the tide of misinformation,” and will limit conspiracy theories.

NASA is gearing up for Artemis II, its first crewed mission to the moon since the Apollo era—but this one is more of a high-speed dress rehearsal than a landing, according to KSL.com. Four astronauts will take a roughly 10-day trip that loops around the moon and comes straight back, with no orbiting or moonwalks.

The crew—Reid Wiseman, Victor Glover, Christina Koch, and Jeremy Hansen—marks a few firsts: the first woman, first person of color, and first non-American assigned to a lunar mission. Koch already holds the record for the longest single spaceflight by a woman, while Glover previously made history aboard the International Space Station. Hansen, representing Canada, is the only rookie in the group.

They’ll launch aboard NASA’s massive Space Launch System rocket, with the Orion capsule on top. After liftoff, the plan is to spend about a day in an elongated orbit around Earth, practicing navigation by flying close to a spent rocket stage—without docking, just eyeballing the distance. As commander Wiseman put it, “Sometimes simple stuff is the best.”

KSL writes that from there, Orion will fire its engine and send the crew on a long arc toward the moon, roughly 244,000 miles away. Using a “free-return” trajectory—basically letting gravity do most of the work—they’ll swing around the far side and travel about 5,000 miles beyond it, farther than any humans have gone before. The moon will loom large during the flyby, and the crew is expected to document rarely seen regions of its far side.

After about six days, they’ll slingshot back toward Earth, wrapping up the mission with a Pacific Ocean splashdown just under 10 days after launch. Engineers will be paying close attention to Orion’s heat shield during reentry, since it took heavy damage during an earlier uncrewed test.

The mission hasn’t been perfectly smooth so far—fueling issues like hydrogen leaks have already caused delays—but Artemis II is still a crucial step. NASA ultimately wants to return astronauts to the lunar surface, and this flight is meant to prove they can get there—and back—safely.

Authored by Tom Gantert via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Food stamp recipients in Florida, Texas, and West Virginia will face restrictions on buying certain kinds of less nutritious items such as soda and candy, some starting in April.

A sign on the window of a grocery store in the Flatbush neighborhood of the Brooklyn borough of New York City on Oct. 30, 2025. Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images

West Virginia’s restrictions became effective on Jan. 1, but retailers have until April 1 to be fully compliant.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has approved Colorado’s restrictions waiver, but the state has delayed implementation of restrictions on certain items for food stamp recipients until after April 30 and stated that it would have a final vote on April 3 on the program.

The Trump administration is clamping down on soda and candy being charged to food stamps, as 22 states now have been approved to restrict certain purchases under the program. The restrictions still require state approval before taking effect.

Kansas, Nevada, Ohio, and Wyoming were the latest states to receive USDA approval for food and beverage restrictions.

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), also known as food stamps, had 40.7 million people participating nationwide at a monthly cost of $7.97 billion as of November 2025.

“The Trump Administration is leading bold reform to strengthen integrity and restore nutritional value within the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program,” the USDA stated on its website. “USDA is empowering states with greater flexibility to manage their programs by approving SNAP Food Restriction Waivers that restrict the purchase of non-nutritious items like soda and candy. These waivers are a key step in ensuring that taxpayer dollars provide nutritious options that improve health outcomes within SNAP.”

For example, starting on April 1, Texas residents will not be able to buy candy or sweetened drinks on their SNAP-provided Lone Star Cards. Those restrictions will ban such purchases as candy bars, gum, and taffy, as well as nuts, raisins, or fruits that have been “candied, crystallized, glazed or coated with chocolate, yogurt or caramel.”

Texas also will ban sweetened non-alcoholic beverages made with water that contain 5 or more grams of sugar or artificial sweetener, according to Texas Health and Human Services.

The USDA also maintains the Restaurant Meals Program in nine states, including New York and California, which allows eligible participants to use their SNAP debit card at qualified fast food restaurants. Those restaurants include such food chains as KFC, Subway, Taco Bell, McDonald’s, and Popeyes. To be eligible for the program, participants must be 60 years of age or older, disabled, homeless, or the spouse of a SNAP client who is eligible for the Restaurant Meals Program.

The Food Research & Action Center, a nonprofit advocacy group, is opposed to SNAP benefit restrictions on items such as candy and soda.

“State efforts to restrict what SNAP recipients can buy with their benefits are expanding across the country—despite evidence that they are harmful, burdensome, and ineffective,” the Food Research & Action Center stated on its website.

The organization said that the modifications of such programs are time-consuming and “fiscally irresponsible” and that research shows that “SNAP participants eat no differently than other Americans.”

The Food Research & Action Center stated: “Policing food choices is ineffective, undermines American values, and worsens food insecurity. The real solution is strengthening SNAP with adequate benefits, access to healthy foods, and proven produce incentives.”

The USDA also offers a SNAP healthy incentive program that provides coupons, discounts, gift cards, and bonus food or extra money to participants who purchase specified healthy foods.