After a Texas flood killed at least 32 people Friday, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem addressed criticism about notification prior to the flood, saying the administration is working on updating the National Weather Service and NOAA's "neglected" and "ancient" systems.
Citing her time in Congress and as governor of South Dakota, Noem said that while the weather is difficult to predict, there have been instances when officials and citizens expressed the need for quicker warning and clearer notification before deadly weather.
"That is one of the reasons that, when President [Donald] Trump took office, he said he wanted to fix and is currently upgrading the technology," Noem said during a news conference with state officials Saturday afternoon.
"The National Weather Service has indicated that with that and the [National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration] (NOAA), we needed to renew this ancient system that has been left in place with the federal government for many, many years."
The National Weather Service told Noem its notifications department started to look at expansion of its limited flood impact area at 1:18 p.m. local time Thursday, about 12 hours before the tragedy.
Though a flood watch was issued, Noem described it as a "moderate" alert.
"When the [weather] system came over the area, it stalled," she said. "It was much more water, much like [what] we experienced during [Hurricane] Harvey, with the same type of system that was unpredictable in the way that it reacted in the way that it stopped right here and dumped unprecedented amounts of rain that caused a flooding event like this."
Initial reports indicated heavy rain Friday morning caused the Guadalupe River to rise nearly 30 feet in 45 minutes.
Weather service employees told Noem they continued to elevate notifications, though those alerts likely would have come through in the early morning hours when local residents were asleep.
Texas officials on Saturday confirmed at least 32 deaths, including 14 children.
One of the hardest hit areas was Camp Mystic, an all-girls private Christian camp in Hunt, Texas.
As of Saturday afternoon, 27 young girls remain missing.
"I do carry your concerns back to the federal government, to President Trump, and we will do all we can to fix those kinds of things that may have felt like a failure to you and to your community members," Noem told a reporter.
"We know that everybody wants more warning time, and that's why we're working to upgrade the technologies that have been neglected for far too long, to make sure that families have as much advanced notice as possible," she added.
Noem said reform is ongoing, though she did not announce a specific timeline.
Elon Musk says the two-party system is broken, and he just launched a new political party to prove it.
On Saturday, Musk announced on X, the social media platform he owns, the formation of the "America Party," calling it a direct response to what he described as a corrupt political establishment that no longer represents the American people.
The announcement followed a viral July 4 poll on X, where Musk asked whether voters wanted independence from what he called the "two-party (some would say uniparty) system."
Over 1.2 million votes were cast, with 65.4% saying "yes."
"By a factor of 2 to 1, you want a new political party and you shall have it," Musk posted Saturday. "When it comes to bankrupting our country with waste & graft, we live in a one-party system, not a democracy. Today, the America Party is formed to give you back your freedom."
The move came just after President Donald Trump signed the "big, beautiful bill" into law Friday at the White House.
The sweeping $3.3 trillion legislation includes tax cuts, infrastructure spending and stimulus measures and has drawn criticism from fiscal conservatives and libertarians. Though Musk did not reference the bill directly in his America Party posts, the timing suggests rising friction between the billionaire and the president. Musk has previously warned that unchecked spending by both parties threatens the long-term health of the economy.
The new party, according to Musk’s posts, will target a few key seats in Congress. The goal is to create a swing bloc powerful enough to hold the balance of power and block what Musk sees as the worst excesses of both Republicans and Democrats.
Some on the right voiced concern in the comments section that a third party could split the conservative vote and help Democrats win more easily.
"Your third party will disproportionately take votes from the right vs the left and give the left an easier path to power," conservative commentator Shawn Farash posted.
Others, like Joey Mannarino, urged Musk to focus instead on reforming the GOP from within.
Critics also pointed out that the X poll was informal, not limited to American voters and vulnerable to bots.
Third parties have traditionally had a difficult time gaining ground in American politics as the system is built for two dominant parties. With the Electoral College, winner-take-all elections and strict ballot access laws, outsiders cannot meaningfully compete. Even when a third-party candidate catches fire, it rarely lasts beyond a single election cycle.
One of the biggest third-party efforts in recent history was Ross Perot’s 1992 run.
He earned nearly 19% of the popular vote as an independent but didn’t win a single Electoral College vote. It was the closest a third-party candidate got to the White House after President Teddy Roosevelt's famed Bull Moose Party run in 1912 against his onetime protégé, William Howard Taft.
Others, like Ralph Nader, have tried with the Green Party, and Gary Johnson with the Libertarian Party, but no third-party candidate has come close to winning national office.
Eight criminal illegal aliens were deported to South Sudan on Independence Day, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced Saturday, after what it called "weeks of delays by activist judges" that left ICE officers stranded and at risk.
"These sickos were finally deported to South Sudan on Independence Day," Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement.
"After weeks of delays by activist judges that put our law enforcement in danger, ICE deported these eight barbaric criminal illegal aliens who are so heinous even their own countries will not accept them."
The deportation effort had been blocked by a series of lower court rulings, which the Supreme Court overturned July 3, granting the Trump administration’s motion to enforce its third-country removal policy. The eight men had been held in Djibouti as legal challenges played out.
According to DHS, the eight men had extensive and violent criminal histories.
Enrique Arias-Hierro, a Cuban national, was convicted of homicide, armed robbery, kidnapping and impersonating a law enforcement officer. Jose Manuel Rodriguez-Quinones, also from Cuba, was convicted of attempted first-degree murder with a weapon, battery, larceny and drug trafficking.
Thongxay Nilakout, a Laotian national, was convicted of first-degree murder and robbery and sentenced to life in prison.
Jesus Munoz-Gutierrez, from Mexico, was convicted of second-degree murder and also sentenced to life confinement.
Dian Peter Domach, a South Sudanese national, had convictions for robbery, multiple gun offenses and driving under the influence.
Kyaw Mya of Burma was convicted of lascivious acts with a child under the age of 12 and served part of a 10-year sentence.
Nyo Myint, also from Burma, was convicted of first-degree sexual assault involving a mentally and physically incapacitated victim and faced additional charges of aggravated assault.
Tuan Thanh Phan, a Vietnamese national, was convicted of first-degree murder and second-degree assault and sentenced to 22 years.
"These are not just immigration cases," McLaughlin said. "These are threats to American communities that judges tried to force ICE to return to the United States."
"We thank our brave ICE law enforcement for their sacrifice to defend our freedoms," McLaughlin said. "We will continue to fight for the freedoms of Americans while these far-left activists continue to try and force us to bring murderers, pedophiles and rapists back to the U.S."
The White House did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment.
President Donald Trump has defended his use of the term "shylock" at a rally this week, saying he was unaware it is considered antisemitic by some people.
Trump used the term in his speech in Iowa on Thursday, shortly after his signature One Big Beautiful Bill Act was passed by Congress earlier in the day.
Shylock is the name of the villainous Jewish moneylender in Shakespeare’s "The Merchant of Venice," who demands a pound of flesh from a debtor.
Over time, the name came to be used more broadly to refer to a loan shark or greedy moneylender. Today, it can be considered an antisemitic slur, particularly when used in reference to Jewish people.
"No death tax, no estate tax, no going to the banks and borrowing some from, in some cases, a fine banker and in some cases, shylocks and bad people," Trump said, while referring to the bill’s elimination of estate taxes and borrowing burdens.
The term did not provoke any reaction from the crowd, but his remark quickly blew up online, and he later defended using it when a reporter said it is widely considered an antiemetic phrase.
"No I’ve never heard it that way," Trump responded. "To me, a shylock is somebody that’s a moneylender at high rates. I’ve never heard it that way. You view it differently than me. I’ve never heard that."
The Anti-Defamation League (ADL), which works to combat antisemitism, said the term evokes "a centuries-old antisemitic trope about Jews and greed that is extremely offensive and dangerous."
"President Trump's use of the term is very troubling and irresponsible," the ADL wrote in a statement Friday. "It underscores how lies and conspiracies about Jews remain deeply entrenched in our country. Words from our leaders matter and we expect more from the President of the United States."
Rep. Jerry Nadler, D- N.Y., who is Jewish, agreed and ripped Trump for using the term.
"The term ‘Shylock’ is one of the most recognizable antisemitic slurs in the English language," Nadler wrote on X. "It’s a centuries-old trope that has fueled discrimination, hatred and violence against Jews for generations. I condemn Donald Trump’s dangerous use of this blatantly antisemitic slur and his long history of trafficking in antisemitic tropes."
Nadler went on to say that Trump has exploited the rise of antisemitism to suppress free speech and that he isn’t serious about tackling the problem.
Conservative political commentator John Podhoretz, who is also Jewish, shot back at Nadler.
"I condemn your endorsement of an anti-Semitic mayoral candidate which you did because you are a pusillanimous coward," Podhoretz wrote, in reference to Nadler endorsing Zohran Mamdani for New York City mayor. "At best Trump said Shylock the same week he destroyed Iran’s nuclear program. What have you ever done for the Jews, Jerry?"
Trump has made tackling antisemitism — particularly on college campuses and through immigration enforcement — a top priority in his campaign. He signed an executive order in January mandating that all federal agencies identify and apply tools to address antisemitic harassment and violence in higher education. His administration has also launched investigations into universities including Harvard, Columbia, and UC Berkeley over allegations of antisemitism and has threatened to pull federal funding if they fail to act.
His daughter Ivanka converted to Orthodox Judaism in 2009 and is married to Jared Kushner, who is also Jewish.
Democrat Joe Biden, while vice president, said in 2014 that he had made a "poor choice" of words a day after he used the term in remarks to a legal aid group.
Prominent Democrats sent messages of doom and gloom rather than celebration on July 4, drawing ire from a multitude of critics. Many of the messages included warnings about supposed threats to the country emanating from the Trump administration.
"This Fourth of July, I am taking a moment to reflect. Things are hard right now. They are probably going to get worse before they get better," former Vice President Kamala Harris wrote in a post on X that included a photo of her and former first gentleman Doug Emhoff at the White House. "But I love our country — and when you love something, you fight for it. Together, we will continue to fight for the ideals of our nation."
Many social media users were quick to point out that Harris cropped former President Joe Biden and former first lady Jill Biden out of the photo. Others took one of Harris’ famous phrases to mock her, saying that the country was "unburdened by what has been."
Harris’ old boss, former President Joe Biden, posted a more mild message, while also encouraging Americans to "fight to maintain" democracy.
Meanwhile, former President Barack Obama also chimed in with a warning of his own, saying that "core democratic principles seem to be continuously under attack." He argued that the word "we" is the "single most powerful word in our democracy," and used his first presidential campaign slogan as one of his examples.
"Independence Day is a reminder that America is not the project of any one person. The single most powerful word in our democracy is the word ‘We.’ ‘We The People.’ ‘We Shall Overcome.’ ‘Yes We Can.’ America is owned by no one. It belongs to all citizens. And at this moment in history—when core democratic principles seem to be continuously under attack, when too many people around the world have become cynical and disengaged—now is precisely the time to ask ourselves tough questions about how we can build our democracies and make them work in meaningful and practical ways for ordinary people," Obama wrote.
Xi Van Fleet, a survivor of Mao’s Cultural Revolution, responded saying, "We the People are taking our country back from those like you who despise America and work tirelessly to dismantle everything it stands for."
Sen. Bernie Sanders appeared to support the anti-Trump "No Kings" movement in his July 4 post.
"On July 4, 1776, Americans said: No to Kings, No to Despotism. On July 4, 2025, all across the country, Americans say again: No to Kings, No to Despotism," Sanders wrote.
In response, several social media users pointed out that, unlike a king, President Donald Trump was elected.
Chinese President Xi Jinping will not attend this week’s BRICS Summit in Brazil, marking the first time the Chinese leader has missed the gathering of major emerging economies. The abrupt decision has triggered widespread speculation about internal political dynamics within China and the fraying cohesion of BRICS itself.
China’s official explanation — a "scheduling conflict" and the fact that Xi already met with Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva earlier this year, according to the South China Morning Post — has been met with skepticism. Premier Li Qiang will attend the summit in Xi’s place, continuing a recent trend of Xi scaling back his appearances on the global stage.
"That doesn’t make sense," said Gordon Chang, an expert on U.S.-China relations. "There are many other countries at the BRICS summit, not just Brazil. To me, it’s extremely significant that Xi Jinping is not going. It suggests turbulence at home — there are signs he’s lost control of the military and that civilian rivals are reasserting power. This is a symptom of that."
Bryan Burack of the Heritage Foundation agrees that Xi’s absence underscores deeper issues: "It’s another indication that BRICS is not going to be China’s vassalization of the Global South." He noted that countries like Brazil and Indonesia have recently imposed tariffs on China over industrial overcapacity and dumping, moves that suggest widening rifts within the group.
"China is actively harming all those countries for the most part, maybe with some exceptions, through its malign trade policies and dumping and overcapacity."
Some analysts point to rising China-India friction as a contributing factor in Xi’s decision to skip the summit.
"China has been at war with India for decades, essentially," Burack said. "These are fundamentally opposing interests. It’s difficult to see China changing its behavior in the near term, and that will keep tensions high."
India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi is expected to take a leading role at the gathering, potentially another deterrent for Xi’s attendance.
Another key leader — Russian President Vladimir Putin — is only expected to address the group by video.
Formed by Brazil, Russia, India and China and later joined by South Africa, BRICS was envisioned as a non-Western counterweight to G7 dominance. It has expanded to include Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, the UAE and, most recently, Indonesia, strengthening its economic footprint.
Economist Christian Briggs highlighted BRICS’s massive scale: "BRICS now comprises 12 full members and up to 23 when counting partners. Collectively, they account for over 60% of the world’s GDP and around 75% of the global population. They control vast natural resources and a growing share of global trade flows."
Yet despite its scale, the bloc remains ideologically and strategically fragmented. "It’s a group of countries that hate each other," Burack said bluntly. "China is harming many of them through unfair trade practices. There’s not a lot of incentive for real unity."
The alliance’s aspirations to challenge the U.S. dollar through alternative payment systems and a potential BRICS currency have gained media traction — but experts caution against overestimating this threat.
"There’s been a lot of fearmongering about a BRICS currency," said Burack. "But the interests of these countries are completely divergent. There’s more smoke than fire when it comes to a currency challenge to the dollar."
Chang echoed this skepticism: "The only country that can challenge the dollar is the United States. Weakness in the dollar is due to what we are doing domestically, not what the BRICS are doing."
Still, Briggs offered a counterpoint, arguing that BRICS members are already reshaping global currency flows.
"They’re moving away from the dollar into digital yuan, rupees, rubles. China has launched a SWIFT alternative already adopted by the Caribbean banking sector — trillions of dollars are shifting."
While its cohesion remains questionable, BRICS poses a long-term challenge to U.S. influence — particularly in regions where Washington has retreated diplomatically and economically.
"China filled the void left by the U.S. in places like Africa," said Briggs. "Now it controls about 38% of the world’s minerals. Meanwhile, Russia’s economy has doubled despite sanctions, because they preemptively reduced reliance on the dollar."
Yet Chang sees India as a brake on any aggressive anti-Western tilt. "BRICS has an ‘I’ in it—and that’s India. Modi doesn’t want to be part of an anti-Western bloc. As long as India’s in BRICS, the rest of the world is safe."
To some, Xi's no-show signals instability in Beijing. To others, the opposite: it demonstrates confidence in China's dominance over the other BRICS members.
"He doesn’t have to be there," Briggs contended. "Xi’s power allows him to delegate. China is trading with nearly 80% of the world now. He’s moving the agenda forward even in absentia."
What’s clear is that BRICS continues to evolve — its internal contradictions as visible as its geopolitical ambitions. Whether Xi's absence marks a retreat or a recalibration remains one of the key questions hovering over the summit in Brazil.
North Carolina Gov. Josh Stein has vetoed four controversial bills that target diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives and transgender rights, setting up a political clash with the Republican-led General Assembly.
Stein, a Democrat, blasted the three DEI-focused bills as being "mean-spirited" that would "marginalize vulnerable people" and took aim at Republicans who failed to pass a fiscal budget for the year that just began.
The DEI bills ought to ban DEI training, hiring practices and staff positions in state and local governments as well as outlawing the use of state funds for DEI programming. The legislation would have imposed civil penalties on workers who violate the rules. No Democrats supported the three DEI bills.
"At a time when teachers, law enforcement, and state employees need pay raises, and people need shorter lines at the DMV, the legislature failed to pass a budget and, instead, wants to distract us by stoking culture wars that further divide us," Stein said in a statement.
"These mean-spirited bills would marginalize vulnerable people and also undermine the quality of public services and public education. Therefore, I am vetoing them. I stand ready to work with the legislature when it gets serious about protecting people and addressing North Carolinians’ pressing concerns."
The measures cutting or eliminating diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives in state and local governments, K-12 public schools and the university system have been a major priority for GOP lawmakers. They argue the programs targeted have overemphasized identity to the detriment of merit and societal unity.
The transgender bill began as a bipartisan measure to curb sexual exploitation by enforcing age verification and consent rules for pornography websites. But lawmakers later added controversial provisions, including a ban on state-funded gender-affirming procedures for prisoners.
It also affirms the recognition of two sexes and requires the state to officially attach a transgender person’s new birth certificate to their old one if they change their sex assigned at birth.
Stein said in a veto message that he strongly supported the anti-sexual exploitation provisions in the bill, but the final measure went too far. "My faith teaches me that we are all children of God no matter our differences and that it is wrong to target vulnerable people, as this bill does," he added.
One Democrat backed the fourth bill before Stein vetoed it. All four bills now return to the General Assembly, which could reconvene later this month to attempt veto overrides. Republicans are one vote short of a veto-proof supermajority in the House.
The vetoes bring Stein’s total to 11 since taking office in January — all within the past two weeks. Stein was previously North Carolina’s attorney general since 2017 after serving in the state Senate from 2009 to 2016.
The progressive attorney and politician campaigned on a platform of lowering the cost of housing, increasing job creation, expanding access to abortion and improving education.
Fox News’ Emma Colton and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
President Donald Trump is riding a major wave of momentum after he signed his $3.3 trillion "big, beautiful bill" Friday – a final notch in a series of wins for his administration in recent weeks.
"President Trump has delivered more wins for the American people in two weeks than most Presidents do in four years," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a Thursday statement to Fox News Digital. "This has been the most historic two weeks of any Administration in history. Thanks to President Trump, America is back and is the hottest country in the world!"
The tax and domestic policy bill arrived on his desk after the House passed the final version of the measure Thursday – meeting Trump’s self-imposed Fourth of July deadline to get the measure over the finish line.
The bill includes key provisions that would permanently establish individual and business tax breaks included in Trump's 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, and incorporates new tax deductions to cut duties on tips and overtime pay.
The measure also raises the debt limit by $5 trillion – a provision that has faced scrutiny from figures such as SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk.
Furthermore, the bill rescinds certain Biden-era green energy tax credits, and allocates approximately $350 billion for defense and Trump’s mass deportation initiative to weed out illegal immigrants from the U.S.
The measure also institutes Medicaid reforms, including new 80-hour-a-month work requirements for Medicaid recipients, and expands work requirements for those on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.
Here are some other recent events that have gone in the Trump administration’s favor:
The U.S. launched strikes June 21 targeting key Iranian nuclear facilities, which involved more than 125 U.S. aircraft, according to Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Following the strikes, Trump said in an address to the nation that the mission left the nuclear sites "completely and totally obliterated," and Caine said that initial battle damage assessments suggested "all three sites sustained extremely severe damage and destruction."
Still, Caine acknowledged that a final assessment would "take some time."
But days later, a leaked report from the Defense Intelligence Agency, published by CNN and the New York Times, cast doubt on those claims, saying that the strikes had only set back Iran’s nuclear program by several months.
However, the Pentagon said Wednesday that internal intelligence assessments indicate the strikes set back Iran’s nuclear program by one or two years.
"We have degraded their program by one to two years, at least intel assessments inside the Department (of Defense) assess that," Defense Department spokesman Sean Parnell told reporters Wednesday.
The Supreme Court ruled, 6–3, to block the lower courts from issuing universal injunctions on June 27. Multiple executive orders Trump has signed during his second administration have been tied up in the courts as a result of nationwide injunctions, including his ban on birthright citizenship.
The Supreme Court’s ruling means that lower courts are only permitted to issue broad injunctions in limited cases, which Trump said would prevent a "colossal abuse of power."
"I was elected on a historic mandate, but in recent months, we've seen a handful of radical left judges effectively try to overrule the rightful powers of the president to stop the American people from getting the policies that they voted for in record numbers," Trump said on June 27.
CBS News’ parent company, Paramount Global, Tuesday agreed to a $16 million settlement with Trump, stemming from a lawsuit Trump filed against CBS in October 2024 related to a "60 Minutes" interview with his opponent in the 2024 election, Vice President Kamala Harris.
In the lawsuit, Trump alleged that CBS deceptively edited the interview with Harris when asked about why Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wasn't "listening" to the Biden administration. While the segment aired one answer from Harris during a primetime special on the network, a less polished answer had previously appeared in a preview clip of the interview.
The money from the settlement will not go to Trump himself, but rather, toward his future presidential library and to cover the plaintiffs' fees and costs. CBS said it worked with a mediator to reach the settlement agreement and that Paramount will not issue an apology.
While Democrats predict major problems with a provision within the "one big, beautiful bill" that adds a work requirement for adults to be eligible for Medicaid, Republican senators are praising the requirement, saying, "We’ve got to get back to work."
The provision requires able-bodied, childless adults between the ages of 18 and 64 to work at least 80 hours a month to be eligible to receive Medicaid benefits. Individuals can also meet the requirement by participating in community service, going to school or engaging in a work program.
"We have folks back home right now harvesting wheat that are working 20 hours in a day," Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan., told Fox News Digital. "We want you to go to college, we want to volunteer, work 20 hours a week, it brings dignity, it brings purpose to your lives. Work is a great thing; it's nothing to be ashamed of."
"Seven million healthy American men out there of working age are not working right now," Marshall continued. "We happen to have seven million open jobs as well. I think I want to do everything I can to help those seven million men find a job. Whether that's through an education or community colleges, technical colleges, I think there's lots of opportunity out there."
Sen. Bill Hagerty, R-Tenn., said "the disincentives to work are a real problem here in America."
"It's amazing that Democrats are trying to make this argument," he said. "I don't think that taxpayers should be footing the bill at all for able-bodied citizens. And certainly, non-citizens should not be getting the benefit of this."
"We need to incentivize work," Hagerty went on. "And certainly, you don't want to be incentivizing a burden on taxpayers."
"We've got to take care of the people that need to be taken care of and it's just unfortunate you've got a lot of freeloaders in this country," said Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala.
Tuberville claimed that many of those he deemed as freeloaders "are coming from the younger ranks because they've grown up, they've got all these student loans, they got a degree that's not worth anything, they can't get a job or they don't want to work and so the way they've done they've turned into socialists, they started living off the government."
"We can't have that. We’ve got to get back to work. This country is built on hard work," he said.
Meanwhile, Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., said he also agrees with the work requirement, telling Fox News Digital that "quite honestly, what we're trying to do is stop enrollment in that Obamacare addition to Medicaid."
"They call it Medicaid expansion, but it's Obamcare. It was Democrats' way of trying to turn us into a single-payer system. And so, it incentivized the states to sign up single able-bodied individuals," he claimed.
"As a result," he went on. "We've created all kinds of [what] I would call legalized fraud on the part of states … Now that they've designed their budgets around that scam, now they're screaming when we're trying to end the scam."
Additionally, while Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., expressed that "of course, we should always eliminate any kind of fraud and that kind of a waste," other Democrats were much less enthusiastic about the work requirement.
"That provision is not designed for efficiency or to save people money that provision is designed to kick people off of Medicaid, like don't believe the hype," said Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn.
Murphy claimed that Republicans "have built a work requirement that they know people won't be able to satisfy because they hate the idea that Medicaid actually helps the working poor in this country."
"So, there's going to be a whole bunch of people who work for a living who are not going to be able to comply with those provisions and are going to lose their healthcare, even though they're working," he said. "That's the intent of the provision and everybody should just be honest about that."
Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., indicated that the provision will "kick 17 million people off of health insurance."
"These are life and death situations that people are making," he said, adding, "This legislation is going to kick 300,000 of my constituents off of their health care coverage."
"These are people that I've spoken to that can't afford it," he continued. "They have no money in their budget to go and buy health care. So, then they got to make a decision between eating and their rent, or they just don't go to the doctor."
James Agresti, president of Just Facts, a public policy research institute, told Fox News Digital that despite Democrats’ claims about the work requirements, he believes reality tells a different story.
"The notion that able-bodied adults without young children cannot work, get an education, or volunteer for 20 hours a week is absurd," he said.
"Murphy’s rhetoric is refuted by decades of experience with other welfare programs that have work requirements, like Temporary Assistance for Needy Families," he explained.
Agresti said that according to an estimate by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), 1.4 million noncitizens and 9.2 million able-bodied adults who won’t work or are engaged in fraud will be removed from Medicaid eligibility.
A spokesperson for Kelly’s office told Fox News Digital that "a bunch of actual experts and media outlets correctly interpreting that same CBO report" estimate that 11.8 million people will be without health insurance by 2034 because of the provision, plus an additional 5.1 million because of the bill ending expanded Affordable Care Act credits.
In response, Agresti said the bill "doesn’t revoke the expanded Obamacare subsidies, which were a temporary COVID-era handout that Democrats enacted in the American Rescue Plan and extended in the Inflation Reduction Act."
"Even the New York Times has reported that adding these numbers into the tally for the big, beautiful bill ‘is an exaggeration’ and not ‘the real number,’" said Agresti.
He also said that numerous studies have proven that the disincentive to work is a real problem in America.
"Even Lawrence Summers, Obama’s chief economist and Clinton’s Treasury Secretary, has written that ‘government assistance programs’ provide ‘an incentive, and the means, not to work,’" he said.
Murphy’s office did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s requests for comment.
EXCLUSIVE: The Trump administration is turning its attention to the Smithsonian Institution, accusing the taxpayer-funded museum complex of using federal dollars to promote what it calls "one-sided, divisive political narratives" that fail to honor the greatness of the American story.
White House official Lindsey Halligan blasted content currently on display at the National Museum of American History’s Entertainment Nation exhibit in an exclusive email to Fox News Digital.
The exhibit, which explores American pop culture, has drawn internal and external criticism for what some see as a politically loaded interpretation of cultural milestones.
"American taxpayers should not be funding institutions that undermine our country or promote one-sided, divisive political narratives," Halligan said. "The Smithsonian Institution should present history in a way that is accurate, balanced, and consistent with the values that make the United States of America exceptional."
The White House statement comes on the heels of several striking examples from the exhibit.
One placard, featured alongside a 1923 circus poster, reads: "Under the big top, circuses expressed the colonial impulse to claim dominion over the world." Another, describing early American entertainment, declares: "One of the earliest defining traits of entertainment in the United States was extraordinary violence."
The exhibit reframes iconic American characters through a critical, politically-charged lens. On The Lone Ranger, the display states: "The White title character’s relationship with Tonto resembled how the U.S. government imagined itself the world’s Lone Ranger."
Mickey Mouse, a beloved American cultural icon, is not spared either. A display for the 1928 cartoon Steamboat Willie states, "Mickey challenged authority, but not everyone was in on the joke."
It continues: "Mickey Mouse debuted as the deckhand ‘Steamboat Willie’ in 1928, amidst a rising anxiety felt by many that modern living and city life were eroding family and community ties and loosening moral codes… But the new character’s outsized facial features, white gloves, and trickster temperament were vestiges of longstanding traditions of blackface minstrelsy."
In reference to the Indiana Jones film series, another panel reads: "His character embodied a confident righteousness that, in many ways, captured the essence of the 1980s" above another subhead referencing President Ronald Reagan's famous speech, asking, "Are you better off?"
One panel calls Magnum, P.I. a challenge to the "popular perceptions of Vietnam veterans as damaged misfits." A section on Jon Stewart’s Daily Show refers to it as "the go-to for viewers who mistrusted politicians and the reporting process."
Another panel highlights the late pop star Selena Quintanilla-Pérez and frames her cultural impact through identity politics.
"Selena got us talking about identity," with a quote from the late singer reading, "I feel very proud to be Mexican."
The text goes on to say her work "cast a light on the longstanding cultural and growing political influence of Mexican American and Latinx communities within the United States."
"The examples [Fox News Digital] highlighted from the National Museum of American History are part of the problem the Trump Administration aims to fix," Halligan said. "Framing American culture as inherently violent, imperialist, or racist does not reflect the greatness of our nation or the millions of Americans who have contributed to its progress."
Halligan confirmed that a top-to-bottom content review is already underway, with input from senior Smithsonian leaders and the Board of Regents. "We are working with leadership at the Smithsonian to audit and review all content at the museums," she said, "and we are committed to ensuring that such content honors our country’s founding principles, tells the stories of American heroes, and does not promote fringe or activist ideologies masquerading as history."
She added, "We will provide updates on this audit as our progress unfolds."
The Smithsonian Institution responded to Fox News Digital with the following brief written statement: "The museum is committed to continuous and rigorous scholarship and research and unbiased presentation of facts and history. As such, and as previously announced, we are assessing content in Smithsonian museums and will make any necessary changes to ensure our content meets our standards."
The Institution did not answer specific questions regarding who authored the Entertainment Nation exhibit, whether outside academic consultants or activist organizations were involved, or who made the decision to present all exhibit text bilingually in English and Spanish.
The controversy comes amid a broader push by President Donald Trump to reshape cultural institutions he says have veered too far left.
In March, Trump issued an executive order directing the Board of Regents to eliminate "improper, divisive or anti-American ideology" from Smithsonian museums. He accused the institution of embracing what he called "a revisionist movement" aimed at "undermining the remarkable achievements of the United States by casting its founding principles and historical milestones in a negative light."
The Board of Regents includes the vice president, the chief justice of the United States, six members of Congress, and nine citizen regents.
Vice President J.D. Vance and Congressman Carlos Giménez, both recent appointees, have advocated for an expedited review of Smithsonian content. Giménez, in a prior interview with The Wall Street Journal, confirmed tensions at the board’s June meeting over how quickly to proceed, though ultimately a compromise was reached.
The Smithsonian receives approximately two-thirds of its $1 billion annual budget from federal appropriations.
The Entertainment Nation exhibit opened in December 2022 and was billed as a permanent exhibition to "celebrate the power of popular culture to shape and reflect history." It is housed in a prime space on the museum’s west wing and features artifacts and media from movies, television, sports, and music.
While the museum’s stated goal is to explore how entertainment intersects with American identity, the Trump administration argues that it instead uses culture to smuggle in ideology often at odds with the values most Americans hold.
"Americans deserve a Smithsonian that inspires national pride, tells the truth, and reflects the greatness of this country," Halligan said. "Not one that serves as an agent for social change and cultural subversion."
Eight migrants were denied a request by a Massachusetts federal judge on Friday to have their deportation to South Sudan halted.
Justice Department lawyers said the men were scheduled to be flown to South Sudan on Friday at 7 p.m. ET after two courts considered their emergency request on July 4, a day when courts would otherwise be closed, Reuters reported.
The migrants, who are from Cuba, Laos, Mexico, Burma, Sudan and Vietnam, filed new claims on Thursday after the U.S. Supreme Court clarified that Boston federal Judge Brian Murphy couldn't require the Department of Homeland Security to hold them.
Also on Friday, federal Judge Randolph Moss in Washington paused the Trump administration's efforts to deport the eight migrants to South Sudan, the latest case testing the legality of the Trump administration's push to ship illegal immigrants to third countries.
Moss had briefly halted the deportation after lawyers for the migrants filed the new claims in his court and sent the case to Boston, where Murphy denied the claim.
The eight men argued their deportations to South Sudan would violate the Constitution, which prohibits "cruel and unusual" punishment, Reuters reported. They have been convicted of various crimes, with four of them convicted of murder, the Department of Homeland Security has said.
They were detained for six weeks on a military base in Djibouti instead of being brought back to the United States.
On Thursday, the migrants filed new claims after the Supreme Court said that a federal judge in Boston could no longer require the Department of Homeland Security to hold them, Reuters reported.
Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House.
During Friday's hearing with Moss, a government lawyer argued that court orders halting agreed-upon deportations pose a serious problem for U.S. diplomatic relations and would make foreign countries less likely to accept transfers of migrants in the future.
The case is the latest development over the legality of the Trump administration's campaign to deter immigration by shipping migrants to locations other than their countries of origin pursuant to deals with other countries, according to Reuters.
"It seems to me almost self-evident that the United States government cannot take human beings and send them to circumstances in which their physical well-being is at risk simply either to punish them or send a signal to others," Moss said during the hearing.
A federal judge on Friday halted the Trump administration's efforts to deport eight migrants to South Sudan, the latest case testing the legality of the Trump administration's push to ship illegal immigrants to third countries.
U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss in Washington made the ruling, on the July 4 holiday, in order to give the migrants time to make an argument to a Massachusetts court.
The eight men, who are from Cuba, Laos, Mexico, Burma, Sudan and Vietnam, argue their deportations to South Sudan would violate the Constitution, which prohibits "cruel and unusual" punishment, Reuters reported. They have been convicted of various crimes, with four of them convicted of murder, the Department of Homeland Security has said.
They were detained for six weeks on a military base in Djibouti instead of being brought back to the United States.
On Thursday, the migrants filed new claims after the Supreme Court said that a federal judge in Boston could no longer require the Department of Homeland Security to hold them, Reuters reported.
Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House.
Friday's order stops the U.S. government from moving the men until 4:30 p.m. ET. They were scheduled to be removed to South Sudan on a 7 p.m. flight.
During Friday's hearing, a government lawyer argued that court orders halting agreed-upon deportations pose a serious problem for U.S. diplomatic relations and would make foreign countries less likely to accept transfers of migrants in the future.
The case is the latest development over the legality of the Trump administration's campaign to deter immigration by shipping migrants to locations other than their countries of origin pursuant to deals with other countries, according to Reuters.
"It seems to me almost self-evident that the United States government cannot take human beings and send them to circumstances in which their physical well-being is at risk simply either to punish them or send a signal to others," Moss said during the hearing.
President Donald Trump signed his $3.3 trillion "big, beautiful bill" on Friday, after the House passed the final version of the measure Thursday to ensure it arrived at the president’s desk by his self-imposed July 4 deadline.
The bill includes key provisions that would permanently establish individual and business tax breaks included in Trump's 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, and incorporates new tax deductions to cut duties on tips and overtime pay.
Before signing the bill, the president said the bill would "fuel massive economic growth" and "lift up the hard-working citizens who make this country run."
"We have officially made the Trump tax cuts permanent," Trump said. "That's the largest tax cut in the history of our country. … After this kicks in, our country is going to be a rocket ship economically. We've delivered no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, and no tax on Social Security for our great seniors. … It makes the child tax credit permanent for 40 million American families. … The Golden Age of America is upon us."
The measure also raises the debt limit by $5 trillion — a provision that has faced scrutiny from figures including SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who formerly led a war against wasteful government spending at the Department of Government Efficiency.
Furthermore, the bill rescinds certain Biden-era green energy tax credits, and allocates approximately $350 billion for defense and Trump’s mass deportation initiative to weed out illegal immigrants from the U.S.
"Wind. It doesn't work," Trump said. "I will tell you, aside from ruining our fields and our valleys, killing all the birds, [and] being very weak and very expensive, [they are] all made in China. You know, I noticed something … with all of the windmills that China sends us … I have never seen a wind farm in China."
The measure also institutes Medicaid reforms, including new 80-hour-a-month work requirements for Medicaid recipients, and expands work requirements for those on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.
Republicans in the Senate were sent scrambling on June 26 to reform and pass the measure ahead of Trump’s July 4 deadline after Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough determined that several Medicaid reforms in the sweeping tax and domestic policy package did not follow Senate rules and must be removed.
Ultimately, the Senate barely passed the measure on Tuesday by a 51-50 margin. Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Thom Tillis of North Carolina, and Rand Paul of Kentucky all voted against the bill, requiring Vice President JD Vance to step in and cast the tie-breaking vote.
The legislation then headed back to the House to hammer out a few differences in the versions passed in both chambers of Congress.
On Wednesday evening prior to the House’s passage, Vance turned up the heat on lawmakers to get the measure through the finish line, citing provisions in the measure that would bolster border security.
"The Big Beautiful Bill gives the president the resources and the power to undo the Biden border invasion," Vance said in a Wednesday post on X. "It must pass."
"Congrats to everyone. At times I even doubted we’d get it done by July 4! But now we’ve delivered big tax cuts and the resources necessary to secure the border. Promises made, promises kept!"
Trump also zeroed in on the measure’s border provisions when he urged lawmakers to get the legislation completed at a "One, Big, Beautiful Event" at the White House on June 26, labeling the bill the "single-most important piece of border legislation ever to cross the floor of Congress."
"This is the ultimate codification of our agenda to — very simply, a phrase that's been used pretty well by me over the past 10 years, but maybe even before that — make America great again," Trump said at the event.
Other administration officials also cautioned that failure to pass the bill would wreak havoc on the economy. For example, the White House's Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought told lawmakers in June that failure to pass the measure would result in a 60% tax hike for Americans and would trigger a recession.
Meanwhile, no Democrats in either chamber of Congress backed the measure. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., labeled the bill "cruel" during floor remarks that lasted hours on Thursday, pointing to Medicaid and SNAP reforms that reports suggest would remove millions of beneficiaries from the programs.
"What is contemplated in this one big, ugly bill is wrong. It’s dangerous, and it’s cruel, and cruelty should not be either the objective or the outcome of legislation that we consider here in the United States House of Representatives," Jeffries said.
A Florida city commissioner said she was shocked to find herself "standing alone" after her colleagues in the state's southernmost municipality voted this week to end an agreement between the police department and federal immigration authorities.
Key West city Commissioner Lissette Carey told Fox News Digital that she considered the potential consequences of severing the 287(g) agreement, which allows police officers to stop, question and detain illegal immigrants.
"I did my research prior to the meeting," Carey said. "I was the only member of the Commission who understood the consequences and respected our state and federal government enough to uphold the law."
In a 5-1 vote, the commission voted to void the agreement, a move that came amid the Trump administration's crackdown on illegal immigration and nationwide mass deportation operations.
"I was deeply disturbed by the lack of understanding and the disregard for the safety, security, and long-term well-being of our city," Carey said. "As the first to cast a vote on this matter, I was disheartened—and frankly shocked—to find myself standing alone in recognizing the importance of upholding this agreement."
The move has already met opposition from leaders in the state capital of Tallahassee.
In a letter dated Wednesday to the commissioners, Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier said their vote violates state law and has essentially made Key West a "sanctuary city."
"Florida law unequivocally forbids sanctuary cities," Uthmeier wrote while demanding the city leaders reverse course. "Failure to take corrective action will result in the enforcement of all applicable civil and criminal penalties, including removal from office by the governor."
He added that they could face removal from office if they don't reverse course.
Carey, whose mother and grandparents arrived in Key West from Cuba in the 1950s, said she supports legal immigration.
"I am proud of my heritage, and I honor the many contributions immigrants make to our communities," she said. "But I also believe in following the law and ensuring public safety."
"Key West is often seen as a carefree, liberal town, but it's also home to conservatives like me who support law enforcement," added Carey.
Earlier in the week, Gov. Ron DeSantis said the issue is a matter of following state law.
"I think the attorney general has weighed in on that, and I’ll let him do the analysis and send them whatever warnings need to be sent," DeSantis said at the opening of the new "Alligator Alcatraz" immigration detention center in the Everglades.
"But the reality is you have a responsibility for full participation," he added. "And you can virtue signal and try to make political statements, but the reality is local governments have to abide by Florida law."
Choosing not to cooperate with immigration authorities only puts residents in those municipalities at risk, a White House spokesperson told Fox News Digital.
"Local officials refusing to work with federal law enforcement will not stop the Trump Administration's mission to remove dangerous, criminal illegal aliens from American communities," the spokesperson said. "It will only put American citizens living in their jurisdiction at risk. Quickly and efficiently deporting violent aliens makes every American community safer."
Other Florida cities have done the opposite. In Miami, city commissioners there narrowly voted in favor last month to allow police officers to work with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) by entering into its own 287(g) partnership.
President Donald Trump signs the sweeping Republican-crafted domestic policy package that he and the GOP call the "One Big Beautiful Bill," into law on Friday at the White House.
The massive tax cuts and spending bill passed the House and Senate this week by razor-thin margins along near party lines.
But the political battle over the bill is far from over, as it moves from Capitol Hill to the campaign trail.
"I'm deeply concerned about this bill and what this will do. We’re going to be talking a lot about it," Democratic Rep. Chris Pappas of New Hampshire told Fox News Digital on Friday.
Pappas, who's running in the crucial 2026 race to succeed retiring longtime Sen. Jeanne Shaheen for a Democrat-held seat Republicans would love to flip, took aim at the bill.
"This was a one-party effort and unfortunately it arrived at a conclusion that I think is not good for our state and for our country,"
Former Republican Sen. Scott Brown, who last month announced his candidacy for the Senate, sees things differently, and he praised the president for helping GOP leaders in Congress get the bill to his desk at the White House.
"The things he said he was going to do, he’s actually done. For somebody in politics to actually do that I think is very rare," Brown said of Trump.
The bill is stuffed full of Trump's 2024 campaign trail promises and second-term priorities on tax cuts, immigration, defense, energy and the debt limit.
It includes extending his signature 2017 tax cuts and eliminating taxes on tips and overtime pay.
By making his first-term tax rates permanent - they were set to expire later this year - the bill will cut taxes by nearly $4.4 trillion over the next decade, according to analysis by the Congressional Budget Office and the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
The measure also provides billions for border security and codifies the president's controversial immigration crackdown.
And the bill also restructures Medicaid — the nearly 60-year-old federal program that provides health coverage to roughly 71 million low-income Americans. Additionally, Senate Republicans increased cuts to Medicaid over what the House initially passed in late May.
The changes to Medicaid, as well as cuts to food stamps, another one of the nation's major safety net programs, were drafted in part as an offset to pay for extending Trump's tax cuts. The measure includes a slew of new rules and regulations, including work requirements for many of those seeking Medicaid coverage.
And the $3.4 trillion legislative package is also projected to surge the national debt by $4 trillion over the next decade.
Democrats for a couple of months have blasted Republicans over the social safety net changes.
"We’re going to be talking about this bill because the results are that 46,000 people in New Hampshire will lose their health insurance. We’ll have people that will go hungry, that won’t be able to access assistance," Pappas warned. "And we know that insurance premiums for all Granite Staters could go up as a result of uncompensated care costs and the burden that this places on our hospitals."
The four-term congressman, who was interviewed by Fox News on Friday as he arrived for the annual July 4th naturalization ceremony in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, noted that "we’ve been hearing from folks and engaging with people all across the state on this issue."
Democrats have spotlighted a slew of national polls conducted last month that indicate the bill's popularity in negative territory.
By a 21-point margin, voters questioned in the most recent Fox News national poll opposed the bill (38% favored vs. 59% opposed).
The bill was also underwater in other national surveys conducted last month by the Washington Post (minus 19 points), Pew Research (minus 20 points) and Quinnipiac University (minus 26 points).
About half of respondents questioned in the Fox News poll said the bill would hurt their family (49%), while one quarter thought it would help (23%), and another quarter didn't think it would make a difference (26%).
Asked about criticism from Democrats on the Medicaid cuts, Brown said "my mom was on welfare. Those are very important programs and I’ve said already that the people that actually need them the most, the ones who are disabled, the ones who can’t get out and work, they should have them."
"It’s meant for lower and middle-income people and I support them getting those benefits. But I don’t support who are here illegally get them," Brown said.
And he added that he doesn't support giving the benefits to "people who are able-bodied and can absolutely go out and do some volunteerism, go out and work."
Republicans are also going on offense over the bill, targeting Democrats for voting against the tax cuts.
Republicans are shining a spotlight on recent polls conducted by GOP-aligned groups that indicate strong support for the bill due to the tax cut provisions.
Brown, who was interviewed by Fox News after he marched in the annual Brentwood, New Hampshire July 4th parade, said "obviously keeping the 2017 tax cuts in place. Certainly for individuals and businesses, it’s really really critical."
And pointing to Pappas, whose family for over a century has owned Manchester's iconic Puritan Backroom restaurant, Brown said "for someone like Chris Pappas, imagine walking into the restaurant he owns and telling his employees ‘oh by the way I’m not going to support your no tax on tips, your no tax on overtime.’ How do you do that?"
Asked about the GOP attacks, Pappas said "I support targeted tax cuts for working people, for our small businesses and to make sure we are targeting that relief to the people that need it, not to billionaires, to the biggest corporations in way that adds $4 trillion to the national debt as this bill does."
"We hoped there would be an opportunity for a bipartisan conversation on taxes and how we can invest in the middle class and working people and our small businesses and unfortunately that didn’t happen," he added.
