Connect with us

Nation

Driver free on bond after he admittedly killed teenager for Conservative views

Published

on

Screen Shot 2022 09 22 at 6.32.41 PM

41-year-old Shannon Brandt is out on bond even though he was the one who admitted to killing a teenager because of the youngster’s political affiliation. Brandt chased 18-year-old Cayler Ellingson and ran him down with his car claiming he was part of a “Republican extremist group.” Police say Brandt was drunk when he hit and killed Ellingson with his SUV.

Brandt was charged Monday with vehicular homicide and leaving the scene of a deadly accident. Later in the week, he was let out on $50,000 bond stating he is not a flight risk. “I have a job, a life and a house and things I don’t want to see go by the wayside — family that are very important to me,” Brandt told the judge.

Since his release, Brandt started removing certain content from his social media, the Post Millenial observed. “Prosecutors allege moments before he was killed, 18-year-old Cayler Ellingson called his mom to come rescue him because 41-year-old Shannon Brandt was chasing him in the city of McHenry, where the street dance had just wrapped up. By the time she could get there, her son was dead” reports National Review.

“He was the one who called 911 to report the crash,” said North Dakota Highway Patrol Capt. Bryan Niewind.

Court papers show Brandt called 911 around 2:30 a.m. Sunday and told the 911 dispatcher that he just hit Ellingson, claiming the teen was part of a Republican extremist group and was calling people to come get Brandt after a political argument.

 

You may like

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Nation

Multiple states launch lawsuit against Biden’s student-loan forgiveness plan

Published

on

Screen Shot 2021 05 13 at 3.33.02 PM scaled

Breaking Thursday, the states of Nebraska, Missouri, Arkansas, Kansas, Iowa, and South Carolina joined together to file a lawsuit against President Biden’s administration in order to stop the student loan-forgiveness program from taking effect.

“In addition to being economically unwise and downright unfair, the Biden Administration’s Mass Debt Cancellation is yet another example in a long line of unlawful regulatory actions,” argued the plaintiffs in their filing.

The attorneys general spearheading the legal challenge also submit that “no statute permits President Biden to unilaterally relieve millions of individuals from their obligation to pay loans they voluntarily assumed.”

Biden, however, has argued that he is able to unilaterally cancel student debt to mitigate the economic effects of the coronavirus pandemic. Specifically, writes National Review, a Department of Education memo released by his administration asserts that the HEROES Act,  which passed in 2003 and allows the secretary of education to provide student-debt relief “in connection with a war or other military operation or national emergency,” provides the legal basis for the cancellation.

But, National Review notes that the plaintiffs point out that Biden declared in a recent 60 Minutes interview that “the pandemic is over.”

The legal brief also adds:

“The [HEROES] Act requires ED [Education Department] to tailor any waiver or modification as necessary to address the actual financial harm suffered by a borrower due to the relevant military operation or emergency… This relief comes to every borrower regardless of whether her income rose or fell during the pandemic or whether she is in a better position today as to her student loans than before the pandemic.”

Moreover, they argue that the HEROES Act was designed to allow the secretary to provide relief in individual cases with proper justification.

The first lawsuit against Biden’s executive order came Tuesday from the Pacific Legal Foundation:

“The administration has created new problems for borrowers in at least six states that tax loan cancellation as income. People like Plaintiff Frank Garrison will actually be worse off because of the cancellation. Indeed, Mr. Garrison will face immediate tax liability from the state of Indiana because of the automatic cancellation of a portion of his debt,” wrote PLF in their own brief.

The state-led lawsuit was filed in a federal district court in Missouri, and asks that the court “temporarily restrain and preliminarily and permanently enjoin implementation and enforcement of the Mass Debt Cancellation,” and declare that it “violates the separation of powers established by the U.S. Constitution,” as well as the Administrative Procedure Act.

You may like

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending Now

Advertisement

Trending

Proudly Made In America | © 2022 M3 Media Management, LLC