New Drugs Are Primary Care Game Changers, but Pricey

 New drugs approved in 2025 are poised to significantly improve the management of motion sickness, acute pain, urinary tract infections (UTIs), and chronic spontaneous urticaria.

Gerald W. Smetana, MD, a professor emeritus of medicine at Harvard Medical School and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, talked about new treatments in a presentation at the American College of Physicians Internal Medicine (ACP-IM) Meeting 2026 in San Francisco.

“This is the first time in my 15-year history of giving this new drugs talk that I’ve given all four drugs a thumbs-up, with the potential to change practice,” Smetana said during his presentation.

Making Headway Against Motion Sickness

Motion sickness is a common problem with limited solutions, Smetana said. In December 2025, the FDA approved tradipitant, a novel neurokinin-1 antagonist that is the first new medication approved to treat vomiting induced by motion in more than 40 years. It works by blocking discordant messages from sensory and vestibular centers that promote reflex nausea.

The approval was based on data from two phase 3 trials conducted on boats, in which the drug significantly reduced vomiting in participants with a history of motion sickness compared to placebo. In one study of 365 adults, about 18% and 20% of those who took 170 mg and 85 mg, respectively, of the drug daily experienced vomiting compared to approximately 44% of those who took placebo.

Whether those without a history of the condition would benefit from proactive treatment remains unclear, Smetana said. Tradipitant is expected to be available this spring.

While the final price has not yet been disclosed, estimated costs of more than $500 per eight-tablet bottle may be prohibitive and place it as a second-line treatment requiring prior authorization, Smetana said.

William Callahan, DO, a family medicine physician at Jefferson Health in Jenkintown, Pennsylvania, noted that the drug is not approved for the prevention of nausea.

Research is needed to compare the drug to the current standard, scopolamine transdermal treatment, and to understand how tradipitant treats nausea alone, Callahan told Medscape Medical News.

“The clear benefit of tradipitant is its safety profile, with no reported anticholinergic side effects,” Callahan said.

Non-Opioid Tackles Acute Pain

Suzetrigine targets the peripheral sensory nerves and dorsal root ganglia, reducing incoming pain signals, Smetana said. The drug represents the first new class of non-opioid pain medication in decades.

The approval of the drug for acute postoperative pain was supported by data from two phase 3 studies that involved adults undergoing bunionectomy or abdominoplasty.

Patients randomly assigned to a 48-hour course of suzetrigine showed a significantly shorter time to a reduction in their pain score than patients assigned to receive placebo.

However, efficacy and safety for subacute and chronic pain are unknown, and data for use beyond 14 days are lacking.

Notably, the studies used hydrocodone bitartrate/acetaminophen for comparison, and suzetrigine performed similarly, Callahan said.

“This is huge: a non-opiate providing opiate-level pain control,” he said.

Gepotidacin: Greater Infection Coverage

Epidemiologic data show that approximately one third of women in the US experience at least one UTI that requires antibiotics, Smetana said.

Not all patients respond to first-line therapies, which include nitrofurantoin monohydrate, trimethoprim-sulfa, and cefpodoxime, Smetana said. The new drug gepotidacin works by blocking the activity of two bacterial topoisomerases and was approved to treat uncomplicated UTI by the FDA in March 2025.

In studies that supported approval, gepotidacin was noninferior to nitrofurantoin. Cure rates in cases of resistant Escherichia coli were also higher for patients treated with the new drug than for those treated with nitrofurantoin. Clinicians may consider using the new drug in cases of known or suspected resistant bugs, Smetana said during his presentation.

The main barrier to expanding use of gepotidacin may be the high cost of nearly $2000 for a 5-day course, Callahan said. And manufacturer cost assistance is only available to those with commercial insurance. With those considerations, the drug will likely be reserved for patients with documented resistance patterns or allergies that require this medication, he said.

Top Dollar for Clearer Skin

Remibrutinib, a selective tyrosine kinase inhibitor given orally, offers an option to help clinicians manage refractory chronic spontaneous urticaria in primary care, Smetana said. The drug was approved in September 2025. The condition, characterized by recurring hives or wheals for at least 6 weeks, is distinct from the physical urticaria caused by heat or skin pressure, he said.

In two studies, patients treated with remibrutinib showed significant improvement in urticaria activity from baseline to 24 weeks with twice-daily dosing at 25 mg, showing sustained improvements for up to 1 year.

No new safety concerns appeared, but given a theoretic potential for effects on the risk for infection, more postmarketing safety data are needed beyond 52 weeks, Smetana said.

The drug may be preferable to patients who would choose oral treatment over injectable biologics despite the higher estimated 30-day cost of $4521 for remibrutinib vs $1472 for omalizumab and $3992 for dupilumab, he said.

Callahan said chronic spontaneous urticaria can be difficult to treat, with significant trial and error needed to identify the best option for a patient, he said.

“Many primary care practices are not set up to administer injectable biologic treatments, which makes this medication important,” he said. “Further studies will be needed to compare remibrutinib to the current standards of care, specifically biologics, which would likely determine where it falls along the pathway of treatment.”

Smetana and Callahan reported having no relevant financial conflicts.

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/new-drugs-are-primary-care-game-changers-pricey-2026a1000cg6

Conservative-Targeting SPLC Indicted By Trump DoJ For Fraudulently Funding KKK & Other Extremist Groups

 The Southern Poverty Law Center was indicted on federal fraud charges that accused it of illegally raising millions of dollars to pay informants in white supremacist and other extremist groups, acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said.

An Alabama grand jury returned an indictment on April 21 with 11 counts of wire fraud, making false statements, and conspiracy to commit money laundering, according to the Justice Department (DOJ).

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said SPLC used paid operatives within extremist circles to incite and intensify racial tensions, arguing the group fostered the very threats it claimed to fight.

“The SPLC is manufacturing racism to justify its existence,” Blanche said in a statement.

“Using donor money to allegedly profit off Klansmen cannot go unchecked. This Department of Justice will hold the SPLC and every other fraudulent organization operating with the same deceptive playbook accountable. No entity is above the law.”

A federal grand jury in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama brought 11 charges against the nonprofit, including six counts of wire fraud, four counts of bank fraud, and one count of money laundering.

The indictment covered the years from 2014 through 2023 and alleged that the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) paid at least $3 million to at least eight informants affiliated with the Ku Klux Klan, United Klans of America, the National Socialist Movement, Aryan Nations-affiliated Sadistic Souls Motorcycle Club, the National Socialist Party of America, and the American Front.

In a twist that no one saw coming, one of the SPLC’s paid informants was a member of the leadership group that planned the Unite the Right protest in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017 that resulted in one death, according to the DOJ.

“As the indictment lays out, after SPLC paid members of these extremist groups, it created work product that reported on these activities that the members participated in or contributed to,” Blanche explained.

“And to that end, it was doing the exact opposite of what it told its donors it was doing.”

Patel said the SPLC facilitated state and federal crimes by funding these groups.

“The SPLC allegedly engaged in a massive fraud operation to deceive their donors, enrich themselves, and hide their deceptive operations from the public,” Patel stated on X. 

“They lied to their donors, vowing to dismantle violent extremist groups, and actually turned around and paid the leaders of these very extremist groups—even utilizing the funds to have these groups facilitate the commission of state and federal crimes.”

“That is illegal—and this is an ongoing investigation against all individuals involved,” Patel added.

The FBI director accused the SPLC of using donors to pay the leaders of extremist groups to stage “hate crimes”

They used the fraudulently raised money by lying to their donor network—thousands of Americans—to go ahead and actually pay the leadership of these supposed violent extremist groups.

Furthermore, our investigation revealed that the Southern Poverty Law Center—on TOP of perpetuating this widespread decade-long multimillion dollar fraud—conducted more criminal activity.

They attempted to HIDE their criminal activity from our financial banking network.

They set up shell companies and entities around America so that the financial institutions that we rely on as everyday Americans were DECEIVED in believing that money was NOT coming from the Southern Poverty Law Center in the perpetration of this scheme and fraud, but rather fictitious entities they stood up to perpetuate this ongoing fraud.

Watch the full press conference below:

But it gets even better worse, during an appearance on FOX News, acting AG Todd Blanche reveals the Biden regime actually closed the investigation into the Southern Poverty Law Center — even though they were paying people to stage "hate crimes".

As Nick Sortor noted, the Biden regime was directly involved in the coverup!

America First Legal broke down some additional 'easter eggs' in the whole 

Simply put, the SPLC’s hypocrisy is now on full display - At the same time that the SPLC wielded unprecedented influence over federal civil rights enforcement, it was also allegedly bankrolling the very extremist groups it purported to seek to destroy.

As Tom Gantert reports for The Epoch Times, the SPLC announced earlier Tuesday that it was the subject of a Justice Department criminal investigation and was facing possible charges related to its use of “paid confidential informants” to infiltrate alleged “extremist” organizations.

Bryan Fair, interim president of the SPLC, said in a video posted on its website before the DOJ news conference that the investigation was “the most serious” of recent acts against it.

“Although we don’t know all the details, the focus appears to be on the SPLC’s prior use of paid, confidential informants to gather credible intelligence on extremely violent groups,” Fair said.

“This use of informants was necessary because we are no stranger to threats of violence.”

Fair said the SPLC no longer works with paid informants but did frequently share the information gained by them with law enforcement. Fair said the informants risked their lives to infiltrate radical groups and the SPLC began working with them during the height of the Civil Rights Movement.

“There is no question that what we learned from informants saved lives,” Fair said.

Rep. Daniel Goldman (D-N.Y.) defended the SPLC on X.

“The DOJ uses paid informants all the time—why is it OK for them but not the SPLC?” Goldman wrote.

He said that the organization “plays a vital role in fighting hatred, yet has been unfairly targeted by [President Donald] Trump and House Republicans since day one.”

“This politicized intimidation needs to stop, now,” he said.

Kyle Shideler, the director for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism at the Center for Security Policy, said the issue is not the use of informants—as long as the informants were not involved in criminal activity, which he presumed the DOJ investigation would determine.

“The issue is that the SPLC always sought to use its supposed expertise on Right Wing Extremists to slander their non-extremist opponents,” Shideler said on X.

“Linking groups like [Turning Point USA] (or my employer) to actual violent actors by putting them all on the same list was the political purpose.”

The Republican National Committee adopted a resolution in 2020 refuting the legitimacy of the SPLC when it came to identifying hate groups.

The resolution said the SPLC “makes a practice of incorrectly labeling persons and organizations as ‘hate groups,’” which mobilizes people to act “in hate and violence” against the people on the SPLC’s list.

The group has vowed to “vigorously defend” itself, its staff, and its work against the allegations.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/conservative-targeting-splc-indicted-trump-doj-fraudulently-funding-kkk-other-extremist

Halliburton Sees First Signs Of Life In America's Oil Patch: "We Are In Early Innings"

 An emerging theme we are focusing on is the early stage of a major capex upcycle in America's oil patch, with even Goldman now moving in that direction and forecasting a boom that could echo the industry's expansion cycle of the early 2000s.

Continental Resources CEO Doug Lawler was the first of the major oil patch players to mention in early April that "Continental is increasing our capital budget, which will increase production."

Now, another giant of the oil patch, Halliburton, a major supplier of the gear, crews, and services that keep drilling and fracking going, reports new signs of life in oilfield activity across North America. 

"While these calls are not for committed crews, they do suggest incremental demand is building in spot markets with smaller operators. This is the leading edge of capacity tightening. While we are in the early innings, in my view the setup for North America is constructive. Premium equipment is already tightening," Halliburton CEO Jeff Miller told investors in the company's first-quarter earnings statement earlier today. 

Halliburton reported strong international performance, especially in Latin America, where revenue jumped 22% year over year, helping to offset disruptions in the Gulf area. The company still beat Bloomberg Consensus expectations on adjusted earnings, though the conflict in the Middle East reduced profit in its drilling and evaluation units by about 2 to 3 cents per share. 

Melius Research analyst James West noted that Halliburton "posted a solid beat across the board" that was "driven by international strength that more than offset continued North America softness." 

Miller's comments about signs of life returning to the oil patch add to remarks made by Continental Resources CEO Doug Lawler earlier this month. 

This leaves us asking whether a broader shale response is still to come...

Answering that question is a team of Goldman analysts led by Michele Della Vigna, who now expects "the sector is poised for a major oil capex upcycle, similar to that of the early 2000s."

We must point out that the oil patch has yet to respond to WTI futures topping $110 a barrel, before sliding to $83 a barrel. WTI tradnig around $89 on Tuesday morning. 

Della Vigna outlined, "The escalation of geopolitical tensions in the Middle East since February 28 may have accelerated the timing of a structural capex upcycle, which we now expect to start in 2027."

She also laid out a list of companies that clients should be long as this emerging theme begins to revive life in the oil patch. Read the report here.

In short, Halliburton has been a leading oilfield services player in North America for decades, and its commentary may be one of the first real signals that the investment cycle is turning up. After a long stretch of under investment, the trend now appears to be shifting back toward renewed capital spending and reserve expansion.

https://www.zerohedge.com/commodities/halliburton-sees-first-signs-life-americas-oil-patch-we-are-early-innings

Trump extends Iran ceasefire upon Pakistani request

 United States President Donald Trump announced on Tuesday that he decided to extend the ceasefire with Iran upon the request of Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Chief of Defense Forces Asim Munir.

The US president claimed that his decision was based on the fact that Iran's government is "seriously fractured," and that Washington was asked to hold its attack until the Iranian representatives and leaders can come up with a "unified proposal."

"I have therefore directed our Military to continue the Blockade and, in all other respects, remain ready and able, and will therefore extend the Ceasefire until such time as their proposal is submitted, and discussions are concluded, one way or the other," Trump said in a post on Truth Social.

https://breakingthenews.net/Article/Trump-extends-Iran-ceasefire-upon-Pakistani-request/66117584

Virginia decides the House’s fate: How Democrats are stealing an edge on April 21 referendum

 As midterm elections approach in November 2026, when the GOP is expected to face hurdles with maintaining control of the House of Representatives, Virginia is witnessing one of the most cynical political battles of the year. At stake is a special statewide referendum scheduled for today, April 21, campaigned by Democrats as a “restoration of fairness.”

In reality, it’s a continuation of efforts to redraw district boundaries to their advantage, aiming to shift Virginia’s current 6-5 Democratic advantage into a 10-1 landslide. According to conservative analysts at Fox News and The Wall Street Journal, if the referendum succeeds, Democrats could gain up to four additional seats in Congress — exactly the kind of gains needed to wrest control of the House from Republicans.

Democrats, who hold both the Virginia General Assembly and the governor’s office (Abigail Spanberger), pushed through a constitutional amendment that temporarily — until 2030 — restores the power to redraw districts back to legislative lawmakers. The new map, already approved by Democrats, artificially concentrates GOP supporters into one “super district,” while granting Democrats a sustainable or near-equal edge in the remaining ten. Republicans, including former Governor Glenn Youngkin, have denounced the plan as “outright gerrymandering” and “theft of voters’ will.” As the pundits noted, this is a direct challenge to Virginia’s constitutional principles and the very idea of fair representation.

Shadow Financing and “Honest” Labels: How Democrats Hide Their Move

The referendum fight has become a pricey battle fueled by “dark money.” The group “Virginians for Fair Elections,” actively promoting the amendment, has poured nearly $65 million into the campaign. Sources cited by Fox News indicate contributions from entities linked to Nancy Pelosi, George Soros, and the national Democrat party.

Their opponents, “Virginians for Fair Maps,” raised about $33 million with backing from Youngkin and Republican mega-donor Peter Thiel. The near-identical names aren’t a coincidence: this is a deliberate tactic to confuse moderates, who traditionally support “fairness” in elections, likely assuming the two groups have similar motives.

Conservative outlets like National Review and Fox News emphasize the hypocrisy. Just a few years ago, Barack Obama and Abigail Spanberger openly condemned gerrymandering as a “threat to democracy.” Now, Obama has recorded videos endorsing the referendum, while Spanberger calls it “leveling the playing field,” a response to Republican redistricting in Texas and other states. Republicans point out: Democrats themselves have long practiced the most aggressive forms of partisan redistricting in Illinois, New York, and Maryland. “This isn’t about fairness,” declared a Virginia Republican congressman on Fox News. “This is about power at any cost.”

New Polls: Americans Are Tired of Gerrymandering, but Democrats Are Betting Everything

New polling paints a worrying picture for Democrats. A Washington Post/Schar School survey of Virginia voters (April 2026) showed only a slight edge in favor — 52% “for” versus 47% “against.” But Republicans and GOP-leaning independents showed much higher turnout intentions: 85% of Republicans say they’ll vote, compared to 77% of Democrats. More importantly: 57% of registered voters believe districts should reflect the actual political makeup of Virginia, not be “balanced” against other states. A staggering 48% directly labeled the 10-1 map as “unfair.”

Nationally, the backlash is even sharper. A YouGov poll (August 2025, still relevant in 2026) found that 76% of Americans see gerrymandering as a “serious problem” and “unfair,” and 69% believe it should be banned by law. Common Cause underscores: 64% of Republicans and independents oppose mid-cycle (mid-decade) redistricting.

These numbers explain Democrats’ desperate strategy. Despite holding a national “generic ballot” lead (averaging +5 to +6 points, per RealClearPolitics, Nate Silver, and Morning Consult as of April 2026), they recognize that without artificially inflating their margins in key battlegrounds like Virginia, holding the House is nearly impossible. Republicans counter that their redraws in “red” states were a response to years of Democrat manipulation and occurred within a normal 10-year census cycle.

Weaponization of Local Referendums: The New Reality of American Politics

Virginia represents a broader trend. Local referendums and judicial challenges have now become the primary tools for bypassing legislative processes and voter will. Campaign spending in the state alone has approached $100 million. For Democrats, this is an opportunity to offset Republican gains elsewhere, like in Texas. For Republicans, it’s a chance to defend the principle of “one person, one vote” and prevent Virginia from becoming a one-party state.

Pundits warn: if the amendment passes, it would signal Democrats’ willingness to disregard their own 2020 reforms for short-term gains. Republicans, backed by Youngkin, Thiel, and five Virginia congressional representatives, are urging voters to say “no” for blue-backed unfair maps, for a biased commission, and for absent accountability.

On April 21, Virginia won’t just vote on district lines. It will decide whether American democracy remains competitive or has become a tool of a single party. Republicans are confident: Americans, weary of partisan gamesmanship, will choose honesty. The outcome of this referendum will be decisive in determining who controls Congress after November 2026.

Mike Robertson is a contributor to American Thinker. 

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2026/04/virginia_decides_the_house_s_fate_how_democrats_are_stealing_an_edge_on_april_21_referendum.html

 by Allan J. Feifer

China has successfully infiltrated every aspect of American politics, and we’re seeing the consequences. What paved the way forward was the utter fragmentation of the American political scene. No longer do we have a strong Democrat-versus-Republican divide; instead, myriad political splinter groups, Democrat subsets: labor-backed organizers, libertarian-leaning activists, pro-immigration coalitions, and growing Muslim and other identity-based blocs, or the smaller number of Republican subsets: evangelical conservatives, MAGA-aligned populists, America Firsters, or defense hawks.

In addition, our government is fragmented: there are no longer three branches but four, if one counts the administrative state; five, if one counts the leftist media; or even six, if one counts all the leftist NGOs; all wielding greater influence derived from soft and dark money injected into the process by influencers, known and unknown.

The end result is intentionally driving polarization and blocking compromise, fostering corruption and foreign influence, while endangering our national security. Fragmentation has specifically benefited China by making it easier for China to influence specific “wings” surreptitiously, further dividing our country, as is their intent.

Identity-based blocs have made us vulnerable to infiltration, corruption, and classic intelligence ops, including honey traps, blackmail, sabotage, and subversion. And while there does seem to be a China problem on the right, the problem has been more obvious among Democrats, with several high-profile cases.

There are strong suspicions that China has targeted popular anti-American podcasters, whether they identify as “right” or left. Thus, you can take your pick between Nick Fuentes, ostensibly on the right, with documented foreign-linked online amplification and foreign crypto donations to his network, and Hasan Piker, who traveled to China, appeared on Chinese state media, and was widely covered by Chinese outlets. One doesn’t need to see anyone’s bank accounts to suspect that Chinese money was involved, although this is speculative, not proven. After all, the point of a good influence operation is that it seems likely, but is not obvious.

Within the Republican party, establishment Senator Mitch McConnell has been rumored to be a target of influence due to his marriage to Elaine Chao and the Chao family’s business interests in Asia, notably the Foremost Group, a shipping company with longstanding ties to China. That background has been cited by commentators and some news accounts when questioning whether family business links influence McConnell’s foreign policy priorities.

McConnell’s perceived exposure pales in comparison to what the public record shows for three different incidents involving California politicians with Chinese exposures:

The Democrat party has become beholden to Chinese interests and their limitless money, even if that’s ostensibly illegal. Neville Singham, whom I wrote about in March, is almost assuredly an American Chinese operative working out of Shanghai, funneling tens of millions of dollars to pro-China, anti-capitalist groups, some violent.

Eric Swalwell’s reputation was nearly destroyed after media reports surfaced alleging sexual misconduct and renewed scrutiny of his past contact with Christine “Fang Fang” Fang, a Chinese national the FBI investigated and believed to be a spy for China. Swalwell was never charged or seriously investigated in connection with those matters and, though it’s hard to believe, remained on the House Intelligence Committee. That decision came from then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, for Swalwell was her protege.

Another tie to China and Speaker Pelosi is the almost-forgotten case of Imran Awan, a Pakistani-born IT specialist who came to America at 14 and eventually became a U.S. citizen. He began working on Capitol Hill in 2004 and served as a shared IT employee for many House Democrats for more than a decade. In early 2017, House security officials barred Awan and several of his associates from the House computer network while investigators examined procurement and equipment handling irregularities.

Imran Awan was arrested at Dulles Airport as he attempted to flee, and in July 2018, he pleaded guilty to a single count of bank fraud tied to a false statement on a loan application; as part of the resolution, prosecutors dropped other potential charges, leaving unresolved, the initial claim that linked him to a foreign intelligence service and the theft of House servers.

Judge Tanya Chutkan (a familiar Democrat operative) sentenced Awan to time served and a period of supervised release; espionage-related charges were never filed. Importantly, and not to bury the lead, Awan, when arrested, it has been alleged, had a suitcase full of hard drives and cash. Democrats in Congress under Pelosi were his only clients. Many suspected, though, that China may have been in the background because Pakistan and China maintain a long-standing, close security and intelligence relationship.

Then, back in 2013, there was the suspected espionage case involving Senator Feinstein’s longtime driver, who had worked for her and was the subject of a counterintelligence inquiry into alleged recruitment by China’s Ministry of State Security. Russell Wong was described as having acted as a liaison to the local Asian American community and attending consular events on the senator’s behalf. The FBI reportedly briefed Feinstein about their suspicions years earlier, only removing the staffer from her office when the matter became public.

Two important caveats: the episode was handled through counterintelligence channels rather than a public espionage prosecution, and major fact-checks note that some claims about the scope of the alleged activity remain non-public. According to contemporaneous accounts, the staffer left Feinstein’s employ (effectively retired) and was not prosecuted for espionage. Wong is alleged to be living in China today.

I don’t know what it is about Democrats, especially California Democrats, whether discussing political intrigue or innumerable ties to the CCP, but Democrats don’t seem to fit my definition of loyal Americans. The rise of intersectional politics allows for bad actors like China to penetrate us at the highest levels. Our national security and the trust we have, or don’t have, in our government can only decline as one revelation after another becomes public.

The government’s sprawling institutions—constantly intruding on, monitoring, and restricting our lives—are making us more vulnerable to sophisticated, determined adversaries like China across multiple domains: military, governance, healthcare, social systems, social media, and education; the threat is driven less by ideology than by the familiar motives of sex, power, and money.

Contrary to what some might think, Donald Trump’s authoritative style (which is not authoritarian, but which shows him unafraid to confront threats to America) is essential to confronting threats from foreign actors and keeping us centered on our constitutional underpinnings. I wonder who, or what, will replace his necessary pushback when he’s gone.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2026/04/china_seems_to_influence_too_many_influence_americans.html

Hags: 2 Supreme Court justices are reportedly bosses from hell on their clerks and staff: new book

 by Monica Showalter

Why are Democrats so loaded with nasty, vicious women?

A new book by respected Washington columnist and editor Mollie Hemingway came out with some doozies of information about the sheer unbearableness of Supreme Court Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, who are apparently nightmares to work for for all who come into their orbit.

According to the Daily Mail:

In her forthcoming book, Alito: The Justice Who Reshaped the Supreme Court and Restored the Constitution, conservative journalist and author Mollie Hemingway lifts the lid on the justices' treatment of clerks. ...

 

 

Hemingway, who spoke with over 100 former clerks and staff for the book, sensationally claims that liberal Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor are the worst justices to clerk for.

 

Hemingway alleges that several of Kagan's former clerks, 'along with others at the Court, have described her as "emotionally abusive," "demanding, demoralizing, demeaning," and "a hard a**."'

 

'Kagan's clerks had fear in their eyes,' Hemingway said someone who clerked for a different justice recounted to her.

 

Other former aides speculated that there is 'something psychological going on there,' Hemingway writes. 

 

Other clerks compared Kagan to Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, moving from 'extremely kind to extremely angry,' Hemingway claims.

 

Another former staffer said Kagan is 'like Klobuchar' - a reference to Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar, who was the subject of a New York Times article about her alleged poor treatment of her staff.

 

Meanwhile, Sotomayor is said to have treated members of the Court's 'permanent staff' like 'valet[s].'

 

There are known 'stories of [Sotomayor] barking at them to help her carry her bags,' per Hemingway's book.

 

Hemingway describes Kagan and Sotomayor's behavior as distinct from their colleagues', and notes that most former clerks and permanent staff members have great opinions of their former bosses.

All the other justices are humane and civilized. But a pair of them has chosen to go the other way, acting like Anna Wintour of 'The Devil Wears Prada' fame (and a top Democrat fundraiser) by abusing those beneath them, confident in their own reflected glory. In some ways, that sounds like Cesar Chavez, albeit not involving sexual predation.

 

But the misery is real enough for those who work under these over-celebrated 'historic firsts' who, like Cesar, have let it go to their heads. Maybe that's the best argument against affirmative action hires, given the frequency of this kind of primadonna-ism.

 

It's probably not impossible that some conservative women have acted this way but I can't think of any instances. But it's very, very common to see such mean, abusive, people on the left.

 

Think of Hillary Clinton throwing her lamps and ashtrays, and ordering staff not to dare look at her, as had been described in Gary Aldrich's expose from the 1990s, Unlimited Access.

 

Think of Sen. Amy Klobuchar, screaming at staff and eating her soup with a comb.

 

Think of former Rep. Katie Porter, hurling a pot full of hot mashed potatoes onto her now-ex-husband and screaming at a staffer to 'get out of my shot' on camera.

 

Think of Jill Biden, known as 'Lady McBiden' who had been reportedly considered 'punishment duty' by Secret Service staff.

 

Think of the late, unlamented Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, who drew the dubious honor of 'meanest member of Congress' for her profane and demeaning treatment of her own staff as well as heavy demands on staff to treat her 'like a queen.'

 

Now we have Kagan, who has some psycho thing going on, apparently to see the 'fear' in the eyes of her clerks, and Sotomayor, who treats clerks like wait staff. 

 

It's disgusting, obviously some unfulfilled craving for power over others, which also shows in their rulings and in the activities of all leftists, whose key interest is always in power over others.

 

Now it's getting out, and it ought to dent these harridans' reputations for any kind of judicial fairness. If someone can't treat underlings with just basic decency, why should anyone expect better in their rulings?

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2026/04/hags_two_supreme_court_justices_reportedly_are_bosses_from_hell_on_their_clerks_and_staff_new_book_alleges.html