The Armor Of Freedom – Truth

Newsletter | April 18, 2024

At the heart of the vicious campaign to destroy the leader of the American opposition is the ruling party’s dirty secret. Yes, they know the incumbent is in danger of losing. Indeed, many polls show he trails the opposition leader by a formidable margin. But it’s even worse — the establishment knows that ordinary Americans hate their policies. That’s why they’re waging the lawfare campaign against Donald Trump, with cases in Georgia, Florida, Washington, D.C., and Manhattan.

This week, Trump turned the tables on his torturers. Forced to defend himself against phony charges in a New York City courtroom, he used his spare time walking the streets of his former hometown, once one of the greatest cities in the world. He promises to restore New York to its former glory, by backing the police, supporting the hard-working men and women who make America work, and by deporting the illegal aliens that have filled the streets and spiked crime rates since the federal government opened our borders.

In Harlem, Trump visited a bodega to show support for the owner, charged with murder after using a knife to fight off an attacker. Trump, the consummate object of establishment hatred, was received in the Latino-majority neighborhood like a star, as if he’d just hit the game-winning home run to earn the Yankees another World Series title. School kids shouted, “I love you Trump.” Their parents chanted, “four more years.”

The chances of him winning a city that voted overwhelmingly for Joe Biden in 2020 are slim, but the point of walking the streets of New York wasn’t to win it. Rather, it was to embrace the love the man who made his name in New York had earned and to return that love. Americans are hurting. Americans are angry. And we are worried about our future. Trump used the media capital of the world to project the message across our country that he hears us, he gets it — after all, they’re going after him, too. But it’s going to be ok.

All of the strategies employed to destroy Trump are designed to protect a ruling class whose ideas are despised by ordinary Americans, from Harlem to the Great Plains, and from the California Central Valley to our southern border. And that’s why, according to reports from the Texas border, progressive activists are handing out fliers telling illegal aliens to vote for Biden. The ruling class knows that Americans hate their policies so much that they have to import new voters in order to stay in power.

It’s all out in the open now. Not even the massive censorship cartel joining the media, Big Tech, and U.S. spy services can hide it anymore. The truth has won out, and the ruling class is cornered. And the opposition is linking arms from sea to shining sea.

Please participate in our Reader’s Survey. Your insights and thoughts are important as we learn what is on the minds and in the hearts of our fellow Americans. We read them all and share some of them Mondays at 9 a.m. during America’s Future live broadcasts with our Executive Director Mary O’Neill on America’s Mondays With Mary. Thank You!

Tony Badran is America’s leading Middle East expert. His writing on American foreign policy in that part of the world, and the threat dangerous powers like Iran, Hamas, and Hezbollah pose to our peace and prosperity, can be found at Tablet, where he is the News and Politics Editor. We spoke with him recently to get his insight on recent developments in the Middle East to see how that may affect us here at home.

Why is the White House describing Iran’s attack on Israel last week as “unprecedented”?

To be sure, Iran has been attacking Israel for decades. Only it has always done so from territories controlled by its various regional proxies, like Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Gaza and the West Bank, the various Shiite militias in Syria and Iraq, and the Houthis in Yemen. Insofar as Iran launched this latest attack from its own soil, including launching ballistic missiles, it qualifies as unprecedented.

How will the US influence Israel’s response?

The White House has another motive in hyping up the attack, which is to underscore the role U.S. military assets and partner forces played in defending against it. The administration has used that role to then restrain Israel from retaliating. The Biden team, therefore, has injected itself as an arbiter between an ally and a terror state. It determines what counts as legitimate defense, which it oversees, and what it regards as unacceptable military action on the part of Israel. Israel therefore is made to accept certain attacks and surrender its sovereign decision making to the Biden administration, which has its own considerations with Iran.

Why has the White House hidden Iran’s role in the October 7 massacre?

The administration is implementing Barack Obama’s policy of alignment with Iran. To that end, it is enriching the Islamic Republic with sanctions relief and non-enforcement, subsidizing and protecting the various pseudo-states that it controls in the region, and shielding its nuclear and ballistic missile programs. So, when this policy resulted in one of Iran’s proxies, Hamas, savagely slaughtering 1,200 people, including dozens of U.S. citizens, the administration felt the need to distance Iran from the massacre if for nothing else than to hide its bloodstained policy, which made Washington complicit in the biggest single-day slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust. It now had become the lawyer of an obscurantist, murderous, antisemitic, terrorist state. Moreover, immediately after Oct. 7, there were multiple reports of Hamas fighters training in Iran and Lebanon, and of Iranian commanders holding high-level meetings in a joint operations room with Hamas and Hezbollah in Lebanon ahead of the attack, leading to questions about what U.S. intelligence was able to collect in the lead-up to the attack, especially in Lebanon, which the administration treats like an American protectorate.

Do Americans have an interest in Israel’s war on Palestinian terror?

As we’ve seen since Oct. 7, the grotesquery of Third World antisemitism and thuggery is now a feature of daily life in American cities—the legacy of an insane immigration policy, coupled with Barack Obama’s vision for America. The Democratic Party’s elevation of this ethos, and the protection it has afforded to its street gangs, make defeating it and everything it stands for important, if nothing else than for affirming civilization over barbarism. On the foreign policy level, having Israel destroy this savage cult of death and defeat its patron, Iran, the lead sponsor of worldwide terrorism, which, among other things, is holding global navigation hostage and threatening our peace and prosperity, is an obvious gain for Americans.

What is your prayer for America?

That America doesn’t abandon our forefathers’ covenant with God to go the way of the dead nations of the Third World.

Editor’s Note: To read other Speaking With American Patriots interviews, please click here.

Citizen’s Reflections On Protecting A Nation

It is no exaggeration that Americans are at risk of losing their rights. The double standard of justice is evidence alone. Lines are blurred between the three branches of government, and abiding by the principles of the Constitution’s separation of powers doctrine is all but extinct. Accountability for years of lies and fake news from propaganda media and political operatives has not occurred, and our nation is in crisis, with millions of illegals flooding into our communities and no end in sight.

Although Lady Justice weeps for a nation under siege, Americans continue to show resilience and resolve to turn the tide each week in the survey responses America’s Future receives from newsletter readers.

The ten points below, recently submitted by one of our survey-takers, reflect practical reminders to all Americans that this great nation’s citizens are paying attention and sharing information and will never quit. The guidance is simple and a call to action to We The People to stay informed, become a critical thinker, and know that the future will be determined by love for our faith, family, and freedom.

Become Vigilant
Dare To Criticize Decisions And Think For Yourself
Get Involved In The Community
Understand That Humans Are Not Angels
Understand That Power Can Corrupt
Learn From Our History
Take Care Of The Family, Love Our Children, And Teach Them Right From Wrong
Understand That It Is The People That Have The Power
Follow The 10 Commandments
Understand That Serving God Is The Best Resistance To Tyranny

Editor’s Note: Readers’ comments to our weekly surveys are shared on America’s Mondays With Mary, a live broadcast hosted by America’s Future Executive Director Mary Flynn O’Neill. Bookmark the link above and watch the show at 9 a.m. on your favorite social media platform.

America’s Future Amicus Briefs Reporting

Since December 2021, America’s Future has filed 50 Amicus briefs, including with the United State Supreme Court (SCOTUS), and in jurisdictions nationwide, at both trial and appellate levels. In the past five newsletters, the travels of 29 of those cases have been chronicled. The status reports below reflect the sixth installment of our Amicus Briefs series. These briefs are filed to stand up for America’s foundational values and our nation’s enduring self-determination. The series will continue over the next several newsletters. To access all the status updates posted thus far, please click here.

Case: Moore v Harper, SCOTUS Dkt No. 21-1271
Court: SCOTUS
Amicus Brief
Filing Date(s): September 6, 2022
Primary Issue(s): Whether the Federal Elections Clause vests exclusive and independent authority in state legislatures to set the rules regarding federal elections.”
Outcome: Contrary to the urging of America’s Future, the SCOTUS issued its ruling on June 27, 2023, affirming the judgment of the North Carolina Supreme Court.

Case: Yukutake v Shikada, 9th Cir. Dkt. No. 21-16756
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Amicus Brief (supplemental)
Filing Date(s): September 19, 2022
Primary Issue(s): Whether Hawaii’s state gun regulatory scheme violates the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.
Outcome: Pending. On April 16, 2024, attorneys for appellant filed a rule 25-2 Letter to the court advising that it has been approximately 14 months since submission of the case, post oral argument.

Case: Eknes-tucker, et al. v Ivey, Alabama Middle District Court – Northern Division, Dkt. No. 2:22-cv-184-LCB-SRW
Court: United States District Court for Alabama’s Middle District—Northern Division
Amicus Brief
Filing Date(s): September 20, 2022
Primary Issue(s): Whether a DOJ subpoena to a nonparty nonprofit organization which would disclose personally identifiable information of donors should be quashed based on the First Amendment.
Outcome: Consistent with the urging of America’s Future, on October 24, 2022, the court issued a memorandum opinion and order granting the motion to quash the DOJ’s subpoenas in accordance with Federal Rules of Civil procedure 26 and 45. As of today (April 19, 2024), the case is still pending at the district court level.

Case: Rhode v Bonta, 9th Cir. Dkt. No. 20-55437
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Amicus Brief (supplemental)
Filing Date(s): September 29, 2022
Primary Issues: Whether California’s Proposition 63, requiring California citizens to undergo a background check every time they wish to purchase ammunition for firearms, is unconstitutional as violative of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.
Outcome: Consistent with the urging of America’s Future, the Ninth Circuit remanded the case to the district court which, on January 30, 2024, issued a permanent injunction, effectively overturning California’s restrictions on ammunition purchases.

Case: Klein v Oregon Bureau of Labor and industries, SCOTUS Dkt. No. 22-204
Court: SCOTUS
Amicus Brief
Filing Date(s): October 7, 2022
Primary Issue: Whether compelling an artist to create custom art for a wedding ceremony violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.
Outcome: On June 30, 2023, consistent with the urging of America’s Future, the SCOUTS vacated the judgment of the Oregon Court of Appeals and remanded the case for proceedings consistent with 303 Creative LLC v Elenis (2023).

Case: Ward v Thompson, SCOTUS Dkt. No. 22A350
Court: SCOTUS
Amicus Brief
Filing Date(s): October 28, 2022
Primary Issue(s): Whether the Ninth Circuit erred in ordering T-Mobile to release records requested by the Jan 6 subcommittee.
Outcome: Contrary to the urging of America’s Future, on November 14, 2022, the SCOTUS denied the application to stay the Ninth Circuit court order compelling T-Mobile to comply with the Jan 6 subcommittee subpoena for records requested.

Editor’s Note: To read all the Amicus briefs’ status updates posted thus far, please click here.

Supreme Court Mid-April Recap

Our Supreme Court (SCOTUS) continues to issue decisions from cases it heard during its current October Term 2023. Although resolutions to this term’s cases will not be complete until June 30, 2024, the Court, thus far, has published 18 opinions out of the 70 cases on its docket. The seven decisions summarized below were issued this month, between April 12, 2024, and today (April 18). To stay informed about these important decisions, readers can access this term’s case highlights and rulings on our website here. To access the SCOTUS website for more information, please visit www.supremecourt.gov.

Bissonnette v LePage Bakeries Park St., LLC (23-51)
ISSUE: Whether a transportation worker must work in the transportation industry to be exempt from coverage under §1 of the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U. S. C. §1 et seq.
RULING: No. “A transportation worker need not work in the transportation industry to be exempt from coverage under §1 of the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U. S. C. §1 et seq..” – The judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit is vacated and the case is remanded.
LINK TO OPINION: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-51_6647.pdf

Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L. P. (22-1165)
ISSUE: Whether pure omissions are actionable under Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 10b-5(b).
RULING: No. “Pure omissions are not actionable under SEC Rule 10b–5(b), which makes it unlawful to omit material facts in connection with buying or selling securities when that omission renders ‘statements made’ misleading” – The judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit is vacated and the case is remanded.
LINK TO OPINION: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-1165_10n2.pdf

Sheetz v El Dorado County (22-1074)
ISSUE: Whether the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause distinguishes between legislative and/or administrative land-use permit conditions.
RULING: No. The Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause does not distinguish between legislative and administrative land-use permit conditions. – The judgement of the Court of Appeal of California, Third Appellate District is vacated, and the case is remanded.
LINK TO OPINION: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-1074_bqmd.pdf

Devillier v Texas (22-913)
ISSUE: Whether owners of property north of U. S. Interstate Highway 10 adversely affected by the flood evacuation barrier constructed by Texas should be permitted on remand to pursue their Takings Clause claims through the cause of action available under Texas law.
RULING: Yes. “Owners of property north of U. S. Interstate Highway 10 adversely affected by the flood evacuation barrier constructed by Texas should be permitted on remand to pursue their Takings Clause claims through the cause of action available under Texas law.”– The judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is vacated and remanded.
LINK TO OPINION: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-913_3204.pdf

Rudisill v. McDonough (22-888)
ISSUE: Whether “servicemembers who, through separate periods of service, accrue educational benefits under both the Montgomery and Post-9/11 GI Bills may use either one, in any order, up to 38 U. S. C. §3695(a)’s 48-month aggregate-benefits cap.”
RULING: Yes. “Servicemembers who, through separate periods of service, accrue educational benefits under both the Montgomery and Post-9/11 GI Bills may use either one, in any order, up to 38 U. S. C. §3695(a)’s 48-month aggregate-benefits cap.” – The judgement out of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is reversed and remanded.
LINK TO OPINION: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-888_1b8e.pdf

McIntosh v. United States (22-7386)
ISSUE: Whether a district court’s failure to enter a preliminary order imposing criminal forfeiture before sentencing prohibits a judge from ordering forfeiture at sentencing subject to harmless-error principles on appellate review.
RULING: No. “A district court’s failure to comply with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.2(b)(2)(B)’s requirement to enter a preliminary order imposing criminal forfeiture before sentencing does not bar a judge from ordering forfeiture at sentencing subject to harmless-error principles on appellate review.” – The judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit is affirmed.
LINK TO OPINION: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-7386_10n2.pdf

Muldrow v. City of St. Louis (22-193)
ISSUE: Whether an employee challenging a job transfer under Title VII must show significant harm with respect to an identifiable term or condition of employment.
RULING: No. “An employee challenging a job transfer under Title VII must show that the transfer brought about some harm with respect to an identifiable term or condition of employment, but that harm need not be significant.” – The judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit is vacated, and remanded.
LINK TO OPINION: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-193_q86b.pdf

Editor’s Note: To read other decisions by the SCOTUS during the October Term 2023, click here.

Public Accommodation Laws

This is the eighteenth entry in our In Focus series identifying and exposing the tools that modern-day tyrants are using to thwart the will of We The People for power and control. To access previous articles, please click here.

Americans who do not suffer from leftist “wokeness” have found it difficult to understand that retail businesses can be compelled to serve a customer — especially when it offends the moral or religious views of the business owner.

This issue entered the American consciousness when Colorado cakemaker Jack Phillips came under attack for “discrimination” for refusing to bake a cake. The charges against Phillips were filed under the Colorado public accommodations law. Colorado is not alone, as some version of these type of laws exist in all but five states. They are ostensibly designed to prevent discrimination, but their profoundly dangerous effect is to require business owners to leave their moral and religious views at home, and not allow them to affect how they conduct business.

Masterpiece Cakeshop

Jack Phillips owns and operates a small Christian business in Colorado, Masterpiece Cakeshop. A same-sex couple demanded he create a custom cake for their same-sex wedding. He explained that his religious faith did not permit him to participate in or facilitate a religious celebration that he believed to be unbiblical. The same-sex couple refused to use any of the many other bakers who were willing to offer their services, but rather complained about Phillips to the Colorado Civil Rights Commission. That state agency took on their cause, and Colorado courts affirmed its findings against Phillips. Neither Phillips’ religious views nor the First Amendment were considered to provide a defense since he was operating a business offering services to the public.

Phillips’ battle began in 2012, and it continues to this day.

The case made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, and the decision of the Colorado court was reversed and remanded, giving Smith a Pyrrhic victory because the Supreme Court ruled in his favor only because Colorado showed “clear and impermissible hostility toward [his] sincere religious beliefs.” Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colo. Civil Rights Comm’n, 584 U.S. 617, 634 (2018).

Last year, he was sued again for refusing to bake a pink and blue birthday cake celebrating the “female transgender” identity of a biologically male Colorado lawyer. At this point, “Phillips has been involved in legal trouble for more than a decade in cases that implicate free speech and the place of Christians in public life as changes to anti-discrimination laws provide more avenues for lawsuits against them.”

The legal organization that provided assistance to Phillips decided not to attack the basic jurisdictional principle Colorado was violating — that no government has the authority to compel anyone to participate in behavior they believe to be immoral. Rather, this legal group only asked the courts to carve out a small exception to give special First Amendment rights to “artists” (cake artists, floral artists, website artists, etc.). This group has expressly conceded that all other Christian businesses (such as those that rent chairs for weddings) could be compelled to conduct business against their moral code. Thus, the core reason that these laws are unconstitutional has yet to be asserted and addressed.

Origins of Public Accommodation Laws

Today’s “public accommodations laws” apply to basically any business, but historically, such laws only applied to a narrow category of businesses. In England, the common law rule developed that the innkeeper was bound to provide food and lodging for any traveler who sought refuge in the inn. Then, travel by horse and by foot was difficult, and places of lodging were few and far between. If the local inn would not accommodate the traveler, the option would be to spend the night in the open, exposing them from facing danger from robbers and even animals. To address this problem, a narrow class of inns were required to serve all comers. The right was so narrow, it often was limited to providing lodging, but allowing the innkeeper to refuse to serve food. Later, certain modes of transportation, such as ships and trains, were deemed “common carriers” which also were required to provide service to all at standard rates.

In the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Congress enacted a national public accommodation law, primarily as a legal tool to prevent racial discrimination. At the time, many in both political parties believed the law to be unconstitutional even though it only applied to a few businesses (e.g., hotels, restaurants, and movie theatres) and prohibited on a few types of discrimination (“race, color, religion, or national origin”). Title II of this law was challenged in court and was upheld. The Supreme Court ruled that Congress could use its authority over interstate commerce to prevent hotels and motels from discriminating on the basis of race in renting rooms. Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States, 379 U.S. 241 (1964).

In recent years, “public accommodations” laws across many states have vastly expanded their scope. Public accommodations laws usually cover almost every conceivable type of business. Colorado’s “Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA)” covers “any place of business engaged in any sales to the public and any place offering services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations to the public.” Ranging far beyond racial discrimination, CADA expanded its coverage to include the vague categories of “sexual orientation, gender identity [and] gender expression.” C.R.S. 24-34-601(2)(a).

State Administrative Agencies

These state public accommodation laws can empower individuals whose business is refused to file suit directly against the businesses, but usually it is a state agency that brings an administrative action on behalf of the complaining party. If the complaining parties had to pay lawyers to file a complaint, few would bother. But when an agency takes on the cause, the activists who initiate the complaint pay nothing, but can receive huge cash awards. Since the costs of defending these actions can be crippling to small businesses, many businesses are compelled to sacrifice their convictions or close their business.

303 Creative LLC

Colorado’s law also would have threatened 303 Creative, LLC, a Christian website design business that its owner, Lorie Smith, wanted to expand to weddings, but not “same sex weddings.” The Tenth Circuit ruled against her, admitting that “excising certain ideas or viewpoints from the public dialogue … is CADA’s very purpose.” 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, 6 F.4th 1160, 1178 (10th Cir. 2021) (emphasis added). When the 303 Creative case reached the U.S. Supreme Court, that Court finally began to provide some protections for people of faith — at least where the service they provided has to do with “expression” of ideas.

Colorado seeks to put Ms. Smith to a similar choice: If she wishes to speak, she must either speak as the State demands or face sanctions for expressing her own beliefs, sanctions that may include compulsory participation in “remedial … training,” filing periodic compliance reports as officials deem necessary, and paying monetary fines…. [T]hat “is enough,” more than enough, to represent an impermissible abridgment of the First Amendment’s right to speak freely. [303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, 143 S. Ct. 2298, 2313 (2023) (emphasis added).]

The Original Plan

This is not at all what the Founders intended in framing the First Amendment and its protection of the Free Exercise of Religion.

Religion or the duty which we owe to our Creator and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence…. The Religion then of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man; and it is the right of every man to exercise it as these may dictate. This right is in its nature an unalienable right … because what is here a right towards men, is a duty towards the Creator. It is the duty of every man to render to the Creator such homage and such only as he believes to be acceptable to him. This duty is precedent, both in order of time and in degree of obligation, to the claims of Civil Society. [Madison, Memorial and Remonstrance (emphasis added).]

In other words, Madison’s plan for our Constitution was based on the notion that man’s obligation to God preceded and superseded his obligation to society. Government did not have jurisdiction over this part of our lives. This basic rule is violated by modern public accomodation laws.

Travis Weber, director of the Center for Religious Liberty, has noted that “public accommodation laws were once part of a ‘noble’ effort to combat state-sponsored racial discrimination, but have since been expanded to compel equal treatment of different types of sexual conduct.” Public accommodations laws have been so divorced from their historical understanding that today, rather than protecting highway travelers from robbers, they have instead become legalized highway robbery, destroying the livelihoods of people of faith who fail to toe the leftist “woke” line.

Editor’s Note: To read the articles in this series, please click here.

Get In The Fight Washington State campaign is around the corner. Register today to attend the Washington State Summit and Training Programs on April 26 and 27 at On Fire Ministries in Spokane, WA. Get the facts and learn what you can do in your community to help end child exploitation and trafficking.

LISTEN ON SPOTIFY: Now you can tune in every week on Spotify to America’s Mondays With Mary and listen to our Executive Director Mary O’Neill’s report on the comments and insights we receive from our fellow Americans to our weekly Reader’s Survey. Listen and learn what’s on their minds and in their hearts and get the latest news about America’s Future activities and updates.

PEOPLE ARE TALKING: Thousands of our newsletter readers tell us that our articles are thought-provoking, increase their knowledge about the history and traditions of America, and keep them informed about the current state of affairs. If you missed one of our weekly newsletters or want to revisit a past edition, you can access them here.

SHOP TIL YOU STOP: We hope you love America’s Future online shop display and ease of accessing your favorite items! There are many new products, including a full assortment of tees for the whole family, a wide range of accessories like coffee mugs and totes, and a special line dedicated to our Project Defend & Protect Our Children. Thank you for your support!

STAY CONNECTED: You’ll find America’s Future on your favorite social media platforms. Thank you for remembering to follow us and please share our posts.

Support America’s Future

America’s Future is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization.
All donations are tax-deductible to the full extent of the law.

AMERICA’S FUTURE, INC. IS A FLORIDA NON PROFIT 501(C)(3) TAX-EXEMPT EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATION. ALL DONATIONS ARE TAX DEDUCTIBLE TO THE FULL EXTENT OF THE LAW. A COPY OF THE OFFICIAL REGISTRATION AND FINANCIAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE DIVISION OF CONSUMER SERVICES BY CALLING TOLL-FREE, WITHIN THE STATE, 1-800-435-7352, OR VISITING WWW.FLORIDACONSUMERHELP.COM. REGISTRATION DOES NOT IMPLY ENDORSEMENT, APPROVAL, OR RECOMMENDATION BY THE STATE. AMERICA’S FUTURE, INC.’S REGISTRATION NUMBER IS CH67839. (EIN 13-1549794)

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.

Necessary

Always Enabled

Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.

Cookie	Duration	Description
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional	11 months	The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy	11 months	The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.

America’s Mondays With Mary – April 29, 2024

America’s Future Files Brief Supporting Second Amendment Rights

IN FOCUS – Climate Change

Fed Investigation Into Diddy May Reopen Old Criminal Cases