Penna Dexter is a radio commentator and columnist for various Christian conservative outlets. She is a frequent commentator and guest host for Point of View Radio Talk Show with Kerby Anderson. Her weekly commentaries air on the Moody Broadcasting Network and the Bott Radio Network. Penna’s columns appear at Baptist Press and the Christian Post blog page. Penna is an executive at Todd Dexter & Associates, the integrated marketing consulting company founded by her husband, Todd Dexter.

For eight years she served as Marlin Maddoux’s co-host on Point of View and for two years she co-hosted a daily drive time live broadcast on the Dallas-based Criswell Radio Network.

Penna’s interest in conservative politics and the issues that affect the family began when she was a child working on political campaigns with her parents. She graduated from the University of Southern California with a degree in International Relations. She spent 8 years in the banking industry. She and her husband Todd have three children who are in their twenties. They are members of Trinity Presbyterian Church.

Michael Berry, Esq., is Senior Counsel and Director of Military Affairs for Liberty Institute. He joined Liberty Institute in 2013 after serving for seven years as an attorney with the U.S. Marine Corps. From 2009 until 2013, Mr. Berry served as an Appellate Defense Attorney in which he argued numerous cases before various federal appeals courts and traveled across the country to teach appellate advocacy to junior attorneys. He was also invited to serve as an Adjunct Professor of Law at the United States Naval Academy.

Following in the footsteps of some of America’s finest intellects—from John Jay, to Joseph Story, to Antonin Scalia—Neil Gorsuch donned a black robe on April 7, 2017, joining eight other justices on a lifetime appointed bench to the nation’s highest Court.

The Supreme Court vacancy, after the passing of the late Justice Scalia in 2016, was a leading issue for voters in the presidential election last fall. Justice Gorsuch’s confirmation was a step in the right direction for American law due to his adherence to originalism in applying the Constitution. According to attorneys at First Liberty Institute, this philosophy is more likely to yield rulings favorable to religious liberty consistent with the First Amendment.

A federal judge suspends Trump’s unenforced ban on funding for sanctuary cities.

A showboating federal judge in San Francisco has issued an injunction against President Trump’s executive order cutting off federal funds from so-called sanctuary cities. The ruling distorts the E.O. beyond recognition, accusing the president of usurping legislative authority despite the order’s express adherence to “existing law.” Moreover, undeterred by the inconvenience that the order has not been enforced, the activist court — better to say, the fantasist court — dreams up harms that might befall San Francisco and Santa Clara, the sanctuary jurisdictions behind the suit, if it were enforced. The court thus flouts the standing doctrine, which limits judicial authority to actual controversies involving concrete, non-speculative harms.

Early this afternoon, Ann Coulter canceled her planned Thursday speech at the University of California, Berkeley. There can now be no doubt: A violent Left-wing mob dictates the rules at one of the nation’s (and the world’s) most prominent academic institutions.

Let’s be crystal clear about the government’s obligation here: It is to protect liberty. That’s why government exists in our constitutional republic, to guarantee the exercise of our unalienable rights, especially when it is threatened. Berkeley instead has chosen to systematically strip those rights from its students and hand ultimate power to the mob, justifying its cowardice through a disingenuous appeal to public safety.

The deprivation of individual rights is comprehensive, ominous, and intolerable.

First, Berkeley strips students of their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms so it can maintain and enforcing an allegedly gun-free campus. As a result, students are forced to depend entirely on campus and city police to secure their safety and liberty.

Critics of today's mass movements want you to think compensated organizers aren't sincere. But it's not true.

On April 15, thousands of protesters gathered around the country to call for President Trump to release his tax returns. Trump responded as he often does, by tweeting: “Someone Should look into who paid for the small organized rallies yesterday. The election is over!” Breitbart News picked up on the tweet and ran a rambling article that linked to its extensive coverage of how George Soros is (allegedly) singlehandedly funding the organizations and staffers leading the anti-Trump movement. Breitbart similarly claimed that an entirely different set of protesters agitating at the University of California at Berkeley in February were paid about $50,000; that same month, the National Review Online claimed that Dakota Access Pipeline protesters had been paid unspecified amounts for their time and trouble.

On May 1 (“May Day”), when people take to the streets to protest for workers’ rights, we can expect corporate and anti-immigrant interests to try to discredit the protests by claiming that some of the protesters are being paid by labor unions. But don’t buy it. Although critics would have us believe that payment and principles are incompatible, they aren’t — and the belief that they are is toxic.

Today’s big media news is cable sports “Worldwide Leader” ESPN laying off 100 people, many of them on-air talent and sportswriters. Early indications are that the layoffs come across the sports the network covers, but will fall hardest on the network’s hockey coverage, which may be all but eliminated. There’s both a business lesson and a political lesson here. Clay Travis at Outkick the Coverage has been all over this story for years, explaining the business problem — ESPN’s business model is disproportionately based on subscriber fees, and as more cable subscribers get the option to unbundle channels they don’t want, ESPN takes direct hits to its bottom line from its plummeting number of subscribers. Because ESPN’s broadcasting contracts are themselves the source of a huge amount of revenue for the sports leagues (especially the NBA), that means that sooner or later the economic losses to the channel will affect the bottom line of the athletes and team owners, too. We are probably a long way away from seeing the end of the implications of this for the business of sports.