Shocking 5-4 Ruling From Supreme Court - Barack Obama's Signature Policy GUTTED
WASHINGTON, D.C. — April 21, 2026
Yes — and the leaked internal Supreme Court memos from 2016 prove it beyond any reasonable doubt.
Barack Obama’s radical Clean Power Plan was never about “clean energy.” It was a deliberate, calculated assault on American energy independence, designed to bankrupt coal-fired power plants, spike electricity prices for working families, and fundamentally reorder the U.S. economy under the guise of climate alarmism. The radical left knew exactly what they were doing: weaponizing the EPA to bypass Congress and impose an America Last agenda that would cripple manufacturing, destroy jobs in red states, and make the United States dependent on foreign energy and unreliable green fantasies.
Thankfully, even Chief Justice John Roberts — a George W. Bush appointee — saw through the scheme. In powerful internal memos, Roberts warned his colleagues that without an immediate stay, the Clean Power Plan would cause “substantial and irreversible reordering of the domestic power sector” before the Court could even review its legality. He was joined by conservative justices who understood the existential threat.
Roberts wrote plainly: “Absent a stay, the Clean Power Plan will cause (and is causing) substantial and irreversible reordering of the domestic power sector before this court has an opportunity to review its legality.”
Justice Samuel Alito reinforced the urgency: “A failure to stay this rule threatens to render our ability to provide meaningful judicial review — and by extension, our institutional legitimacy — a nullity.”
In a rare 5-4 emergency ruling along ideological lines, the Supreme Court blocked Obama’s power grab. The radical left was stunned. Behind closed doors, Obama officials were shocked at how quickly the Court acted to protect the American people from their destructive scheme.
This was not an isolated mistake. It was part of a broader pattern. From the Iran nuclear deal that funded terrorism, to the open-border policies that overwhelmed our cities, to the endless regulations that crushed small businesses — the Obama-Biden radical left consistently put globalist elites, climate fanatics, and foreign interests ahead of American workers. They wanted higher energy prices. They wanted coal country decimated. They wanted America weaker so their internationalist vision could rise.
The New York Times’ convenient leak of these confidential memos — the second major breach after the Dobbs opinion — reeks of the same deep state desperation we’ve seen for years. As legal scholar Jonathan Turley correctly noted, these leaks are “clearly designed to wound some of its members” and make the Court appear “porous and partisan.” The radical left cannot win in the court of public opinion or at the ballot box, so they resort to sabotage and selective leaks.
President Donald Trump saw this danger from day one. That’s why he immediately repealed the Clean Power Plan in his first term, unleashed American energy dominance, and delivered record-low unemployment, cheaper gas, and true energy independence. Under Trump, America became a net energy exporter for the first time in decades — the exact opposite of Obama’s destructive vision.
The 5-4 ruling was one of the earliest and most important uses of the Supreme Court’s emergency “shadow” docket to check executive overreach. It saved countless jobs, protected reliable baseload power, and prevented the radical left from turning off the lights on the American dream.
Today, as President Trump returns to the White House and continues dismantling the remnants of the Obama-Biden regulatory nightmare, we see the contrast clearly. America First means affordable energy, strong manufacturing, and putting our own citizens first. The radical left’s “clean energy” agenda was always code for economic suicide and national decline.
The house of cards of Obama’s legacy is collapsing. Every time the truth leaks out — whether through internal memos or border statistics or inflation numbers — the American people see who was really trying to “fundamentally transform” this country… into a weaker, poorer, less free version of itself.
President Trump is reversing that damage every single day. Secure borders, booming energy production, and judicial pushback against radical executive power are the antidote to the Obama era’s intentional sabotage.
We are winning. American energy is roaring back. And the radical left’s war on prosperity is being exposed and defeated.
MAGA knows the truth: Barack Obama’s policies were not mistakes — they were features of a deliberate America Last agenda. Thank God the Supreme Court stepped in, and thank God President Trump is back to finish the job.
Nearly 150,000 California Mail Ballots Rejected In Primary
California election officials are examining why nearly 150,000 mail-in ballots were rejected during the state’s June primary, with late-arriving ballots accounting for most of the increase.
The higher rejection rate comes despite years of election law changes designed to make voting more accessible and ensure more ballots are ultimately counted.
According to data compiled by the California Secretary of State’s office, 148,241 mail-in ballots were rejected during the June primary, representing 1.73% of all mail ballots returned.
That marks an increase from the 2024 primary, when 108,982 ballots were rejected, or 1.56% of all mail ballots cast.
The largest reason for rejection was ballots arriving too late to qualify under California law.
State data shows that 93,479 ballots were rejected because they failed to meet the state’s deadline requirements.
California allows mail ballots to arrive up to seven days after Election Day, provided they are postmarked on or before Election Day.
Voting experts believe many of the rejected ballots received postmarks dated after Election Day, making them ineligible to be counted even if they arrived within the seven-day grace period.
Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation, said the timing of postal processing appears to be a significant concern.
“Ballots rejected due to lateness are caused primarily to being postmarked too late to count, not because they arrived too late to count,” Alexander said.
Election experts have questioned whether recent operational changes within the U.S. Postal Service may be contributing to delayed postmarks.
Earlier this year, a group of mostly Democratic U.S. senators wrote to the Postal Service expressing concern that mail-processing changes could affect ballot handling during federal elections.
Updated Postal Service procedures mean postmarks may reflect when mail is processed at regional facilities rather than when it first enters the mail system.
Because processing centers have been consolidated in some areas, election officials have warned that postmark timing could be affected.
Before the June primary, California election officials encouraged voters to mail ballots as early as possible because of potential postal delays.
The June election also featured a highly competitive race for governor, which some experts believe encouraged many voters to wait until the final days before casting ballots.
In addition to late-arriving ballots, approximately 44,000 ballots were rejected because election officials determined the voter’s signature did not match the signature on file.
Another 8,300 ballots were rejected because the return envelope did not contain a signature.
State records also show that 743 ballots were rejected because those voters had already cast another ballot.
Other rejected ballots involved missing ballots inside return envelopes or multiple ballots submitted in a single envelope.
The highest rejection rate in the state occurred in Tulare County, where 3.52% of returned mail ballots were rejected.
Alpine County and Merced County followed closely, each recording rejection rates of 3.36%.
California has frequently faced criticism for taking weeks to complete vote counting after major elections, largely because state law permits ballots meeting certain requirements to continue arriving after Election Day.
Following the June primary, President Donald Trump again criticized California’s election system, while the Department of Justice opened an investigation into election administration in Los Angeles County.
Election experts emphasize that the increase in rejected ballots should not be interpreted as evidence of widespread voter fraud.
A 2025 report by the Brookings Institution found documented cases of mail ballot fraud remained extremely rare, estimating roughly four cases for every 10 million mail ballots cast, The Associated Press reported.
State officials have not identified evidence of widespread fraud connected to the June primary, but the increase in rejected ballots is expected to receive additional scrutiny as election administrators evaluate whether changes in postal operations, voter behavior or election procedures contributed to the higher rejection rate.
