At least one sheriff in New York state is pushing back against a new law forcing law enforcement agencies to stop cooperating with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Democratic New York Governor Kathy Hochul and Attorney General Letitia James issued an order on July 24 requiring 12 local law enforcement agencies to terminate their agreements with ICE.

‘All I can say about immigration-related issues is that if there is a very dangerous person in this jail, and the expectation is that I’m going to release that person back out into the community, I’m not doing that.’

Broome County Sheriff Fred Akshar excoriated the order in a media briefing where he called politicians in the state capital hypocrites.

“It is becoming increasingly … frustrating, you know, to listen to the edicts and, you know, the white noise coming from, again, the political class in Albany,” Akshar said. “I would like to think that the vast majority of New Yorkers understand that the political class in Albany continues to destroy the great state of New York.”

Akshar said he would have to comply with the law ending 287(g) programs in the state by Aug. 25 but indicated that he would continue to cooperate with ICE in other ways.

“And you have policy after policy after policy as it pertains to public safety that continues to put criminals over law-abiding New Yorkers,” he added. “And that is frustrating. So the reality is this: Whether or not I agree or disagree with a law that has been authored by the legislature and signed by the governor, my responsibility is to enforce the law.”

RELATED: Dem. Gov. Hochul says NY college campuses will be offered as emergency shelters for NYC illegal immigrants

“All I can say about immigration-related issues is that if there is a very dangerous person in this jail, and the expectation is that I’m going to release that person back out into the community, I’m not doing that,” he added.

Broome County is located in the Southern Tier of the state and includes about 195,000 residents.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Law enforcement, New york, Sheriffs, Illegal immigration, Immigration and customs enforcement, Politics 

Spanish authorities say at least 34 people have died during the sudden and startling invasion of the tiny Spanish territory of Ceuta in Morocco.

Reports initially said thousands of people were overrunning the small province in northern Africa, but authorities have since said that the invasion grew to tens of thousands of migrants.

‘Ceuta is a Spanish city, and what happened yesterday deserves our full reproach, our condemnation at the strongest possible level of rejection, condemnation and consideration as deplorable.’

Spain’s Ministry of the Interior said about 25,000 migrants had been expelled from Ceuta back to Morocco and 150 migrants were being removed per minute.

Ceuta’s president, Juan Jesús Vivas, said about 60,000 migrants had overrun the province and also reported the official number of those dead so far.

He went on to call the situation “absolutely unsustainable” and criticized the government’s response as action “taken too late and insufficiently.”

Despite the claims of the interior ministry, some videos on social media apparently show the migrants continuing to stream in while troops look on.

Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez referred to the invasion as an “attack” on his country and “a violation of Spain’s territorial integrity” at a news conference Friday.

“Ceuta is a Spanish city, and what happened yesterday deserves our full reproach, our condemnation at the strongest possible level of rejection, condemnation and consideration as deplorable.”

RELATED: Mamdani vows to protect migrants in apparent DEFIANCE of Supreme Court ruling on TPS

Adri Salido/Getty Images

Some suspect that the invasion was sparked by a Spanish Supreme Court decision which found that migrants crossing by land could be expelled without due process, but those who entered the country by sea required documentation before they were deported.

The U.S. State Dept. also issued a statement decrying the illegal crossings into Spain.

“The United States stands with the people of Spain, and all Europeans, against this egregious violation of their sovereignty and human rights,” the statement read.

“This unacceptable incident is the direct result of the Spanish Government’s deliberate efforts to enable and facilitate mass illegal migration into Europe,” the agency added. “We are considering actions to defend Americans at home and abroad from this threat and stand ready to assist other European allies considering similar options.”

RELATED: ‘Absolute chaos’: THOUSANDS of migrants OVERRUN border into Spain from Morocco — at least 9 people dead

France 24 reported that most of the migrants were Moroccan and were seeking jobs in Europe. Migrants told them it took up to four hours to swim into Ceuta from Morocco.

A local workers’ association leader told CBS News it had become a major humanitarian crisis with thousands of migrants, including unaccompanied children, sleeping in parks and on the sidewalks.

Sánchez accused “human trafficking mafias” of exploiting the ruling by the Supreme Court.

“This demands one of the strongest condemnations, particularly of the human trafficking mafias that deceive many young people, many of whom find death, whether in the ocean or at this border,” he added.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Mass migration, Europe, Spain, Morocco, Invasion, Politics, Ceuta 

This week, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson discussed with Michelle Obama, of all people, the importance of justices appearing impartial — and so far, the reactions to their conversation have been just about what you’d expect.

She told the hosts on the Wednesday episode of “IMO with Michelle Obama & Craig Robinson” that “we all have to believe that there is a judicial system that is going to be fair, that is going to be neutral, that when you bring your dispute to the court, that judge doesn’t have any pre-existing stake in the particular issue.”

‘Can’t make this up.’

It’s a surprising take, considering Jackson’s background.

For one thing, former President Joe Biden explicitly chose Jackson for the Supreme Court on the basis of her race and sex, though she said during her confirmation hearing that she could not define “woman” because she’s “not a biologist.”

Jackson has also made a habit of penning bias-saturated jeremiads that have in some cases been extreme enough to raise the eyebrows of even other liberals on the bench. For instance, she:

insinuated in her lone dissenting opinion in Trump v. American Federation of Government Employees that President Donald Trump was some sort of power-hungry menace and that those on the bench who failed to stop his “wrecking ball” were sycophantic enablers whose decision was both “hubristic and senseless”;claimed in her dissenting opinion for Trump v. CASA Inc. that the Trump administration’s request to address universal injunctions — which the high court found “likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has given to federal courts” — amounted to a request “to engage in unlawful behavior”;accused her colleagues in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard of “let-them-eat-cake obliviousness” for their colorblind approach and claimed that race-based college admissions address “the well-documented ‘intergenerational transmission of inequality’ that still plagues our citizenry” to the “benefit of us all”; andechoed LGBT ideologues in her lone dissenting opinion in Chiles v. Salazar, claiming that “a robust professional consensus now acknowledges that sexual orientations and gender identities range widely” and that reality-affirming therapy for trans-identifying kids was ineffective and harmful.

Despite these opinions, Jackson and Obama seem to believe that Jackson has been a relatively neutral jurist.

RELATED: Platner’s replacement in Maine is a family man — just not in the way voters might expect

Obama pressed Jackson about whether she has to closely monitor her exposure to news, media, and other content “so that there isn’t a bias.”

After noting that certain individuals employed at the court screen her invitations for various appearances and events “to make sure that there are no ethical conflicts,” Jackson replied that “there are lots of limits on what judges can do, and I try to be very, very mindful and scrupulous with respect to that because, as you say, our obligation is to be unbiased in our approach.”

“And, so, you have to then navigate all the sources that could make for an appearance of partiality, which you want to avoid,” the Biden nominee continued. “So there are lots of things that I end up not accepting for that reason. News sources, I think, you know, I don’t have a lot of time — unfortunately, you know — but I do, you know, the normal, general media sources are made available, and I think it’s harder when you’re talking about — there’s so much social media now.”

Jackson’s expression of concern about bias and perceptions of bias while in the company of a rank partisan like Michelle Obama struck some critics as insincere or at the very least tone-deaf.

House Republican Conference Chairwoman Lisa McClain (R-Mich.) highlighted the cognitive dissonance, writing, “Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson says SCOTUS must avoid even the appearance of political bias … while appearing on Michelle Obama’s podcast.”

Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) wrote, “Ketanji Brown Jackson finds a way to inject political bias into just about everything she does. Whether it’s attending the Grammys, joining Michelle Obama’s podcast, or refusing to define the word woman, she couldn’t care less about remaining impartial.”

“DEI hire justice Ketanji Brown Jackson says she’s careful about which public engagements she accepts because she has to be impartial … As she appears on MICHELLE OBAMA’s podcast,” Libs of TikTok tweeted. “Can’t make this up.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Joe biden, Ketanji brown jackson, Marsha blackburn, Michelle obama, Us supreme court, Politics 

Virginia Democrats are welcoming criminals back to the ballot box.

Gov. Abigail Spanberger (D) has restored voting rights to 66,085 felons in her first six months in office. That’s 56,000 more than former Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) restored during his entire four-year tenure, according to the official annual reports filed by the secretary of the commonwealth.

‘A shameful relic of our Jim Crow past.’

“I’m proud that — after contending with my predecessor’s efforts to deny Virginians their fundamental rights — we have restored the rights of more than 66,000 Virginians who have served their time,” Spanberger said in a Friday press release. “These Virginians deserve the right to use their vote, make their voices heard, and be recognized as contributing citizens to our Commonwealth and country.”

Spanberger’s office did not respond to requests for comment.

Under Youngkin, applicants were required to submit a formal Restoration of Rights form detailing whether they had completed all terms of incarceration, were on probation or parole, or had been convicted of a violent offense.

Felons were also asked if they had “paid all fines, fees, and restitution” or were currently paying them, according to court filings.

Spanberger’s administration axed those safeguards.

RELATED: Illegal immigrant allegedly attacks Virginia police — after dodging persecution for allegedly choking his wife

JASON REDMOND/AFP/Getty Images

The new team “re-established processes to both review applications and proactively identify — and restore the rights of — Virginians who have lost their right to vote” and is using “a streamlined, online system that removed unnecessary questions added during the Youngkin administration,” according to the press release.

The removed questions included the requirement to report probation status and fine repayment.

The governor also instructed Secretary of the Commonwealth Candi Mundon King to expand “proactive identification” of eligible ex-convicts.

Current eligibility is determined by whether a person has been convicted of a felony and is no longer incarcerated.

“By giving these Virginians back their ability to make an impact at the local, state, and national levels, we are empowering our neighbors to take hold of their second chance,” Spanberger said. “This fall, voters can cast their ballots for Virginia to no longer strip so many of our neighbors of their fundamental rights — a shameful relic of our Jim Crow past.”

Virginia voters will decide in November whether to pass a constitutional amendment automatic restoration of voting rights for released felon inmates.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Virginia, Abigail spanberger, Democratic party, Voter rolls, Politics, Felons 

Pregnant celebrities on red carpets may make later-in-life motherhood look effortless, but BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey is warning that the reality is far more complicated.

Most recently, Anne Hathaway graced the red carpet in a beautiful dress, showing off her bump at 43 years old. While this is Hathaway’s third baby, many women are taking it as proof that women can and should wait until their 40s to become a mother.

“She’s a beautiful pregnant woman. I am so happy for her,” Stuckey says. “And I’m so glad that she is on social media. She’s on the red carpet showing that you can do all of these things. You can have a baby. I also love that she is showing that you don’t have to stop having a baby when you’re 35 just because they call you ‘geriatric’ or whatever it is.”

“You can keep having a baby, and it’s beautiful. It doesn’t ruin your life,” she adds.

Now, the media is running with Hathaway’s pregnancy and making it seem as if it’s as easy to get pregnant in your 40s as it is in your 20s or 30s.

“The Wall Street Journal published an article on July 13 titled, ‘Your 40s used to be middle age. Not anymore,’” Stuckey explains.

“While I am happy about all the things that I listed, and I’m happy about the contribution of another image-bearer of God to the world, and I think motherhood is fantastic, the risks have not changed in association with pregnancy after 40,” she continues.

“Am I saying that you shouldn’t do it if you are a married woman? No. But just because we changed the name because geriatric was offensive doesn’t mean that the risks don’t exist. It is much more difficult to get pregnant after 35 and especially after 40,” she adds.

But the risks don’t just affect the mother.

“The risks to the baby do increase after that,” she says.

And it’s not just the health risks associated with later pregnancies that have Stuckey concerned, but the unrealistic view of time.

“It is pushing this idea that you can party through your 20s, chase your career through your 30s, choose to settle down when you are 38 and you will be just as likely to get married and have children and be a trad wife when you are 45 as if you did it when you were 25,” she says.

“I just don’t want to sell women this unrealistic vision of what their life will absolutely look like if they defer marriage for promiscuity and for their career to be a girlboss forever,” she continues.

“I don’t have a problem obviously with women getting pregnant later in life. I have a problem with us presenting that as if it … is the ideal,” she adds.

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Allie beth stuckey, Anne hathaway, God, Motherhood, Trad wife, Wall street journal, Blazetv show 

Republicans are worried that the election for one of Texas’ seats in the U.S. Senate is slipping away after astounding results from the most recent polls.

Three of the polls show Democrat candidate James Talarico beating Republican state Attorney General Ken Paxton, and a fourth shows a tie. Another three show Paxton beating the Democrat.

An average of the poll had Talarico above Paxton by 0.7%.

Republican Sen. Mike Lee of Utah called on conservatives to back Paxton in light of Talarico’s extremist opinions and policies.

“Now is the time for every Republican to support @KenPaxtonTX. No exceptions. We can’t have a senator from Texas who thinks ‘God is nonbinary,'” wrote Lee with a link to the polling. Paxton defeated one of Lee’s colleagues, incumbent Sen. John Cornyn, in the Republican primary runoff after receiving Trump’s endorsement.

Two of the polls showing the Democrat winning were Fox News and New York Times/Siena polls, while the ones showing Paxton winning included Quantus and YouGov.

An average of the poll had Talarico above Paxton by 0.7%.

The Decision Desk election analysis group noted that Talarico was faring far better against Paxton in polling on the road to the election than Beto O’Rourke did when he tried to unseat Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas in 2018. O’Rourke lost that contest.

Paxton most recently went on the attack after a report documented evidence that Talarico might have violated the residency rules when he ran for state representative in 2022.

“James Talarico has proven he has zero regard for Texans and the rule of law. He’s been lying to voters and shamelessly committing election fraud to hold onto power,” he wrote on Tuesday.

RELATED: Yet another bewildering anti-Christian statement from James Talarico has been unearthed

The Talarico campaign claimed that the discrepancy came from processing delays and denied the allegations.

Democrats have a slim chance of winning the U.S. Senate in the midterms, but a victory in Texas would go a long way to help their cause.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Ken paxton, Us senate, James talarico, Polling, Midterm elections, Mike lee, Politics