UPDATE: Backdoor Politics at play? West Virginia Senator Tom Willis just PULLED SB1071, the machinegun bill, from consideration. Call him NOW at (304) 357-7867 and urge
him to force a recorded vote on SB 1071 TODAY!
Please share this post so others can see and act. #westvirginia… pic.twitter.com/YHhygfxcvh— Guns&Gadgets (@Guns_Gadgets) February 27, 2026
Kentucky HB 749 Follows West Virginia in Expanding Citizens’ Access to Modern Machine Guns
In a decisive move that reaffirms Kentucky’s proud heritage as a constitutional carry state and a bulwark for unalienable rights, Rep. TJ Roberts (R-Burlington) introduced House Bill 749 on February 25, 2026. This landmark legislation establishes an Office of Public Defense within the Kentucky State Police, tasked with acquiring and transferring modern, select-fire machine guns directly to law-abiding citizens. HB 749 is nothing short of revolutionary: it weaponizes a clear federal exemption to dismantle the artificial, unconstitutional barriers erected by the 1986 Hughes Amendment, restoring to Kentuckians the very arms the Founding Fathers intended for a well-regulated militia and the security of a free state.
Rep. Roberts, a steadfast defender of the Second Amendment who just days ago voted against HB 299, the GOP-backed bill criminalizing Glock switches, has long argued that law-abiding citizens deserve parity with the very tools carried by law enforcement and the military. “Federal law explicitly allows states to sell machine guns to their citizens,” Roberts declared upon filing the measure. His bill does exactly that, sidestepping the Hughes Amendment’s post-1986 registration ban through 18 U.S.C. § 922(o)(2)(A), which carves out transfers “to or by” a state or under its authority. No more overpaying for pre-1986 “transferables” that now fetch $25,000 to $60,000 on the collector market.
Kentucky residents who pass a standard background check may soon be able to purchase true military-pattern full-auto firearms at reasonable prices, AR-15/M16 platforms, squad automatic weapons (SAW), submachine guns, and the arms “in common use” for militia purposes.
Firearm industry ‘responsible controls’ legislation is existential threat to gun owners
Anti-gun activists think they have figured out a way around the Second Amendment, democratic accountability, and the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) to impose a limitless raft of gun control on the American people.
The strategy is to enact what civilian disarmament advocates term “firearm industry responsibility” laws in anti-gun states. These laws impose a duty on members of the firearms industry to institute “reasonable controls” over the sale and distribution of their products, on top of the mountains of explicit state and federal statutes and regulations they are tasked to comply with, lest they face ruinous civil liability.
The term “reasonable controls” is vague and ill-defined, resulting in the decidedly unreasonable circumstance where gun industry members can’t know how to comply with the law. These statutes empower anti-gun government officials to abuse the vague language in a manner that imposes ever-expanding restrictions on the industry and its customers, limited only by the officials’ imagination. Moreover, this legislation impacts not just firearms dealers, manufacturers, and distributors as they would be understood under federal law, but includes any business involved in the stream of commerce for ammunition or any other firearm-related products.
The goal is to use the threat of devastating civil liability to force the firearms industry to restrict the rights of themselves and their customers by instituting gun controls that were not enacted (and often rejected) through the democratic process and may be found unconstitutional if imposed directly by government. The entire enterprise is a grotesque and cynical evasion of democratic accountability and constitutional review.
Thus far, 10 states have enacted versions of this legislation, with extremist gun control advocates in Virginia also seeking to enact a variant (HB21) at present.
Democrats’ gun grab collapses as major anti-2A bills go down in flames
In the final stretch of New Mexico’s legislative session, two sweeping gun control measures championed by progressive Democrats have effectively collapsed — a major victory for New Mexicans’ Second Amendment rights.
Senate Bill 17, the so-called “Stop Illegal Gun Trade and Extremely Dangerous Weapons Act,” was rolled indefinitely in the House Judiciary Committee, halting what critics described as one of the most aggressive gun control packages ever introduced in New Mexico. Meanwhile, Senate Bill 261, which sought to dramatically expand so-called “gun-free zones” around polling places and ballot drop boxes, failed to advance out of the House Government, Elections and Indian Affairs Committee after Ranking Member Rep. John Block forcefully exposed what he called “massive holes” in the legislation.
According to reporting from the Santa Fe New Mexican, the bill’s sponsors admitted the bill’s effective death, with state Sen. Debbie O’Malley telling the outlet, “There’s not enough time to hear it again.”
Missouri Senator Introduces Second Amendment Financial Privacy Measure
A measure introduced in the Missouri state Senate on February 9 is designed to protect the privacy of lawful gun owners and gun purchasers in the Show Me State.
Senate Bill 216, the “Second Amendment Financial Privacy Act,” was introduced by Republican state Sen. Jill Carter and presented in the Senate Transportation, Infrastructure and Public Safety Committee. The measure would prohibit government entities from keeping a list, record or registry of privately-owned firearms.
Records may be maintained during a criminal investigation and prosecution of gun ownership. It also bans credit card networks from using a merchant category code (MCC) to differentiate firearm sales from other transactions.
At issue is a relatively new MCC for gun purchases adopted by the International Organization for Standardization in early 2023. MCCs are used by payment processors (like Visa and Mastercard) and other financial services companies to categorize transactions. Prior to the creation of the specific gun code, firearms retailers were classified under the MCC as sporting goods stores or miscellaneous retail.
When the new code is used, credit card companies and other payment processors can tell that the purchases were firearms, creating a de facto gun registry. The U.S. Senate is currently considering a measure that would ban use of the gun-specific MCC nationwide.
BLUF
Draconian restrictions on the right to armed self-defense in public don’t make peaceable and law-abiding citizens safer. They just render them far less capable of defending themselves and others.
Look at the Defensive Gun Uses that Hawaii Wants to Criminalize.
Late last month, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Wolford v. Lopez, a case challenging a newly imposed Hawaii law that presumptively bans concealed carry permit holders from any private property open to the public (like gas stations and shopping malls) unless they first get express permission from the owner. Combined with other restrictions, the law has the practical effect of making lawful public carry virtually impossible in Hawaii.
Fortunately, the nation’s highest court appears likely to strike down the new restriction. But there’s still so much work left for the court to do when it comes to protecting the right to keep and bear arms—including, specifically, against infringements by the Hawaiian government. Even without the express permission requirement hanging over their heads, Hawaiian concealed carry permit holders will still be prohibited from exercising their rights in an absurdly long list of “sensitive places.”
These include, among other locations:
Any bar or restaurant that serves alcohol, regardless of whether the permit holder imbibes;
Any “stadium, movie theater, or concert hall”;
Any place at which any sporting event of any level of competition is being held;
Any beach, playground, or park, including “any state park, state monument, county park, tennis court, golf course, swimming pool, or other recreation area or facility under control, maintenance, and management of the State or a county”;
Any parking area adjacent to the prohibited locations above.
Constitutionally, it’s abhorrent. As a matter of public policy, it’s laughable – and dangerous.
Personally, I’d rather such laws didn’t get enacted rather than live through the years it takes for a case to get through the court system
OSD 364: Gun control is quietly having a moment
Huh, normally we like retro vibes.
A few months ago, in “OSD 352: ‘Gun rights are winning and nobody has realized it’, 2025 edition”, we checked in on state-level gun control laws:
Delaware passed an assault weapons ban in 2022 and Illinois and Washington passed one in 2023. Colorado is going to have a permit-to-purchase regime for “assault weapons” in 2026. Those were major setbacks. Previously, we had often cited the pleasing fact that all seven states with AWBs had originally passed them between 1989 and 1994. The idea was that AWBs weren’t a trend, they were a relic from a moral panic. That is no longer entirely true.
This hasn’t been a big topic because it happened on state by state, but it is a sea change. From 1994 to 2022, no state changed its mind in favor of AWBs. But that equilibrium — seven states with AWBs and 43 without — no longer holds. In addition to the states above, Virginia and New Mexico look to be on their way to bans of their own in 2026.
It’s a mirror image of the concealed carry revolution. That also happened state by state, and most of the country was shall-issue before most people even knew that was a trend. The same could happen with AWBs. What will decide that is whether guns continue to build cultural momentum and whether the courts get involved.
On that latter point, a New Mexico ban might have a silver lining. It’s in jurisdiction of the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals. Unlike the circuit courts covering, say, California or New York or Massachusetts, the Tenth Circuit might strike down an AWB. That could generate a circuit split, since other circuit courts to look at the issue have upheld AWBs. And a circuit split makes it likelier for the Supreme Court to accept an AWB case. Justice Kavanaugh has already basically announced that the Court is looking to take such a case in the next 1-2 years.
There’s a “you know you’re over the target when you’re taking flak” aspect to expansions of individual rights. As the rights gain momentum, they provoke a backlash of crackdowns from governments that are hostile to them. So the moment of most contentious backlash is the moment right before you win. But a right has to survive long enough to break through to that point. Keep at it.
Political grandstanding has always been fraught with the danger that the politician and his staff are just stupid enough to make a public fool of the politician. And sometimes this stupidity should hurt.
DOJ Officials Claim Thomas Massie Just Made an Unbelievable Error
Reps. Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna may have gotten themselves into hot water after falsely accusing four men of being tied to the crimes of Jeffrey Epstein in front of Congress.
Ro Khanna read the names of six people on the House floor and described them as “wealthy, powerful men” involved in Epstein’s crimes.
It turns out that 4 of them were just random people selected for an FBI photo lineup and had no connection to Epstein’s crimes. https://t.co/upSpLpYR96 pic.twitter.com/bbANktq9zZ
— Greg Price (@greg_price11) February 13, 2026
The pair claimed that four names, which the Department of Justice redacted in the release of the files, were “powerful men” engaged in connected to Epstein, but those men were simply randomly selected for a police line up and had zero real connection to the case.
Massive and Khanna claim that the fault in the false accusations lies with Department of Justice officials, stating that the DOJ “illegally redacted names without explanation and then refused to give context for the names once they redacted.”
“And you see no reason why those men’s names are redacted in these files?”
“No, unless they were in some random lineup, but this requires the DOJ to respond to it.”
I’m posting this transcript from Monday for the finger pointers at DOJ (and their paid bot swarm) who are trying… pic.twitter.com/nEN4UDomSK
— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) February 14, 2026
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche and Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon say that the pair jumped onto social media and in front of Congress to wave the men in front of the country rather than reach out to the DOJ for clarification beforehand.
The two have faced calls online to resign for airing the names of innocent men, with some saying that they have no interest in the victims and are only pursuing the matter for attention.
Suppressors are hearing protection tools. Medical professionals know this, and now Virginia lawmakers know it too. pic.twitter.com/Evrjp6rB6P
— American Suppressor Association (@AmSuppressor) February 11, 2026
Virginia Gun Owners Defeat $500 Suppressor Tax
Virginia Gun Owners Defeat $500 Suppressor Tax
The announcement that suppressors in the Commonwealth of Virginia will not be taxed is being considered a victory by many. The proposed suppressor tax has been removed, at least for now. It would seem Abigail Spanberger and her gang of anti-gun tyrants are getting the pushback they deserve. The Virginia gun grabbers might be starting to realize that taking advantage of the citizens they represent is not good optics for reelection, and gun owners across the Country are demanding Democrats obey and uphold the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Especially the 2nd Amendment.
Be still my beating heart…..
BLUF:
We cease to be a republic if we permit perpetual foreign interference in our election system, dilute the political power of American citizens, and fuel the systematic evisceration of our sovereignty by granting political representation to those not entitled to it.
If SCOTUS Bans Illegals From The Census, Dems Could Lose Power For Years
Census figures used for congressional apportionment, redistricting, and redistributing federal funds have historically counted illegal aliens.
There are many drivers behind the new nullification crisis that the left is stoking over immigration, but perhaps the most significant political one is that the Trump administration’s mass deportation policy poses a greater threat to Democrat Party power than perhaps any other single initiative.
If federal authorities were to successfully remove millions of illegal aliens from the country, some estimates suggest it would result in the reallocation of nearly a dozen House seats and electoral college votes. Billions of dollars in taxpayer funding would be redirected out of blue states and into red ones.
That is because the census figures used for congressional apportionment, redistricting, and redistributing federal funds have historically counted all residents including illegal aliens. On balance, this has benefited Democrat-led states — where such populations are largely though not exclusively concentrated — over Republican-led ones.
The projected outmigration of citizens from blue to red states would compound the negative effect of the deportations for Democrats as we head towards the 2030 census, potentially swinging control of the House and the presidency in Republicans’ favor going forward.
Grassroots Legislative Report—February 9, 2026
By Tanya Metaksa
What’s New—Connecticut: Governor Ned Lamont has put the full weight of his office behind HB5043; Florida: HB1551, to provide protections at the state level to complement the PLCAA; Hawaii: On Feb. 2, a hearing was held in the Senate Public Safety and Military Affairs Committee; Indiana: SB 176, a bill. to prevent shooting ranges from being closed; Maryland: Hearings are scheduled in three Committees this week; Missouri: The Senate Transportation, Infrastructure, and Public Safety Committee will hold a hearing on Monday on SB1128; Nebraska: A hearing was held on Feb. 2, on LB1237; New Hampshire: On Feb. 5, the House passed HB1793; New Mexico: The Senate Health & Public Affairs Committee held a hearing on SB17, an omnibus gun-control bill,on Jan. 28; Oregon: The legislature convened on Feb. 2, and immediately, the House Committee on the Judiciary had a hearing for HB4145; Pennsylvania: HB 1909 passed the House 104-94. South Dakota: SB2,removing silencers from the state’s controlled weapons listing has passed both the House and Senate; Virginia: The Democrat controlled legislature is on a mission to erase the Second Amendment in the Commonwealth; Washington: The Senate is in a hurry to pass HB2320
Silencer Central Helps South Dakota Pass Suppressor Deregulation
Silencer Central, America’s leader in silencer sales and advocacy for suppressor ownership, is proud to announce that its work with the South Dakota legislature is paying off. Both the South Dakota state senate and house of representatives have voted unanimously to deregulate suppressors. The bill now goes to Governor Rhoden for signature into law.
“We are all trying to work on complete deregulation of silencers at the Federal level,” said Brandon Maddox, Silencer Central Founder and CEO. “We found that 16 states had regulations in place requiring the Federal Stamp for ownership. Now that South Dakota’s government has voted to remove that roadblock, we can focus on getting these laws overturned in the other states.” Maddox continued, “We are excited that we now have some momentum. Last summer, we started this process, working with our representatives, law enforcement, and our lobbyists to get this passed. I was honored to have had the opportunity to testify on behalf of silencer owners across the state and help get everyone on board to make this happen. Now, we are focused on these other states as well as full Federal deregulation.”
The South Dakota bill removes suppressors from the state’s definition for “controlled weapons” and eliminates the requirement for a Federal Stamp should the NFA designation or the transfer process continue to change. Silencer Central is working together with the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) in every affected state to develop and support similar legislation. This paves the way for full Federal deregulation of suppressors, furthering the mission of Silencer Central to simplify suppressor ownership. For more information, go to https://www.silencercentral.com/blog/south-dakota-deregulates-suppressors/.
Proposed WV House Bill Would Expand Castle Doctrine, Strengthen Self-Defense Protections
CHARLESTON, WV (LOOTPRESS) — A newly introduced bill in the West Virginia House of Delegates would expand the state’s Castle Doctrine laws, strengthening legal protections for people who use force — including deadly force — in self-defense.
House Bill 4878, introduced on January 28, would broaden when and where West Virginians may legally defend themselves, their homes, and others, while also shielding them from both criminal charges and civil lawsuits when force is lawfully used.
The legislation clarifies that a lawful occupant may use reasonable force, including deadly force, against an intruder or attacker inside a home or residence if they reasonably believe the intruder could cause death, serious bodily harm, or intends to commit a felony.
The bill also extends those protections beyond the walls of the home to include the curtilage — areas immediately surrounding a residence, such as yards, driveways, and porches — and removes any duty to retreat when a person is lawfully present.
We’ve been able to do online sales for the past 40 years. (FOPA ’86)
At least for the time being, this is standard operational grandstanding that’ll go nowhere.
More Restrictions: Democrat Reps. Push Bill to Limit Online Ammo Sales
The legislation would “also require ammunition vendors to report any sales of more than 1,000 rounds within five consecutive days to the U.S. Attorney General, if the person purchasing ammunition is not a licensed dealer.”
Rep. Mfume commented on the legislation, saying, “Since we last introduced this bill, the crisis of mass shootings has continued unabated. We’ve been living with this scourge of violence for so many years as assault weapons and enormous amounts of ammunition continue to fall into the hands of diabolical people.”
He added, “Mass shootings are not going to stop on their own, and we cannot keep waiting for the next one to occur.”
Rep. Coleman said:
Regulating online ammunition sales is a commonsense step to countering the number of mass shootings we see every year. This legislation closes the loophole that makes tragedies like these so unfortunately common. Public safety must come before convenience for an unregulated market: Americans send us to Washington because it is our job to protect them, not mourn them.
The online ammo sales gun control bill has 17 co-sponsors.
Florida House Wastes Little Time Repealing Parkland-Era Gun Control Law
It didn’t take long for the Florida House to approve a bill that would allow adults 18 and older to once again purchase long guns in the state, undoing a measure adopted after the Parkland shootings in 2018 that raised the age to purchase a firearm to 21. The 2026 session kicked off in Tallahassee on Tuesday, and by Thursday afternoon the repeal bill had already cleared the lower chamber in a 74-37 vote.
House Majority Leader Tyler Sirois, a Merritt Island Republican who is sponsoring this year’s bill, said the Parkland shooting was a “tragedy.” But he said lowering the minimum gun-buying age to 18 is about Second Amendment rights.
“The legislation seeks to restore the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens,” Sirois said.
But Rep. Christine Hunschofsky, a Parkland Democrat who was the city’s mayor at the time of the mass shooting, said the law that increased the minimum age to 21 has “stood the test of time” and that it has been found constitutional by the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
“This bill today is going to hurt families,” Hunschofsky said.
It’s true that the Eleventh Circuit upheld Florida’s law using the bizarre argument that “minors” couldn’t enter into legal contracts at the time of the Founding, which it considered analogous to depriving young adults of their ability to purchase a firearm today. But Hunschofsky failed to acknowledge that other appellate courts have concluded that adults under the age of 21 are fully vested with their Second Amendment rights, and the Supreme Court is currently hanging on to close to a half-dozen cases dealing with the conflict, including the NRA’s challenge to Florida’s law.
The law in question has been in place less than a decade, so it’s hardly stood the test of time. It has, however, remained in place despite the fact that the Florida House of Representatives has voted to repeal it for four years straight. Over the past three years the Florida Senate has failed to follow suit, and it sounds like gun owners once again have their work cut out for them in the upper chamber.
When asked Tuesday about the issue, Senate President Ben Albritton, R-Wauchula, noted that last year, senators “were not supportive of it. I have not heard anything different this year.”
“We are clearly a responsible gun-law state and we have a lot of freedoms here with the Second Amendment, which I’m proud of,” Albritton said. “But as it relates to that bill, it will be determined by the (committee) chairs in the Senate and the Senate appetite for such a bill as a whole.”
Albritton himself has been noncommittal about repeal, but former Senate President Kathleen Passidomo, who chairs the powerful Senate Rules Committee, has been vocally opposed to undoing the gun control law. Albritton could always use some parliamentary slight of hand and assign the House bill to another committee, but at this point he’s expressed no interest in doing so.
Florida gun owners should be contacting their state senators and demanding they restore the right to keep and bear arms to young adults in the Sunshine State. I think there’s a very good chance the Supreme Court will eventually say that it’s unconstitutional to block adults under the age of 21 from purchasing or possessing firearms, but we’re still probably a couple of years away from that decision. In the meantime, the rights of under-21s continue to be curtailed, and its up to the Florida legislature to correct its error. The House has done its part. Now it’s time for the Senate to do the same.
Grassroots Legislative Update—December 29, 2025
By Tanya Metaksa
HAPPY NEW YEAR
What’s New—2025 Legislative Summary Part I, Legislative Sessions; The following states adjourned with no legislative action on Second Amendment laws in 2025: Georgia-April 4; Idaho-April 4; Indiana-April 24; Kentucky-March 28; Maryland-April 7; Mississippi-April 3; 2026 Pre-Legislative Action-Florida; Carry-over action-Michigan; New Jersey; North Carolina;
State Legislative 2025 Summary (Part I, Part II next week)
The following states are still in SESSION:
Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin
The following states adjourned with no legislative action on Second Amendment laws in 2025: Georgia: April 4; Idaho, April 4; Indiana April 24; Kentucky: March 28; Maryland: April 7; Mississippi: April 3;
Nope. Not going to agree to anything that will keep the NFRTR registration. If they want to tax sales of NFA firearms for medicare funding, do it like they do with Pittman-Robertson funding for wildlife restoration, an excise tax at the point of sale.
Health Care for Gun Rights? Bill Would Reverse Silencer Tax for Medicare Funds
A coalition of Democrat legislators is backing a move to rewind last summer’s repeal of the NFA tax on suppressors, short-barrel rifles, and similar items to fund their own health-care initiative.
These sponsors are backing the so-called Medicare Investment and Gun Violence Prevention Act, which would repeal the hard-fought removal of NFA taxes established by Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill. The scheme would then reinstitute the tax and direct the funds to pay for Medicare costs.
Current backers include Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-Fla.) and a host of blue-state senators like Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), and Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.). They claim the re-removal of Americans’ gun rights would scrounge up some $1.7 billion in taxes over the next decade.
“This legislation is a 2-for-1 response to Republicans driving up health care costs and letting guns invade our communities,” claimed Sen. Alsobrooks. “When Republicans snuck in tax cuts to the Big Ugly Bill on gun silencers and short-barreled rifles, they made their position clear: guns matter more than Americans’ lives. At a time when health care costs are skyrocketing, and just days after yet another tragic school shooting, now is the time to act. Our bill will repeal the unnecessary tax cuts on deadly weapons and use the money saved for Americans’ health care, which has been decimated by Republicans.”
Of course, it is not “money saved,” as Sen. Alsobrooks claims. It is money taken, via a defunct tax mechanism, from Americans exercising their constitutionally protected Second Amendment rights. Ironically, it also attacks proven hearing safety devices like suppressors in the name of better health care.
The move to snatch back gun rights via NFA taxes is backed by a host of anti-gun interest groups, ranging from Newtown Action Alliance and Brady to Marylanders to Prevent Gun Violence.
While the plot is an extreme long shot in the currently Republican-controlled House and Senate, many Democrats are eagerly looking to next year’s midterm elections. At the moment, it is hard to take the barely 2.5-page bill seriously, but 2026 is just around the corner.
Governor Rhoden working with State Senator Crabtree to deregulate suppressors in South Dakota
RAPID CITY, S.D. (KOTA) -An effort is underway to deregulate suppressors in South Dakota.
Governor Rhoden and State Senator Casey Crabtree will be working to remove suppressors from the list of controlled weapons in South Dakota. Removing suppressors from the state’s controlled weapons list would still mean they are regulated under federal law and purchasers would still need to go through background checks on other measures. Rhoden’s office says however the step sends a message of support to further deregulate the parts at the federal level. South Dakota NRA State Director Brian Gosch says he agrees with that sentiment. Gosch added during a phone call on Tuesday, “Suppressors are all about hearing protection”
Rhoden told KOTA Territory News last week that he believed the federal government was heading toward deregulation and that South Dakota was taking the lead on the issue.
“It shows that we respect our 2nd amendment rights in South Dakota, and was really, the suppressors were vilified and shouldn’t have been on that list in the first place,” said Rhoden.
State Senator Crabtree and Rhoden both initially announced their own individual proposals before announcing they would work together on Tuesday. Crabtree said in a press release, “Thanks to President Trump and Republican Leaders, the One Big Beautiful Bill was a major win for gun owners purchasing suppressors. This session, we will update South Dakota law to reflect this Second Amendment victory.”
Crabtree was referring to the Big, Beautiful Bill’s removal of a $200-dollar tax stamp to purchase suppressors. That tax will expire next month.
Every Republican president is Hitler, until the next Hitler comes along, and the former Hitler is transformed into a wizened elder statesman to attack the current Hitler. – Glenn Reynolds
Very shortly, you’re going to hear this from Democrats in media:
Look, I had disagreements with Trump, but he kept the crazies on the fringes.
The really dangerous extremist is JD Vance. Trump, by comparison, is a responsible patriot (that’s the Bush/Cheney trajectory): pic.twitter.com/wqlYKRo0cX
— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) November 17, 2025
BREAKING: Dems Finally Cave on Schumer Shutdown Clown Show; Newsom: ‘Pathetic.’
What did Senate Democrats get out of the 40-day Schumer Shutdown? Nothing more than what they would have had with the clean continuing resolution.
Chuck Schumer’s caucus threw in the towel last night, with at least ten Democrats plegding to vote to end the filibuster on the CR. The Senate will replace that CR with new language that would extend government operations until the end of January while negotiations continue on the FY2026 budget. Forty days ago, Schumer demanded passage of an extension of expiring ObamaCare subsidies, plus repeals of Medicaid changes in the One Big Beautiful Bill that eliminated coverage for illegal aliens.
So what did Democrats end up getting for this biblical walk in the idiotic budget wilderness? A promise for a vote on the ACA subsidies, with no guarantee of GOP support:
“We may not have gotten everything we wanted”? Democrats didn’t get anything they wanted. They didn’t even get a pass on the filibuster for the debate on ACA subsidies, let alone a commitment for an extension. We’ll get back to that in a moment, but the only real concession in this deal from the GOP is a pledge to rescind the layoffs that Russ Vought began, and those only took place because Schumer shut the government down:
A handful of Senate Democrats on Sunday indicated they are ready to advance a package of bills that could end the government shutdown, multiple sources told Axios.
Why it matters: It is the most significant movement toward a bipartisan breakthrough in the talks to reopen the government in over a month.
- At least 10 Senate Democrats are poised to support a procedural motion to advance a package of spending bills and a short-term funding measure through the end of January, multiple sources from both parties told Axios.
- The deal includes a December vote on a Democratic proposal to extend ACA tax credits for one year, multiple sources said. It would take 60 votes to pass.
- It also includes language aimed at providing assistance to federal employees who were laid off during the shutdown, as well as a provision to fund SNAP benefits through Sept. 30.
