The Maps Are Moving: How A Supreme Court Ruling Turned The 2026 House Race Into A Republican Offensive

A few short weeks ago House Democrats were riding high. They had spent tens of millions to win a Virginia referendum that promised up to four new seats. President Trump was struggling in the polls. The path to a House majority looked plausible.

Yet in the span of roughly two weeks, a combination of aggressive Republican redistricting and a pivotal Supreme Court decision has dramatically altered the battlefield. What was once a Democratic advantage has become a steep uphill climb. Republicans are now positioned to gain as many as 10 to 14 seats through map changes alone - enough to transform a narrow 217–212 majority into something much more durable.

Supreme Spark

The turning point was the Supreme Court’s ruling in Louisiana v. Callais. The decision effectively curtailed the use of race in drawing congressional districts under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. For Democrats, who had long relied on VRA protections to create majority-minority districts in the South, the ruling was a gut punch. For Republicans, it was an opening.

Southern states with Republican trifectas moved with remarkable speed. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed a map that could eliminate four Democratic seats. Alabama called a special session to redraw its map with the goal of flipping two Democratic districts and giving the GOP all seven seats. Tennessee targeted the lone Democratic stronghold in Memphis. Louisiana, South Carolina, and even Mississippi began exploring ways to eliminate their remaining Democratic representatives.

Republican Redistricting Surge

Here’s a clear breakdown of the Republican-led redistricting efforts and their potential impact:

Here's the updated version with black text in the header (since the black background is being locked out):

State Current GOP Seats Potential Change Status / Notes Florida 20 of 28 +4 Map signed by Gov. DeSantis. Multiple lawsuits pending. Texas 24 of 37 +5 New map approved by Supreme Court. Most aggressive early move. Alabama 5 of 7 +2 (aiming for 7–0) Special session called. Targeting Reps. Figures and possibly Sewell. Tennessee 8 of 9 +1 (targeting Rep. Steve Cohen) Special session underway. Memphis seat in crosshairs. Louisiana 4 of 6 +2 (aiming for 6–0) Redrawing after SCOTUS ruling. Primary delayed. South Carolina 6 of 7 +1 (targeting Rep. Jim Clyburn) Considering new map to eliminate Clyburn’s deep-blue seat. North Carolina 7 of 14 +1 New map approved; flips one Democratic seat. Mississippi 3 of 4 +1 (targeting Rep. Bennie Thompson) Gov. Reeves considering it — most likely for 2028.

Total Potential Republican Gains: 10–14 seats

Democrats have tried to mount a counteroffensive in states where they still hold power, but their efforts have been more limited and face greater legal headwinds. In California, voters approved Proposition 50 last year, a Democratic-drawn map designed to net the party five additional seats - though the map is now under legal challenge following the Supreme Court’s Louisiana v. Callais decision. Virginia appeared to deliver one of Democrats’ biggest victories when voters approved a redistricting referendum on April 21 that could give the party as many as four new seats - potentially 10 of the state’s 11 districts. However, that victory is now in serious jeopardy after a Virginia judge ruled the referendum invalid just one day later, nullifying the results. Efforts in New York to flip the state’s lone Republican seat were blocked by the Supreme Court, while proposed maps in Maryland and Illinois have either been rejected by Democratic lawmakers or paused over legal concerns. Utah remains a rare bright spot for Democrats, where a court-imposed map could add one seat. Overall, Democratic gains have proven far more fragile and uncertain than the aggressive Republican advances in the South.

Democratic Counter-Moves

Democrats have not been passive. They’ve pursued their own aggressive strategies where they hold power:

State Current Dem Seats Potential Change Status / Notes California 13 of 52 +5 Proposition 50 passed by voters. Now facing lawsuits after SCOTUS ruling. Virginia 6 of 11 +4 (could reach 10 of 11) Voter-approved referendum. Major uncertainty — Virginia Supreme Court may strike it down. Utah 1 of 4 +1 Court rejected GOP map and imposed a new one drawn by a centrist group. New York 15 of 26 Limited / blocked Attempt to flip Staten Island’s GOP seat blocked by SCOTUS. Now pushing to amend state constitution. Maryland 7 of 8 None Gov. Moore’s map rejected by Democratic legislature over legal concerns. Illinois 14 of 17 None (paused) Proposed race-based amendment paused after SCOTUS decision. Bottom Line

Republicans currently hold a clear structural advantage, especially across the South, where they control the process in multiple states, while Democratic gains are more limited and face greater legal uncertainty (particularly in Virginia and California). Virginia remains the single biggest near-term variable for Democrats. If the court overturns the referendum, their path to a House majority becomes significantly harder.

A potential 10-to-14 seat Republican gain would be significant. In a chamber this closely divided, it could mean the difference between a fragile majority and comfortable control heading into 2028.

Yet, the devil is in the details (including election-related malarkey). Even the most skillfully drawn maps can be overwhelmed by national political tides. If the economy weakens, if President Trump’s approval ratings remain low, or if a major scandal erupts, some of these newly Republican-leaning districts could still flip. Conversely, a strong Republican environment would amplify the advantages of these new maps.

So for now, the momentum belongs to Republicans, but the situation remains fluid. Multiple maps face lawsuits, Virginia’s fate is uncertain, and candidate recruitment and national conditions could still reshape the battlefield.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 17:20

Dana White Says Society Is Failing Young Men, And The Backlash Proves His Point

Authored by David Manney via PJ Media,

Dana White touched some nerves this week when he mocked modern concerns over toxic masculinity and warned that society is increasingly pushing young men aside.

Cue the shrieks in 3...2...1...0

White's broader point, however, resonated with millions of Americans who see young men struggling socially, economically, and emotionally while much of modern culture (read: feminazis) treats masculinity itself like a behavior problem needing correction.

White appeared on The Katie Miller Podcast, where the host and wife of Stephen Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff for policy, asked him about the state of young men and women in America today. 

DANA WHITE: “When you're a man, you are the provider. You are the one that that takes care of your family. You are the example for your kids when they grow up and your sons, and your daughters.

“You can't be that guy that I see posting on social media. Oh, I had a bad day, and… pic.twitter.com/3P1M8GsTZY

— Katie Miller (@KatieMiller) May 5, 2026

White went on to argue that young men are struggling with a wildly different set of circumstances than the ones he grew up with.

"Times are changing from when I was young," he said. "These young men, I think, you know, we went through COVID and the whole woke era and all the weird s--- that went on during that period. A lot of the young males felt displaced."

The UFC president noted that he often gets accused of outlandish things like "being the head of the manosphere, whatever that means" and of "toxic masculinity."

Around 12 years ago, I ran into such a proud feminist who started to rip me a new one because I held a door open for her. I let her go for about five seconds before laying some truth on her, saying, “You know who taught me to hold a door for women? My mother, the strongest person I've ever known.”

It stopped her cold. Maybe because of what I said, but I really think it's because of how I said it. My guess was that she was used to rolling over men trying to be polite.

For years, political activists, academics, and media commentators have used phrases like "toxic masculinity" to describe aggressive, destructive, or antisocial male behavior.

So when White opines on what manhood supposedly is or isn’t, it offers insight into the perspective of some men in the MAGA movement, which is deeply obsessed with performative masculinity. That’s why I found it pitiful to see him publicly berating men who openly discuss their mental health.

White delivered his commentary, fittingly, on the podcast of MAGA influencer Katie Miller, who is married to White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller. White, after saying it’s a “man’s job” to make sure a woman feels “safe” and is “treated right,” admitted that his idea of masculinity is “toxic” and railed against men who talk about their feelings

And that's fair; real abuse, violence, and recklessness deserve criticism regardless of gender.

Problems start when the conversation expands so broadly that ordinary masculine traits begin falling under suspicion too. Competitiveness becomes dangerous, stoicism becomes unhealthy, physical toughness becomes outdated, and leadership becomes problematic.

Even fatherhood sometimes gets discussed less as a social necessity and more as an optional accessory.

Young men notice.

Many of them also notice who usually delivers the lectures. Discussions surrounding masculinity often happen in universities, activist circles, corporate HR departments, entertainment panels, and political spaces where traditional male culture receives little respect.

Blue-collar values, physical labor, risk-taking, hunting, mechanical trades, competitive sports, and military service were, for years, increasingly viewed through a skeptical culture lens instead of being treated as honorable parts of society.

White's comments gained traction partly because he works inside one of the few major industries where unapologetic masculinity still openly exists. The UFC built an audience around discipline, competition, toughness, accountability, and merit. Fighters either win or lose, and excuses carry little value once the cage door closes.

Many cultural leaders still respond by doubling down on criticism instead of asking why so many young men feel disconnected from institutions increasingly dominated by ideological messaging. 

Could it be that those institutions have been increasingly hostile in their ideological messaging?

Our entertainment industry has talked about empowering nearly every demographic group imaginable, while conversations involving boys and men frequently center around correction, privilege, or danger.

White argued that society risks creating a generation of displaced young men searching for identity and purpose. Recent political trends suggest he may have found something. President Donald Trump made major gains among younger male voters during the 2024 election cycle, especially among working-class men frustrated with cultural hostility toward traditional masculinity.

Not every criticism of masculinity is unfair; plenty of destructive male behavior exists. Every society needs standards involving responsibility, self-control, and respect. Yet healthy masculinity historically built families, defended nations, worked dangerous jobs, and carried enormous physical burdens most people preferred avoiding.

Society heavily depends on those traits today, even while portions of "elite" culture mock them.

White's critics often frame masculinity discussions as a battle between progress and backwardness.

If you’re considering looking to White for lessons on manhood or mental health, consider that this is a person who was recorded slapping his wife in public in 2023 (White said afterward, “I’ve been against this. I’ve owned this. I’m telling you that I’m wrong” but faced no repercussions) and said he had “almost no feelings about” the death of his parents, from whom he was estranged.

And yet, there he was on Miller’s podcast, lecturing American men on how they should ignore their feelings and make women feel “safe.” 

A man discussing his feelings or openly referencing his mental health issues obviously doesn’t preclude him from providing or being present for his loved ones. It’s suggestions to the contrary that contribute to the men’s mental health crisis, which people like White seem to want us all to ignore.

Many ordinary Americans instead see fathers coaching Little League, mechanics fixing engines, linemen restoring power after storms, soldiers serving overseas, and construction workers building homes. Most don't view those men as threats to society.

Fighter culture understands something modern politics often forgets: young men usually respond better to purpose than humiliation. They want challenge, respect, direction, and responsibility. Constantly framing masculinity itself as suspicious leaves many entirely tuning out.

Ironically, the furious backlash toward White helped reinforce his argument; a culture truly comfortable with masculinity probably wouldn't panic each time somebody yelled "Man!" in a crowded theater.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 17:00

UN Climate Panel Quietly Admits Its Doomsday Climate Scenarios Were 'Implausible'

The IPCC has published a new generation of climate scenarios - and buried in the fine print is a remarkable concession: the extreme warming pathways that dominated climate research, policy, and media coverage for decades were never actually plausible. It took a while to notice because almost no one in mainstream media bothered to report it.

"The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has just published the next generation of climate scenarios," Science policy analyst Roger Pielke Jr. wrote, calling it "big news" that "eliminated the most extreme scenarios that have dominated climate research over much of the past several decades." 

The conclusion was unambiguous. "The IPCC and broader research community has now admitted that the scenarios that have dominated climate research, assessment and policy during the past two cycles of the IPCC assessment process are implausible. They describe impossible futures."

Those "impossible futures" formed the backbone of a decade-plus of apocalyptic climate messaging - melting ice caps, submerged coastlines, mass extinctions, widespread crop failures, and global hunger, always around the corner, always demanding immediate, economy-reshaping action to avert a catastrophe that, it now turns out, the underlying science community had assigned to a category closer to science fiction than projection.

The new IPCC framework formally demotes its remaining "HIGH scenario" from expected outcome to "exploratory - a thought experiment, not a projection."

That's a significant institutional retreat. 

Pielke noted that the previous framework lacked "any systematic effort to evaluate plausibility of scenarios," meaning the scariest pathways were able to dominate the policy debate for years without anyone in the room applying a basic reality check. 

What matters today is that the group with official responsibility for developing climate scenarios for the IPCC and broader research community has now admitted that the scenarios that have dominated climate research, assessment and policy during the past two cycles of the IPCC assessment process are implausible. They describe impossible futures.

Curiously, the revised framework was technically adopted back in 2021, but has only now filtered into public view as related technical and institutional changes caught up. And it’s fair to ask why. The policy consequences of those “impossible futures” were very real.

As the Daily Sceptic's Chris Morrison opines; 

It cannot be over-emphasised how important this finding of implausibility is. It means that almost every fearmongering mainstream media climate headline and story that has been written over the last 15 years is junk. Of course it also explains why a growing band of sceptical commentators have refused to accept the political concept of ‘settled’ science and have engaged in widespread debunking. Shooting fish in a barrel is one way of describing this work. At times, with just a modicum of investigative scepticism, the stories can be seen as little more than an insult to average human intelligence.

When the RCP8.5 assumptions are loaded into computer models, they run politically-convenient red hot suggestions that the temperature in 2100 will rise by about 4°C from a 1850-1900 baseline – in other words, a rise of nearly 3°C in the next 80 years. Only the most deranged eco loons will claim such large short-term rises out loud, so the activist scientists quietly loaded garbage assumptions into their computers to arrive at their garbage-out Armageddon scares. The writing was on the wall for RCP8.5 last year when President Trump’s executive order titled ‘Restoring Gold Standard Science’ effectively banned the use of RCP8.5 for scientists on the United States federal payroll. It also noted one of the unrealistic RCP8.5 assumptions driving deliberate climate psychosis to be that end-of-century coal use will exceed estimates of recoverable reserves.

At the time, the climate researcher Zeke Hausfather dismissed the Trump Administration’s claims about RCP8.5 by stating that the research community had moved on. But Pielke has taken issue with this ‘nothing to see here’ claim. He states that from 2018 to 2021, Google Scholar reported 17,000 articles published using RCP8.5 compared with 16,900 in the next three year period. “Some shift,” he observed.

Again, those using less charitable words might note that the ultimate climate crackpipe has proved difficult to put down. A long and painful process of rehabilitation now seems likely.

RCP8.5 assumed high emissions of carbon dioxide leading to a radiative forcing (extra energy trapped in the Earth’s atmosphere) of 8.5 watts per square metre. The new pathways act as agreed guidelines for computer models that will then provide information for the IPCC’s forthcoming seventh assessment reports. Pielke has run the figures and estimates that the new high scenario will produce 3°C of warming by 2100, a reduction from 3.9°C but still an improbable 1.8°C rise in less than 80 years. Of course these new scenarios are just assumptions anyway, and on past observational evidence of atmospheric gas ‘saturation’ stretching back 600 million years they still grossly overestimate the warming effect of a few trace gases. Much higher levels of CO2 were the norm in the past in a complex, chaotic, non-linear and ultimately unmeasurable atmosphere. Climate scare bingo based on sightings in mainstream media of ‘scientists say’ will likely continue as long as an audience, albeit a diminishing one, still believes in the politicised agitprop of a ‘climate emergency’.

* * *

Climate change has been sold for years as an existential race against the clock, and despite decades of failed predictions, the alarmism hasn’t stopped.

In 2019, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) warned that if we don’t address the climate issue, the planet would be destroyed in just 12 years.

Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) warned in a video posted on social media in 2023 that climate change is the “greatest threat facing our country and all of humanity,” and warned that “If there is not bold, immediate, and united action by governments throughout the world, the quality of life that we are leaving our kids and future generations is very much in question.”

This regular framing of the need for immediate action has prompted Democrats to impose massive spending and sweeping mandates. Billions in taxpayer dollars have gone into green energy boondoggles, all justified by the promise of stopping catastrophic climate change. The same narrative fueled a wave of regulations that hit ordinary Americans with higher costs and fewer choices. In 2020, Gov. Gavin Newsom put that agenda into action, signing Executive Order N-79-20 to phase out gas-powered passenger vehicles by 2035 and medium- to heavy-duty vehicles by 2045. Two years later, Gov. Kathy Hochul followed through in New York with her own executive order, mandating that 35% of 2026 model-year cars sold in the state be "emissions-free," scaling to 68% by 2030 and 100% by 2035. These Zero-Emission Vehicle mandates, along with aggressive federal emissions standards, were sold to the public as necessary responses to scenarios the IPCC now effectively acknowledges were describing things that could never happen.

Climate alarmism, of course, didn’t exist in a vacuum. It grew into a full-blown political and financial ecosystem - a machinery of grants, advocacy groups, media narratives, and regulatory agendas built on the premise that civilization had twelve to fifteen years to change course or face collapse. 

“The now-implausible upper-end scenarios […] are not just academic constructs used in esoteric research,” explains Pielke. “They are embedded in the policies and regulations of most of the world’s largest economies, found across the world’s most important multilateral institutions, and used in the climate stress tests that govern hundreds of billions of dollars in bank capital.”

That reality should spark real outrage. 

For years, the public was bombarded with worst-case scenarios that drove policy, justified massive spending, and steered hundreds of billions in capital - all under the banner of urgency and fear. If those dire projections were overstated or outright implausible, then the scale of the misallocation is staggering, and the media should be taking an interest in this story. Americans were told the clock was about to run out, and they were forced to pay accordingly. The fact that this reckoning hasn’t triggered a broader backlash says as much as the original alarmism ever did.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 16:40

The Democratic Party Is Dead, Long Live The Jacobins!

Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via American Greatness,

For the past century, the agendas of the Democratic Party were predictable. They professed concern for working Americans and supported blue-collar unions.

Unemployment insurance, a 40-hour work week, disability insurance, and Social Security were their trademarks—often rapidly achieved by growing government bureaucracies and continually raising taxes. Still, many Democrats were socially conservative.

By the 1970s, Democrats still deplored antisemitism. Party officials had rejected their own segregationists to champion civil rights.

Presidents like Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, and John F. Kennedy all supported strong defense and military deterrence.

All that is now passé.

The only vestigial Democrat left in Congress is Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman, himself roundly despised by Democrat leaders.

Today, supporting Israel and calling for campuses to stop their institutionalized antisemitism is Democratic political suicide.

Forty years ago, any Democrat with a Nazi tattoo was political toast; today, he can become the party’s nominee for the Maine Senate race.

So, the current Democrat Party is no longer truly democratic at all. Its new spirit and methods resemble the radical Jacobin Party of the French Revolution. Today, Democrats claim that if any opponent gives a Roman salute, he is a Nazi—while insisting that one of their own with a Nazi tattoo is not.

Jacobinism rejects Martin Luther King Jr.’s emphasis on the “content of . . . character.” It instead prefers fixating on “the color of . . . skin.”

It aims to divide the nation arbitrarily between the noble oppressed and the toxic oppressors.

So these new Jacobins have institutionalized racially separate college dorms and graduation ceremonies, along with hiring and promoting on the basis of race.

The new Jacobins destroyed the southern border and welcomed in 10–12 million illegal aliens, seen as a future proletariat constituency. Today’s Jacobins would now ridicule Bill Clinton’s 1990s calls for secure borders and an end to illegal immigration as “fascist” and “racist.”

The most recent nihilist developments in American society can be attributed to these Jacobin “Democrats”: biological men competing in women’s sports; critical legal theory that normalizes cashless bail; race-based reparations; violent felons arrested and back on the street hours later; radical abortion on demand until birth; attacks on the concept of the cultural “melting pot”; and opposition to organized Christianity.

These agendas lack broad majority support. So street theater and violence focus on Tesla dealerships, ICE officers, conservative campus speakers, and, at times, any journalists covering the unrest.

Jacobins make excuses for pro-Hamas campus violence, which often targets Jewish students. The often violent and corrupt Black Lives Matter movement was a Jacobin ancillary.

Free speech is labeled “disinformation” and “misinformation”—synonyms for not toeing the Jacobin Party line. Until recent pushbacks, near-religious radical green agendas warred against fossil fuels and cost the working classes billions of dollars for sky-high fuel and electricity costs.

Like the Robespierre brothers of old, the most radical Jacobins are so often to be found among the wealthiest and most privileged Americans. Radical New York mayor Zohran Mamdani grew up as a rich Ugandan. Radical, self-described communist Maine senatorial candidate Graham Platner attended one of the most elite and expensive prep schools in the United States.

When avowed socialists Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Bernie Sanders barnstormed the country, they did so via private jets.

Radical “Squad” member Rep. Ilhan Omar cannot decide whether she is worth $30 million or nothing. Hard-left California billionaire, gubernatorial candidate, and radical environmentalist Tom Steyer is a billionaire who jump-started his fortune by investing in coal plants overseas and offshoring profits to avoid taxes.

At least 10 states are drafting laws to tax the net worth, as well as the income, of “billionaires and millionaires,” apparently for their “social” crimes. Mayor Mamdani taps on the window of philanthropist Ken Griffin as a warning to get out of town. The mayor of Seattle scoffs at the rich leaving her state with their billions due to new punitive taxes, offering a sarcastic “bye.”

In the old days, Democrats were embarrassed by their radicals and distanced themselves from the Weather Underground, Students for a Democratic Society, and the Black Panthers. Today, left-wing bomb throwers are the Democrat Party.

Hasan Piker, another multimillionaire, $200,000 Porsche-driving communist, has openly supported “social murder.”

So Piker praised Luigi Mangione’s targeted murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson.

Meanwhile, Jacobins on social media expressed disappointment that all three assassination attempts on Donald Trump failed. The arsonist who burned down Pacific Palisades was a Mangione acolyte and saw his destruction as a revolutionary act, perhaps a form of mass “social murder.”

Jacobin politicians call for Trump to be “eliminated,” label him as a “fascist,” and call for “any means necessary” to end his presidency.

The aim is to lower the social and psychological barrier to violence.

The Jacobin Democrats of today are systematically destroying the legacy of the Democratic Party. And why not?

Their model is not the American Founding, but the radical mandated equality—and violence—of the French Revolution.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 16:20

30 House Dems Demand US Confirmation That Israel Has Nuclear Arsenal

In the latest indication that Israel's position in American politics is growing increasingly shaky, a group of 30 House Democrats have co-signed a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, demanding that the US government finally acknowledge the existence of Israel's nuclear arsenal. It's a milestone event: For decades, both parties have diligently co-conspired in avoiding such a confirmation, typically claiming ignorance on the rare occasions when journalists or citizens asked them about it.

MUST SEE: For many years, journalist @samhusseini has tracked down high-level politicos in Washington, D.C. and asked them variations of the same question:

“Do you know that Israel has nuclear weapons?”

Watch as he presses John Negroponte, Mike Pence, John Kerry, the Biden and… pic.twitter.com/kDtFyZhA4i

— Decensored News (@decensorednews) April 7, 2026

Now we have dozens of House representatives asking the question. "This is something that people did not dare do before,” Avner Cohen, a historian of Israel's nuclear program, told the Washington Post. “Even raising these questions publicly is a departure from a bipartisan norm.”

The letter puts the need for transparency in the context of the ongoing US-Israel-initiated war with Iran -- which was launched over the claim that Iran was on the brink of developing a nuclear weapon, a claim that clashes with the repeated conclusions of the US intelligence community. The letter emphasizes that many of the countries with stakes in the conflict -- including the United States, the UK, Russia, China and Pakistan -- are nuclear-weapon states. 

“The risks of miscalculation, escalation, and nuclear use in this environment are not theoretical...Congress has a constitutional responsibility to be fully informed about the nuclear balance in the Middle East, the risk of escalation by any party to this conflict, and the administration’s planning and contingencies for such scenarios.”

Further violating the long-running bipartisan commitment to ignoring Israel's doomsday arsenal, the four-page letter points to many indications of that arsenal's existence, including revelations and photographs provided in 1986 by Israeli nuclear technician Mordechai Vanunu, the contents of a formerly classified 1974 National Intelligence Estimate, and a statement-under-oath by then-Secretary of Defense nominee Robert Gates casually including Israel in a list of nuclear powers operating in the Middle East. 

Israeli leaker Mordechai Vanunu provided this photo to the London Sunday Times, and said it shows the control room of a plutonium separation plant. Israel tracked him down, used a female agent to lure him to Italy, drug him, then put him on a freight ship to Israel where he was imprisoned. 

The letter culminates in a pointed list of questions. Among other things, the Democratic representatives demand to know what nuclear weapons capability Israel has, the country's enrichment capabilities, and its doctrine guiding the use of nuclear weapons.

The Post reports that the Trump administration has been assessing Israel's potential to go nuclear in its joint war on Iran with the United States. "There is a low boil of unease about Israel’s nuclear program and what could compel them to use nuclear weapons short of facing a WMD attack,” a Trump administration official told the Post. One such scenario that US officials are said to "frequently" wring their hands over: An overwhelming barrage that causes an extraordinarily higher pace of Israeli civilian casualties. 

The letter to Rubio was organized by Texas Democratic Rep. Joaquin Castro. As we reported in March, Castro used a House hearing to put America's top arms control official on the spot, pointedly asking him, "Does Israel have nuclear weapons?" Under Secretary of State for Arms Control Thomas G. DiNanno repeatedly dodged and obfuscated, even claiming that "it would be outside of my purview as the arms control and arms proliferation under secretary to discuss that specific question."

We are four weeks into a war where both sides have targeted each other's nuclear facilities.

We risk nuclear disaster. Yet the main Trump official on arms control refused to answer my question on Israel's nuclear capabilities and told me to ask the Israeli government. pic.twitter.com/Sxnru3EIrl

— Joaquin Castro (@JoaquinCastrotx) March 25, 2026

The letter recounts DiNanno's refusal to answer question posed by Castro, and three of the questions for Rubio directly probe the  veil of secrecy surrounding Israel's nuclear weapons: 

• "What are the specific restrictions on Undersecretary DiNanno answering such a question?
• What is the Department’s guidance to its employees on the discussion of any Israeli nuclear weapons capability?
• Please provide any documentation or information regarding the administration’s policy on discussing any potential Israeli nuclear weapons capability, including who has issued any such policies, what such restrictions cover, and who is bound by those restrictions."

Those questions are doubly awkward, because it may be illegal for Rubio to answer them. A secret classification directive issued by the Obama administration seemingly makes explicit the prohibition on talking about Israeli nuclear weapons. It was released in 2015 pursuant to a Freedom of Information Act inquiry. Though its contents are almost entirely redacted, the un-redacted title speaks volumes: “Guidance on Release of Information Relating to the Potential for an Israeli Nuclear Capability.”

One driver of Washington's practice of feigning ignorance about Israel's nuclear arsenal is the fact that -- combined with Israel's refusal to join the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty -- Israel's arsenal makes every dollar of US aid to Israel illegal, thanks to legislation enacted in the 1970s. While not addressing that inconvenient truth explicitly, the House Dems' letter to Rubio made an implicit reference to it: "If any such disclosure of any Israeli nuclear weapons capability would implicate U.S. laws concerning nonproliferation, we are ready to work with you to address those concerns through legislative action."

That language suggests that the Dems would cooperate in explicitly granting Israel an exception to the ban on aid to non-NPT nuclear states. Israel and its supporters often claim indignation when the country is, in their words, "singled out" for criticism. We don't expect they'll complain if Israel is singled out for an explicit exception to US nuclear non-proliferation law.  

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 15:45

The Complicated Reality Behind High Gas Prices

Authored by Petr Svab via The Epoch Times,

Average gas prices in the United States have gone up by almost 40 percent since March 1.

The reason appears straightforward: Iran has blocked the Strait of Hormuz in response to the U.S. military operation that decapitated its regime and degraded its military. Hundreds of tankers trapped behind the strait cannot deliver their oil, depriving the world of 7 percent to 10 percent of its supply.

Although that explains drastic price increases and even shortages in Europe and Asia, the United States gets almost no oil through the strait. In theory, the country should be energy-independent, as it is a net petroleum exporter.

But in reality, the United States is highly intertwined with the global oil market, and there is little chance it could disentangle itself from it, according to experts who spoke to The Epoch Times.

“Oil is a fungible commodity that can be shipped anywhere in the world, and that is why everyone is impacted by the events,” said Patrick De Haan, petroleum analyst with gas price tracker GasBuddy.

Countries facing shortages are willing to pay top dollar for U.S. oil.

“There’s huge demand to export the product,“ said Paul Sankey, an oil market analyst and president of Sankey Research.

”So that draws the prices up.”

If the U.S. government were to impose limits on oil exports, it would likely cause more problems than it would solve, the experts said.

Light Sweet Versus Heavy Sour

Not all crude oil is made the same. The oil produced in the United States through fracking is called “light sweet.” It is the easiest to refine and contains few impurities such as sulphur.

Much of Middle Eastern oil is categorized as “medium.” It is still fairly easy to process, but it is thicker and contains more sulphur. Canada largely produces “heavy sour” oil. It is even thicker and more sulphurous. Venezuela, despite its gigantic reserves, produces mostly very heavy, sour oil that few refineries can process.

U.S. refineries are generally geared toward heavier oil.

An aerial view shows the Chevron El Segundo refinery, one of California’s largest petroleum processing facilities, in Manhattan Beach, Calif., on April 8, 2026. Average gas prices in the United States have gone up by almost 40 percent since March 1 amid the war in Iran. Mario Tama/Getty Images

“Most of our refineries were built at least half a century ago now,“ said David Blackmon, an energy policy analyst and adviser. ”They were set up to refine heavier grades of crude oil coming in from the Middle East and Mexico, the big producing countries at that time, because we were heavily dependent on foreign oil during those days.”

Refineries have been adjusting to processing lighter grades, Sankey noted.

But switching from one grade to another remains difficult, said Keming Ma, former process engineer at a major refinery in Asia. It is easier to change the oil than the refinery.

“They blend the oil with a different grade to accommodate the refinery,” he said.

In fact, refineries have an incentive to maintain their setup for heavier oil, according to Robert Dauffenbach, an energy expert and professor emeritus at the University of Oklahoma’s Price College of Business.

“These companies have invested billions of dollars into being able to take advantage of the price spread between heavier sour crude, which, quite frankly, can’t be run at every single refinery, so it tends to be cheaper,” he said.

And so the United States exports about 5 million barrels of largely light oil daily, while importing more than 6 million barrels of largely heavy oil.

“We’re kind of maxed out on the amount of light, sweet crude we can run out of refineries,” Dauffenbach said.

And there is another reason why heavier oil is desirable.

Refineries separate crude oil through distillation into fractions, from the lightest such as methane and propane, through petrol (gasoline), and then into heavier oils such as kerosene, diesel, and heating oil until only asphalt is left. The lighter the crude, the less of the heavier fractions it yields.

An aerial photo shows the Nave Photon crude oil tanker carrying Venezuelan oil docked in Freeport, Texas, on Jan. 16, 2026. Venezuela’s crude is largely heavy and sour—thicker and more sulphurous—making it difficult for most refineries to process. Mark Felix/AFP via Getty Images

“We import heavy sour ... because we need it for our refineries to make heavier products like diesel and jet fuel,” said Tracy Shuchart, a senior economist at NinjaTrader Group.

Export Ban Repercussions

“[Limiting exports] would likely push prices down here temporarily, but it would negatively impact many of our major allies that are now relying on us,” De Haan said.

The United States produces about 13 million barrels of crude per day, but its refineries, now running virtually at maximum capacity, guzzle about 16 million barrels per day, Dauffenbach said. The refineries produce more than Americans consume.

“America is a big winner from the exports,“ Sankey said.

”So you'd be shooting yourself in the foot if you banned exports.”

A ban would also throw a wrench into the supply chain.

“Our domestic storage would fill up with this light grade of crude coming out of the shale place, and we'd have to stop importing that heavier crude that we need to manufacture diesel,” Blackmon said.

A farmer prepares a blend of minerals, biologicals, and fertilizers to be sprayed onto fields during seeding in Hickory, N.C., on April 10, 2026. Experts say demand for fuels such as diesel and jet fuel is one reason U.S. refineries favor heavier crude. Grant Baldwin/AFP via Getty Images

It is the heavier fractions “that are very highly desirable right now,” De Haan said.

“Right now, the price of diesel is up even more significantly than gasoline,“ he said. ”So if anything, refiners would like more heavy oil right now.”

An export ban would also have a chilling effect on the industry.

“You’re going to disincentivize more export infrastructure,” Sankey said.

There is not much risk that exports would dent domestic supply too much, he added.

“There’s a limit on how much we can export as well,“ he said. ”So that’s probably not going to be a huge pull above a certain level of exports, which will be the capacity maximization of the existing export infrastructure.”

The Trump administration has already made clear that an export ban is not on the table.

Fuel prices are displayed at a truck stop in Belvidere, Ill., on April 6, 2026. With diesel prices rising faster than gasoline, refiners are turning to import heavier crude needed to produce diesel, experts said. Scott Olson/Getty Images

What Is Next?

The most obvious way out of the current conundrum is to open the Strait of Hormuz. Yet it is not clear how and when that will happen.

Iran does not have the capacity to block the strait outright. Yet it can still issue a credible threat to attack passing vessels. In response, insurance companies are not willing to insure ships, hence shipping companies are not willing to risk passage.

The Trump administration is trying to negotiate a deal with Iran amid a rolling ceasefire. Meanwhile, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, a part of Iran’s military that answers to the clerical regime leadership, continues to threaten the crucial shipping lane.

The uncertainty leaves traders scrambling for clues about where oil prices are heading.

Boats navigate the sea in the Strait of Hormuz near Qeshm Island, Iran, on April 28, 2026. The Trump administration is trying to negotiate a deal with Iran amid a rolling ceasefire, but it rejected Iran’s last offer and continues to blockade Iran’s ports. Asghar Besharati/Getty Images

“The market is trying to figure this out,” Dauffenbach said.

It seems, though, that the general tendency is for prices to rise.

“It’s pretty clear in my mind that oil prices are going to continue to slowly rise until there’s a resolution here,” De Haan said.

“That’s what we’re starting to see again. The ceasefire and the peace talks only temporarily pushed the oil prices lower.”

The initial price shock was not as drastic as some expected, in part because of the supply chain lag.

“Going into this conflict, we had some cushions against the supply shock,” Blackmon said.

“We had [about] 400 million barrels of oil already in tankers on the water that provided a cushion. That’s about four days of global supply.”

In addition, the United States, Japan, and China have substantial oil reserves.

“But those are now being depleted on a daily basis,“ he said. ”And, last I saw, about two-thirds of that cushion on the water has been delivered now.”

Still, the United States is much better off than many other countries, particularly in Asia and Europe.

Cars queue at an entry gate to the PCK Schwedt refinery in Schwedt, Germany, on April 30, 2026. Fuel prices in Germany have surged to more than $9 per gallon amid a global energy crisis tied to the Iran conflict. Tobias Schwarz/AFP via Getty Images

Americans experienced “a sticker shock” when gasoline went from $3 to $4, but “the gasoline price is already low here in global terms,” Sankey said, noting that in Germany, gas is now more than $9 per gallon.

The United States benefits not only from domestic supply, but also from substantial imports from Canada.

“About 95 percent of what we consume is here in North America,” Blackmon said.

“We get a little from Mexico, but their industry has really gone downhill in recent years. And then we get some from Venezuela, and some from Brazil and Guyana.”

Canadian oil is generally cheaper “because it has limited means to flow out to the global marketplace,” De Haan said, although he noted that Canada recently opened a pipeline to the West Coast, which will allow it to access other markets in the future.

Thus, Americans are seeing higher prices, but at least no shortages.

“We’re insulated from the big supply shock, because we have such a high degree of energy security,” Blackmon said.

Policy Fixes

Even without export restrictions, the U.S. federal government has some policy options for easing the situation. One thing it has already done is suspend the Jones Act, which states that only American-made and American-flagged ships with American crews can run between American ports. This restriction has previously increased shipping costs between American ports.

Although helpful, it does not move the price much, Dauffenbach said.

“Now they’re getting to the point where there’s not much difference between Jones Act and internationally flagged [ships] because there’s a lack of ships right now,” he said.

A pumpjack stands idle in the Huntington Beach oil field, with port cranes visible in the distance, in Huntington Beach, Calif., on April 23, 2026. America benefits not only from domestic supply, but also from substantial imports from Canada. Mario Tama/Getty Images

The government could call a gas tax holiday.

“It would bring prices down immediately by 18.4 cents a gallon,” he said.

Individual states could also roll back their gas taxes. Georgia has already done so, he noted.

Customers fill up with gas in Los Angeles on March 11, 2026. Despite higher prices, Americans have not faced shortages because of the country’s “high degree of energy security,” analyst David Blackmon said. John Fredricks/The Epoch Times

The federal government could allow year-round sales of E15, a fuel containing more ethanol.

“Ethanol is cheaper than gasoline right now, so that would help bring down prices a little bit,” he said.

For now, Americans are stuck paying more, as demand remains steady.

“It’s very difficult for demand to dissipate in the United States, unless things get really out of control, just because everybody has to drive everywhere here,” Shuchart said.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 15:25

AI Is Causing A Tidal Wave Of Job Cuts At Crypto Firms

Layoffs are spreading across crypto and fintech — and executives increasingly say AI is part of the reason, according to Bloomberg.

Coinbase, PayPal, Gemini, and Crypto.com have all recently cut jobs while emphasizing efficiency and automation. On Tuesday, Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong framed the shift in stark terms, warning that “the biggest risk now is not taking action” as the company tries to become “lean, fast, and AI-native.”

Bloomberg writes that the trend gained momentum after Block, Inc. — the parent company of Square, Inc. and Cash App — announced major cuts earlier this year and pointed to AI as part of a broader restructuring effort. Since then, more firms have adopted similar language, pitching layoffs as preparation for an AI-powered future.

Critics aren’t fully convinced. Many of these companies are also facing more immediate business pressures: crypto trading activity has cooled, digital asset prices remain below their recent highs, and payments companies are navigating slower growth and tighter competition. Some firms have additional internal challenges — Block, Inc. expanded aggressively during the pandemic-era boom, while PayPal is still working through a broader turnaround under new leadership.

That has fueled accusations of “AI washing,” where companies use artificial intelligence as a cleaner explanation for layoffs tied to weaker demand or overhiring. John Todaro of Needham & Company questioned how much of the narrative is real: “Whenever I see these layoffs and AI is part of the reason, I step back and ask, do we see this from companies where the market is super hot?” He added: “I am not sure I buy that AI angle.”

Others say both things can be true. Raman Shalupau, founder of CryptoJobsList, estimated that current cuts are “probably an 80/20 split across the industry right now between real AI efficiency gains versus trimming down from the last bull run.”

Even when companies aren’t cutting headcount, they’re reshaping jobs around automation. Coinbase has been flattening management layers and asking leaders to operate more like “player-coaches,” while 0G Labs said it reduced staff by 25% after internal AI tools significantly improved productivity.

The bigger question is whether this marks a permanent shift in how crypto and fintech firms operate — or whether AI has simply become the latest justification for cost-cutting during a tougher market cycle. For now, both explanations appear to be driving decisions.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 15:05

Worth Every Dollar (Until It Isn't)

Authored by Bryan Lutz via DollarCollapse.com,

Jamie Dimon just gave the trillion-dollar AI capex boom his blessing.

Standing next to Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei in New York on Tuesday, the JPMorgan chief told Wall Street that the buildout is “worth the trillion-dollar investment”… a sentence that would have been a punchline two years ago.

Now it feels like even the mainstream media disagrees with the consensus.

Here’s the problem...

BofA Global Research charted every market concentration peak of the last sixty years on a single line:

Four bubbles. Four peaks. All in roughly the same 40-44% concentration band.

And we just printed the fourth one.

The world’s largest bank cosigned the bet at the exact level the last three manias topped out.

Axios reports:

Jamie Dimon blesses the trillion-dollar AI capex boom

JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon stood next to Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei in New York on Tuesday and told Wall Street the AI buildout is worth every dollar.

Why it matters: With investors increasingly anxious about whether AI revenue can keep pace with spending, the head of the world’s largest bank endorsed a capital expenditure wave projected to top $1 trillion next year.

• The latest Big Tech earnings reports last week made clear that the massive buildout is propping up not only the stock market, but U.S. economic growth writ large.

• “The technology is so powerful, it’s worth the trillion-dollar investment,” Dimon said at an Anthropic event unveiling new partnerships and AI agents tailored to financial services.

Zoom in: Dimon and Amodei also addressed Mythos, Anthropic’s powerful new model whose cyber capabilities prompted Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell to convene an emergency meeting with major bank CEOs last month.

• Dimon, who was invited but unable to attend that meeting, said the banks have since gotten together to “triage the issues” — and argued protections should extend to all banks, not just the largest.

• “The government can’t do all that,” he said.

• Amodei said he had a great conversation with Bessent and pushed back on the suggestion that Mythos’s limited release was driven by compute constraints, calling that a “misconception.”

So a banker blesses a trillion-dollar bet, the regulators panic about a single AI model, and the index rips on the back of seven names doing all the spending.

This is what late-cycle capex manias look like in real time… every cycle has them, and every cycle ends the same way.

Stack accordingly.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 14:10

"Stunning Quarter": Highest Earnings Growth In Over Two Decades

Yesterday, Deutsche Bank's head of thematic research published his latest chartbook, "The Great 2026 Reset," which delves into the market and political implications of the Iran conflict (available here to pro subs).

One key topic explored by Reid is the remarkable US Q1 earnings season. As we previewed ahead of the start of reporting seasons, earnings are significantly exceeding consensus estimates across all metrics, despite a high bar.

S&P 500 earnings growth is projected to accelerate sharply from 13.4% in Q4 to 24.6% in Q1 – a four-year high and a level rarely seen outside of post-shock recoveries. Excluding special factors, this represents arguably the strongest earnings growth in two decades.

The AI boom is a clear contributor, but strength is widespread, with double-digit growth seen in average and median companies, and all 11 sectors posting positive growth for the first time in four years. This strong performance has in many places been driven by higher prices amid supply constraints, surging demand within the AI value chain, and other disruptions.

In light of these robust Q1 results, DB has raised its 2026 EPS forecast from $320 to $342, driven by strong Q1 beats, gravity-defying performance in MCG & Tech, and higher oil and commodity prices.

Reid says it's worth noting that while the US equity market has outperformed many markets since the start of the Iran conflict, this has only moved it from the bottom quartile to the middle of the global pack year-to-date.

Even with a surge since the conflict began, tech performance over the past six months (since the end of October) shows only a modest increase.

Given current high valuations, strong earnings growth is helping the US market "grow into" these valuations, yet other markets have demonstrated notably better performance over the last 18 months.

More in the full DB note available here.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 13:55

Iranian President Says Iran Willing To Prove Peaceful Nature Of Nuclear Program

Iran has told other regional countries that it is ready to 'prove' that its nuclear program is peaceful in nature, and that it is willing to meet international standards in that regard, according to the Iranian presidency.

This comes as Iran's Foreign Ministry has insisted that the nuclear issue be left out of talks related to ending the war with the US, with a statement saying that "at this stage, we do not have nuclear negotiations" - but which remains a key demand by Washington.

Within years after the first Trump administration unilaterally pulling out of the earlier Obama JCPOA nuclear deal, the Iranians had booted IAEA inspectors from the country, citing that the deal was collapsing due to Washington policies, which included the reimposition of far-reaching sanctions.

Anadolu Agency

The appeal for international verification that its program is for peaceful nuclear energy and domestic consumption comes via Turkish media this week:

Iran is fully prepared to meet global standards to demonstrate the peaceful nature of its nuclear program, the presidency said on Tuesday.

The remarks came during a phone call between President Masoud Pezeshkian and Iraqi Prime Minister-designate Ali al-Zaidi, according to a statement from Iran’s presidency.

Pezeshkian said Iran had shown full readiness in all negotiations to offer assurances within the framework of international regulations and global monitoring mechanisms. He criticized what he described as contradictory US policies, saying Washington continues to apply pressure while simultaneously calling for negotiations.

Iraq's Zaidi in turn said Baghdad is prepared to support de-escalation efforts and could host talks between Iran and the United States, according to the statement. Iraq itself has been deeply impacted by the war, and Iran has even fired ballistic missiles and drones on the north, reportedly targeting US troop installations in or near Erbil in Kurdistan.

Also, earlier this week widely a Reuters report raised eyebrows and serious questions related to the effectiveness of the 38-day aerial campaign which saw US-Israel bombs unleashed in the many thousands (combined: some 20,000+ munitions expended) on the Islamic Republic.

"US intelligence assessments indicate that the time Iran would need to build a nuclear weapon has not changed since last summer, when analysts estimated that a US-Israeli attack had pushed back the timeline to up to a year, according to three sources familiar with the matter," the report lays out.

"The assessments of Tehran's nuclear program remain broadly unchanged even after two months of a war that US President Donald Trump launched in part to stop the Islamic Republic from developing a nuclear bomb," it continued.

New satellite imagery: Iran may have taken fresh "passive defensive measures" near Natanz nuclear facility...

IRAN NUCLEAR UPDATE: Possible NEW Passive Defensive Measures Noted at Pickaxe Mountain

Based upon newly available satellite imagery of the Pickaxe Mountain underground complex, just south of the Natanz Nuclear Complex, it appears that as early as April 22nd, the two eastern… pic.twitter.com/KGAhBkLks8

— Inst for Science (@TheGoodISIS) May 6, 2026

President Trump as well as Israeli leadership have persisted in advancing the narrative than Tehran is bent on achieving a nuclear bomb, something which the Iranians have repeatedly denied. But there's a concern over deep division between the IRGC and civilian leadership, with 'hardliners' in the former camp seen as more ready to seek a nuke.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 13:35

DOJ To Ask Supreme Court To Intervene In E. Jean Carroll's Lawsuit Against Trump

Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times,

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) said it will ask the U.S. Supreme Court to allow it to intervene in President Donald Trump’s appeal of the $83.3 million jury award E. Jean Carroll won against him in a defamation lawsuit.

The DOJ will ask the Supreme Court to substitute the United States for Trump in the lawsuit, arguing that in 2019, during his first term as president, when Trump denied Carroll’s sexual assault claims against him, he was acting as an employee of the government.

Assistant U.S. Attorney General Brett Shumate said in a filing with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on May 5 that the DOJ will invoke the federal Westfall Act in a bid to substitute the federal government for Trump as the defendant in the lawsuit. The appeals court previously denied the request to replace Trump as the defendant.

The DOJ argues that Trump is immune from suit because he was acting within the scope of his presidential duties and speaking on matters of public concern when he made the statements about Carroll that led to the $83.3 million verdict.

A federal jury ordered Trump to pay those damages over the statements in which he denied the sexual assault allegations and accused Carroll of lying.

The Westfall Act shields federal employees from common law tort lawsuits arising from their government employment.

Common law refers to the body of law developed over centuries by court rulings, as opposed to statutes passed by legislatures. A tort is a wrongful act or infringement of a right that gives rise to civil liability.

If a federal employee is sued in his individual capacity for a tort that occurred while he was acting within the scope of his employment for the government, the act states that “the United States shall be substituted as the party defendant,” and the court will dismiss the employee from the lawsuit.

Carroll, an author, testified during a 2023 trial that Trump attacked her around 1996 in a dressing room in a department store near Trump Tower in New York City. Trump denied the allegations.

In its May 2023 verdict, a federal jury held Trump liable both for sexually abusing Carroll and defaming her when he made statements in October 2022 denying her allegations. The jury awarded Carroll $5 million in damages.

The Second Circuit upheld both the $5 million verdict and the $83.3 million verdict on appeal.

Shumate urged the Second Circuit to stay the award, noting that the DOJ intends to file a petition with the Supreme Court challenging the circuit’s denial of a request to substitute the government as defendant in the lawsuit.

The Epoch Times reached out to Carroll’s attorney, Roberta A. Kaplan, for comment. No reply was received by publication time.

Separately, on May 5, Trump asked the Second Circuit to stay the award to give him time to prepare an appeal to the Supreme Court over the circuit court’s rulings.

Trump previously filed a petition with the Supreme Court in November 2025 to challenge the $5 million verdict. It is unclear when the high court will act on it.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 13:15

Inflation Expectations Jump To 3 Year High As Financial Pessimism Surges: NY Fed Survey

Ahead of tomorrow's jobs report which is expected to show a substantial slowdown from last month's 178K surge, moments ago we got another reminder that the stagflationary iceberg remains front and center ahead of the US, after the NY Fed's latest monthly survey of consumer expectations reported that Inflation expectations at the one-year horizon rose again to 3.64% in April from the previous month’s 3.42%, the highest since September 2023. Inflation expectations were unchanged at 3.15% for the three-year-ahead horizon and also unchanged at 3.01% at the five-year-ahead horizon in April. 

The jump in year-ahead expectations took place even though 1 year gas inflation expectations tumbled sharply in April to 5.11% from 9.42% in April, which had been the highest reading since March 2022.

Other commodity price change expectations also rose, but to a more limited degree: food prices are now expected to rise 5.2%, down from 6%; medical costs to rise 9.6%, also a bit lower than the 9.7% in March; the price of a college education to rise 8.8% (down from 9%); and rent prices should drop from 7.1% to 6.0%.

Turning to the labor market, sentiment has continued to deteriorate fast with respondents saying that the mean probability the US unemployment rate will be higher next year rose another 0.4% (after the 3.6% jump a month ago) to 43.9%; highest reading since April 2025

On the other end, median one-year-ahead earnings growth expectations rose by 0.3% to 2.7% in March, tied for the highest since April 2025.

More bad news: the mean perceived probability of losing one’s job in the next 12 months increased again, this time by 0.2% to 14.6%, tied with the series’ 12-month trailing average of 14.6%. The mean probability of leaving one’s job voluntarily, or the expected quit rate, in the next 12 months declined by 0.1% to 18.2%.

A silver lining: the mean perceived probability of finding a job if one’s current job was increased modestly by 0.1% to 46.0%, while remaining below its 12-month trailing average of 47.5%. The increase was broad-based across age, education, and income groups.

Perceptions about households’ current financial situations also deteriorated compared to a year ago, with a larger share of households reporting a worse financial situation and a smaller share reporting a better financial situation. Year-ahead expectations about households’ financial situations also worsened, with the share of households expecting a worse financial situation at its highest level since April 2025, and a smaller share of households expecting a better financial situation in one year from now.

Perceptions of credit access compared to a year ago also deteriorated, with a higher share of households reporting it is harder to get credit and a smaller share of households reporting it is easier to get credit. Expectations for future credit availability deteriorated, with the net share of respondents expecting it will be harder to obtain credit in the year ahead increasing.

 There was a glimmer of good news when it comes to household debt: the average perceived probability of missing a minimum debt payment over the next three months decreased by 0.9% to 11.4% the lowest reading in more than two years and below the 12-month trailing average of 13.2%. 

But the most concerning data was that expectations for household income dropped again, for a 5th straight months, sliding to just 2.8%, the lowest since Oct 2025...

... while spending growth expectations jumped to 5.4% - after all those inflation-adjusted prices aren't going down without a recession - the highest since July 2023.

And some more Household Finance observations:

• The median expectation regarding a year-ahead change in taxes at current income level increased by 0.3 percentage point to 3.4%.
• Median year-ahead expected growth in government debt increased by 0.2 percentage point to 10.0%, its highest reading since June 2023.
• The mean perceived probability that the average interest rate on saving accounts will be higher in 12 months increased to 26.7%, its highest reading since November 2024.
• The mean perceived probability that U.S. stock prices will be higher 12 months from now increased by 2.1 percentage points to 38.4%

More in the full report from the NY Fed.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 12:44

Boeing Shares Rise As CEO Set To Join Trump On China Trip, Fueling Aircraft Order Speculation

Boeing shares rose in late-morning trading in New York after CNBC reported that CEO Kelly Ortberg will join President Trump on his trip to Beijing next week for talks with President Xi Jinping.

Boeing shares climbed a little more than 2% on the news as traders began to price in the possibility of a Chinese aircraft order, potentially covering both narrow-body and wide-body jets from the U.S.-based aircraft manufacturer.

Senator Steve Daines, who is leading the bipartisan delegation to China, has called for stability and peaceful cooperation between the U.S. and China.

"I strongly believe that we want to de-escalate, not decouple. We want stability; we want mutual respect," Daines said in opening remarks at a meeting with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi on Thursday, according to Reuters.

Daines also released a statement:

Readout of Daines' Congressional Delegation Trip to China

U.S. Senators Steve Daines (R-MT), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Jerry Moran (R-KS), and Deb Fischer (R-NE) today conducted three official meetings in Beijing with Premier of China Li Qiang, Chairman of the National People's Congress Zhao Leji, and Director of the Office of the Central Foreign Affairs Commission and Foreign Minister Wang Yi.

The bipartisan delegation discussed the importance of direct and open communication between the leadership of the two countries as well as issues of international and local importance. Topics of discussion included cooperation to stop the flow of fentanyl precursors, Iran and the Strait of Hormuz, and supply chain security. The Senators discussed the importance of reciprocal trade and opening up China's markets to sustained agriculture trade across beef, wheat, pulse crops, potatoes, apples, cherries, soybeans, grain sorghum, seafood, and other industries. The delegation also discussed the importance of China's relationship with Boeing and the proposed aircraft purchase currently under consideration. The Senators expressed their hope for an impactful and successful summit between President Trump and President Xi next week.

Readout of Daines’ Congressional Delegation Trip to China pic.twitter.com/0rtj6CZNTj

— Steve Daines (@SteveDaines) May 7, 2026

Related:

• Did Trump Force China's Hand? Beijing Nears 500-Jet Boeing Deal Ahead Of Xi Summit

Semafor speculates that the Trump team will invite "CEOs from Nvidia, Apple, Exxon, Boeing, and other big companies." 

Given Beijing's history of using large commercial aircraft purchases as goodwill gestures, Ortberg's inclusion on the trip raises the likelihood that Boeing could benefit and suggests tensions are cooling between the two superpowers, despite ongoing energy and trade turmoil in the Gulf region.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 12:25

Planet Fitness Crashes Most On Record After Membership Slump Hits Outlook

Planet Fitness shares crashed the most on record, according to Bloomberg data going back to 2015, after the budget gym operator slashed its full-year outlook, citing weaker-than-expected new-member sign-ups during the first quarter.

CEO Colleen Keating told analysts, "We faced some internal and external headwinds that impacted our join momentum year-to-date."

Keating said, "Our overall performance reflects the strength and resiliency of our model. However, the addition of more than 700,000 net new members during the quarter did not meet our expectations."

She continued, "Severe cold and winter weather in late January and February disrupted joins, especially as several of the storms fell on Mondays, our busiest join day of the week. We anticipated that our March campaign, Black Card first month free, which was very successful during the same time last year, would improve our join momentum over the remainder of Q1 and into Q2," adding, "Yet as we moved through March and into early April, our join trends remained below our plan."

Planet Fitness now expects 2026 sales growth of about 7%, down from prior guidance of roughly 9%. It also cut its adjusted EPS growth outlook to about 4%, well below the Bloomberg Consensus of 9.7%.

Here's a snapshot of the full-year forecast, courtesy of Bloomberg:

• Sees club sales growth up about 1%, saw up about 4% to 5%

• Sees revenue up about 7%, saw about up 9%

• Sees adjusted EBITDA up about 6%, saw about up 10%

• Still sees system-wide new club openings of about 180 to 190 locations

While first-quarter sales and profit beat Bloomberg Consensus estimates, traders focused on dismal membership trends. Shares crashed 32% in the early U.S. cash session.

In the year, Planet Fitness shares are down nearly 60%, trading at levels last seen in Covid 2020 lows. Shares have fallen 61% since late 2025.

Not one analyst questioned Planet Fitness executives on whether GLP-1 trends impacted membership.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 11:55

Beijing Flip-Flops, Asks Banks To Pause Loans To Sanctioned Refiners Days After Ordering Them To Ignore Sanctions

Over the weekend, we reported that in what some called a "watershed moment", Beijing ordered Chinese companies not to comply with US sanctions on five domestic refiners linked to the Iranian oil trade, deploying for the first time a blocking measure introduced in 2021 that was aimed at protecting its firms from foreign laws it deemed unjustified. Of note, China's refiners - including Hengli Petrochemical (Dalian) Refinery which was sanctioned last month and several other privately-owned processors - had been facing asset freezes and transaction bans. Hengli was the most ambitious target to date in China’s refining sector, and underscores US eagerness to push Iran to the negotiating table at all costs, even just weeks before an expected and long-awaited meeting between Trump and his counterpart Xi Jinping. 

Well, maybe not. In an apparent reversal of its blocking measure orders, overnight Bloomberg reported that China’s financial regulator advised the country’s largest banks to temporarily suspend new loans to five refiners recently sanctioned by the US over their ties to Iranian oil.

The National Financial Regulatory Administration asked banks to review their exposure and business dealings with firms including the abovementioned Hengli Petrochemical (Dalian) Refinery, one of China’s largest private refiners, while awaiting further guidance. For now, banks have been guided not to extend new yuan-denominated credit, though they have also been told not to call in existing loans, Bloomberg's sources said. 

The verbal directive, which came before China entered a long holiday weekend on May 1 and ahead of the upcoming Trump-Xi summit contrasts with a May 2 notice from China’s Ministry of Commerce, which instructed companies to disregard US sanctions. That was the first time China had deployed a blocking measure introduced in 2021 aimed at protecting its firms from foreign laws it deemed unjustified.

While China has often railed against unilateral sanctions, it has in past instances also quietly allowed its largest companies to comply with them, in order to avoid blowback on its own economy. Its largest state banks have a history of complying with US sanctions against Iran, North Korea, and even top officials in Hong Kong to avoid losing access to the US dollar clearing system. In earlier episodes, Beijing sought to shield its systemically important lenders by channeling Iran-related transactions through China National Petroleum Corp’s subsidiary Bank of Kunlun Co., which is currently sanctioned. 

As Bloomberg notes, the moves highlight the balancing act Beijing faces as it tries to project defiance toward the Trump administration while shielding its largest state-owned banks from US secondary sanctions. Tensions are escalating between the superpowers just weeks before a long-awaited meeting between President Donald Trump and his counterpart Xi Jinping in Beijing on May 14–15. 

Meanwhile, the White House has been ratcheting up efforts to cut off Iranian oil shipments to starve the Tehran regime for which oil remains the most vital financial lifeline. Late last month, the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control blacklisted Hengli, targeting a significant and well-connected player in the country’s vast crude-processing industry. The US also warned banks they are at risk of secondary sanctions if they support Chinese private refiners that buy Iranian oil.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the US sent letters to two Chinese banks warning them of the risk of secondary sanctions if they are found to be supporting transactions tied to Iran. Bessent didn’t identify the banks. 

Separately, but perhaps linked to this, China’s independent refiners have slowed purchases of Iranian crude as they seek to manage a government push to make fuel at any cost to ensure energy security while they face collapsing profit margins.

There are about 16 million barrels on ships anchored in the Yellow Sea off the Chinese coast, almost 40% higher than the level prior to a US blockade of Iran’s ports in mid-April, according to data from Kpler. Already razor-thin teapot margins plunged to record negative levels after the cordon began, while Iran’s oil prices have climbed since the war started, compounding the economic stress on independent refiners.

While the cost of Iranian crude is now fetching a slight premium to ICE Brent, compared with discounts prior to the war, China’s domestic fuel policy is also crimping refiners’ profits. Price hikes are often softened to help shield consumers, preventing processors from fully passing on rising costs. Above all, Chna’s "energy security" is the dominant theme, even if it means an entire industry has to suffer huge losses.

The smaller processors, known as teapots, have little choice but to keep making fuels such as diesel and gasoline. They have been told by Beijing to keep output at 2025 levels, even if they incur losses, or face cuts to their oil import quotas. Refining rates in Shandong province ramped up over April to the highest level in almost two years, even as processing margins sunk deeply into the red.

Chinese purchases of Iranian oil are expected to be above 1.4 million barrels a day this year, down from a March peak of 1.8 million barrels a day, according to Emma Li, lead China market analyst at Vortexa Ltd. “China’s demand for high-risk crude is unlikely to weaken materially,” she said. 

“I would not be surprised if the teapots are prioritizing politics over economics with an eye to their long-term survival,” said Erica Downs, a senior research scholar at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy. “They may be calculating that if they do their part to help China weather the energy crisis, then maybe they will build up some goodwill in Beijing.”

China's teapots have a checkered history with government authorities. They have resisted efforts by Beijing to consolidate the industry in the past, but proved crucial for China’s fuel security in the 2000s. Iran also relies heavily on the smaller refiners, which buy most of the OPEC producer’s crude.

“In China, during special times like this, it becomes a political mission for private refiners to help secure fuel supplies,” said Liao Na, the founder of GL Consulting, which provides research on the Chinese refining industry.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 11:40

Shake Shack Shares Crash Most On Record; McDonald's CEO Warns Of Faltering Consumer

Shake Shack shares crashed the most on record after the burger chain reported weaker-than-expected first-quarter revenue and adjusted EBITDA, with management blaming the miss on "significant weather impacts."

But the weather excuse may be masking a much larger problem: a weakening consumer increasingly pushing back against premium fast-casual pricing, with the average Shake Shack meal costing around $23.

SHAK reported first-quarter results that missed Bloomberg Consensus estimates, with revenue and adjusted EBITDA coming in light as the burger chain faced margin pressure despite positive comparable sales.

Here's a snapshot of first-quarter results, courtesy of Bloomberg:

Revenue: $366.7 million, estimate $372.5 million (Bloomberg Consensus)

Shack sales: $354.0 million, estimate $358.7 million

Licensing revenue: $12.7 million

Adjusted EBITDA: $37.0 million, estimate $45.5 million

Comparable sales: +4.6%, estimate +4.65%

Traffic growth: 1.4%

Restaurant-level operating margin: 21.2%, estimate 21.9%

CEO Rob Lynch noted that soaring beef costs rose by a low-teens percentage, while unfavorable weather eroded profit. Underlying sales and traffic momentum remained solid in the quarter.

Wall Street analysts were not thrilled with the earnings report. Shares crashed by the most on record, plunging 29% in the early U.S. cash session.

For the year, shares are down 17% and now trading at early-2024 levels.

Separately, Shake Shack announced in a separate release that Michelle Hook will be appointed as the new CFO next Monday.

Earlier, McDonald's CEO warned that current consumer environment is getting pressured: "Clearly, when you have elevated gas prices, which is the core issue that I think we’re all seeing about in the press right now, gas prices, inflation on that, that is going to disproportionately impact low-income consumers. And so we expect the pressures there are going to continue."

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 11:25

Hormuz To Year-End: Bullish Or Bearish?

With hopes of a permanent truce being continually undermined by minor skirmishes and blockade infringements, it remains unclear whether this war is close to ending. And while oil prices gyrate from one Trump Truth post to the next, two weeks of Brent above $100/barrel (only just inching below as of this morning) suggests the market is not buying into the quick resolution narrative.

Though it is worth asking the question, what if the peace talks are truly different this time?

Joining ZeroHedge tonight at 7pm ET to answer what a post-Hormuz reopening means for markets will be former Morgan Stanley chief investment officer Adam Parker, who now runs Trivariate Research, and Michael Pento of Pento Portfolio Strategies. Parker and Pento will be hosted by Adam Taggart, founder of Thoughtful Money and regular ZH moderator.

Context:

The U.S. and Iran are reportedly close to a preliminary peace agreement that would reopen the Strait of Hormuz, ease shipping restrictions, and begin a broader 30-day negotiation process. Reuters and Axios reported the draft framework could be finalized within days.

President Trump paused “Project Freedom,” the U.S. naval operation escorting ships through Hormuz, specifically to give diplomacy room to advance. Officials described the move as a confidence-building step tied directly to ongoing negotiations.

Markets reacted as if a breakthrough is increasingly likely. Oil prices plunged 7%+ yesterday on the reports.

A potential wrench in the works, Israel remains eager to continue striking Tehran and claims it did not know Trump and the Iranians were ‘close’ to a deal. Israel has also continued bombing Lebanon despite President Trump’s April 17 demand that they stop.

Even assuming the best case scenario of an imminent reopening, baked-in supply disruptions may be sufficient to trigger a recession later in the year. 

UBS projects US headline CPI will rise to 4.44% in May, driven by a sharp 12% increase in gasoline prices

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) May 6, 2026

Might a post-Hormuz “peace rally” be short-lived upon the realization of a weak real economy, burdened by higher gas, fertilizer, and food prices?

Tonight:

Tune in tonight at 7pm ET to hear from Pento, Parker, and Taggart to see how they are positioned into year-end. Right here on the ZH homepage, X feed, and YouTube channel.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 11:10

Saudi Arabia Vs UAE

By Benjamin Picton, Senior Market Strategist at Rabobank

The Little Red Hen

Markets are bulled-up this morning on prospects for peace in the Iran war. The S&P500 and NASDAQ closed at fresh all-time highs and Brent crude prices closed 7.8% lower at $101.27/bbl. While some analysts are understandably wary of another Axios report touting progress in Middle East relations (and therefore lower oil prices!), markets are clearly not in a mood to look a gift horse in the mouth.

Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Ismail Baghieri told news sources that Iran is reviewing a 14-point American memo that outlines terms for peace. Axios reports that those terms include Iran giving up the nuclear fuel that it has enriched to near-weapons-grade (though, there is no detail on who they would give it up to), an Iranian commitment to never seek a nuclear weapon, moratoriums on Iranian nuclear enrichment, Iranian agreement to enhanced UN-led nuclear inspections, and a framework to gradually restore navigation through Hormuz and lift US sanctions.

The IRGC Navy announced via X that safe transit through Hormuz would be ensured. This comes just 24 hours after Donald Trump paused Operation Freedom, an initiative to free commercial ships trapped in the Persian Gulf that triggered exchanges of fire between Iran and the US and its allies – most notably the UAE. In a curious case of timing, Iran officially launched a new government agency called the ‘Persian Gulf Strait Authority’, which perhaps raises the probability that transit through Hormuz will not look as it did prior to the war, and that the Iranian tollbooth could be a concession made by the American side to get a deal done.

This has far-reaching implications for the post-war order. At face value, acceding to Iran operating Hormuz as a tollbooth looks like an American strategic defeat since it leaves the GCC and ‘the West’ in a worse position than prior to the war with respect to energy and other commodity flows. It also sets an uncomfortable precedent whereby other countries might get the idea that freedom of navigation through natural maritime chokepoints is no longer sacrosanct, and certainly no longer underwritten by US naval power for free. Regular readers will recall that an Indonesian minister recently did a bit of kite flying on the idea of tolling the Strait of Malacca, which would have sent a chill up the spine of most of East Asia and Oceania and drew quick (but polite) denunciations across the region.

On the plus side for the Americans, leaving Hormuz in nominal Iranian control would only increase the incentive for the GCC to build the infrastructure to send oil West to Israeli ports or Southeast into the Gulf of Oman. It seems awfully coincidental that the UAE announced that it would be leaving OPEC immediately after the US agreed to provide it with dollar swaplines, which are usually reserved for European allies. It seems to be the case that the UAE has answered the call to partner with the US and Israel because the latter two provided it with support versus Iran where others didn’t. This could mean that the UAE supports US ambitions after the war ends by pumping more crude than would have been the case had it remained in OPEC, but the question of where that oil flows and whether it remains part of a mostly fungible world market now looms.

This may rub Saudi Arabia the wrong way given that the Kingdom vies with the UAE for influence in the region and the two have been at odds recently in Yemen. Media reports that Trump’s decision to pause Operation Freedom came after Saudi Arabia suspended permission for the US military to use its bases and airspace to support it. Was this decision by Saudi Arabia informed by deepening US ties with the UAE?

There is also the question of how Europe fits in with a post-war order. France is now moving the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier and its escorts towards the Middle East to support a Franco-British led mission to support freedom of movement through Hormuz. British PM Starmer, meanwhile, is in campaign mode for today’s round of UK local government elections, making the pitch that he kept Britain out of the war while his opponents from the Conservative Party and Reform were of a mind to support the Americans.

This reminds me of the story of the little red hen:

US: “Who will help me to ensure that Iran never acquires a nuclear weapon?”
“Not I!” said France. “Not I!” said Britain. “Not I!” said South Korea. “Not I!” said Australia.
US: “Fine. Then I will do it myself.”

US: “Who will help me to re-open the Strait of Hormuz?”
“Not I!” said France. “Not I!” said Britain. “Not I!” said South Korea. “Not I!” said Australia.
US: “Fine. Then I will do it myself.”

US: “Who will help me to consume the cheap energy from Venezuela, the US homeland, and the UAE?”
“I will!” said France. “I will!” said Britain. “I will!” said South Korea. “I will!” said Australia.
US: ...you get the picture.

The point here is that the US is now in the business of securing physical supply chains and membership of the supply chain club brings not only privileges, but also responsibilities. Namely: the responsibility to meaningfully contribute to the attainment of common geopolitical goals. It doesn’t bear reminding that the US has been critical of NATO and the EU, and the latest US national security strategy openly questions whether political and demographic changes might mean that Western countries won’t be US allies at all in a few years’ time. One need only look at the political preferences of Gen Zs in those countries to understand the concern.

There are diverging reactions to this across the rest of the West. Canada under Mark Carney and – to a certain extent – France under Emmanuel Macron have taken up the mantle of official leaders of the opposition to Trumpism and the breaking of the liberal world order to remake the global settlement in a way that allows the US to respond to Chinese production and supply chain dominance. Israel, the UAE and Argentina are “all the way with Donald J”, Japan and Australia (who has just announced an 82% tariff against Chinese steel) are increasingly leaning that way as defense and economic ties deepen and geographical realities overrule the luxury of preference.

Which way various countries choose to jump will inform market access, investment decisions, supply chain access, cost of credit and all sorts of other important variables in the future. Choose wisely, dear reader.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 10:55

eBay Nukes GameStop CEO's Account After Buyout Stunt Well... 

Why yes they did: "GameStop's Highly Confident Letter from TD is contingent on the GME/Ebay combination being investment grade... and Moody's said it won't be": David Faber, CNBC https://t.co/uhZbUF72qn

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) May 7, 2026

GameStop CEO's eBay Account Nuked 

GameStop CEO Ryan Cohen revealed on X that his eBay account was suspended after he listed a pair of "used socks" on the auction website, a publicity stunt that comes as he pursues a $56 billion bid to acquire the online marketplace.

Cohen listed a pair of used socks on his eBay account, but it appears he also listed other items, as the warning notification in the screenshot he posted on X shows: "You've reached the amount ($50,000) you can list this month."

on phone with customer support @eBay . please respond @eBay pic.twitter.com/HuUKxwivqN

— Ryan Cohen (@ryancohen) May 6, 2026

Hours after he shared a screenshot of his used socks eBay listing on X, he posted late Wednesday that his account "has been permanently suspended."

I have been suspended from eBay pic.twitter.com/0vadYCQ6KE

— Ryan Cohen (@ryancohen) May 7, 2026

Cohen's eBay ban comes days after he made a $56 billion buyout bid for eBay, funded by "half cash, half stock."

On Monday, Cohen joined CNBC's Andrew Sorkin to discuss GameStop's bid for eBay.

Sorkin asked Cohen, "How does the math work for you?"

That was the moment Cohen provided little information on the basic math, instead referring back to a press release, as well as the $20 billion financing letter from TD. That interview raised more financing questions, with some believing the takeover bid for the auction site was merely a stunt.

"Big Short" investor Michael Burry went from saying "GameStop Makes Its Play $56 Billion for eBay, Makes Perfect Sense" one day, to exiting his long GameStop position the next day, citing: "Wall Street does indeed mistake debt for creativity, and does so constantly. I of all people should have known."

As we pointed out earlier in the week, Wall Street analysts were widely skeptical of the financing deal, given that eBay's market cap is 4 times that of GameStop's.

GameStop's 13D filing shows Cohen's eBay position: derivatives, or option calls, represent 99.89% (22,176,000 shares) of its $EBAY position.

Certainly, Cohen is attention-seeking... Was the stunt all about trying to cash in on eBay call options?

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 10:40

Marijuana Vendors Sued For Allegedly Not Warning Consumers Of Risks

Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times,

Companies that legally sell recreational marijuana to adults are being sued in Illinois and Connecticut for allegedly not warning customers of the possible health problems caused by the drug.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs say these proposed class actions—four in all—that were filed May 4 in federal and state courts are the first of their kind. Federal and state court rules govern whether a class action gets certified and is allowed to proceed.

The lawsuits come after recent studies reported that marijuana use can change human DNA and cause psychosis, and that the drug increases the risk of death from cardiovascular disease, cancer, and other causes.

The newly filed legal complaints say that cannabis is highly addictive and can contribute to mental health disorders such as schizophrenia, suicidal ideation, and depression.

About 129 million Americans say they have used marijuana at some point in their lives. As more states legalize use of the drug, that figure is expected to rise.

The lawsuits allege that the defendants—Cresco, Curaleaf, Green Thumb Industries, and Verano—marketed recreational marijuana for its supposed medicinal benefits to generate billions of dollars in revenues, while not letting consumers know of health risks.

Attorney Jack Franks in Marengo, Illinois, said the plaintiffs are seeking damages for overpaying or being misled into buying the products.

They are also seeking clear product warnings that spell out the mental and physical health risks, Franks told The Epoch Times.

“It’s a legal product in many states, but it’s not adequately laid out what the risks are,” he said. 

“They deliberately marketed highly potent products while concealing the known risks. Our clients deserve the truth.”

Attorney James Bilsborrow of New York City said the case rests upon “decades of gold-standard medical research establishing that cannabis, especially high-potency cannabis, is wreaking havoc on public health.”

“Rather than warn consumers about these well-established dangers, the cannabis industry, following the tobacco and opioid industries’ playbook, has denied the risks and marketed its products as safe or even therapeutic,” he told The Epoch Times.

The plaintiffs in the Illinois lawsuit are 41 consumers who purchased cannabis products, according to the federal class action filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.

The legal complaint alleges that cannabis purveyors promote their products to “an unsuspecting public through a public relations megaphone as the antidote to ailments of all kinds, including, among others, insomnia, narcolepsy, over-eating, cancer, auto-immune disorders, neuropathy, pain, anger, boredom, sadness, shyness, irritable bowel syndrome, grief, and opioid addiction.”

The similar Connecticut lawsuit names as plaintiffs 18 consumers who bought marijuana products.

The legal complaints for the lawsuits filed in state courts in Illinois and Connecticut were not available at publication time. The plaintiffs’ attorneys said the state lawsuits are largely the same as the federal lawsuits.

A Verano spokesman told The Epoch Times that the company strongly disagrees “with the allegations and [intends] to defend the matter vigorously.”

“This lawsuit is part of a broader litigation campaign that plaintiffs’ counsel has brought against several multi-state cannabis operators, and mirrors claims that have been rejected by courts in similar legal actions against multi-state operators in the industry earlier this year,” the company said.

Verano complies with applicable state laws and regulations, including those related to labeling, testing, and warning requirements, the company said.

“The medical use and benefits of cannabis have also long been recognized by the states themselves, as reflected in the comprehensive medical marijuana programs that state legislatures and regulators have established and overseen for years.”

The Epoch Times reached out for comment to the defendants, Cresco, Curaleaf, and Green Thumb Industries.

No replies were received by publication time.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 10:25