Foundations
Here's a look at documents from U.S. foundations
Featured Stories
Reason Foundation Issues Commentary: States React to Nitrous Oxide Deaths With Unnecessary, Unworkable Bans
LOS ANGELES, California, April 23 -- The Reason Foundation issued the following commentary on April 22, 2026, by senior policy fellow Hanna Liebman Dershowitz:
* * *
States react to nitrous oxide deaths with unnecessary, unworkable bans
State legislatures truly concerned about teen safety should look beyond bans and embrace a regulatory approach that protects and educates consumers.
*
In recent years, prompted by concern about danger to teens amid an increase in incidents of deaths associated with nitrous oxide use, states have scrambled to respond with legislative solutions, mostly turning
... Show Full Article
LOS ANGELES, California, April 23 -- The Reason Foundation issued the following commentary on April 22, 2026, by senior policy fellow Hanna Liebman Dershowitz:
* * *
States react to nitrous oxide deaths with unnecessary, unworkable bans
State legislatures truly concerned about teen safety should look beyond bans and embrace a regulatory approach that protects and educates consumers.
*
In recent years, prompted by concern about danger to teens amid an increase in incidents of deaths associated with nitrous oxide use, states have scrambled to respond with legislative solutions, mostly turningto bans. While the dangers of nitrous oxide use are serious and important, there are better ways to dissuade use and provide support for young people using substances.
Colloquially known as "whip its" or "laughing gas," this is the same stuff you may remember from dental visits, assuming you've never tried it for fun.
Nitrous oxide has been used in medicine since the mid-1800s and recreationally even earlier. The short-acting, non-flammable sedative is safe for medical use, and is also widely sold as a propellant in food preparation to conveniently whip cream, and for automotive uses. When inhaled, it produces a euphoric feeling that has attracted young people seeking a cheap, quick high for many decades.
According to a study published in JAMA Network Open, annual deaths from nitrous oxide use in the U.S. increased from 23 in 2010 to 156 in 2023, a development understandably alarming to public officials. The inhalant is predominantly used by youth aged 16 to 30. Long-term use poses serious health risks, and in the rare cases when death occurs, asphyxia is typically the cause of death.
The uptick during the study period reflects a new generation of young people being exposed to this substance and a new generation of products marketing to them. The recent crop has appeared in smoke shops, gas stations, and convenience stores, as well as online, under names such as Galaxy Gas, often with catchy packaging and added flavorings.
Nitrous oxide, by virtue of not being a scheduled drug under the Controlled Substances Act, is not regulated by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA); rather, it is regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). In June 2025, the FDA updated its warnings about nitrous oxide, noting the increase in use observed by the FDA and the press.
Instead of practical responses, states have largely responded with bans and regulations that will remove the products from certain locations or impose penalties for selling to minors.
Louisiana was the first state to pass a bill responding to the renewed attention to nitrous oxide, banning retail sales for recreational use of nitrous oxide (and other substances such as butyl and amyl nitrates) in gas form in 2024.
Also in 2024, Michigan banned the sale of nitrous oxide items for recreational use, with greater penalties for selling to kids under 18.
Oklahoma followed with the "Maddix Bias Act" in 2025, criminalizing the use of nitrous oxide and adding harsher penalties for its sale by adults to people under 18. The law was named after and followed the death of a recently graduated high school baseball star who died in a single-vehicle car crash, the driver of which was found to be under the influence of nitrous oxide.
In Washington, House Bill 2532, a bill banning sales of nitrous oxide except for medical, food, or automotive uses, was sent to the governor in March after passing unanimously in both chambers and was signed into law on March 24.
Florida Senate Bill 432, also known as "Meg's Law," at press time was heading to that state's governor's desk. It passed unanimously in both houses in March. This law prohibits the sale of nitrous oxide products by tobacco and nicotine sellers.
New York A09287, which died in committee in March, would have criminalized the sale and possession of nitrous oxide for non-approved uses, and also would have added a crime of "driving while ability impaired by nitrous oxide." The bill would have also provided for education about the harms of nitrous oxide.
Minnesota House File 325 would ban only flavored nitrous oxide for recreational use. It has been introduced but has not yet moved ahead.
In Tennessee, lawmakers are responding after an adult Nashville woman, Kelly Rosenthal, died several months after sharing her addiction story on TV. "You can just walk into any smoke shop if you're over 21" to purchase nitrous oxide, she said. Tennessee's House Bill 1644/Senate Bill 1843 would prohibit vape sellers from selling nitrous oxide products. It is on the governor's desk. Another bill in that state would adopt a full ban on recreational use.
In Mississippi, lawmakers introduced a prohibition on "knowingly" selling the product for use as an inhalant. The bill died quickly before going anywhere.
A big concern of many public officials is that some of these products deploy eye-catching packaging and designs that may be especially appealing to young people, and it's fueled by popular videos on TikTok and other social media sites showing young people inhaling the products. If this is the chief concern, why aren't lawmakers trying to regulate packaging? Why create a whole new regime of prohibition?
The data reflecting greater use and deaths from nitrous oxide call for educating young people about the dangers of addiction, suffocation, and death after inhaling nitrous oxide, not banning their sale or prohibiting their sale to minors. Bans or laws that curtail sales in certain locations are unlikely to eliminate the dangers. These kinds of laws may give some parents a false sense of security, but they might also frustrate people seeking the products for legitimate uses and lead youth into situations with disreputable sellers who are motivated to sell more expensive and possibly more dangerous products.
We know that complete bans are not necessary to dissuade youth, because consumption has been drastically reduced for many more dangerous substances, such as alcohol and tobacco, without criminalizing use. Those substances, although legal for adults, have been successfully regulated by substantial public education combined with age-gating. While limiting the presence on store shelves may serve as a deterrent to some youth who would not seek them out elsewhere, it is unclear whether a ban would be the best way to limit access, especially since one permissible use for nitrous oxide is in baking, rendering these products widely available in grocery stores and online.
Turning away from the moral panic, there are actually many valuable uses of nitrous oxide even beyond dental work, baking, and cars. For example, nitrous oxide, in its low-dose dental preparation, has been used to treat opioid addiction and has shown promise as a treatment for alcohol withdrawal and depression, among other conditions.
It is laudable that policymakers want to stem the use of nitrous oxide among youth. Unfortunately, the outmoded, knee-jerk measures being passed to address nitrous oxide harms give legislators a box to check but don't solve any real problems. State legislatures truly concerned about teen safety should look beyond bans and embrace a regulatory approach that protects consumers through public education, warnings, harm reduction services, and quality controls.
* * *
Hanna Liebman Dershowitz is a senior policy fellow at Reason Foundation.
* * *
Original text here: https://reason.org/commentary/states-react-nitrous-oxide-deaths-unnecessary-unworkable-bans/
OMRF hosts science demonstration event for young professionals
OKLAHOMA CITY, Oklahoma, April 23 -- The Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation posted the following news:
* * *
OMRF hosts science demonstration event for young professionals
*
About 100 young professionals saw biomedical science in action this week during an outreach event at the Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation.
The April 21 "Science Lounge" event was hosted by OMRF's Ambassadors group, which was created to generate awareness among their peers about the foundation's work.
Ambassador Kelsey D'Emilio of Edmond said such events are crucial to share the scientific advancements being made
... Show Full Article
OKLAHOMA CITY, Oklahoma, April 23 -- The Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation posted the following news:
* * *
OMRF hosts science demonstration event for young professionals
*
About 100 young professionals saw biomedical science in action this week during an outreach event at the Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation.
The April 21 "Science Lounge" event was hosted by OMRF's Ambassadors group, which was created to generate awareness among their peers about the foundation's work.
Ambassador Kelsey D'Emilio of Edmond said such events are crucial to share the scientific advancements being madein her home state to an age group that otherwise may have limited knowledge about OMRF.
"I had no idea this place existed until I was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis and was urged to come home from the East Coast for treatment," she said. "So to come home and discover the best treatment available literally in my backyard and to see my health restored, it's an amazing thing, and I want to share that with others, because this place is worth their support."
Likewise, Ben Coldagelli of Oklahoma City said he had no knowledge of OMRF until he was approached by a former work colleague, Kevin Henry, now senior director of philanthropy and outreach for OMRF. Coldagelli said touring the labs and eventually becoming an Ambassador taught him about "the incredibly important scientific progress taking place here every day."
During the evening's live demonstration, guests watched scientist and avid cyclist Matt Bubak, Ph.D., reach his cardiovascular limit on a stationary bike. As Bubak pedaled against ever-increasing resistance, his mentor, Benjamin Miller, Ph.D., explained why this test, known as a VO2 max, is the best indicator of a person's longevity.
"The VO2 max tells us the maximum rate of oxygen your body can consume and use during intensive exercise," said Miller, an exercise physiologist and head of OMRF's Aging and Metabolism Research Program. "The higher your VO2 max score, the higher your endurance capacity and heart health."
At Miller's urging, guests yelled encouragement as Bubak neared the point of tapping out. His ultimate ceiling was a VO2 score of 47.1. "He's not going to beat Lance Armstrong in a race, but he's really fit," Miller quipped.
Guests also visited two booths at which scientists explained the relevance of their expertise.
At one, Caleb Marlin, Ph.D., showed how artificial intelligence - gained through thousands of human tissue, blood and urine samples - is helping predict kidney damage progression in people with lupus, a chronic autoimmune disease.
At the other booth, data scientist Gideon Hallum displayed color-coded images of two lungs - one diseased and one healthy - to illustrate how high-throughput data provides fast, critical context and perspective to researchers.
OMRF President Andrew Weyrich, Ph.D., told guests about the statewide, grassroots effort that launched OMRF following World War II and noted that the parents and grandparents of some attendees may have been involved in that effort.
"In addition to being a research institution, we're also a training institution that prepares future scientists from all over the world," he said. "We also hope to train the community about who and what we are, and that's where you come in - to help us spread the word."
***
Original text here: https://omrf.org/omrf-hosts-science-demonstration-event-for-young-professionals/
Georgia Looks to Early Literacy Reform to Improve Reading Outcomes
ATLANTA, Georgia, April 23 -- The Georgia Public Policy Foundation posted the following news release:
* * *
Georgia Looks to Early Literacy Reform to Improve Reading Outcomes
*
While a great deal of focus on education policy in Georgia has revolved around school choice policies and education finance, there are significant changes taking place inside the classroom as well.
Georgia has joined several states in addressing early literacy, that fundamental period for students that typically begins around age 5. Students who fall behind in reading early are far less likely to graduate from high
... Show Full Article
ATLANTA, Georgia, April 23 -- The Georgia Public Policy Foundation posted the following news release:
* * *
Georgia Looks to Early Literacy Reform to Improve Reading Outcomes
*
While a great deal of focus on education policy in Georgia has revolved around school choice policies and education finance, there are significant changes taking place inside the classroom as well.
Georgia has joined several states in addressing early literacy, that fundamental period for students that typically begins around age 5. Students who fall behind in reading early are far less likely to graduate from highschool. The need is urgent: In the 2024 National Assessment of Educational Progress ( NAEP ), just 30% of Georgia fourth graders rated "proficient" or better in reading. Georgia's average score was roughly in line with the national average, which is no real consolation when the national benchmark still leaves too many students below basic reading proficiency.
In this year's legislative session, the General Assembly passed House Bill 1193, the Georgia Early Literacy Act of 2026. This bill expands the use of literacy coaches, strengthens direction around early reading instruction and pushes earlier identification of students who are falling behind.
This effort is part of a broad shift in education policy. States across the country-especially Georgia's neighbors in the South-have recently moved toward early reading reforms that emphasize structured literacy, explicit attention to phonics instruction, stronger teacher support and earlier intervention for struggling students. The best-known example of this is Mississippi, where literacy reforms helped produce some of the nation's most notable reading gains.
Mississippi offers an example of how literacy-based reforms can improve outcomes. Its 2013 Literacy-Based Promotion Act emphasized early reading and paired it with classroom support such as universal screeners, diagnostic assessments, intensive interventions for students with reading deficiencies and literacy coaches in targeted schools. This became a blueprint for similar reforms and the catalyst for what came to be known as the "Mississippi Miracle," or the rapid improvement of its students' performance.
After Mississippi adopted the Literacy-Based Promotion Act, its reading performance improved markedly over time. Its NAEP scores for fourth grade reading climbed from 49th in the country in 2013 to ninth by 2024. The state also now consistently ranks highly in reading scores among economically disadvantaged and minority students.
Louisiana pursued similar literacy reforms including requiring a statewide K-3 literacy screener, offering free science-of-reading training for teachers and leaders, and providing guidance on the use of literacy coaches. These reforms also focused on moving away from cueing-based reading instruction, which relies on context such as pictures and other clues instead of phonics to teach words. Its fourth grade NAEP reading score rose from 210 in 2019 to 216 in 2024, making it one of only two states where fourth graders outperformed their pre-pandemic reading and math results.
Another example is Tennessee. The Tennessee Literacy Success Act requires districts to use foundational literacy instruction with a phonics-based approach, administer universal K-3 screeners, adopt aligned instructional materials and submit literacy plans for state approval. Tennessee's 2024 implementation review reported that English language arts scores and universal screener results continued positive trends.
Efforts like these are not a one-to-one comparison with Georgia's literacy effort. In fact, HB 1193 is not Georgia's only recent literacy-based reform (take 2018's HB 538, for example). It's also not true that such legislation is a magic formula for success. Some commenters, such as the Progressive Policy Institute's director of education policy Rachel Canter, have recently pointed out that Mississippi's achievements did not come from teaching phonics alone. Rather, they came from a broader raising of standards that emphasized accountability and featured disciplined implementation.
Canter specifically mentioned Georgia's prior efforts to implement literacy standards as having implementation issues. She said Georgia did not carefully narrow the reading screeners it approved, and that the Georgia Department of Education's original list had 16 options of widely varying quality. She added that this problem helped prompt a 2024 bill aimed at limiting the approved tests.
She also asserted that the Georgia Department of Education has been reluctant to force districts to change their practices. In other words, Georgia adopted parts of the Mississippi approach on paper without the same level of accountability and implementation discipline.
Canter also notes that Georgia lawmakers have recognized some of those implementation problems and tried to address them through follow-up legislation. Indeed, HB 1193 requires unified literacy plans across districts and attaches stronger consequences to early intervention and promotion decisions.
The attention to literacy-based learning in state policy is certainly vulnerable to overreaction. American Enterprise Institute Senior Fellow Robert Pondiscio noted that "miracle" stories are symptomatic of a fad-driven culture in education, and that they, "depend on the premise that success lies not in the slow work of building systems, but in the one magical lever we have somehow failed to discover and pull." Canter has even described the Magnolia State's progress as more of a "Mississippi marathon" in recognition of the long-term dedication to reform that it represents.
While such cautions and qualifications are critical, they should not obscure the fact that literacy-based learning has proven to be a key piece in improving student outcomes, so long as it is complemented by disciplined implementation and persistent accountability. Without a foundation of reading proficiency, too many Georgia students risk falling behind for years to come.
Topics on this page
Georgia Mississippi Rachel Canter National Assessment of Educational Progress Georgia Department of Education Tennessee American Enterprise Institute Louisiana English Georgia General Assembly
***
Original text here: https://www.georgiapolicy.org/news/georgia-looks-to-early-literacy-reform-to-improve-reading-outcomes/
Freedom From Religion Foundation: Voucher Fight Exposes Dangers of Taxpayer-Funded Religious Education
MADISON, Wisconsin, April 23 -- The Freedom From Religion Foundation issued the following news release on April 22, 2026:
* * *
Voucher fight exposes dangers of taxpayer-funded religious education
A growing controversy over inclusion of Muslim schools in state voucher programs illustrates a core problem with taxpayer-funded religious education.
As Texas rolls out its $1 billion school voucher program, one of the largest in the country, Islamic schools have faced exclusion amid openly hostile rhetoric from state officials. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has bluntly stated, "We don't want school choice
... Show Full Article
MADISON, Wisconsin, April 23 -- The Freedom From Religion Foundation issued the following news release on April 22, 2026:
* * *
Voucher fight exposes dangers of taxpayer-funded religious education
A growing controversy over inclusion of Muslim schools in state voucher programs illustrates a core problem with taxpayer-funded religious education.
As Texas rolls out its $1 billion school voucher program, one of the largest in the country, Islamic schools have faced exclusion amid openly hostile rhetoric from state officials. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has bluntly stated, "We don't want school choicefunds going to radical Islamic indoctrination."
Abbott's comment lays bare what voucher proponents often deny: that so-called "school choice" programs are not religiously neutral, but instead invite government officials to pick and choose which religions they favor for public support. Such schemes inevitably lead to discrimination and constitutional violations.
"You can't have it both ways," FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor points out. "If taxpayer dollars are going to fund sectarian religious education, then the government is inevitably forced to decide which religious teachings are 'acceptable' and which are not, thereby engaging in discrimination against some and favoritism toward others. That's precisely the kind of action the Constitution forbids."
Already, some Islamic schools are suing, alleging religious discrimination after being excluded from participation while Christian schools are invited to receive public funds. Even as courts have intervened to allow applications, Texas officials continue to signal resistance to including Islamic institutions.
At the same time, lawmakers in other states are advancing policies that explicitly target Muslim-affiliated schools. In Florida, recent legislation threatens to strip voucher funding from schools tied, often speculatively, to organizations labeled as "terrorist," raising serious concerns about religious profiling and government overreach.
FFRF emphasizes that this is not an isolated problem, but an inherent feature of voucher schemes.
"When public money is diverted to religious schools, discrimination is not a bug, it's the system working as designed," Gaylor explains. "Today, it's Muslim schools being targeted. Tomorrow, it could be another minority faith. The only consistent and constitutional solution is to keep taxpayer dollars out of religiously segregated schools altogether."
Voucher advocates champion public funding for Christian schools, insisting these programs are about "freedom" and "neutrality," but sing a different tune when their tax dollars might go to support religions they do not subscribe to.
"Tax dollars should go only to public schools, which welcome all-comers and are dedicated to teaching, not indoctrinating in religion," adds Gaylor.
The Freedom From Religion Foundation objects to citizens being taxed to support any religion, and especially being used to proselytize students.
FFRF will continue to oppose voucher programs nationwide and defend the constitutional separation between state and church.
* * *
The Freedom From Religion Foundation is a U.S.-based nonprofit dedicated to defending the constitutional principle of separation between state and church and educating the public on matters relating to nontheism. With nearly 42,000 members, FFRF is the largest association of freethinkers (atheists, agnostics and humanists) in North America. For more information, visit ffrf.org.
* * *
Original text here: https://ffrf.org/news/releases/voucher-fight-exposes-dangers-of-taxpayer-funded-religious-education/
[Category: Religion]
Foundation for Economic Education Posts Commentary: New Partnerships in Asia
DETROIT, Michigan, April 23 -- The Foundation for Economic Education posted the following commentary on April 22, 2026, by political theorist Jake Scott:
* * *
New Partnerships in Asia
The emerging Pacific security paradigm.
*
In February 2026, Indonesia and Australia signed the Treaty on Common Security ("the Jakarta Treaty"), a commitment to developing joint training facilities in Indonesia, increased cooperation and information sharing, and consulting on security matters at ministerial level between the two countries. But in the last two months, this already important agreement gained greater
... Show Full Article
DETROIT, Michigan, April 23 -- The Foundation for Economic Education posted the following commentary on April 22, 2026, by political theorist Jake Scott:
* * *
New Partnerships in Asia
The emerging Pacific security paradigm.
*
In February 2026, Indonesia and Australia signed the Treaty on Common Security ("the Jakarta Treaty"), a commitment to developing joint training facilities in Indonesia, increased cooperation and information sharing, and consulting on security matters at ministerial level between the two countries. But in the last two months, this already important agreement gained greatersignificance, as it has expanded to include Papua New Guinea (PNG) and Japan. It seems that a new security paradigm and new trade partnerships are emerging in the Pacific.
Indonesia and Australia have a relationship that is both close and strained. Whilst the two nations signed a major trade agreement in 2020 that has seen the trade relationship between them deepen and blossom, it took over ten years to pass amid diplomatic scandal and international crises. In 2013, for instance, President Yudhoyono said that ties between Indonesia and Australia had been damaged after it came to light that Canberra had been spying on President Yudhoyono's calls with his ministers. Not only did it cause diplomatic embarrassment, but it led to major protests in Jakarta, where residents burned the flag of Australia, saying the country was "insulted." Likewise, in 2015, Jakarta announced that two Australian citizens--Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran--had been executed over drug smuggling into the country, causing serious rifts between the two nations. Trade talks were shelved that year.
Nevertheless, the 2020 agreement--the Indonesia-Australia Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (IA-CEPA)--in retrospect marked the beginning of deeper ties between the two countries that has led to a desire for greater cooperation, culminating in the Jakarta Treaty of this year.
Since the IA-CEPA came into force, trade between the two nations has nearly tripled, rising from $12.91 billion in 2020 to $35.38 billion in 2024, the most significant shift in bilateral trade for Australia and Indonesia in a generation.
The road to this particular agreement began as a result of, first, the election of Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto in October 2024 and, second, the re-election of Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese's Labor Party in May 2025. As Albanese's first overseas bilateral engagement of his second term, the discussions were intended to build on the 2024 Australia-Indonesia Defence Cooperation Agreement, which established the joint military exercises that would later be concretized in the Jakarta Treaty.
But the broader geopolitical context is, inevitably, the main catalyst. Indonesia joined the BRICS group in early 2025, and announced it had become a signatory to US President Trump's Board of Peace in January 2026. This is a nation increasingly looking to deepen its integration in global politics, and Albanese's own preference for deeper ties means that the opportunity was there to take, while hedging Canberra's bets on Indonesia's position.
Moreover, Danantara, Indonesia's sovereign wealth fund, is already exploring partnership with Australia over industries that have opened up as a result of the Jakarta Treaty, especially in farming and renewable energy. Most significantly, Danantara is eyeing up partnership opportunities in Indonesia's $5 billion waste-to-energy projects, which Australian businesses look keen to invest in.
Thus the Jakarta Treaty emerged as a mutually beneficial treaty. Its expansion to include Japan and PNG in March 2026, however, involves two very different sets of factors. For Japan, the interest is strategic, while PNG's motivations are more geographic and immediate.
In Japan, recent political history has been marked by a major repositioning of itself from a passive security consumer into an active regional partner, with Southeast Asia as central to such a project. It should come as no surprise, then, that in 2021 Japan and Indonesia signed a security agreement on the transfer of defense equipment and technology, enabling joint research and development, as well as the capacity to produce defense systems. This existing relationship was deepened in 2025 when Japan supplied high-speed patrol boats to Indonesia, enhancing maritime surveillance near the Strait of Malacca.
Japan is, therefore, an important partner for Indonesia in maritime security, but is also quite reliant on Indonesia for maritime security, due to its structural vulnerabilities, especially its dependence on seaborne energy imports and consequent exposure to chokepoints that run through the Indonesian archipelago.
Not only that, but Japan and Australia are deeply close, but have thus far relied on US investment to reinforce their defensive posture against China. In 2024, Japan was Australia's third-largest importer, with an estimated value of AUD 32.2 billion ($23 billion), of which motor vehicles accounted for over a third. Likewise, Japan was (and still is) Australia's fourth-largest foreign direct investor, holding nearly AUD 285 billion ($203 billion).
With FDI becoming increasingly unreliable, Indonesia has become an attractive regional ally for both Japan and Australia due to its non-aligned stance, it being the largest economy in Southeast Asia, and being a country that China takes seriously. Formalizing and deepening the relationship with Indonesia makes sense for both Australia and Japan on multiple fronts--economically, strategically, and politically--without upsetting Beijing.
But there is one opportunity that this pact unlocks access to: Japan's newly-burgeoning defense industry. Already valued at $44.7 billion in 2026, it is forecast to reach over $50 billion by the end of the decade. This is driven by a political decision to double the size of defense spending from 1% to 2% of GDP by 2027--and has already risen to 1.8%. This is a significant opportunity for Indonesia, with a longstanding infrastructure that allows the opportunity to be seized.
For PNG, the land border it shares with Indonesia's Papua province makes the security challenges real, not abstract. PNG Defense Minister Billy Joseph framed trilateral talks between PNG, Indonesia, and Australia as opening "new pathways for deeper trust and coordinated action on issues such as border control, maritime security, disaster response, and Defense capability development." Joseph emphasized the geographic, cultural, and strategic ties that all three nations shared, that "make collaboration essential."
The emergence of the trilateral agreement is, in turn, built on the PukPuk Treaty signed between PNG and Australia in October 2025 on mutual defense. The strategic infrastructure for a deeper relation between PNG and Australia already existed, meaning that the trilateral agreement is by no means a new development, but rather the natural extension of a strategic relationship to the nation that is PNG's largest neighbor and with whom it shares the most immediate security concerns.
The Jakarta Treaty and its expansion represent, therefore, a major milestone in the region: for the first time in decades, the Indo-Pacific's middle powers are acting autonomously to build their own regional security architecture, and building stronger economic ties with their neighbors.
* * *
Dr Jake Scott is a political theorist specialising in populism and its relationship to political constitutionality. He has taught at multiple British universities and produced research reports for several think tanks.
* * *
Original text here: https://fee.org/articles/new-partnerships-in-asia/
FFRF Ensures Nonreligious Students are Eligible for Iowa's Highest Athletic Honor
MADISON, Wisconsin, April 23 -- The Freedom From Religion Foundation issued the following news release on April 22, 2026:
* * *
FFRF ensures nonreligious students are eligible for Iowa's highest athletic honor
The Freedom From Religion Foundation has persuaded the Iowa High School Athletic Association to revise the criteria student-athletes need to win the state's highest school honor.
A concerned Iowa parent reported that the Iowa High School Athletic Association (IHSAA) was imposing a religious criterion on students in order to be eligible for the Bernie Saggau Award of Merit, an award described
... Show Full Article
MADISON, Wisconsin, April 23 -- The Freedom From Religion Foundation issued the following news release on April 22, 2026:
* * *
FFRF ensures nonreligious students are eligible for Iowa's highest athletic honor
The Freedom From Religion Foundation has persuaded the Iowa High School Athletic Association to revise the criteria student-athletes need to win the state's highest school honor.
A concerned Iowa parent reported that the Iowa High School Athletic Association (IHSAA) was imposing a religious criterion on students in order to be eligible for the Bernie Saggau Award of Merit, an award describedas the "highest student honor" that the association awards annually. According to the official description, the award is "presented annually to the graduating student who best exemplifies a patriotic spirit, with strong religious and moral convictions, living and professing the qualities of honesty, integrity and sportsmanship [emphasis added]." FFRF learned that high schools throughout Iowa were advertising the award using the "strong religious and moral convictions" language.
FFRF stepped in to make certain nonreligious students are also eligible for the award.
"Because the IHSAA is a state actor due to its operational agreement with the Iowa Department of Education, the IHSAA is obligated to respect students' First Amendment rights," FFRF Staff Attorney Sammi Lawrence wrote to the district.
Public school students have a constitutional right to be free from discrimination on the basis of religion or nonreligion when participating in the Iowa High School Athletic Association contest. Participation includes students' eligibility for the Bernie Saggau Award of Merit regardless of whether they subscribe to a religion. It is well settled that public entities may not show favoritism toward or coerce belief or participation in religion, especially in the school context. By conditioning eligibility for the award on "strong religious . . . convictions," the association is clearly favoring religion over nonreligion.
Thankfully, the organization took FFRF's guidance on the issue.
Iowa High School Athletic Association Executive Director Tom Keating emailed FFRF informing the state/church watchdog of a new, more inclusive approach regarding the award.
"The words, 'religious and' have been removed from the verbiage on the award certificate," Keating wrote. "This year's certificates will reflect that change."
FFRF is pleased to see the Iowa's top school athletic association work to make a respectful environment for freethinking Hawkeye State students.
"Students should never be excluded from an award because they are atheists or otherwise nonreligious, particularly when 44 percent of young people today have no religious affiliation," says FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor. "We're pleased the association corrected this unconstitutional requirement and will judge students based on merit rather than applying an inappropriate religious litmus test."
* * *
The Freedom From Religion Foundation is a national nonprofit organization with over 41,000 members across the country, including hundreds of members in Iowa. FFRF's purposes are to protect the constitutional principle of separation between church and state, and to educate the public on matters relating to nontheism.
* * *
Original text here: https://ffrf.org/news/releases/ffrf-ensures-nonreligious-students-are-eligible-for-iowas-highest-athletic-honor/
[Category: Religion]
FFRF Condemns Trump's Threatened Prosecution of Group Fighting Christian Nationalism
MADISON, Wisconsin, April 23 -- The Freedom From Religion Foundation issued the following news release on April 22, 2026:
* * *
FFRF condemns Trump's threatened prosecution of group fighting Christian nationalism
The Freedom From Religion Foundation is denouncing the Department of Justice's criminal indictment of the Southern Poverty Law Center.
For more than 50 years, the center has been a leading advocate for civil rights. Its research, of special interest to FFRF, has been indispensable to the nation's understanding of the white Christian nationalist movement that fueled the Jan. 6 insurrection.
... Show Full Article
MADISON, Wisconsin, April 23 -- The Freedom From Religion Foundation issued the following news release on April 22, 2026:
* * *
FFRF condemns Trump's threatened prosecution of group fighting Christian nationalism
The Freedom From Religion Foundation is denouncing the Department of Justice's criminal indictment of the Southern Poverty Law Center.
For more than 50 years, the center has been a leading advocate for civil rights. Its research, of special interest to FFRF, has been indispensable to the nation's understanding of the white Christian nationalist movement that fueled the Jan. 6 insurrection.The center's annual "Year in Hate and Extremism" report named white Christian nationalism as the key ideology that inspired the attack on the U.S. Capitol, drawing directly on the February 2022 report co-published by the Freedom From Religion Foundation and the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty.
By elevating that work, the Southern Poverty Law Center helped to bring a clear warning about Christian nationalism to the American people, giving it the institutional weight of more than half a century of research on extremism. The center has continued to document how white Christian nationalism stokes anti-immigrant hate through false claims of "Christian persecution" and "white genocide," and how the movement seeks to dominate American political and cultural life.
One year ago, FFRF, along with more than 100 other civil rights organizations, signed the Unity Pact, a commitment organized by The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. The premise is simple: When any of our organizations is unjustly targeted, we will stand as a unified coalition. An attack on one is an attack on all. The Trump administration's threatened prosecution of the Southern Poverty Law Center is precisely the kind of moment the Unity Pact was built for.
"The Southern Poverty Law Center has spent decades doing the work this administration would rather no one do: naming the people and movements that threaten equality and our democracy," says Annie Laurie Gaylor, Freedom From Religion Foundation co-president. "If you track and name extremists, now it seems you become the target. This administration pardoned the Jan. 6 insurrectionists and is now going after the organizations that warned the country about them."
Late last year, the House Republicans held an unprecedented hearing focusing on the Southern Poverty Law Center, charging that it coordinated efforts with the Biden administration "to target Christian and conservative Americans and deprive them of their constitutional rights to free speech and free association." That was an absurd accusation. Now the Justice Department has lowered the boom, and it's vital that anyone who cares about civil rights, free speech and saving our democracy condemns its move.
* * *
The Freedom From Religion Foundation is a U.S.-based nonprofit dedicated to defending the constitutional principle of separation between state and church and educating the public on matters relating to nontheism. With nearly 42,000 members, FFRF is the largest association of freethinkers (atheists, agnostics and humanists) in North America. For more information, visit ffrf.org.
* * *
Original text here: https://ffrf.org/news/releases/ffrf-condemns-trumps-threatened-prosecution-of-group-fighting-christian-nationalism/
[Category: Religion]
