College Republicans Chapter Sues School for Right to Make Nazi Salute

The University of Florida kicked its College Republicans chapter off of campus over the weekend over a photo of a member performing a Nazi salute, and now the organization is suing the university.

The UF College Republicans filed a lawsuit in federal court Monday, alleging that their First Amendment rights were violated. The salute photo had circulated on social media, along with photos of the group’s members with neo-Nazi Nick Fuentes and far-right podcaster Myron Gaines.

In a statement, the university’s interim president Donald Landry said that the Florida Federation of College Republicans, which oversees campus GOP groups in the state, told the university that it had disbanded the UF chapter. Landry said that UF then moved to deactivate them.

“The University of Florida has emphatically supported its Jewish community and remains committed to preventing and addressing antisemitism and other forms of discrimination and harassment that are threatening and disruptive to our students,” Landry said in his statement.

The chapter is being represented in court by Anthony Sabatini, who alleged to the South Florida Sun-Sentinel that the Nazi photo was the “final straw” for the university, and the“edgy” student group felt they had been targeted for some time. Sabatini, a conservative Lake County commissioner, also claimed the chapter was really shut down because it hosted Florida Republican gubernatorial candidate James Fishback on March 11.

Fishback has repeatedly called his GOP rival, Representative Byron Donalds, a “slave.” Donalds is Black. Sabatini said that event was used to deactivate the group and replace it with more “vanilla” conservatives.

Young Republicans across the country seem to have a racism and antisemitism problem. Earlier this month, a Republican group chat of Florida International University students leaked online and showed dozens of its members engaging in racist, antisemitic, and depraved language. Last year, a leaked Young Republicans group chat comprising members from across the country showed members being similarly racist and antisemitic, while casually throwing around rape jokes.

Earlier this month, the national College Republicans named a far-right associate of Fuentes, Kai Schwemmer, as its national political director, showing that this rot is only increasing. White supremacy appears to be the future of the Republican Party.

A federal judge ejected a top prosecutor from the New Jersey U.S. attorney’s office out of his courtroom Tuesday, accusing the government of “operating unlawfully” in light of recent reports that Alina Habba, a former personal lawyer to Donald Trump, was still illegally involved in the office’s functions.

U.S. District Court Judge Zahid Quraishi was markedly frustrated as soon as Tuesday’s proceeding began, grilling the office’s head of appeals, Mark Coyne, for failing to provide proper documentation prior to his appearance before the court. As a result, Quraishi ordered Coyne not to speak, though he allowed Coyne to remain in the room “for moral support.”

But Coyne would not comply with the mute order—particularly as Quraishi’s conversation with Coyne’s more junior colleague, Daniel Rosenblum, turned to the office’s current triumvirate leadership structure and Habba’s rumored involvement.

Habba resigned from her position atop the office in December, when a federal appeals court ruled that her appointment was unlawful. Last week, the office’s trio of replacement leaders were also found to be occupying their positions unlawfully. Habba has since been serving as a senior adviser to Attorney General Pam Bondi, overseeing myriad U.S. attorneys’ offices and reportedly stepping back into the New Jersey office.

Rosenblum, the line prosecutor on the case, told Quraishi that he had been with the office for just two and a half years and that he was “not aware of” Habba’s involvement in the office’s operations—but that response was not as clear cut as the judge wanted.

“All right. So she could be operating the office?” he asked.

That’s when Coyne could no longer stay silent.

“She is not,” Coyne said, which Rosenblum repeated.

“Sit down, Mr. Coyne. If you speak again, I’m going to have you removed. I already told you not to speak,” Quraishi said.

Coyne then started to speak again, though Quraishi cut him off.

“You didn’t file a notice of appearance. You don’t get to blindside the court and do whatever it is you guys want to do. So if you continue to speak, you can leave,” Quraishi stated.

As Coyne continued to interrupt, Quraishi ordered the guards.

“I’m directing the court security officers to remove Mr. Coyne,” Quraishi said. “Mr. Coyne, I told you not to address this court. You didn’t file a notice of appearance. You don’t get to blindside this court. I’m going to ask you to leave … or I’ll have you removed.”

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts on Tuesday called for an end to “personal hostility” toward judges, a not-so-subtle message that came just two days after President Trump went on a long diatribe about courts ruling against him.

“It does come with the territory.… When any of us issue an opinion, it’s often a dissent,” Roberts said when asked how he handled criticism at a Baker Institute for Public Policy panel. “It’s important that our decisions are subjected to scrutiny, and they are. The problem sometimes is that the criticism can move from a focus on legal analysis to personalities. And you see—from all over, not just any one political perspective on it—that it’s more directed in a personal way. And that, frankly, can be actually quite dangerous.”

“Judges around the country work very hard to get it right. And if they don’t, their opinions are subject to criticism,” Roberts continued. But personally directed hostility is dangerous, and it’s got to stop.”

On Sunday night, Trump raged against “the courts,” including the Supreme Court, for ruling against his tariffs. He also took time to personally attack Judge James Boasberg—who axed his attack on Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell last week.

“They openly disrespect the Presidents who nominate them to the highest position in the Land, a Justice of the United States Supreme Court, and go out of their way, with bad and wrongful rulings and intentions, to prove how ‘honest,’ ‘independent,’ and ‘legitimate’ they are,” Trump wrote about the Supreme Court. “The Democrat Justices just vote Democrat—They always stick together! Our Country was unnecessarily RANSACKED by the United States Supreme Court, which has become little more than a weaponized and unjust Political Organization.”

He then went on to attack Boasberg with similarly inflammatory language:

The Courts treat Republicans, and me, so unfairly, always seeming to protect those who should not be protected. They are highly politicized. Cases don’t matter, the Judge does! As an example, how is this absolutely terrible Federal Reserve Chairman, Jerome ‘Too Late’ Powell, not even allowed to be investigated for the horrible job he does? I strongly criticized Jerome ‘Too Late’ for his horrible performance throughout his tenure, which is either gross incompetence, total dishonesty, or both, and, in return for this well justified criticism, get viciously and wrongfully blamed by, as usual, a Wacky, Nasty, Crooked, and totally Out of Control Judge, named James Boasberg, a man who suffers from the highest level of Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS), and has been ‘after’ my people, and me, for years.

Trump has long singled out judges who deliver rulings he doesn’t like. Just last month, Trump called Roberts, as well as Justices Neil Gorsuch, Amy Comey Barrett, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and Sonia Sotomayor, “FOOLS and ‘LAPDOGS’ for the RINOS and Radical Left Democrats” for striking down his “Liberation Day” tariffs.

Democrats are increasingly confident that they will win the House of Representatives come November. But even a blue wave doesn’t mean Hakeem Jeffries would receive a natural promotion to House speaker.

Jeffries, a Democrat representing New York’s 8th district, has been House minority leader since 2023. He was the first Black person to head a party in either chamber of Congress, and has generally enjoyed strong standing in his caucus. In 2024, he led the charge to pass a foreign aid bill to Ukraine, Israel, and the Indo-Pacific, which had been stalled in the House for months.

But his stature has fallen greatly since, largely due to his persistent support of Israel despite the country’s ongoing genocide in Gaza, his acceptance of money from foreign lobbying groups, and for mounting what some Democrats have seen as weak and ineffective resistance to the Trump administration. Now, Axios reports, he faces increased opposition to his leadership from within his own party.

Mai Vang, a progressive House primary challenger in California, told Axios that “the Democratic Party and its leadership—Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries—have failed to mobilize meaningful opposition to Trump’s illegal war and their silence as AIPAC and corporations flood Congressional primaries with millions of dollars is deafening.”

”I cannot support this kind of leadership,” she concluded. ”If we want to defeat Trump and rebuild trust with working Americans, we need new leadership and a new direction.”

Vang is not alone. Last fall, 57 Democratic House candidates said they were neutral on Jeffries’s leadership and 25 said they were opposed to it, out of 113 who responded to a poll by Axios. His popularity has only lessened since, the site reports.

“I think we need to have a new type of leadership that’s ... going to fight back significantly harder against the Trump administration,” New Hampshire primary candidate Heath Howard told Axios at the time.

Maryland primary candidate Harry Jarin said, “The anger of the base right now is not being matched by Democratic leadership ... and that is going to have to change one way or another.”

Jeffries’s supporters cite the fact that he has steered his party through multiple government shutdowns with House Democrats generally unified.

“Leader Jeffries is focused on addressing the affordability crisis, stopping the bombing in the Middle East, reining in ICE and taking back the House to stop Republican extremists from destroying America,” Jeffires spokesperson Justin Chermol told The New Republic in a statement. “Beyond that, we have zero interest in a frivolous story from [Axios,] the same outlet that once sensationally claimed Leader Jeffries was going to face a serious primary. How did that work out?”

Oddsmakers continue to make Jeffries the favorite for next House speaker, providing Democrats win in November. But there’s always a chance that someone else gets the nod instead—Anabel Mendoza, a progressive candidate in Illinois, specifically touted Michigan Representative Rashida Tlaib.

This story has been updated.

The state of Arizona has filed criminal charges against the online prediction market Kalshi for allowing people to bet on elections and “operating an illegal gambling business” in the state.

Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes filed 20 misdemeanor counts in Maricopa County Superior Court in the state Tuesday, saying in a statement that “no company gets to decide for itself which laws to follow.”

“Kalshi may brand itself as a ‘prediction market,’ but what it’s actually doing is running an illegal gambling operation and taking bets on Arizona elections, both of which violate Arizona law,” Mayes said.

The New York–based Kalshi said in its own statement that Mayes’s case is based “on paper-thin arguments,” arguing that its business model is not like a casino or a sportsbook and that it “should not be overseen by a patchwork of inconsistent state laws.” Instead, the company says it serves as a conduit for federally regulated swaps, putting it under the federal jurisdiction of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

“States like Arizona want to individually regulate a nationwide financial exchange, and are trying every trick in the book to do it,” Kalshi’s statement said. The company faces fines of between $10,000 and $20,000 for each violation if found guilty.

Kalshi’s foray into political betting has raised questions about whether politicians and other insiders are betting on certain events and elections to cash in. They allow people to profit off predicting war and the destruction that comes with it, as was the case with the Iran war or the decision to strike Venezuela. Kalshi recently announced partnerships with CNN and the Associated Press, while its competitor Polymarket has partnered with The Wall Street Journal, Substack, and X.

Arizona’s criminal case will be watched across the country to see if prediction markets can be reined in or regulated. At the very least, hopefully the fate of America’s leadership and human suffering around the world won’t be the focus of wagers from the depraved.