Judge Overturns Drag Show Ban, Tells Those Offended “Just Don’t Go”

A federal judge struck down a Texas ban on drag shows on Tuesday, ruling it was unconstitutional—and that anyone who really has that much of a problem with it just shouldn’t go.

The law known as Texas Senate Bill 12, which is supported and enforced by Attorney General and Republican Senate nominee Ken Paxton, would have fined business owners up to $10,000 for hosting events with “sexually oriented performances.” The performers themselves faced the potential of a Class A misdemeanor, which can carry up to a year in jail.

U.S. District Judge David Hittner, a Reagan appointee, ruled that the law was a vague and unconstitutional restriction on free speech.

“For those who find such activities as described in this case offensive, the solution is relatively simple ... just don’t go,” he wrote.

Hittner also used Elvis Presley, Miley Cyrus, and recently deceased country music legend Dolly Parton as examples of why the drag ban was unconstitutional.

“Just as many people criticized Elvis’s signature hip gyrations and were offended by his display of male sexuality, chastised Dolly Parton as a voluptuous sex symbol because of her big hair, flamboyant clothes and breast exposure, and shamed Miley Cyrus for ‘twerking’ on stage during a live performance at the 2013 MTV Video Music Awards, there are ‘erotic’ elements in countless popular performances that could be subject to both civil and criminal penalties under S.B. 12,” he wrote.

“The Texas drag ban was blocked the same day we lost Dolly Parton. I couldn’t have ever guessed this day,” said Brigitte Bandit, a drag queen and plaintiff in the case who often performed as Parton. “Drag is free speech, bitch.”

Donald Trump just lost a lot of support in South Carolina.

Supporters of defeated Republican candidate Ralph Norman booed and jeered at mentions of the president’s name during his concession speech Tuesday night, expressing their palpable aggravation over Trump’s unwanted involvement in the contentious Senate runoff.

Trump had endorsed—and actively campaigned for—Darline Graham for South Carolina’s open Senate seat. Against all odds (and the predictions of Republican strategists, who thought Graham was headed for a heavy defeat), he got his wish: Graham won the race by five percentage points.

“The president got involved. He has that right, that’s his prerogative,” Norman said, sparking a wave of boos from the crowd.

“His policies are good, I never understood why he got in this race,” Norman continued as the crowd clapped.

“But it is what it is, and I’ll accept it,” he added. “I’ve always said something good will come out of this. I don’t know what it is, but something good will come out of it.”

The junior Graham took the reins of her sibling’s powerful office last month, after the 71-year-old suddenly passed away from an aortic dissection. Despite having zero relevant experience or qualifications, Graham gained the president’s support and was subsequently appointed by South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster.

Within the span of a few short weeks, the 62-year-old undertook a gambit to make her interim responsibilities more permanent, throwing her name on the ballot to be formally selected by the state electorate. The money poured in behind her, with chief executives, lobbyists, and prominent Republican donors pumping thousands of dollars into her nascent campaign, violating the weekly thresholds set by the Federal Election Commission—a detail not lost on Norman in his closing remarks on Tuesday.

“We had $8 million spent against us. I couldn’t come up with that much money,” Norman said. “All of our money came from South Carolina and my personal account. My opponent—the money came from outside PACs, I mean it’s a fact, I’m not being critical.”

Graham’s next political hurdle arrives in November, when she’ll have to face off against Democrat Annie Andrews, a pediatrician, in the general election. This time, the odds will be more in the Republican nominee’s favor: The last time South Carolina elected a Democrat to the Senate was in 1998.

Meta has agreed to pay up to $17.1 billion in a settlement with 48 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, and Northern Mariana Islands, for the harm that its social media platforms have done to kids and teenagers. 

Under the terms of the settlement, the company will agree to put a cumulative two-hour limit for users of Facebook and Instagram under 18, which will require a parent’s permission to override. Meta will also hide likes on minors’ posts by default and block “extreme makeup filters.” The only states that weren’t a part of the settlement were New Mexico, which won its own lawsuit against Meta earlier this year, and Florida. 

Meta only has to pay 70 percent of the total sum unless TikTok, owned by Paramount Skydance, and YouTube, owned by Google parent Alphabet, also agree to pay states $5.3 billion between them and implement default time limits on their apps and services. If they don’t, Meta doesn’t have to pay the remaining 30 percent, which is also $5.3 billion. 

Meta is still facing thousands of lawsuits from individuals, organizations, and school districts. New Mexico’s lawsuit resulted in the company having to pay $375 million in civil penalties, create a $567 million fund to address harms to children in the state, and put limits on how minors interact with the app. 

The settlement is a rare agreement across political lines, with Democratic as well as Republican state and territorial attorneys general all seeking to hold Meta accountable. CEO Mark Zuckerberg seemingly sought to avoid accountability by cozying up to President Trump after the 2024 election, donating $1 million to Trump’s inauguration fund and changing Meta’s content moderation policies after meeting with the president. 

But Meta is now on the record agreeing that restitution needs to be made due to the harms of its social media platforms, even if it isn’t outright admitting guilt. It remains to be seen if other social media platforms like TikTok and YouTube follow suit.  

The settlement still needs approval from a federal judge. 

This story has been updated.

Army chief of staff General Randy George insisted on conducting a probe into whether the Pentagon violated protocol after the military performed a flyby around MAGA musician Kid Rock’s Tennessee estate—and a No Kings protest. Days later, he was fired.

George was reportedly advised by the Army’s No. 2 officer, General Chris LaNeve, to drop the probe at the behest of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

This new information, reported by The Washington Post, offers a potential catalyst for George’s abrupt firing, as the Pentagon gave no specific reason when he was booted out in April.

The flyby occurred on March 28, and saw two AH-64 Apache helicopters hover over a No Kings protest in Nashville, Tennessee, before performing maneuvers next to Kid Rock’s mansion nearby. The Army briefly suspended the helicopter crews involved before Hegseth personally intervened and announced the soldiers would not be punished. “No punishment. No investigation. Carry on, patriots,” Hegseth wrote on X at the time. Weeks later, he and musician Kid Rock went on a taxpayer-funded helicopter joyride.

While Hegseth and the Pentagon still decline to say why exactly George was fired, his refusal to ignore possible violations may certainly have played a role. George is one of numerous high-ranking military officials who have been unceremoniously fired by Hegseth during his tenure.

An increasing number of American service members are becoming uncomfortable with their orders under President Trump, and are trying to leave the military.

MS NOW reports that the number of conscientious objectors in the military is growing, with many citing violations of international law. The GI Rights Hotline at the Quaker House has seen a spike in interest from service members who see their orders as immoral. The Center on Conscience and War, which helps service members file applications as objectors, has also seen applications go up by six times since the Iran war began in February, higher than any other time in the last 25 years.

Normally, the organization has about 50 objectors in a year, said Mike Prysner, who runs a hotline at the CCW, but since February, Prysner said the organization has assisted about 140 applicants.

“The Iran war was really the breaking point for them when they realized that they had to take action to make sure that they did not participate in something that they were going to regret for the rest of their lives,” Prysner said.

MS NOW spoke to one military member anonymously, who said that they believed their superiors were targeting civilian infrastructure in Iran, which violates the Geneva Conventions.

“I realized there’s no way that you could interpret the international laws as saying that you’re allowed to strike civilian bridges, but in reality, if the president wants to blow up bridges, the lawyers will find a way to say that it is OK to do it, and nobody anywhere up or down the chain of command ever stops and says no,” the service member said.

It’s not just the Iran war that has service members questioning their morals. Some military personnel are troubled by U.S. airstrikes on so-called “drug boats” in the Southern hemisphere under Operation Southern Spear, believing they violate international law.

Another anonymous service member told MS NOW that they weren’t sure if the weapons they loaded onto planes on an aircraft carrier in the Caribbean Sea would be used against civilians, and they began to believe they were causing harm in their duties. Those concerns are not unfounded, as the Department of Defense has admitted that it does not know who is aboard the boats it is bombing.

In all, MS NOW spoke to five anonymous members of the military who object to their orders under this administration, and they want no part of it.