The Boy Scouts of America taught me valuable lessons about tying knots, lighting fires, and what it means to be a man, but I’m glad to see the Department of War reconsidering its historic partnership with the Scouts.

Founded in 1910, the Boy Scouts of America taught young men wilderness survival skills, fostered friendship, and trained boys to become citizens and leaders. In order to attain the rank of Eagle Scout, a young man must not just demonstrate mastery of many skills but also plan his own project, leading others.

For these and other reasons, the military awards an automatic rank increase to Eagle Scouts who enlist. A 2017 post for Scouting Magazine noted that 20% of West Point cadets, 12% of the Naval Academy Class of 2016, and 10% of Air Force Academy cadets had attained the highest rank in Scouting.

Yet the Boy Scouts of America no longer exists, and the organization that replaced it, Scouting America, leaves a great deal to be desired. It is high time the military reconsider, and establish clear benchmarks for a scouting program that fosters virtue, rather than virtue-signaling.

The Trans Scouts of America

As a young man, I learned the Scout Law: “A scout is trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent.”

Tragically, the Boy Scouts of America abandoned these commitments. In January 2017, the organization endorsed transgender ideology, which I’ve long argued is fundamentally at odds with both trustworthiness and reverence:

‘A scout is trustworthy’ means more than just telling the truth. It means living with integrity, not presenting a false sense of yourself to others. There is a fundamental falseness in presenting yourself as a boy when you are in fact biologically a girl. But I think there is a worse loss of integrity among those who encourage biological girls to identify as boys.

‘A scout is reverent’ means honoring God, or at least a principle greater than yourself. Christians—and most Jews and Muslims, to my knowledge—believe that God created humans male and female, and that their sexuality is a good gift from God. Rejecting that gift—or encouraging others to reject it—is arguably irreverent.

Endorsing transgender ideology is a fundamental rejection of the virtues the Boy Scouts of America once championed.

The Boy Scouts of America also faced 82,000 claims of child sexual abuse in a scandal that led the institution to declare bankruptcy in 2020. I thank God that I never experienced any such abuse, but I am horrified by the fact that an institution tarred by such a scandal would go on to embrace an ideology that arguably makes young people more vulnerable to predation.

The Boy Scouts drifted from a non-political home for Democrats and Republicans alike to a left-leaning institution. The transgender policy came after the Boy Scouts allowed open homosexuality among boys in 2013, and then among adult leaders in 2015. In 2020, it announced solidarity with the Black Lives Matter movement and introduced a “diversity and inclusion” merit badge, now mandatory for the rank of Eagle Scout.

When the BSA changed its position on homosexuality, former scout leaders banded together to form Trail Life USA, a Christian alternative. The BSA encouraged a faith in God or a higher power, but Trail Life USA is explicitly Christian. By 2023, Trail Life USA had grown to more than 50,000 members in all 50 states, with 1,200 troops across the country.

Perhaps fittingly, at the beginning of this year the organization changed its name from Boy Scouts of America to “Scouting America.”

The Department of War

Last week, NPR published a story claiming that Secretary of War Pete Hegseth had written a memo cutting off Scouting America. Hegseth reportedly wrote that the Scouts no longer promotes “masculine values,” instead focusing on “gender confusion” and diversity, equity, and inclusion.

A War Department official told The Daily Signal that “the department will not comment on leaked documents that we cannot authenticate and that may be pre-decisional.”

I support the Department of War’s connection with scouting institutions. Scouting trains young boys—and girls—to develop important skills, and the military should reward scouting achievements with a higher initial rank.

That said, I think Scouting America has taken this important relationship for granted, and it is high time the Department of War develop clear guidelines for what kind of scouting program it will honor. Since Scouting America aims to indoctrinate kids on “diversity, equity, and inclusion” and rejects the distinction between men and women, Hegseth would be well advised to reconsider this relationship.

I’d recommend two things. First, the Department of War should set forth clear standards for scouting partners: standards focused on key skills and virtues, not political correctness. Second, the Department of War should seriously consider partnering with Trail Life USA and American Heritage Girls, the conservative alternatives to the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts.

Perhaps, if the military establishes clear standards, it may not just send Scouting America a well-deserved wake-up call, but also encourage reforms to restore the Boy Scouts to their own high ideals.

The post An Eagle Scout Weighs in on Department of War Cutting Ties With the Boy Scouts appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Fraudsters in the Somali community of Minnesota stole billions of dollars from American taxpayers over a period of years, and the state government did nothing to stop it.

That outrageous scandal has finally become part of a “national conversation” after City Journal published a stunning article written by Christopher Rufo and Ryan Thorpe titled “The Largest Funder of Al-Shabaab Is the Minnesota Taxpayer” in November. Al-Shabaab is a Somalia-based Islamist terror organization.

“Minnesota is drowning in fraud. Billions in taxpayer dollars have been stolen during the administration of Governor Tim Walz alone,” Rufo and Thorpe wrote. “Democratic state officials, overseeing one of the most generous welfare regimes in the country, are asleep at the switch. And the media, duty-bound by progressive pieties, refuse to connect the dots.”

The piece highlighted truly titanic fraud schemes involving various state welfare programs, including “Feeding Our Future,” a program that received hundreds of millions of dollars annually and was ultimately “being used to fund lavish lifestyles, purchase luxury vehicles, and buy real estate in the United States, Turkey, and Kenya.”

The report set off a firestorm.

Rufo was accused of being anti-immigrant and racist. Many on social media accused him of exaggerating the problem. But then The New York Times published a follow-up basically confirming that Minnesota’s social services were essentially eviscerated by Somali fraudsters under Walz’s watch.

There was a very important line in this piece provided by Ahmed Samatar, a professor at Macalester College. Samatar said, according to the Times, that “Somali refugees who came to the United States after their country’s civil war were raised in a culture in which stealing from the country’s dysfunctional and corrupt government was widespread.”

This sort of gets to the heart of why immigration policies have been so out of whack and destructive in Western countries for a generation, producing the current justified backlash.

It should be no surprise that in concentrated Somali communities, like the ones that exist in Minnesota, similar scams have taken place. One doesn’t need to be wholly against immigration to understand that. After all, Thomas Jefferson warned in his famed “Notes on the State of Virginia” about taking in too many people from “absolute monarchies” who will bring with them “the principles of the governments they leave imbibed in their early youth.”

“These principles, with their language, they will transmit to their children,” Jefferson wrote. “In proportion to their numbers, they will share with us in legislation. Our laws and institutions must therefore be guarded with jealous attention; and in order to preserve them, we must incorporate our immigrants into the body of our people.”

He recommended essentially slowing our roll bringing in people from such places. That’s prudence, not nativism.

What we’ve seen under President Joe Biden and Democrat governors like Walz, is the furthest thing from prudence. Instead, our country has been subjected to a reckless, cynical vote grab combined with the toxic empathy of modern leftism.

President Donald Trump said on Sunday that the U.S. needs to stop taking people in from countries like Somalia where they have “virtually no government” and “then they come into our country and tell us how to run our country.”

The president is on to something here when talking about the Somalia issue. The war-torn nation typically ranks as one of the most corrupt on Earth. Theft of public money is commonplace.

In 2022 it was discovered that two-thirds of the five thousand civil servants in Somalia didn’t report to work and in many cases were likely “ghost employees” according to the Horn Observer.

Somali President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud groused about this issue.

“There are more than 5,000 civil servants registered in our biometric system, but only 1,500 of them report to work every day,” he said, according to the Horn Observer. “Where are the rest? They do not exist or they do not live in the country. However, they are still paid. They are thieves and their superiors who accepted this scheme are also thieves. They are simply stealing public money.”

Hassan may be right, but it seems he doesn’t have a leg to stand on. He’s been accused of corruption related to public land sales.

There has been, no surprise, widespread problems with theft of international aid in Somalia too. The European Union had to temporarily suspend Somalia’s World Food Programme in 2023 because of widespread theft. Reuters reported how the program was supposed to send $130 a month to displaced persons in a refugee camp, but they would frequently only receive $65 after it was handled by the camp manager.

In 2024 the Minnesota Informer published an interesting piece about the corruption clearly taking place among Somalis in Minnesota. It was written by Kayseh Magan, a man with a Somali background who had worked as a fraud investigator in the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office.

Magan explained that widespread fraud was common in the Somali community. He said that this crime problem is the classic case of when “desire meets opportunity.” Magan wrote that “Minnesota’s public programs don’t adequately guard against organized fraud.”

Part of the issue: The fraudsters have exploited “the burgeoning political power of the Somali community, and the feckless fear that establishment politicians and state agencies show when confronted with charges of racism or Islamophobia.”

It’s here we see the crisis facing many Western governments playing out in the most extreme way in Minnesota. They’ve combined a generous welfare state with the near religious belief in mass immigration from developing, “third world” countries as Trump called them. To even question that system is to be ostracized as part of the wholly unacceptable “far right.”

The result in Europe, after years of evidence that the system isn’t working, is that governments literally silence people who disagree with unlimited immigration. The U.K. is conducting this Orwellian experiment in tyranny as I write this.

What we are seeing in the United States is hopefully an immigration reset of sorts. More Americans now question the value that unlimited, unchecked migration from dysfunctional countries brings to ours. What is happening in Minnesota needs to stop. The country can’t afford it.

The post Thomas Jefferson Could Have Predicted Massive Somali Minnesota Fraud Schemes appeared first on The Daily Signal.

With time winding down before the House breaks for Christmas, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries is hitting Republicans’ pressure points.

On Monday, Jeffries announced he is introducing a discharge petition—a way to circumvent Republican leadership—in a bid to extend COVID-19-era enhanced health care premium tax credits before they expire. 

Jeffries appears to be trying to hit Republicans where it hurts, fomenting dissent in their caucus and gaining political momentum off of the health care issue.

Discharge Mayhem

Discharge petitions, which require 218 members to sign on in order to force consideration of a bill, have become increasingly common in this Congress. The petitions are a thorn in the side of leadership, granting Democrats power in the minority.

The mechanism allows a member to force a vote on legislation that leadership is not putting on the floor once the petition collects 218 signatures. The petition then sets off a timer of seven legislative days for the petition to “ripen,” at which point the speaker is given two legislative days to schedule a vote.

Recently, a discharge petition brought forward by Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Ro Khanna, D-Calif., forced consideration of a bill to compel the release of information on the now-deceased convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Rep. Jared Golden, D-Maine, has also successfully gathered the 218 signatures necessary to force consideration of a bill to protect federal employees’ union rights.

Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Pa., has also submitted a discharge petition to force a vote on his bill to sanction Russia, and the backers of a bipartisan bill to ban stock trading among members have discussed a discharge petition to force it on to the floor, as well.

Jeffries Not Interested in Negotiating

Jeffries is demanding a three-year, clean extension of the Obamacare premium tax credits—an idea most Republicans have rejected. 

“We only need a handful of Republicans to join us in order to save the healthcare of tens of millions of Americans,” Jeffries writes in his letter announcing the initiative. “It’s time for the do-nothing Republican Congress to proceed with urgency.”

This demand for a clean extension—despite Republicans criticisms of the credits as market-distorting, prone to fraud, and permissive of abortion—is in contrast with the openness some Democrats previously expressed to negotiate and reform the credits with Republicans.

“We have to write a version that is good for our values that helps people, but also is designed to get some Republican votes,” Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., said shortly before the shutdown ended. 

Kaine ultimately voted to end the shutdown after receiving Republican guarantees of a vote on whether or not to extend the credits.

“Time has run out on Republican inaction,” Jeffries told The Daily Signal when asked why he would propose a clean extension.

The credits, which were boosted to higher levels and granted to higher earners under President Joe Biden, were set to expire at the end of 2025 by Democrats.

“We have a discharge petition that if it received an up or down vote in the House of Representatives, we are confident will pass,” Jeffries told The Daily Signal. “But obviously, [Speaker of the House] Mike Johnson [R-La.] has zero interest in protecting the health care of the American people. Instead, these extremists are gutting the health care of the people that they represent, including in the state of Louisiana.”

In response to Jeffries’ statement, a spokeswoman for Johnson told The Daily Signal, “Democrats are once again fabricating a narrative and misrepresenting the speaker’s position. The speaker welcomes President Trump’s efforts to lower health care costs, and any White House input is a meaningful contribution to the thoughtful, deliberative conversations taking place in Congress.”

The White House, although it has not released any final proposal of how to resolve the subsidy expiration issue, has reportedly flirted with the idea of a two-year extension of the credits, involving reforms such as ending zero-premium credits.

She added, “After 43 days of the Democrat Shutdown—during which they demanded bipartisan talks and direct White House engagement—Democrats now attacked the mere possibility of President Trump’s involvement. If Democrats truly want to address health care affordability, why would they reject a plan they haven’t even seen? Democrats clearly prefer a partisan fight over working towards a bipartisan solution.”

The Path Forward

Jeffries’ discharge petition might be more of a messaging ploy than an actual attempt at passing legislation, as Democrats have consistently messaged on purported Republican attacks on health care and entitlement programs.

In the Senate, Republicans are still discussing proposals for replacing the COVID-19-era credits, such as Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy’s proposed flexible savings accounts, which, if enacted, would allow consumers more flexibility in shopping for health care coverage and eliminate direct subsidies to insurance companies.

Jeffries suggests that, with total Democrat unanimity in the House, picking up the five necessary Republican defectors is a possibility.

“I guess we can always hope that there are a handful of Republicans who will actually do what they said that they would do once their shutdown ended, which is to work with Democrats to find a path forward,” he told reporters Monday.

Democrats’ success in this attempt would have to involve an extraordinary revolt against Republican leadership, going against the long-established position that the credits need reform if they are to be extended at all.

The post Jeffries Tries to Sidestep Republican Leadership on Health Care appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Charlie Kirk’s legacy could live on for generations to come in Ohio if a bill on education ultimately becomes law, and it’s one step closer to doing so. The Ohio House voted along party lines last month to pass the Charlie Kirk American Heritage Act, which permits the teaching of Christian influence on American history.

State Rep. Gary Click, a Republican who represents Ohio’s 88th district and who sponsored the bill, previously told The Daily Signal that the bill aims to prevent teachers from feeling “shackled” when teaching about the influence of religion. There’s also a free speech component.

The bill “works to preserve the ability for educators to discuss the positive impact of religion on American history, highlighting its consistency with freedom of speech and emphasizing how imperative it is to reduce politically motivated hate and violence in society,” according to a November press release.

Kirk was assassinated during a Turning Point USA event on September 10 at Utah Valley University. Click told The Daily Signal that although he had been aware of issues for teachers speaking about religious influence “for a long time,” Kirk’s assassination prompted this legislation.

“Charlie was a committed Christian, whose life and work will serve as a testament to the power of conservative ideals combined with a legacy of faith for generations to come,” Click added.

Throughout October and early November, the bill went through sponsor testimony, and legislators heard from proponents and opponents.

Opposition

The American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio, among other left-leaning groups, opposed the bill.

“H.B. 486 is an uncomplicated bill, essentially confirming Ohio’s K-12 public school teachers and faculty at our state universities and colleges are permitted to teach about religion in their classrooms,” Gary Daniels, the group’s legislative director, testified in October. “If that is all H.B. 486 seeks to accomplish, then House Bill 486 is entirely unnecessary and it’s introduction is deeply puzzling.”

Both the U.S. and Ohio Constitutions protect such teaching, Daniels noted.

“However, H.B. 486 does not stop there,” he noted. “Indeed, the other admitted goal of H.B. 486 is to promote Christianity to captive K-12 school students and also adults in our colleges and our universities.”

He argued that references to Christianity in the bill aim to “paint Christianity in the most positive light while deliberately avoiding the negative,” such as historic justifications for slavery, denying women the right to vote, and the battles between different Christian denominations. He warned that “promotion and celebration of one particular religious faith or set of religious beliefs” will “create far more problems than it solves.”

Clarity

Finn Laursen, an education consultant for Christian Educators, told The Daily Signal that the bill provides needed clarity about what educators are allowed to teach. Laursen also testified for the bill last month.

Ohioans tend to assume, Laursen warned, that public schools must be secular. “Quite frankly, well-meaning administrators stop it,” he noted, even when it comes to the role that Christianity played in America’s founding. In addition to his role as a consultant, Laursen has 32 years of experience working within public schools as a teacher, counselor, principal, and superintendent.

Laursen argued that neutrality towards religion is often “misunderstood.”

“Here’s the truth: that schools are government schools, employees are government employees, so they need to be neutral to religion,” he stressed. “And I think that’s what’s misunderstood. Neutral means you can’t proselytize. You can’t push your beliefs on someone. But it doesn’t mean you can’t study it. I mean, the Bible is taught in public schools across the nation, but not as the divine Word of God, but as history, as sometimes poetry, literature.”

Gabe Guidarini, chairman of the Ohio College Republican Federation, expressed hope for a revival of sorts, if the bill becomes law.

“I’m thrilled to see the Ohio House act in line with the spirit of America’s founding by passing this bill,” Guidarini told The Daily Signal. “If the bill makes it past the governor’s desk, it’ll help empower a rebirth of education on our nation’s Christian ideals and history. I want to especially thank Representatives Gary Click and Mike Dovilla who made this victory possible.”

Rep. Mike Dovilla, a Republican who represents the 17th district, also sponsored the bill.

“It’s essential that we highlight the positive influence religion has had throughout our history – uniting communities, enriching our shared values, and safeguarding our First Amendment rights as Americans to speak and worship freely,” Dovilla said.

Kirk was known for his Christian faith, and his group of Turning Point USA has been devoted to equipping and empowering high school and college students. Kirk’s widow, Erika Kirk, now heads the group.

After passing the Ohio House, the bill goes to the Senate.

The post Ohio Bill Honoring Charlie Kirk’s Legacy Closer to Becoming Law appeared first on The Daily Signal.

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. I’d like to talk about immigration, legal and illegal. Under President Joe Biden, we let in an estimated 2 million illegal immigrants and about 1 million legal immigrants. We’re starting to see some of the consequences that happen when you don’t vet people at the border.

We have, over the years, a massive Somali expatriate population in Minnesota. Now we are learning that during the COVID-19 period, when there were not audits and scrutiny, as there should have been, a lot of Somali expatriates, both legal citizens and green card holders and illegal aliens, ran a massive fraud against their adopted country, perhaps multibillion.

And Rep. Ilhan Omar, the self-appointed representative and the elected representative of the Somali community, has denied anything was wrong. Tim Walz, who is the governor of Minnesota, doesn’t wanna talk about it. That entire community abused the hospitality that was accorded to them.

Now we hear that an Afghan refugee who came in, largely unvetted, they say he was militarily vetted, but that doesn’t—that’s not the same criteria for someone that we want to bring in and accord enormous generosity to: give him a subsidized apartment, let him, his wife, and five children have access to it and subsidies with it ahead of normal U.S. citizens.

And he repays that gratitude with what? He drives across the country and executes a young National Guardsman from West Virginia and almost fatally wounds—seriously wounds—his companion. Murders one and tries the murder of the other, who’s in critical condition. As what? Thanks for the generosity that was accorded to them?

Almost daily, we hear of an illegal alien who is involved in a DUI and kills innocents on the road. We hear about murders. And we’re kind of tired of it, and we’re reexamining immigration.

We all understand that illegal immigration is clearly wrong. You cannot come into the country without legal authorization, and if you are here illegally, then you should return to your home. I think all Americans agree with that. They may disagree about the tactics of finding illegal immigrants. It’s much easier to destroy the border and allow 10,000 people to come across a day than it is the hard work of finding them and then rounding them up when they don’t wanna go back home, and then having the Left champion them as if they’re saviors or heroes or something for breaking the U.S. immigration law.

But I want to get back to just a larger issue of immigration. Something is wrong with all of this because we are not inculcating immigration—talking about it in the way that we used to talk about it. We’re talking about it in the salad bowl, not the melting pot.

We’re assuming that people that come in here, when—the moment they arrive, they have grievances against this country. They’ve been victims of oppression. We don’t really audit them legally. We don’t say to them, “We want you to know English. We want you to respect our laws. We want you to be acquainted with our traditions and customs and history, and we insist that you acculturate, you integrate, and you assimilate and do full American citizenship.” We don’t do that.

And so, we have truck drivers who are here both legally and illegally who don’t speak English, they don’t read English. And yet, out of our kindness, our naivete, or stupidity, we give them driver’s licenses. And the result is they’re killing people on American freeways. And yet, we can’t object because we feel that we’re going to be illiberal.

So, what is the solution? The solution is to rethink legal immigration. It should be much smaller, maybe 200,000 or 300,000, a number that we feel we can comfortably and easily assimilate. They must come in with knowledge of the English language. They should have some skill sets, so they do not become wards of the local, state, or federal government.

And most importantly, we have to have a civic education program in K-12 and outreach to them that explains, “You wanted to come to our country. We don’t wanna go to your country. You made the decision. You said that you wanted to give up your homeland, your customs, everything about it, and transfer across the ocean to the United States. If you wanted to do that, then we can accommodate you, but it’s going to be brutal. You’re going to be an American citizen first and a Somali or an Indian or a Mexican or a Guatemalan second. You’ll be fully assimilated. But don’t come over here and then congregate in a community where you speak your native language and you break our laws, and you feel that you can do so with impunity, as if you’re some victim on a Marxist binary of victim/victimizer, oppressed/oppressor. It’s not gonna work.”

Yes, we are a nation of immigrants*. We’re a nation of legal immigrants whose first mission upon arrival in America was to be a better American than a native-born American. And many millions were. I don’t think that is the case now, and the fault is not just with the immigrant, it’s with us.

We ask nothing of the immigrant. So little confidence, perhaps, we had in our own culture and civilization, we were derelict. And it’s the 11th hour, and if we don’t change rapidly in our approaches to legal immigration, we’re gonna end up and have a rendezvous with the European disaster and tragedy.

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

The post America’s About to Have a ‘Rendezvous’ With Europe’s Immigration Disaster appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Millions of Americans may soon see changes to their television programming if a decades old broadcast restriction that impacts TV station ownership is modified.

The Federal Communications Commission currently caps an entity from reaching more than 39% of U.S. TV households, but the federal agency is considering changing that rule. The longstanding federal regulation will likely be the topic of a Dec. 17 Senate Commerce Committee hearing, chaired by Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, where all three FCC commissioners are set to testify.

The federal rule has divided Republican leaders. FCC chairman Brendan Carr has considered modifying the federal agency’s cap on commercial broadcasters in the past.

“Over the decades, as the media landscape has evolved, the Commission has revisited these rules to account for new competitors and advances in technology,” Carr said in a statement released in June.

“Those changes have only accelerated in recent years with the advent of online offerings. Broadcasters now compete for eyeballs with YouTube stars, social media platforms, and streaming services like Hulu and Netflix, not to mention traditional cable and satellite offerings,” the federal regulator continued. Carr went to explain that he believed the FCC had the authority to change the cap without further legislative action by Congress.

Meanwhile, President Donald Trump has expressed concerns about left-wing networks potentially expanding their footprints in the United States if the FCC cap is discarded.

“If [lifting the FCC cap] would also allow the Radical Left Networks to “enlarge,” I would not be happy,” the president wrote in part on Truth Social, adding, “ABC & NBC, in particular, are a disaster–A VIRTUAL ARM OF THE DEMOCRAT PARTY.”

“They should be viewed as an illegal campaign to the Radical Left. NO EXPANSION OF THE FAKE NEWS NETWORKS. If anything, make them SMALLER!” Trump added.

However, the National Association of Broadcasters, a trade organization that includes major media companies, is in favor of ending the cap. 

“Local broadcasters are not asking for special treatment; we are asking for the ability to compete in today’s media landscape,” NAB president and CEO Curtis LeGeyt said in a statement provided to The Daily Signal. 

“Lifting the arbitrary 39% limit, which applies only to broadcast stations, will allow station groups to invest in local journalism, sports rights and the technology that keeps communities informed during emergencies, especially in smaller markets,” LeGeyt continued.

“The national cap was imposed during an era before broadband and streaming reshaped how Americans get their news, and the longer Washington delays addressing it, the harder it becomes for local stations to sustain the trusted local news and reporting that Americans rely on every day. We appreciate Chairman Carr’s recognition that empowering local broadcasters will require modern ownership rules, and we look forward to swift FCC action,” the NAP president concluded.

The Daily Signal reached out to Cruz’s office and the FCC for comment.

The post FCC Considers Jettisoning Longstanding Rule Limiting Broadcasters appeared first on The Daily Signal.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt defended the Department of War’s second strike on an alleged drug boat in the Caribbean.

Leavitt said at Monday’s press briefing that Secretary of War Pete Hegseth authorized Adm. Frank Bradley to carry out the second strike on Sept. 2, reportedly killing two people who survived the initial attack.

Leavitt addressed the strike after a Washington Post report reported Hegesth ordered the military to “kill everybody.” Hegseth denounced the story as “fake news.”

“President [Donald] Trump and Secretary Hegseth have made it clear that presidentially designated narco-terrorist groups are subject to lethal targeting in accordance with the laws of war,” Leavitt said. “With respect to the strikes in question on Sept. 2, Secretary Hegseth authorized Admiral Bradley to conduct these kinetic strikes.”

“Admiral Bradley worked well within his authority and the law directing the engagement to ensure the boat was destroyed and the threat to the United States of America was eliminated,” she continued.

The Biden administration allowed enough fentanyl to enter the country to “kill every American, man, woman and child, many times over,” Leavitt said.

“That’s why you’ve seen a drastic difference in this administration’s policy with respect to the last,” she said, “and it’s one of the many reasons the American public reelected this president and support this secretary of war in conducting these strikes.”

Hegseth held meetings with many members of Congress over the weekend who expressed concerns over the strikes, located mostly near Venezuela, Leavitt said. She said the administration has also held 13 bipartisan briefings to Congress on the strikes.

“There have been a number of document reviews from members of Congress to review the classified DOJ Office of Legal Counsel opinion and other related documents,” she said. “Twenty-nine senators and 92 representatives have reviewed those documents, which is about two thirds of those that are Democrat members, and they have been made available to all 100 senators, all 435 members of the House, and to general counsels of the relevant committees on a bipartisan basis for their review.”

The post White House Defends Strikes on Venezuelan Narco-Terrorists appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The Vatican supports a Palestinian state, according to Pope Leo XIV.  

“The Holy See has for many years publicly endorsed the proposal of a solution of two states,” the pope told reporters Sunday on board a flight from Turkey to Lebanon. “We all know that in this moment, Israel does not accept that solution,” he said, adding that the Vatican sees it as the “only solution” to end the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas.  

The Holy See is the governing authority of the Roman Catholic Church and is headed by the pope in the Vatican.

Israel and Hamas are still engaged in a ceasefire agreement that took effect in October, just over two years after Hamas carried out a terrorist attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, that left 1,200 people dead and another 251 captives in Gaza. Since the ceasefire took effect, Israeli troops have pulled back to the designated “yellow line” within Gaza. All the living hostages were returned on Oct. 13, but Israel has accused Hamas of slow walking the remains of the deceased hostages. The bodies of two dead hostages are still believed to be in Gaza.  

The U.S. helped to broker the current peace deal between Israel and Hamas that is based on President Donald Trump’s 20-point peace plan, that includes a complete end to the war and the disarmament of Hamas.  

Leo stressed that the Vatican is a friend to Israel, adding, “we try with both sides to be a voice of mediation that can help get closer to a solution with justice for all.”  

Leo, who is the first American pope, is not the first pope to openly endorse a Palestinian state. In 2009, Pope Benedict XVI called for a “sovereign Palestinian homeland,” and before his death earlier this year, Pope Francis said he believed a two-state solution was the “the only solution” to the conflict between Israel and Hamas.  

In 2015, the Vatican signed its first “Comprehensive Agreement between the Holy See and the state of Palestine,” in which it declared a “hope that the much desired two-State solution may become a reality as soon as possible.”  

An argument for a two-state solution in which Palestine would receive formal statehood crosses political divides and has received support from some Republicans and Democrats. Still, there is significant opposition to a two-state solution, especially on the political right, fearing that the “solution” would ultimately lead to the erasure of Israel.  

The two-state solution, in which Israel and Palestine would have their own state side by side, is “a great branding move,” but it is “not a solution,” Heritage Foundation senior research fellow Eugene Kontorovich previously told The Daily Signal. “It is an interim step to the destruction of Israel.”  

“The minimum demands of the Palestinians are the ethnic cleansing of every single Jew in Judea and Samaria, every single Jew in the Old City of Jerusalem,” according to Kontorovich. “They want something no one has ever asked for before—they want an independent country, free of Jews, free of an ethnic minority.”   

Instead of agreeing to a diplomatic solution, Kontorovich says the Palestinians have chosen “war and jihad.”   

The post Palestinian State Seen as ‘Only Solution’ to Conflict, Pope Says appeared first on The Daily Signal.

A three-judge panel disqualified President Donald Trump’s former personal lawyer as the acting U.S. attorney in New Jersey, in a case pushed by the head of a liberal lawfare group, and by Hunter Biden’s former lawyer.

The panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit determined Monday that Alina Habba’s appointment violated federal procedures. This upheld U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann’s ruling in August.

“It is apparent that the current administration has been frustrated by some of the legal and political barriers to getting its appointees in place,” Judge D. Michael Fisher wrote in the ruling. “Its efforts to elevate its preferred candidate for U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey, Alina Habba, to the role of Acting U.S. Attorney demonstrate the difficulties it has faced.”

The litigation to disqualify Habba involved Democrat lawyers opposing the Trump administration, such as Norm Eisen, the executive chairman of the Democracy Defenders Fund, who vowed to bring more than 100 lawsuits against the Trump administration. 

Also in the mix was Abbe Lowell, the former attorney for Hunter Biden, the son of former President Joe Biden. 

Gerry Krovatin, a New Jersey lawyer involved in ethics cases against Republicans and Democrats in the state, also represented one of the plaintiffs.

“The court’s decision affirms that U.S. Attorney Alina Habba is unlawfully and invalidly serving as the chief federal law enforcement officer in New Jersey, marking the first time an appellate court has ruled that President Trump cannot usurp longstanding statutory and constitutional processes to insert whomever he wants in these positions,” the three lawyers said in a statement. “We will continue to challenge President Trump’s unlawful appointments of purported U.S. Attorneys wherever appropriate.”

The lawyers needed a client with standing to challenge Habba’s capacity to bring charges. The three lawyers represented Cesar Pina, who pleaded not guilty to wire fraud, money laundering, and bribery charges. Pina was among plaintiffs who challenged Habba’s authority to bring criminal cases. 

The disqualification marks another setback for the Trump administration’s Justice Department regarding appointed prosecutors. 

Last week, a federal judge dismissed criminal cases against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General  Letitia James. The judge determined that Lindsey Halligan had been unlawfully appointed as interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. 

Reuters contributed to this story.

The post How Liberal Lawfare Actors Spearheaded Case That Got Trump-Appointed Prosecutor Disqualified appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Should the Trump administration or the courts determine whether an illegal alien qualifies for asylum due to threats of persecution, when the facts are not in dispute?

Supreme Court justices pressured a Justice Department lawyer on that issue Monday.

The case involves Salvadoran national Douglas Humberto Urias-Orellana, who claims he faced threats to his life from a hitman in his country. He illegally entered the United States in June 2021 during the Biden administration’s border surge. 

The question before the justices is whether federal courts should defer to the executive branch’s judgment on immigration deportation cases when facts are not in dispute. In this case, the federal court deferred to the Justice Department’s determination that the case did not constitute persecution. Plaintiffs argue the courts should make that interpretation.

For this reason, the plaintiffs did not focus on the hitman’s threat in the legal arguments, which seemed to perplex Justice Sonia Sotomayor. 

“I actually don’t understand why a credible death threat would not always cause suffering or harm,” Sotomayor said. “Are you arguing something quite different?”

Nicholas Rosellini, arguing for the plaintiffs, said, “We did not make that argument explicitly before the First Circuit.”

He added in the appellate court arguments, the government argued entirely for judicial deference to the Bureau of Immigration Appeals. 

“Deciding whether undisputed facts qualifies persecution under the law involves legal interpretation, not fact finding,” Rosellini told the court. “Courts have repeatedly established legal principles on things like sexual violence, religious persecution, economic deprivation, and beyond. The court did not establish those principles by pondering the term ‘persecution’ in the abstract. They interpret the law by applying the persecution standard to particular sets of undisputed facts.”

Arguing for the government, Justice Department lawyer Joshua Dos Santos said the Supreme Court has spoken to the issue in the 1992 case of Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Elias-Zacarias. In that case, the high court found a Guatemalan man could not seek asylum in the United States because an anti-government guerrilla group sought to force him into military service. 

Dos Santos added that Congress passed reforms of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, which reviews rules adopted by federal agencies, and the government’s standard for “persecution” is thoroughly reviewed by the executive branch. 

“There’s no way, no realistic chance, that when Congress was overhauling standards of review, in OIRA, … that it was either unaware of that practice, or silently departing from it,” Dos Santos said. 

Justice Brett Kavanaugh questioned giving too much deference to the executive branch without judicial review, and pressed Dos Santos. 

Dos Santos replied that the Bureau of Immigration Appeals and federal immigration judges “have expertise in looking at recurring fact patterns, and seeing all kinds of different versions of these cases, far more cases than any court of appeals is ever going to see.”

Immigration judges are Justice Department officials, and not members of the federal judiciary. The same is true of the Board of Immigration Appeals, which upheld the immigration judge’s decision in this case.

After the Department of Homeland Security sought removal of Urias-Orellana and his family, the family applied for asylum based on persecution. Urias-Orellana also sought protection under the United Nations’ “Convention Against Torture.”

Urias-Orellana contends his association with his half-brother Juan puts his life in danger. Under the Immigration and Naturalization Act, asylum seekers who have been denied relief by the Board of Immigration Appeals can appeal to federal courts. 

A federal immigration judge denied the family’s applications for asylum, and determined this did not amount to persecution, or demonstrated reasonable fear of future persecution if they returned to El Salvador. As for the U.N. anti-torture claim, the judge found he didn’t report his harassment to the police. The BIA upheld the judge’s determination.

After that, the plaintiffs appealed the case to the First Circuit Court of Appeals, which found it should defer to the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision since facts were not in dispute.

The post Who Decides Whether an Illegal Immigrant Gets Asylum for ‘Persecution?’ Supreme Court Weighs Arguments appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Parents are growing increasingly concerned about the prevalence of technology in classrooms, and the negative side effects that change is fueling among children nationwide.

Ever since the COVID-19 pandemic pushed schools to remote learning, many have only grown increasingly reliant on technology, shifting assignments into digital forms and handing every student a computer or tablet to aid their education in the classroom. But after seeing their kids become angrier, less sociable, and less educated, parents are asking where the teachers have gone.

“What are we doing with an iPad all day, for eight hours a day in our kids’ hands?” Patricia McCoy, a mother of four in Wyoming, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “Honestly, it’s disturbing. They give your kids worksheets on the iPad. There’s no actual critical thinking happening because they’re given apps to replace the teachers.”

Even when parents ask for additional help for their struggling children, the solution at some schools always comes back to more technology.

“If your kid is struggling in math, instead of giving them tutoring, they’re going to recommend to you that your child use this app on their iPad to help teach them how to do this math,” McCoy continued. “But that app doesn’t teach them how to do the math. They enter the problem and it gives them the solution all written out and worked out, so there’s no critical thinking being done. The answer is being given to them. They have ChatGPT at the ready, and other things similar to ChatGPT, which, again, does all the thinking for them. And all they have to do is show up, log into the iPad, get the answers from one app, put it into another app and get the grade.”

This has some parents wondering where the teachers have gone and whether they are teaching their students at all.

“They Don’t Want to Teach”

“COVID did create a lot of this, and it made it a lot easier for some of the teachers now to just place these kids in front of a screen,” Mike Maldonado, a California father of five, told the DCNF. “And it makes it easier for some of these teachers because they don’t want to teach. They’re just there for a job.”

“We can’t ignore the fact that all this stuff makes it easier on the teacher, which actually, I think produces a worse result,” Jaime Brennan, member of the Frederick County Board of Education who spoke on behalf of herself and not the board, told the DCNF. “When a teacher can go online and make up an assignment using AI, now they haven’t thought. Now they’re not using their brainpower, and it’s like a trickle-down effect. We’ve already introduced screens and technology to the level that as humans, I don’t think we were designed to use, and we haven’t adapted to it very well.”

Critically, Brennan said, the use of AI has prevented students from developing automaticity, the skill of memorizing basic solutions, such as simple addition, to the point that you do not even think about it, which is a foundational skill students carry on throughout their education and adult life.

McCoy told the DCNF that the digital learning environment has left her youngest son academically “two to three years behind” his siblings, who did not go through this new screen-based school system.

“He is drastically farther behind academically,” McCoy said. “He does what he needs to to pass, but intellectually and academically, he is years behind his two brothers and his sister at this age, and that is sad and heartbreaking as a mother to know that I probably failed my child because I went along with what the school said was going to help them.”

Despite being “years behind,” McCoy’s son is on track to graduate on time.

“We graduate kids who have to go to community college and take remedial math,” Brennan mentioned. “Our kids leave 12th grade and they go to 13th grade. So we’re putting out kids that are not ready to operate in the regular world.”

Possessed by the Screen

Not only is she worried about his education, the concerned mom has seen a noticeable shift in her son’s mood as he is forced to rely on more and more screen time.

“I tried to take my son’s phone away one time, and it looked like a demon was looking back at me. My son was not looking at me,” McCoy recalled. “His eyes were completely black and cold. It was like he was a totally other person, like a drug addict, and you’re taking their drug from them. And he was 15 at the time.”

Without his phone, McCoy said her son was a new person.

“That week, he was a totally different person. He wasn’t overly tired and drowsy all day. He was actually interacting with the family and spending time with us. Instead of being shut down and closed off in his room, he was playing with our dogs more,” McCoy said. 

Maldonado thinks these behavioral issues stem partly from the lack of human interaction children experience in increasingly screen-dependent classrooms.

“Part of the problem is that they’ve lost a lot of the interaction,” Maldonado said. “This is why some of these kids I think act out, because they don’t want to listen to the teacher. There has to be that communication between two people, two humans, and not a screen where they can’t really interact and get the tone, the voice inflection of a response.”

“That is a major issue,” Maldonado continued. “Without social skills, how do you function in society? And we see it all the time. Social skills are definitely learned, it’s a trait that you pick up from interacting with people when you’re young. And that’s the big thing, people don’t realize that if there’s no interaction, that person is going to be withdrawn, not just from the classroom, but from the home and from society.”

The issue is especially apparent in children who were younger during the COVID year, Maldonado said. The so-called COVID babies are typically “the ones who you can see have the majority of the behavioral issues.”

“It is hard to get some of these kids to actually look you in the eye and make eye contact. They don’t know human interaction,” Brennan concurred, adding that students today are not even dating as much as they used to. “I’m really concerned where that’s going to lead, and what our kids are going to be like. We’re already seeing negative impacts of kind of this disintegration, people are waiting till later to getting married. They’re not getting married.”

The Price America Is Paying

Meanwhile, as the use of artificial intelligence (AI) among youth increases, more data and stories are coming out revealing the tool often exposes children to inappropriate content, damages the development of critical thinking skills, and at times, drives kids to suicide by explicitly coaching them to do so. Brain scans from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) revealed that brain engagement was severely diminished under participants who used AI compared to those who used a traditional search engine, and memory recall following assignments completed with AI tanked.

Interestingly, schools that struggle with budget concerns and often fail to see promised districtwide staff raises somehow find funds to buy brand-new devices for every student—even when they already had slightly older, but still functional devices.

“Most of [the money goes] to administration and fees and other things that have nothing to do with the education of our kids, or they spend it on these expensive iPads and technology that shouldn’t even be in the classrooms, and then they go to the state and say, ‘You’re not giving us enough money. We need more money,’” McCoy told the DCNF. “Well, we keep throwing money at the problem, but the problem doesn’t get better or go away. It gets worse every year. So clearly, money isn’t solving the issue on why our kids can’t read, write and do math.”

“Stop spending the money on the iPads and put that money back in the classrooms instead,” McCoy continued. “Give it to the teachers.”

While Tina Descovich, co-founder and CEO of parental advocacy group Moms for Liberty, mirrors the concerns of many parents, she also told the DCNF there could be a place for technology in the classroom.

“I think they have to be used in a very responsible fashion,” Descovich said. “There’s so many wonderful teachers that would like to use AI in a way to help enhance their skills and teach their children better.”

Moms for Liberty signed a pledge with the White House in September to help foster innovation and interest in AI with America’s youth.

Brennan remains concerned that technology in the classroom prevents kids from thinking independently and may harm future skill building rather than facilitate an interest or expertise in technology.

“Are you trying to keep pace with the kids who are learning to use the technology, or are you trying to create the kids who are going to develop the technology? Because those are two different things,” Brennan said. “So if we’re just teaching our kids to be technology consumers, then sure, the easy way out is to do everything on the technology. If you’re trying to keep teach kids to be the technology developers, they need to learn to think and process away from the technology. They need to have other skills that are not technology based.”

Parents Still Have Power

For parents concerned about the technological takeover of their children’s classrooms who feel like their schools aren’t listening to them, Descovich said that along with helping their kids at home when possible, parents should “rally with likeminded parents.”

“Start educating your community,” Descovich said. “I think when parents really understand what’s happening and what the concerns are and what the risks are, they will want to take action. And when you have enough parents showing up at school board meetings and speaking about an issue we have, as we know, you definitely can make an impact, and they will listen.”

Originally published by the Daily Caller News Foundation

The post ‘No Critical Thinking’: Parents Sound Alarm as Tech Begins to ‘Replace the Teacher’ appeared first on The Daily Signal.

TSA is preparing to roll out a new method for travelers to confirm their identity if they do not have a Real ID or a passport. For a $45 fee, domestic air travelers can prove their identity ahead of scheduled travel through the TSA Confirm ID process.  

Providing travelers who do not have a passport or Real ID with another option to confirm their identity is part of Transportation Security Administration’s “multilayered security approach,” a senior TSA official told press during a phone call Monday. The new option maintains TSA’s standards, the official said, and ensures the agency will keep “bad actors off the airplanes” and TSA knows the true identity of all passengers.  

Beginning on Feb. 1, travelers who have yet to obtain a Real ID or another acceptable form of identification, can visit pay.gov or TSA.gov to use the new identification process. The Confirm ID application, according to TSA officials, will typically take about 10 to 15 minutes to complete, but could take up to 30 minutes. 

TSA is encouraging travelers to complete the process ahead of time, but it can be done at the airport. TSA warns this could lead to travel delays for the individual. The $45 fee is nonrefundable even if the application is denied, or the traveler misses their flight.  

Once a traveler completes the Confirm ID process, they can proceed to the TSA security checkpoint and present the agent with the receipt for the application. An approved Confirm ID is good for 10 days from the first day of travel. 

TSA officials stressed that taxpayers will not be saddled with the cost of the new program, but expenses for operating and processing the new identification travel option will be covered by the $45 fee.  

TSA is working with the airlines to help facilitate the new process and make travelers aware of the option ahead of the Feb. 1 implementation. The new identification system will remain in place indefinitely, according to senior TSA officials.  

In May, TDS began enforcing the new Real ID policy. A Real ID is a traditional state driver’s license that meets new, higher standards of security. The physical card has a small gold star in the top right corner.  

Following the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attack on the U.S., the 9/11 Commission recommended the federal government raise security standards through identification cards. In 2005, Congress passed the REAL ID Act.

More than three million people fly domestically in the U.S. every day, according to the Federal Aviation Commission. While about 94% of U.S. travelers are compliant with the new travel guidelines that took effect in the spring, senior TSA officials say they are working toward 100% compliance and hope the TSA Confirm ID process will remind more Americans to schedule time at the DMV to acquire their Real ID card. 

Children under the age of 18 are not required to present an ID at the security checkpoint.  

The post No Real ID? No Problem! TSA to Rollout Alternative Identity Verification Method for Air Travel appeared first on The Daily Signal.

FIRST ON THE DAILY SIGNAL—The Department of Education on Monday notified universities that they will be required to disclose foreign funding to the agency as is required by law.

Higher education institutions will be required to use a new foreign funding reporting portal, set to launch on Jan. 2, to disclose foreign source gifts and contracts with a value of $250,000 or more, The Daily Signal can first report.

“The Trump administration is launching a new state-of-the-art system for colleges and universities to more efficiently and securely report their foreign gifts and contracts as required under the law,” Secretary of Education Linda McMahon told The Daily Signal. “After years of neglect by the Biden administration, the new portal will assist our institutions of higher education in fulfilling their statutory responsibilities and enable us to protect our national security by facilitating improved compliance.”  

The move is in line with Section 117 of the Higher Education Act, which requires colleges and universities to biannually disclose foreign source gifts and contracts to the Department of Education.

Institutions that don’t comply could face Department of Justice enforcement, including civil actions compelling compliance and recouping the full cost of enforcement.   

“America’s taxpayer funded colleges and universities have both a moral and legal obligation to be fully transparent with the U.S. government and the American people about their foreign financial relationships,” McMahon said. “We are grateful to the many stakeholders for their feedback in designing this portal and look forward to vigorously protecting our educational institutions from potentially harmful foreign influence.”

The current reporting portal has not been meaningfully updated since the first Trump administration, according to an agency official.

The Biden administration did not prioritize enforcing Section 117 or monitoring potential foreign influence at American universities, the agency says.

The new portal, a top priority for the Trump Education Department, has already undergone internal and external testing by universities, and it was designed based on years of comments and feedback from university filers.

Nine universities, including the University of Texas at Austin, MD Anderson, the University of Texas Medical Branch, the University of Southern California, Pepperdine University, Purdue University, Indiana University, Washington University, and the University of Arizona, beta-tested the portal and provided feedback.

The portal’s improved features include the ability to upload foreign funding disclosures in bulk rather than individually; executive summary visualizations to improve public transparency; and other tools for drafting, reviewing, and submitting reports to the department. 

Trump’s April executive order, “Transparency Regarding Foreign Influence at American Universities,” makes it a priority “to end the secrecy surrounding foreign funds in American educational institutions and safeguard America’s students and research from foreign exploitation.”

The new reporting portal represents an “important step” to carry out the directive, according to the agency.

A senior Department of Education official previously told The Daily Signal the agency would undertake more investigations into universities that fail to accurately disclose funding from foreign adversaries.

Trump’s Department of Education has already launched investigations into Harvard, the University of California at Berkeley, the University of Michigan, and the University of Pennsylvania for what it says are untimely and inaccurate foreign financial disclosures, in violation of Section 117 of the Higher Education Act.

There’s only a 40% compliance rate with Section 117 among universities, the official said.

Universities that are funded by foreign adversaries can allow that to influence their decision-making, according the official.

Foreign governments use donations to get sought-after lab seats in Ivy League science, technology, engineering, and math programs. Universities funded by Middle Eastern adversaries have often been hesitant to condemn antisemitic, anti-Israel activity, the official said.

The post Exclusive: Education Department Ramps up Pressure on Universities to Disclose Foreign Funding appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The Indiana State House is set to convene this afternoon to discuss a redistricting effort to boost Republicans chances in the 2026 midterms.

President Donald Trump has taken a particular interest in the state matter declaring that Indiana Gov. Mike Braun “must produce on [redistricting], or he will be the only Governor, Republican or Democrat, who didn’t.”

The president is trying to win two House seats from Indiana’s congressional delegation for the GOP, which currently sends seven Republican members and two Democrat members to the federal House of Representatives. The move comes after Texas state Republicans changed the Lone Star State’s congressional map, and California Democrats gerrymandered their own congressional lines in response. Missouri has also jumped into the fray with Republican Gov. Mike Kehoe signing redistricting legislation in September. That new map could give Republicans an additional House seat from the state.

According to the media outlet Axios, Indiana State House Republicans will need 67 of their members to show up on Monday to ensure a quorum is made to conduct state business. There are presently 70 Republicans in the state house meaning that the party can only afford to lose three of its members. Axios reported that State Rep. Mitch Gore thought five Republican state representatives could break ranks. Two of those five confirmed to the media outlet that they would in fact try to be present for the quorum call suggesting that Republicans will likely get their wish for a legislative session in the state house to discuss redistricting. Any legislation would only need 51 votes in the state house to pass through the chamber.

The Indiana State Senate is expected to convene next week to take up legislation passed by the state house. Several Indiana state senators have expressed opposition to the redistricting effort. Sen. Michael Bohacek said he would not back the redistricting attempt after Trump called Minnesota Governor Tim Walz retarded. Bohacek has a daughter with Down syndrome.

“Somalian gangs are roving the streets looking for ‘prey’ as our wonderful people stay locked in their apartments and houses hoping against hope that they will be left alone. The seriously retarded Governor of Minnesota, Tim Walz, does nothing, either through fear, incompetence, or both,” Trump had said in a post on Truth Social. 

As the redistricting debate has raged, several Republican state senators have received threats including “swatting,” which is when someone sends a false report to police leading law enforcement to dispatch to a particular address. State Sens. Andy Zay, Jean Leising, Kyle Walker, Greg Goode, and Linda Rogers are among the Indiana lawmakers that have been targeted with threats. 

Even if Republicans get their way and a new congressional map is implemented in Indiana, some GOP lawmakers have raised concerns that the new congressional district lines will not guarantee that Republicans are able to pick up all nine House seats in next year’s elections.

“In Indiana, redrawing our Congressional maps mid-cycle is not the best way for us to do that. Spreading out all of the Democrats in Lake and Marion counties across the rest of our districts will in no way guarantee a 9-0 map,” Republican State Sen. Blake Doriot said in a statement.

“There are no well-established Republican candidates working those hypothetical districts—they haven’t walked a parade, haven’t raised a dollar, and there will likely first be a primary race before we even get to the General Election,” Doriot added.

The post Trump Pressures Republicans as Indiana Mulls Redistricting appeared first on The Daily Signal.

DAILY CALLER NEWS FOUNDATION—“Iryna’s Law” took effect in North Carolina on Monday after lawmakers passed the tough-on-crime legislation in response to a Ukrainian refugee’s highly publicized murder on a Charlotte train.

The wide-ranging law broadly discourages pretrial release for defendants with prior criminal histories, requires mental health examinations in some serious cases and increases punishment for crimes committed on public transportation systems — provisions that relate to the August murder of Iryna Zarutska, the law’s namesake. It also adds ten assistant prosecutors to Mecklenburg County, gives the state’s chief justice authority to suspend magistrate judges, expands methods for executions and allows courts to extend probation sentences for juveniles they deem to be dangerous.

Zarutska was fatally stabbed on a light rail train by a man whom authorities identified as Decarlos Brown Jr., a mentally ill homeless resident with more than a dozen prior arrests.

The law requires jail or house arrest for anyone convicted of three Class 1 misdemeanors or higher offenses in the past 10 years. It also directs judges to order mental health evaluations for defendants who were involuntarily committed in the past three years or are a danger to the community in order to determine whether to institutionalize them again. Additionally, it bans judges from releasing defendants on a “written promise to appear”—the same declaration Brown made in January before police say he murdered Zarutska in Charlotte.

The law mandates that police inform judges about any arrestee behavior that shows they are dangerous to the community before detainment decisions are made. Judges must also order officials to provide a “criminal history report” on all defendants before deciding conditions of pretrial release, the text says.

Judges who grant pretrial release to criminals convicted of Class 1 misdemeanor or higher offenses three times, or those facing violent charges, must provide “written findings of fact” explaining the decision, the law says.

Democrat North Carolina Gov. Josh Stein signed Iryna’s Law in October. Stein praised the requirements for judges to weigh defendants’ criminal records in pretrial release rulings. He went on to call the death penalty provisions “barbaric” and complained about the bill’s emphasis on cash bail, NC Newsroom reported. The legislation states that lethal injection is North Carolina’s preferred execution method, but that if it is unavailable, others may be used.

The Trump administration criticized liberal cities’ criminal justice policies after Zarutka’s murder and charged Brown in September with committing an act causing death on a mass transportation system. The Department of Justice is pursuing the death penalty for Brown, and he also faces state-level murder charges over Zarutska’s death.

Originally published by Daily Caller News Foundation.

The post North Carolina ‘Iryna’s Law’ Takes Effect, Cracking Down on Repeat Offenders appeared first on The Daily Signal.

A year away from the midterm elections, President Donald Trump and Republicans will face a test in Tuesday’s House special election in Tennessee.

“To the Great People of Tennessee’s 7th District, who gave me Record Setting Wins in each of three Elections, I am asking you to get out and VOTE FOR MATT VAN EPPS,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post Sunday.

Van Epps, the Republican nominee, is running to replace Republican former Rep. Mark Green, who resigned from Congress in July to work in business.

Trump also heaped scorn on Aftyn Behn, the Democrat Tennessee state representative seeking an upset in a district where Republicans have won comfortably in the past.

“Matt is fighting against a woman who hates Christianity, will take away your guns, wants Open Borders, Transgender for everybody, men in women’s sports, and openly disdains Country music,” Trump wrote.

Republicans have highlighted Behn’s online footprint in recent days, including a podcast appearance in which she said of Nashville, the home of country music, “I hate this city, I hate the bachelorettes, I hate the pedal taverns, I hate country music. I hate all of the things that make Nashville, apparently, an ‘it’ city to the rest of the country, but I hate it.”

Nashville is the largest city in the district.

In response to the resurfacing of the audio, Behn said on CNN, “I was a private citizen. Nashville’s my home. Do I roll my eyes at the bachelorette parties and the pedal taverns that are blocking my access to my house? Yeah. Every Nashvillian does, but this race has always been about something bigger.”

In 2020, Behn expressed support on social media for calls to defund the police, in addition to writing, “good morning, especially to the 54% of Americans that believe burning down a police station is justified.”

Pressed for clarification on those remarks, Behn said on MS NOW, formerly MSNBC, “I don’t remember these tweets” and “I’m here to talk about my race which is in literally nine days.”

The race comes at a crucial point in Trump’s presidency. Republicans are one year away from midterm elections which could either save their trifecta or hand power to Democrats.

Tennessee has not elected a Democrat president since Bill Clinton in 1996, but it was a quintessential swing state for much of the 20th century.

A recent survey from Emerson College Polling and The Hill shows the race could be uncomfortably close for Republicans, with Van Epps leading at 48% support against Behn’s 46%.

In addition to Trump’s call for middle Tennessee to rally behind Van Epps, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., also joined the candidate at rallies on Monday. Tennessee Republican Reps. Tim Burchett and Andy Ogles, as well as Sens. Marsha Blackburn and Bill Hagerty joined as well.

The campaigns did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The post Tennessee House Race a Bellwether for Trump? appeared first on The Daily Signal.

President Donald Trump has reportedly guaranteed Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and his family safety, but only if they flee the country right away.  

Trump and Maduro spoke on the phone in November, and according to a report, the White House told Maduro to leave the country and allow for democratic leaders to assume rule of the nation. Sources told the Miami Harald that Maduro, his wife Cilia Flores, and his son Nicolas Ernesto Maduro Guerra, 35, would be given safe passage out of the country, but only if Maduro resigns.  

On Sunday, Trump confirmed the call with Maduro had taken place, telling reporters aboard Air Force One the call was neither good nor bad.  

“It was a phone call,” the president said, declining to comment further.  

On Saturday, Trump said the airspace over Venezuela should be considered “closed.”  

“To all Airlines, Pilots, Drug Dealers, and Human Traffickers, please consider THE AIRSPACE ABOVE AND SURROUNDING VENEZUELA TO BE CLOSED IN ITS ENTIRETY,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.  

When asked if the comment should mean an airstrike on Venezuela is eminent, Trump told reporters to not read “anything” into the remarks.  

The tension between Trump and Maduro is growing as the U.S. continues to carry out strikes on reported narco-terrorists’ vessels off the coast of Venezuela. On Friday, The Washington Post reported that Secretary of War Pete Hegseth ordered a strike on a vessel on Sept. 2 that was, according to the administration, carrying members of the Venezuelan prison gang Tren de Aragua. When two survivors were seen in the water after the first strike, a second strike was reportedly conducted.  

The targeting of the men “amounts to murder,” Todd Huntley, a former military lawyer who advised Special Operations forces, told The Washington Post.  

Asked about the incident, Trump said he did not “know anything” about the it, adding Hegseth “said he did not do it.”  

The Trump administration has now carried out more than 20 strikes on alleged narco-vessels.  

Hegseth has repeatedly defended the strikes and on Saturday, following The Washington Post’s report on the second strike targeting the two men, he blamed the “fake news” for “fabricated, inflammatory, and derogatory reporting to discredit our incredible warriors fighting to protect the homeland.” 

“As we’ve said from the beginning, and in every statement, these highly effective strikes are specifically intended to be ‘lethal, kinetic strikes.’ The declared intent is to stop lethal drugs, destroy narco-boats, and kill the narco-terrorists who are poisoning the American people,” Hegseth wrote on X.  

The post Trump Reportedly Gives Maduro Opportunity To Leave Venezuela Safely   appeared first on The Daily Signal.

President Donald Trump has invited to the White House the families of the National Guard members who were shot Wednesday evening near the White House, allegedly by an Afghan national.

“I said when you’re ready—because that’s a tough thing—come to the White House. We’re going to honor Sarah, and likewise, honor Andrew,” he told reporters Sunday. “Recover or not, we’re going to.”

Sarah Beckstrom, 20, died from her injuries. The second National Guard member, Andrew Wolfe, 24, is “fighting for his life,” according to Trump.

The president said he has spoken to both families.

“The one is no longer with us, and Andrew is fighting for his life,” he said. “And his parents are unbelievably great people, highly religious people, and they’re praying, and they want everybody to pray for Andrew, and he has a chance to make it, but his mother and father, they were so unbelievable. They were so positive. From West Virginia, great state.”

Trump said he also spoke with Beckstrom’s parents.

“The only thing I can say, they were devastated,” he said. “They can’t even believe it could happen.
It’s absolutely devastating, of course, to lose your children.”

After the shooting, War Secretary Pete Hegseth said that Trump has asked for 500 additional troops to be deployed to the District of Columbia.

Trump said he would “permanently pause” migration from “third-world countries” after the suspect, who was evacuated from Afghanistan as part of Operation Allies Welcome in 2021, was identified. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said Sunday that the administration believes the alleged shooter was “radicalized since he’s been here in this country.”

“We do believe it was through connections in his home community and state, and we’re going to continue to talk to those who interacted with him,” she said.

The post Trump Promises To Honor National Guard Members Shot by Afghan National appeared first on The Daily Signal.

After President Donald Trump was sworn in for a second term in January, American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten asserted she was “really sad” about the inaugural speech. 

“Rather than unifying people and building on America’s best qualities, Trump delivered a speech that was laden with divisiveness, showing that he is the president of only some Americans,” Weingarten said in an inauguration day statement.

“Those of us in the labor movement and in public education are fighting for opportunity and dignity for all Americans.” 

Perhaps not surprisingly, the AFT—one of America’s largest public school teachers unions—has participated in a deluge of lawsuits against the Trump administration policies. What’s more interesting is that several of the legal actions are seemingly at most education-adjacent, and in other cases have little or nothing to do with K-12 public education. 

The AFT has sued regarding federal employees, immigration, and student loans for college students. 

The AFT began as exclusively a teachers union, but has six separate divisions that also represents other public school employees such as teacher aides, custodians, and bus drivers, as well as health care workers and higher education faculty. The union’s website says it also represents public employees that includes federal and state employees. 

“The AFT’s lawsuit spree against the Trump administration reveals what we’ve long known: these organizations have strayed far from their mission of representing teachers,” Aaron Withe, president of the Teacher Freedom Alliance, a conservative education group, told The Daily Signal. “This is exactly why so many teachers are choosing to opt out—they want representation focused on their profession, not a political action committee.”

The litigation that is unrelated or only loosely connected to education includes: 

• In October, the AFT joined other labor unions in a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s plans for mass firing of federal employees during the government shutdown. The lawsuit alleged it was illegal to fire furloughed government workers. Weingarten asserted in October that Trump wanted to “illegally fire tens of thousands of federal employees in a callous act of political retribution.”

• In October, the AFT joined a legal action opposing a Department of Transportation rule that prevented certain immigrants from getting a commercial driver’s license, in some cases even if the individuals have authorization to work in the United States. Weingarten asserted, “For the Trump administration, the cruelty is the point.” Though she did note the relevance for the union, asserting, “Many AFT members require a CDL to work as school bus drivers—and right now we are seeing people turned away from training for these positions.”

• In the case of American Federation of Teachers et al v. Bessent, in Scott Bessent’s role as treasury secretary, the union sued the Treasury Department, the Office of Personnel Management, as well as the Department of Education to stop the White House Department of Government Efficiency from accessing data on federal employees. A district judge imposed an injunction on the administration from collecting the data, but the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the injunction in August. While the AFT opposes DOGE on policy—and the Education Department was one of the defendants—public school teachers are not federal employees.   

• Another case—American Federation of Teachers, AFL-CIO v. Goldstein—also revolved around the federal workforce. It challenged a Trump executive order to reduce the federal bureaucracy. Specifically, the plaintiffs sued over the provision of the order that called for the gradual elimination of the the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service. The defendants in the case were the FMCS, and the Office of Management and Budget. Gregory Goldstein was named the lead defendant in his role as acting director of the FMCS. The case is still pending.

• The cases of AFT v. Department of Education is about student loans, which is for higher education. The union sued to protect student loan borrowers in an income-driven repayment plan, which has more to do with higher education than k-12. 

The nation’s other large teachers union–the National Education Association–has not shied away from challenging the Trump administration in court either. But the litigation seems to go in fewer direction. The NEA is the lead plaintiff in one case against the Trump administration, this one regarding race-based admissions in higher education. It was also part of a coalition that sued to stop the dismantling of the Education Department, which at least could be related to k-12.

As The Daily Signal previously reported, both the NEA and AFT participated in “No Kings” protests opposed to Trump administration policies. 

The AFT did not respond to phone and email inquiries from The Daily Signal for comment.

Withe, of the Teacher Freedom Alliance, said such litigation should give AFT members pause. 

“The question every AFT member should be asking is: how does suing over federal employment commission matters or treasury regulations help me as a teacher?” Withe added. “The answer is it doesn’t. It serves the union’s leftist political agenda while diverting resources away from actual teachers.”

The post How AFT Anti-Trump Lawfare Has Little to Do With K-12 Public School Teachers appeared first on The Daily Signal.

As pregnancy centers have increasingly come under attack from Democrat lawmakers in recent years, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear a case next week that could protect pregnancy centers from lawfare.

Ahead of the court’s scheduled oral arguments in First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, Inc. v. Platkin on Dec. 2, women who have been involved with or helped by pregnancy centers are speaking out.

First Choice Women’s Resource Centers believes subpoenas issued by New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin for donor and other information violated its First and 14th Amendment rights. The nonprofit asked the court in February of last year to intervene and the justices agreed to hear the case in June.

How Did the Case Get Here?

In November 2023, Platkin sent subpoenas to the center, which pro-life advocates call “unlawful” and “improper.”

As Alliance Defending Freedom explained, the subpoena demanded 10 years’ of documents, “including its statements on abortion pill reversal, information it provided to clients and donors, documents identifying personnel, copies of every First Choice solicitation and advertisement, and information related to outside organizations that First Choice works with.” Attorneys with ADF filed a lawsuit the following month.

Aimee Huber, the executive director at First Choice, recently told reporters that “there were no allegations of wrongdoing, it was simply a fishing expedition.” She also shared how “completely daunting” it was for her “small nonprofit” to comply.

Lincoln Wilson, an attorney with ADF, explained that “the issue the court is going to consider is whether First Choice is allowed to bring its constitutional challenge to the attorney general’s subpoena in federal court.” He added that “the heart of First Choice’s First Amendment challenge is its association rights,” which, of the many claims, is “the biggest one” First Choice has.

The Supreme Court has taken up similar cases in the past, and ruled in favor of plaintiffs who brought similar claims as First Choice. Wilson brought up the 1958 case of NAACP v. Alabama, a landmark case in which the court unanimously protected the right of association and made clear that the organization did not have to release its donor information, as it’s protected by the First Amendment. These rights were affirmed in 2021 with Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta.

“We think the same thing is going on here with the attorney general’s subpoena and his attempt to get that information from First Choice,” Wilson shared. “And we have a right to address those claims in federal court.”

Abortion and the Need for Pregnancy Resource Centers in New Jersey

New Jersey is friendly to abortion, with no gestational limits on the procedure. Huber pointed out that the state has the fifth-highest rate of abortion in the country, adding that the state “has done everything they could to make New Jersey a sanctuary state for abortion.”

“Since pregnancy centers like ours do not perform or refer for abortion, we are targets for a government that disagrees with our views. If our attorney general can bully us, it can happen in other states that promote abortion,” Huber warned. “It is our hope that our efforts will result in protection for other pregnancy centers across the nation.”

Donors are particularly important to pregnancy resource centers because, as Odalys Banks, the direct of centers at First Choice explained, their services are made possible thanks to private donors and volunteers. Many of them do so anonymously over privacy concerns and could pull back or even withdraw if they could no longer do so privately.

It’s Not Just New Jersey

While First Choice Women’s Resource Centers operate in New Jersey, pregnancy resource centers operate throughout the country.

The Daily Signal spoke with Rebekah Cohen Morris, the executive director of Aim Women’s Center in Steubenville, Ohio. Her center provides a range of services free of charge, from housing to ultrasounds to parenting classes. Women can earn points at such classes to shop for baby essentials at their boutique.

Above all, Cohen Morris emphasized her center aims to give women sense of “dignity” and how she’s “always thinking holistically” about them.

While Cohen Morris spoke to how the “current climate is very favorable to pregnancy resource centers in Ohio,” she pointed out that she is “definitely aware” of the potential threats to centers in the Buckeye State like those occurring in New Jersey. This is especially if a governor who is not pro-life comes into office.

With the wide range of services that PRCs, including Aim Women’s Center provides, staff like Cohen Morris are constantly busy assisting women. Should a center be hit with “frivolous requests,” as is the case in New Jersey, that takes away time from helping women who may be in crisis. “It really interferes with the amount of women that we can see and the quality of services that we could give,” Cohen Morris warned about the threat of being such a target.

If donor information is made public, Cohen Morris added, “you are putting the entire operation at risk potentially.”

The Daily Signal also spoke with Aisha Taylor, an Ohio-based mom who received support from a PRC in Michigan when she was pregnant with twins.

The center she received help from offered a similar “Baby Bucks” program for women to earn a way to acquire baby essentials by attending parenting classes.

Tayor emphasized that parenting was her choice, which the resource center helped her with. She referred to the “huge community support” and said the emotional support that she received from “an important village for [her] during a very difficult time,” was essential.

Without such assistance, Taylor revealed to The Daily Signal that she might not have been able to continue her pregnancy, which would have resulted in her being pressured by her twins’ father into having an abortion. “And in that moment, my choice was trying to be taken from me to make a decision that I did not want to make,” Taylor said about the pressure. Some studies show that a majority of women are pressured into abortions.

Beyond that sense of support for women who want to be parents, to resist that pressure, Taylor wondered who would fill the void in providing such resources.

Where the Case Is Expected to Go

Wilson told reporters that this case “matters not just to First Choice, [but] it matters to pregnancy centers around the country,” which “are all subject to the same kind of harassment.”

The attorney pointed out that “especially after the Dobbs [v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization] decision,” which sent the abortion issue back to the states, “many of [these centers] have suffered violence and vandalism.”

“And if the government can just go ahead on a pre-textual theory and demand that you turn over the names of your donors, then everyone in this country is less free,” Wilson said.

Should the court rule in favor of First Choice, Wilson believes the likely path will involve remanding the case to the district court to act on the constitutional claims “that it’s so far refused to decide.”

The post The High-Stakes SCOTUS Case Targeting Pregnancy Centers, Explained appeared first on The Daily Signal.