WNBA standout Sophie Cunningham recently emphasized her belief that maintaining women’s sports as a domain exclusive to biological women is simply logical.

Former NBA player Enes Kanter Freedom underscored this perspective last week by humorously suggesting he might enter the WNBA draft.

Not long after, ex-NBA athlete and Republican political figure Royce White echoed Freedom’s sentiment by announcing similar intentions.

These declarations from the men came in response to a comment by WNBA officials following Cunningham’s statement. The league affirmed its commitment to principles like “justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion” and plans to form a “task force” to address policies concerning transgender athletes.

One might wonder, isn’t a basketball league’s primary focus simply to play basketball?

A little fun, levity and entertainment wouldn’t hurt, either.

To that end, Kanter Freedom and White have a point: Does anyone really think it’s fair for them to play in the WNBA?

It would be a spectacle (which would never happen, of course).

They’d dominate, obviously, and we doubt a single female player would want to take a hard foul from either one.  

The two men-turned-women (wink) would make a mockery of the league, and quickly. Kanter Freedom played 11 seasons in the NBA and weighs 250 pounds. White, who joined the NBA for one season, weighs in at 260.

The average WNBA player’s weight? 170 pounds.

What Cunningham argues, and Kanter and White are emphasizing through their trolling, is that biology produces some undeniable facts. The strongest men are physically stronger than the strongest women, and biological males have an innate advantage over women in sports. 

That’s why men and women compete in separate leagues in the first place.

WNBA brass and some on the lickspittle left might find such facts inconvenient. But they can’t bend reality to fit their ideology.

By pointing that out, Kanter Freedom and White just dunked on the WNBA.

Donald Trump has thrown his weight behind FIFA President Gianni Infantino’s contentious re-election campaign, warning of potential financial disaster for the organization if his ally and advocate is not reinstated for another four-year stint.

On Truth Social, the former U.S. President voiced his strong support, stating, “FIFA would be making a terrible mistake if, for any reason, they even considered replacing President Gianni Infantino. He is fantastic, having just presided over the most successful World Cup, by four times, ever presented. If he is gone, it will never be as successful or profitable again! Thank you for your attention to this matter. President DJT.”

The “four times” comment likely refers to the anticipated viewership for the 2026 World Cup, which is projected to more than double the television ratings achieved during the 2022 event in Qatar.

Despite Trump’s endorsement, Infantino’s future remains uncertain. This past Monday, he faced allegations of deceit from a joint statement issued by UEFA, the Asian Football Confederation (AFC), and CONCACAF—the regional governing body overseeing soccer in the Caribbean, North, and Central America.

These football governing bodies accused Infantino of a breach of trust, stemming from his now-scrapped plan to sell World Cup stakes to private equity investors, including Joshua Kushner, brother to Trump’s son-in-law, Jared.

Furthermore, Infantino ‘placed himself above the collective,’ according to the three confederations, which called for a fully independent review of his conduct. 

‘Football’s strength has always been its unity,’ the statement concluded. ‘We call for that unity to be honored now, for leadership that serves football, not seeks to command it.’ 

FIFA released a statement on Saturday criticizing a ‘concerted and ongoing effort’ to ‘undermine’ both the organisation and Infantino.

UEFA announced on Thursday that they will continue to boycott FIFA competitions if Infantino remains at the top of world football after his scandalous plans to sell $4.2 billion (£3.1billion) in World Cup stakes to private investors collapsed. Meanwhile, Norwegian Football Federation (NFF) president Lise Klaveness called for him to resign on Friday.

Mexico’s football federation broke ranks with CONCACAF to come out in support of Infantino, with Argentina, Qatar, Paraguay, Morocco and Egypt among those in favour of him remaining as FIFA president.

Infantino has also faced allegations this week that UEFA made a ‘departure payment’ to a female employee with whom he is alleged to have been in a relationship while general secretary of European football’s governing body.

UEFA confirmed a payment was made, but FIFA labeled the allegation as ‘categorically untrue.’

The next FIFA presidential elections take place next March.

Prior to Trump’s Truth Social post, Infantino was said to be in talks with the White House on the best way to save his job, the New York Post reported.

As an insider told the Post: ‘He wanted to get online with [Secretary of State Marco Rubio] and talk about how soccer can be a form of soft power for America. But we all know that it is about job protection. It is not about anything else at this point.’

A second source described Infantino as feeling ‘isolated’ by the ‘avalanche’ of negativity surrounding his now-doomed plans. ‘He is looking for allies of note to publicly support him,’ they said.

The Daily Mail reached out to FIFA and the White House for comment but did not receive a response. Meanwhile on X, the Assistant Secretary of State for Global Public Affairs, Dylan Johnson, denied that a call would take place.

He posted: ‘There are no plans for [Marco Rubio] to speak with Infantino and there is no call this morning. [The New York Post] should check their sources or they could have just asked us.’

On Tuesday, a FIFA spokesperson told the Daily Mail: ‘The FIFA President has not made any call to the US President, or any members of his administration, in recent days. It is pure fiction.’

Infantino’s alleged last-ditch attempt to save his presidency came after Trump brutally denied all knowledge of Infantino’s bold sell-off plan.

When asked ‘did Mr Infantino speak to you about his proposal to sell a stake in the World Cup?’ Trump brutally first replied: ‘Who?’

After the question was repeated, the president then added: ‘No, I didn’t speak to him.’

Trump’s reaction to Infantino in that Oval Office media session was a far cry from previous comments before and during the World Cup, in which he often gave a glowing review of the FIFA boss.

The Post also reported that Infantino repeatedly tried to call Trump amid the controversy, only to be met with a wall of silence from the president, who received FIFA’s inaugural peace prize last year. 

On Monday, a New York judge put a sudden stop to Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s contentious introduction of a luxury second home tax. The court directed City Hall to remove a disputed list displaying the private details of over 900,000 homeowners in New York City, including their names, addresses, and property values.

Judge Wayne Ozzi issued a temporary order restraining the Mamdani administration from proceeding with actions predicated on this controversial property roll or any mailed notices. He also prohibited the city from enforcing approaching deadlines against affected homeowners.

Furthermore, the judge’s order halts the city’s efforts to impose, assess, or collect the tax surcharge from those listed on the supplemental roll. The city is also barred from dispatching any notifications without conducting proper individual assessments and adhering to the notice requirements mandated by state tax law.

MAMDANI EXTENDS DEADLINE FOR NYC HOMEOWNERS TO SEEK EXEMPTION FROM NEW PIED-À-TERRE TAX

The courtroom setback came after attorney Randy Mastro blasted the Mamdani administration over what he called a botched rollout of a surcharge targeting second homes valued at more than $5 million.

“The city screwed this up… got it wrong… stop the train and make them do it over,” Mastro told the court.

Mastro argued that the city was supposed to first determine whether properties actually qualified as non-primary residences before putting homeowners through the surcharge process.

Instead, he said, the administration published a supplemental property roll covering a vast number of properties and sent notices that left New Yorkers scrambling to prove their homes were their primary residences.

“The city is to bear the burden,” Mastro argued, accusing officials of failing to use available information to determine which properties actually qualified. “They didn’t do their homework.”

Mastro said the publication of property owners’ names, addresses and property values unleashed confusion and public backlash.

“This is ludicrous. It is not right,” he told the court, arguing that the disclosure effectively “doxx[ed]” homeowners.

Outside the courthouse, Mastro declared the ruling “a very good day for all New York City homeowners.”

“The Mamdani administration botched this rollout,” Mastro said, alleging the city sent letters to thousands of people who live in their own homes and “never should have received a letter suggesting they may be subject to the surcharge.”

He also accused the city of posting a list of “over 900,000 New Yorkers by name, address and property value.”

“That’s a pretty shocking thing that happened,” Mastro said.

The lawsuit was filed by three New York City homeowners who are not challenging the legality of the pied-à-terre surcharge itself, but rather how Mamdani’s administration implemented it.

They allege the city incorrectly identified their primary residences as potentially subject to the surcharge, failed to conduct the statutorily required individualized initial determination before mailing notices and improperly shifted the burden onto homeowners to prove they were not subject to the surcharge.

One plaintiff, Simon Hedley, ultimately received an exemption after providing tax information. Mastro argued his experience demonstrated how easily the city could have made the required determinations itself.

“Was it negligence, was it laziness?” Mastro asked in court.

The city defended its rollout, arguing that freezing the process would itself hurt taxpayers seeking exemptions and disrupt deadlines. Attorney Steven Banks argued that keeping the supplemental roll in place would preserve the status quo and give taxpayers time to navigate the process.

The hearing grew heated at times as lawyers sparred over the administration’s handling of the tax.

When Mastro attempted to interrupt Banks during the city’s argument, Banks shot back, “Say nothing while I’m speaking.”

The two also clashed over Mastro’s characterization of the notices as “terrorizing” homeowners. Banks called the language offensive in reference to Mamdani being the city’s first Muslim mayor.

“That’s not terrorism,” Banks said of the rollout. “It happens to be acting in accordance with law.”

Mastro later clarified that he was describing how homeowners perceived the notices, arguing that residents viewed them as threatening because they indicated a homeowner was subject to the surcharge.

Mastro repeatedly hammered the administration’s execution of the tax, calling the situation “extraordinary,” the notices “bizarre” and the publication of the property roll “ludicrous.” He argued that “thousands of New Yorkers are on edge” and urged the court to remove what he called the “threat of jeopardy.”

“A TRO radically upsets the status quo,” Banks told the court.

In granting the TRO, Ozzi found that the notices caused irreparable harm and that the city, not property owners, was required to make the initial determination. He also found the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits because of missteps by the city, while stressing that the underlying case has not yet been decided.

The judge said he could not “unring the bell” on notices already sent, but could prevent additional mistakes, and said the city had not done its due diligence.

Mamdani’s administration quickly vowed to fight back.

“We disagree with today’s ruling, but we are confident in both the pied-à-terre surcharge and the City’s ability to implement it fairly and effectively,” Matt Rauschenbach, a spokesperson for the mayor, said.

“This surcharge asks those who own second homes valued at $5 million or more to contribute their fair share to the city they benefit from,” he added.

Rauschenbach said the Law Department would “appeal the ruling immediately,” which the administration says will stay the order, and that the city intends to continue implementing the surcharge.

Mamdani himself had struck a defiant tone before the ruling, taking a shot at Mastro over his repeated legal challenges to City Hall.

“There are few things more certain in New York City than death, taxes and Randy Mastro filing a lawsuit against this administration,” Mamdani said.

The mayor said he remained confident both in the legality of the city’s actions and in the surcharge itself, arguing that revenue from second homes worth more than $5 million would help pay for “safer streets,” “stronger schools” and other city services.

When asked directly whether he regretted the rollout, Mamdani defended the administration’s handling of it, while acknowledging that “with any new tax, there are more questions than there are answers.”

Mamdani said only about 17,000 homeowners in a city of 8.5 million are potentially affected and pointed to the city’s extension of an exemption deadline.

The legal fight is now moving quickly.

Ozzi ordered the defense to submit its order to show cause by Aug. 24, with plaintiffs’ replies due Aug. 27. Oral arguments on the merits are scheduled for Aug. 31.

The Little League World Series is already mired in controversy as a team from Tulsa, Oklahoma, briefly found itself disqualified on Monday, only to be reinstated shortly after by a Texas judge. The swift turn of events has captivated fans and participants alike.

Initially, the Tulsa team faced expulsion from the 2026 Little League Baseball Southwest Region Tournament due to the alleged ineligibility of one of its players. This decision came from the Little League International Tournament Committee after a protest questioned the eligibility criteria adhered to by the team.

While Little League Baseball described the committee’s decision as definitive, Judge Ryan Luna from the 414th District Court intervened, granting a temporary restraining order requested by Tulsa team parents and players. This legal move has reignited hopes on the diamond for the Oklahoma squad.

A press release highlighted Judge Luna’s directive, stating, “Judge Luna has ordered the championship game to proceed on Aug. 11 at 6 p.m. as planned. The victorious team will advance to represent the southwest region in Williamsport. The result will rightfully be decided on the field.”

In the wake of the court’s intervention, Little League Baseball is left pondering its subsequent actions, with its next move remaining uncertain for now.

In its original statement announcing the disqualification of the Tulsa squad, the organization had said that the Little League Baseball Southwest Region Tournament would determine a winner with a one-game championship between Texas West and Louisiana. 

While Little League Baseball had not said what had made the player ineligible, Sports Illustrated had reported that three teams taking part in the regional tournament had requested the Tulsa team be investigated. 

According to the complaint, SI reported, the three teams wanted Little League to look into “whether Tulsa National Little League operated its entire 2026 baseball program in compliance with Little League Regulations, Playing Rules, Operating Policies, Charter Requirements and Player Eligibility Requirements required for International tournament eligibility.” 

It also alleged that the Tulsa squad had violated the Sibling Participation Regulation II(a)(1), League Eligibility, Pitching more than one game in a day Regulation VI(k) and Completing a game Rule 4.10(c)(2).

In a bold move that could reshape public health policy, President Donald Trump has signed an executive order aiming to revamp long-standing federal guidelines on childhood vaccinations. This order also encourages states to reconsider their school vaccine mandates.

This executive directive reclassifies childhood vaccines into three specific categories. It instructs federal agencies to promote these new recommendations and strongly advises states to reassess their policies on school immunization requirements.

Named the ‘Gold Standard Childhood Vaccine Recommendations,’ the order also propels President Trump’s long-held objective to separate the combined measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine into individual doses. This initiative is rooted in concerns about a discredited link to autism.

The order, in its essence, proposes that all childhood vaccinations should be given during separate medical appointments whenever possible.

Despite these changes, medical professionals have consistently advocated for the combined MMR vaccination, citing its safety and efficacy. They caution that dividing the vaccine into separate shots might leave children susceptible to serious illnesses for extended periods.

The order explicitly acknowledges that the administration’s earlier vaccine directives have been ‘delayed due to litigation’ and instructs federal agencies to advance the new recommendations ‘to the fullest extent allowable by law.’

The order, however, is largely symbolic. States hold the power over school vaccine mandates, not the federal government. Even changes to the federal vaccine schedule would require formal rulemaking through the CDC and its advisory committee.

The order comes as measles cases are surging. The CDC has recorded 2,465 cases across 47 states so far in 2026 – already surpassing last year – with 93 percent in unvaccinated people. Childhood vaccination rates have dropped to 92.5 percent, leaving nearly 300,000 children vulnerable.

The MMR vaccine has been proven safe and effective through decades of research. It is 97 percent effective at preventing infection, adverse effects are rare and there is no scientific evidence that separating the vaccines provides any medical benefit.

The CDC’s current MMR dosing schedule is two doses: the first at 12 to 15 months of age and the second at four to six years old, before starting school.

Under the current CDC schedule, vaccines generally are spread across multiple doctor visits in a child’s first year and a half at two, four, six, 12 and 15 months. 

Rather than getting all at once, children receive a few shots at each visit designed to protect them as early as possible. Medical experts say this schedule is carefully studied and proven safe. 

The executive order does not provide a specific updated schedule with ages and timing. It directs agencies to review the recommendations and adjust the schedule ‘as appropriate.’

The latest order builds on a change announced in January, when the Department of Health and Human Services slashed the number of vaccines recommended for all children from 17 to 11.

Under the administration’s proposed vaccine guidance overhaul, which is advisory and cannot be mandated, vaccines for 11 diseases including measles, mumps, polio and whooping cough would be recommended for all children.

Vaccines for hepatitis A and B and meningococcal disease would be recommended only for high-risk groups or through shared decision-making between parents and doctors. Flu and Covid shots would also fall into the shared decision-making category.

Trump said Monday: ‘Together, there could be a possibility [the MMR] is quite lethal and separately it looks like they are not at all lethal but very effective. 

‘For example, at one year, you should have five separate visits for vaccines rather than getting them all in the same day.’

‘And I saw this early on and I’ve seen proof of it where they have a vaccination thing, it looks like the size of a bottle of soda poured into a little child’s body and bad things happen in many cases.’

There is no evidence that the combined MMR vaccine is lethal. Serious side effects are extremely rare and the risks of the vaccine are vastly outweighed by the risks of the diseases it prevents. 

Before the measles vaccine, about 500 children died from measles every year in the US. According to the CDC, about 1 to 3 out of every 1,000 children infected with measles will die from complications, while there have been no deaths shown to be related to the MMR vaccine in healthy people.

Doses of live viruses like those in the MMR vaccine are tiny — a fraction of a teaspoon.

Many states now follow guidance from the American Academy of Pediatrics and other major medical groups, which recommend vaccines based on a child’s immune system development and oppose nonmedical exemptions, after splitting from the CDC schedule over what they called a departure from ‘long-standing medical evidence.’

‘AAP recommends immunizations that have been designed to teach the immune system to recognize and resist serious diseases,’ said Dr Sean O’Leary, chair of the AAP Committee on Infectious Diseases.

‘They are carefully tested and monitored over time. The pacing and combination of vaccines are based on what we know about when your child’s immune system is ready to learn and respond best.’

Trump’s push to split the MMR vaccine stems from a long-held personal belief, rooted in a debunked theory linking childhood vaccines to autism.

The president has publicly questioned whether the number of vaccines children receive can cause autism, despite decades of research finding no link.

He has framed the issue as a matter of ‘common sense,’ telling reporters last year: ‘This is based on what I feel. It seems to be that when you mix them, there could be a problem. So, there’s no downside in taking them separately. In fact, they think it’s better.’

He has said that he and First Lady Melania Trump deliberately spaced out vaccines for their son Barron, describing it as ‘the old-fashioned way.’

A federal judge blocked similar changes in March, siding with major medical organizations that argued Health Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr had unlawfully changed vaccine policy and improperly reconstituted the federal panel that advises the government on vaccines.

More than 40 studies involving over 5.6 million people have found no link between the MMR vaccine, or any vaccine, and autism.

The 1998 study that originally sparked fears was retracted, its author lost his medical license, and subsequent research has repeatedly reaffirmed the safety of childhood vaccines.

In late 2025, RFK Jr directed the CDC to remove explicit statements from its website declaring that vaccines do not cause autism.

The agency updated its text to instead highlight areas needing further observation, prompting criticism from public health groups.

The latest CDC data shows that 1 out of 31 kids were diagnosed by the time they turned 8, up from 1 out of 36 just two years earlier, but that increase is linked to broader diagnostic criteria, better screening and greater awareness, rather than vaccines.

Private insurers are still required to cover all ACIP-recommended vaccines at no cost, including those in the ‘shared clinical decision-making’ category. The order does not change that.

Major health insurers have also pledged to continue covering the broader September 2025 vaccine schedule through at least 2026, and some states have passed laws requiring insurers to cover vaccines beyond the federal minimum.

The one exception is HPV. Insurers are no longer required to cover additional doses beyond the newly recommended single dose, though some plans have pledged to do so temporarily.