News & Brews September 15, 2026
Get News & Brews in your inbox each day: Subscribe here!
‘Activism = pedagogy’ to teachers’ union
An op-ed in the Washington Post exposes how Princess Moss, the new president of the National Education Association, believes teachers are failing if they don’t bring their radical politics into the classroom. One of Moss’s recommended books is The Critical Importance of Teacher Advocacy: Empowered Educators on the Front Lines. She explains that the book “brings together stories of educators who refuse to separate teaching from their fight for justice.” And “justice” in this case is far-left radicalism.
Consider this statement from one of the book’s contributors: “Activism is my pedagogy…. Being a teacher without being political is dangerous for students…. If we don’t acknowledge the systemic oppression that stands in the way of our students’ success, then how can we expect them to care about the Pythagorean theorem?” You can claim your local public school and teachers are great all you want—and there are, indeed, many great public school teachers. But there’s no avoiding that every traditional public school is part of this larger system — and this is the philosophy permeating public education today.
As the late Voddie Baucham famously said, “We cannot continue to send our children to Caesar for their education and be surprised when they come home as Romans.”
SCOTUS blocks Trump’s mail-in voting plan
Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court let stand a lower court ruling blocking President Trump’s effort to have the U.S. Postal Service enforce new voting requirements for mail-in voting for this year’s midterm elections. POLITICO reports, “Most of the high court’s majority did not offer a detailed rationale for their decision, which took place on the court’s emergency docket, saying simply that the Trump administration’s position was unlikely to succeed and that the legal factors at issue did not favor lifting the lower-court ruling.”
Shapiro’s data center order wasn’t all ‘new’
Broad + Liberty reports, “When Gov. Josh Shapiro signed his executive order on data center development last month, he did not lack drama…. He promised to put ‘the strictest guardrails in the nation’ on developers he called ‘predatory,’ declared that non-compliant companies would have ‘no pathway’ to build in Pennsylvania, and vowed that the days of Big Tech ‘bullying’ local communities were over. What he did not mention was how much of his sweeping new order was already codified as law.” Indeed, “several of [his order’s] most prominently touted provisions either restate or repackage legal requirements already on the books, or remove access to programs that carried no legally binding timeline advantages to begin with.”
Allegheny leads Pa. in Flock cameras
As opposition to Flock cameras abounds, Axios reports that Allegheny County leads the state in the number Flock-brand and similar cameras. All told, the county has 827 automated license plate readers (ALPRs), including 192 Flock cameras. Across Pennsylvania, the Pittsburgh region and Philly region have the most of these cameras, with Luzerne and Dauphin also popping up as counties with higher concentrations. “The cameras — which police say can help find stolen vehicles and wanted individuals — are used by law enforcement, businesses, HOAs and other private owners, but their ability to track vehicles at all times has fueled a growing privacy backlash and calls for tighter oversight or removal.” In total, Pennsylvania has 3,630 ALPRs.
The misguided war on billionaires
”There is a rising outcry against billionaires. They are increasingly described as a class that has somehow taken too much from the rest of us. The proposed remedy is usually … tax away a substantial portion of their wealth and give it to government to spend. Before doing that, we ought to ask a simple question: Where is that wealth now, and what is it doing?”
So writes Wally Nunn in his introduction to an op-ed diving into these very questions he raises. “A billionaire’s fortune is less interesting for what it allows him to consume than for what it allows society to build,” he explains. He concludes that “our objective should not be to prevent people from becoming extraordinarily wealthy by creating extraordinary value. We should want more people trying to do exactly that.”
