Marco Rubio told Fox News that far-left Democrats espousing regret over voting to confirm him as secretary of state is likely just "confirmation" that he is doing a good job.
Democrat Maryland Sen. Chris Van Hollen told Rubio during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing yesterday that he "regret[ted] voting" to confirm him as secretary of state after indicating as much on "Fox News Sunday" in March. Rubio shot back at the hearing that Van Hollen's regret just proves he is doing a good job, and he subsequently told Fox News that the same goes for other Democrats who are expressing regret over their nod of approval to him earlier this year when he was confirmed by the Senate 99-0.
"In some cases, depending on … whoever you're talking about and what they stand for, the fact that they don't like what I'm doing is a confirmation I'm doing a good job," Rubio said. "That's how I feel about it."
A growing number of Democrats are coming out against Rubio despite voting to confirm him, with the bulk of the criticism describing him as a sell-out to the Trump administration.
"I don't recognize Secretary Rubio," Sen. Jacky Rosen, D-Nev., added during the Tuesday Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing with Van Hollen, noting that in the past she had viewed him as "a bipartisan" and "pragmatic" person.
"I'm not even mad anymore about your complicity in this administration's destruction of U.S. global leadership. I'm simply disappointed," Rosen said.
Last week, Democrat Hawaii Sen. Brian Schatz lamented that Rubio has aligned himself "so closely" with President Donald Trump.
"President Trump’s narrow and transactional view of the world is not news to anybody. But what is genuinely surprising to me is that Secretary Rubio is aligning himself so closely with it," Schatz said during a live event hosted by the Council on Foreign Relations last week.
"This is someone who, up until four months ago, was an internationalist. Someone who believed in America flexing its powers in all manners, but especially through foreign assistance," Schatz continued. "And yet, he is now responsible for the evisceration of the whole enterprise. He’s a colleague. I voted for him. We talk all the time. But what I’m trying to understand is: What happened?"
Schatz noted that he hopes to see Rubio "reemerge, reassert himself and save the enterprise."
Rubio's supportive stance on Trump's foreign aid cuts, his defense of the deportation of Kilmar Abrego Garcia and his alleged lack of action to help get him back to the U.S., his approach to the Russia-Ukraine war, and Rubio's decision to pull visas from foreign college students in the U.S. for stoking anti-Israel sentiment on university campuses are all issues Democrats have pointed to for why they regret voting to confirm Rubio.
The secretary's alleged role in bringing white South African refugees to the U.S. was also something for which Rubio was chastised by Democrats during his Tuesday testimony on Capitol Hill.
"I think a lot of us thought that Marco Rubio was going to stand up to Donald Trump," Democrat Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy said in March during an interview on CNN. "Marco Rubio has not, and that's been a great disappointment to many of his former colleagues in the Senate."
Yesterday — 21 May 2025Latest Political News on Fox News
President Donald Trump’s "big, beautiful bill" could be headed for a House-wide vote as soon as Wednesday night after its approval by a key committee.
The House Rules Committee, the gatekeeper for most legislation before it gets to the full chamber, first met at 1 a.m. Wednesday to advance the massive bill in time for Speaker Mike Johnson’s Memorial Day deadline for sending it to the Senate.
Proceedings crept on for hours as Democrats on the committee repeatedly accursed Republicans of trying to move the bill "in the dead of night" and of trying to raise costs for working class families at the expense of the wealthy.
Democratic lawmakers also dragged out the process with dozens of amendments that stretched from early Tuesday well into Wednesday.
Republicans, meanwhile, contended the bill is aimed at boosting small businesses, farmers, and low- and middle-income families, while reducing waste, fraud, and abuse in the government safety net.
In a sign of the meeting’s high stakes, Johnson, R-La., himself visited with committee Republicans shortly before 1 a.m. and then again just after sunrise.
But the committee kicked off its meeting to advance the bill with several key outstanding issues – blue state Republicans pushing for a raise in state and local tax (SALT) deduction caps, and conservatives demanding stricter work requirement rules for Medicaid as well as a full repeal of green energy subsidies granted in former President Joe Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).
Johnson told Fox News Digital during his earlier visit that he was "very close" to a deal with divided House GOP factions.
Returning from that meeting, Johnson signaled the House would press ahead with its vote either late Wednesday or early Thursday.
But the legislation’s passage through the House Rules Committee does not necessarily mean it will fare well in a House-wide vote.
A pair of House Rules Committee members, Reps. Ralph Norman, R-S.C., and Chip Roy, R-Texas, were two of the conservative House Freedom Caucus members who had called for the House-wide vote to be delayed on Wednesday.
Meanwhile, the White House bore down hard on those rebels, demanding a vote "immediately" in an official statement of policy that backed the House GOP bill.
Republicans are working to pass Trump’s policies on tax, immigration, energy, defense and the national debt all in one massive bill via the budget reconciliation process.
Budget reconciliation lowers the Senate’s threshold for passage from 60 votes to 51, thereby allowing the party in power to skirt the minority — in this case, Democrats — to pass sweeping pieces of legislation, provided they deal with the federal budget, taxation or the national debt.
House Republicans are hoping to advance Trump’s bill through the House and Senate by the Fourth of July.
House Republicans believe they are close to passing Trump's Big, Beautiful Bill.
After the meeting at the White House, with the president and members of the Freedom Caucus, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-LA) suggested that the House could vote in the overnight on the Big, Beautiful Bill.
But it quickly became apparent that was a physical – and parliamentary – impossibility.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) later introduced a "manager’s amendment" to make final changes to the bill. Those alterations were designed to coax holdouts to vote yes.
It’s now likely that the House debates the bill in the early hours of Thursday with a vote in perhaps the late morning.
But Democratic dilatory tactics could further delay passage of the bill.
It’s possible Democrats could engineer protest votes to "adjourn" the House. Calls to "adjourn" hold special privileges in the House and require immediate consideration.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) could also take advantage of a special debate time on the floor to "filibuster" the measure. Top House leaders from both parties are afforded what’s called the "Magic Minute." That’s where they are allotted a "minute" to speak on an issue. But the House really allows them to speak as long as they wish out of deference to their position. Then-House Minority Leader and future Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) set the record for the longest speech in November, 2021, delaying considering of former President Biden’s "Build Back Better" Act. McCarthy spoke for eight hours and 32 minutes.
The House Freedom Caucus seems much more satisfied with the upcoming changes to the bill. Especially after the meeting with the president.
But here is the main reason the House wants to move this as quickly as possible:
Republicans don’t want the bill to fester. Problems develop the longer this sits out there. So when you think you have the votes, you put it on the floor and force the issue. There could also be attendance problems later on Thursday or beyond.
This subject has been jawboned to death for weeks. Johnson said weeks ago he wanted this passed by Memorial Day. So Johnson – and President Trump – want GOPers who are skeptical or holdouts to put up or shut up. You do that by putting the bill on the floor and requiring a vote.
That said, it’s possible the GOP leadership might not have the votes ahead of the actual roll call vote. So calling a vote applies pressure on those holdouts. Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) used to "grow" the vote on the House floor. In other words, they would start the vote – not having all the ducks in order – and then "grow" the vote during the actual roll call and cajoling or twisting arms. The same may happen today.
Also, if the vote is a little shy of passage, Republican leaders could hold the vote open and then single out those Republicans who have either voted no or have not cast ballots. Then the leadership can really turn up the heat and accuse them of not supporting the president’s agenda. If push comes to shove, they can then have the President weigh in and use his powers to coax those holdouts to vote yes.
Here’s the long-term outlook: If the House passes the bill, this goes to the Senate. This will be a project which will consume most of June. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) wants this done by July 4. But the question is what the Senate actually produces. The House and Senate must be on the same page. If the Senate crafts a different legislative product, then this must return to the House to sync up. Either the House eats what the Senate put together. Or the House and Senate must blend their differing versions together into a single, unified bill. That could take most of July. Remember that this bill includes an increase in the debt ceiling. The Treasury says Congress must lift the debt ceiling by early August.
U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said Wednesday that the Trump Gold Card, which makes it possible for any foreigner to buy a visa for $5 million, will be available online within weeks.
Lutnick was a guest at Axios’ streamed event, Building the Future, Wednesday, where he was interviewed by company co-founder Mike Allen about several topics, including President Donald Trump’s offering of a Gold Card.
In March, Trump said the Gold Card would go on sale "very, very soon," explaining it would be like a green card, "but better and more sophisticated." He said the newest path to citizenship in the U.S. would allow the "most successful job-creating people from all over the world to buy a path to citizenship."
Allen asked Lutnick when the $5 million Gold Card would be available, and Lutnick said he expected a website called trumpcard.gov to be up and running in about a week.
"The details of that will come soon after, but people can start to register. And all that will come over a matter of the next weeks — not month, weeks," Lutnick said.
He also shared a story about a recent "great dinner" in the Middle East with about 400 people.
During the dinner, Lutnick said, he had his phone out when one of the senior leaders walked by and asked why his phone was out.
"I go, ‘I am selling him cards,’" Lutnick said. "So, basically everyone I meet who’s not an American is going to want to buy the card if they have the fiscal capacity."
He acknowledged that not everyone will be able to afford a Gold Card, but it will be available to those who can afford to help America pay off its debt.
"Why wouldn’t they want a plan B that says God forbid something bad happens, you come to the airport in America and the person in immigration says, ‘Welcome home.’ Right? As opposed to, ‘Where the heck am I going if something bad’s happening in my country,’" Lutnick continued.
He noted that everyone will be vetted for a card, adding those who come in with $5 million for a visa are going to be "great people who are going to come and bring businesses and opportunity to America. And they’re going to pay $5 million."
Lutnick offered one more hypothetical scenario, saying if 200,000 people purchase the Gold Card for $5 million, that's $1 trillion.
"Remember, we get 280,000 visas per year now for free, not counting the 20 million people who broke into this country for nothing under Biden," Lutnick said. "And, so, I want you to think about that. We give it away for free and said Donald Trump’s gonna bring in a trillion dollars for what purpose? To make America better. And it makes perfect sense to me."
Trump has previously touted his plan before to attract the world’s wealthiest to become U.S. citizens, though it comes at a time when he is both clamping down on illegal migration and as universities are increasingly in the spotlight amid soaring school costs and crippling student loans.
After Trump’s announcement in March, Lora Ries, director of the Heritage Foundation's Border Security and Immigration Center, warned it could invite fraud.
"Any immigration benefit draws fraud. … People are willing to do anything and say just about anything to come to the U.S.," Ries told Fox News Digital.
In an interview in February with Fox News’ Chief Political Anchor Bret Baier on "Special Report," Lutnick said all candidates will be "deeply vetted."
"These are vetted people," Lutnick told Baier. "These are going to be great global citizens who are going to bring entrepreneurial spirit, capacity and growth to America. If one of them comes in, think of the jobs they are going to bring with them, the businesses they are going to bring with them, and they are going to pay American taxes as well. So, this is huge money for America."
Fox News Digital’s Caitlin McFall contributed to this report.
The Army on Wednesday said it is approaching its second phase of separation with service members experiencing gender dysphoria, an initiative that follows the Trump administration's directive of prioritizing military excellence and readiness.
A new memo issued by Army Secretary Daniel Driscoll and obtained by Fox News Digital outlines two phases in the separation process, the first of which will be completed at the beginning of June.
The first phase, which ends June 6, allows service members who have been diagnosed with or have a history of gender dysphoria to identify themselves and volunteer to separate from the military branch, an Army spokesperson told Fox Digital.
Once a service member notifies an immediate commander, that commander will then notify a superior, initiating the separation process.
Soldiers who reached a threshold for years of service qualify for voluntary separation pay or double the pay a service member would get by separating from the Army for various reasons, the spokesperson said.
In the case of pending administrative action against them, their discharge may also not be honorable.
The Army said those who volunteer for separation, but do not qualify, will still be separated and afforded benefits; they will only forfeit the additional separation pay, according to the spokesperson.
After the June 6 deadline for voluntary separation, the Army will enter the involuntary separation phase.
In the second phase, "there will be means of identifying those who did not want to self-identify," the spokesperson said.
Fox News' Peter Doocy has some unique insight on former President Joe Biden as questions continue to persist about whether there was a coverup to hide his declining mental state while serving as commander-in-chief.
Doocy, a senior White House correspondent, posted multiple videos to X on Wednesday showing him questioning Biden and the White House about the then-president's cognitive decline.
"I have some unique insight on President Biden, having dedicated six years of my life to covering him," he wrote. "If you are wondering why nobody asked about his mental fitness, and why nobody asked if White House staffers were covering up his decline… then you weren’t paying attention."
In one video, Doocy is seen questioning Biden about Special Counsel Robert Hur's report that concluded that one of the reasons Biden wasn't charged for his handling of classified Obama-era documents found in his former office and at home was because he was a "well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory."
"I'm well-meaning and I'm an elderly man and I know what the hell I'm doing. I put this country back on its feet. I don't need his recommendation," Biden replied.
Doocy then asked how bad Biden's memory was and would he be able to continue to serve as president.
"My memory is so bad, I let you speak," Biden shot back.
Much of the media has been criticized for its reluctance to question Biden or the White House about his health concerns. The former president's health is once again in the headlines after CNN anchor Jake Tapper and Axios correspondent Alex Thompson's new book, "Original Sin: President Biden's Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again," was released on Tuesday.
The book alleges that Biden’s inner circle concealed his cognitive decline for years and was released just days after news broke that Biden had been diagnosed with advanced prostate cancer.
In one instance, during a news briefing, Doocy questioned then-White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre about a campaign event in which Biden was present.
"At a fundraiser this week, President Biden told donors about how Charlottesville inspired his campaign, and according to the pool, a few mins later he told the story again nearly word for word. What's up with that?"
"What I can tell you is, and I'm going to be careful not to talk about it because this was a campaign event,… the president was making very clear why he decided to run in 2019," Jean-Pierre responded.
In another briefing, Jean-Pierre said Biden was making a "light-hearted joke" and "speaking off the cuff" when she was asked by Doocy about Biden's remarks that his "health is fine. It's just his brain."
In another video, Jean-Pierre was asked about Biden's gaffe when he appeared to mix up French President Emmanuel Macron with François Mitterrand, the former president of France who died in 1996.
"How is President Biden ever going to convince the three-quarters of voters who are worried about his physical and mental health that he's OK even though in Las Vegas he told a story about recently talking to a French president who died in 1996?"
"I'm not even going to go down that rabbit hole with you," she replied.
Doocy also asked if Biden had been tested for Parkinson's Disease or dementia following his disastrous debate performance against then-candidate Donald Trump.
"What we shared with you was comprehensive, but he's had a full physical. We've shown the results of those this past three years," Jean-Pierre said. "We showed it just four months ago, and it is in line with what we have done, similar to President Obama, similar to George W. Bush. We are committed to continue to be transparent. We are committed to continue to show the results of those physicals, and look, it's the president's medical team that makes a decision."
In another briefing, Jean-Pierre was questioned about why Biden was treated by White House staffers "like a baby."
Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has been hard at work this week meeting with as many factions within the House GOP as possible to quell concerns ahead of a chamber-wide vote on President Donald Trump’s "big, beautiful bill."
Managing a razor-thin House majority isn’t easy in the best of times, but negotiating the vast tax-immigration-energy-defense-debt limit bill has revealed both old and new fractures within the Republican Conference.
Fox News Digital took a look at what the key factions have been looking for.
The House Freedom Caucus and their allies have been pushing the bill to go further on curbing Medicaid’s Affordable Care Act (ACA) expansion, and implementing work requirements for able-bodied Americans on the government healthcare program sooner than the current bill’s 2029 deadline.
There’s broad consensus among Republicans on needing work requirements for able-bodied Americans on healthcare, but cutting too deeply into the Obamacare-era expanded population has some moderate GOP lawmakers worried.
The conservatives have consistently argued that they are only seeking to reshuffle the program to make it more available for vulnerable people who truly need it, including low-income women and children.
That same group has argued in favor of a total repeal of President Joe Biden’s green energy tax credits in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) – a push that has pitted them against Republicans whose districts have businesses that benefitted from those subsidies.
Moderate Republicans in California, New York, and New Jersey have been taking a stand on raising the state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap.
SALT deduction caps primarily benefit people living in high-cost-of-living areas like New York City, Los Angeles, and their surrounding suburbs.
Republicans representing those areas have argued that raising the SALT deduction cap is an existential issue — and that a failure to address it could cost the GOP the House majority in the 2026 midterms.
Several of the Republicans vying for higher SALT deduction caps have pointed out that their victories are critical to the party retaining control of the House in 2024.
SALT deduction caps did not exist before Trump’s 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), which notably instilled a $10,000 ceiling for married and single tax filers.
That cap has been received positively by the majority of Republicans, however – and those in lower-tax, GOP-controlled states have dismissed the push for a higher SALT deduction cap as an unearned reward for Democratic states with high-tax policies.
Republicans in places like Tennessee and Missouri have argued it was their tax dollars subsidizing wealthier, blue-leaning areas’ tax breaks. Blue state Republicans, meanwhile, have contended that they send more tax dollars back to the federal government which in turn helps pay for lower-tax states.
There is some overlap between Republicans looking for more modest cuts to the IRA and those seeking a higher SALT deduction cap – but not completely.
Republicans in swing districts in Arizona and Pennsylvania have argued that upending those tax credits now would harm businesses in their districts that had begun changing their operations already to conform to those new tax breaks.
"Countless American companies are utilizing sector-wide energy tax credits – many of which have enjoyed broad support in Congress – to make major investments in domestic energy production and infrastructure for traditional and renewable energy sources alike," they wrote.
But conservative fiscal hawks pushing for a total repeal said in their own letter that the U.S.' growing green energy sector was the product of government handouts rather than genuine sustainable growth.
"Leaving IRA subsidies intact will actively undermine America’s return to energy dominance and national security," they said. "They are the result of government subsidies that distort the U.S. energy sector, displace reliable coal and natural gas and the domestic jobs they produce, and put the stability and independence of our electric grid in jeopardy."
Singer-songwriter Bruce Springsteen continued his criticism of President Donald Trump Wednesday by releasing a six-track digital extended play (EP) that included his political rants while performing in Manchester, United Kingdom, last week.
"The Boss" included four songs on the 31-minute EP, "Land of Hope & Dreams." The songs included "Land of Hope and Dreams," "Long Walk Home," "My City of Ruins" and "Chimes of Freedom."
All four songs were recorded live May 14, 2025, when Springsteen publicly lambasted Trump.
During his intro to "Land of Hope and Dreams," Springsteen said it was great to be back in Manchester, calling on the "righteous power of art, of music, of rock and roll, in dangerous times."
"In my home, the America I love, the America I've written about, that has been a beacon of hope and liberty for 250 years, is currently in the hands of a corrupt, incompetent and treasonous administration," he said. "Tonight, we ask all who believe in democracy and the best of our American experience to rise with us, raise your voices against authoritarianism and let freedom ring."
Springsteen went on another political rant against Trump and the U.S. government before the E Street Band kicked into the song "My City of Ruins."
"There's some very weird, strange and dangerous s--- going on out there right now," Springsteen told the British crowd. "In America, they are persecuting people for using their right to free speech and voicing their dissent. This is happening now. In America, the richest men are taking satisfaction and abandoning the world's poorest children to sickness and death.
"This is happening now," he added. "In my country, they're taking sadistic pleasure in the pain that they inflict on loyal American workers. They're rolling back historic civil rights legislation that led to a more just and plural society. They're abandoning our great allies and siding with dictators against those struggling for their freedom."
Springsteen also accused the government of defunding American universities that "won’t bow down to their ideological demands."
"They're removing residents off American streets and, without due process of law, are deporting them to foreign detention centers and prisons," he said. "This is all happening now. A majority of our elected representatives have failed to protect the American people from the abuses of an unfit president and a rogue government. They have no concern or idea of what it means to be deeply American.
"The America that I've sung to you about for 50 years is real and, regardless of its faults, is a great country with a great people," Springsteen added. "So, we'll survive this moment."
The crowd responded with applause when Springsteen continued to pontificate his stance on the current administration.
The comments went viral last week, and Trump responded by slamming Springsteen and calling him "highly overrated" Friday.
"I see that Highly Overrated Bruce Springsteen goes to a Foreign Country to speak badly about the President of the United States," Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social. "Never liked him, never liked his music, or his Radical Left Politics and, importantly, he’s not a talented guy — Just a pushy, obnoxious JERK, who fervently supported Crooked Joe Biden, a mentally incompetent FOOL, and our WORST EVER President, who came close to destroying our Country.
"Sleepy Joe didn’t have a clue as to what he was doing, but Springsteen is ‘dumb as a rock,’ and couldn’t see what was going on, or could he (which is even worse!)? This dried out ‘prune’ of a rocker (his skin is all atrophied!) ought to KEEP HIS MOUTH SHUT until he gets back into the Country, that’s just ‘standard fare.’ Then we’ll all see how it goes for him!"
Springsteen declared last year that "I'll be casting my vote for Kamala Harris and Tim Walz" in the presidential election. Harris lost the race to Trump.
Fox News Digital's Greg Norman, Lindsay Kornick and Brooke Singman contributed to this report.
Sparks flew on Capitol Hill Wednesday as Education Secretary Linda McMahon faced off with Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman, D-N.J., in a fiery exchange during a House Appropriations subcommittee hearing in the latest clash over the Trump administration’s efforts to dismantle the Department of Education.
The war of words began when Watson Coleman asked, "Do you believe that there is illegal discrimination against people who are Black or brown, and other types of discrimination in jobs and education in this country?"
Watson Coleman pressed further: "Then can you tell me why the Office of Civil Rights and the Department of Education is being decimated?"
McMahon responded, "Well, it isn’t being decimated. We have reduced the size of it. However, we are taking on a backlog of cases that were left over from the Biden administration."
Watson Coleman grew visibly frustrated and accused the administration of racial bias in immigration and education policies, saying its actions amounted to "favoritism and prioritization of white over color."
In a blistering rebuke, Watson Coleman said, "Your rhetoric means nothing to me. What means something to me is the actions of this administration. I’m telling you, the Department of Education is one of the most important departments in this country. And you should feel shameful to be engaged with an administration that doesn’t give a damn."
McMahon, remaining composed, replied, "I am the secretary of Education who has been approved to run this agency by Congress. And I was appointed by the president. And I serve at his pleasure under his mandate. So, therefore, the direction of his administration is what I will follow."
The exchange came as part of a larger hearing in which McMahon laid out President Donald Trump’s 2026 education budget proposal, which calls for a $12 billion cut to the Education Department, a 15% reduction.
McMahon described her work as the department’s "final mission": to wind it down and restore education oversight to states, parents and local educators.
"Let’s focus on literacy. What we’re seeing in those scores is a failure of our students to learn to read," McMahon said. "We’ve lost the fundamentals."
Chairman Rep. Robert Aderholt, R-Ala., praised McMahon’s approach, noting, "Despite $3 trillion in federal education spending since 1980, student achievement has not improved. The answer is not more money. It’s more accountability and local control."
The plan consolidates 18 federal programs into a single $2 billion block grant to states. Democrats labeled the proposal as a backdoor effort to gut federal support for public schools.
On student loans, McMahon said the department has begun recovering repayments after years of Biden-era pauses and confusion.
"Since we restarted collections in May, we have recovered nearly $100 million," she said.
She also defended staffing cuts and administrative restructuring, stating, "We’re delivering on all of our statutory requirements with fewer people and lower overhead."
Republicans on the subcommittee shared their support for charter schools and school choice. McMahon, in agreement, pointed to a proposed $60 million increase in charter school funding.
"We’ve got about a million students on charter school waiting lists," she said. "Parents should be deciding where their children can go to school and get the best education."
Democrats also criticized McMahon for not defending early childhood education, particularly Head Start, even though the program technically falls under the Department of Health and Human Services.
"Every Head Start program in the country has three days of funding. That’s not someone else’s problem. It’s America’s children," said Rep. Josh Harder, D-Calif.
McMahon responded, "The earlier we can start education, the better, but I don’t believe the federal government is responsible for everything. That’s where states can lead."
The Trump administration also defended its position forcefully outside the hearing room.
"On the topic of corruption, let’s not forget that the Department of Education was created by President Carter in an attempt to win voters," Savannah Newhouse, Education Department press secretary, said in a statement to Fox News Digital following the exchange.
"Since then, we have spent over $3 trillion pretending the department is necessary as student learning outcomes have not improved," she continued. "While the congresswoman from New Jersey basks in her five minutes of fame, the Trump administration is working to improve student outcomes and ensure American families have access to the quality education that they deserve."
-Justice Department begins dismissing Biden-era police lawsuits against Minneapolis and Louisville
China is concerned by President Donald Trump's proposal for a new U.S. missile defense system, called the Golden Dome, which is designed to protect against adversarial attacks on America.
Golden Dome has a "strong offensive nature and violates the principle of peaceful use in the Outer Space Treaty," Chinese Foreign Minister Mao Ning said Wednesday.
"The project will heighten the risk of turning space into a war zone and creating a space arms race, and shake the international security and arms control system," Mao said. "We urge the U.S. to give up developing and deploying global anti-missile system."…READ MORE
DIPLOMATIC RECKONING: Trump to meet leader of ‘out of control’ South Africa at White House
'PROMISE KEPT': Rising star takes victory lap after Trump DOJ rolls back massive Biden anti-police push: 'Undo the damage'
'CAPACITY FOR DENIAL': Biden family misled public on Beau’s cancer diagnosis, new book says
'LOT OF QUESTIONS': Harris, Becerra covered up Biden mental decline, California Democratic candidate for governor says
CRITICAL AID: At least 82 killed in Israeli strikes on Gaza as critical aid fails to reach Palestinians
WALKING THE FRONT LINES: Putin visits Kursk region for first time since booting Ukrainian forces from territory
'STRETCHING' THE SYSTEM?: Israel encircles 2 of northern Gaza’s last functioning hospitals, groups say
PRICE TO PAY:Dems warn House Republicans will pay price at ballot box for passing Trump's 'big beautiful bill'
LEFT FLANK ASSIST: Trump and Cruz' No Tax on Tips plan passes Senate with unexpected help from Dem
ART OF THE DEAL?: House Freedom Caucus heading to White House after delay play on Trump's 'big, beautiful bill'
'STOPS THE MUTILATION': Marjorie Taylor Greene pushes bill to punish those who perform gender transition measures on minors
Protesters affiliated with several leftist groups, including the People's Action Institute, flooded a Capitol Hill office building in Washington on Wednesday as the House prepared to vote on the "big, beautiful" budget bill backed by President Donald Trump.
Capitol Police have responded to several protests over Medicaid cuts that disrupted activities in Capitol office buildings over the last several weeks.
On Wednesday, protesters affiliated with the People’s Action Institute shut down a hallway in the Longworth House Office Building as part of a protest against cuts to Medicaid in the budget bill.
In a video obtained by Fox News Digital, protesters could be seen blocking a hallway and shouting, "We got the power," while raising their fists. Many protesters held signs reading "Medicaid Cuts Kill."
Capitol Police quickly cleared the protesters from the building; there appeared to be no arrests.
Democrats have been shining a spotlight on portions of the budget bill that restructure Medicaid, the nearly 60-year-old federal government program that provides health insurance for roughly 71 million adults and children with limited income.
The cuts to Medicaid, being drafted in part as an offset to pay for extending Trump's 2017 tax cut law that is set to expire this year, include a slew of new rules and regulatory requirements for those seeking coverage. Among them are a new set of work requirements for many of those seeking coverage.
Wednesday’s protest was not the only one that has disrupted activity in the Capitol office buildings this month. Fox News Digital reported on Medicaid protesters disrupting a budget markup by the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on May 13.
Video taken by Fox News Digital of the protests showed Capitol Police attempting to gain control of the situation, shouting repeatedly, "If you’re not getting arrested, then go!"
The video also shows a woman in a wheelchair being removed from the committee chamber while screaming, "They want to kill the disabled, they want to kill the sick, they want to kill the veterans who have fought for us."
Amid the chaos, Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., spurred on the crowds, saying, "Keep fighting, stay strong, we’re not going to let them take away healthcare. You are leading the way. Thank you very much."
In response to criticism about disrupting activity in the congressional office buildings, Unai Montes-Irueste, a spokesperson for the People’s Action Institute, told Fox News Digital that "Medicaid cuts kill. Nothing is more disruptive than death."
Montes-Irueste said "there is no congressional district in the country that supports ripping healthcare coverage away from Medicaid recipients so that Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg can buy new yachts."
Despite the accusations that Republicans want to cut Medicaid, Rep. Richard Hudson of North Carolina, the chair of the National Republican Congressional Committee, told Fox News Digital this month that "Republicans are ending waste, fraud and abuse in Medicaid so the most vulnerable get the care they need."
Hudson said that "Democrats are lying to protect a broken status quo that lets illegal immigrants siphon off billions meant for American families. We’re strengthening Medicaid for future generations by protecting taxpayers and restoring integrity."
The House of Representatives is expected to vote on the budget bill sometime between Wednesday night and Thursday morning, the timing dependent on passage of a rules resolution from the House Rules Committee.
The typically calm confines of the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee were the site of several clashes on Wednesday between Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin and Democrats on the panel adjudicating his annual budget request.
Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., rattled off a list of cancers he claimed Zeldin's actions at the agency could cause, remarking the New York Republican must be proud of how many regulations he’s slashed in such a short time.
"Your legacy will be more lung cancer — it'll be more bladder cancer, more head and neck cancer. There'll be more breast cancer, more leukemia and pancreatic cancer, more liver cancer, more skin cancer, more kidney cancer, more testicular cancer, or colorectal cancer — more rare cancers of innumerable varieties. That will be your legacy. … My kids are gonna be breathing that air, just like yours," he said.
"If your children were drinking the water in Santa Ana, Mr. Zeldin… maybe you would give a damn," he said after holding up a glass of water and claiming the EPA’s move toward streamlining its grants and expenditures will lead to a panoply of bad outcomes.
"You need the money for a tax cut for rich people because you’re totally beholden to the oil industry," Schiff fumed, accusing Zeldin of unlawful termination of congressionally appropriated grants.
"You could give a rat’s a-- about how much cancer your agency causes," Schiff said, raising his voice as Sen. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., banged the gavel to note his time was up.
Earlier in the hearing, Zeldin clashed with Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., over grant reviews and claimed the administrator couldn’t "get [his] story straight."
Whitehouse appeared to make the claim that the EPA was not individually reviewing each of the grants it was canceling and cited court testimony from Zeldin official Travis Voyles that he had conducted an "individualized review" as of February.
"You guys are gonna have to start getting your story straight," Whitehouse said, "because there are three completely different statements, and they cannot all be true. It cannot be that Voyles personally himself conducted—"
"He did," Zeldin cut in.
"… the review of 781 grants—" Whitehouse continued.
"He did; I did," Zeldin cut in again.
"… and that [Deputy Administrator Daniel] Coogan saw to it that it was individually done," Whitehouse said as the two men talked over each other.
After some more back-and-forth, Zeldin told Whitehouse that it must be a "crazy concept" for him to consider that more than one person could review the hundreds of grants in question and for more than one per calendar day.
Zeldin said he and his EPA colleagues have been "busting their a--" to identify waste and abuse and that Whitehouse was only interested in scoring political points.
"I'm using the facts as your employees stated them," Whitehouse claimed.
"We’re on it every single day, because we have a zero-tolerance policy towards wasting dollars," Zeldin shot back.
"You don't care about wasting money," he went on, adding that he had promised committee member Sen. Pete Ricketts, R-Neb., at a prior hearing that he would make reviewing grants in this way a priority of his tenure. "I have to come back here in front of Sen. Ricketts today, and even though you don't care about wasting tax dollars, Sen. Ricketts does."
Fox News Digital reached out to Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.V., chair of the Committee on Environment and Public Works for comment, but did not hear back by press time.
A Texas-based doctor was sentenced Wednesday to 10 yearsin prison for healthcare fraud after he carried out what prosecutors said was a nearly two-decade scheme that involved falsely diagnosing thousands of patients with degenerative diseases and profiting handsomely off their treatments.
Jorge Zamora-Quezada, a rheumatologist licensed to practice medicine in Texas, Arizona and Massachusetts before being stripped of his licenses in each state, raked in hundreds of millions of dollars for the misdiagnoses and treatment he ordered during his roughly 20 years as a medical practitioner. The treatments included punishing rounds of chemotherapy, intravenous infusions, and a battery of other tests, monthly visits, and regular procedures associated with the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, a chronic, autoimmune condition for which there is no cure.
The sentencing, and his earlier court appearances, played out at times like a study in contrasts. Prosecutors detailed his extravagant lifestyle, including a private jet, 13 properties across the U.S., including in Aspen and various towns in Mexico, and a Maserati – while the health of the patients he defrauded continued to worsen.
Prosecutors accused him of taking advantage of vulnerable individuals in Texas, such as teenagers, elderly individuals, and disabled persons, in order to carry out the scheme. Some of them testified at Wednesday’s hearing about the ongoing side effects they suffered as a result of the doctor’s actions, including receiving chemotherapy or IV infusions they did not need.
It’s "one of the most egregious" cases of its kind the Justice Department has brought in this space, Matthew Galeotti, head of the Justice Department Criminal Division, told Fox News Digital in a sit-down interview on Wednesday.
That’s because of "all of the various kinds of misconduct rolled into one," he said, "and because it was pervasive – the scheme lasted more than 18 years."
"By the time you're towards the end of the scheme, he knows the consequences some of these things have had on the victims, and he's going forward anyways," he said of the doctor.
The Justice Department's Criminal Division has been prosecuting this case for years. Unlike other departments, it is one of the few where career and political staff alike are largely in lockstep, with goals and cases that transcend partisan politics and seek instead to hold criminals like the Texas doctor accountable.
Galeotti said he sees the case as emblematic of the Trump administration’s goals to vindicate victims and counter wasteful government spending.
"Even in cases where you don't see this level of misconduct, where you're not prescribing someone chemotherapy medicine that doesn't need it, which obviously sort of stands out on its own, we still have a problem because you were wasting government funds that should be going to actually benefiting patients," Galeotti said.
A separate Justice Department official told Fox News Digital Zamora-Quezada’s case was one of the "most significant" instances of patient harm that he had seen in at least a decade.
"There was testimony about truly debilitating side effects from the medications, things like strokes, necrosis of the jawbone, really the jawbone melting away, hair loss, liver damage," the official said.
The doctor’s actions were seen as particularly egregious, in the Justice Department's telling, because they sought to prey on lower-income communities in Texas, targeting teenagers, elderly persons, and disabled individuals. The doctor also operated in areas with less access to medical care and with fewer native English speakers compared to other parts of the state.
"Of course, it's always the most twisted when you're benefiting from someone else's misfortune – misfortune you caused – and misfortune you used for your own personal enrichment," Galeotti said.
"They're the hallmarks of the worst kind of conduct that you see," Galeotti said.
Zamora-Quezada was convicted by a jury in 2020 of seven counts of healthcare fraud, one count of conspiracy to commit healthcare fraud, and one count of obstruction of justice. His attorneys argued that the fraud was not "pervasive" in the way the government made it out to be, according to public court filings.
Prosecutors said Zamora-Quezada purchased condominium properties in vacation towns, including in Aspen, San Diego, and Puerto Vallarta, Mexico. They said he commuted to his various doctors’ offices in Texas in a Maserati and a private jet, both emblazoned with his initials, "ZQ." His assets were forfeited after he was charged, prosecutors said.
Meanwhile, they said, while Zamora-Quezada was living a life of luxury, out of nearly 100,000 Medicare patients he treated, Zamora-Quezada diagnosed 72.9% of them with rheumatoid arthritis. Prosecutors compared that data to seven other Texas rheumatologists, who cumulatively diagnosed 13% of their patients with the same condition.
Prosecutors asked for $100 million in restitution, but the judge required him to pay $28 million.
Attorneys for Zamora-Quezada did not respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment.
The Trump Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is warning Democrats and leftists doxxing ICE agents and impeding immigration enforcement operations that it is "not playing games."
In response to an online video of a Democratic state representative in Tennessee allegedly stalking ICE agents, DHS said, "This Administration is not playing games with the lives and safety of our ICE officers."
The DHS statement claimed that "people doxxing our officers and impeding ICE operations are siding with vicious cartels, human traffickers, and violent criminals."
The statement came in response to a video posted on social media by Rep. Andy Ogles, R-Tenn., allegedly showing Tennessee Democratic state Rep. Aftyn Behn "stalking" ICE agents in the Nashville area.
The video appears to show Behn and another woman in a car saying they were following and "bullying the ICE vehicles and state troopers."
"This is a win," Behn said, laughing.
Ogles said that Behn and her companion were "openly admitting they were trying to stall law enforcement from stopping illegal aliens." Ogles said "this isn’t just reckless, it’s aiding and abetting."
In response to the incident, DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin told Fox News Digital that "attacks and demonization of ICE have resulted in officers facing a 413% increase in assaults."
McLaughlin said DHS "has the ability to trace phone numbers and track location information" and that "any individual who participates in the doxxing of our brave federal immigration agents will be identified and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law."
DHS and the U.S. Secret Service on May 1 served a search warrant on the home of a Los Angeles resident accused of posting fliers in various Southern California neighborhoods with the names, photos, phone numbers and locations of ICE officers working in the region.
Earlier this year, anti-ICE activists began putting up posters featuring the personal information of ICE and Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) officers working in the Los Angeles and Southern California area.
The posters include the faces of several ICE agents and say, "These armed agents work in Southern California. ICE and HSI racially terrorize and criminalize entire communities with their policies. They kidnap people from their homes and from the streets, separating families and fracturing communities. Many people have died while locked up in jails, prisons, and detention centers."
Abigail Jackson, a spokesperson for the White House, told Fox News Digital that "whether it’s [Minnesota Gov.] Tim Walz slandering ICE officers as ‘Nazis’ or members of Congress physically assaulting them, the Democrat party is truly unhinged, and their dangerous behavior is putting lives at risk.
"They are defending illegal terrorists and attacking those who are keeping Americans safe," Jackson added, noting the administration "will hold anyone accountable who commits a crime against [federal law enforcement officials]."
Behn did not respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.
In an exclusive interview with Fox News Digital, Trump border czar Tom Homan outlined the progress that has been made at the border, and detailed how the president’s "big beautiful bill" could solidify items that have improved border security.
"All those accessories on the border, we can lock it in to make it permanent," Homan explained. "So we're going to put more border walls up. We'll put more water buoys in. That's going to save lives, right, because people see the water buoys, you can't get over them, which many people won't attempt to go into that river, which means we save lives."
According to data from the Customs and Border Patrol (CBP), apprehensions at the border are down 93% from April 2024 to April 2025 under the Trump administration. Fulfilling the president’s campaign promise to reign in the heightened flow of illegal immigrants has been one of the administration’s top priorities, and Homan told Fox the "big beautiful bill" will "solidify the success" the numbers are already illustrating.
"[The bill] is going to save lives," Homan said. "It's going to add technology to the existing new border wall that the Biden administration didn't put into the wall. So, it's a smart wall, but Biden stopped the tech equipment from getting embedded in the wall to let us know when someone approaches that wall, climbs the wall, digs under that wall."
Trump’s border czar also pointed out an important element of the legislation, which provides funding for the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to purchase beds for illegal migrants who are detained.
"Right now we've got 50,000 people in custody. We're only funded for $34,000. ICE is already in a hole at $500 million. We need 100,000 beds. This bill does that."
The president’s "big beautiful bill" contains many components of Trump’s agenda, including border security, tax policy, debt limit, and defense spending. It has had issues making it through the legislative process as some House Republicans have advocated for provisions such as state and local tax (SALT) deduction caps and spending cuts.
President Trump spoke out strongly against any cuts to Medicaid or SALT deduction caps during his visit to Capitol Hill to rally support for the bill on Tuesday.
As for the border, GOP members whose districts line the southern border spoke out in support of the legislation.
"It may be a big and beautiful bill, but it has the muscle and backbone of historic border security and the ability to deport the millions of criminal illegals Joe Biden let walk into our country," Congressman Darrell Issa, R-California, told Fox News Digital.
Texas Republican Rep. Tony Gonalzes, who represents the largest border district in Congress, also highlighted border elements of the legislation.
"These are exactly the priorities I have fought tooth and nail for during the last four years, and I’m proud to see we’re finally getting it done," Gonzales told Fox News Digital. "My communities along the border will be much better off, and I’m proud to have played a key part in making that happen."
FIRST ON FOX: Republicans outperformed Democrats on voter registration in four key battleground states between the 2020 and 2024 presidential elections, according to research by the American Association of Political Consultants (AAPC).
The bipartisan political consultant non-profit teamed up with analysts from Data Trust, a conservative organization, and Target Smart, which has aligned with Democrats in past election cycles. Compiling data from the 2020 and 2024 elections in Arizona, North Carolina, Nevada and Pennsylvania, the research suggests a national shift in voter registration toward the Republican Party.
"We wanted a bipartisan analysis because there are so many conventional wisdoms this election challenged," Larry Huynh of Trilogy Interactive andDemocrat AAPC Board President said. "The data was pretty clear that the Democrats were caught off guard with voter registration and turnout efforts and failed to mount a sufficiently compelling counter-effort to compete. We should all learn from this and take a deeper dive into our voter registration and turnout operations."
AAPC unveiled the research this week during the 2025 Pollie Awards, a political communications awards program, in Colorado Springs, Colo.
"The Trump campaign and the Republican Party deserve considerable recognition for their voter registration success and turnout efforts and the party should try to build on these successes," Kyle Roberts of AdImpact and the incoming Republican AAPC Board President told Fox News Digital.
From 2020 to 2024, the bipartisan political analysis found the share of registered Democrat voters dropped in all four battleground states. Meanwhile, the share of registered unaffiliated and Republican voters increased in Arizona, North Carolina, Nevada and Pennsylvania, according to the data compiled by Data Trust and Target Smart.
In three out of four of the states analyzed, unaffiliated voters accounted for the largest electoral increase. Democrats saw the largest electoral drop between 2020 and 2024 across the four battleground states, following the same trend as voter registration.
Voter turnout across party lines dropped in three out of the four battleground states analyzed, the data revealed. And while Democrat turnout dropped more than Republican turnout in those three states, the difference was less than a percentage point in every state but Arizona.
Data Trust and Target Smart also analyzed trends across demographic groups, including Black, Hispanic and rural voters. The overall increase in Republican registration, turnout and electoral growth was consistent across the demographic groups analyzed.
President Donald Trump won all seven battleground states in 2024 – Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Republicans maintained control of the House of Representatives and won back the Senate.
70% of voters believed the country was on the wrong track and wanted change in the 2024 presidential election, according to Fox News Voter Analysis. The economy and immigration were top issues as Trump tied inflation to President Joe Biden's administration and vowed to secure the border on his first day in office.
As AAPC seeks to analyze Republicans' inroads with swing state voters in 2024, Democrats are facing their own reckoning this week as a new book reveals the alleged "cover-up" of Biden's cognitive decline.
CNN anchor Jake Tapper and Axios political correspondent Alex Thompson's book, "Original Sin: President Biden’s Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again," released on Tuesday, paints an unflattering picture of Democrats' losses in 2024.
While political commentators focus on what Democrats did wrong in 2024, AAPC's new data reveals what Republicans did right on voter registration and turnout.
The Republican National Committee (RNC) opened "Black Americans for Trump" and "Latino Americans for Trump" offices across the battleground states in 2024, seeking to expand their reach among traditionally Democrat voting blocs.
Over 160,000 volunteers joined the RNC's "Protect the Vote" efforts on election integrity in 2024, which included more than 100 lawsuits and recruiting poll watchers across the country. Seizing on Republicans' election distrust following Trump's loss in 2020, the RNC built a coalition of supporters across the country that propelled voters to the polls and landed Trump a win in 2024.
The marquee event in the run-up to potentially passing the so-called "big, beautiful bill" began Wednesday at 3 p.m. ET as House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and members of the Freedom Caucus headed to the White House to meet with President Donald Trump.
The White House is really amping up the pressure now on the Freedom Caucus. A White House statement said, "The Administration strongly supports passage of H.R. 1, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act." It added that "President Trump is committed to keeping his promises, and failure to pass this bill would be the ultimate betrayal. If H.R. 1 were presented to the President, he would sign it into law."
Fox is told that the House GOP brass would like to pass the bill "today." There is an increasing scenario that "today" means very late Wednesday night or the early hours of Thursday morning. They are banking on the idea that pressure from the president will force the Freedom Caucus to vote "yes." They also need to provide a fig leaf for the Freedom Caucus so they can exit these negotiations with a "win."
The Freedom Caucus is upset that the SALT Caucus achieved a victory with an increase in the deduction for state and local taxes. So the Freedom Caucus is asking, "Where is our deal?"
We expect House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., to parachute a "manager’s amendment" or two into the bill at the end. This would be introduced before the House Rules Committee and made a part of the bill. The manager’s amendment is essentially the final change to the bill. The key is to make sure that it sweetens the measure in a way that it drags the final outstanding votes across the finish line.
Here’s the dynamic: House GOP leaders are worried about losing members from an attendance perspective on Thursday. So they feel it’s best to move sooner rather than later. Also, there’s the potential of losing votes the longer this sits open. So Republican leaders want to lock this down as soon as possible. That’s why an overnight/early morning scenario is very much in play right now.
Here are the concrete steps which must happen to pass the bill:
– Johnson introduces his manager’s amendment to tweak the bill and court reluctant Republicans to vote yes.
– The Rules Committee incorporates that amendment into the bill.
– The Rules Committee votes on the overall "rule," which sends the "new" version of the bill with the changes via the manager’s amendment to the floor.
– The House debates the "rule" to set the table for the actual debate.
– The House must adopt the "rule" in order to put the bill on the floor. If the Rules Committee fails to send the rule to the floor or if the GOP stumbles in its effort to get it out of the Rules Committee, they’re stuck. So these two procedural steps are crucial.
– The House then debates the bill on the floor, based on the ground rules approved earlier by the rule.
Those are a lot of steps. But things can move very fast when they get these things in place in the House. That’s why Republican leaders want the pressure of the president to force the issue in the next 12 to 24 hours.
That said, there is a distinct possibility of this unfolding overnight or in the wee hours of the morning on Thursday.
There is also a possibility that this stalls, and we are staring at a Thursday night/wee hours of Friday scenario, too.
A U.S. appeals court ordered the Trump administration this week to comply with a lower court judge's order to return a 20-year-old Venezuelan migrant deported from the U.S. to El Salvador in March, marking another setback in legal battles over its use of the Alien Enemies Act.
The 2–1 decision from the 4th Circuit leaves in place U.S. District Judge Stephanie Gallagher’s earlier ruling that Daniel Lozano-Camargo, previously identified in court documents as "Cristian," must be allowed back into the country.
Gallagher, a Trump appointee, ruled that Lozano-Camargo's removal violated an agreement that the Department of Homeland Security struck with a group of other migrants who entered the U.S. illegally as children and later sought asylum. DHS agreed not to deport these individuals, who later sought asylum in the U.S. until their cases could be fully adjudicated in court.
The decision paves the way for the Trump administration to appeal the case to the Supreme Court. In the interim, Gallagher has said she will amend her ruling to set a formal timeline for the government to return the 20-year-old migrant to the U.S.
The Justice Department appealed the case to the 4th Circuit earlier this month.
The majority opinion, published Monday night, rejected its request, stressing what judges said was their role in ensuring the courts have the ability to prevent any attempted "degradation of effective judicial review" by the executive branch.
"As is becoming far too common, we are confronted again with the efforts of the Executive Branch to set aside the rule of law in pursuit of its goals," Judge DeAndrea Gist Benjamin said, writing for the majority. "It is the duty of courts to stand as a bulwark against the political tides that seek to override constitutional protections and fundamental principles of law, even in the name of noble ends like public safety."
"The Government’s breach denied Cristian the benefit of the bargain and the process he was due," Gregory added.
Gallagher ruled in April that the government violated a 2024 settlement between DHS and a group of young asylum seekers, including Lozano-Camargo. Under that deal, DHS agreed not to deport the migrants, all of whom entered the U.S. as unaccompanied children, until their cases were fully heard in court.
Last month, Gallagher said Lozano-Camargo’s deportation was a "breach of contract" since his asylum case had not yet been heard and ordered the U.S. government to arrange for his release. Lawyers for the Trump administration argued Lozano-Camargo was eligible for removal under the Alien Enemies Act, citing his arrest and conviction on cocaine possession charges as recently as January. They also claimed, without evidence, he was a member of a "violent terrorist gang."
Gallagher reiterated her previous decision this month, emphasizing it has nothing to do with the strength of his asylum request in a nod to two apparent low-level drug offenses. Rather, she stressed, it was a matter of due process.
The government is "measuring utility using the wrong yardstick" in this case, she told the administration, adding it is not a case of whether Lozano-Camargo will eventually receive asylum, but the process afforded to him in the interim.
Process, she said, is important for various reasons, noting that even when outcomes in certain criminal cases or trials seem obvious, individuals are still entitled to a trial under U.S. law.
"We don’t skip to the end and say, ‘We all know how this is going to end, so we’ll just skip that part,'" she said.
This was also upheld by the judges of the appellate court.
"The Government's breach denied Cristian the benefit of the bargain and the process he was due," Benjamin said, writing for the majority.
Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., introduced a House resolution Wednesday to expel Democratic New Jersey Rep. LaMonica McIver, who earlier this week was served with federal charges for allegedly assaulting law enforcement officers this month while protesting at a federal immigrant detention center.
"On May 9th, McIver didn't just break the law, she attacked the very people who defend it," Mace said in a press release announcing the new House Resolution. "Attacking Homeland Security and ICE agents isn't just disgraceful, it's assault. If any other American did what she did, they'd be in handcuffs.
"McIver thinks being a Member of Congress puts her above the law. It doesn't. She should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law."
The Department of Justice announced federal charges against McIver Monday, accusing her of "assaulting, impeding and interfering with law enforcement" earlier this month at a Newark-area immigrant detention center known as Delaney Hall.
McIver was protesting at the detention center with two other members of Congress to conduct what they claimed were their congressionally mandated oversight duties. Ras Baraka, the mayor of Newark, New Jersey, who was arrested after the incident, later had his charges dropped.
Law enforcement said McIver "slammed her forearm into the body of a uniformed" immigration official while trying to "restrain the agent by forcibly grabbing him." McIver also allegedly tried to block agents from arresting Baraka and, after he was put in handcuffs, allegedly "pushed an ICE officer and used her forearms to forcibly strike the agent."
According to a press release accompanying Mace's resolution, the House of Representatives already has a precedent for expelling members of Congress who have been charged with serious criminal offenses.
"In a time when public trust in government is at a historic low, the House must act decisively," Mace said. "The charges are serious. And the public deserves to know that criminal conduct in the halls of Congress has consequences."
McIver made her first court appearance Wednesday virtually before a United States Magistrate Judge for the District of New Jersey at 11 a.m.
The judge read McIver her rights and the charges against her, later indicating to the member of Congress she would be granted bail and released on her own recognizance as the case makes its way through the courts. But she will only be allowed to travel domestically and must notify the government if she intends to travel internationally for her work duties. A preliminary hearing was scheduled for June 11.
"I think the charges are absurd. You know, it's ridiculous. I was there to do my job along with my other colleagues. We have done this before. This is our obligation to do. It's in our job description to have oversight over a facility. And the entire situation was escalated by ICE," McIver said during an appearance on CNN Tuesday.
"They caused the confrontation. Homeland came and caused this chaos that we see. It was a very tense situation, but it could have been easily not happened. They had every opportunity to not allow this to happen. It was very unnecessary. And it just, once again, we were there to do our jobs," she added.
"And if I'm going to be charged with a crime for doing my job, it just speaks to where we're headed in this country and what we are dealing with as leaders and as Congress members, you know, here in this country."
Fox News Digital has reached out to McIver's office for comment on Mace's resolution.
Vice President JD Vance's suggestion this week that the U.S. could walk away from supporting Ukraine if peace talks with Russia stagnate could serve as catnip for the Kremlin, according to experts who say Russian President Vladimir Putin might choose to smother progress in hopes of getting America to wash "its hands of the war."
WhilePresident Donald Trump has indicated that the U.S. may disengage from the negotiations as a last resort if they prove futile, Vance has taken the rhetoric a step further by saying the U.S. is definitely open to doing so.
"We’re more than open to walking away," Vance told reporters on board Air Force Two on Monday, just moments before a high-stakes phone call between Trump and Putin. "The United States is not going to spin its wheels here. We want to see outcomes."
But Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyycautioned that no one wins if the U.S. steps aside from the talks, except for Russia.
"It is crucial for all of us that the United States does not distance itself from the talks and the pursuit of peace because the only one who benefits from that is Putin," Zelenskyy wrote in a Monday post on X.
Vance's remark about abandoning mediation between the two countries would only embolden Russia, even though a lack of U.S. involvement still wouldn't give Putin everything he wants, according to John Hardie, the deputy director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies’ Russia program, a nonprofit research institute based in Washington.
For the moment, Moscow still benefits from U.S. involvement in the talks because the Kremlin wants the U.S. to help advance a deal that benefits Russia and alleviates sanctions, Hardie said.
"But, for the Kremlin, the United States washing its hands of the war would be the next best outcome if it means an end or reduction to U.S. support for Ukraine, especially since President Trump may well move to normalize relations with Russia anyhow," Hardie told Fox News Digital. "So the administration’s threat to walk away risks perversely incentivizing Kremlin intransigence. A better approach would be to ramp up the economic and military pressure on Russia if Putin continues to reject compromise."
Russia still desires normalization with the U.S., which can only happen if the war ends swiftly and relatively amicably, said Peter Rough, a senior fellow and director of the Center on Europe and Eurasia at the Hudson Institute think tank.
"That reset in relations is a giant carrot the administration is dangling in front of the Kremlin," Rough told Fox News Digital. "If the U.S. walks away because Russia will not make peace, however, then that carrot disappears as well."
Rough noted that other administration officials besides Vance, including Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, have mentioned the possibility of walking away from a deal, so Vance's comments don't necessarily reflect a huge change in policy. And it's unclear right now what exactly stepping aside would mean.
"The purpose of those comments has been to impress on the Kremlin that U.S. patience is not limitless," Rough said.
Vance hasn't shied away from issuing bold foreign policy statements since becoming vice president. From sparring with Zelenskyy in the Oval Office in Februaryto appearing to counter Trump when Vance remarked in May that the war in Ukraine was far from over after Trump indicated a deal might emerge soon, Vance has been outspoken in a way most vice presidents haven't been.
When asked for comment or if there were any concerns about Vance's Monday statement, the White House referred Fox News Digital to Vance’s office. Vance’s office declined to provide comment when asked if his remarks would encourage Russia to sit the negotiations out and continue its attacks.
Vance has adopted an outspoken approach as vice president, starting off with his fiery February statements at the Munich Security Council in which he asserted that Europe needed to "step up in a big way to provide for its own defense."
That boldness has carried over into the Russia-Ukraine negotiations, where Vance has taken a proactive approach, at times appearing to be forging his own path.
Vance and Rubio engaged in discussions to end the conflict in Ukraine with Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in Rome on Sunday, among other issues. Vance and Rubio also discussed the Trump administration's efforts to end the war with Vatican prelate Archbishop Paul Richard Gallagher on Monday.
Aboard Air Force Two on Monday, Vance said the negotiations had reached "a bit of [an] impasse" between the two countries and that the conflict is not the Trump administration’s war to wage but rather belongs to former President Joe Biden and Putin.
"There is fundamental mistrust between Russia and the West. It's one of the things the president thinks is, frankly, stupid, that we should be able to move beyond," Vance told reporters. "The mistakes that have been made in the past, but ... that takes two to tango."
"I know the president's willing to do that, but if Russia's not willing to do that, then we're eventually just going to have to say ... this is not our war," Vance said. "It's Joe Biden's war, it's Vladimir Putin's war. It's not our war. We're going to try to end it, but if we can't end it, we're eventually going to say, 'You know what? That was worth a try, but we're not doing it anymore.'"
Vance's Monday statement came just before Trump was scheduled to speak with Putin, seemingly undercutting the high-leverage telephone call and also underscoring Vance's influence over foreign policy matters in the White House.
Specifically on Ukraine negotiations, Vance has remained outspoken, engaging in confrontation when Zelenskyy visited the White House in February.
In that exchange, Vance accused Zelenskyy of being "disrespectful" after Zelenskyy pointed out that Putin has a track record of breaking agreements and countered Vance’s statements that the path forward was through diplomacy to end the war in Ukraine.
"Do you think that it's respectful to come to the Oval Office of the United States of America and attack the administration that is trying to prevent the destruction of your country?" Vance asked at the Oval Office meeting.
Almost immediately after the U.S. signed a minerals deal with Ukraine on May 1, Vance said the war in Ukraine wouldn't end in the near future, despite the fact that Trump indicated the previous week that an agreement was on the horizon.
"It’s not going anywhere," Vance told Fox News on May 1. "It’s not going to end anytime soon."
Still, he characterized the agreement as "good progress" in the negotiations.
Trump and Putin spoke over the phone Monday to advance peace negotiations to halt the conflict between Moscow and Kyiv, just days after Russia and Ukraine met in Turkey to conduct their first peace talks since 2022.
After the call, Trump said both countries would move toward a ceasefire and advance talks to end the war.
Meanwhile, Trump has suggested continued U.S. involvement may not be a viable option moving forward, but he has been reticent about specifics on what would actually prompt him to walk away from the talks. For example, Trump said on May 8 in an interview with NBC News that he believes peace is possible but that the U.S. wouldn't act as a mediator forever.
"Well, there will be a time when I will say, 'OK, keep going, keep being stupid," Trump said in the interview.
"Maybe it's not possible to do," he said. "There's tremendous hatred."
Still, Trump signaled that the U.S. would take a backseat in the negotiations between Moscow and Kyiv after his call with Putin.
"The conditions for that will be negotiated between the two parties, as it can only be, because they know the details of a negotiation that nobody else would be aware of," Trump said in a Monday post on Truth Social.
Trump has continued to distance the U.S. from the conflict, and he later described the conflict as a "European situation."
"Big egos involved, but I think something's going to happen," Trump told reporters on Monday. "And if it doesn't, I'll just back away and they'll have to keep going. This was a European situation. It should have remained a European situation."
Trump also doubled down on extracting the U.S. from the war, claiming it didn't involve U.S. personnel.
"It's not our people, it's not our soldiers … it's Ukraine and it's Russia," Trump said in the Oval Office on Wednesday while hosting South African President Cyril Ramaphosa.
According to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, sanctions against Russia could ramp up in the event Russia fails to cooperate.
"President Trump has made it very clear that if President Putin does not negotiate in good faith that the United States will not hesitate to up the Russia sanctions along with our European partners," Bessent said Sunday in an interview with NBC.
Vance has previously said the concessions that Russia is seeking from Ukraine to end the conflict are too stringent but believes there is a viable path to peace and wants both to find common ground.
"The step that we would like to make right now is we would like both the Russians and the Ukrainians to actually agree on some basic guidelines for sitting down and talking to one another," Vance said at the Munich Leaders Meeting in Washington on May 7.
Russia's demands include Ukraine never joining NATO and preventing foreign peacekeeper troops from deploying to Ukraine after the conflict. Russia is also seeking to adjust some of the borders that previously were Ukraine's.
