Lightnews — Scholar-powered news

Reposted by Matt Streckfuss

hopeful66

@hopeful66.bsky.social

go.bsky.app/5aWBSrP

February 10, 2026 at 3:08 AM

Reposted by Matt Streckfuss

hopeful66

@hopeful66.bsky.social

go.bsky.app/5k63ADu

February 10, 2026 at 3:39 AM

Reposted by Matt Streckfuss

thewakan.bsky.social

@thewakan.bsky.social

February 9, 2026 at 7:20 PM

Reposted by Matt Streckfuss

Adam Cohen (My Personal Views Only)

@axidentaliberal.bsky.social

Howard Lutnick claimed he vowed-in 2005-that he would never spend time with Jeffrey Epstein

Yet it appears the relationship between them became so close-even after Epstein was convicted of a child prostitution charge in 2008-that Lutnick apparently went to Epstein’s island

IN 2012

Lutnick must go

February 9, 2026 at 6:38 PM

Reposted by Matt Streckfuss

Rœ

@rocam54.bsky.social

Why isn’t every politician, leader, prosecutor, and news channels focused on this. The President is accused with significant proof of killing and raping minors.

February 9, 2026 at 2:03 AM

Matt Streckfuss

@mdstreck.bsky.social

That really was a great half time show. Energy, excitement, well thought out and some fun surprises - like a real wedding!

February 9, 2026 at 3:19 AM

Reposted by Matt Streckfuss

Will Stancil

@whstancil.bsky.social

Here’s the situation in the Twin Cities:

Random Bovino-style tear-gassing: Way down

Relentless persecution of immigrants: Unchanged

Thuggish violence against observers: Way up

February 8, 2026 at 9:30 PM

Reposted by Matt Streckfuss

MeidasTouch

@meidastouch.com

NEWS: Democrat Chasity Martinez has won the Louisiana HD-60 special election, defeating Republican Brad Daigle and holding the seat.

Martinez won 63%–37%. Trump carried the district by 13 points in 2024.

Another major Democratic overperformance.

February 8, 2026 at 3:27 AM

Reposted by Matt Streckfuss

Randy Fair

@southerngayteacher.bsky.social

Please notice both packs:

As the most politically engaged people in the country, we have the opportunity to choose candidates that can bring our voters back to the polls. Active accounts from last week.

We didn’t lose Pack 1
go.bsky.app/Fyr6dfJ

We didn’t lose Pack 2
go.bsky.app/7YCGGEv

February 8, 2026 at 2:19 PM

Reposted by Matt Streckfuss

ᑕᕼᗴᖇYᒪ

@cheryl2877.bsky.social

Cheryl's Starter Pack (#25)

"Change is never easy, but always possible" - Barack Obama

We are #StrongerTogether

Please Repost and Follow

go.bsky.app/Ric7oCK

February 7, 2026 at 4:21 PM

Reposted by Matt Streckfuss

👑Maricella Brooks🌊🦅

@fireeyebooks.bsky.social

💙
Follow these great Resisters!
Always vet.

👊Thank you for including me in this fabulous starter pack!✊💙🕊️

@donshifs.bsky.social

bsky.app/starter-pack...

February 7, 2026 at 3:25 AM

Reposted by Matt Streckfuss

TheRoyalrash

@theroyalrash.bsky.social

@kansasreflector.com

Chris Geidner @chrisgeidner.bsky.social · 3d

Judge Dana Douglas's dissent sets up the unusual circumstances of this appeal, the stakes of this case, and the error of the majority very well from the start.

"Straining at a gnat, the majority swallows a camel."

Dana M. Douglas, Circuit Judge, dissenting:
The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of
1996 (IIRIRA) was passed in part out of a desire to equalize the treatment
of noncitizens presenting at ports of entry for inspection and those
apprehended in the interior after effecting an unlawful entry. It pursued this
aim in several ways, most prominently by deeming both classes of noncitizens
“applicants for admission” subject to the same removal procedures and
excluding noncitizens detained based on certain criminal offenses from
eligibility for bond.
The Congress that passed IIRIRA would be surprised to learn it had
also required the detention without bond of two million people. For almost
thirty years there was no sign anyone thought it had done so, and nothing in
the congressional record or the history of the statute’s enforcement suggests
that it did. Nonetheless, the government today asserts the authority and
mandate to detain millions of noncitizens in the interior, some of them
present here for decades, on the same terms as if they were apprehended at
the border.1 No matter that this newly discovered mandate arrives without
historical precedent, and in the teeth of one of the core distinctions of
immigration law. The overwhelming majority of courts in this circuit and

elsewhere have recognized that the government’s position is totally
unsupported. Undeterred, the majority and the government distort the
statutory text, abstract it from its context and history, ignore the Supreme
Court’s clearly stated understanding of the statutory scheme, and wave away
the agency’s previous failure to detain millions of noncitizens as if it were a
rounding error.
And for what? The majority stakes the largest detention initiative in
American history on the possibility that “seeking admission” is like being an
“applicant for admission,” in a statute that has never been applied in this
way, based on little more than an apparent conviction that Congress must
have wanted these noncitizens detained—some of them the spouses,
mothers, fathers, and grandparents of American citizens. Straining at a gnat,
the majority swallows a camel. I dissent.

1 Despite the long period of undisturbed interpretation of the statutory provisions
at issue here, the government has insisted that we take up this issue with unprecedented
urgency, in a manner that does not reflect the gravity of the outcome Petitioners face. After
our court granted the government’s request to expedite this case, the government
requested that we further expedite our disposition of the case by issuing an order resolving
the appeal with a notation that the opinion would follow. This request appears to be
virtually unprecedented in this circuit. Notably, as of February 5, 2026, the government
has not made a similar request in its case pending before the Seventh Circuit, the only other
circuit that thus far has heard the government’s argument on this statutory issue. See
Castañon-Nava v. U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., No. 1:18-cv-03757 (7th Cir.), docket.

February 7, 2026 at 4:23 AM

Reposted by Matt Streckfuss

Dale Walls

@dalewalls1.bsky.social

Starter Pack Boost 💙🌊

If you despise the Trump Regime, have had enough, and want to grow with us…. I’d like to help 🤝😊

Just share and say hi 🤷🏽

I’ll vet and add you ASAP 👊🏽🌊
go.bsky.app/4HzgtEi

February 6, 2026 at 3:09 AM

Reposted by Matt Streckfuss

M Meerkat

@kackbro.bsky.social

THIS 👇 HERE......

February 6, 2026 at 10:09 AM

Reposted by Matt Streckfuss

Kitty Kowalski

@kittykowalski.bsky.social

We are all responsible

Mary L Trump @maryltrump.bsky.social · 4d

Every American needs to watch this:

February 6, 2026 at 3:08 PM

Reposted by Matt Streckfuss

jennifer uncoolidge

@histoftech.bsky.social

No joke: I got angry hate mail today for writing an obituary of a Black woman scientist—because the person felt she did didn’t deserve the recognition.

Which just makes me want to share it again: www.nature.com/articles/d41...

Gladys Mae West obituary: mathematician who pioneered GPS technology

She made key contributions to US cold-war science despite facing huge barriers as a Black woman.

www.nature.com

February 6, 2026 at 9:09 AM

Reposted by Matt Streckfuss

Veteran Fighting Fascist

@vetsfighfascist.bsky.social

FFS Go over the Kamala's Bsky account and follower her if you have not.. Come on people!

bsky.app/profile/kama...

bsky.app

February 5, 2026 at 9:50 PM

Reposted by Matt Streckfuss

The Tennessee Holler

@thetnholler.bsky.social

For those keeping score at home:

February 4, 2026 at 3:48 PM

Reposted by Matt Streckfuss

Sande

@sande0724.bsky.social

Hmmm 🤔

February 4, 2026 at 12:39 AM

Reposted by Matt Streckfuss

Sheila in Southeast Michigan

@iamhereinmichigan.bsky.social

I’m not a constitutional scholar but if a president advocates for a change to election laws that is contrary to the constitution, isn’t that a violation of his oath of office?

February 3, 2026 at 1:25 AM