This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Quotes displayed in real-time or delayed by at least 15 minutes. Powered and implemented by FactSet Digital Solutions. Mutual Fund and ETF data provided by LSEG. A person who identified himself as a "citizen reporter" repeatedly attempted to interrupt House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer's press conference on holding the Clintons in contempt of Congress. House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer's press conference devolved into chaos Wednesday morning when an apparent activist repeatedly interrupted and confronted the Kentucky Republican about his plans to initiate contempt of Congress proceedings against the Clintons. Comer addressed reporters after Hillary Clinton missed her scheduled deposition in the committee's Jeffrey Epstein probe. Minutes after he began talking, however, a man who identified himself as a "citizen reporter" started heckling him and the other Republicans present. I'm still talking," Comer snapped at the man when he first began interrupting his comments. Rep. James Comer talks to a person who was interrupting him as he spoke to reporters after former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did not appear for a closed-door deposition on Capitol Hill on Jan. 14, 2026, in Washington, D.C. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images) The man can be heard shouting, "Congressman, did you enter their sworn statements into the record?" You're not even a reporter," Comer said. A few minutes later, when announcing the committee would depose Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell, the man began again, prompting Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., to comment, "Hey, the Cartoon Network called, and they want you to take your job back." A Capitol Police officer stands between Rep. James Comer and a person who was interrupting him on Capitol Hill on Jan. 14, 2026. Comer called for security to come at one point as the protester appeared to shout he was "having a conversation." We'll be happy to answer questions throughout the day about this." But the chaos did not end there, as the man approached Comer when he began walking away. He walked close by Comer, even appearing to make physical contact at one point, which prompted Capitol Police officers to separate the man from the GOP lawmakers. The man appeared to be let off with a warning after police took a photograph of his identification. Elizabeth Elkind is a politics reporter for Fox News Digital leading coverage of the House of Representatives. Previous digital bylines seen at Daily Mail and CBS News. Follow on Twitter at @liz_elkind and send tips to elizabeth.elkind@fox.com Get the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews and more Fox News politics content. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Quotes displayed in real-time or delayed by at least 15 minutes. Powered and implemented by FactSet Digital Solutions. Mutual Fund and ETF data provided by

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters. At Vox, our mission is to help you make sense of the world — and that work has never been more vital. But we can't do it on our own. We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today? The government is recruiting ICE agents with (literal) neo-Nazi propaganda. Progressives have long argued that Donald Trump's immigration agenda is a fundamentally fascistic enterprise. In their telling, the president's goal is not merely to enforce America's borders but to purify its blood — and unleash state violence against anyone who resists his campaign of ethnic cleansing. Of course, there's nothing new about the left deriding Republicans as fascists (in 2008, Keith Olbermann advised George W. Bush, “get them to print you a T-shirt with ‘fascist' on it.”). Traditionally, however, GOP officials have sought to combat that charge. Yet in recent days, the Trump administration has gone out of its way to validate it — rallying to the defense of an ICE agent who shot an unarmed woman dead on video, while disseminating white nationalist propaganda from official government accounts. As communications strategies go, this one is a bit odd. Even if the Trump administration were indeed a fascist regime, it would have little political incentive to advertise its own extremism. But Trump's most radicalized followers on X and Truth Social are. Last week in Minneapolis, an ICE agent shot 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good to death. By now, you have probably witnessed her final moments; videos of the encounter quickly became ubiquitous on social media. In them, the masked agent — later identified as Jonathan Ross — steps in front of Good's car while another demands that she exit her vehicle. Good, an anti-ICE protester, responds by trying to drive away. The ICE officer proceeds to shoot at her three times — twice, when he is standing to the car's left and therefore faces no conceivable threat from her. The Trump administration could have responded to this by expressing concern or sorrow about Good's seemingly needless death. Instead, Trump rushed to Truth Social to condemn Good as “a professional agitator” who had “violently, willfully, and viciously ran over the ICE Officer, who seems to have shot her in self defense.” Vice President JD Vance and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, meanwhile, suggested the ICE agent had merely defended himself against an act of “domestic terrorism.” As an approach to political damage control, all this was bizarre. The administration had little basis for confidence that public opinion would be on the ICE agent's side; it doesn't take much imagination to picture the median American disapproving of a law enforcement officer shooting a young mother multiple times through her SUV's side window. And subsequent polling confirms that most Americans think such violence is actually bad: A YouGov survey taken over the weekend found Americans favoring criminal charges for Ross by a 53 percent to 30 percent margin. Instead, the administration opted to associate its immigration agenda with a Nazi slogan. This post is, on its face, evocative of white nationalism. To say that it has only “one heritage” is to suggest that only one of its ethnic groups is truly American. Under Trump, the official accounts of federal agencies have repeatedly referenced white nationalist memes and works. This was accompanied by a link where one could sign up to join ICE. Last August, DHS shared an ICE recruitment poster beneath the phrase, “Which way, American man?” — an apparent reference to the white supremacist tract, “Which Way, Western Man?” which argues that “Race consciousness, and discrimination on the basis of race, are absolutely essential to any race's survival. Meanwhile, last fall, Vance refused to condemn a group of Republican activists who had praised Hitler and disparaged Black people as “monkeys” in their private group chat. When Trump came to office, his plans for mass deportation enjoyed considerable public support. The administration could have tried to safeguard this mandate by insisting that ICE uphold high standards of conduct and pursue broadly supported objectives: to remove undocumented criminals from the country and establish a greater deterrent against unauthorized migration. Instead, it has chosen to defend ICE agents brutalizing — and, in one case, killing — US citizens while relentlessly winking at neo-Nazis from official government accounts. Public support for both ICE and Trump's immigration agenda has (predictably) declined as a result. The simplest explanation for the administration's actions is that it is full of authoritarian white nationalists, who see propagandizing for a more racially pure United States — and empowering ICE to brutalize its enemies — as sacred missions. Yet we know that the Trump administration is capable of strategic communication. Judging by the frequency and length of their posts, each spends a large share of their waking hours scrolling through X and Truth Social. Once brought together by such resentments, extremely online reactionaries are liable to radicalize each other. This is due in part to a phenomenon that social scientists call “group polarization”: When people who all broadly agree on a subject discuss it together, they tend to gravitate towards more and more extreme versions of their pre-existing position. Back then, researchers placed supporters of gun control in a room and had them deliberate on that issue. The subjects quickly became more passionate about restricting firearms. And the same basic pattern held for a wide range of other issues. Algorithmic social media promotes group polarization on an unprecedented scale. Anti-immigration conservatives are perpetually in conversation with each other, digesting an endless profusion of arguments and evidence that reinforces their nativist worldview. At the same time, social media rewards the expression of more extreme points of view — both because these attract greater attention and because they help to establish one's superlative commitment to the cause: If everyone in your online community supports mass deportation, then merely advocating for that policy will do little to draw notice or demonstrate your ideological purity. Violating taboos that constrain others' advocacy — such as norms against open racism, antisemitism, or apologetics for ICE brutality — however, are liable to gain one both attention and distinction. For these reasons, among others, the online right has grown increasingly militant in its nativism. It is impossible to know Trump or Vance's motivations with certainty. Likewise, it's difficult to see why Vance would stick his neck out for a racist Republican group chat if not to cultivate the esteem of his online community. Trans athletes always faced a difficult road in this Court. Why Trump is making a bid to control the US economy.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., speaks during a news conference at the Capitol, Tuesday, Jan. 13, 2026, in Washington. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., speaks with reporters at the Senate Subway on Capitol Hill, Thursday, Jan. 8, 2026, in Washington. WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Republicans are facing intense pressure from President Donald Trump to vote down a war powers resolution Wednesday that is aimed at limiting the president's ability to carry out further military action against Venezuela. Democrats are forcing the vote after U.S. troops captured Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro in a surprise nighttime raid earlier this month. “Here we have one of the most successful attacks ever and they find a way to be against it. He also hurled insults at several of the Republicans who advanced the legislation, calling Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky a “stone cold loser” and Sens. Trump's latest comments followed earlier phone calls with the senators, which they described as terse. The legislation, even if passed by the Senate, has virtually no chance of becoming law because it would eventually need to be signed by Trump himself. Sen. Josh Hawley, a Missouri Republican who helped advance the war powers resolution last week, has indicated he may change his position. Hawley said that Trump's message during a phone call last week was that the legislation “really ties my hands.” The senator said he had a follow-up phone call with Secretary of State Marco Rubio that was “really positive.” Hawley said that Rubio told him Monday “point blank, we're not going to do ground troops.” The senator said he also received assurances that the Trump administration will follow constitutional requirements if it becomes necessary to deploy troops again to the South American country. “I'm in listening-and-receive mode at this time,” said Hawley, adding, “I don't know how we're going to proceed next on the floor.” Collins had voted against similar war powers resolutions in previous months before voting last week to advance the one currently before the Senate. That likely left Sen. Todd Young, an Indiana Republican, with the crucial vote. Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine, who has brought a series of war powers resolutions this year, said he wasn't surprised at Trump's reaction to Congress asserting its ability to check the president. “But I think people who ran for the Senate, they want to be U.S. senators and they don't want to just vote their own irrelevance.” Ohio State University professor Peter Mansoor, a military historian and retired U.S. Army colonel with multiple combat tours, said that trend since World War II allows Congress to shirk responsibility for war and put all the risk on the president. In the post-Vietnam War era, lawmakers tried to take back some of their authority over wartime powers with the War Powers Resolution of 1973, which allows lawmakers to hold votes on measures that restrict a president from using military force in specific conflicts without congressional approval. “Politicians tend to like to evade responsibility for anything -- but then this gets you into forever wars,” Mansoor said, arguing that debate in Congress before formal declarations of war would force an agreement on clearer goals for military conflict. Trump has used a series of legal arguments for his campaign against Maduro. As he built up a naval force in the Caribbean and destroyed vessels that were allegedly carrying drugs from Venezuela, the Trump administration tapped wartime powers under the global war on terror by designating drug cartels as terrorist organizations. As he exited the classified briefing room at the Capitol, Paul said, “Legal arguments and constitutional arguments should all be public, and it's a terrible thing that any of this is being kept secret because the arguments aren't very good.” Lawmakers, including some Republicans, have been alarmed by Trump's recent foreign policy talk. In recent weeks, he has pledged that the U.S. will “run” Venezuela for years to come, threatened military action to take possession of Greenland and told Iranians protesting their government that “ help is on its way.” He's concerned about the protesters in Iran, but not concerned about the damage that ICE is doing to the protesters and Americans in Minnesota and other places,” said Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, referring to the fatal shooting of a woman in Minnesota by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer. In a floor speech Wednesday morning, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., vented his displeasure at the measure as he questioned whether this war powers resolution should be prioritized under the chamber's rules. “But Democrats are taking up this bill because their anti-Trump hysteria knows no bounds.” Schumer said he hoped at least the five Republicans would hold to their position because they “understand how important this is.”

This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Quotes displayed in real-time or delayed by at least 15 minutes. Powered and implemented by FactSet Digital Solutions. Mutual Fund and ETF data provided by LSEG. Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey joins 'Fox & Friends' to address his lawsuit aiming to block ICE operations, his criticisms of immigration enforcement agents in the city and allegations of fraud in his state. The federal agent who fatally shot Renee Nicole Good in Minneapolis last week suffered internal bleeding to his torso when he was struck by her vehicle, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin confirmed to Fox News on Wednesday. The extent of the bleeding to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent Jonathan Ross was not immediately clear. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem had previously said the agent was treated at a hospital following the incident on Jan. 7 before being released later that same day. Members of law enforcement work the scene following the fatal shooting of 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good by an ICE agent during federal operations on Jan. 7, 2026, in Minneapolis, Minnesota. "The ICE agent walked away with a hip injury that he might as well have gotten from closing a refrigerator door with his hips," he told reporters Friday. He walked out of there with a hop in his step." Renee Nicole Good moments before she was shot and killed by a federal agent in Minneapolis. Federal officials have said that when Good pulled forward in her vehicle toward the ICE officer, he acted in self-defense and described the driver's actions as "an act of domestic terrorism." Authorities have also said that Good had been following and harassing federal officers earlier that day. Democrats and some local residents, however, have condemned the shooting as a murder and called for Ross' prosecution. Renee Nicole Good's Honda Pilot is seen at the scene where it drove onto a curb after the fatal shooting on Jan. 7, 2025, in Minneapolis. This is a developing news story; check back for updates. Fox News' Jamie Vera contributed to this report. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Quotes displayed in real-time or delayed by at least 15 minutes. Powered and implemented by FactSet Digital Solutions. Mutual Fund and ETF data provided by

SpaceX has not officially announced the decision and did not respond to a request for comment, but activists told The Associated Press that Starlink has been available for free to anyone in Iran with the receivers since Tuesday. “Starlink has been crucial,” said Mehdi Yahyanejad, an Iranian whose nonprofit Net Freedom Pioneers has helped smuggle units into Iran, pointing to video that emerged Sunday showing rows of bodies at a forensic medical center near Tehran. “That showed a few hundred bodies on the ground, that came out because of Starlink,” he said in an interview from Los Angeles. “I think that those videos from the center pretty much changed everyone's understanding of what's happening because they saw it with their own eyes.” Activists fear they could be accused of helping the U.S. or Israel by using Starlink and charged with espionage, which can carry the death penalty. Since then, more than 50,000 units are estimated to have been sneaked in, with people going to great lengths to conceal them, using virtual private networks while on the system to hide IP addresses and taking other precautions, said Ahmad Ahmadian, the executive director of Holistic Resilience, a Los Angeles-based organization that was responsible for getting some of the first Starlink units into Iran. Starlink is a global internet network that relies on some 10,000 satellites orbiting Earth. Subscribers need to have equipment, including an antenna that requires a line of sight to the satellite, so must be deployed in the open, where it could be spotted by authorities. Many Iranians disguise them as solar panels, Ahmadian said. After efforts to shut down communications during the 12-day war with Israel in June proved to be not terribly effective, Iranian security services have taken more “extreme tactics” now to jam Starlink's radio signals and GPS systems, Ahmadian said in a phone interview. Security services also rely on informers to tell them who might be using Starlink, and search internet and social media traffic for signs it has been used. “The government is using every tool in its toolbox.” Still, Ahmadian noted that the government jamming attempts had only been effective in certain urban areas, suggesting that security services lack the resources to block Starlink more broadly. Iran did begin to allow people to call out internationally on Tuesday via mobile phones, but calls from outside the country into Iran remain blocked. “This time around they really shut it down, even fixed landlines were not working,” he said. “But despite this, the information was coming out, and it also shows how distributed this community of Starlink users is in the country.” Musk has made Starlink free for use during several natural disasters, and Ukraine has relied heavily on the service since Russia's full-scale invasion in 2022. It was initially funded by SpaceX and later through an American government contract. Musk had raised concerns over the power of such a system being in the hands of one person, after he refused to extend Ukraine's Starlink coverage to support a planned Ukrainian counterattack in Russian-occupied Crimea. As a proponent of Starlink for Iran, Ahmadian said the Crimea decision was a wake-up call for him, but that he couldn't see any reason why Musk might be inclined to act similarly in Iran. “Looking at the political Elon, I think he would have more interest ... in a free Iran as a new market,” he said. Julia Voo, who heads the International Institute for Strategic Studies' Cyber Power and Future Conflict Program in Singapore, said there is a risk in becoming reliant on one company as a lifeline, as it “creates a single point of failure,” though currently there are no comparable alternatives. China has been exploring ways to hunt and destroy Starlink satellites, and Voo said the more effective Starlink proves itself at penetrating “government-mandated terrestrial blackouts, the more states will be observing.” “It's just going to result in more efforts to broaden controls over various ways of communication, for those in Iran and everywhere else watching,” she said.

The meeting comes after President Donald Trump said this morning that “anything less” than US control of Greenland is “unacceptable.” The measure advanced last week with five GOP votes, but the Trump administration has launched a pressure campaign to try to flip some of those senators. • DOJ probe into Fed chair: White House officials are heaping blame on DC US Attorney Jeanine Pirro over her office's criminal investigation into Fed Chair Jerome Powell, sources tell CNN. Trump said yesterday he hopes Powell will “be out of there soon.” Republican Sen. Josh Hawley said Wednesday he'll vote to block a resolution to rein in President Donald Trump's war powers in Venezuela without congressional approval — flipping his position after heavy lobbying from the White House, including Trump himself. Hawley was one of five GOP senators who voted with Democrats to advance the resolution. The next steps aren't yet clear: Senate GOP leaders are still attempting to flip another Republican to help kill the measure before it comes up for a final vote, which was expected Wednesday. Sen. Todd Young could be the pivotal vote, but he has not projected his plans. Specifically, Hawley said, Rubio explained that the US currently has no ground troops in Venezuela, and that if the administration sought to put ground troops, it would abide by the War Powers Act and first seek congressional authorization. He added Rubio told him directly the administration would not put ground troops into Venezuela. CNN International Diplomatic Editor Nic Robertson shares what Greenlanders are saying as President Donald Trump demands to take over the country the “easy way” or “hard way.” Senate Majority Leader John Thune said he is “uncertain” if efforts by GOP leaders and the White House have persuaded at least two Republican senators to change their positions on a War Powers resolution related to Venezuela that faces a key vote Wednesday. Thune said it's clear to him there are no active military actions taking place in the country and he believes the War Powers Act, which enjoys special legislative privileges for consideration, should not be applicable because there aren't any boots on the ground. Republican leaders are considering tabling the measure entirely before formal debate begins, something they can only do if at least two of the five Republicans who voted with Democrats on an initial procedural vote change their positions. Kaine said he made clear the motion wasn't in opposition to the US operation to oust then-Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, adding later: “There may be some need in Venezuela, but all we're saying is, if we need to put our sons and daughters into military action against or within Venezuela, it ought to be approved by Congress, and not just by the president.” Trump in recent days has waged a public and private pressure campaign seeking to flip the five Republican votes. “Why would the president decide he wanted to treat Republican senators badly for just voting that we shouldn't send our sons and daughters into war without a vote of Congress?” Kaine said of Trump's public attacks. That's why everything so far has been classified, because a public debate starts to get into questions like the legal rationale and some of the other decisions that the White House would prefer to keep hidden,” he added. Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen and his Greenlandic counterpart Vivian Motzfeldt arrived at the White House moments ago, ahead of their meeting with Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. The government of Greenland and Denmark's defense ministry announced there would be an increased military presence in and around Greenland starting today, citing “security tensions.” It comes as Vice President JD Vance is set to host a meeting today with the Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen and his Greenlandic counterpart Vivian Motzfeldt, alongside Secretary of State Marco Rubio, as President Donald Trump continues to voice his desire to take over the self-governing territory. Expanded exercise activities in Greenland could include guarding critical infrastructure, providing assistance to Greenlandic authorities, including the police, receiving allied troops, deploying fighter aircraft in and around Greenland, and naval operations, the Danish defense ministry said in a statement. The Senate is expected to take another procedural vote today on a war powers resolution, which would rein in President Donald Trump from further actions in Venezuela without Congress' approval. The measure advanced last week with five Republican votes, but Trump and his administration have launched an intense pressure campaign to try and flip some of the senators. Meanwhile, House Foreign Affairs Committee Democrats, led by ranking member Rep. Gregory Meeks, are holding a special meeting on Venezuela this morning. Amid the controversial criminal investigation into Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, President Donald Trump in remarks to the Detroit Economic Club yesterday again called for interest rates to be lowered. President Donald Trump said this morning that “anything less” than US control of Greenland is “unacceptable,” arguing the United States needs the territory for national security purposes, which could in turn strengthen NATO. “NATO becomes far more formidable and effective with Greenland in the hands of the UNITED STATES,” Trump wrote in an early morning Truth Social post. Trump reiterated his assertion that acquisition of Greenland is essential for the US national security and “vital for the Golden Dome that we are building.” He also argued that NATO leaders should be pushing for the United States to have Greenland. “NATO should be leading the way for us to get it. IF WE DON'T, RUSSIA OR CHINA WILL, AND THAT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN! Militarily, without the vast power of the United States, much of which I built during my first term, and am now bringing to a new and even higher level, NATO would not be an effective force or deterrent - Not even close! They know that, and so do I,” Trump wrote in the post. Yesterday, Trump dismissed comments from Greenland's Premier Jens-Frederik Nielsen, who said at a news conference in Copenhagen that “Greenland does not want to be owned by the USA. Greenland does not want to be governed by the USA. President Donald Trump yesterday teased a series of affordability initiatives set to be rolled out in the coming weeks, including a health care framework and new housing policies. “Later this week, I'll announce our health care affordability framework that will reduce premiums for millions of lower drug prices, delivering price transparency and demand honesty and accountability from insurance companies all over the country, all over the world,” Trump said in remarks to the Detroit Economic Club. Aside from the economy, prices and taxes, Trump went off-script on various other topics during his speech, including elections, immigration and foreign affairs, often abandoning his teleprompter to do so and making numerous false claims along the way. Foreign affairs: Trump mentioned the operation to take Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro into custody, calling it “as flawless an attack as there has ever been.” He also nodded to his decision to strike Iranian nuclear facilities in June, suggesting without the attack “you wouldn't have peace in the Middle East.” Vice President JD Vance is set to host a meeting today with the Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen and his Greenlandic counterpart Vivian Motzfeldt, alongside Secretary of State Marco Rubio, as President Donald Trump seeks to take over Greenland. Speaking to reporters in Copenhagen yesterday, Løkke said the meeting was requested by Denmark and Greenland. “Our reason for seeking the meeting we have now been given was to move this whole discussion, which has not become less tense since we last met, into a meeting room where we can look each other in the eye and talk about these things,” Løkke added

The high court ruled 7-2 in favor of Rep. Michael Bost (R-IL), deciding that Bost has proper standing, as a federal candidate for office, to sue Illinois over its late-arriving mail ballot law. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion, which was joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh. “Under Article III of the Constitution, plaintiffs must have a ‘personal stake' in a case to have standing to sue,” Roberts wrote. “Congressman Bost has an obvious answer: He is a candidate for office. The majority ruling found that candidates do not need to prove they are in danger of losing an election in order to file a lawsuit, finding that “winning, and doing so as inexpensively and decisively as possible, are not a candidate's only interests in an election.” “To the representative, that loss of legitimacy—or its diminution—is a concrete harm ‘[R]eputational harms,' as a general matter, are classic Article III injuries,” Roberts added. “I cannot join the Court's creation of a bespoke standing rule for candidates. We have always held candidates to the same standards as any other litigant…And we have repeatedly rejected requests to create special standing rules for particular litigants,” Barrett wrote. Barrett said she instead found that Bost's reasoning that the law caused his campaign to spend more money was sufficient for a “traditional pocketbook injury.” Jackson's dissent said the majority opinion “subtly shifts from our longstanding actual-injury rule to a presumption that certain kinds of plaintiffs are sufficiently aggrieved to satisfy Article III standing, regardless of whether they will experience any particularized harm.” But I am against doing so selectively; either Article III standing requires an actual or imminent injury in fact that is particularized to the plaintiff, or it does not. Bost has plainly failed to allege facts that support an inference of standing under our established precedents,” Jackson wrote. “By carving out a bespoke rule for candidate-plaintiffs—granting them standing ‘to challenge the rules that govern the counting of votes,' simply and solely because they are ‘candidate[s]' for office—the Court now complicates and destabilizes both our standing law and America's electoral processes,” Jackson added in her dissent. The ruling focused on a lawsuit that Bost and other GOP candidates brought against Illinois over its late-arriving mail ballot law. Bost said while he “won this initial battle…the fight for election integrity continues.” Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group that supported Bost, said Wednesday's ruling marked a “huge win for election integrity.” The Supreme Court's ruling in Bost v. Illinois Board of Elections is expected to open the floodgates for candidates' lawsuits against state election procedures, establishing clear standing for those candidates prior to the time immediately before Election Day. The high court is set to hear arguments in Watson v. Republican National Committee, a case challenging Mississippi's late-arriving mail ballot law, later this term.

This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Quotes displayed in real-time or delayed by at least 15 minutes. Powered and implemented by FactSet Digital Solutions. Mutual Fund and ETF data provided by LSEG. Drew Horn, CEO of GreenMet, discusses President Trump's warning to Greenland leaders, U.S. security guarantees, NATO's role and why Arctic investment and critical minerals are now a geopolitical flashpoint. A new poll found that only one in five American adults approve of the Trump administration's efforts to acquire Greenland. Just 17% of those surveyed in the Reuters/Ipsos poll conducted this week said they were in favor of U.S. actions to take over the Danish territory. Both sides were in closer agreement in their opposition to using U.S. military force to seize Greenland. Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House for comment. People walk in downtown Nuuk, Greenland, on Tuesday, Jan. 13, 2026. On the right is President Donald Trump. The Reuters/Ipsos poll also found that 66% of American adults believe U.S. efforts to acquire Greenland could hurt relations with NATO and European countries. President Donald Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social on Wednesday that, "The United States needs Greenland for the purpose of National Security." "It is vital for the Golden Dome that we are building. NATO should be leading the way for us to get it," Trump continued. "NATO becomes far more formidable and effective with Greenland in the hands of the UNITED STATES," he added. Danish Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen and Greenlandic Foreign Minister Vivian Motzfeldt are meeting Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Vice President JD Vance at the White House on Wednesday morning. Danish troops practice looking for potential threats during a military drill in Kangerlussuaq, Greenland, on Sept. 17, 2025. On Tuesday, Greenland's prime minister declared that, "we choose Denmark," if it had to decide between remaining a Danish territory or becoming part of the United States. Greg Norman is a reporter at Fox News Digital. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Quotes displayed in real-time or delayed by at least 15 minutes. Powered and implemented by FactSet Digital Solutions. Mutual Fund and ETF data provided by

This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Quotes displayed in real-time or delayed by at least 15 minutes. Powered and implemented by FactSet Digital Solutions. Mutual Fund and ETF data provided by LSEG. Chris Wright joins 'Fox & Friends' ahead of President Donald Trump's meeting with oil executives to discuss the administration's approach to Venezuela's oil. Legendary pro golfer Greg Norman on Wednesday praised President Donald Trump for the U.S. action in Venezuela that led to the capture of Nicolás Maduro and his wife. Greg Norman before the final round of LIV Golf Miami tournament at Trump National Doral on Aug. 7, 2024. "He's true to his word," Norman said. "And I said this during his first term, I've known quite a few presidents but he's the first president I've spent time with that has true stars and stripes flowing through his blood. "So, what he did in Venezuela, I applaud it. Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro greets his supporters during a rally in Caracas on Dec. 1, 2025. Trump announced on Jan. 3 that U.S. special forces conducted a "large-scale strike" against Caracas, and seized Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores. Both were taken to New York and appeared in a Manhattan federal court Jan. 5 on drug charges, where they each pleaded not guilty. The raid came after months of pressure on Venezuela and more than two dozen strikes in Latin American waters against alleged drug traffickers as part of Trump's effort to crack down on the influx of drugs into the U.S. The Trump administration routinely stated that it did not recognize Maduro as a legitimate head of state and said he was the leader of a drug cartel. Likewise, Trump said in December 2025 he believed it would be "smart" for Maduro to step down. The Trump administration has justified seizing Maduro as a "law enforcement" operation, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio said congressional approval wasn't necessary since the operation didn't amount to an "invasion." Fox News' Diana Stancy contributed to this report. Follow Fox News Digital's sports coverage on X and subscribe to the Fox News Sports Huddle newsletter. Ryan Gaydos is a senior editor for Fox News Digital. Get all the stories you need-to-know from the most powerful name in news delivered first thing every morning to your inbox. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Quotes displayed in real-time or delayed by at least 15 minutes.

Philadelphia officials continue to thrust their city into the spotlight regarding the Trump administration's illegal immigration efforts, including actions taken by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Much of it seems to center on two well-known left-wing ideological figures in Philadelphia: the city's district attorney, Larry Krasner, and now, Philadelphia Sheriff Rochelle Bilal. Bilal came under scrutiny due to recent comments she made at a press conference in which she disparaged ICE officers and criticized them over the controversy involving the death of Renee Good. Bilal described ICE as “fake, wannabe law enforcement.” Shortly after, Bilal added to the controversy by calling a black Republican congressman a racial slur. In a social media video post last week, Bilal called Rep. Wesley Hunt (R-TX) a “handkerchief head negro.” Bilal's comments came, once again, regarding the Good incident and were in response to Hunt calling for respecting law enforcement. Like much of what Bilal says, and has said, her comments made little, if any, sense. They were just the hateful, bigoted, mindless rants of an agenda-driven and incompetent city bureaucrat in Philadelphia. And this description is in addition to her earlier pointless comments regarding the death of Good, who was killed while impeding ICE officers in a city over 1,000 miles away from Philadelphia. Adding in her bigotry, prejudice, and radically toxic political agenda, Bilal represents the worst of every bureaucrat in the City of Brotherly Love. Moreover, Bilal would be wise to follow the adage, “those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.” For as Bilal rambled on about “made-up law enforcement” and called Trump a criminal and a black Republican congressman a racial slur, she has a history of being the very thing she claimed to object to, dismiss, and oppose. Her background is rife with lawsuits, controversies, incompetence, and questionable ethics. “In a city where incompetence and corruption are taken for granted, Philadelphia Sheriff Rochelle Bilal's tenure stands out as particularly inept,” said Sonny Mazzone, a Republican political strategist in Philadelphia. Her words arguably reeked of someone desperately trying to plead for attention on the national level. Her criticisms of ICE and comments about Good were irresponsible. He added that her rhetoric is damaging and endangers not only law enforcement but also innocent civilians. “Despite such an abysmal record, Bilal's endorsement of Renee Good fleeing from ICE agents, an action that led to Good's death, is the most irresponsible act of her tenure,” Mazzone said. “Her actions do not only endorse illegality but encourage behavior that puts law enforcement and civilians at risk.” Moreover, the fact that Bilal holds such a position of power speaks volumes about the shortcomings of Philadelphia, and arguably its voters. Her words were so toxic that, while the left-wing propaganda network promoted Bilal's speech, long and far, the city's police commissioner rebuked her comments, having to “clear up some confusion about law enforcement authority in the City of Philadelphia,” in a statement of his own. “Philadelphia Police Department offices have been inundated with calls and emails from across the country and around the world, which makes it necessary to clear up some confusion about law enforcement authority in the City of Philadelphia,” Bethel stated. Furthermore, in an embarrassing rebuke of Bilal's incompetence, Bethel asserted that the Philadelphia Police Department would continue to work with all law enforcement “partners.” Bethel's response was yet another example of the needlessness of Bilal's commentary. “​​Although Bilal is not particularly competent or intelligent, her rise through the viper pit that is the Philadelphia Democrat machine requires a level of political cunning and guile,” Mazzone said.

President Donald Trump, right, meets with Emir of Qatar Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani aboard Air Force One at Al Udeid Air Base in Doha, Qatar, Saturday, Oct. 25, 2025. U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth speaks at the Al Udeid Air Base, May 15, 2025, in Doha, Qatar. WASHINGTON (AP) — Some personnel at a key U.S. military base in Qatar were advised to evacuate by Wednesday evening, according to a U.S. official and the Gulf country, as President Donald Trump has warned of possible action after a deadly crackdown on protesters in Iran. The decision came as a senior official in Tehran brought up the country's retaliatory attack in June at Al Udeid Air Base outside Doha, Qatar. The official, citing the need for operational security, would not go into further detail, including whether the evacuation was optional or mandatory, whether it affected troops or civilian personnel, or how many people were advised to leave. The anti-government demonstrations in nearby Iran began in late December, and Trump has said he is willing to conduct military operations against Iran if the Tehran government continues to kill and arrest protesters. Trump said Tuesday that he believes the killing is “significant ” and that his administration would “act accordingly.” He has noted that he was cutting off the prospect of talks with Iranian officials and told Iranian citizens that “help is on its way,” without giving more details. “The State of Qatar continues to implement all necessary measures to safeguard the security and safety of its citizens and residents as a top priority, including actions related to the protection of critical infrastructure and military facilities,” Qatar's international media office said on the social platform X. The base, which hosts thousands of American service members, was targeted by Iran in June in retaliation for U.S. strikes on its nuclear facilities. Ali Shamkhani, an adviser to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, wrote on X that “the #US President, who repeatedly talks about the futile aggression against #Iran's nuclear facilities, would do well to also mention the destruction of the US base in #Al-Udeid by Iranian missiles.” “It would certainly help create a real understanding of Iran's will and ability to respond to any aggression,” he added. The Navy had five small ships — two destroyers and three littoral combat ships — in the waters off Iran as of Tuesday. Ali Larijani, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, had a phone call Tuesday with Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, Qatar's prime minister. In a statement on X, Al Thani said he “reaffirmed the State of Qatar's backing of all de-escalation efforts, as well as peaceful solutions to enhance security and stability in the region.” Iran's decision in June to retaliate against U.S. strikes by targeting the sprawling desert base created a rare tension between the two maritime neighbors, with Qatari officials saying it caught them by surprise. A Qatari military officer said one of 19 missiles fired by Iran was not intercepted and hit the base, but Trump said in a social media post at the time that “hardly any damage was done.” The State Department had no immediate comment on the potential for any security alerts to be issued for American diplomats or other civilians in Qatar. In June, the embassy had issued a brief shelter-in-place advisory to U.S. citizens in Doha but stopped short of evacuating diplomats or advising Americans to leave the country.

Burned cars and propane tanks with markings on them sit outside a house destroyed by wildfire, Friday, Dec. 8, 2023, in Lahaina, Hawaii. Nearly 1,000 households displaced by catastrophic wildfires on the Hawaiian island of Maui are anxiously awaiting word on whether federal assistance helping them stay housed will be left to expire, forcing them to find new housing or pay more for it in one of the tightest and most expensive rental environments in the country. For 2 1/2 years, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has been key to assisting those residents. Advocates say evicting renters and taking away financial assistance will undermine progress toward bringing residents back to Lahaina, the West Maui town that was largely razed by a massive fire on Aug. 8, 2023, and could lead to a new wave of homelessness and more departures from the island. “All of them entering into our already impacted rental market in February scares me a lot,” said Nicole Huguenin, executive director and co-founder of the mutual aid organization Maui Rapid Response. Then-President Joe Biden declared a major disaster, unlocking FEMA assistance to help 12,000 displaced people, 89% of whom were renters at the time of the fires. His administration eventually extended the 18-month program until February 2026. But with few homes rebuilt and rental inventory nearing zero, the state requested another extension in May with a decision due before the end of January. President Donald Trump has frequently floated the idea of eliminating the agency, saying he wants states to take on more responsibility handling disasters. While it's not clear whether that change in approach will influence the decision on the housing assistance, it is weighing on residents. “It falls into the hands of the current administration and I'm not sure if they're fond of the amount of money we've had to use,” said Kukui Keahi, a Lahaina fire survivor who rents an apartment through FEMA after living in her car and couch-surfing after the fire. If the program expires, all housing-related financial assistance to fire survivors would cease and any units being leased directly through FEMA must be vacated, according to an agency notice. The request is “currently under review,” according to FEMA spokesperson Daniel Llargues. Maui County spokesperson Laksmi Abraham said the county is “working with the state and FEMA toward an extension and is optimistic” it will be granted. While megafires in other states have destroyed more homes, Maui's fires created a unique crisis. After working with the Red Cross to house 8,000 residents in hotels and other temporary shelters in the initial weeks, FEMA slowly transitioned families to other forms of housing assistance. It offered money for rent, installed temporary shelters on burned properties, and leased thousands of units itself to rent back to survivors, though some complained of burdensome eligibility requirements and having to move several times. If rental assistance ends, the roughly 190 households living in modular units, 470 in the direct lease program and 280 relying on financial assistance will be thrust into an already stressed housing market that has seen little improvement since the fires. Maui's rental vacancy rate is under 2% and as of mid-2025 there were zero available units priced at or below what the federal government deems fair market rent, according to the Hawaii Emergency Management Agency, or HIEMA. Two- and three-bedroom units still cost nearly double what they did before the fires. Critics have partially blamed those increases on FEMA's own housing programs, which often leased properties for well above fair-market prices to incentivize landlord participation, though the island's housing shortage predated the fires. “My goal is to (pay) what I was before and I can't, there's no way,” said Keahi, the displaced resident who is also program deputy at the Hawaiian Council, a nonprofit administering multiple recovery initiatives on Maui. The slow recovery of Maui's tourism-dependent economy is also limiting what tenants can afford. To confront the supply challenges, the county passed a bill last month banning short-term rentals in apartment-zoned properties beginning in 2029, despite strong opposition from some concerned about the impact to tourism and jobs. Rebuilding is also gaining momentum, with 109 residential construction projects completed and about 300 in process. Barros said if an extension is granted, FEMA could impose some new “milestones” for the state to meet to speed along its recovery. FEMA has taken on prolonged housing assistance missions in the past, for both large disasters like Hurricane Katrina and smaller events, depending on the needs. Extensions are typically based on factors like unit availability and the number of households in need, as well as progress made by both households and local governments to find alternative solutions. The county and state have been working on contingency plans “for months” if FEMA assistance ended, including possibly taking over Kilohana, Barros said. Next door to Kilohana is Ka La'i Ola, another community of 450 modular units created through a state-philanthropic partnership. Kimo Carvalho, CEO of the housing nonprofit Home Aid Hawaii which manages Ka La'i Ola, said a Kilohana resident recently called saying his housing might expire and asking if he could apply to Ka La'i Ola.

President Donald Trump said Wednesday that “anything less” than US control of Greenland is “unacceptable,” arguing the United States needs the territory for national security purposes, which could in turn strengthen NATO. “NATO becomes far more formidable and effective with Greenland in the hands of the UNITED STATES,” Trump wrote in an early morning Truth Social post. In the earlier social media post, Trump reiterated his assertion that acquiring Greenland, which is a self-governing territory of Denmark, is essential for US national security. He also argued that NATO leaders should be pushing for the United States to have Greenland. “NATO should be leading the way for us to get it. IF WE DON'T, RUSSIA OR CHINA WILL, AND THAT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN! Militarily, without the vast power of the United States, much of which I built during my first term, and am now bringing to a new and even higher level, NATO would not be an effective force or deterrent - Not even close! They know that, and so do I,” Trump wrote in the post. This may be the real reason Trump wants Greenland On Tuesday, Trump dismissed comments from Greenland's Premier Jens-Frederik Nielsen, who said at a news conference in Copenhagen: “Greenland does not want to be owned by the USA. Greenland does not want to be governed by the USA. Several factors, accentuated by the climate crisis, make Greenland an important strategic region, such as its geopolitical position, its rich natural resources (including oil, gas and rare earth minerals) and the potential northern shipping routes around it. While Trump has downplayed the significance of Greenland's natural resources, Mike Waltz highlighted last year when he was Trump's incoming national security adviser that the administration's focus on the territory was also “about critical minerals” and “natural resources.” As Trump continues threatening to take Greenland, the government of Greenland and Denmark's Ministry of Defense announced there would be an increased military presence in and around the territory starting Wednesday due to “security tensions.” It added that the expanded exercise activities could include guarding critical infrastructure, providing assistance to Greenlandic authorities – including police – receiving allied troops, deploying fighter aircraft in and around Greenland, and naval operations. Sweden has also sent an unspecified number of troops to Greenland, following Denmark's request to do so, Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson announced on X. European leaders have rejected Trump's calls to control Greenland. French President Emmanuel Macron warned Wednesday that the knock-on effects of the US trying to seize Greenland from Denmark would be “unprecedented.” If the sovereignty of a European and allied country were to be affected, the knock-on consequences would be unprecedented,” Macron said, according to his government's spokesperson. He added that France is monitoring the situation and “will conduct its actions in full solidarity with Denmark and its sovereignty.” “For me, it is important Greenlanders know … that we respect (their) wishes and they, they can count on us,” she added. He stopped short of saying he would pull the US out of NATO, adding, “maybe they would be upset” if he took Greenland but expressing indifference about the effects of such a move: “If it affects NATO, then it affects NATO.” Pressed by CNN on Sunday whether he would increase the amount of US military bases on Greenland in the meantime, Trump said, “We could put a lot of soldiers there right now if I want, but you need more than that.

“I don't know whether or not we should get into telling who can buy single-family or multi-family housing, you know?” Cleaver said. Last week, President Donald Trump announced that his administration will release a plan to ban institutional investors from buying single-family homes. Cleaver, a longtime legislator involved in housing on Capitol Hill, said he appreciated that the White House is examining solutions to problems with housing affordability, but didn't think such a policy change would have a significant effect. “The problem of the lack of sufficient, affordable, and decent housing is not necessarily being impacted by corporate entities,” Cleaver said. Cleaver pointed out that corporations currently own a very low share of the country's housing stock. “I'm glad that the president said that, because now I have at least some hope that the interest of the White House is similar to the interests of those of us who would like to see an expansion of available, decent, affordable housing,” Cleaver said. Proponents of banning firms like Blackstone from buying single-family homes, many of whom are on the Left and populist Right, argue that those investors are crowding out the market for homebuyers. For instance, the End Hedge Fund Control of American Homes Act, which was cosponsored by a number of House Democrats, would have imposed an excise tax on hedge funds that own a number of single-family homes over a specified amount. “Anything that Trump puts out, I have to double-check and triple-check because he and I don't share the same values,” he said. “On one hand, it sounds like something that I might be supportive of, but I'm always looking for the hook or the catch with him.” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) told the Washington Examiner that the Trump proposal “kind of feels like a stunt” because there hasn't yet been a legislative plan that has been released. “Also, beyond institutional investors, we don't have enough homes, and if we don't solve for the many problems that are preventing us from expanding our housing supply, then we're not lowering the price of homes for anybody,” she said. Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) is one Democrat who seemed intrigued by Trump's latest push. “I think, overall, that's a positive development,” Fetterman told the Washington Examiner last week. Details of the White House plan are still forthcoming. “We're not going to have a forced sale here.”

Kristan Hawkins is not what you might call a unifying figure. The founder and leader of Students for Life of America, a grassroots anti-abortion network, Hawkins travels to college campuses for Charlie Kirk-style debates about abortion and birth control. “Talking with students, (both) pro-life and pro-choice … when I talk about contraception, it's probably one of the easiest things I can get agreement on in an audience,” Hawkins said. “Even the women who have probably come to protest me.” CNN spoke to more than two dozen women, doctors and experts from different parts of the country who say that for a growing number, the answer is no. Other options include condom use, nonhormonal devices and surgical interventions. These methods are primarily used to prevent unwanted pregnancies, but hormonal contraceptives have also been prescribed to help with gynecological conditions, and the pill, in particular, for skin care issues. The pill has also been credited with helping drive teen pregnancy rates to historic lows. Yet whether it's conservatives who have traditionally opposed birth control for religious reasons or left-leaning women who are questioning medical orthodoxies, skepticism over hormonal birth control is becoming a shared talking point among some women, especially in online forums focused on health and wellness. Many hormonal birth control detractors argue that the divide in attitudes tends to be more generational rather than ideological. Almost 1 in 4 (22%) women ages 18 to 25 said in a 2024 KFF survey that they were using menstrual tracking to prevent pregnancy, which the health policy nonprofit said could reflect growing interest in nonhormonal methods that are discussed extensively on social media outlets targeting young people. After Kennedy married MAHA's priorities to Trump's “Make America Great Again” movement in his second term, the administration has made some dramatic moves that have alarmed health professionals, including changing vaccine schedules and amplifying an unproven link between autism and pregnant women's use of Tylenol. Now, skepticism of the pharmaceutical industry has also accelerated debates around hormonal contraception. Some hormonal birth control can be prescribed to help prevent ovarian cysts. Most side effects are mild and temporary, fading “within two to three months as the body adjusts,” said Dr. Mariam Gomaa, a board-certified obstetrician and gynecologist affiliated with Johns Hopkins University. On popular podcasts, some MAHA influencers have suggested that birth control can affect future fertility, a false theory universally rejected by the scientific community but seizing on an anxiety among young women. (The scientific consensus is that hormonal contraception does not have a long-term effect on fertility and can actually assist with fertility care, according to the American Society of Reproductive Medicine.) At the same time, there is a political conversation that has been placing greater emphasis on conversations about fertility, starting families and having more “Trump babies.” “The most feminist thing you can do for yourself is not take birth control.” Health professionals who spoke to CNN warn that a proliferation of misinformation and unfounded theories about the harmful effects of hormonal contraceptives appear to be a major factor fueling those concerns. “It can lead patients to be dissuaded from seeking treatment for things like (polycystic ovary syndrome) or endometriosis, a lot of which we use hormonal contraceptives for.” Alex Clark, a popular podcaster with the conservative media company Turning Point USA, said she began learning about hormonal birth control through documentaries and books that discussed the possible side effects, such as Dr. Sarah Hill's “This Is Your Brain on Birth Control,” which gives a nuanced assessment of its risks and benefits. By 2022, Clark had Dr. Leah Gordon, a self-described natural fertility doctor and “IVF mama,” on her podcast to talk about whether methods like intrauterine devices factored into infertility issues. At the time, Clark — who now helms “Cultural Apothecary,” a pop culture podcast focused on health and wellness with a MAHA perspective — said she was seeing only “feminist, liberal women who were raising concerns” about how these could negatively affect women's bodies. She has publicly railed against the wide use of birth control pills, arguing that millennial women were casually prescribed the medications as a “one-size-fits-all Band-Aid” to address everything from period cramps to acne, with little discussion about side effects. Stephanie Bocek, a mother of two, echoed that sentiment when speaking to CNN from her farm in rural Virginia, where she stocks her kitchen with unpasteurized milk, raises chickens and guinea fowl and tends to her 3,000-square-foot vegetable garden on a typical day. “I was at the Naval Academy, and I was prescribed birth control as a solution for like women's health issues to manage things, you know, just like PMS symptoms in regular periods,” she recalled, saying she then developed side effects like a loss of her usual sense of optimism. It was only recently, Bocek added, that through her own research, she connected the dots to taking birth control pills and came to regret her decision. Some women, like Bocek, say their doctors rarely discuss the side effects of hormonal birth control, even as they are quick to prescribe it. Numerous studies over the years have confirmed that doctors often dismiss women's medical concerns, leading to avoidable misdiagnoses and mistrust. Brittany Hugoboom, founder of the conservative women's publication Evie — which has published numerous articles critical of hormonal birth control — and a menstrual cycle tracking app called 28, says she started to notice an uptick in women turning away from hormonal birth control around 2019, before an “exodus” these past few years as more women shared their stories of weight gain, low libido, mood changes and depression. Aversion to hormonal birth control was considered a “crunchy liberal” position at the time, Hugoboom said. But as more women, including celebrities, told their stories on social media, there was this “bonding over the shared experience of being dismissed — or even gaslighted — by their own doctors,” she said. “Women deserve more options when it comes to their bodies, and they shouldn't be shamed for choosing noninvasive, hormone-free methods that can be just as effective when used correctly,” she said. While Hugoboom disputes that questioning birth control is a “right-wing” stance, women's discussion of hormonal contraception has taken on a new tinge that dovetails with conservative priorities. Meanwhile, social media has seen the steady but now ubiquitous rise of “tradwife” content from young influencers who tout taking on the traditional role of a stay-at-home mother. More than a half-dozen women's reproductive doctors told CNN that they have also seen a notable increase in patients expressing concerns about hormonal contraceptives, including the birth control pill. Some women who have never taken them are more reluctant to start, while others currently taking a form of hormonal birth control are increasingly expressing a desire to stop and explore alternative options. Dr. Franziska Haydanek, an ob/gyn who practices in western New York, found social media fame by correcting false information about women's health online. Fran” to her almost 700,000 TikTok followers — says there's no doubt in her mind that the growing MAHA movement has played a significant role in casting doubts about the safety of hormonal birth control. “I very much welcome people accessing evidence-based information when it comes to (medical decisions),” she said. Health professionals said patients who have questions or concerns about birth control should speak to their doctors about risks, benefits and side effects, as everyone's case is different. “If these people running do not speak about MAHA and say that they are in support of MAHA, they will hemorrhage votes, and we will hand the midterms to the left.” Hawkins, the activist, says she is well aware that most of the young women who agree with her on contraception don't find much other common ground with anti-abortion advocates like her.

Over the last several months, Chicago, Minneapolis and St. Paul have seen a dramatic escalation in federal immigration enforcement along their chilly streets, with agents arresting thousands – including some US citizens – in neighborhoods, shopping centers, schools and at protests. Illinois and Minnesota, joined by their city counterparts, are now separately pursuing legal action against the administration, filing lawsuits Monday in federal courts over immigration enforcement they call unlawful and unconstitutional. A hearing has not yet been scheduled in Illinois. Some of the answers have been edited for length and clarity. CNN: What are Illinois and Minnesota asking for from judges in their lawsuits? Honig: Fundamentally, both of these states are asking federal judges to block Immigration and Customs Enforcement from enforcing immigration law in their states and cities. There are variations between them, but that's the core ask. As a backup, both states ask the courts for some sort of ruling or declaration that some of the tactics ICE is using are unconstitutional. Honig: The main difference is that Illinois asks to block all ICE activity in the state, whereas Minnesota phrases its ask as seeking to stop this “surge” of officers. But pointing to the surge is legally irrelevant, because whether you're talking about a group of ICE agents who are already there, or who were added after some point, the fundamental ask is still the same. You're still asking a judge to block ICE from doing its job as it sees fit in your state. Minnesota and Illinois are suing the Trump administration over immigration operations. CNN: What is the legal precedent for an ask like that? There is no example, nor does either state cite an example in their papers, of a judge prohibiting a federal law enforcement agent from enforcing federal law in a given state. The reaction that we've heard from various Minnesota officials, including Attorney General Keith Ellison, when confronted with this lack of precedent and lack of case law, is essentially, “Well, this is really bad, though. Well, this is an invasion.” There is plenty of dramatic language in the complaints, but that doesn't change the legal calculus. You can't just take a situation that has no legal precedent and no legal support and say, “Well, yes, but our situation is really, really bad, therefore we get to invent new law.” CNN: In your opinion, how strong do you think the states' arguments are? Honig: I think the arguments that both states are making, that ICE should be blocked, either entirely or just the surge, are close to completely meritless. Fundamentally, what they're asking for is legally completely unwarranted. CNN: What do you think is the most likely outcome for each suit? But I think the best, realistic scenario for the states is – if they get sympathetic judges who decide to put ICE through its paces – maybe they call in ICE agents as witnesses, or ICE officials as witnesses, probe into ICE's training, policies and tactics and issue some sort of declaration that ICE needs to do things differently or better. Some sort of window dressing like that is probably the best realistic outcome. There's no way a judge is going to say, “I hereby block you, ICE, from carrying out enforcement activities.” And if a judge does do that, it'll be reversed. Listen to Minnesota AG announce lawsuit against Trump administration over ICE enforcement surge CNN: If the states' chances of winning are close to zero, what can be done? Honig: I'm not saying there's nothing to be done. This is just not the way to address any abuses or excesses by ICE. What the courts are not supposed to do, first of all, is prohibit the federal executive branch from carrying out federal executive branch prerogatives and, secondly, issue blanket theoretical advisory rulings about the way the world ought to look or ought not to look. The state was successful in that case and Trump has largely backed off National Guard deployment there for now. What are the key differences between that case and this one over immigration enforcement? Honig: The National Guard was an entirely different case where Trump used a specific law, Section 12406, to deploy the National Guard. So that case was based on the action Trump took that was based on a specific federal statute, and the Supreme Court construed and defined that statute against the Trump administration. Legally, it's a completely different scenario from what we have here. CNN: Illinois and Minnesota filed their suits Monday; the latter also filing a temporary restraining order request. One, the judges can just reject these out of hand. The judges might decide to hold fact-finding hearings, they might decide, “I want to dig into what ICE is doing a bit.” That's all within the broad discretion of these district court judges. I think those are the next steps, but if a district court judge is to say, “ICE, you can't go in there, you can't go into that state, you can't go into that city,” I think that will get reversed real quick. CNN: Is there a timeline we can anticipate here for how quickly the judges may act on these lawsuits? Honig: Judges are in charge of handling their own dockets and calendars.

Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) announced she is under a federal investigation for her participation in a joint video message in 2025 in which she told members of the intelligence community and the United States military that they were not obligated to follow illegal orders. The video warned that “this administration is pitting” military members and intelligence community professionals “against American citizens.” It also warned that “threats to our Constitution aren't just coming from abroad, but from right here at home.” Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ), Slotkin, Rep. Chris Deluzio (D-PA), Rep. Chrissy Houlahan (D-PA), Rep. Jason Crow (D-CO), and Rep. Maggie Goodlander (D-NH) appeared in the video and issued a message saying, “You can refuse illegal orders.” None, however, elaborated on what orders were considered unlawful. “Facts matter little, but the threat matters quite a bit,” Slotkin said in her interview with the New York Times. “Six weeks ago, Senator Mark Kelly — and five other members of Congress — released a reckless and seditious video that was clearly intended to undermine good order and military discipline,” Hegseth said in a post on X. “As a retired Navy Captain who is still receiving a military pension, Captain Kelly knows he is still accountable to military justice. “Therefore, in response to Senator Mark Kelly's seditious statements — and his pattern of reckless misconduct — the Department of War is taking administrative action against Captain Mark E. Kelly, USN (Ret),” Hegseth added. “The department has initiated retirement grade determination proceedings under 10 U.S.C. Kelly announced he was suing Hegseth on Monday. “A spokesman for Ms. Pirro's office declined to confirm or deny any investigation, and it is unclear exactly what officials have identified as a possible crime related to the video,” the New York Times reported.