Skip to content

political dissent

Another Sniper – Dan Rayfield Oregon AG

    Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield is under fire for a controversial $10,000 fine levied against a South Carolina citizen accused of unauthorized practice of psychology. Critics argue the penalty is an unconstitutional assault on free speech, punishing political expression across state lines under the guise of professional regulation. The case raises alarms about state overreach, misuse of administrative proceedings, and potential violations of First and Fourteenth Amendment protections. With Oregon’s family courts already facing scrutiny, the move deepens concerns about whether elected officials are weaponizing state power to silence critics and chill constitutionally protected speech nationwide.

    Black Chief Justice Raheem Mullins

    Judicial Speech Police

      In the People’s Republic of Connecticut, free speech now comes with a security review. A shadowy branch within the judiciary—led by DEI apparatchiks like Chief Justice Raheem Mullins and Marshal Services Director O’Donovan Murphy—has redefined citizen dissent as “threats” against judges. Under the guise of “judicial security,” the state now spies on political speech, targeting bloggers and critics with an unaccountable Office of Protective Intelligence. But where are the arrests, prosecutions, or public threat definitions? Nowhere. The speech police are here, cloaked in robes and race-baiting rhetoric, declaring war on the First Amendment—because the judiciary can’t take the heat.