Virginians have until Thursday to provide written testimony on the State Corporation Commission website about whether they support or oppose allowing Florida-based NextEra Energy to move forward with its proposed purchase of Richmond-based Dominion Energy. More than 2,400 comments have already been submitted.

NextEra is attempting to take over Dominion in an all-stock deal valued at $67 billion. The tie-up would create the largest regulated utility in the country. But because of that regulation, any such agreement must be signed off on by the State Corporation Commission.

The commission hosted its final in-person opportunity for public testimony last week in Richmond. Ahead of that session, commission staff members recommended that the three commissioners refuse to allow the merger, writing that the agreement wouldn’t adequately protect ratepayers in Virginia.

The next phase of the process begins next Tuesday, Nov. 17, when the commission will take testimony from parties involved in the proposed merger. That includes commission staff as well as representatives from the two utility companies and, potentially, political leaders.

The Virginia Chamber of Commerce has said it supports the merger. It released an independent economic analysis that found the partnership would create more than 9,300 construction jobs, generate $2.27 billion in new economic activity at peak, and deliver $1.87 billion in bill credits for Virginia businesses and residential consumers, enough to provide $500 in bill credits for a typical Virginia residential customer.

“This new analysis demonstrates that the proposed merger of Dominion Energy and NextEra Energy will deliver significant benefits for Virginians through new investment, job creation, workforce development support, and enhanced energy reliability to meet growing residential, commercial, and industrial demand and help ensure Virginia remains economically competitive for decades to come,” Brad N. Hall, the president and CEO of the Virginia Chamber of Commerce, said in a statement to the Daily Signal.

Union leaders also expressed support.

“Their proposed shareholder-funded $100 million investment would support career development, hands-on training and apprenticeships in partnership with unions, creating more pathways for Virginians to learn a trade, build a career and prepare for the major energy and infrastructure investments Virginia will need in the years ahead,” Kevin Battle, the business manager and secretary-treasurer at the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers Local Lodge 45, wrote.

Political leaders, however, are taking the opposite side of the merger.

“After listening to Virginians from different backgrounds across the Commonwealth and closely reviewing this proposal, I have concluded that it does not provide the protections Virginians demand and should not be approved,” Democrat Lt. Gov. Ghazala Hashmi announced last month after a five-city “listening tour.”

Hashmi first attempted to involve herself in the approval process back in July when she submitted a long list of questions that she asked the State Corporation Commission to consider before it could approve the merger. The lieutenant governor may be staking out a campaign issue for 2029, when the office will again be open because of Virginia’s gubernatorial one-term limit.

Gov. Abigail Spanberger also weighed in. “I am calling for a six-year freeze to Virginians’ base residential electricity rates, a tripling of monthly bill credits for ratepayers, and additional commitments to lower energy costs and meet our long-term clean and homegrown energy goals if the State Corporation Commission is to approve this merger,” she announced last month.

Spanberger also brought Virginia back into the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, a separate measure which is expected to push up rates.

However, it isn’t clear that either woman should have a role in the process. The attorney general’s office usually speaks for the state, not the governor or lieutenant governor.

“In Virginia we have some foundational issues with our energy system that we have to address: The grid is overworked, we need more energy to meet the demand that we have, and costs are too high for every single one of us,” Attorney General Jay Jones said in a statement. “That’s exactly why we have opposed this merger in front of the SCC, because the transaction won’t do anything to address those fundamental issues.”

Richmond City Council announced that it will oppose the merger unless the companies agree to maintain the same number of employees that Dominion has now for at least five years.

After the hearings wrap up, the State Corporation Commission’s final decision is due by Jan. 11.

A new documentary is set to showcase America’s landscapes as a “love letter” to the country in its 250th anniversary year.  

The 40-minute film “America the Beautiful” premieres Nov. 11 across more than 70 theaters nationwide. Narrated by award-winning actor Kelsey Grammer, it shows America “from sea to shining sea” and trace the history of America’s conservation efforts, beginning with President Theodore Roosevelt.  

“As we’re celebrating the 250th, this entire year, we wanted to create something that reminds us of what makes this country so extraordinary,” Antoinetta Monteleone, CEO of Mission Partners Entertainment Group, said, “from these coastlines, these mountains, these wonderful breathtaking landscapes—it’s really a love letter to this country.” 

Monteleone said the film will be shown in fulldome theaters and on giant screens. 

“The scale of these screens, several stories high, you really do feel immersed,” Monteleone said. “I think it will give people a greater appreciation of the amazing preservation to date of these landscapes and natural wonders.” 

Audiences will view American landmarks such as the Grand Canyon and Yellowstone National Park. The native wildlife species, including formerly endangered American bison and bald eagles, feature as prominent examples of preservation efforts. 

“I hope that the audience walks out feeling inspired and proud of the natural beauty of the country,” Monteleone said, “and hopefully sparks a bit of curiosity, maybe encourages them to go out to some national parks they’ve never been to, explore nature in general, and maybe just get them inspired and wanting to do a little more to protect our natural world.”  

The documentary explores the history of American conservation—from Roosevelt establishing the U.S. Forest Service, to the foundation of wildlife management, to modern no-till farming methods that preserve soil fertility.  

“I think it is important,” Monteleone said, “that we continue those efforts that Teddy Roosevelt and others have done before us to protect these natural wonders.” 

The film highlights modern conservationist figures such as Roosevelt’s great-great-grandson Simon Roosevelt, who calls for Americans to continue to steward their country’s land responsibly.  

“Just as new life enlivens nature and beautifies this country year after year,” Roosevelt said, “you who cherish and revive the wild will enrich the lives of your children and your children’s children.” 

The film is available for limited screening until Nov. 25. Select venues allow free admission for veterans on Nov. 11. 

Additional information on participating theaters and film details can be found on the film’s website.  

The election of America’s first Muslim senator, Michigan’s Abdul El-Sayed, a second-generation immigrant from Egypt, is a watershed moment in the triumph of multiculturalism. This moment was made possible by the enduring legacy of the Johnson administration and the Hart-Celler Act, which opened the United States to large-scale immigration from the Third World in 1965. Consequently, America’s Muslim diaspora has grown from roughly 100,000 in 1960 to more than 5.5 million today.

Since 9/11 plunged America into a decades-long war on terror, the country’s Muslim population has more than doubled. As I show in a newly released report, however, the policies that have facilitated these trends are a stark departure from the old American tradition on immigration.

That tradition was rooted in the conviction that “America must be kept American.” Our forefathers recognized that too much immigration from nations that are too disparate in culture, religion, and mores would change America’s regime of natural rights, self-government, and ordered liberty into something both foreign and undesirable. On this basis, they would have viewed mass immigration from the Islamic world, and elsewhere, as a threat to our political and cultural heritage.

The naturalization acts of the early republic, which largely prohibited naturalization from outside the Western world, epitomized this policy. Together, the various writings, debates, speeches, statutes, and court opinions from that time formed the foundation of a consistent political tradition that endured for 175 years, from the Naturalization Act of 1790 until the passage of Hart-Celler in 1965.

The growing prevalence of Islamic culture presents a host of practical problems for American society, as our embrace of multiculturalism has made it impossible to accommodate Islam without altering the character of the nation itself. Many Muslim immigrants and their children reject the traditional “melting pot” settlement that integrated previous waves of immigrants into a unified American national identity.

A 2026 op-ed in The Washington Post by Shadi Hamid, a senior fellow at Georgetown University’s Alwaleed Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, exemplifies this view. Hamid argues against the premise that “a minority community’s right to be in the United States depends on its willingness to converge with the cultural mainstream.” In Hamid’s view, “America was not founded on the assumption that its citizens would eventually come to agree on foundational questions.”

This sentiment is widely shared by prominent Islamic organizations across America. The Council on American-Islamic Relations’ 2026 Civil Rights Report explicitly criticizes the old American tradition on immigration that sought “to preserve the ideal of U.S. homogeneity” and all attempts to restore the vision of America as united by a “single heritage.” To this end, the report asserts the organization’s commitment to protecting Muslims’ “right to be different.”

In this same spirit, the Islamic Circle of North America declared in a statement issued on the 25th anniversary of 9/11 that it rejects “the premise that American belonging is contingent on loyalty tests or displays of patriotism.”

The Founders’ writings on immigration and Islam indicate that though they were never faced with the prospect of mass immigration from the Muslim world, they intuited the problems associated with it.

The old American tradition on immigration was predicated on an understanding of republican citizenship, which emphasized the will and desire to assimilate into our cultural and political heritage as a necessary prerequisite for naturalization. By and large, this same tradition viewed Islamic culture as incompatible with a free society and the principles of republican government.

If America is to preserve our national heritage, we must reject the post-1965 settlement that is facilitating the transformation of our society and recover the old American tradition on immigration rooted in the Founders’ theory of republican citizenship.

We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal.

A few weeks ago, in anticipation of Veterans Day, I had the privilege of visiting the National Museum of the United States Army at Fort Belvoir.

The museum, which is free of charge, has put together a special exhibition and program in celebration of the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence and the founding of U.S. Army.

The exhibit, which runs through June 2027, is something I wholeheartedly encourage parents to take their children to so they can truly appreciate our nation’s history and heritage, along with the sacrifice made to preserve the freedom bestowed on us by our Creator and affirmed by the 56 brave signers of that historic document. The museum confirms that “CALL TO Arms: The Soldier and the Revolutionary War” is on display through June 2027 and has free admission.

To say my soul was stirred as I viewed the heroism of so many who have fought for our nation’s freedom would be an understatement.

Starting with the American Revolution, in which Gen. George Washington led a ragtag army not only into battle but eventually to victory over what was then the greatest army on the face of the earth, and continuing through the brave souls who stormed the beaches of Normandy to bring an end to Nazi tyranny and the courageous men and women today who fight for our freedom, we owe them endless words of praise and appreciation for all they’ve done to keep our nation strong and free.

And the sacrifices made are far beyond what many of us could ever humanly endure, such as those made by the soldiers who were part of the infamous World War II Bataan Death March.

In April 1942, after the Japanese had captured the Philippines, more than 78,000 U.S. and Filipino soldiers were marched by their captors for more than a week under a relentless sun. Only 54,000 reached the prisoner-of-war camp.

When those who survived reached their camp, it got even worse. One survivor, James Bollich, recalled:

“I remember looking around and deciding that the way people were dying that within a few weeks we would all be dead. Our food was nothing but a handful of cooked rice a day. The barracks we stayed in were made out of bamboo with thatched roofs, no doors or windows. At night, the mosquitoes would chew us alive and during the daytime the flies would get all over us. The big killer was dysentery. They had open latrines that had flies by the billions, covering our camp. Once you caught dysentery you were gone.”

One of my dear friends had the privilege of knowing one of the last survivors of that march.

That man, a friend of my friend’s father who also served in World War II, told of how, if a soldier tried to get a drink of water, he was shot. According to him, those who collapsed fell on their dead colleagues, and others were buried alive. He witnessed public beheadings, and the emotional and physical toll he endured would go on for longer than the war itself. His bones, brittle from the malnutrition and punishment he endured, broke easily and frequently throughout the remainder of his life.

But despite what he went through, he was a man of tremendous joy who gave everyone he knew a hearty hello and a big bear hug whenever he saw them. When asked if the pain and suffering he experienced were worth it, he would reply, “The pain was a small price to pay to preserve freedom.”

While the exhibit at the National Museum of the United States Army focuses on the American Revolution, the museum, as a whole, is a grand tribute to men and women like these brave individuals who endured incredible suffering to make sure the rest of us didn’t.

So, this Veterans Day, instead of just seeing a nice day off in the middle of the week, I would encourage each of us to reflect more deeply on the sacrifice made by the first veterans, that ragtag Revolutionary War army who fought to make our nation free, as well as those who came afterward to preserve and secure the freedoms we continue to enjoy today.

It would be my hope that all of us can say to those who have served, “Thank you” for what you’ve done to keep America the land of the free and the home of the brave.

We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal.

On Tuesday night, the House of Representatives voted to send Rep. Thomas Massie’s articles of impeachment against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to committee, effectively killing the legislation.

In a 211-204 vote, the articles of impeachment were sent to the Judiciary Committee. Republican leadership was able to rally members to show up and vote, while 11 Democrats and seven Republicans missed the vote. The vote was essentially along party lines, with one Republican voting against sending the articles to committee.

“The Democrats’ attempt to impeach Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has miserably FAILED!” President Donald Trump posted on Truth Social.

“Every single Republican, except Thomas Massie, a major LOSER, voted in favor of Pete. Again, Victories in Venezuela and Iran, the Best Recruitment Numbers in the History of the Military (Long waiting lists to get in!), and Spirit like rarely seen before, led to the EXONERATION of a Great American Patriot. The Democrats continue to weaponize and abuse the United States of America. They must be stopped,” the president continued.

On Friday, Massie told the Daily Signal that he believed he had gathered support from Republicans following the massive “blue wave” that will send Republicans into the minority for the 120th Congress.

“Some people will vote for it because they’re not coming back, I think, and some people will vote for it because they want to put some daylight between themselves and this administration or themselves in this war,” Massie said last week. “It’s an opportunity for them to show the people that they got the message, even if Trump hasn’t shown that he got the message.”

However, Massie suspected Republican leadership might attempt to refer the articles to a committee to effectively kill the legislation, rather than holding a vote on the impeachment itself.

“I’ve heard from several members [that] they agree with some of the Articles of Impeachment but not all of them,” Massie posted Tuesday on X.

“If the motion to kill my resolution by referring it to committee fails, and we proceed to the Articles themselves, I’ll request a vote on each of the Articles separately,” he continued.

Massie, who will not return to Congress in January after losing his May primary, has roughly 20 legislative days left in office. His next effort will likely be to advance his Epstein Files Transparency Act II, which he says needs only two more signatures to force a vote.

“These two things will be more than the entire conference does on its own, outside of the CR [continuing resolution]. I mean, they had to shut Congress down for two-and-a-half weeks to avoid these two things,” he concluded when speaking to the Daily Signal on Friday.

On Election Day, the Democratic Socialists of America scored numerous victories in the Lone Star State involving local propositions and candidates.

The DSA supported two major propositions that voters approved in Corpus Christi and Houston, and it opposed a Dallas proposition that voters rejected.

Corpus Christi’s Proposition B, also known as the Fair Water Amendment, was approved by 68.46% voters. The proposition ends the city’s drought surcharge exemption fee for large industrial water users and requires them to pay mandatory drought surcharges during draught stages 2 and 3.

Houston’s Proposition A, also known as the Houston Freedom Act, was approved by 71.4% of voters. The Houston Freedom Act is a city charter amendment that makes enforcement of Class A and Class B misdemeanor marijuana possession offenses the Houston Police Department’s lowest priority. The measure also prohibits police from requesting, executing, or participating in no-knock search warrants, requiring them to wait at least 15 seconds before entering an individual’s home.

Dallas’ Proposition A was opposed by the DSA and was rejected, with 56.21% of voters against it. The proposition would have authorized a public safety bond that would have issued $443 million in general obligation bonds to fund multiple public safety projects, including a new Dallas Police Department property room and evidence storage facility, a public safety training complex at Dallas Executive Airport, and replacement of the fire station at Akard and Canton. 

The DSA also supported candidates in local and state elections across Texas. Two of the candidates lost their bid for office, while one is heading to a runoff. 

For Texas state House District 91, the DSA supported Democrat candidate Yisak Worku, who lost his bid to Republican incumbent David Lowe 52.7% to 47.3%. 

In local elections, the DSA supported Corpus Christi City Council District 2 candidate Isabel Araiza, who finished behind two other candidates who advanced to a runoff.  

The DSA-endorsed candidate for Austin City Council District 1, Misael Ramos, advanced to a runoff. The runoff election between Ramos and Amber Goodwin will be held Dec. 12. Ramos won 34.1% of the vote compared with Goodwin’s 34.35%. 

Military service has always been close enough for me to admire, but it has never been mine to claim.  

Members of my family have served during the Korean War and the Vietnam War. Others graduated from West Point or joined the Navy. Their stories have never felt distant to me. Their experiences, however, still are.  

That is why Veterans Day should make someone like me uncomfortable.  

Every year, we celebrate Veterans Day to honor those who have worn the uniform. It’s a day full of social media tributes, American flags, parades, and praise-filled speeches from politicians.  

There is nothing wrong with these traditions. The problem is that our gratitude usually ends there. It is easy to thank veterans for their sacrifices and just move along with our day. It’s comfortable.  

What is harder is to stop and consider the weight behind the words we are saying. “Thank you for your service” should come with a desire to understand what that service required.  

We toss around the word “served” so often that the meaning of that word gets lost. Military service can demand time away from family, personal discomfort, lack of control over where you live, and, for some, losing life itself. 

It is about sacrifice and being selfless.  

When I ask my grandfather about what it was like to serve during the Vietnam War, I only get glimpses of what he went through. He tells me about rescue missions to retrieve fellow soldiers who had been injured. He remembers friends who never came home. I can listen to those stories, but I can’t pretend to understand what it was like to live through them. 

Living and working in Washington, D.C. has only reinforced that realization for me. Reminders of military sacrifice are everywhere, but proximity does not automatically create understanding. Familiarity can make it easier to stop noticing. 

Listening to veterans gets us closer to understanding their experiences than a perfunctory thank you ever could. We are always in danger of letting gratitude become casual and easy.  

Genuine gratitude is more than a few words. It requires something of us: our time and attention.  

We can start by listening. Sit down to ask veterans about their life in service if they are willing to share. Pay attention to the challenges that don’t disappear when the uniform comes off. Preserve their stories so their experience is not forgotten. Let your concern for them extend beyond the patriotic days already marked in our calendars.  

Civilians should not let “thank you for your service” be the end of the conversation; it should only be the beginning.  

I will never know what it was like for my family members who served. Their experiences are not mine to claim simply because I share their last name or know their stories. Their example, however, is something I can carry forward.  

This year, and those in the future, take the time to sit with your words a moment longer before moving on with your day. Reach out to veterans in your community and listen.  

Veterans Day should make us a little uncomfortable, not because we should feel guilty for the sacrifices we did not make, but because we should never become too comfortable benefiting from them.  

And perhaps the best way to thank our veterans is to make sure our gratitude does not end when Veterans Day does. 

We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal.

Scouting America will introduce its new Military Service & Veterans Badge on Veterans Day. 

The Military Service & Veterans Badge is meant to inspire Scouts while also encouraging them to honor and understand the armed forces. The Scouting America website states that the badge is “designed to deepen understanding and foster respect, this badge connects Scouts with the heritage of our Armed Forces and the individuals who have served our nation with courage and commitment.” 

Senior Vice President of Marketing Michael Ramsey told the Daily Signal, “The Military Service Merit Badge is a way for us to provide content and information for Scouts who are interested in learning more about careers in the military and certainly a way to learn about the importance of the contributions that our veterans have made to our country.” 

There are more than 135 merit badges that Scouts can choose from as they work toward becoming an Eagle Scout. They range from learning basketry to first aid. The Military Service & Veterans Badge will be the first military-related badge. 

The program was compiled with the aid of veterans and has been in the process for about a year.

The requirements for the Military Service & Veterans Badge are available online and many Scouts have already shown interest. 

To earn the badge, the Scouts must study military history and military career opportunities. A Scout must also initiate a meeting with a veteran. Scouting America hopes the firsthand accounts will help Scouts truly appreciate the sacrifices veterans have made. 

All told, the requirements to earn the badge are broken into 10 sections: Explore Military Heritage, Understand the Cost of War and Value of Peace, United States Armed Forces, Understand Military Recognition, Military Uniforms and Insignia, Reflect on Symbols of Service, Honor Veterans, Military Academies, Inspire Service and Leadership, and Careers/Hobby.

Most of these requirements focus on the history of different military awards and symbols while also educating the Scout on military academies and careers. 

According to Scouting America, “Approximately 15% of military academy cadets and midshipmen enter the academies as Eagle Scouts.” Many Scouts go straight from Scouting America to the armed forces, and the new badge will give Scouts a chance to learn more about being in the military. It will give them a taste of what it’s really like to serve their country. 

On Veterans Day, the Military Service & Veterans Badge will officially be made available for Scouts to earn. The new merit badge is in keeping with the original ideals of Scouting America, which encourage Scouts to serve their country, as expressed in the Scout Oath: “On my honor, I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country … ” 

We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune was reelected as the top GOP senator for the 120th Congress as Republicans head into the minority. Not only did the conference choose to keep Thune in charge, but it also reelected his entire leadership team.

Current Senate records identify Thune as majority leader, and current reporting confirms he was reelected to the GOP’s top post and is set to become minority leader in the new Congress.

Everyone was running unopposed and was elected by acclamation, meaning there was no official vote or ballot, like the House had earlier in the day.

While Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin attempted to delay the Senate Republicans’ leadership election today, his effort failed in a 15-31 vote. As promised, he walked out, choosing not to participate in the final vote. Johnson had publicly pledged to walk out if Republicans proceeded with the elections.

“I really don’t like walking out, but you know that’s what I said I was going to do, and I did it,” he told reporters as he walked out.

Thune said in a statement, “I appreciated the opportunity to have an open, honest, and transparent conversation with my colleagues today, and I am honored to have their continued trust and support to lead the Senate Republican Conference in the 120th Congress.”

“I’m proud of what this Republican team has accomplished together, and we remain united in our commitment to advancing conservative priorities, working with President [Donald] Trump and our colleagues in the House, and holding the line against Democrats’ efforts to enact their far-left, liberal agenda. We have important work ahead of us, and I look forward to serving alongside my colleagues on behalf of the American people,” Thune continued.

Majority Whip John Barrasso, Senate Republican Conference Chairman Tom Cotton, Senate Republican Policy Committee Chairwoman Shelley Moore Capito, and Senate Republican Conference Vice Chairman James Lankford were also reelected to the roles they will hold in the minority.

“Senate Leadership Fund congratulates Senator John Barrasso on his reelection as Republican Whip!” Senate Leadership Fund Executive Director Alex Latcham said in a statement.

“Whip Barrasso plays a central role in advancing President Trump’s agenda, including the historic Working Families Tax Cuts, and he’ll continue to be a strong leader for the American people,” Latcham continued.

Sen. Bernie Moreno of Ohio was elected National Republican Senatorial Committee chairman to replace Sen. Tim Scott, who served his two-year term cycle. The National Republican Senatorial Committee serves as the party’s campaign arm for the Senate.

Moreno told reporters Senate Republicans are going to be “absolute savages” when it comes to ending government corruption, a top concern for voters.

“Senator Moreno is a proven winner who possesses boundless energy and the keen political instincts that will be critical to our efforts. Senate Leadership Fund looks forward to a close partnership with Senator Moreno as we work to elect strong Republicans to the U.S. Senate,” Latcham said in a statement congratulating Moreno.

Editor’s note: This is a lightly edited transcript of today’s video from Daily Signal senior contributor Victor Davis Hanson. Subscribe to our YouTube channel to see more of his videos.

Hello, this is Victor Davis Hanson for the Daily Signal. 

We all talk about waste, fraud and abuse, or corruption in politics. It’s kind of a boilerplate accusation, but I think here we are in 2026, and almost any day you look at the news or social media, there’s some investigation, some of them warranted, some of them not, but corruption is on everybody’s mind. 

Exit polls, when voters were asked after our Tuesday midterm elections, “What concerned you the most?” We concentrated on affordability, the Iran war, gas prices, illegal immigration, both pro and con, but a lot of people listed very highly corruption. And I take corruption in the widest sense of the word, financial corruption, but also unethical behavior and personal invective that’s kind of coarsened our whole society. 

And I don’t understand in the midterms how Ilhan Omar, who has … There’s pretty credible evidence that she abused her immigration laws, and her sister and other people under her purview were involved in one of the most massive fraudulent schemes that we could see with entitlement funds. She was reelected by 70% of the vote. 

Now, we’ve all heard about Hunter Biden. We looked at the laptop. We remember his references to Mr. Big, Mr. 10%. We knew what the prosecutor in Ukraine had said about him. It was pretty clear that he was an embezzler and part of the Biden family consortia that grifted off of our money, and he got a pardon. 

It’s pretty clear also that Nancy Pelosi, when she entered Congress in the 1980s, was not a rich person at all, even though her husband was sort of a wheeler-dealer, real estate investor, stock investor. But over her 30-year-plus career in Congress, she had a 16,000-plus percentage rise in her stock portfolio. 

She went from less than a million dollars to over $120 million. How can you do that when you’re a full-time politician? And we know how you can do that because people in Congress, especially at the highest levels of leadership in Congress and on committees, meet with all sorts of financial people. 

They draft laws. They know which legislation is going to be on the docket, whether it will pass months before it actually does, and they act accordingly. Is that illegal? It should be. We have a Pelosi bill, but that’s just another example.  

But we, as conservatives, can’t just say it’s Hunter or Pelosi or Ilhan Omar because Alina Habba, who I had a high regard for, allegedly was obtaining pardons from the Trump administration for people who had been convicted of serious crimes and were given clemency or pardons. 

In some cases, there was a quid pro quo alleged deal for over $50 million. Steve Bannon, whom I’ve met and I like personally, but you remember just a few years ago, he pleaded guilty to the charge that he had been raising funds from conservatives who really wanted the wall finished, and they thought maybe if they used their own funds, they could, private effort, they could override the Biden opposition. 

And yet there was an admission on his part that those funds were diverted to other uses without the donors’ notice.  

I think you’ve all seen, as well, the news that Susie Wiles, whom I had a lot of respect for as the chief of staff of the Trump administration, has now been transferred to the political side of the administration. 

Fine. But there were also allegations, not proven, that her daughter, who is a well-known lobbyist, may have been charging people or asking for, quote, “donations” to steer them to the right people to either get legislation moderated, introduced, canceled, or people who wanted appointments within the administration. 

She was the go-to person, Susie Wiles’ daughter, to get immediate action. That’s unethical. I don’t know if it’s illegal or not, but it’s unethical.  

Besides the corruption, very quickly, there’s also kind of a lunatic, a lunatic element in our society now, and all sides do it, where the F-word, the S-H-I-(Blank) word, foul-mouthed, but more importantly, even macabre, really ruthless medieval threats and kind of, I don’t know how to put it, a vampire-ish delight in people’s gruesome deaths. 

And they’re in the public square. We had the two leftist podcasters, Jennifer Welch and Angie Sullivan. They’re hardcore Democrats. You could call them neo-socialists. And they actually said on air to thousands, if not millions of people, that they wanted to dig up Charlie Kirk’s corpse so that somebody could shoot him again. 

Think about that. And when they talk like that, if you walk across college campuses or you investigate what protesters are doing, people are wearing white T-shirts with paint-stained marks that emanate from their neck. In other words, they’re glorified in the gruesome death of Charlie Kirk.  

And what was his crime? 

He tried to mobilize young people who were Christian and conservatives to get active politically, and he did so on the college campus. And he was a free speech advocate. He wanted to debate anybody, anytime, anywhere about anything.  

But that’s not even isolated. Dave Chappelle, the well-known famous comedian, said the other day on stage to a, I don’t know, a sold-out audience that he felt a lot better after Charlie Kirk was murdered. 

We had a Brazilian immigrant, Isa, I think her name was, [Casahuga], and she went to a Turning Point USA event, read a poem, and she referred to the Kirkiversary.  

In other words, it was a point, a calendar date, the anniversary of Charlie Kirk’s gruesome murder that they were celebrating.  

And then when she was asked what she meant, she told the master of ceremonies who was holding the event that he should wear a neck brace, i.e., he was taking a risk coming on a college campus because he should be murdered. 

All of these people then make these immediate apologies, but only when they’re called on. In the case of Isa, she was worried that she was going to be deported to Brazil. She was on a student visa.  

In the case of Jennifer Welch and Angie Sullivan, they may be socialists, but capitalists fund their program, so they gave a pro forma and insincere apology. 

I don’t know what Dave Chappelle will do. He probably won’t do anything. He has a particular insularity from criticism. So, we’re starting to see not just massive corruption among the Somali community in Minnesota, not just massive corruption in California, but we’re starting to see unethical behavior at the highest levels. 

Some of us have been very worried about the Trump administration, that there are members associated with some of the Trump family that are very active in the Middle East investing and helping people who are investors in the Middle East find receptive avenues in the United States that they might not otherwise find, given that they don’t have contacts at the highest level of government, and vice versa. 

They are steering people from the United States who want to invest in the Middle East. I don’t know if that’s illegal, but it seems highly unethical. And the point I’m making, part of the MAGA movement, as was the Tea Party predecessor, was a reaction against the aristocratic classes and the corruption at the highest levels of government. 

And conservatives can’t criticize Hunter Biden and Nancy Pelosi and all of these other people and their language and the F-word and, and gruesome and less gruesome metaphors and delight in people’s personal death, injury, misfortunes, unless they have the moral high ground.  

And so, I think, as we try to digest the midterm elections, people on the conservative side said, “This party, these, us, we will not engage in corruption. 

“We’re gonna be beyond suspicion of corruption.” And maybe Donald Trump can go to the Congress and say, “I wanna beef up the Pelosi bill so Congress people don’t invest as insiders during their tenures, and I will have an executive order in the executive branch matching step for step what you do in Congress.” 

It’s time to clean up the language, clean up the behavior, stop the hate speech, and stop the graft and obvious corruption.  

We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal.

Senate Republicans have less than 20 days to confirm President Donald Trump’s judicial nominees, a crucial move to ensure that his legacy extends beyond his term.

“Very important for the U.S. Senate to confirm all of our pending 161 Nominations, including 25 Federal Judges,” Trump wrote on Truth Social Monday. He made official announcements for the final three judicial nominees on Tuesday: Elliot Gaiser, Grayson Lambert, and James Sullivan.  

“We expect all of our highly qualified nominees to be confirmed quickly this Congress,” a White House official told the Daily Signal.

Republicans have to act fast before they lose the majority, but Democrats could call privileged votes to slow down the process. Another roadblock to confirming Trump’s nominees could come from a Republican senator. 

Arkansas Republican Senators John Boozman and Tom Cotton reportedly oppose the nomination of former Arkansas Solicitor General Lee Rudofsky to the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, preferring Arkansas Supreme Court Justice Cody Hiland. Rudofsky’s confirmation would give Trump-appointed judges a majority on the 8th Circuit. 

The Senate Judiciary Committee was supposed to consider the nomination of Rudofsky and nine other judges on Tuesday morning, but the committee put an asterisk next to his name on the agenda, indicating that his consideration was postponed to a future hearing. 

“It is unlikely the Senate has time to get another nominee through the process,” Mike Davis, president of Article III Project, said. “Republicans will lose this seat to Senate Democrats’ obstruction in January.”

The Senate should prioritize filling the existing appellate court vacancies because of the important role these courts play, said Zack Smith, legal expert at the Heritage Foundation.

“The White House, the senators, they need to be on the same page because this vacancy needs to be filled before the new Senate comes into power,” Smith told the Daily Signal.

Elliot Gaiser, Trump’s nominee for the Northern District of Texas, currently serves as assistant attorney general for the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel. Before that, he was solicitor general of Ohio and a clerk for Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito when he penned the majority opinion in the case overturning Roe v. Wade. 

As the head of the Office of Legal Counsel, Gaiser has been responsible for making sure some of the Trump administration’s most newsworthy actions pass legal muster. According to the Washington Post, Gaiser’s office was responsible for approving the capture of Nicolas Maduro, strikes on drug traffickers’ boats, and more. 

“Texas will appreciate having such a talented and intelligent Judge on their Federal Bench,” Trump said of 37-year-old Gaiser. 

Anna St. John, a federal district judge in Louisiana, has already cleared the Senate Judiciary Committee. 

Her work has included litigation involving religious liberty, free speech, and class-action settlements. She previously served as president and general counsel of the Hamilton Lincoln Law Institute and its Center for Class Action Fairness. 

Trump said St. John has a history of championing “Religious Liberty, Free Speech, and protecting Women’s Sports.” 

Smith said confirming the nominees is key to Trump’s legacy.

“One of President Trump’s signature accomplishments is the way he has transformed the federal courts, particularly the appellate courts and the federal district courts as well,” he said. “It’s important to fill every available vacancy while the Senate Republicans are still in power, and that’s particularly true where you currently have two Republican senators per state.”

“Because keep in mind, so long as the blue slips exist, once a Democratic senator takes power in a state,” he said, “they could effectively block President Trump’s district court nominees from moving forward.”

Trump has asked Senate Majority Leader John Thune to eliminate blue slips, a tradition that allows home-state senators to hold up judicial nominations, in order to speed up the process of judicial confirmations, but he refused.

Senators return a blue slip indicating if they support the nominee. If either senator from a state withholds or rejects a blue slip, the Judiciary Committee chairman can prevent the nomination from advancing.

Trump called the practice “old and outdated,” but Thune said there were “more Republican senators who are interested in preserving that than those who aren’t.”

Trump on Monday told reporters he wish Thune could accomplish more, but that he’s a “very fine man.”

“I like John Thune. I wish they could get more produced,” Trump said. :You know, we’ve had Save America up there, we’ve had, you know, voter ID and proof of citizenship, and many other things.”

Editor’s note: This is a lightly edited transcript of “Victor Davis Hanson: In His Own Words” from Daily Signal senior contributor Victor Davis Hanson. Subscribe to Hanson’s own YouTube channel to watch past episodes.

Jack Fowler: Very briefly here, let me just say that Victor has written a significant post on X. You’ll find it there. His handle is @VDHanson. It may also now be up on the Blade of Perseus, Victor’s website. 

By the way, that’s victorhanson.com. Check that out. Go there. Do subscribe. Here’s what Victor wrote. I’ll just read a little bit. 

The midterm is not the end term. It is too soon to calibrate the direction of the post-midterm Democratic and Republican parties, but if the first 72 hours are any indication, and despite the soon-to-be speaker’s denials, the Left is already bragging about subpoenas and is intoxicated by the notion of investigations and impeachments. 

And Victor says a lot more, and he’s gonna tell us what more he said and why he wrote this piece. Victor? 

Victor Davis Hanson: I was a little upset. My point is, if you had criticisms of the administration and you supported it and you were constructive, why didn’t you voice it? And then after the election, all these people—it’s what John F. Kennedy said after the Bay of Pigs. He said success has a thousand mothers or parents, and failure is an orphan. 

So what I’m getting at is, all these people are coming out now, especially in The Wall Street Journal, but everywhere, saying that they should—not that they should have done this, but these people, it’s over, it’s done, it’s nothing. 

And what I wanted to do in this tweet—and I have a longer version of it that’s coming out Monday at American Greatness or Tuesday—is say that a lot of it was the messaging, and I had been saying that for a long time. 

So what I did in this—first, I want to tell everybody, just take a deep breath because the Trump MAGA movement is not over, and the Trump presidency is not over. 

It’s got two and a half years, almost. We’ve got two more months in this year, and then we’ve got a month in 2028. So it’s three months and  

Jack Fowler: 27 months total 

Victor Davis Hanson: Yes, 27 months, exactly. 

And so, what I’m getting at is, if you just look at Barack Obama and look at Clinton, who came in with bigger majorities than Donald Trump and got wiped out over their two midterms—not so much Clinton the second time, but they lost. 

What happened to them? Nothing. They started to do executive orders. Could they get new legislation through? No. Could they appoint more liberal judges? No. Could they replace a Cabinet member? No. 

And I want to qualify that the Democrats are much more unyielding about confirmations than the Republicans were. Some of them they confirmed, even though they were Democrats. 

And then foreign policy? No, nothing. The Republicans yelled to high heaven that Bill Clinton should have congressional authority to join the coalition of NATO partners in Serbia, and we bombed for 77 days without congressional authority on his initiative. 

And it turned out to be, if you believe it was necessary to save the Kosovo people from slaughter by [Slovan] Milosevic, it led to Milosevic’s downfall. 

He cut a deal with [Newt] Gingrich, and he then claimed credit for it. He wouldn’t have been able to do it without Gingrich, but he said he balanced the budget for four years. 

And he did, but he didn’t do it by himself. He did it with Newt Gingrich, but he worked across the aisle. He had a lot of executive orders. 

He and Joe Biden were the pardoners par excellence. They set the example of pardoning people. Remember that when these questions of pardons come up. 

And then Barack Obama, he was more ambitious. My gosh, he recognized Cuba by himself. He didn’t even go to Congress. He went into the disastrous Paris Climate Accord without Congress. 

People said, aren’t you a constitutional lawyer? Don’t you realize the Senate has to have a two-thirds ratification vote? 

No, I don’t think so. I’m a constitutional lawyer, and we’re going to do the Iran deal. They need $400 million at night on a pallet. 

So he did that, and he remade the Middle East. He created, in his last two years, a Shia alternative to the Gulf states and Israel and the moderate Jordan and Egypt states. 

And it was basically the Syrians under the crazy Assads and Iran, no need to talk about that. And then Hezbollah, who had taken over Lebanon, and then Hamas, and then the Houthis had taken a lot of Yemen. 

And that’s what he gave us in his last term. 

And you know what? When the campaign started that I was writing about, the president just gets above it all. Al Gore disastrously said he didn’t want Clinton campaigning. 

Clinton said, that’s even better. You’ll fight it out with George W. Bush, and I’ll be presidential. 

Obama said, I’m going to interfere in this election, but I’m going to do it quietly. I’m going to get [James] Comey and [John] Brennan, [James] Clapper into my office, and I’ll have Susan Rice take phony notes, and then they’ll go after Russian collusion. 

But I won’t do it. I’ll just go out in the golf place and say, I’d like to be president if I just called in from the basement. Third term. 

And he did have a third term with Biden. But the point I’m making is that he went out with 60% approval, and Clinton went out with about 68%. And they had been lower than Trump at 37%, 38%. 

So the president, under our system, is not a parliamentary prime minister when he loses the majority in the parliament. I.e., he doesn’t have to resign, nor does his party have to resign. 

And then we know what happens with wave elections. Remember 2010? The Tea Party really didn’t have a particular leader, but they swept 63 seats, and then they thought, we’re going to win the Senate in 2010 and ’12. 

And they nominated—was it Christine Ingle or whatever her name was? And in Delaware, they nominated that poor woman. 

Jack Fowler: Oh, yeah.  

Victor Davis Hanson: She said she’s not a witch. 

Yes. I’m not a witch. 

Jack Fowler: Oh my God, I met her. She came to National Review. Christy something. 

Yeah, I’ll figure it out. 

Victor Davis Hanson: That was really cruel. When you have to make a campaign ad saying you’re not a witch, you can’t win. 

So they were picking, and they got extreme, and they thought they were going to do this and that, but they had no leader. 

And the same thing happened in the Clinton era. Once, in October, it was exposed, and Ken Starr started publishing some of them. And I can’t repeat it on this show, but some of the details of the sexual congress between Monica and Bill came out in public. 

They were very gross. It was taking place in the little bathroom off the Oval Office, and people said this is disgusting. 

And then when he lied about it under oath and said that he had not had sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky, Monica Lewinsky, he lied, and he was disbarred. 

So then what do you do with him? What do you do with him when the economy is about 4% GDP, inflation’s about 2.5%, and he’s paid back two years of the debt? 

There are budget surpluses, and then he’s got economists saying, if you let Bill and Gingrich go, we’ll get four years. And if you let the winner, Al Gore or Bush, continue this, the entire debt will be paid off within six years. 

Why would you impeach a president like that? And we did, we on the Right. And it just backfired terribly, and he picked up seats. 

And then, even though he didn’t have Congress, he picked up, I think, five seats in the House, and he didn’t lose any Senate seats. 

So I’m getting at the overreaction will be even worse with a socialist. 

And coupled with the presidential running, Donald Trump declared his candidacy on Nov. 15, 2022. That, Jack, is eight days from now in the same term. 

Eight days from now, is somebody gonna declare they’re president? It’s gonna be soon, and once that starts, nobody’s gonna wanna know what Stephen Miller’s wife did on Tuesday afternoon or how big his house is. 

They’re not gonna wanna know any of that. They’re gonna wanna go—it’s gonna be [Marco] Rubio, [Ron] DeSantis, JD Vance, AOC, [Gavin] Newsom, [Abdul] El-Sayed. 

Jack Fowler: Don’t forget Chris Christie. 

Victor Davis Hanson: Chris Christie’s already said he’s going to run. He wants to get 1%. 

Yeah, so I guess— 

Jack Fowler: Or skim milk. 

Victor Davis Hanson: He wants to have that 1%. 

But my point is, a president in his last two terms under our system is set free. He has no elections to worry about. He signs executive orders. He does what he wants. 

Yes, he doesn’t have nominations, judges and Cabinet, and that’s bad. But as long as he keeps his minority, in this case perhaps 45 seats, these Republicans together, they don’t have 60 votes to override. 

So if they want to, say, pass a law and say, we’re going to repeal the estate tax exemption, so no more $19 million, it’ll go down to $1 million. 

And they go in and they vote, and it’s 58 to 42, and they get some Republicans to join them, and then he vetoes it, and that’s it. 

They don’t get 60. They can stop them. But you have to have solidarity because you only have a four- or five-seat safety valve. 

You can’t have [Lisa] Murkowski and others joining the Left on these veto overrides. 

So basically, that’s what I was saying. Don’t panic, and he can do a lot of good stuff. 

And then I also said, I tried to go through systematically what were the symptoms of what everybody said. JD said four things: MAGA, there was not enough America First economics, the war and Israel. 

I think he got two of them. There was anger over the war, and I’ll address that in a second very quickly, and the economy. 

But I don’t know what America First is. He took a beating from the tariffs. That was all designed to tell foreign entities, if you come to the United States and give jobs to the forgotten, you don’t have any tariffs. If you don’t, you’re going to be tariffed off the charts. 

And all he did was give tips, no tax for tips, refunds for Social Security for certain people, no more taxes on—It was all America First. 

Okay, so then there are two things that I tried to address very quickly. 

The economy, yes, but I keep asking this question. In 2022, Joe Biden was running—he was president, excuse me. He had his first midterm, and everybody, including me, thought there would be a red wave. 

Why? Because he was polling 40%. 

Wars were breaking out. There was a huge war in Ukraine that he had precipitated by cutting off defensive weapons to Ukraine and saying he wouldn’t react unless it was a major invasion. 

And he had pulled out of Afghanistan just months earlier, August of 2021, his first year, and he had never been over 40% since because he left $140 billion we put into Afghanistan. 

I don’t know how much of that we want to count. Renewed buildings, warehouses, roads, bridges, a billion-dollar embassy, $350 million for Bagram refitting, 100,000 vehicles. 

Everybody, we’re all worried about car prices. 100,000 we bought, brand-new vehicles turned over. 

But when you put the weapons and the infrastructure, it was over $50 billion easily, more than the Iran War. 

And he was unpopular. And how did he survive? He picked up a Senate seat. He only lost nine House seats. 

Yes, he lost the House, but the Republicans only had seven advantages. 

So was the economy then good? 

Well, Victor, 80% that year said it’s the economy, so obviously the economy— 

No, it was much worse than in 2026. 

Interest rates were higher. GDP was lower. Inflation was almost three times higher than it is now during our midterms. 

The poverty rate was a point and a half lower. The median family income was, depending on how you adjudicate it, either $14,000 or $8,000 lower. 

The stock market, if we go on the day right before our midterms, it was 20,000 points lower under Biden at his midterms, or now maybe 17,000 or 18,000. 

I could go on, but the economy was terrible, and yet we didn’t have a red wave. And now we’re told the economy is terrible when it wasn’t nearly as terrible as Biden’s, and we did have a blue wave. 

So I was trying to explain in this article, there were three reasons. 

The media just said this was COVID. Donald Trump did it. No, Donald Trump didn’t do it. He left office, and Joe Biden inherited a 1.9% annual inflation rate, and he enjoyed a 7.4% aggregate rise over four years. 

Okay, so then they said, what was it then? What was it? I said this to Megyn Kelly. 

It was the media. Janet Yellen said, this is just temporary, and we know with Trump, every day you have to use the word unexpectedly. 

165,000 jobs just created unexpectedly. Unexpectedly. 

But the media, number two. If you’re going—it’s very different inheriting 7% inflation versus 21%, three times higher. 

So when Donald Trump had 2.7% in his first year, you add 21% to it because that’s what prices are. 

So now you have 28% coming into this year, 28%, but it wasn’t Donald Trump. Excuse me, not 28%. You have 21 plus 2.7, 23.7. 

Joe Biden, three times higher, 9.1%, but he’s coming in with seven, so he has 16. 

So you got eight points, eight percentage points higher because of the inheritance. 

Nobody said this then. We are going to lower the rate of inflation. We inherited 21% in four years. It averages to 5.1. 

My promise in the first year is to halve that. He did that almost, 2.7. We’ll see what it is this year. It might be 3.5. We’ll see because there’ll be more. 

And then he should have said, and I can’t lower the 21%. That’s why you can’t afford things. 

I can only lower the rate of inflation so we don’t increase it too much. But more importantly, I can raise wages, and I can raise per-family median income. 

And he did. It was negative wage growth in 2022, negative, and it was positive in 2020, about 2.5%. 

So you can give people more money as compensation, and you lower the rate that prices grow, and finally that rat and the snake, that big lump starts to disappear. 

That’s all he had to say. Instead, he said, I’m gonna lower prices. 

Yes, but it was impossible for him to do that without a recession. We call it deflation. 

Look at Japan. They can lower prices from the year, from 10 years, but they had a recession. It’s a deflationary spiral. 

So that wasn’t articulated. 

And then very quickly, I said the other two. The border. Everybody wanted the border closed. It was closed, so everybody said it’s not an issue. 

Why would I vote on that? It’s done. It was done. 

And then all the polls said, would you like to deport aliens? Yes, 80%. 

Would you like to deport people who are criminals? Yes, 90%. 

Would you like to, when it was phased, phase it, would you like to deport illegal aliens even when they haven’t committed crimes? 

Yes, 55%. 

But here’s the kicker. What nobody could have anticipated was, we want the border closed, and we want all 10 million that Biden let in, especially those 500,000 criminals, deported. 

But we go to bed at 10 o’clock at night, and we wake up at six, and we want them all gone during the evening. 

So then, when we walk out on the streets of Minnesota or Phoenix, we don’t see any ICE officers who are pulling aside Herlinda, who works for my cousin, or Jose, who cuts the palm trees for my grandfather’s place. 

I don’t want to see that. I like the idea in the abstract because I poll that way, but I don’t want to see ICE officers. 

And when the Left discovered that, and Kristi Noem and Corey Lewandowski didn’t understand that and thought, I’m going to wear, like, SWAT team stuff, and I’m going to do all these photo ops, make all these about arresting people, you played right into the hands of Tim Walz and the Minnesota lunatics. 

They have 600 sanctuary cities, everybody, and jurisdictions. How do you get 10 million people out of there who spread all over the United States that Biden let in at 10,000 to 12,000 a day? 

We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal.

An incident late last month at Miami University in Oxford, Ohio, has garnered attention on social media as a student faces a felony charge for allegedly threatening pro-life students with a reference to the assassination of Charlie Kirk in September of last year.

Screenshots of the Miami Ohio page at the Yik Yak social media site, along with reporting from WLWT, show a comment targeting the Students for Life of America table at the university. “How many dining dollars to kirk the anti abortion table in Armstrong,” the Oct. 28 post read.

Alixandra R. Patterson was arrested on Nov. 2.

Patterson is facing charges of aggravated menacing, inducing panic, and making a terroristic threat. Court records mention telecommunications harassment as well. Members of the College Republicans reported the threat to the FBI.

She is being held on a $170,000 bond at the Butler County Jail and is listed as being in custody, according to court records. Should Patterson post bail, she’ll have to wear an ankle monitor, stay off social media, and stay away from the students who were threatened.

The alleged threats in question took place as the Students For Life America team and student members were engaged in what the organization describes as an “educational outreach display” known as “Meet Abortion’s Victims.”

Pictures of the display, including ones with SFLA Ohio regional coordinator Grace Kimzey, show a table with a sign reading “Every Abortion Has a Human Victim.”

The table has fetal models and information cards, among other items. Displays next to the table detail circumstances in which a woman might have an abortion, including diagnosis of Down syndrome, rape, or a woman who is the victim of human trafficking.

SFLA President Kristan Hawkins, who has been visiting campuses alongside Turning Point USA, told Fox News, “There are signs saying we are filming in this area, yet there will be students who will stand beside me and call me Mrs. Kirk, and they’ll use the verb ‘Kirked’ over and over again.”

She recounted alarming instances of students on campus mocking Kirk’s assassination and downplaying safety concerns, even claiming that Hawkins deserved violence.

Hawkins and SFLA’s press release emphasized the importance of free speech for students sharing the pro-life message.

In a statement to the Daily Signal, a spokesperson for the university indicated that, “Due to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), the university cannot confirm if a student is being disciplined or is currently in the disciplinary process. Every Miami student is afforded their due process rights through our Code of Student Conduct.”

The spokesperson added that the university “handles any reports of possible policy violations by students or violations of law through the Office of Community Standards and through campus and local law enforcement, with potential sanctions that vary based on the alleged violation and a student’s previous conduct history.”

Conservative justices seemed reluctant to grant the Trump administration sweeping authority to penalize employers importing immigrant workers.

The Supreme Court heard arguments Tuesday in a case that could have broader implications for the Trump administration’s immigration-enforcement agenda. While the administration argues that it can oversee all employer-related cases involving immigration, justices questioned the scope of that authority.

“You can’t really rely on immigration as a basis for this,” Justice Clarence Thomas said of the Labor Department issuing fines for violations against immigrant workers without the involvement of Article III courts.

“No, we absolutely can rely on immigration as a basis for this,” Sarah Harris, principal deputy solicitor general, replied. “There are plenty of civil penalties in the immigration context, both for the aliens themselves, for violating the conditions of admission to the United States.”

Justice Neil Gorsuch said the bulk of immigration statutes are related to admissions or deportations, not administrative actions. Chief Justice John Roberts stressed that the administration seemed to argue for a deference to the executive branch that will extend to many future cases.

In the case of Department of Labor v. Sun Valley Orchards, LLC., the department investigated and imposed penalties and back wages of more than $500,000 against the New Jersey-based Sun Valley Orchards after it concluded that farm workers had poor working conditions. The department found that the farm charged workers for meals and used unlicensed drivers to transport them, according to SCOTUSblog.

Justice Samuel Alito on Monday said the workers were not directly involved in the litigation and further questioned the significance of immigration to administrative action.

“This is not a contract action by the aliens,” Alito said. “They have no say in the conduct of this litigation. The government is not seeking, has not sought, just compensation for them, but civil penalties.”

The case itself stretches back to 2016, under the Obama administration. The farm owners, the Marino family, have denied the allegations, according to the Institute for Justice, a conservative-libertarian organization that is defending them.

Robert E. Johnson, senior attorney at IJ, argued that the Labor Department should not be able to take more than $500,000 from a family farm via an administrative judge that it employs. The farmers should have access to an Article III court, he said.

Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued in a brief, citing Founding-era figures former Chief Justice John Marshall and former President James Madison, that Congress may authorize executive branch agencies to impose fines for violations of immigration laws without courts.

“An employer accordingly has no vested right to import foreign labor; instead, it may bring aliens into the country only with the government’s permission. And when Congress grants a U.S. entity the privilege of bringing an alien into the United States, it may require the entity to accept executive adjudication of its compliance with the privilege’s terms and conditions,” Sauer’s brief said.

After an administrative law judge sided with the Labor Department, the farm sued in federal court over the department’s authority to impose the penalties. U.S. District Judge Joseph Rodriguez again sided with the Labor Department.

However, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the Constitution requires executive branch agencies to proceed before a federal district court, rather than an administrative judge.

how much power the Trump admin has in immigration enforcement

Immigration hawks argue that certain agribusiness jobs are magnets for illegal immigration. However, some conservative and filed amicus briefs in the case arguing that

While Democrats celebrate the Department of Justice’s decision last Friday to drop its lawsuit involving suspected noncitizen voters in California, another lawsuit remains ongoing, keeping the legal battle over election security in the Golden State far from over.

One day before the election, the Supreme Court rejected the DOJ’s emergency appeal seeking to require California to separate ballots associated with approximately 20,000 suspected noncitizens identified on a DOJ-provided list from other ballots.

On Friday, the DOJ announced it was dropping its lawsuit seeking to segregate the disputed ballots because the election had already taken place and the ballots could no longer be separated.

First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli explained the decision on X, saying he would “pursue every civil and criminal remedy to ensure only eligible American citizens vote.”

California Attorney General Rob Bonta called the lawsuit an “unlawful effort to interfere with California’s elections and disenfranchise eligible voters.”

However, the DOJ’s legal fight with California isn’t over. The department is continuing a separate lawsuit seeking access to the state’s voter registration records.

United States v. Weber, filed in September 2025, seeks to require California to turn over its statewide voter registration database so the DOJ can determine whether the state is properly maintaining its voter rolls, including keeping noncitizens off them.

California Secretary of State Shirley Weber has refused to turn over the records, arguing that doing so would violate state laws protecting voters’ private information.

The case was dismissed in January 2026, but the DOJ appealed the ruling in February, and the case remains before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The ongoing legal battle comes as California voters rejected Proposition 39, a ballot measure that would have required identification to vote in person and additional identifying information when voting by mail.

As of Nov. 5, Decision Desk HQ projected the proposition would fail, with approximately 39% voting in favor of voter ID and 60% voting against.

Republican Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio will be the next House minority leader after a conference-wide election Tuesday afternoon.

Jordan beat Rep. Steve Scalise, the current House majority leader, 106-73, according to multiple reports.

The two announced their candidacies last week in competing “Dear Colleague” letters after Speaker Mike Johnson decided against running for the position.

Jordan is a co-founder and former chairman of the House Freedom Caucus and the current chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. He touted his experience in his letter to members last week, casting himself as “battle-tested on the oversight front.”

The experience will serve the GOP well in the 120th Congress, when Democrats will hold a commanding majority and are already discussing investigations and impeachments.

House Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Harris congratulated Jordan in a statement: “Congratulations to Jim Jordan, House Freedom Caucus founder and former chairman, on being elected House Republican Leader!”

“A fierce fighter, uniter, principled conservative, and relentless advocate for the American people. Jim is exactly the right man for the job to fight back against the radical, crazy agenda of Democrats,” Harris stated.

This story is developing and will be updated.

AUSTIN, Texas—When Houston Mayor John Whitmire announced last week that he would scale back police collaboration with ICE deportations, he seems to have inadvertently disclosed the approach the state’s newly elected Democratic leadership will be taking on immigration.

Whitmire signaled that Gov.-elect Gina Hinojosa, Lt. Gov.-elect Vikki Goodwin, and Attorney General-elect Nathan Johnson among others, are messaging that they might not make use of two Republican-passed anti-sanctuary laws.

During a Nov. 6 televised press conference in which he said that the Houston Police Department would be limiting when officers contact ICE, the Democratic mayor revealed that he changed the ICE policy after learning from members of the new Democratic state leadership in private consultations that they were not likely to make use of a Republican-passed “sanctuary cities” ban law.

He said that Texas state leaders will deprioritize the 2017 Senate Bill 4 (SB-4), which allows top state officials to make use of fines and jail time to force local governments to turn over illegal aliens to ICE.

“I’ve been in contact with the new statewide elected officials, and SB-4 is not a priority of the new statewide elected officials,” said Whitmire, who left his legislative seat in December 2023 to become mayor.

“This is the right thing to do at the right time,” he said later during the press conference. “I was on the floor when Senate [Bill] 4 passed. I voted against it.”

If Whitmire’s account of his conversations is accurate, the new government’s apparent plan not to enforce the sanctuary cities ban has invited other Democrat-led Texas cities, such as Austin and San Antonio, to consider scaling back cooperation with ICE. A falling domino effect would damage President Donald Trump’s mass deportation program in a state with the nation’s second largest illegal alien population—about two million without legal status.

By some accounts, other cities are already moving to act before new Texas leaders take office in January.

The 2025 ICE Deputization Law

Attorney General-elect Johnson told Austin media outlet KXAN the day after his election that he’ll exercise “discretion” in enforcing another law all three new state leaders had voted against just last year, SB-8.

That law requires most of the state’s sheriffs and their personnel to be federally deputized by ICE (under Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act), to make immigration arrests on the agency’s behalf during the normal course of duty or by alerting ICE of aliens in jail custody.

Texas leads ICE’s expanding 287(g) deputization program, with 527 agreements involving 429 law enforcement agencies as of mid-September. As of Nov. 4, 202 of the 232 sheriffs’ offices subject to the mandate have deputized law enforcement personnel.

But Johnson, who voted against SB-8 as a state legislator, now suggests he is disinclined to sue sheriffs who fail to comply with it.

“If somebody has legitimate law enforcement reasons for not having a 287(g) agreement … then I have the discretion to recognize that they are charged with keeping the public safe, and I don’t want to take steps that would prevent them from keeping the public safe,” he told KXAN.

Johnson also indicated that he may discontinue the Attorney General’s Office’s own participation in 287(g), which he has described as a “political stunt,” a “waste of time,” and a “misdirection of resources.”

“I presently do not see a reason to keep that agreement in place,” he told KXAN after the election.  

Now other cities are considering changing their own policies.

Blue City Rebellion 

Most major cities in Texas are led by mayors, city managers, and city council members who align with the Democratic Party, including Houston, Austin, Dallas, El Paso, and San Antonio.

City leaders are as predisposed against the sanctuary ban law today as they were in 2017 when they perceived that Republican leaders would enforce compliance with it.  

In the hands of Republican governance, SB-4 has deterred city mayors, managers, and police chiefs in Texas cities from adopting ICE noncooperation policies. The law authorizes the Texas Attorney General to fine cities, levy Class A misdemeanor charges carrying up to a year in jail against officials, and potentially remove officials from office.

Blue cities took note when Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton won a $300,000 settlement from San Antonio in which the city admitted no fault. This was the first enforced SB-4 enforcement action. The city’s mayor, Ron Nirenberg, allegedly told city staff not to contact ICE after 12 people believed to be illegal aliens were discovered.

But now, city leaders are feeling free to reduce their cooperation with ICE too.

For his city, Whitmire has issued an executive order that would relieve police from serving administrative ICE warrants on illegal aliens during routine duties and calling ICE to pick them up. They’d still be told to alert ICE when transporting aliens arrested for jailable offenses.  

Other city leaders are following suit.

Austin’s Mayor Kirk Watson on Nov. 6 asked the police chief and the city manager to revise the city’s policy governing ICE warrants, while council members are calling for immediate retreat from ICE collaboration. In San Antonio, Mayor Gina Ortiz Jones said she will ask the city manager to explore options for ending the police department’s cooperation with ICE altogether, according to The San Antonio Current.

Enforcing Laws They Hate

Gov.-elect Hinojosa, Lt. Gov.-elect Goodwin, and Attorney General-elect Johnson have not publicly commented about the mayor’s revelation of their conversations.

But Hinojosa, in voting no to SB-4 with Whitmire against SB-4 in 2017, proved a fierce opponent of the anti-sanctuary law.

Neither Goodwin nor Johnson had been elected in 2017. But in the years since the sanctuary-ban law was passed, both have made their views on immigration enforcement quite clear and last year voted against SB-8. They have issued statements that raise questions about whether they will enthusiastically enforce either law.

“Texas requires our law enforcement agencies to cooperate with ICE. But that agreement assumes ICE operates within the law,” Goodwin said in February calling for an emergency committee to review the legality of the deputization program. “When concerns arise about deaths, detentions, and lack of transparency, state leaders have a responsibility to step back and evaluate whether this partnership is in the best interest of Texans.”

So far, ICE’s response to these spiraling developments is short: “We remain disappointed that sanctuary politicians seek to limit cooperation with ICE, as our law enforcement are simply fulfilling their sworn duties to serve and protect our communities,” the agency told the Associated Press.

A new House report details the federal government’s decades-long failure to hold convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein accountable.

The report, released Tuesday by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, says that crimes committed by Epstein after 2005 could have been prevented if not for failures by federal investigators and prosecutors, and it specifically faulted the Trump administration’s Justice Department for not sufficiently protecting survivors.

“Epstein operated with impunity, shielded and enabled by powerful connections and a justice system that repeatedly failed his victims,” House Oversight Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., said in a statement. “Governments at every level and powerful institutions must meet their legal obligations to identify these crimes, stop perpetrators, and deliver justice for survivors.”

After the Epstein Files Transparency Act was enacted in 2025, the Justice Department didn’t adequately communicate with Congress about the release of documents to the public, the report says.

“Despite extraordinary efforts undertaken by DOJ staff to expedite the release of EFTA records, questions remain as to whether the DOJ has released all relevant documents,” the report says. “Moreover, given the speed with which EFTA records were released, several instances of deficient redaction exposed sensitive information of survivors.”

Epstein died in a federal prison in New York in 2019 in what government officials determined was a suicide. Understaffing and systemic dysfunction at the U.S. Bureau of Prisons allowed the death to occur, the report says.

Epstein and business partner Ghislaine Maxwell facilitated the recruitment, control, and abuse of young women, while Epstein cultivated relationships with prominent individuals in government and business, the report says.

“We cannot undo the horrific harm inflicted on these women. But we must ensure that allegations of criminal activity are thoroughly investigated, survivors are protected, and those responsible are held accountable,” Comer added. “The failures of the past must not be repeated.”

The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida entered into a non-prosecution agreement with Epstein in 2007. Then-U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta, who made the deal, spoke to the committee. Acosta briefly served as labor secretary during the first Trump administration but resigned over questions surrounding the Epstein agreement.

“While some of these failures reflected poor judgment by the USAO, others appeared to stem from Epstein’s pervasive influence and far-reaching connections, potentially including two attorneys employed by the office,” the report says.

The committee recommends the Justice Department interview or re-interview key witnesses and investigate allegations of criminal activity involving Epstein’s associates, providing survivors with unredacted access to their records.

Financial institutions failed to act on indicators of human trafficking and immigration fraud, the report notes.

“The U.S. Department of Treasury (Treasury) and FinCEN should review whether financial institutions are meeting their obligations under reporting requirements designed to prevent suspicious activities such as money laundering and human trafficking,” the report says.

The report, titled “A Review of the Federal Government’s Mishandling of the Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell Criminal Investigations,” is the culmination of a 15-month investigation that included transcribed interviews and depositions with former President Bill Clinton, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Microsoft founder Bill Gates, Trump administration Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, former Attorney General Bill Barr, and Maxwell.

The Daily Signal first reported in September the committee’s plan to make recommendations on closing loopholes in human trafficking laws and ensuring that signers of nondisclosure agreements be required to report sexual misconduct.

War Secretary Pete Hegseth told the Daily Signal he has a “ton of support” in Congress as outgoing GOP Rep. Thomas Massie leads an effort to impeach him.

Hegseth defended himself against the impeachment articles at a Tuesday press conference, his first since May. The secretary told the Daily Signal that his legislative affairs team has been working with GOP leaders on Capitol Hill, including Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana and Majority Whip Tom Emmer of Minnesota, to fight the Kentucky Republican’s impeachment effort.

“What people misunderstand is the depth of partnership and work that we have done with House Republicans and Senate Republicans and others that are willing to reach across the aisle,” Hegseth told the Daily Signal.

“Our [legislative] affairs team has been very active, obviously working with Speaker Johnson, who’s done a fantastic job, and the Whip Tom Emmer. We’ve been in touch with a lot of members. There’s a—there’s a ton of support,” he continued.

Following the press conference, which lasted nearly 30 minutes, President Donald Trump issued a statement of support for his war secretary.

“Pete Hegseth gets an ‘A’ PLUS, PLUS, PLUS for his defense against a disgruntled, angry, defeated former Congressman, Thomas Massie, a TOTAL LOSER!” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

Hegseth also praised new White House Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, saying there is “no greater friend” to the War Department. On reports that Miller pitched himself for the job on the promise that he would end the Iran war, Hegseth told the Daily Signal he talks to Miller “about a lot of things,” and he is meeting with him soon “about the ways that we’ll work together.”

Massie introduced the articles of impeachment on Monday, citing “high crimes and misdemeanors” related to the Iran war. He told the Daily Signal last week that support for impeachment had grown since the election.

The congressman brought similar charges against Hegseth in September, but those efforts were blocked by Johnson, who canceled scheduled votes and adjourned the House early.

“There’s also an understanding that this is one disgruntled guy who drew up some really flimsy articles that aren’t grounded and actually in the Constitution, or things that are high crimes and misdemeanors,” Hegseth told the Daily Signal.

“Whether they love everything that’s been done, or they don’t want to vote for something that isn’t real, I’m grateful that Republicans have been taking a real look at this, and the Speaker has led on it, and I appreciate that,” Hegseth concluded.

Trump posted a second statement of support shortly afterward, calling the press conference a “MUST SEE.”

“I let the president speak for himself, and I’m grateful for his support. We’ve never had a better commander in chief. Full stop. I get to watch him every single day. He lives and breathes America first, and it’s the honor of a lifetime to be his Secretary of War,” Hegseth said of his support from the president.

Hegseth’s parents and his brother were in attendance at the press conference.

The secretary traveled to the Naval War Academy on Monday, where he told the Daily Signal and other reporters that he wasn’t worried about impeachment threats linked to the Iran war.

Following last week’s midterm elections, Vice President JD Vance posted on X that he had met with pollsters who said the Iran war was a top factor in the GOP’s losses.

Hegseth told the Daily Signal on Monday that he appreciates the vice president, but he agrees with the president on the decision to launch the war.

“The President says he’d do it again. I agree. [It] doesn’t have to be necessarily popular, but it can be necessary,” Hegseth said.

I get it. All this talk of the “blue wave” makes you want to kick the nearest Smurf.

Many midterm victors seem to believe that killers are better than cops, men in women’s sports are better than women in women’s sports, toilet paper is better than the U.S. Constitution, and the Lord is not the Great I AM, but singing “I Am What I Am” in a West Hollywood production of “La Cage aux Folles.”

As easy as it is to sink into despair and defriend anybody who has a D in their name, let alone next to their name, I’m here to let you in on a little secret. If you think God has forsaken this nation, you haven’t been paying attention. We’ve been here before, and not too far in the past.

Nov. 6, 2012. President Barack Obama wins reelection. Four more years of his ignoble work to “fundamentally change” America away from being a prosperous, united nation.

“Well, boys,” you could imagine the Founders saying, “It was fun while it lasted.”

“You didn’t build that anyway,” Obama would respond.

Two days after the election, I was attending a pastors’ leadership conference in L.A. (Why a Hollywood comedy writer was at a pastors’ leadership conference is a story for another day.)

All around the sanctuary that first day, at lunch, and even at times from the pulpit, the vibe was downcast over the election. The party that had pretty much cackled and hissed God out of its convention had won. “We’ve lost the culture,” the pastors were saying over and over. Another Obama term guaranteed more suffering for the unborn and a further turn away from our Christian founding.

Yeah, the worship team played songs of praise, but those fellas were singing the blues.

That night, the keynote speaker, Bishop Kenneth Ulmer, took the pulpit. Bishop Ulmer had lost his voice earlier in the day, and by night, he could barely manage a rasp. But as he got into his message, his voice grew stronger. By the time he got to the heart of his sermon, that voice was booming through the Valley.

And that message? “The King Has One More Move.”

However down you may be, however bad the situation, however hopeless and lost the board looks, you are never, ever, ever going to checkmate God. The King always has one more move. Always.

Was the message meant to be political? While Bishop Ulmer had bigger spiritual fish to fry, he was far too sharp not to know what time it was. (In fact, in a seminar the next day, he tied the pastors in the room in knots, demonstrating how the Bible would be twisted and turned against traditional marriage by church progressives. Prophetic was he.)

He knew those at the conference needed to hear “The King has one more move.”

Was he right? Did the King have one more move?

Does the pope ride the popemobile?

We actually saw several moves. Let me give you two examples. Around the same time Obama was sticking his nose in the air in his election triumph, a young kid was starting to put his nose to the grindstone. He’d left college to go straight into political activism. He brought his faith into the fight.

His wisdom, his message, his heart, his dogged determination would not only help bring about the political revolution of 2024, but also raise a new army of young, fearless conservative men and women who embrace traditional values like marriage and family. I’m talking, of course, about Charlie Kirk.

We cannot begin to calculate the long-term power and impact of that army.

God also had another move that still defies imagination. He tapped a coarse, boastful, twice-divorced billionaire reality-show star, who had been a darling of the liberal elite, and turned him into their worst enemy. He spared the man several times from their bullets to continue the task, even though if you had asked him about Sodom and Gomorrah, he’d be likely to say “Who are they? A Jersey law firm?”

Twice now, that most unlikely of moves has helped stop the disintegration of our nation.

Today, it is tempting to look into the Promised Land and see the territory in the hands of giants, or at least socialist-Islamist locusts magnified into giants.

But hold fast. The King still has one more move. What will that move be? Beats me. I’m still flummoxed by Trump in 2016.

But I may have a clue. Remember that conference I was at? And the dejection over how we had lost the culture? Questions about how we get it back?

The second day, a speaker asked that very question. In the long silence, I heard that still, small voice say, “Look around.” Okay. I scanned the sanctuary brimming with pastors. A long pause. Then, “You’re the only one here who actually works in the culture.”

Oh. Busted. The Hollywood humor writer had a role and responsibility in the fight.

The King still has one more move. And the move starts within each of us.

We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal.