Strait of Hormuz closed off amid escalating Iran conflict - Eric J. Lyman

 

by Eric J. Lyman

The U.S. embassy in Saudi Arabia was hit by drone strikes as the shipping lane that normally carries a fifth of the world's oil was all but shut down

 

The Strait of Hormuz was all but closed to maritime traffic as of early Tuesday amid fears of Iranian tacks and threats of attacks against tankers passing through the choke point. 

The strait, which under normal conditions carries around a fifth of the world’s oil supply, was effectively closed after a commander from the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps said that any vessel attempting to pass through the waterway would be set “ablaze.”

Iran’s threats were in retaliation to the intense U.S. and Israeli strikes on the country this week.

The news put further upward pressure on oil prices, with futures for brent crude topping $85 per barrel early On Tuesday, gaining nearly 9 percent over the previous 24 hours. Prices had been as low as $60 per barrel in January, before tensions in the region intensified. 
 

Separately, the Saudi Arabian Ministry of Defense confirmed reports that the U.S. embassy in Riyadh had been struck by Iranian drones, causing a fire and structural damage that was eventually brought under control. There were no reports of injuries to embassy personnel.  

Eric J. Lyman

Source: https://justthenews.com/world/strait-hormuz-closed-amid-escalating-iran-conflict

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Iran at a Strategic Turning Point - Ahmed Charai

 

by Ahmed Charai

Whether or not any single individual ultimately leads that transformation, the emergence of structured, modernization-oriented leadership is essential if Iran is to move from confrontation to responsible statehood.

 

• Governments confident in their legitimacy do not rely systematically on lethal repression to preserve authority. Iran's long-term stability — should responsible leadership emerge — will depend not on ideological rigidity, but on whether political structures align with the aspirations and capabilities of its people.

• Any future framework must be conditional, sequenced, and compliance-based.

• Economic reintegration would need to be phased and benchmark-driven.

• Whether or not any single individual ultimately leads that transformation, the emergence of structured, modernization-oriented leadership is essential if Iran is to move from confrontation to responsible statehood.

• What follows will not be determined by rhetoric but by decisions — in Tehran, by the Iranian people; in Washington; and across the region. This is not merely a period of tension; it is a structural test of governance, credibility, and strategic direction. The objective is the restoration of balance, sovereignty, and lawful order.

Governments confident in their legitimacy do not rely systematically on lethal repression to preserve authority. Iran's long-term stability — should responsible leadership emerge — will depend not on ideological rigidity, but on whether political structures align with the aspirations and capabilities of its people. Pictured: Members of Iran's security forces on a street in Tehran on March 2, 2026. (Photo by Majid Saeedi/Getty Images)

For many years, I have argued that a political system built on internal repression and external confrontation cannot sustain durable legitimacy or long-term strategic credibility. A state that governs through fear at home while exporting instability abroad ultimately confronts the accumulated costs of that contradiction. No system can indefinitely suppress its society while destabilizing its region without eroding its own foundations.

For more than four decades, the Islamic Republic of Iran has relied on a dual doctrine: coercion internally and confrontation externally. Domestically, repression has been institutionalized — imprisonment of journalists, systematic discrimination against women, suppression of civil protests, and repeated lethal crackdowns. Externally, the regime projected power through proxy militias, ideological expansion, and calibrated destabilization, even as its own economy deteriorated under sanctions, corruption, and structural mismanagement.

Recent coordinated military operations conducted by the United States and Israel represent more than a tactical development. As Commander in Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces, President Donald Trump framed the action as a restoration of credible deterrence and a reassertion of red lines long tested. His message to the regime was clear: destabilization will no longer be absorbed without consequence. His message to the Iranian people was equally deliberate — this confrontation is not with Iran as a nation, but with a governing structure whose policies have endangered both its citizens and regional stability.

This recalibration alters Tehran's cost-benefit calculus. The strategic gray zones within which it operated for years are narrowing, and the margin for escalation without consequence is shrinking.

Tehran's response reinforced the logic of deterrence restoration. Rather than de-escalating, the regime widened the confrontation, directing attacks toward Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Riyadh. These actions are strategically revealing. A state that reacts to pressure by striking neighboring countries — many of which have prioritized economic modernization and regional integration — signals unpredictability rather than strategic confidence.

Iran's regional posture is now more constrained than at any point in recent years. Its proxy networks face sustained pressure. Its economy remains structurally fragile. Its domestic legitimacy has been repeatedly challenged through nationwide protest movements, during which thousands of Iranians have been arrested and many killed. The regime's reliance on force to silence dissent underscores its insecurity, not its strength.

At this critical juncture, clarity of distinction is essential: Iran is not synonymous with the regime. It is a nation with immense civilizational depth, significant human capital, and a young, educated population that has repeatedly demonstrated courage in demanding dignity and accountability.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the Iranian public directly: "You are not our enemies, and we are not your enemies. We have a common enemy: the murderous cult of the ayatollahs." He urged members of Iran's security forces to reconsider their alignment and described this moment as an opportunity to establish "a new and free Iran."

Whatever one's policy preferences, the strategic importance of this messaging is substantial. It reframes the confrontation as one between governance models — authoritarian expansionism versus accountable statehood — rather than between nations. It challenges the regime's long-standing narrative that external pressure is an attack on Iranian identity itself.

Recent protest movements inside Iran, particularly those led by women and younger generations, reveal a society that is politically conscious and dynamic. Governments confident in their legitimacy do not rely systematically on lethal repression to preserve authority. Iran's long-term stability — should responsible leadership emerge — will depend not on ideological rigidity, but on whether political structures align with the aspirations and capabilities of its people.

Whether change in Iran unfolds gradually or through accelerated transition, responsible policymakers must consider what a stable reintegration pathway would require under established regional security principles.

Any future framework must be conditional, sequenced, and compliance-based. Security normalization would require verifiable commitments: cessation of proxy warfare, disengagement from non-state armed actors, adherence to maritime security norms, and transparency in missile doctrine consistent with international obligations. Participation in regional security dialogue would follow measurable compliance — not precede it.

Economic reintegration would need to be phased and benchmark-driven. Sanctions relief or expanded market access would be tied to financial transparency, anti-corruption enforcement, compliance with global banking standards, and adherence to non-proliferation commitments. Regional partners and allies that have aligned themselves with prosperity, integration, and strategic transparency could provide structured channels for gradual reintegration into trade, technology, and investment networks.

The United States would anchor this process within a rules-based financial and legal framework, ensuring predictability, accountability, and adherence to international norms.

Institutional stabilization would be essential. Any responsible leadership in Tehran would need to strengthen governance structures, reinforce judicial independence, and ensure civilian oversight of security institutions. International engagement, if offered, would be technical and performance-based — focused on capacity building rather than political engineering.

Encouragingly, voices within the Iranian opposition have increasingly articulated a vision grounded in constitutional governance, economic modernization, and reintegration into the international system. Figures such as Reza Pahlavi, the son of the former Shah, who has consistently emphasized secular statecraft, institutional reform, and peaceful transition, represent part of a broader movement seeking to align Iran with global norms of accountable governance. Whether or not any single individual ultimately leads that transformation, the emergence of structured, modernization-oriented leadership is essential if Iran is to move from confrontation to responsible statehood.

Iran now stands at a consequential moment in its modern history. The forces of deterrence, domestic aspiration, and regional recalibration are converging.

What follows will not be determined by rhetoric but by decisions — in Tehran, by the Iranian people; in Washington; and across the region. This is not merely a period of tension; it is a structural test of governance, credibility, and strategic direction. The objective is the restoration of balance, sovereignty, and lawful order.

The choices made now will shape not only Iran's future, but the strategic architecture of the Middle East for generations.

This article originally appeared in the Jerusalem Strategic Tribune and is reprinted here by the kind permission of the author.

 

Ahmed Charai is the Chairman and CEO of World Herald Tribune, Inc., and the publisher of the Jerusalem Strategic Tribune, TV Abraham, and Radio Abraham. He serves on the boards of several prominent institutions, including the Atlantic Council, the Center for the National Interest, the Foreign Policy Research Institute, and the International Crisis Group. He is also an International Councilor and a member of the Advisory Board at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22317/iran-strategic-turning-point

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Iran starts ‘indiscriminate’ strikes across Gulf of Oman, hits shadow tanker tied to regime - Emma Bussey

 

by Emma Bussey

Maritime intelligence firm says Tehran is targeting commercial traffic regardless of nationality after sanctioned tanker with Iranian crew was hit

 

Iran is conducting "indiscriminate" targeting of vessels across the Gulf of Oman and the wider Persian Gulf following the launch of U.S.-Israeli strikes under Operation Epic Fury, according to a maritime intelligence firm.

Windward AI noted the sanctioned Palau-flagged tanker Skylight was hit as the conflict across the Middle East entered its second day, with the tanker also holding Iranian nationals among the crew and ties to the regime.

"Analysis of vessel affiliations, targeting patterns, and cargo data points to a strategy of indiscriminate area denial — not precision targeting — aimed at demonstrating Iran's capability to disrupt the Strait and deter commercial shipping," the firm said Monday.

Gulf of Oman tanker attacks escalate as Iran retaliates against Operation Epic Fury with missiles targeting U.S. allies, disrupting commercial traffic through choke point. (Reuters)

Iran has been retaliating with missiles and drones targeting U.S. and allied positions across the region, including in Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates.

Maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, which links the Gulf of Oman to the Persian Gulf, is the world’s most critical energy chokepoint.

While three other vessels were reported attacked since the hostilities escalated Feb. 28, Windward described Skylight as "the highest-risk vessel in the group and the most anomalous target."

The UKMTO Operation Centre also later confirmed attacks on Skylight, MKD Vyom and Hercules Star, warning of significant military activity across the Gulf of Oman, the Persian Gulf, the North Arabian Sea and the Strait of Hormuz.

 

Tanker targeted off Oman coast

Oman’s Maritime Security Centre confirmed that the oil tanker #Skylight was targeted five nautical miles north of Khasab Port in Musandam. #MarineTraffic data indicate the Palau flagged vessel arrived on 22 February and remained in ballast. The… pic.twitter.com/pCD8Vq47x4

— MarineTraffic (@MarineTraffic) March 1, 2026

Skylight had been sanctioned by the U.S. Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control in December 2025, and was used to transport Iranian petroleum products, according to reports.

It was operated by United Arab Emirates-based Red Sea Ship Management LLC, which Windward noted has documented ties to front companies linked to Iran’s Ministry of Defense.

The vessel had been at anchor since Feb. 22 and carried 20 crew members — 15 Indians and five Iranians.

DUBAI HOTEL FIRE APPEARS TO BE CAUSED BY IRANIAN STRIKE; INJURIES REPORTED

A satellite view of the Strait of Hormuz, a critical chokepoint for global energy supply, connecting the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman.  (Gallo Images/Orbital Horizon/Copernicus Sentinel Data 2025/Amanda Macias/Fox News Digital)

"The Skylight anomaly — striking a vessel with an Iranian crew, Iranian operational ties, and active OFAC sanctions — is the single strongest piece of evidence against deliberate targeting by affiliation," Windward said.

Reuters also reported March 1 that the Palau-flagged tanker was hit off Oman’s Musandam Peninsula in the Gulf of Oman, injuring four.

Oman’s Maritime Security Center said in a post on X that Skylight was attacked about 5 nautical miles north of Khasab Port, caught fire and was evacuated.

Emma Bussey is a breaking news writer for Fox News Digital. Before joining Fox, she worked at The Telegraph with the U.S. overnight team, across desks including foreign, politics, news, sport and culture. 

Source: https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/7252498158295181812/1034594441338388238

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Trump’s Way of War - Victor Davis Hanson

 

by Victor Davis Hanson

Trump’s doctrine is simple: strike first at the guilty, strike hard from afar, skip the nation-building, and end wars on America’s terms.

 

War is the use of arms to settle differences—tribal, political, religious, cultural, and material—between organized groups. It is unchanging. The general laws of armed conflict stays immutable, given the constancy of human nature.

However, the manner in which war is conducted remains fluid. New weapons, tactics, and strategies elicit counterresponses in an endless cycle of tensions between defensive and offensive superiority.

That said, has President Trump introduced a novel way of waging Western war against America’s foreign enemies?

We saw glimpses of it during his first term, when he eliminated Iranian general and terrorist kingpin Qassem Soleimani and ISIS terrorist grandee Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. In the former case, he preferred hitting the cause rather than the effects of Iranian terrorism in Syria and Iraq, while making it clear that he had no intention of striking the Iranian mainland and entering into a tit-for-tat “forever war.”

In large part, he was successful. Iran never quite replaced the venomous Soleimani. And despite tired threats, its performative art responses did not kill any Americans, and they were seen by Trump as venting and not worth a counterresponse.

In the case of the killing of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, Trump likewise went after the catalyst of ISIS terrorism. But he also bombed ISIS into near nonexistence in Iraq, since, unlike Iran, it lacked the financial and material resources of a state sponsor of terror, and it had no independent ability to make weapons or finance its terrorism.

In 2018, Trump probably killed more Russian ground troops (more than 200?) than America had during the entire Cold War, with his furious response to the Wagner Group assault on a U.S. Special Operations base near Khasham, Syria. Yet the defeat of Russian mercenaries also led to no wider conflict.

In these three cases, Trump successfully portrayed his antagonists as the unprovoked aggressors, employed overwhelming force to eliminate them, and declared them one-off occurrences with no need to punish the ultimate source or sponsor of the aggression with further force, and he was largely successful in limiting subsequent attacks on American installations.

In Trump’s second term, he widened his doctrine of “preventative deterrence” with operations to remove Venezuelan communist strongman Nicolás Maduro, along with two separate bombing campaigns against Iran.

While the second Iran operation is now in progress, it may resemble the earlier two in a number of facets.

Trump again portrayed Venezuela and Iran as unpunished past and present psychopathic aggressors. He went after Maduro, whom Biden had largely ignored, for his past of exporting gang-bangers and criminals across the Biden-era open border and for using Venezuela’s cartel connections to profit from American deaths.

As for attacking Iran, Trump cited the theocracy’s past terrorist attacks on Americans and U.S. allies, its effort to assassinate Westerners, and its unwillingness to abandon plans to create a nuclear weapon.

What, then, are Trump’s new ways of conducting war?

1. Geostrategy. Always behind these seemingly unconnected events—and other nonkinetic moves like warning Panama about Chinese intrusions—strategic concerns loom. The common denominator is usually isolating China from strategic spaces, allies, and oil—and Russia in a lesser sense.

Loud and terrorist, but ultimately impotent, proxies of strategic enemies—Cuba, Iran, Venezuela—are preferable targets. They are not just easily identified enemies given their past anti-American violence; they are also targeted because their demise offers a global display of the weakness of their distant patrons and underwriters.

2. Wars of Reckoning. Trump always frames his interventionism as reactive and long overdue. It is a sort of “reckoning war” for previously overlooked crimes that his predecessors had ignored but are often seared in the American mind. “Preemptive” or “preventative” wars, these strikes may be. But Trump himself avoids the baggage that those adjectives of aggression convey in the collective American memory.

3. War among Negotiations. Trump’s way of warmaking is usually an extension of ongoing negotiations (e.g., over Iran’s nuclear weapons or Maduro’s subsidies to terrorists and drug trafficking). So, during discussions, he offers various exit ramps to his adversaries and publicly laments the possibility of violence.

Meanwhile, American naval and expeditionary assets show up and amass to ramp up the pressure. Trump does not wait for negotiations to fail, but usually offers a deadline to his adversaries. And then he simply informs his advisors of the point at which the enemy has no intention of seeking a peaceful settlement. A strike follows.

4. The Culpable Apparat. Trump prefers top-down war. That is, he starts his attacks by targeting the enemy apparat, not its lesser henchman. The aim is both to disrupt its command and control and to separate an enemy leader from a population deemed not necessarily culpable.

His enemy counterparts—al-Baghdadi, Khamenei, Maduro, Soleimani, the Wagner Group—are widely regarded as odious, which strengthens his prophylactic or reactive action. For all the boilerplate, even Trump’s enemies do not gain empathy since their antiwar activism becomes inseparable from the de facto defense of a rogues’ gallery of deposed and hated killers and thugs.

5. No to Nation-Building. There is no nation-building. Trump sees the U.S. as responsible only for lighting the fuse of revolution, then giving the oppressed the chance of something better if they do not miss their chance at regime change and working with the Americans.

6. No Boots on the Ground. There are few ground troops involved—no chances for an Abu Ghraib misadventure, or humiliating skedaddles from Kabul, or maimed Americans from shaped-charge IEDs.

It is much harder for targets to kill Americans in the air and on the seas. And because there is zero investment in occupying a country and hands-on rebuilding of its institutions, casualties are kept to a minimum. Trump equates deploying a larger ground force in the Middle East with imbecility.

The weapons of choice of Middle East Islamists and terrorists—IEDs, sniper rifles, suicide vests, sudden rocket salvos—are far less effective, given America is fighting its sort of war with overwhelming firepower, technological advantage, and mobility in the air and on the oceans.

Trump prefers overkill to shock and awe, or using minimalist forces. Still, visuals are important. The point is not just to demolish the opposition but to do it with overwhelming redundancy as a global revelation of America’s assets, especially for viewing by the Russians, Chinese, and North Koreans.

7. Exit Strategy? There is an exit strategy of sorts, partly rhetorical and partly real—but usually arbitrarily declared by Trump himself. He alone starts the shooting and stops it according to his own definition of when the war begins and ends. The enemy has a vote, of course, but Trump frames the conflict in ways that lessen his say.

Because a transactional rather than ideological Trump holds few grudges, he can announce after taking out Iran’s nuclear facilities in summer 2025 that he wishes to “Make Iran great again!”

Or he praises the Venezuelan people and professes to restore their oil industry to its proper profitability and transparency—even as he storms their presidential palace. If the enemy refuses to give up, Trump assumes it eventually will. He has endless patience, both to pound it by air and sea and then, at any moment, praise the defeated and declare the hostilities over. Critics counter that without regime change—that so often requires ground troops—rotating the faces of the current Venezuelan or Iranian government will not result in a radical change in the targeted nation’s behavior.

8. No to Internationalism. Trump cares nothing for the UN’s condemnations, given its own moral bankruptcy and lack of credibility. For action outside Europe, he does not really consult NATO and much less the European Union. He assumes all three will follow a predictable script: initially critical, then tentative as the tide of battle turns, and finally either praising Trump’s success or eager to get in on itself.

Nor does he worry much about veiled threats from Russia or China. He is careful to consult a key few in Congress, but cares even less that the American Left opposes anything he does. Or rather, he expects their Pavlovian resistance and considers their shrill outbursts and street theater public relations as pluses and the stuff of future campaign ads.

9. Deterrent Displays. Trump uses his strikes as global reminders of American prowess. He showcases the USS Gerald R. Ford mammoth carrier, the largest warship in the history of conflict.

Media maps of American naval assets cover four disparate seas surrounding the Iranian theater—the Mediterranean, the Red Sea, the Persian Gulf, and the Indian Ocean—and derive from Pentagon press releases.

New weaponry is showcased—whether it’s a mystery sonic boom weapon at Maduro’s presidential palace, a new fleet of kamikaze drones in flight to Iran, or a monstrous new carrier.

10. American Self-Interest. Trump will not act unless the public can be apprised of American self-interest, and, in a cost-benefit calculation, there is a good chance of success. He has no interest in liberating and rebooting another Iraq and Afghanistan, since their oppressed populations may hate the infidel Americans as much as they do their own oppressors.

Trump saw Bagram Air Base as fortifiable, strategically located, and defensible, and thus in the U.S. interest, but certainly not so the graveyard of empires or the gender studies program at the university in Kabul. It is no accident that both the targets, Venezuela and Iran, have oil, offering the wherewithal for the liberated without the U.S. having to fund their own restoration. Flipping petro-dictatorships that were proxies under the aegis of China and Russia weakened both.

What Trump says and does are sometimes divergent. Funding Ukraine weakens Russia, which is in the U.S. interest, so Trump finds ways to keep the arms coming mostly without commentary. Letting Israel take care of business and jumping into the war to humiliate Iran last summer unleashed forces that destroyed the Assad regime in Syria—and finally got Russia out of the Middle East.

The present conflict over Iran is the greatest challenge that Trump has faced in either of his two terms. But given his past record, there is a good chance that he will eventually rid Iran of its theocracy—the fleeting hope of the past eight presidents.

For five decades, the Iranian street and its unhinged theocracy scared silly the Middle East with its “Death to America” chants, its promise to destroy the Zionist entity, its brag of going nuclear, and its often overt warnings to rip apart the Sunni-dominated Gulf.

But Trump, with help from Israel, finally revealed the theocracy to be a Keystone Kop kleptocracy. The mullahs screamed “Death to America!” but it was Trump’s America that finally brought death to them. 

Victor Davis Hanson

Source: https://amgreatness.com/2026/03/03/trumps-way-of-war/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Israeli forces begin ground operations in southern Lebanon - i24 news

 

by i24 news

Witnesses told Reuters that the Lebanese army had pulled out of at least seven forward operating positions along the border

 

Illustration - IDF troops in LebanonIDF Spokesperson

 

The Israel Defense Forces announced overnight that it has expanded its ground deployment in southern Lebanon, seizing several commanding positions inside Lebanese territory beyond the five posts previously held. 

Troops are now deployed across the entire border sector, particularly on heights overlooking roads and villages near the border. Additional divisional-level units are expected to join the operation in the coming days.

---

According to the IDF, Hezbollah continues to maintain significant firing capabilities, with thousands of rockets and missiles, mostly north of the Litani River. On Sunday evening, the group carried out a limited launch toward Israel, which security sources described as a test of Israeli response. The IDF says its operations are focused on weapon stockpiles, military infrastructure, and preventing infiltration attempts.

The army stated that it has communicated with the Lebanese authorities and army to avoid escalation, warning that any direct involvement would constitute entering the conflict. Some Hezbollah members were reportedly stopped at Lebanese army checkpoints as they headed south, but a senior Israeli official emphasized that the IDF "relies only on itself."

---

Witnesses told Reuters that the Lebanese army had pulled out of at least seven forward operating positions along the border, allowing the IDF’s 91st "Galilee" Regional Division to position forces at several points near the border as part of an enhanced forward defense posture.

US, Israel call for Iranians to seize their future

On the economic front, Israel highlighted financial pressure on Hezbollah, noting that Iran has transferred over $1 billion to the group this year, while, for the first time, Hezbollah members reportedly did not receive their salaries at the start of the month.

Defense Minister Israel Katz said, "Prime Minister Netanyahu and I authorized the IDF to advance and seize additional controlled territories in Lebanon to prevent firing on Israeli border communities. We have promised security for the Galilee communities, and that is what we will do."

---

The IDF continues its operations against Hezbollah targets in southern Lebanon, emphasizing that the terrorist organization "is already paying and will pay a price for firing at Israel."

i24 news

Source: https://www.i24news.tv/en/news/israel/defense/artc-israeli-forces-begin-ground-operations-in-southern-lebanon

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

President Trump, Rubio warn Iran 'hardest hits are yet to come' - Misty Severi

 

by Misty Severi

“We’re knocking the crap out of them,” Trump said. “We’ve got the greatest military in the world and we’re using it ... We haven’t even started hitting them hard. The big wave hasn’t even happened. The big one is coming soon.”

 

President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued stark warnings to Iran Monday that the "hardest hits" in its new conflict in the region is still to come if it does not agree to end its nuclear program.

The United States and Israel launched missiles at Iran over the weekend, which resulted in the death of Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khameini. Iran has since retaliated by targeting Israel and U.S. bases in several Middle Eastern countries.

Trump told CNN that he thinks the U.S. side of the conflict is "going very well," and warned Iran that bigger hits could still be coming.

“We’re knocking the crap out of them,” Trump said. “We’ve got the greatest military in the world and we’re using it ... We haven’t even started hitting them hard. The big wave hasn’t even happened. The big one is coming soon.”

The president also commented that the U.S. was ahead of schedule in the amount of damage it has caused Iran, but that he anticipates the attacks will last approximately one month.

Rubio echoed the president's comment, stating that the next phase of U.S. attacks on Iran will be "more punishing" than the ones they have dealt it so far.

"The hardest hits are yet to come from the U.S. military. The next phase will be even more punishing on Iran than it is right now," Rubio told reporters. "The objectives of this operation are to destroy their ballistic missile capability and make sure they can't rebuild it, and make sure that they can't hide behind that to have a nuclear program."

The State Department has urged Americans currently in the Middle East to leave their respective countries in light of the escalating conflict.  

Misty Severi

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/security/president-trump-rubio-warn-iran-hardest-hits-are-yet-come

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Britain, France, and Greece reinforce Cyprus amid Iranian threats - i24 news

 

by i24 news

Britain reportedly plans to send warship HMS Duncan to Cyprus to protect RAF Akrotiri from potential Iranian attacks

 

The leaders of Cyprus, Egypt and Greece met in the Cypriot capital for talks following the discovery of gas deposits in the east Mediterranean on Tuesday 21, 2017.AP Photo/Petros Karadjias

 

Britain is planning to send a warship, HMS Duncan, to Cyprus to defend RAF Akrotiri from potential Iranian attacks, three sources told The Times. 

The deployment was discussed on Tuesday morning during a meeting between Defence Secretary John Healey and senior military officials. The UK currently has no capability to defend Cyprus against ballistic missile strikes, raising concerns about the island’s vulnerability.

---

Meanwhile, France is reportedly preparing to send air defenses to Cyprus, such as anti-missile and anti-drone systems to Cyprus, according to a Cyprus news agency. French Foreign Minister Catherine Barrot stated that France is ready to defend its partners if they request assistance.

Sources in Cyprus suggest that the drones that recently targeted British bases on the island were likely launched by Hezbollah in Lebanon. In response, Greece is sending two frigates and F-16 fighter jets to Cyprus to reinforce security, the Ministry of Defence said.

IRGC: enemies who killed Khamenei will not be safe 'even at home'

This, after an Iranian-made drone hit Britain’s RAF Akrotiri air base in Cyprus on Monday, causing limited damage and no casualties. 

Cypriot President Nikos Christodoulides said that “information received through various channels indicates that it involved an unmanned drone, which caused limited damage.” He added that “all the competent services of the republic are on alert and in full operational readiness” and stressed that “our country does not participate in any way and does not intend to be part of any military operation.”

i24 news

Source: https://www.i24news.tv/en/news/international/europe/artc-britain-france-and-greece-reinforce-cyprus-amid-iranian-threats

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Pelosi's war powers flip-flop exposed in resurfaced Obama-era clip contradicts Trump criticism on Iran - Leo Briceno

 

by Leo Briceno

Former House Speaker Pelosi defended Obama's Libya strikes without congressional approval   

 

A clip of former U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has resurfaced online where she flatly defended the then-Obama administration’s decision to strike Libya — without the congressional authorization she believes President Donald Trump should have secured before conducting his own strikes over the weekend.

"You’re saying that the president did not need authorization initially and still does not need any authorization from Congress on Libya?" a reporter asked Pelosi at a press event back in 2011.

"Yes," Pelosi answered plainly.

The unambiguous answer contrasts sharply with Pelosi’s view of Trump’s strikes against Iran on Saturday.

Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., speaks at the 2026 California Democratic Party State Convention in San Francisco, Saturday, Feb. 21, 2026. (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu)

In a joint effort targeting Iranian military leadership, the U.S. and Israel killed Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Saturday, citing an imperative to halt Iran’s pursuit of developing a nuclear weapon.

Pelosi swiftly condemned the operation.

"President Trump’s decision to initiate military hostilities into Iran starts another unnecessary war which endangers our servicemembers and destabilizes an already fragile region," Pelosi said in a post to X.

"The Constitution is clear: decisions that lead our nation into war must be authorized by Congress."

Pelosi, alongside other Democrats, is pursuing a war powers resolution that would limit Trump from taking further military action against Iran without express congressional approval.

Trump’s strikes bear similarity to President Barack Obama’s decision to strike Libya in 2011 under Operation Odyssey Dawn.

In that operation, Obama ordered a series of strikes against Libya in March 2011, looking to deter Muammar Gaddafi from attacking civilian protesters.

FETTERMAN PRAISES TRUMP'S IRAN OPERATION AS 'HISTORIC' MOMENT FOR AMERICA AMID PARTY DIVISIONS

President Barack Obama, accompanied by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, speaks during a Transfer of Remains Ceremony, at Andrews Air Force Base, Maryland, on Sept. 14, 2012. (AP)

Gaddafi, known as the "Mad Dog of the Middle East," was the ruler of Libya from 1969 to 2011. He had a long and complicated relationship with the U.S. — at times aligning with national objectives and, at others, governing in a manner the U.S. couldn’t ignore.

The final straw came in the Libyan revolt of 2011, when demonstrations broke out in Benghazi and other cities. Like recent uprisings in Iran, Gaddafi met the threat to his rule with crushing force, marching his forces toward several Libyan cities that had resisted his power.

In what he described as attempts to uphold international law, Obama said the U.S., in partnership with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), had taken the strikes to protect Libya’s civilians to protect Libya’s civilians.

GOP REP MASSIE JOINS DEMOCRATS IN OPPOSITION TO US IRAN STRIKES

"We struck regime forces approaching Benghazi to save that city and the people within it," Obama said in remarks after the attacks.

The strikes did not kill Gaddafi.

Gaddafi was killed later that year at the hands of revolutionaries in October.

Libyan Leader Moammar Gadhafi gestures to supporters as he speaks in Tripoli, Libya. As rebels swarmed into Tripoli late Sunday, Aug. 21, 2011. (Associated Press)

While Obama said he had consulted a bipartisan group of congressional lawmakers, he did not pursue a declaration of war before carrying out his strikes.

"So, for those who doubted our capacity to carry out this operation, I want to be clear: The United States of America has done what we said we would do," Obama said.

Pelosi’s office did not respond to a request for comment on whether she saw any key differences between the attacks carried out by Obama and those now ordered by Trump.

 

Leo Briceno

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pelosis-war-powers-flip-flop-exposed-resurfaced-obama-era-clip-contradicts-trump-criticism

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Chinese state-run media promotes anti-Iran War protests organized by CCP-linked Singham Network - Jerry Dunleavy

 

by Jerry Dunleavy

China helps promote astroturfed far-left protests against the U.S. strikes on Iran through a financial network in league with infamous radical-left financier and multi-millionaire Neville Roy Singham. China has a lot at stake in the outcome of the conflict.

 

Chinese state-run propaganda outlets are promoting U.S. protests against the Trump Administration’s strikes against the Iranian regime, with the protests being organized by a Chinese Communist Party-linked financial network in the United States.

Immediately after the start of this weekend’s U.S. military-led operation striking Iranian leadership and military sites, street protests opposing the conflict with Iran were quickly organized in New York City and nationwide by the the leftist "Act Now to Stop War and End Racism" (ANSWER) Coalition, the Marxist revolutionary group known as the People’s Forum, the far-left anti-war group Code Pink, and the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL).

Just the News has previously reported on how these and other radical activist groups have leadership links or financial ties to the funding network backed by wealthy Marxist businessman Neville Roy Singham, who himself is linked to the CCP and whom some in his network call "Comrade." 

The U.S. and the Israelis launched a joint attack early Saturday morning against Tehran, killing Iranian leader Ayatollah Ali Hosseini Khamenei and degrading the Iranian military.

Chinese media promote protests against Iran attacks

Chinese state media outlets such as Xinhua News Agency, China Daily, China Global Television Network (CGTN), the Global Times, the People’s Daily, and China[dot]org — all directly run by the CCP — quickly promoted the far-left protests organized by these Singham-linked groups, as the Chinese government denounced the actions taken by President Donald Trump against China’s now-besieged ally in the Middle East.

Articles by multiple Chinese state-run outlets over the past few days touted the anti-war protests, approvingly quoted a People’s Forum leader at length, and shared protest photos and videos featuring anti-war signage produced by ANSWER and PSL. The protests were also touted by Singham network-linked outlets such as the People’s Dispatch and BreakThrough News.

The Chinese Embassy in the U.S. did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The People’s Forum, ANSWER, Code Pink, and PSL did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Just the News also previously reported in January about a similar phenomenon, where Chinese state-run propaganda outlets promoted U.S. protests against the Trump Administration’s arrest of Venezuelan strongman Nicolás Maduro — with the protests appearing to be organized by the Singham network.

CCP propaganda touts anti-war protests — and repeatedly quotes a Singham Network leader

Xinhua on Sunday ran a story declaring that “New Yorkers protest against U.S. military attack on Iran.”

“Hundreds of New Yorkers rallied in Times Square and then marched along streets in New York City in protest of U.S.-Israel coordinated airstrikes against Iran on Saturday,” Xinhua said. The CCP-run outlet then quoted Layan Fuleihan, the education director at the People’s Forum at length, describing the forum as “a socialist organization and movement incubator based in New York City.”

"We cannot forget that it is the United States that has over 5,000 nuclear warheads ready to be launched. It is the United States that is pointing those nuclear warheads at the towns and cities of everyday people like you and me all across the world," the CCP outlet quoted Fuleihan as saying. "Iran poses no threat to the United States. We will not fall for the lies that were used to deceive us 20 years ago," Fuleihan said during a Saturday rally speech, according to Xinhua.

The Chinese outlet added that “there is absolutely no reason and no working person, no family here in the United States that says they wake up every day, and they are afraid of Iran, said Fuleihan.”

Xinhua on Sunday published another essentially identical article on Sunday, where the featured quote at the top of the story was the “5,000 nuclear warheads” quote from Fuleihan.

Xinhua was originally called the Red China News Agency, and the Justice Department has stated that it is “directly subordinate to the State Council of the People’s Republic of China” and that it “reports to the State Council and the Communist Party of China’s Propaganda and Public Information Departments.”

Fuleihan consistently praised Hamas and CCP

The People’s Forum says that Fuleihan “is the Education Director at The People’s Forum, and she is a popular educator, organizer, and lifelong student of historical and contemporary struggles of the oppressed.” Fuleihan’s X account also lists her as being affiliated with the People’s Forum’s 1804 Books website, which says that it is “your shop for socialist literature and revolutionary theory with internationalist resources for political education, organizing & movement building.” She is also listed as an author at the People’s Dispatch.

Fuleihan praised Hamas for its terrorist attacks against Israel on October 7, 2023 the day after they occurred. “Yesterday, the world woke up to incredible news,” she said at the time. “The media will tell you that yesterday, terrorists invaded Israel. But we know that actually what happened is that the oppressed people of Palestine broke out of the open-air prison they have been subjected to.”

Fuleihan also has a history of praising China’s government. China Daily on Sunday also reposted the Xinhua story which praised the Singham-linked protests and which quoted the People’s Forum activist at length. The protest photo the Chinese state-run outlet featured at least two PSL signs, one which declared “Stop the War on Iran” and the other which said “No New U.S. War in the Middle East.”

The Chinese outlet also fired off a tweet on Saturday which quoted the People’s Forum director at length.

China Daily operates under the umbrella of the Chinese government’s State Council Information Office.

The Chinese echo chamber

The Global Times also on Sunday shared the Xinhua article touting the Singham-linked protests and quoting People’s Forum leader Fuleihan. The Global Times was designated as a “foreign mission” of the CCP by the State Department during the first Trump administration.

China.org also published the Xinhua article on Sunday about the Singham network protests with the same quotes from Fuleihan. China.org is a Chinese government-run website also published under the State Council Information Office's control.

The Bernama News Agency — a Malaysian state-run news agency — also decided to publish the same Xinhua article on Sunday, with a photo prominently featuring multiple PSL signs including one saying “No New U.S. War in the Middle East.”

The People’s Daily online outlet also reposted a different Xinhua article on Monday with the headline “People attend protest against U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran in San Francisco.”

A photo in the article showed a stack of “No U.S.-Israel War on Iran!” signs from ANSWER, with a caption saying the picture from Saturday taken by a Xinhua photojournalist “shows a placard during a protest against U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran in San Francisco.” Another San Francisco protest photo in the article had one of the ANSWER signs visible.

The People’s Daily is the official newspaper of the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party.

A tweet by Xinhua on Sunday also stated that “hundreds of New Yorkers rallied in Times Square and then marched along streets in New York City in protest of U.S.-Israel coordinated airstrikes against Iran on Saturday.”

The accompanying video showed a mix of at least a dozen signs from PSL and ANSWER, including saying, “Hands Off Iran!”, “No New U.S. War in the Middle East,” “Money for People’s Needs, Not War with Iran,” and “Stop the War in Iran.”

Xinhua reporter Li Yuanqing said in the video that “participants condemned the latest strikes on Iran.”

CGTN published a story on Sunday titled “Anti-war protests erupt in U.S. as politicians criticize military operation against Iran.” The web link for the article similarly claimed that “Protests erupt in U.S. amid political backlash after strikes on Iran.”

“Anti-war demonstrations erupted across major U.S. cities on Sunday, while prominent politicians in the country openly criticized the U.S.-Israel joint military actions against Iran,” CGTN wrote. “According to U.S. media reports, masses have rallied and marched to demonstrate their disapproval of the joint military operation in cities including Washington, Chicago, Boston, New York, and Los Angeles.”

CGTN on Sunday also shared a Sunday story titled “Anti-war protests held in several major U.S. cities” which said that “a growing number of anti-war protests have been reported in several major U.S. cities. Hundreds of New Yorkers rallied in Times Square and then marched along streets in New York City in protest of the U.S.-Israel coordinated airstrikes against Iran on Saturday.”

The CGTN video clip narrated by Walter Morris — the national correspondent for CGTN in Washington, D.C. — said that “we have also seen a growing number of anti-war protests in several major U.S. cities.” The video showed multiple ANSWER signs including two saying “Hands Off Iran!” The State Department during the first Trump Administration designated CGTN as a “foreign mission” of the Chinese government due to its Chinese state control.

China Daily on Sunday also said on X that “people across the world protest against #US-Israeli strikes on #Iran. #Israel.” The photo showed at least four PSL signs declaring, “Stop the War on Iran.”

Singham Network spun into action within minutes of U.S. strikes against Iran

“A short time ago, the United States military began major combat operations in Iran. Our objective is to defend the American people by eliminating imminent threats from the Iranian regime, a vicious group of very hard, terrible people,” Trump said in a Truth Social video posted at 2:30AM early on Saturday.

The Singham Network quickly kicked into high gear. Only four minutes later, ANSWER issued a tweet at 2:34AM on Saturday that “TODAY: EMERGENCY NATIONWIDE DAY OF ACTION — STOP THE WAR ON IRAN!”

“Trump and Israel are carrying out an unprovoked, illegal bombing of Iran,” ANSWER declared. “This war threatens to cause unthinkable death and destruction. Iran has not attacked the United States.”

ANSWER added: “The people of this country reject another war for regime change and empire, a war which only serves the interests of a tiny elite and oil executives. Today, protests will take place in cities around the United States to oppose a new war with Iran.”

The group said that the “initial sponsoring organizations of the day of protest” include Singham network groups such as ANSWER, the People’s Forum, and Code Pink.

The protest hub website set up by ANSWER in the early morning hours of Saturday now claims that “immediately, people hit the streets to express the majority sentiment in this country: we reject another endless war for regime change” and called upon protesters to “continue this anti-war outpouring this Monday as part of a coordinated day of action.”

PSL sent a Saturday tweet at 2:46AM, quote-tweeting ANSWER and tagging the People’s Forum and Code Pink, among others. “With just hours notice, people across the United States will take the streets to oppose a new war on Iran,” the socialist party said. “Join the emergency nationwide day of action TODAY, SAT. FEB 28 to say no to war for empire — find an action near you.”

The People’s Forum swung into action on Saturday at 2:52AM, including sharing an ANSWER graphic on X opposing war with Iran.

The sockpuppet bubble of repeating the same propaganda under different names

“EMERGENCY DAY OF ACTION IN NYC TO STOP THE WAR WITH IRAN: TODAY, 2/28 at 2PM in Times Square,” the forum tweeted. “The U.S. and Israel are carrying out an unprovoked, illegal bombing campaign on Iran. This war serves no one but a tiny elite and oil executives and is a continuation of more than two years of genocide in Palestine and U.S.-Israeli aggressions throught [sic] the region. Join us in the streets to say NO to another U.S. war for empire!”

BreakThrough News tweeted on Saturday at 4:31AM that “BREAKING: As Trump announces ‘major combat operations’ against Iran nationwide ‘NO WAR ON IRAN’ protests have been called across the U.S. on Saturday.” The Singham-linked outlet said that the call to action said that “the people of this country reject another endless war and will take to the streets now and make our voices heard.”

The outlet added that the national organizations involved in leading the protests included ANSWER, the People’s Forum, and Code Pink.

BreakThrough News later on Saturday also tweeted a segment featuring Fuleihan from the People’s Forum who was there to “break down the [sic] how people here in the U.S. are responding to Trump's attack on Iran.”

"In just the few hours after Trump launched this illegal attack on Iran, the people inside the United States have begun to mobilize,” Fuleihan said in the video. “A call went out in the early hours of the morning today for a national day of action all across the United States. … Trump’s actions are deeply unpopular — you can see that in the speed in which people have come out to call protests.” She directed people to the ANSWER website to join protests.

PSL also said on X later on Saturday that “the people’s answer to this new crime needs to be mass protest in the streets to demand a stop to the war.”

Claudia De La Cruz on Saturday also shared the ANSWER tweet and said that “Trump is launching another unnecessary war. This is not about self defense- this is an attack on the sovereignty of another nation. STOP WAR ON IRAN!!!”

De La Cruz said in a 2024 interview about her campaign as the PSL nominee to be U.S. president that “I co-founded and co-directed […] the People’s Forum.” The forum says that De la Cruz “is a central committee member of The Party for Socialism and Liberation” and that “in 2018, she co-founded The People’s Forum.”

The People’s Dispatch on Saturday said that “anti-war movements and left parties around the world have spoken up against the U.S.-Israeli aggression.”

The forum-linked outlet included a graphic quoting Brian Becker, the national director of ANSWER, condemning the U.S. strikes against Iran. 

Brian Becker is reportedly a “founding member” of PSL as well as a national organizer for the far-left ANSWER Coalition. He is also listed as an “instructor” on the People’s Forum website, where he has taught classes on “Lenin and the Path to Revolution” and the “History of the Communist Manifesto.”

Becker’s X account describes him as “Director @answercoalition [ANSWER Coalition], a founder of @pslweb [the Party for Socialism and Liberation], and show host of @TheSocProgram [the Socialist Program].”

The Network Contagion Research Institute reported that Ben Becker — Brian Becker’s son — founded BreakThrough in 2020.

Code Pink on Saturday morning tweeted that its followers should “TELL CONGRESS: WE WANT PEACE WITH IRAN! Act now." Just the News previously reported that Code Pink co-founder Jodie Evans, who married Singham in 2017, personally recruits Americans for pro-CCP “Red China” trips to the country.

The International People’s Assembly — whose “Coordinating Committee” in North America includes Code Pink and PSL — further tweeted on Saturday that “we call upon social movements, political parties, labor unions, and all people of conscience around the world to demonstrate their opposition to this aggression.”

Neville “Comrade” Singham closely tied to China

Singham’s links to these far-left groups are not surprising — the wealthy tech businessman is a confirmed Marxist. “For months we’ve been the target of a campaign that alleges our funding comes from ‘dark money.’ A few years ago we met Roy Singham, a Marxist comrade who sold his company & donated most of his wealth to non-profits that focus on political education, culture, & internationalism,” the People’s Forum tweeted in December 2021.

The New York Times reported that Singham works in Shanghai, that his efforts there are linked to the CCP, and that he has attended at least one CCP workshop on promoting the party globally.

The outlet also said Singham shares offices with a Chinese media company called Maku Group. The Chinese group’s “About Us” page — which has since been deleted but which was archived by the WayBack Machine in 2023 — says the goal of the company is to "promote a positive vision of China worldwide."

Singham, who is white, also wrote that he had served on the Central Committee of the League of Revolutionary Black Workers. The league, according to the Marxists Internet Archive, “played a key role in inspiring the Black Liberation Movement and spreading Marxist-Leninist ideas among Black workers and workers in general.” Singham reportedly worked as a “strategic technical consultant” with the Chinese government-linked Chinese telecom giant Huawei from 2001 to 2008, according to New Lines Magazine.

Then-senator and now Secretary of State Marco Rubio told the Biden Justice Department that “it appears that organizations tied to Neville Roy Singham, a U.S. citizen, have been receiving direction from the CCP.”

“I categorically deny and repudiate any suggestion that I am a member of, work for, take orders from, or follow instructions of any political party or government or their representatives,” Singham told The New York Times in 2023. “I am solely guided by my beliefs, which are my long-held personal views.”

The House Oversight Committee voted in January to subpoena Singham for information about this sprawling activist network, and the House Ways and Means Committee also sent letters demanding information from the Singham-linked People’s Forum and BreakThrough News last month.  

Jerry Dunleavy

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/security/chinese-state-run-media-promote-anti-iran-war-protests-organized-ccp-linked

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

'Trial by bureaucrat': Diverse businesses urge SCOTUS to stop federal agencies usurping courts - Greg Piper

 

by Greg Piper

From FCC to FDA, federal agencies play hide-and-seek with constitutional right to jury trial, businesses from phone companies to vaping industry tell justices.

 

Less than two years after the Supreme Court banned the Securities and Exchange Commission from using its own bought-and-paid-for administrative judges to apply civil penalties and stopped privileging federal agencies' interpretations of ambiguous laws, the high court is considering further restrictions on the administrative state.

Conservative, libertarian and business groups, from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to more than a dozen "vaping industry stakeholders," filed friend-of-the-court briefs last week supporting a constitutional challenge to a pillar of President Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal. SCOTUS accepted the case last month and will hear oral arguments April 21.

The Federal Communications Commission is defending its prerogative to "assess monetary forfeiture penalties for certain violations" of the 92-year-old Communications Act and its regulations, giving regulated entities a choice: dare the government to sue for payment in a jury trial, or pay the penalty and guarantee review by an appeals court but no jury.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the FCC's $57 million fine via its own in-house court against AT&T for allegedly mishandling customer data, citing the 2024 SCOTUS precedent against the Securities and Exchange Commission's in-house courts, which itself upheld the 5th Circuit's ruling for hedge fund manager George Jarkesy.

The 2nd Circuit upheld the FCC's $47 million penalty against Verizon a month after the D.C. Circuit upheld its $80 million and $12 million penalties against pre-merger T-Mobile and Sprint, respectively, for the same alleged violations, with both appellate courts accepting the FCC's theory that its collection scheme does not violate the 7th Amendment.

Verizon's petition for review, which SCOTUS accepted and consolidated with AT&T's, faulted the two appellate courts for circumventing the right to a jury trial through a "distinct statutory quirk" in the Communications Act, which conditions a jury trial on the Justice Department actually suing regulated entities for nonpayment within five years.

Branded a 'repeat offender' just to have a day in court

"Lower courts have wrongly held that SEC enforcement targets are not entitled to jury trials in penalty-collection cases," the New Civil Liberties Alliance wrote in a press release denouncing "trial by bureaucrat." It filed a brief with the National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors and National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center.

NCLA senior litigation counsel Russ Ryan cited a "huge disconnect between FCC’s assurance that these companies would eventually get a jury trial if the agency tried to collect its penalties in court and SEC’s insistence for decades that no jury trial is required when it collects administrative penalties in court."

The feds are "using a 'loophole' to delay justice and damage reputations," giving the FCC years to sue "while the agency publicly brands the company a lawbreaker and treats them as a 'repeat offender' in all future dealing," said the Liberty Justice Center, which also filed a brief. 

The right to jury trial "is too sacred to be treated as a 'maybe' that only happens years after the government has already tarnished your name and declared you guilty" via a "pay-to-play" understanding of the 7th Amendment, LJC said.

The brief by "vaping industry stakeholders" says the stakes go beyond one federal agency, since the Food and Drug Administration enforces its core statute and a youth restriction statute on them through civil penalties in an administrative tribunal.

They "represent the baseline collective experience of many regulated parties across the administrative ecosphere" and "have witnessed from the luxury boxes the decimating market impacts of FDA punishing violations" of questions reserved for federal courts, under the Constitution's Article III, in other forums.

"Size does not discriminate when it comes to the reach and impact of agency monetary penalty schemes," which "target an eye-popping number of regulated parties," the vaping brief says. "An agency cannot un-ring the bell after a non-Article III tribunal makes factual findings, legal conclusions, adjudges guilt, and levies punishment."

The stakeholders urged the high court to confirm its "public rights" exception to Article III courts "does not apply to ordinary enforcement actions rooted in negligence (AT&T and Verizon) or the marketing of adulterated or misbranded vaping products (Wulferic)," the latter a federal judge's ruling against the FDA's civil penalties as a 7th Amendment violation under Jarkesy.

Small businesses can't afford 'two rounds of penalty proceedings'

"The Seventh Amendment arose out of the crown’s expansion of juryless admiralty courts" to hear "a range of cases traditionally tried in common law courts," a perfect analog to the FCC's in-house courts usurping real courts that would hear negligence torts such as mishandling customer data, the Chamber and Business Roundtable said in a joint brief.

Not only did these juryless courts play a major role in the colonists' break from the British Empire, but the U.S. Constitution struggled for ratification without "civil jury protections" championed by the Anti-Federalists, culminating in the 7th Amendment, they said. 

Contrary to the 2nd Circuit's finding, the FCC's "back-end judicial review scheme" does not change the fact that the Communications Act "could not be clearer" that its liability findings constitute a "binding legal determination," the brief says. 

The forfeiture orders to AT&T and Verizon unambiguously order payment "in bold, capital letters," and the law "gives the carrier no right to judicial review (or a jury) before the imposition of any penalty," just the right to "petition for juryless review" after paying, they said.

"Many regulated entities cannot afford two rounds of penalty proceedings," and the FCC's reading "would provide a roadmap to circumvent" the Jarkesy precedent, the small business-focused Institute for Justice brief says, 

"Agencies could 'reform' their procedures to place the right to judge and jury at the end of years (and potentially multiple rounds) of agency proceedings," which would have forced Jarkesy "to navigate over six years of agency proceedings—all overseen by biased agency judges – so long as there was a theoretical jury at the end of the procedural rainbow," IJ said.

The government is giving "short shrift" to federal courts under Article III by basing its argument on the 7th Amendment, IJ also said.

While juries only hear part of a case, "Article III judges typically make legal rulings at the threshold of litigation—including legal rulings that weed out insufficient allegations – and oversee pre-hearing procedures to ensure fairness to all sides" as well as "the entire case."

T-Mobile's brief said the "government’s waiver theory rests on a faulty premise: that any collection action … secures de novo review of all legal and factual findings in an FCC forfeiture order," which courts including the 5th Circuit have explicitly denied, while others "restrict challenges to penalty amounts" or haven't heard the issue.

Even if a fresh review of legal and factual findings were available, the Justice Department "controls the forum" and "has every incentive to select a forum that restricts such challenges," the carrier said.

AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile and Sprint each decided to pay "tens of millions of dollars in penalties" to secure appellate review because the FCC's forfeiture orders "imposed immediate, real-world harms, and a hypothetical, government-initiated ... collection action of uncertain scope in an unknown venue at an unknown time was not a viable alternative," it said.

"Petitioners [Verizon and AT&T] did not intentionally relinquish their constitutional rights by invoking the only statutory mechanism that secured them," the brief says. 

Greg Piper

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/federal-agencies/trial-bureaucrat-diverse-businesses-urge-scotus-stop-federal-agencies

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter