Connect with us

Politics

Woke Boise Mayor Forced to Remove LGBT Flag From City Hall in Light of New Flag Law

Published

2 hours ago

on

Rainbow flag waving against a blue sky with clouds, symbolizing LGBTQ+ pride and diversity.Rainbow flag waving against a blue sky with clouds, symbolizing LGBTQ+ pride and diversity.Image: Wikicommons/Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license.

The woke Mayor of Boise, Idaho, Lauren McLean (D), was finally forced to remove the rainbow LGBT “pride” flag from its City Hall following implementation of a new flag law.

McLean tried to circumvent a prior law by formally designating the flag as the “official flag of our city” through a resolution.

In 2025, Idaho passed House Bill 96, which limited the flags that state and local governments (cities, counties, schools, etc.) could display on government property.

It generally restricted flying to the U.S. flag, the Idaho state flag, and a narrow list of approved flags (such as POW/MIA flags, official military flags, or certain historical flags).

Following efforts by some cities, like Boise, to attempt workarounds, HB 561 was introduced as a follow-up “cleanup” bill to close those loopholes and add real penalties.

On March 31, 2026. Idaho Republican Gov. Brad Little (R) ended efforts to play games with the language by signing House Bill 561 into law.

HB 561:

  • Expands the definition of “governmental entity” and “government property” to include not just buildings but also adjoining land, parks, roads, boulevards, etc.
  • Limits local flags: Cities and counties can only fly their own “official” flags if those were formally designated before January 1, 2023.
  • Adds enforcement teeth: Imposes a civil penalty of $2,000 per day, per offending flag.
  • Gives the Idaho Attorney General (Raúl Labrador) the authority to enforce the law, including issuing warnings and filing lawsuits.
  • Requires a 10-day “cure” period (warning) before fines kick in.
  • Removes or tightens some previous exceptions for other flags.
  • Includes some carve-outs added during the legislative process (e.g., allowances for certain historic international/cross-border flags or the Basque flag in specific contexts).

KTVB reports that the new rules have forced Boise to back down.

“Today, Governor Little signed HB 561 into law—a bill written with one purpose in mind: to prevent Boise from expressing our values by flying our official Pride flag, something we have done with the support of our community for more than a decade,” she wrote.

The mayor explained that the financial penalties would fall on taxpayers, which led the city to remove the flags from city property. According to the new law, a governmental entity that does not comply with the law will be asked to pay $2,000 per flag for each day the flag is displayed.

“Because the law includes a substantial penalty – one that would ultimately fall on the taxpayers of Boise to shoulder—I decided to take down the city’s official Pride flag,” McLean stated. “But let me be clear: Boise’s values have not changed, and they are not defined by any single action taken at the Statehouse.”

Governor Little signed the bill privately on Tuesday, March 31, 2026, at 11:44 a.m. Shortly after (around noon), the City of Boise removed the Pride flag from City Hall.

A video was shared of the flag removal while a subdued crowd gathered, like it was a solemn changing of the guard at Arlington, while crooning a self-soothing pride ballad.

Watch here.

The post Woke Boise Mayor Forced to Remove LGBT Flag From City Hall in Light of New Flag Law appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

Supreme Court Justices Alito and Thomas Not Planning to Retire This Year

Published

31 minutes ago

on

April 19, 2026

By

Conservative Supreme Court Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas are not planning to retire this year amid speculation that Trump could appoint at least one more justice to the high court.

Fox News reported that Alito, a George W. Bush nominee, is not expected to step down from the bench.

CBS News later reported that Clarence Thomas is not planning on retiring this year either.

President Trump’s interview with Maria Bartiromo sparked chatter about the justices.

Trump told Bartiromo that he is prepared to name replacements.

“It could be two, could be three, could be one. I don’t know — I’m prepared to do it, but when you mention Alito, he is a great justice,” Trump told Maria Bartiromo this week.

Fox News reported:

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito is not expected to step down this term and has already hired all four law clerks for the upcoming annual term despite speculation the high court justice was weighing retirement, multiple sources said.

Alito “is not stepping down this term and is in the process of hiring the rest of his clerks for the next term,” a source told Fox News Digital. Two other sources told Fox News that Alito is not retiring this term, which lasts until the Supreme Court’s new year kicks off in October.

Justices tend to hire their clerks two to three years in advance, although that process is not necessarily indicative of a justice’s retirement plans.

The revelation that Alito is reportedly not planning to step down comes after President Donald Trump told Fox Business’ Maria Bartiromo he is “prepared” to appoint up to three Supreme Court justices if vacancies arise. Trump added he has a shortlist of nominees in mind, though he did not mention any names.

The post Supreme Court Justices Alito and Thomas Not Planning to Retire This Year appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Continue Reading

Politics

Iran Has ‘Agreed to Everything,’ Trump Says

Published

31 minutes ago

on

April 19, 2026

By

Donald Trump speaking to reporters in the White House garden, wearing a suit and pink tie, with greenery and construction materials in the background.

President Donald Trump said on Friday that Iran has “agreed to everything” and will work with the United States to remove its enriched uranium.

The president told CBS News in a phone interview that the removal operation will not involve U.S. troops on the ground.

“No. No troops,” he said. “We’ll go down and get it with them, and then we’ll take it. We’ll be getting it together because by that time, we’ll have an agreement and there’s no need for fighting when there’s an agreement. Nice right? That’s better. We would have done it the other way if we had to.”

The other way would have involved troops going in and seizing the material.

“Our people, together with the Iranians, are going to work together to go get it. And then we’ll take it to the United States,” he said of the enriched uranium.

Axios had previously reported that several proposals were in discussion, with one being the possibility of the uranium being moved to a third-party country.

Iran had sought an agreement allowing them to “down-blend” their enriched uranium.

“A top priority for the Trump administration is ensuring Iran can’t access the stockpile of nearly 2,000kg of enriched uranium buried in its underground nuclear facilities, in particular the 450kg enriched to 60% purity,” Axios explained.


Most commercial nuclear power plants use 3 to 5 percent enriched uranium, and 90 percent is often the threshold associated with nuclear weapons, according to the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation.

Before the outbreak of the war, U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff told Fox News that in March, Iranian negotiators boasted to him that they had enough enriched uranium to build 11 nuclear weapons.

The Iranian negotiators apparently said “they had the inalienable right to enrich all their nuclear fuel that they possessed,” Witkoff said.

“We, of course, responded that the president feels we have the inalienable right to stop you dead in your tracks,” he added.

“In that first meeting, both the Iranian negotiators said to us, directly, with no shame, that they controlled 460 kilograms of 60 percent, and they’re aware that that could make 11 nuclear bombs, and that was the beginning of their negotiating stance,” Witkoff recounted.

He explained that 60 percent enriched uranium can be brought to weapons grade in roughly one week in a nuclear facility.

Witkoff noted, “They were proud that they had evaded all sorts of oversight protocols to get to a place where they could deliver 11 nuclear bombs.”

The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday that the U.S. blockade of the Strait of Hormuz initiated on Monday was costing Iran up to $435 million a day, including $276 million in lost exports.

The blockade, coupled with weeks of air strikes from the U.S. and Israel, which devastated Iran’s steel and petrochemical facilities, has the country’s economy on the brink of collapse.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

The post Iran Has ‘Agreed to Everything,’ Trump Says appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Continue Reading

Politics

Alec Baldwin to Face Civil Trial in Fatal ‘Rust’ Shooting

Published

31 minutes ago

on

April 19, 2026

By

A judge ordered Alec Baldwin to face a civil trial over negligence after he fatally shot a producer on the set of ‘Rust.’

Baldwin shot and killed 42-year-old Halyna Hutchins and injured 48-year-old Joel Souza on the movie set of ‘Rust’ in Santa Fe, New Mexico in October 2021.

Serge Svetnoy, a lighting technician who was almost hit with a bullet while on the set of Rust filed a lawsuit and claimed he suffered emotional distress.

A Los Angeles Superior Court Judge on Friday allowed the lawsuit to move forward.

Alec Baldwin was charged with two counts of involuntary manslaughter for the shooting death of Halyna Hutchins.

NBC News reported:

A judge ruled on Friday that a civil case against actor Alec Baldwin over alleged negligence on the “Rust” set in 2021 can proceed to trial this fall.

Serge Svetnoy, a gaffer on “Rust,” first filed a lawsuit in November 2021, alleging that he narrowly missed being hit while on set that day. He claimed that cost-cutting and corner-cutting measures on the Western meant that Baldwin, armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed and other producers “were consciously aware of the wrongfulness and harmfulness of their conduct.”

He alleges that he suffered from emotional distress due to negligence on the part of Baldwin and Rust Movie Productions.

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Maurice Leiter allowed Svetnoy’s claims for punitive damages, negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress to move forward.

In a case filed by Santa Fe prosecutors, Alec Baldwin was previously charged with two counts of involuntary manslaughter for the shooting death of Halyna Hutchins.

In July 2024 Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer dismissed the case with prejudice which means prosecutors cannot refile the case.

Alec Baldwin’s defense team accused state prosecutors of concealing evidence. In a stunning move, the judge dismissed the charges in the middle of the trial!

The post Alec Baldwin to Face Civil Trial in Fatal ‘Rust’ Shooting appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Continue Reading

Trending