博客

Trump backs both South Carolina GOP rivals as runoff tests his endorsement grip

2026-06-23 09:55 EDT / Fox News

The president backed Lt Gov Pamela Evette and Attorney General Alan Wilson days after his pick lost in Georgia

By Paul Steinhauser Fox News

Published June 23, 2026 9:55am EDT

South Carolina Lt. Gov. Pamela Evette is interviewed by Fox News Digital on the eve of the Republican gubernatorial runoff election.

PELZER, South Carolina — Both candidates in Tuesday’s Republican gubernatorial runoff election in this solidly red southeastern state have President Donald Trump’s blessing.

Trump, seemingly aiming to cover his bases, made an 11th-hour endorsement ahead of the runoff and is now backing both contenders in the showdown to succeed term-limited Republican Gov. Henry McMaster.

The South Carolina runoff had been viewed as the latest test of Trump’s immense grip over the GOP and the power of his endorsements in Republican nominating contests.

But on Friday, just three days after the candidate Trump was backing in neighboring Georgia’s Republican gubernatorial runoff lost, the president took to social media to say that he was supporting longtime state Attorney General Alan Wilson as well as Lt. Gov. Pamela Evette in the battle for the GOP gubernatorial nomination.

TRUMP WINS TWO, LOSES ONE AS GEORGIA BILLIONAIRE DELIVERS RARE BLOW TO ENDORSEMENT MACHINE

South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson, a Republican gubernatorial candidate, campaigns on the eve of the state’s runoff elections, in Sumter, S.C., on June 22, 2026.(Paul Steinhauser/Fox News)

“I can’t hurt one of them by only Endorsing the other, so, therefore, I am going to Endorse, for Governor of South Carolina, both Pam Evette and Alan Wilson!” Trump wrote, adding: “With either one you can’t go wrong.”

The endorsement of Wilson appeared to be a move by Trump to hedge his bets, because Trump was already backing Evette, who is also supported by McMaster, a longtime top ally of the president.

Trump’s decision to support both Evette and Wilson wasn’t the first time he’s made dual endorsements in the same Republican race. Most famously, Trump endorsed “ERIC” in the 2022 GOP Senate primary in Missouri, where the two major candidates were Eric Schmitt and Eric Greitens. Both candidates claimed the endorsement, with Schmitt ultimately winning the nomination.

In South Carolina, Trump endorsed Evette late last month, a week and a half before the gubernatorial primary.

Evette finished on top of a crowded field of contenders in the primary election, with Wilson second. The field also included Reps. Nancy Mace and Ralph Norman, and multimillionaire businessman Rom Reddy. Since no candidate won a majority of the vote, as the top two finishers, Evette and Wilson advanced to the June 23 runoff.

DEMOCRACY ’26: STAY UP TO DATE WITH THE FOX NEWS ELECTION HUB

South Carolina Lt. Gov. Pamela Evette, a Republican gubernatorial candidate, is interviewed by Fox News Digital on the eve of the state’s runoff elections, in Pelzer, S.C., on June 22, 2026.(Paul Steinhauser/Fox News)

Mace and Norman endorsed Wilson after failing to advance to the runoff. And Wilson was also backed — and joined on the campaign trail on the eve of the runoff by Sen. Ted Cruz, the conservative firebrand from Texas.

Mace, reacting to Trump’s endorsement of both Evette and Wilson, wrote on social media, “LMAO,” which is a common abbreviation for the phrase “laughing my a– off.”

The runoff between Evette and Wilson turned combustible, and in last week’s final debate, both candidates launched personal attacks and accused each other of lying and misrepresenting their records.

Wilson worked to contrast his tenure as attorney general with what he’s argued is Evette’s largely ceremonial role as lieutenant governor. And he has spotlighted his experience as a combat veteran, prosecutor and the state’s top law enforcement official.

Evette showcased herself as an outsider and a Trump-endorsed businesswoman, while casting Wilson as a career politician.

“The president had a lot of confidence in me when it was a crowded field, and I won it for him on June 9. I’m going to win it for him again on June 23,” Evette told Fox News Digital on the eve of the runoff. “I have always been very loyal to the president. I’ve traveled wherever he’s asked me to help stump for him, fundraise for him.”

https://www.foxnews.com/video/6399111336112

Wilson, campaigning with Cruz, pointed to Trump and said in a Fox News Digital interview, “I’ve been fighting and defending his agenda for the better part of a decade, and to have the president reflect that understanding in his endorsement a few days ago means so much to me.”

Cruz, who endorsed Wilson a week ahead of Trump’s backing, told Fox News Digital, “I was very glad to see the president endorsing Alan Wilson… My philosophy, as you know, is that I support the strongest conservative who can win, and I think in the governor’s race that’s Alan Wilson.”

The brute force of the president’s endorsement power has been on display in GOP primaries over the past two months, with his candidates ousting incumbents he targeted in showdowns in Indiana, Louisiana, Kentucky and Texas that grabbed plenty of national attention.

But Trump’s endorsement streak in statewide and congressional Republican primaries was snapped three weeks ago when his 11th-hour endorsement of Republican Rep. Randy Feenstra of Iowa in the race to succeed retiring GOP Gov. Kim Reynolds wasn’t enough to propel the three-term congressman to victory.

Zach Lahn raises his fist in celebration after defeating his primary opponent in Iowa’s GOP gubernatorial race on June 2, 2026.(Zach Lahn for Governor via Facebook)

Feenstra was narrowly edged by Zach Lahn, a businessman, farmer and former political strategist who was backed by the political wings of MAHA — the acronym for the Make America Healthy Again movement aligned with Trump Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. — and Turning Point USA, the powerful conservative organization co-founded by the late Charlie Kirk.

Trump rebounded two weeks ago, as Evette finished first and advanced to Tuesday’s runoff.

Meanwhile, longtime Trump ally Sen. Lindsey Graham did win a majority of the vote in the Republican Senate primary, and avoided a runoff.

Graham, who was endorsed by Trump, was facing primary challenges from five candidates, including conservative businessman Mark Lynch, who took aim at the senator over his support for the war in Iran. Lynch was backed by some MAGA leaders who have been critical of the president.

Last week, Trump-backed candidates won two of the three top races.

Rep. Barry Moore, a House Freedom Caucus member and longtime Trump supporter who was endorsed by the president, comfortably defeated rival Jared Hudson, a former Navy SEAL sniper who was supported by some top names on the right, in solidly red Alabama’s GOP Senate runoff.

In battleground Georgia’s Republican Senate runoff, an 11th-hour endorsement by Trump this past weekend helped boost Rep. Mike Collins, a MAGA champion, to victory over former college football coach Derek Dooley, who was backed by popular conservative Gov. Brian Kemp.

Republican Rep. Mike Collins, a U.S. Senate candidate, campaigns from the back of a pickup truck, at a stop in Woodstock, Georgia, on June 14, 2026.(Paul Steinhauser/Fox News)

Collins will face Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff in the general election in a race that’s among a handful that will likely decide if the GOP holds its slim majority in the chamber in the midterms.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

But in Georgia’s GOP gubernatorial runoff, the candidate Trump backed, Lt. Gov. Burt Jones, who was also backed at the last minute by Kemp, was defeated by billionaire businessman Rick Jackson, who ran as an outsider.

Paul Steinhauser covers the national campaign trail from coast to coast for Fox News

Supreme Court rules against Rastafarian who sued prison officials for cutting his dreadlocks

2026-06-23T14:18:35.401Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/23/politics/landor-supreme-court-opinion

• The Supreme Court ruled that a Rastafarian prisoner cannot sue officials who forcibly cut his dreadlocks despite religious protections.
• Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote for the 6-3 majority that prisoners lack authority to sue without explicit congressional permission.
• The decision marks a rare instance where the conservative court sided against a religious claim in prison.

AI-generated summary was reviewed by a CNN editor.

CNN—

The Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that a devout Rastafarian who attempted to sue prison officials for holding him down and cutting his dreadlocks could not proceed with his case, a decision that will make it harder for believers of other faiths to enforce federal religious protections in prison.

The opinion, written by Justice Neil Gorsuch for a 6-3 court, marked a rare instance in which the conservative majority sided against a religious claim and underscored its hesitancy to let Americans sue to enforce their rights without explicit authority from Congress.

“Mr. Landor would have us hold, for the first time, that so long as a penny of federal spending makes its way to an individual, however indirectly, Congress can regulate his conduct directly based on the fiction that he has consented to regulation,” Gorsuch wrote. “None of that is consistent with our precedents.”

The court ruled that the man at the center of the case, Damon Landor, could not sue state officials over his treatment because local officials were not aware of the details of a federal law that protects religion.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, writing for the court’s three liberals, criticized the majority for what she saw as a decision to weaken the federal law under which Landor was attempting to sue. The court’s move, Jackson wrote, will make it much more difficult for prisoners to drag officials to court over allegations that their rights have been impugned.

“Prisoners like Landor who suffer violations of their religious freedom in state prisons – no matter how blatant – will often be left remediless,” Jackson wrote. “And encroachments on prisoners’ statutory rights are likely to happen with fair frequency, as state-empowered prison officials will have little incentive to abide by federal law, even if it is handed to them on a piece of paper.”

Jackson asserted that the court’s rationale effectively reduced “some of Congress’s greatest legislative achievements — federal laws that secure civil rights, environmental stability, healthcare, and more — to nothing more than the wheelings-and-dealings of an especially wealthy private party.”

Landor had a few weeks left in his sentence for drug possession when guards at a Louisiana prison handcuffed him to a chair and shaved off the knee-length dreadlocks he had grown over nearly two decades. Minutes earlier, Landor had handed his guards a judicial opinion demonstrating that they were required to allow dreadlocks for religious purposes.

The guards tossed that opinion in the trash before holding Landor down and cutting his hair.

He was incarcerated without incident at two other facilities before he was transferred to the Raymond Laborde Correctional Center. He came armed with a copy of an appeals court ruling from 2017 that allowed prisoners to have dreadlocks.

Landor, who began serving a five-month prison sentence in 2020, had previously taken a promise known as the Nazarite vow to not cut his hair.

Landor’s case at the Supreme Court rested on the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, or RLUIPA. Congress passed that law, and another that dealt with religious accommodation more widely, in response to a landmark but controversial 1990 precedent from the court.

In late 2020, the justices ruled that the other law, which has nearly identical language, allows people whose religious rights have been burdened to seek damages against government officials acting in their individual capacity.

But Louisiana countered that RLUIPA is effectively a spending contract between state officials and the federal government, which provides funding for state prisons. The individual officials involved in Landor’s forced shaving were not parties to that contract, Louisiana said, so they can’t be held personally liable.

A panel of the conservative 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Landor was not entitled to sue.

The 5th Circuit said that it “emphatically” condemned “the treatment that Landor endured,” but an earlier appeals court precedent settled the case against him. The full appeals court ultimately decided against rehearing the case and Landor appealed to the Supreme Court in 2024.

On the one hand, the case appeared designed for a Supreme Court that has consistently sided with religious interests in recent years. Last year, the court sided with a group of religious parents who wanted to opt their children out of books dealing with LGBTQ themes in elementary school.

In 2022, it backed a high school football coach who had been removed from his job for praying on the field before games.

A year before that, it allowed a Catholic foster care agency to continue to work for the city of Philadelphia even though it declined to screen same-sex couples as potential foster parents.

Rachel Laser, the president and CEO of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, described the decision as hypocritical.

“Once again, we see a court that will bend over backward for the religious freedom of Christians but allows the government to trample the religious freedom of non-Christians,” said Laser, whose group frequently opposes decisions from the Supreme Court that back religious interests.

This story has been updated with additional details.

伊朗和阿曼将研究霍尔木兹海峡服务收费问题

2026年6月23日 22:37 / 联合早报

伊朗谈判代表加利巴夫说，根据伊朗与美国签署的谅解备忘录，在60天的免费期结束后，霍尔木兹海峡的服务费将正式生效。 （路透社）

伊朗和阿曼星期二（6月23日）说，两国将研究霍尔木兹海峡航行管理服务的收费标准，并坚称两国对这条水道拥有主权。

法新社报道，德黑兰方面曾多次表示，计划对穿越霍尔木兹海峡的船只收取“海上服务费”，而非通行费，这一计划遭到美国的强烈反对。

伊朗和阿曼在星期二发表的联合声明中强调了两国“对其领海的主权权利”，但阿曼外交部长在社媒X上说，双方都致力于“确保安全无虞的免费通行”。

声明称，双方同意通过两国外交部联合工作组就此问题继续对话。

声明还说，工作组旨在“根据国际标准，就霍尔木兹海峡未来的航行管理、相关服务及收费标准达成一致”。

此前，两国高级官员在马斯喀特举行会晤。伊朗外交部长阿拉格奇和首席谈判代表加利巴夫会见了阿曼苏丹塔里克和外交部长阿布赛迪。

上周，伊朗外交部说，伊朗将对穿越霍尔木兹海峡的船只征收“海上服务费”。

加利巴夫说，根据伊朗与美国签署的谅解备忘录，在60天的免费期结束后，服务费将正式生效。

谅解备忘录指出，与霍尔木兹海峡接壤的伊朗和阿曼将与其他海湾国家共同讨论海峡的“未来管理和海上服务”。

根据上周与美国签署的协议，伊朗已解除对霍尔木兹海峡的封锁。美国总统特朗普曾威胁称，如果阿曼试图控制与伊朗接壤的水道，他将“炸毁阿曼”。

美国财政部长贝森特也说，如果阿曼协助实施收费制度，他将实施制裁。

阿曼外交部长阿布赛迪在与阿拉格奇和加利巴夫会晤后，星期二在X上说，“我们重申了对国际法和免收费安全通行的承诺”。

US states sue California over landmark plastics packaging law

2026-06-23 / Reuters

By Jonathan Stempel

June 23, 2026 1:42 PM UTC Updated 1 hour ago

Workers wait at a recycling center in Arcadia, California, U.S., January 25, 2024. REUTERS/Mario Anzuoni

June 23 (Reuters) – California has been sued by 17 U.S. states, which are seeking to undo a new state law designed to limit ​the use of single-use plastic and promote recycling.

In a complaint filed ‌on Monday in the Sacramento, California federal court, the states, each with a Republican attorney general, accused California of trying to “impose its own policy preferences on the ​entire nation” with its Plastic Pollution Prevention and Packaging Producer Responsibility ​Act.

Jumpstart your morning with the latest legal news delivered straight to your inbox from The Daily Docket newsletter. Sign up here.

• The law was signed by Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom in ⁠2022, and took effect on May 1. It requires producers to ​reduce single-use plastic for packaging and food service items by 25%, and ensure ​that all such items are recyclable or compostable by 2032.
• States led by Nebraska said the law violates the U.S. Constitution’s Commerce Clause by substantially burdening interstate commerce.
• They also ​said the law will boost prices for consumers, with inflationary effects ​hitting lower-income Americans especially hard, as producers pass on the “extremely expensive” costs of transforming a ‌wide ⁠range of products and practices.
• “Once again, California is trying to enact a policy that negatively impacts the rest of the country,” Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers said in a statement. “If California goes unchecked, consumers will be ​forced to pay ​more for basic ⁠necessities.”
• The National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors is also a plaintiff.
• Defendants include Zoe Heller, who is director of the California ​Department of Resources Recycling & Recovery, and the Circular Action ​Alliance, a “producer ⁠responsibility organization” charged with implementing the law. The nonprofit said it is also the only such organization in Colorado, Maryland, Minnesota, Oregon and Washington.
• CalRecycle, as ⁠Heller’s office ​is known, did not immediately respond on ​Tuesday to a request for comment. The Circular Action Alliance did not immediately respond to ​a similar request.

Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; Editing by Andrea Ricci

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

伊朗和阿曼将研究霍尔木兹海峡服务收费问题

2026年6月23日 22:37 / 联合早报

伊朗谈判代表加利巴夫说，根据伊朗与美国签署的谅解备忘录，在60天的免费期结束后，霍尔木兹海峡的服务费将正式生效。 （路透社）

伊朗和阿曼星期二（6月23日）说，两国将研究霍尔木兹海峡航行管理服务的收费标准，并坚称两国对这条水道拥有主权。

法新社报道，德黑兰方面曾多次表示，计划对穿越霍尔木兹海峡的船只收取“海上服务费”，而非通行费，这一计划遭到美国的强烈反对。

伊朗和阿曼在星期二发表的联合声明中强调了两国“对其领海的主权权利”，但阿曼外交部长在社媒X上说，双方都致力于“确保安全无虞的免费通行”。

声明称，双方同意通过两国外交部联合工作组就此问题继续对话。

声明还说，工作组旨在“根据国际标准，就霍尔木兹海峡未来的航行管理、相关服务及收费标准达成一致”。

此前，两国高级官员在马斯喀特举行会晤。伊朗外交部长阿拉格奇和首席谈判代表加利巴夫会见了阿曼苏丹塔里克和外交部长阿布赛迪。

上周，伊朗外交部说，伊朗将对穿越霍尔木兹海峡的船只征收“海上服务费”。

加利巴夫说，根据伊朗与美国签署的谅解备忘录，在60天的免费期结束后，服务费将正式生效。

谅解备忘录指出，与霍尔木兹海峡接壤的伊朗和阿曼将与其他海湾国家共同讨论海峡的“未来管理和海上服务”。

根据上周与美国签署的协议，伊朗已解除对霍尔木兹海峡的封锁。美国总统特朗普曾威胁称，如果阿曼试图控制与伊朗接壤的水道，他将“炸毁阿曼”。

美国财政部长贝森特也说，如果阿曼协助实施收费制度，他将实施制裁。

阿曼外交部长阿布赛迪在与阿拉格奇和加利巴夫会晤后，星期二在X上说，“我们重申了对国际法和免收费安全通行的承诺”。

The Odds: Will the Bell toll for Josh Shapiro?

10:15 AM EDT, Tue June 23, 2026 / CNN

By Ainsley Ehlers, CNN

The Odds: Will the Bell toll for Josh Shapiro?

As Pennsylvania voters prepare for the November midterms, CNN News Central’s John Berman and Chief Data Analyst Harry Enten look at Gov. Josh Shapiro’s popularity as he seeks a second term.

4:07 • Source: CNN

Charlie Kirk murder suspect’s ex-roommate can’t testify at hearing, judge rules

June 23, 2026 / 8:04 AM EDT / CBS/AP

The former roommate of the suspect accused in Charlie Kirk’s murder will not have to testify in person during a preliminary hearing in the case, a Utah judge ruled on Monday. The decision denied a request from the defense team representing the suspect, Tyler Robinson, and argued any testimony’s credibility could be challenged later if the case goes to trial.

Judge Tony Graf made the ruling during a hearing Monday morning, saying the purpose of a preliminary hearing is to establish whether there is enough evidence to justify bringing the case to trial, not to determine whether someone is innocent or guilty.

Graf also postponed a ruling until Friday on whether prosecutors could face sanctions for comments to the media about a bullet fragment recovered from the conservative activist’s body. The defense team had asked Graf to block the death penalty in the case, claiming the prosecutors’ comments could sway potential jurors regarding his guilt.

Robinson, 23, has not yet entered a plea. He is charged with aggravated murder in the Sept. 10 killing of Kirk, a close ally of President Trump, who was shot in the neck while addressing a crowd of thousands at Utah Valley University.

Prosecutors have said DNA consistent with Robinson’s was found on the trigger of the rifle, the fired cartridge casing and two unfired cartridges. They have also said Robinson reportedly texted his roommate, who was also his romantic partner, that he targeted Kirk because he “had enough of his hatred.”

But Robinson’s defense team said in court filings in May that a bullet fragment recovered during an autopsy could not be conclusively connected to the rifle found near the scene of the shooting, citing an analysis from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. The defense team asked the judge to delay the preliminary hearing, originally scheduled for May, so that they could review material, including the bullet analysis.

Robinson’s defense team asked the judge to block prosecutors from using recorded statements from the roommate in the preliminary hearing, set to begin on July 6. The roommate should be brought to testify in person, the defense attorneys said, so that Robinson can exercise his right to confront witnesses in person and challenge their credibility. But Graf denied that request, saying the time for challenging witnesses will come later.

blob:https://www.cbsnews.com/48ab7d1e-501f-49ae-80f1-a8e454a75156

“The Utah Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized that a preliminary hearing is not a trial on the merits, but a gateway to the finder of fact,” Graf said. The task of determining whether a witness is credible is a job for the jury if the case goes to trial, he said.

The case has attracted widespread attention, and online speculation and conspiracy theories grew after the defense team disclosed in public court documents that initial tests were inconclusive to determine whether the bullet was fired from the suspected murder weapon.

Conjecture over that evidence fueled unsubstantiated conspiracy theories that there might have been a second shooter, or that his death was staged. Attorneys on both sides have raised concerns that the misinformation and extensive media attention could taint the potential jury pool.

Graf held a hearing earlier this month over whether prosecutors should be held in contempt for their comments about the bullet.

Robinson’s attorneys accused prosecutors, including Deputy Utah County Attorney Christopher Ballard, of trying to influence potential jurors by going on a “media tour” to talk about ballistics evidence in the case.

Ballard argued at the June 12 hearing that he didn’t speak to the media about case specifics, and he only remarked generally about how ballistics testing can be inconclusive.

Federal judge blocks state bans on buying soda and candy with food stamps

2026-06-23T15:24:46.477Z / CNN

By Tami Luhby

35 min ago

PUBLISHED Jun 23, 2026, 11:24 AM ET

Bags of candy are displayed on a store’s shelves on April 21, in Miami.

Joe Raedle/Getty Images

A federal judge on Monday blocked the Trump administration from allowing five states to ban the purchase of sugary drinks and candy with food stamps.

The decision is a major setback for Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s “Make America Healthy Again” movement, which is focused on minimizing the consumption of ultraprocessed foods to reduce the prevalence of chronic diseases such as obesity and diabetes.

Kennedy has worked closely with Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins, who has granted waiver requests by nearly two dozen states to restrict food purchases in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, the formal name for food stamps. Not all of the bans have gone into effect yet.

US District Judge Amy Berman Jackson in the District of Columbia ruled that the US Department of Agriculture lacked the authority to approve state waivers in pilot projects in Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Tennessee and West Virginia.

In their waivers, the states sought to change the federal definition of food to one that restricted certain products. The bans differed somewhat in each state, with all limiting the purchase of sugary drinks, such as soda and energy beverages, and some also restricting candy. The limits applied to all SNAP recipients, with no exceptions allowed.

The five food stamp enrollees who brought the suit argued they need to buy the restricted items for their health and wellness — describing some of the drinks as necessary to address Type 1 diabetes, kidney issues and lack of energy.

Jackson pointed out that her decision is not intended as a comment on whether the bans are a good idea.

“The federal defendants and the states may have a genuine desire to improve the health of SNAP households by encouraging healthy choices at the store, and they can take lawful steps to meet those goals,” Jackson wrote. “But what they cannot do is violate the law and their own regulations along the way.”

The judge noted the authority the USDA is relying on allows the agency to enact pilot projects to test the efficiency of the SNAP program but does not include improving the health and diet of recipients.

CNN has reached out to the USDA and HHS for comment.

One of the law firms that brought the case said the ruling “is a major step in restoring essential food assistance to the millions of families that rely on SNAP nationwide.”

“This decision makes clear that the USDA cannot bypass the legal guardrails that establish how SNAP must operate across the country,” said Katharine Deabler-Meadows, senior attorney at the National Center for Law and Economic Justice. “It affirms that families deserve a program that works without confusion.”

Supreme Court rules Rastafarian ex-inmate can’t sue prison officials for shaving dreadlocks

June 23, 2026 / 11:55 AM EDT / CBS News

Washington — The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected a former Louisiana inmate’s effort to sue state prison officials after they shaved his dreadlocks in violation of his religious beliefs.

The high court divided 6 to 3 along ideological lines in ruling against Damon Landor, with the three liberal justices in dissent. Justice Neil Gorsuch authored the opinion for the majority.

Landor, who is a devout Rastafarian, sought to sue the Louisiana Department of Corrections and Public Safety and prison officials for violations of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, or RLUIPA, after prison guards shaved his head. While lower courts condemned Landor’s treatment, judges on two different courts dismissed his claims. The Supreme Court’s ruling upholds the decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit rejecting Landor’s effort to revive his suit against the officers.

Landor, Gorsuch wrote, “does not have a federal RLUIPA cause of action against the officers. Under the Spending Clause, Congress lacks regulatory authority to impose liability on them directly and must depend instead on consent. And because they never agreed to answer suits like this one, Mr. Landor’s case cannot proceed against them any more than a breach of contract action might proceed against a defendant who never formed a contract.”

The ruling is a rare loss for a plaintiff arguing violations of his religious rights. In recent years, the high court has repeatedly sided with religious parties, including in a 2022 decision in favor of a Texas inmate who requested his pastor lay hands on him and audibly pray during his execution.

In a dissenting opinion joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson rejected what she said was the majority’s “full-throated endorsement of a contract analogy,” and warned its decision will leave prisoners like Landor whose suffer violations of their religious rights while incarcerated “remediless.”

“Encroachments on prisoners’ statutory rights are likely to happen with fair frequency, as state-empowered prison officials will have little incentive to abide by federal law, even if it is handed to them on a piece of paper,” Jackson wrote.

The case, known as Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections and Public Safety, arose in 2020, when Landor had nearly completed a five-month prison sentence. As a devout Rastafarian, Landor pledged to “let the locks of the hair of his head grow,” known as the Nazarite Vow, which he had upheld for nearly 20 years.

For the first four months of his incarceration, two prisons had permitted Landor to keep his hair long or under a “rastacap.” But that changed after Landor was transferred to the Raymond Laborde Correctional Center for the remaining three weeks of his sentence. Landor told an intake guard at the facility that he was a practicing Rastafarian and provided the guard with proof of his religious accommodations. He also gave the guard a copy of a 2017 ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, which found Louisiana’s policy of cutting the hair of incarcerated Rastafarians violated the RLUIPA, according to court papers.

But prison guards threw the decision in the trash, handcuffed Landor to a chair and shaved his head, his lawyers said.

Landor sued the prison warden and guards under the RLUIPA, which protects the religious rights of individuals confined to institutions. A federal judge dismissed the case, finding that the law does not allow for damages against individual state officials. A three-judge panel of judges on the 5th Circuit upheld that decision.

While the appeals court “emphatically” condemned Landor’s treatment, it said a 2009 decision in the circuit ended his case. In that earlier ruling, the 5th Circuit held that the RLUIPA doesn’t permit lawsuits against officers in their individual capacities. The full 5th Circuit then declined to rehear Landor’s case.

The Trump administration backed Landor in the dispute, warning in court papers that if inmates could not obtain money damages in actions against government officials sued in their individual capacities, it would undermine RLUIPA’s enforcement.

俄罗斯：美国并非乌克兰问题的“客观调解人”

2026年6月23日 22:50 / 联合早报

俄罗斯总统普京重申了俄罗斯要求乌克兰从顿巴斯东部地区全面撤军的立场，并称俄军即将攻占关键要塞城市康斯坦丁尼夫卡。 （路透社）

俄罗斯星期二（6月23日）说，美国已不再是斡旋结束乌克兰战争的“客观调解人”，并抨击欧洲增加国防开支的计划。

法新社报道，俄罗斯外长拉夫罗夫在莫斯科对外国使节说：“就美国而言，从他们的行动来看，他们似乎正在放弃扮演客观调解人的角色，转而加大对俄罗斯的制裁力度。”

在本月初于法国举行的七国集团峰会上，包括特朗普在内的各国领导人同意通过加强制裁来加大对俄罗斯“战争经济”的压力。

自2025年重返白宫以来，特朗普一直在敦促双方进行谈判。

不过，在美国斡旋下进行的穿梭外交进展甚微，基辅拒绝接受莫斯科提出的割让领土、限制军队规模和放弃西方支持的要求。

近几个月来，莫斯科对欧洲持续支持乌克兰，以及阻止特朗普施压基辅接受俄方提出的和平协议感到越发不满。

俄罗斯总统普京星期二另行发表讲话称，欧洲正通过大规模的重新武装计划“公开”备战。

“现在西方公开表示，他们正在准备与我们开战，并且正在增加他们的军事进攻预算。”

普京重申了俄罗斯要求乌克兰从顿巴斯东部地区全面撤军的立场，并称俄军即将攻占关键要塞城市康斯坦丁尼夫卡（Kostiantynivka）。

普京还说，乌克兰对俄罗斯基础设施的报复性袭击不断升级，旨在“动摇社会”，并且得到了西方的支持。上周，莫斯科一家炼油厂遭到大规模袭击。