Trump to Pull Stefanik UN Ambassador Nomination to Protect Republican House Majority

Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell / March 27, 2025

President Donald Trump is pulling the nomination of Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., to be United Nations ambassador.

The move is designed to protect House Republicans’ slim majority, the president said.

“With a very tight Majority, I don’t want to take a chance on anyone else running for Elise’s seat,” the president said on Truth Social. “The people love Elise and, with her, we have nothing to worry about come Election Day.”

Others can do a good job in the position, so Stefanik “will stay in Congress, rejoin the House Leadership Team, and continue to fight for our amazing American People,” according to Trump.

“Speaker [Mike] Johnson is thrilled! I look forward to the day when Elise is able to join my Administration in the future,” he said. “She is absolutely FANTASTIC. Thank you Elise!”

While Stefanik would likely have had no trouble getting the necessary votes for confirmation, Republicans hold a narrow majority in the House with 218 seats while Democrats hold 213 seats. There are currently four vacant seats.

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, was expected to slow-walk the special election to replace Stefanik.

Stefanik’s nomination was expected to move forward on April 2, the day after the Florida special elections, Axios reported last week. She would have been the last of Trump’s Cabinet to get confirmed.

Stefanik is the second of Trump’s Cabinet picks to have their nominations withdrawn, following Rep. Matt Gaetz’s withdrawal in November after it became clear he did not have the votes to be confirmed.

This is a breaking news story and it may be updated.

Watch Our Live Inauguration Day Coverage

Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell / Katrina Trinko / January 20, 2025

The Daily Signal’s Tony Kinnett will be doing live coverage today from Washington, D.C. Catch his show, which you can watch right here, starting at 10:30 a.m. Eastern and concluding half an hour after the inauguration. Stay tuned to get smart commentary from guests, including Scott Rasmussen and Kurt Schlichter, and watch the inauguration itself.

American Tea Parties, Greek Yogurt Parties

Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell / Katrina Trinko / David Azerrad / June 21, 2011

When it comes to crushing debts, unsustainable entitlements and ballooning deficits, Americans and Europeans are all in the same sinking boat. Where they part ways is in their response to the looming crisis.

Faced with out-of-control government spending and the prospect of a bleak economic future, Americans from across the country have rallied under the banner of the Tea Party and sent a clear message to Washington: Enough! In a vigorous manifestation of that greatest of all checks on government—the “vigilant and manly spirit which actuates the people of America”—citizens began a grassroots wave of orderly protests that have since only grown in number and promise to keep the pressure on Washington to pull its financial act together.

Meanwhile in Greece, proposed austerity measures to avert bankruptcy have left the country paralyzed by strikes and riots. Last week in Athens, Greek police fired teargas at protesters who responded by throwing stones and yogurt. This week, the country is being hit with blackouts as the main power company goes on strike. Violent protests have sadly become the norm whenever European governments attempt to tackle their financial woes. Their citizens, coddled by the nanny-state and its promises of cradle-to-grave no-hassle living, do not take well to being told it’s time to face the music.

Cynics will say that Americans aren’t hurling stones and yogurt because the government has yet to touch their benefits, and that when it does, things will get ugly here too. Perhaps. But there are reasons to believe that Americans, who by and large still view themselves as free citizens of a republic rather than dependent wards of the welfare state, will have the fortitude to accept whatever painful cuts are necessary. And thanks to the efforts of the Tea Party, these cuts, when they do occur, will not be as drastic as they would have been had the people sat by in torpor until the crisis hit.

Trump DOJ Cracks Down on States Housing Biological Men in Women’s Prisons

Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell / Katrina Trinko / David Azerrad / Fred Lucas / March 27, 2026

The Justice Department opened an investigation into male inmates being placed in women’s prisons in California and Maine.

The DOJ notified California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Maine Gov. Janet Mills, respectively, on Thursday about the pending probes, noting the danger to female inmates of potential sexual assault.

California law allows male prisoners who identify as females to be incarcerated in women’s prisons under the state’s 2021 Transgender Respect, Agency, and Dignity Act.

California has transferred 47 prisoners from male to female prisons since passing the 2021 law. However, out of 84 requests, it has transferred only seven female inmates to male prisons, according to data from the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

“Keeping men out of women’s prisons is not only common sense—it’s a matter of safety and constitutional rights,” Attorney General Pamela Bondi said in a statement. “The Trump Administration will not stand by if governors are facilitating the abuse of biological women under the guise of inclusion.”

The Justice Department will investigate potential violations of the constitutional rights of female inmates at prisons in San Bernardino County and Madera County in California, and at the Maine Correctional Center in Windham, Maine.

Noting allegations of sexual assault, the DOJ press release said that men in California state prisons charged with sex crimes who “have intact genitals, can request transfer to women’s prisons based on self-identification as transgender.”

Prisons under the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation are safe, spokeswoman Terri Hardy said.

“CDCR is committed to providing a safe, humane, respectful and rehabilitative environment for all incarcerated people, enforcing a zero-tolerance policy as mandated by the federal legal requirements known as the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA),” Hardy told The Daily Signal.

“Any suggestion that all transgender women be assigned to men’s institutions as a matter of policy is a suggestion to violate federal law.”

The department says 2,405 inmates are classified as “transgender, nonbinary, and intersex.” Of those, 1,028 requested to be transferred from male to female prisons, with 246 requests pending, and 132 denied. Another 140 inmates changed their minds.

The California numbers show that three people were transferred back to male prisons involuntarily, while nine were transferred back voluntarily.

The Justice Department says it will also investigate allegations that Maine has allowed a biological male inmate to remain housed with women despite complaints of assault.

“Incarcerated individuals can be particularly susceptible to having their rights violated,” Andrew B. Benson, U.S. attorney for the District of Maine, said in a public statement.

“The U.S. Attorney’s Office is committed to protecting the civil rights of all Maine citizens, no matter where they live, and will work with our colleagues in the Civil Rights Division to ensure that this vulnerable population is protected from harm while housed in state custody.”

Jill R. O’Brien, director of government affairs at the Maine Department of Corrections, stated that Maine prison officials refer any crimes to prosecutors.

“The Department follows state and federal law in our practices regarding transgender residents,” O’Brien told The Daily Signal. “Transgender residents’ housing decisions are made by a multidisciplinary team, under department policy, in compliance with state and federal law.”

Under Maine law, inmates have the right to have their “gender identity respected and acknowledged, irrespective of anatomy or physique.”

The law also says that housing “must be consistent with the person’s consistently held gender identity except when such placement or search would present significant management or security problems to the correctional or detention facility or threaten the health and safety of the person.”

However, the most recent monthly report from Maine’s department says that of 2,069 state inmates, “No residents identified as transgender.”

The federal government terminated certain grants to Maine last year on the basis of the Department of Corrections’ transgender policy, but the funding was restored, O’Brien noted.

Ohio Lawmakers Steadfast in Passing Pro-Life Legislation

Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell / Katrina Trinko / David Azerrad / Fred Lucas / Rebecca Downs / March 27, 2026

While the pro-life cause suffered a major setback in Ohio when the Reproductive Freedom Amendment passed in 2023, Ohio lawmakers continue to pass legislation to protect the unborn.

The Ohio House of Representatives passed the Share the Health and Empower With Informed Notices Act, or the SHE WINS Act for short, on Wednesday by a party-line vote of 64 to 32. The informed consent bill was introduced in the Senate on Thursday.

This bill requires women to be informed of alternatives to abortion, as well as the risks associated with the procedure and of carrying her pregnancy to term. The bill also requires a 24-hour waiting period for women seeking an abortion.

Under the bill, a woman is to be informed of medical assistance benefits, as well as how she may withhold or withdraw her consent of the abortion at any time. A woman must freely consent to the abortion without coercion.

There’s also a provision about medication abortion reversal, with the bill noting “that time is of the essence.”

A major focus of the bill for both supporters and opponents is the 24-hour waiting period.

“For a decision as monumental as abortion, a time of reflection first is the least we can ask,” Ohio Right to Life Executive Director Carrie Snyder said.

“Ensuring patients receive details of a major procedure with time to process the information before the procedure occurs is certainly a standard of care practiced in other areas of medicine,” she added.

Nan Whaley, the president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio, claimed the SHE WINS Act would be a “burdensome 24-hour roadblock” for women seeking abortion in a statement shared with The Daily Signal.

While the bill’s critics claim the legislation is burdensome, supporters suggest the bill simply holds the abortion industry to the same standard as others in the medical community.

In a statement for The Daily Signal, Republican Ohio state Rep. Josh Williams explained it’s about “ensuring abortions are held to the same clinical standards as other medical procedures.”

“We should provide all patients considering undergoing any medical procedure with all the information necessary to establish informed consent, including abortion procedures,” Williams added.

Center for Christian Virtue Senior Fellow Peter Range told The Daily Signal that the SHE WINS Act is “a commonsense bill for women’s health.”

“All it requires is that elective abortions meet the same informed consent standards applied to other forms of medical care, Range said. “The bill ensures that any mother has access to all necessary information, including the risks, before making a final decision about abortion.”

“It’s beyond me why anyone who cares about women’s health would oppose this,” Range added.

Supporters of the bill also believe that, if signed into law, it would not be struck down in the courts because of the Reproductive Freedom Amendment.

“The issue 1 constitutional amendment that passed in Ohio says that a state interest is compelling if it is for the limited purpose of protecting the health of the individual seeking care and is consistent with accepted clinical standards,” Williams explained.

This “bill does exactly that,” Williams claimed.

Range was similarly confident. “This legislation should withstand any court challenges because it doesn’t affect any provisions of the abortion amendment passed here in Ohio,” he explained. “This bill focuses on women’s health and safety, so it should receive broad support.”

Whaley’s statement, meanwhile, claimed “the right to an abortion is protected by the Ohio Constitution,” and argued that a prior bill similar to the SHE WINS Act was ruled unconstitutional in 2024.

“Continuing to push these medically unnecessary restrictions is a waste of time and taxpayer funds and directly contradicts the will of the voters,” Whaley claimed.

In addition to the 24-hour waiting period, the bill includes provisions such as women being informed of the abortion procedure being used as well as abortion alternatives.

Whaley also took issue with the abortion reversal provision, which she described as an “an unproven and unethical procedure that goes against the current American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists (ACOG) standards and ultimately compromises patient safety.”

“Ultimately, the court battles will land in the Ohio Supreme Court, where we await their interpretation of the amendment,” Snyder told The Daily Signal. “In the meantime, our legislators care deeply about women and babies in Ohio and are doing their best to make sure that at the very least, women have solid information and time to process it.”

DHS Orders Payment of 50,000 US Airport Workers in Emergency Action

Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell / Katrina Trinko / David Azerrad / Fred Lucas / Rebecca Downs / David Shepardson / March 27, 2026

REUTERS—The Homeland Security Department said on Friday it was taking emergency action to pay 50,000 airport security officers who have gone unpaid since mid-February, after work absences brought chaos and long security lines to U.S. airports.

“[The Transportation Security Administration] has immediately begun the process of paying its workforce. TSA officers should begin seeing paychecks as early as Monday,” DHS said.

President Donald Trump said on Thursday he would take executive action to pay TSA workers and issued a memo directing the payments Friday.

The TSA said earlier on Friday that nearly 12% of airport security officers did not show up for work on Thursday, the most absences since mid-February.

Major disruptions, including airport security lines of several hours or more, were reported at a number of major airports on Thursday and again on Friday. The TSA said more than 3,450 officers did not show up for work on Thursday, including more than one-third of officers at New York’s JFK and at airports in Baltimore, Houston, and Atlanta.

The TSA cited reports of lines of four hours or more at airports across the country—the worst lines in the agency’s nearly 25-year history.

Airline officials told Reuters that absences and lines could worsen this weekend if there were no concrete details on how TSA officers would be paid. Nearly 500 airport security officers have quit since February.

It is unclear how long the funding will last or whether Trump would tap funding for the Homeland Security Department approved last year as part of a massive tax and spending bill.

Democrats in Congress have held up funding for DHS while demanding a change in rules governing its immigration operations, after agents in Minneapolis shot and killed citizens Renee Good and Alex Pretti.

Republican leaders in the House of Representatives on Friday rejected a bipartisan Senate compromise to end the six-week deadlock over DHS funding.

Congressional Democrats had proposed funding TSA separately while negotiating over reforms on how Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents operate.

The TSA had reiterated on Wednesday that the agency could be forced to close smaller airports if staffing issues worsened.

Airports are grappling with a school spring break travel surge with about 5% higher volume than last year’s.

Hundreds of immigration agents and Homeland Security Investigations officers began deploying at 14 U.S. airports on Monday to aid security screening.

Originally published by Reuters.

‘ABSURD’: House Rejects Senate DHS Bill

Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell / Katrina Trinko / David Azerrad / Fred Lucas / Rebecca Downs / David Shepardson / George Caldwell / March 27, 2026

House Republican leadership and the party’s hardline conservative faction rejected the Senate’s homeland security funding deal, which omits funding for border security.

“The Republicans are not going to be any part of any effort to reopen our borders or to stop immigration enforcement,” Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., said Friday afternoon as he announced his intention to advance an eight-week stopgap funding bill for the Department of Homeland Security instead.

“We are going to deport dangerous criminal illegal aliens because it is a basic function of the government. The Democrats fundamentally disagree,” he said.

The bill, which would extend funding of the agency to May 22, has little chance of passing the Senate as written. Democrats have demanded additional restraints on immigration enforcement as a condition of funding the entire department.

Early Friday morning, the Senate agreed by unanimous consent to fund key agencies within the Department of Homeland Security, such as the Transportation Security Administration, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Coast Guard, and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, before leaving for recess.

However, the bill did not fund Immigration and Customs Enforcement and most of Customs and Border Protection.

House conservative hardliners outright rejected the Senate proposal, stating their desire to fund immigration enforcement and include a requirement for photo identification to vote in federal elections.

The Senate abdicated its responsibility.

No funding for Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), which fights child sex trafficking.
No funding for Border Patrol.
No voter ID.

Bad for America. Bad for Americans.

Full @freedomcaucus press conference ? pic.twitter.com/G3eksYsK9s
— Rep. Eric Burlison (@RepEricBurlison) March 27, 2026

“It’s absurd,” said Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, at a Friday press conference with fellow Freedom Caucus members.

“I mean, could the Senate be any more lazy than to send us a bill that doesn’t do the job and then leave town?”

Rep. Riley Moore, R-W.Va., a member of the House appropriations committee, said, “We can’t take a bill up that literally is defunding the priorities of the president, the things that we ran on, the reasons that we were elected.”

Moore added, “We need to amend that bill, put our priorities back in it.”

The House Rules Committee, the leadership-controlled panel that determines the conditions for debate of bills on the House floor, would also need to support a funding bill before a floor vote.

Committee member Rep. Austin Scott, R-Ga., called the Senate’s work “ridiculous,” attributing it to “pure laziness and desire for the Senate to go on vacation instead of doing their job.”

My constituents didn’t send me to Washington to defund ICE and not pass the SAVE America Act.

We need to amend this bill to:
– fund ICE
– fund CBP
– add Voter ID

The American people need to us to hold the line. pic.twitter.com/uqCaQ28KmN
— Rep. Riley M. Moore (@RepRileyMoore) March 27, 2026

On the ensuing House Republican conference call, Johnson announced his alternative plan of a clean extension of funding for the department.

Rather than clear a path for ending a six-week shutdown, the Senate’s after-midnight deal may be more of a setback.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., was quick to speak on behalf of his party in opposition to the House Republicans’ plan.

“A 60-day CR that locks in the status quo is dead on arrival in the Senate, and Republicans know it,” wrote Schumer on X.

A 60 day CR that locks in the status quo is dead on arrival in the Senate, and Republicans know it.

We’ve been clear from day one: Democrats will fund critical Homeland Security functions—but we will not give a blank check to Trump’s lawless and deadly immigration militia… pic.twitter.com/WBivMRihcw
— Chuck Schumer (@SenSchumer) March 27, 2026

GROTESQUE: Barack Obama’s Orwellian Push for Virginia Redistricting Is Something to Behold

Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell / Katrina Trinko / David Azerrad / Fred Lucas / Rebecca Downs / David Shepardson / George Caldwell / Tyler O'Neil / March 27, 2026

What do you call it when a politician tells you to put elections “back on a level playing field” by voting for a redistricting map gerrymandered to give Democrats 10 seats to Republicans’ one?

“Lying” doesn’t quite foot the bill. “Rank deception” is closer, but I think this kind of rhetoric calls for the big guns.

I’ll settle on “shameless Orwellian gaslighting,” because supporting the Virginia redistricting push in the name of “fairness” involves redefining basic words in the same manner as the oppressive government in George Orwell’s “1984,” and this rhetorical strategy seems designed to make people with rational concerns about the ballot initiative question their sanity.

This particular shameless Orwellian gaslighting comes from America’s 44th president, Barack Hussein Obama.

I’m not sure what sin I committed in a previous life, but it must have been egregious for the gods of YouTube to subject me to this vomit-inducing ad—and they do so, multiple times a day.

Perhaps it’s retribution from George Soros, whose Fund for Policy Reform shoveled $5 million into the effort that bombards me with Obama’s message. I really should have thought twice before criticizing his dark money manipulations in my second book.

I find the ad disgusting on multiple levels, but the basic problem is the fundamental lie that the Virginia redistricting effort is all about restoring “fairness.”

You see, I’m old enough to remember the halcyon days of yesteryear when Virginians overwhelmingly voted (66% to 34%) to pass a constitutional amendment creating a bipartisan commission for redistricting. Oh, that was only six years ago?! Imagine that.

Something else funny happened in 2020. The U.S. Census Bureau undercounted Republican-leaning states and overcounted Democrat-leaning states.

Dems will point to Trump's call for Republicans to take advantage of redistricting.

Yet Texas didn't redistrict for politics—it did so because the previous maps violated the law. And the 2020 census undercounted GOP-leaning states.

?8/14 pic.twitter.com/HvTjqCvncZ
— Tyler O'Neil (@Tyler2ONeil) October 28, 2025

Sure, President Donald Trump has demanded that Republican-majority legislatures redraw maps to give Republicans an edge, but in doing so, he’s merely echoing what has been longstanding Democrat practice in states like California and Illinois.

Gerrymandering is technically legal—with a few important caveats the Supreme Court seems constantly to be considering—but there’s something sordid about it.

When Barack Obama urges Virginia residents to “let voters decide, not politicians,” he’s trying to tap into moral outrage about gerrymandering involving politicians choosing their voters, rather than the other way around.

The thing is, he’s trying to make the fairness argument for something that’s inherently unfair.

The Virginia maps aim to take the Old Dominion’s current six-five advantage for Democrats and turn it into a 10-to-one slant. That’s not exactly representative of a state that gave Kamala Harris 52% to Trump’s 46% in 2024.

Even Virginia Democrats are souring on this blatant partisan power grab.

Mark Moran, a Democrat running against Sen. Mark Warner in Virginia’s U.S. Senate primary, announced on X that he would be voting against the measure.

“I think the Virginia redistricting is extremely anti-democratic and that it is a reactionary policy to Donald Trump that was created by DC consultants,” Moran wrote. He noted that “the new maps slice up Arlington and take away the voice of everyone outside of northern Virginia.”

Advocates note that the redistricting will only last until 2030, but Moran noted that four years is hardly “temporary.”

“They say it’s ‘temporary’ but FOUR years of gerrymandering isn’t ‘temporary’ and because I value our constitutional republic over all else… I’ll be voting NO and I encourage everyone else to, but I can’t hold my tongue any longer despite what this will do to me with the Dems in Virginia,” he added.

I’m going to say this despite what it will do to me politically – I think the Virginia redistricting is extremely anti-democratic and that it is a reactionary policy to Donald Trump that was created by DC consultants…

In 2020, 66% of Virginians voted for bipartisan maps…the…
— Mark Moran for U.S. Senate (@itsmarkmoran) March 23, 2026

I suspect the sonorous voice of Barack Obama in that nauseating redistricting ad likely drove Moran to the tipping point. A human being can only take so much repeated lying before the truth explodes out of him. God bless Moran for speaking out.

A new poll from Heritage Action suggests many other Democrats may secretly agree with Moran.

Heritage Action asked Virginians this question:

“The U.S. Census results are used to create electoral maps that determine how many congressional
districts each state has and how those districts are drawn. Should electoral maps disproportionately
favor one political party over another?”

Most Democrats (57%) said “no,” as did most independents (69%) and Republicans (56%).

Heritage Action also asked whether “partisan elected leaders, or bipartisan commissions that include private citizens” should draw electoral maps. Vast majorities of Democrats (73%), Independents (79%) and Republicans (71%) chose bipartisan commissions.

Then Heritage Action presented the language of the ballot initiative, and asked respondents whether they considered the language “clear” or “confusing.” Less than half of voters (38%) said it was clear, while 50% called it confusing. Even more Democrats found the language confusing (46%) than clear (43%).

Sure, the Heritage Action poll only surveyed 814 likely Virginia voters between March 20 and March 24, with a margin of error of plus/minus 3.43 percentage points, but that’s still evidence that some Democrats agree with Moran.

It was always rather bold for Democrats to try this scheme only six years after Virginians voted for bipartisan redistricting—next month, we’ll see if it was foolish, as well.

House Republican Group Hijacks House Floor to Reject Radical Islam

Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell / Katrina Trinko / David Azerrad / Fred Lucas / Rebecca Downs / David Shepardson / George Caldwell / Tyler O'Neil / Pedro Rodriguez / March 27, 2026

A dozen members of the Sharia Free America Caucus spoke consecutively on the House floor Thursday evening against the “threat of radical Islamic terrorism” in the United States.

The speeches, organized by Republican Texas Reps. Keith Self and Rep. Chip Roy, the founders of the caucus, claimed that America was on the same migration trajectory as Europe and drew attention to a string of recent “radicalized Islamist” attacks in the United States.

“These attacks, clustered in just a few weeks, shows that the enemy are inside the gates,” Self said.

“We cannot allow that here in the United States,” Self continued. “According to Islam, many non-Muslims like me are regarded as infidels, and many others who convert to Christianity or any other religion are labeled apostates. Both infidels and apostates are punishable by death in Islam.”

Rep. Mary Miller, R-Ill., added that “we are currently witnessing a rise of radical Islamic terrorist who claim allegiance to Sharia law.”

Self also said Sharia law represents a threat to the Constitution. “The American people demand that we stop an ideology seeking to replace the U.S. Constitution,” Self added.

The Root of the Caucus’ Concerns

The caucus, which has now reached 60 members, was founded in hopes of stopping the United States from falling victim to “civilization jihad,” Roy said on the floor.

During his remarks, Roy read a 1991 manifesto from the Muslim Brotherhood that states Islamists have the “responsibility” to carry out “civilization jihad” against their host nation. The State Department designated certain elements of the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization in 2025.

“In order for the Islamic movement to become part of the homeland to which it exists, its movement must plan and struggle to obtain the keys and the tools of this process to carry out the grand mission as a civilization jihadist, a responsibility which relies on the shoulders of Muslims,” the memorandum reads, according to Roy. “The process of settlement is a civilization jihadist.”

“What I’m here to tell you is that this, by what I just read, is that this is a political ideology that is designed to attack and take over our civilization, to carry out the civilization jihad I just described.”

Self claimed in his speech that, “Sharia does not content itself through private practice. It demands eventual dominance over the host culture.”

A War Against the West

Roy then called on his colleagues to acknowledge the threat of radical Islam, which he claims has allowed the alleged attackers to inflict damage on Americans.

“The fact is, you cannot win a war that you do not acknowledge exists,” Roy said. “This has been brought on by our own actions as a government.”

Republicans have accused Democrats of refusing to acknowledge radical Islamic violence.

“Let’s be very clear, there is a war being waged against Western civilization, against the United States of America, and against the state of Texas,” Roy said. “Since 9/11, some five million people have been granted ability to come into our country, from majority Muslim countries, in a post 9/11 world where we were attacked.”

Europe’s Fight

Members of the caucus suggested America is trending in the same direction as Europe thanks to mass migration.

“They [Europeans] have fallen to mass immigration of those who refuse to embrace western values,” Rep. Buddy Carter, R-Ga., said. “European culture is disappearing to open border policies, all the while crime across the board is skyrocketing. The United States must not fall down the same path.”

“If you look at Paris and you look at London, and you think that this is somehow acceptable, you are misguided,” Roy added.

Self claimed that radical Muslims “are infiltrating Western nations.”

Carter, however, applauded the “patriotic Europeans” that have begun to fight back against their “self-sabotaging governments and electing leaders and policies that place Europe first.”

In Germany and France, political parties that reject mass migration from Muslim majority countries have dramatically risen in popularity in recent years.

This week, the European Parliament voted for the first time to allow the deportation of migrants.

The Air Force Is Finally Restoring Honor to the Faithful It Wrongly Punished

Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell / Katrina Trinko / David Azerrad / Fred Lucas / Rebecca Downs / David Shepardson / George Caldwell / Tyler O'Neil / Pedro Rodriguez / Christopher Motz / March 27, 2026

The Department of the Air Force’s March 19 decision to correct the records of airmen and guardsmen discharged over the COVID-19 mandate deserves real praise.

At Secretary of War Pete Hegseth’s directive to conduct a review, the Air Force Review Boards Agency examined and upgraded the records of nearly 600 airmen, changing them to “Honorable” service, restoring reenlistment eligibility, and replacing stigmatizing separation language, such as “for misconduct” and with “Secretarial Authority.”

Many service members, such as the Navy SEALs and other sailors represented by First Liberty Institute in a class action suit, received relief as a result of litigation. But others, such as Navy SEAL Blake Martin—who gave stirring testimony to the Religious Liberty Commission last December—were left with no pensions, marred records, and an unresolved breach of trust.

The Air Force’s review was completed nine months early, and it restores concrete benefits, including eligibility for the VA home loan and the Post-9/11 GI Bill. This update is the beginning of justice.

Many of these service members had sincere religious objections—often grounded in religiously-formed conscience or in opposition to the use of abortion-derived fetal cell lines in testing or development associated with the vaccines. Air Force chaplains frequently confirmed that those beliefs were sincere.

Under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and under the military’s own regulations, the government may not substantially burden religious exercise unless it can satisfy the most demanding legal test: a compelling interest advanced through the least restrictive means, applied to the individual person before it.

Yet the data shared by the Air Force at the time revealed its own disregard for this standard. In December 2021, the service said it had received more than 8,600 religious accommodation requests and had approved none of them, while it had granted nearly 1,900 medical and administrative exemptions. In ensuing religious liberty litigation, a federal appeals court agreed with airmen that the Air Force had applied a de facto policy of rejecting religious accommodation requests.

The War Department Inspector General effectively confirmed this. In a June 2022 report, the IG found a “trend of generalized assessments rather than the individualized assessment required by Federal law and DoD and Military Service policies.” It found that denial memoranda generally did not reflect a true individualized analysis as required by law.

In one Air Force example, a general officer denied an airman’s request with a one-sentence statement invoking a regulation and nothing more. Worse still, the IG found that general officers were processing an average of 50 appeal denials per day over 90 days—about 12 minutes per package—which it said seemed insufficient for genuine individualized review, especially while those generals were still performing all the other duties of their demanding senior-level roles. In effect, this was a rubber-stamp process disposing of religious claims.

With this discreditable history, the Air Force’s present action should be applauded. These troops did not abandon their duty. They asked their government to respect the very freedoms they had sworn to defend and were met with disregard for their core religious civil liberties.

Still, a full account must note that accountability has lagged behind correction. Gen. Kenneth Wilsbach, who led Pacific Air Forces during the period when command-level authorities were central to this denial structure, is now chief of staff of the Air Force. Adm. Daryl Caudle, who, as Fleet Forces commander, helped defend the Navy’s vaccine regime in court, is now chief of naval operations—even as the Navy, like the Air Force, pursued a policy of near-total denial of religious accommodation requests in 2021-2022. Promotions came; accountability did not.

But last week’s Air Force action is still worth celebrating. It restores honor where honor was wrongly denied. It acknowledges that faithful troops were not the problem. The problem was generals who didn’t follow the law and their own regulations as they should have.

The Air Force has now taken an important step toward making these veterans whole, and the other services will hopefully soon follow. It should be commended for that step—and urged never to forget why it became necessary.

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

House Passes Legislation to Combat Mexican Government’s Seizure of American-Owned Port

The House of Representatives passed bipartisan legislation to grant the president authority to limit U.S. port access for countries that have seized American property abroad.

As Congress remains bitterly divided on the SAVE America Act and funding for the Department of Homeland Security, the Defending American Property Abroad Act of 2026 passed with bipartisan support. The bill, introduced by Rep. August Pfluger, R-Texas, passed by a vote of 247 to 164.

“Today’s House passage of my Defending American Property Abroad Act of 2026 is a necessary step to protect American businesses and workers from unfair treatment overseas,” Pfluger told The Daily Signal.

My Defending American Property Abroad Act just PASSED the U.S. House!

When countries violate trade agreements and illegally seize assets from U.S. companies, it puts American job security, economic security, and national security at risk. Proud to have led on this bipartisan… pic.twitter.com/yaCuiKnLkH
— Rep. August Pfluger (@RepPfluger) March 27, 2026

The impetus for Pfluger’s legislation was a longtime dispute involving the Mexican government and a U.S.-owned port in Mexico. Lawmakers say that Mexico has violated the USMCA trade agreement by attempting to seize control of a port operated by Vulcan Materials.

Vulcan Materials Company, based in Alabama, is one of the nation’s largest producers of construction aggregates.

Pfluger has raised concerns about this dispute since 2022, but in March 2023, Vulcan’s deep-water port at Punta Venado was seized by the Mexican government.

“When countries violate trade agreements and illegally seize assets from U.S. companies, it puts American job security, economic security, and national security at risk. This legislation is critical because it ensures there are enforceable consequences for those actions,” Pfluger said.

Mexico is using its military to illegally occupy the property of an American company, Vulcan Materials. This facility and port are critical to our trade and security strategy, which is why I’m leading an effort to deter Mexico from fully seizing this facility and ensure they face…
— Congresswoman Beth Van Duyne (@RepBethVanDuyne) September 23, 2024

“It sends a clear message to any foreign government that the United States will not tolerate this behavior,” Pfluger continued. “We will defend our economic interests, uphold the rule of law, and stand firmly behind American companies operating abroad.

The legislation stipulates that ships may be restricted from entering U.S. waters or unloading at U.S. ports without the president’s approval if these vessels previously stopped at ports previously owned by U.S. entities but later taken over by foreign governments in the Western Hemisphere.

Speaker Mike Johnson congratulated Pfluger on the House passage of the legislation. “U.S. investments abroad have long been essential to both our economic development and national security,” Johnson, R-La., claimed, “and this legislation takes a crucial step to protect and defend U.S. business interests globally.”

“I am thrilled to see this pass with overwhelming bipartisan support,” Pfluger said, “and I will continue advocating for it until it passes through the Senate and is signed into law.”

Iran-Linked Hackers Breach FBI Director’s Personal Email, Publish Photos and Documents

REUTERS—Iran-linked hackers have broken into FBI Director Kash Patel’s personal email inbox, publishing photographs of the director and other documents to the internet, the hackers and the bureau said on Friday.

On its website, the hacker group Handala Hack Team said Patel “will now find his name among the list of successfully hacked victims.” The hackers published a series of personal photographs of Patel sniffing and smoking cigars, riding in an antique convertible, and making a face while taking a picture of himself in the mirror with a large bottle of rum.

The FBI confirmed that Patel’s emails had been targeted. In a statement, bureau spokesman Ben Williamson said, “We have taken all necessary steps to mitigate potential risks associated with this activity” and that the data involved was “historical in nature and involves no government information.”

Handala, which presents itself as a group of pro-Palestinian vigilante hackers, is considered by Western researchers to be one of several personas used by Iranian government cyberintelligence units. Handala recently claimed the hack of Michigan-based medical devices and services provider Stryker on March 11, saying it had deleted a massive trove of company data.

Alongside the photographs of Patel, the hackers published a sample of more than 300 emails, which appear to show a mix of personal and work correspondence dating between 2010 and 2019.

Reuters was not able to independently authenticate the Patel messages, but the personal Gmail address that Handala claims to have broken into matches the address linked to Patel in previous data breaches preserved by the dark web intelligence firm District 4 Labs. Alphabet-owned Google, which runs Gmail, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

‘Make Them Feel Vulnerable’

Iran-linked hackers—who initially kept a low profile after the United States and Israel launched coordinated strikes against the Islamic Republic last month—have increasingly boasted of their cyber operations as the conflict drags on.

In addition to the hack against Stryker, Handala on Thursday claimed to have published the personal data of dozens of defense company Lockheed Martin employees stationed in the Middle East. In a statement, Lockheed Martin said it was aware of the reports and had policies and procedures in place “to mitigate cyber threats to our business.”

Gil Messing, chief of staff at Israeli cybersecurity company Check Point, said the hack-and-leak operation against Patel was part of Iran’s strategy to embarrass U.S. officials and “make them feel vulnerable.”

The Iranians, he said, are “firing whatever they have.”

It is not unusual for foreign hackers to target senior officials’ personal emails, and breaches and leaks both happen periodically. Hackers famously broke into Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s personal Gmail account ahead of the 2016 election and published much of the data to the WikiLeaks site. In 2015, teenage hackers broke into then-CIA Director John Brennan’s personal AOL account and leaked data about U.S. intelligence officials.

Relatively unsophisticated breaches of this nature are in line with a U.S. intelligence assessment reviewed by Reuters on March 2. The assessment said Iran and its proxies could respond to the killing of Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei with low-level hacks against U.S. digital networks.

Iran-linked hackers may have other emails in reserve.

Last year, another group operating under the pseudonym “Robert” told Reuters it was considering disclosing 100 gigabytes of data stolen from White House chief of staff Susie Wiles and other figures close to President Donald Trump.

Reuters has not been able to verify the claim and the group has not responded to messages in several months.

Originally published by Reuters.

Judge, Longtime Thorn for Trump, Sides With Administration

U.S. District Judge James Boasberg—with a history of halting Trump administration policies—sided with the president in a case regarding deporting criminal illegal immigrants to El Salvador.

Boasberg, the chief judge in the District of Columbia and an appointee of President Barack Obama, sided with the administration against liberal groups who sued to prevent illegal immigrants from El Salvador convicted of crimes in the United States from being deported to prisons back home.

The judge—who previously curbed President Donald Trump’s policies on deporting illegal immigrants and prompted congressional Republicans to call for his impeachment—ruled that the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge a diplomatic agreement between two countries.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced an agreement on the policy with El Salvadoran officials in February 2025.

Under the agreement, El Salvador would detain the convicts with the U.S. covering the cost.

The following June, five liberal nonprofits, led by Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights, sued the State Department to void the policy. The plaintiffs alleged the prisoners were subjected to human rights abuses and couldn’t contact their legal counsel.

The groups claimed standing since they provided legal counsel, saying the policy impeded their ability to communicate with clients.

“This Court is all too familiar with the Government’s hasty deportation of immigrants to El Salvador, though only through the lens of individual removals,” said Boasberg’s opinion issued on Wednesday.

“The present suit arrives from a different vantage point, training its sights not on those removals but on the diplomatic instrument that preceded and allegedly enabled them.”

The government moved to dismiss the case, which he granted.

“Even assuming the Agreement helped set in motion the events Plaintiffs describe, it does not itself carry independent legal force and vacating it would not likely prevent the conduct that produces their injuries,” he wrote.

He went on to write that the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security would likely have the authority to restart a similar agreement if the courts strike down the existing one.

“The two governments have already reached a meeting of the minds to transfer individuals from the United States to Salvadoran prisons in exchange for funds,” he wrote. “That shared understanding does not dissolve were a court to set aside the Agreement.

“And with the understanding in place, the Government need only reach for the tools it already has — DHS’s statutory removal authority and State’s foreign assistance funding — to execute the same transfers again.”

Early in Trump’s second term, Boasberg ordered a halt to deportation flights of Venezuelan migrants. He later moved toward contempt proceedings when flights continued. A D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals vacated his contempt finding.

In July 2025, the Justice Department filed a misconduct complaint against Boasberg.

In December, Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, proposed articles of impeachment against Boasberg.

During President Joe Biden’s administration, Boasberg approved subpoenas of the phone records of House and Senate Republicans as part of the Justice Department’s “Arctic Frost” investigation into Trump’s challenge of the 2020 election results.

‘Do Not Mention China’: Alleged AI Smuggling Conspiracy Rings Alarm Bells

Federal charges over an alleged conspiracy to smuggle advanced artificial intelligence technology to China have sparked bipartisan concern.

Federal prosecutors announced charges against one Chinese national and two Americans on Wednesday for allegedly violating U.S. export control laws by attempting to send restricted computer chips to China. The alleged conspiracy began in 2023, included an order for more than $100 million, spanned three states, and involved two large tech companies.

The three men charged are Stanley Yi Zheng, 56, a Chinese national; Matthew Kelly, 49, of Hopewell Junction, New York; and Tommy Shad English, 53, of Atlanta. The three are presumed innocent.

The office of U.S. Attorney Theodore S. Hertzberg of the Northern District of Georgia is prosecuting the case.

“Keeping sensitive tech from falling into the wrong hands is a matter of utmost importance to our national security and U.S. competitiveness,” Hertzberg said in a public statement.

“My office is proud to ensure that any bad actor who seeks to profit from endangering our security will face justice in an American courtroom.”

The criminal complaint says that in May 2023, Zheng, Kelly, and English began conspiring together to obtain servers with export-controlled chips and ship them to Thailand, with China as the final destination. The three allegedly used the names of Thailand-based companies as the purported purchasers of the servers.

According to the complaint, they attempted to order 750 computer servers for about $170 million. Of those, 600 had chips that were restricted by Commerce Department export rules and required a license for export to China. Yet, by February 2024, the attempted purchases appeared to fall apart.

The 41-page criminal complaint says that two technology firms—Nvidia and Supermicro—tipped off federal law enforcement about the attempted smuggling. The trio allegedly sought to smuggle Nvidia graphics processing units (GPU), as well as compatible Supermicro servers, PC Magazine reported.

“The complaint shows that our due diligence process works well. Despite several efforts, the would-be smugglers failed to clear our diligence process and did not receive GPUs from us,” an Nvidia spokesperson told The Daily Signal in an email response.

A Supermicro spokesperson did not respond to an inquiry for this story by publication time.

Zheng was arrested on March 22 and appeared in court in the Northern District of California on March 23. He is being held without bail pending trial, according to the Justice Department. Kelly and English surrendered to federal authorities on March 25, respectively in the District of New Jersey and the District of Northern Georgia, where they had initial court appearances.

After the announcement of charges on Wednesday, a conservative Republican and a liberal Democrat in the Senate seemed to find common ground.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., in an X post said that she and Sen. Jim Banks, R-Ind., wanted a freeze on Nvidia’s export license due to security concerns.

“Nvidia’s CEO said there was no evidence its AI chips were being smuggled. DOJ indicted individuals at a big NVIDIA partner for allegedly smuggling the chips to China. @SenatorBanks and I want a freeze to NVIDIA’s export licenses until it takes our national security seriously,” Warren posted.

Nvidia's CEO said there was no evidence its AI chips were being smuggled.

DOJ indicted individuals at a big NVIDIA partner for allegedly smuggling the chips to China. @SenatorBanks and I want a freeze to NVIDIA's export licenses until it takes our national security seriously. pic.twitter.com/0u2VsisN7D
— Elizabeth Warren (@SenWarren) March 25, 2026

Banks was less explicit, but his X post on Wednesday said, “The AI race against Communist China isn’t just a technological race, it’s a moral one.”

The AI race against Communist China isn’t just a technological race, it’s a moral one. pic.twitter.com/UGyQpQUOpB
— Senator Jim Banks (@SenatorBanks) March 25, 2026

The Daily Signal contacted the court clerk for all three federal district courts in an attempt to reach the defense counsel for the three men charged. The clerks’ offices in New Jersey and Georgia said the filings from the case were not yet available.

A spokesperson for the Federal Public Defender’s office for the Northern District of California told The Daily Signal, “Federal public defender Ana Botello made a special appearance for Mr. Zheng, who informed the court he would be retaining his own counsel.”

Kelly’s phone number was listed on WhitePages.com, but no one answered the phone. The other defendants did not have listed numbers that corresponded to the localities based on information from the Justice Department.

Investigators in the probe obtained text messages between the three alleged co-conspirators. In one June 2023 text, Kelly referenced an attempt to purchase computers. “They just need more details about your company, customers, revenue, etc.,” she texted. English replied, “I’m not breaking my back. I fake these weeks ago.”

A March 2024 text showed Zheng telling Kelly, “DO NOT MENTION ANYTHING ABOUT CHINA.”

What’s Driving the Rise in Catholic Conversions Across the US?

At a time when we’re often told institutions are collapsing, trust is evaporating, and the truth is “relative,” a surprising trend is emerging.

As Easter approaches, thousands of Americans are flocking to one of the oldest institutions in the world: the Catholic Church.

A recent New York Times report highlighted a surge in adult conversions to Catholicism across the United States, with dioceses from New Jersey to Oregon reporting significant increases in new members entering the church through the Order of Christian Initiation of Adults.

Americans to Convert to Catholicism

Traditionally, the night before Easter Sunday, at the annual Easter Vigil Mass, newcomers receive sacraments of baptism, confirmation, and eucharist, and are officially welcomed into the Catholic Church. Those already baptized in another Christian denomination receive confirmation and the eucharist.

By the time Easter arrives, these catechumens and candidates will have spent months studying the Bible and Catechism of the Catholic Church at weekly meetings, weekend retreats, and Sunday Scripture lessons.

The New York Times is reporting that the Catholic Church is experiencing a significant surge in converts. pic.twitter.com/RQ96u7KdpF
— Sachin Jose (@Sachinettiyil) March 26, 2026

This Easter, the numbers suggest a surge across America, according to the Times story.

In the Archdiocese of Newark alone, more than 1,700 people are expected to enter the Catholic Church, a 30% increase from last year and a 72% jump since 2023.

And Newark is far from an outlier.

The Archdiocese of Detroit will receive 1,428 new Catholics into the church, its highest number in 21 years. The Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston will have its most in 15 years. In the Diocese of Des Moines, the count jumped 51% from last year, from 265 people to 400.

Stability in an Age of Chaos

For decades, American institutions, from universities to media outlets, have drifted away from objective truth, embracing relativism, identity politics, and ideological conformity. At the same time, social life has fractured: declining marriage rates, rising loneliness, and record levels of anxiety and depression.

The COVID-19 pandemic only accelerated these trends, leaving many Americans isolated and questioning the foundations of modern life.

“I think technology has isolated us from one other. I think that COVID just really magnified that isolation,” Archbishop Mitchell Thomas Rozanski of St. Louis told the Times. “We are realizing many of the ills of our society, particularly anxiety and depression, come about from that isolation.”

Catholic converts in the US have reached a near 20-year high, with Catholics on track to become the largest single religious group, surpassing American Evangelical Protestants.

Protestants as a whole will likely still outnumber Catholics, but the trend suggests the US may be… pic.twitter.com/TXMJEJOXHX
— AF Post (@AFpost) March 24, 2026

Rozanski, whose diocese is experiencing the highest number of converts since 2016, has found the loneliest group of people entering the church to be those ages 18 to 35, a cohort that’s growing in several dioceses.

In today’s anti-institution environment, the Catholic Church stands out—not because it has changed, but because it hasn’t.

“In our age of uncertainty, and in our age of great anxiety, is a thirst and hunger for God and stability that faith brings to people’s lives,” Rozanski told the Times.

For over 2,000 years, the Catholic Church has maintained a consistent set of teachings on morality, human dignity, and the nature of truth. For generations raised on constant change, that permanence is increasingly attractive.

A Rejection of Relativism

In many ways, this wave of conversions represents something larger than a religious trend.

It is a quiet rejection of the assumptions that have dominated American culture for decades: that truth is subjective, that tradition is oppressive, and that fulfillment can be found in material success or personal autonomy alone.

Friends, in recent years, the Church has seen a surge in conversions to the Catholic faith.

Praise God for the movement of the Holy Spirit in the hearts and minds of many—especially in young adults, who seem to be leading the charge!https://t.co/vNsLYulIBs
— Bishop Robert Barron (@BishopBarron) March 27, 2026

Instead, a growing number of Americans, especially young adults, are moving in the opposite direction.

They are choosing structure over chaos. Tradition over trend. Truth over relativism.

And in doing so, they are rediscovering a faith that, for centuries, has claimed to offer not just answers, but ultimate meaning.

Senate Jams House With DHS Funding Bill in Dead of Night

In the early hours of Friday morning, the Senate voted to fund most of the Department of Homeland Security while excluding funding for immigration law enforcement agencies.

The deal, which passed by unanimous consent at around 2:30 a.m., could put an end to chaos at airports across the nation but may upset hardliners in both parties.

Senate Republican leadership requested unanimous consent from the chamber to fund key agencies within the department, such as the Transportation Security Administration, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Coast Guard, and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency.

However, Immigration and Customs Enforcement receives no funding in the bill, and most of Customs and Border Protection does not receive funding, either.

However, both immigration enforcement agencies already received funding from the “One Big, Beautiful Bill,” a July 2025 party-line budget reconciliation bill.

Hearing no objections, the Senate was able to pass the bill and leave town.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., argued Friday morning that the deal, although imperfect, is for the best after several weeks in which Democrats refused to fund the Department of Homeland Security without additional restraints on immigration enforcement.

“We had hoped we would get a [full] funding bill and we were trying to accommodate their requests for reform,” Thune said. “We couldn’t get any closer on it, so you kind of pivot to the next strategy. But it’s unfortunate it didn’t get done because it’s not good for America.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., presented the deal as a win for his party after six weeks of voting against funding bills.

“Democrats held firm in our opposition that Donald Trump’s rogue and deadly militia should not get more funding without serious reforms, and we will continue to fight for those reforms,” said Schumer.

“I’m very proud of our Democratic caucus. Throughout it all, Senate Democrats stood united—no wavering, no backing down.”

Now, the deal will go to the House, where some conservatives are already expressing their displeasure with a deal that forgoes funding the president’s immigration agenda.

“And just like that, while Americans were asleep, Senate Republicans were wide awake tossing the radical Democrats a political lifeline to end the government shutdown without funding ICE and our brave Border Patrol,” wrote Rep. John Rose, R-Tenn., Friday morning on X.

And just like that, while Americans were asleep, Senate Republicans were wide awake tossing the radical Democrats a political lifeline to end the government shutdown without funding ICE and our brave Border Patrol.

Now they’re off to take their recess — getting off the hook from…
— Congressman John Rose (@RepJohnRose) March 27, 2026

Rose is running against Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., for governor of the Volunteer State.

“Now they’re off to take their recess—getting off the hook from having to vote on the SAVE America Act and fully funding ICE,” Rose added.

House conservatives had called for an extended Senate debate on the SAVE America Act, legislation that would require photo identification and proof of citizenship to vote in federal elections.

Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, also heaped scorn on the Senate’s work.

“Why would @SenateGOP throw Democrats a political lifeline now… to fund TSA that doesn’t fund ICE & CBP – and in process likely get off of SAVE America Act to go home for Easter recess…???” he wrote on X.

One of the House’s options to fast track a bill is under “suspension of the rules”—an expedited process that requires two-thirds support for passage.

However, under current House rules, motions to suspend the rules are only in order on Mondays, Tuesdays, and Wednesdays.

Another option is for the House to seek unanimous consent; an unlikely scenario where, out of over 430 members, none would have an objection.

Alternatively, the House could move the bill through the rules committee—a leadership-controlled panel that determines the conditions for debate.

However, that process takes time, and the panel has multiple members, such as Roy, who are likely annoyed by the idea of the Senate leaving Washington without funding immigration enforcement or making progress on the SAVE America Act.

The House Republican Whip team informed members in a Friday email that a vote to fund the Department of Homeland Security is possible today.

On Friday morning, members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus gathered and declared their opposition to the bill.

“We can’t believe that the Senate abdicated its responsibility,” said House Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Harris, R-Md.

“What we’re suggesting is that the only thing we’re going to support is adding that funding into the bill, adding voter ID, sending it back to the Senate, making them come back in and do their work.”

The Senate abdicated its responsibility.

No funding for Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), which fights child sex trafficking.
No funding for Border Patrol.
No voter ID.

Bad for America. Bad for Americans.

Full @freedomcaucus press conference ? pic.twitter.com/G3eksYsK9s
— Rep. Eric Burlison (@RepEricBurlison) March 27, 2026

Harris rejected the idea of moving the bill on suspension of the rules, calling it a “very bad move for the American people.”

“Could the Senate be any more lazy than to send to us a bill that doesn’t do the job and then leave town?” Roy said. “We’re going to stand up and say ‘no’ to that. We’re going to send back a bill that’s responsible.”

This article was updated with quotes from the House Freedom Caucus.

Europe’s Blackout War

An ongoing element of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine has been targeting and crippling energy infrastructure.

Like Londoners in 1940 seeking shelter from German bombs raining down on them, Ukrainians are often forced to take cover in Kyiv’s metro as Russian missiles and drones barrage their city. Justifying such continuous, large-scale strikes, Russian President Vladimir Putin declared, “These attacks on our part were in response to persistent attacks on Russian soil with American ATACMS… Russia will choose the methods of destruction based on the nature of the chosen goals and the threats posed to Russia.”

In January, about 16% of Kyiv’s apartment buildings were left without heat as Ukrainians were hit not only by the Kremlin’s strikes but freezing winter temperatures. While Russia suffered nearly 1.2 million casualties since February 2022 and has gained a meager 1.5% of territory since the start of 2024, such attacks are taking a physical and psychological toll on Ukrainians who were forced to live in the dark.

To help their neighbors withstand rolling blackouts, a Polish fundraiser called “Warmth from Poland for Kyiv” collected close to $2.9 million to buy generators and power stations for Ukraine’s besieged capital. Four years into the war, this campaign’s 77,000 individual donations illustrates how a majority of Poles are still willing to provide financial or in kind donations and organize charity drives for Ukraine.

In an effort to disrupt Russia’s oil and gas exports and its army’s fuel supplies, Ukrainian drones and missiles have also been directed at refineries and pipelines.

While this strategy has general bipartisan support in Poland by leaders who agree that no Russian targets are off limits, Hungary, another NATO member and neighbor of Ukraine, has lamented these offensive attacks. Faced with the growing threat of the war spilling over into Central Eastern Europe, how are Ukraine’s NATO neighbors preparing to keep their states running if Russia attacks their critical infrastructure?

Poland and Hungary have taken strikingly different paths, encapsulating how energy security and national security intertwine in this region. Warsaw’s strategic foresight proved that phasing out Russian energy in Europe is possible through reinforcing strategic transatlantic alignment.

Diverging Steps

NATO and EU members in Central Eastern Europe drew various lessons from Russia’s economic blackmail, systematic interruptions in gas supplies, and illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014.

When Poland’s then-President Lech Kaczynski warned of Moscow’s neoimperial ambitions, most Western European leaders sought business as usual. Germany full-heartedly collaborated with Russia on the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, with former government officials taking lucrative board positions in Russian energy companies.

Radek Sikorski, Poland’s then defense minister, went so far as to say that such energy deals resembled a new Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact.

Outlooks also varied between former Soviet satellites once dependent on eastern pipelines: Warsaw prepared for the worst-case scenario while Budapest failed to diversify its energy sources.

In 2000, Poland relied on Russia for the vast majority of both its oil (over 90%) and natural gas (around 80%), whereas by 2025 it had reduced imports of both to essentially zero through a policy of supply diversification. Today, over 90% of Hungary’s crude oil imports and roughly 72% of its natural gas imports come from Russia.

Despite new geopolitical realities, Budapest largely stuck to the energy status quo. Speaking at a conference in Washington in 2019, Hungary’s Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó said that his country can’t stop buying Russian gas because there aren’t enough interconnectors that would allow Budapest to buy American liquified natural gas.

Szijjártó ignored hints that the necessary infrastructure could be built if there was political will to do so. Fast forward seven years: When Ukraine hit the Druzhba pipeline, which supplies Russian oil to Hungary (and Slovakia) in August 2025, Szijjártó complained that Brussels and Kyiv tried to drag Hungary into the war.

Diversify, Baby, Diversify: Poland’s Break With Russian Oil and Gas

Although not without internal disagreements and outrageously disadvantageous contracts with Gazprom, Poland chose to diversify its energy supplies out of a realist necessity to disengage with a Russia that rooted its foreign policy in neo-imperialism and economic blackmail. But, this process did not happen overnight and there were political hurdles along the way.

Despite the signing of an initial agreement between Poland and Norway’s energy companies in 2001, the Polish government abandoned this initiative. Poland’s government argued that it didn’t need additional gas since it was receiving enough from the Yamal contract signed with Russia in 1993.

Asked in a 2009 interview about overreliance on Russian fossil fuels, Poland’s then deputy prime minister sardonically replied, “Does Russian gas not burn well in your stove or furnace?”

When the contract was up for renewal, Russia negotiated from the position of a resource robber baron—their European gas monopoly forced Warsaw to sign an overpriced contract in 2010. Under the “take or pay” clause, Poland was compelled to pay Gazprom for unused gas, forbidden to re-export it for a profit to third countries like Germany or Czechia. Between 2010-2016, Poland paid Gazprom 10%-25% more than Germany, despite lower transport costs.

As Russia toyed with supplies to Ukraine as a means of strong arming the nation to its political dominance, Warsaw understood that it could not be laden to Russia as a resource provider. Decisions to build natural gas import and regasification capabilities were made in 2006 and construction began five years later.

The natural gas terminal on the Baltic coast has been in operation since 2015, with an expansion completed in 2025.

A major 24-yearlong contract was signed in 2018 between U.S. and Polish energy companies, creating the basis for American natural gas imports.

Recent data shows that between 2019 and 2024, American natural gas exports to Poland have more than tripled, increasing from 38,042 to 132,568 million cubic feet (MMcf) annually. Most of this comes from terminals in Louisiana (most notably in Sabine Pass—91,131 MMcf) and Texas, for example Corpus Cristi, (18,129 MMcf).

In addition, the Baltic Pipe was launched in 2022 as a means of further diversifying energy supplied from Norway’s North Sea to Poland via Denmark. In 2024, alongside 41% of Poland’s imported natural gas coming from American liquefied natural gas, an additional 38% came through the Baltic Pipe, making Norway the second largest supplier of Poland’s fossil fuels.

This mix can be a lifeline in times of war. Poland understands this, aiming to become one of Central Eastern Europe’s energy hubs. In February 2025, Ukraine received its first delivery of U.S. natural gas via Poland, which according to Naftohaz, can provide gas to 700,000 families during one winter month. U.S. natural gas exports to Ukraine through the terminal on the Baltic coast could reach 35 billion cubic feet this year.

Energy Security Challenges

A regional transition is taking shape, seeing the source move from the traditional southern coal mines of Silesia to the Baltic Sea coast in the north, becoming Central Eastern Europe’s energy-import corridor. Securing this sea is critical to Poland and the region’s future energy sovereignty.

A well-developed network of liquefied natural gas, oil, and fuel terminals, as well as pipelines and interconnectors significantly helped the countries of the region diversify their energy resource supply and consumption. In addition to hydrocarbons, infrastructure on the Baltic will also be a major source of Poland’s electrification.

Plans to develop a nuclear power plant, low-emission power generation from SMR technology, and off-shore wind farms will speed-up the country’s transition away from coal-fired electricity production. It’s estimated that thanks to this mix 60% of Poland’s energy resource consumption will come from Baltic Sea infrastructure by 2040.

This ambitious transition presents a major concern for securing Poland’s energy hub. Russia is increasing aggressive maneuvers and tactics aimed at the Baltic Sea region’s energy sector—reconnaissance of strategic assets, cyberattacks, disrupting maritime traffic, and damaging infrastructure, especially via its nefarious “shadow fleet” of vessels.

Since 2023, Russia damaged over 11 subsea cables and pipelines in the Baltic Sea, including ones linking Finland and Estonia and the Balticonnector gas pipeline. While the Kremlin lost the ability to exert direct leverage over countries, like Poland, by cutting off energy supplies, it now aims to destabilize the maritime environment of the Baltic as a means of complicating new investments, trade flows and resource deliveries, which can severely hinder further development and diversification.

Implications and Strategic Choices

Russia will continue to be a nuisance toward Europe’s critical infrastructure and energy sector, employing a mix of hybrid attacks, propaganda, and conventional or unconventional military actions.

Like others, Poland recognizes the security challenges that its ambitious energy diversification faces. For this reason, Warsaw is pursuing a policy centered around close defense ties with its Nordic and Baltic partners.

Most recently, Poland announced it will buy three Swedish submarines to jointly patrol underwater infrastructure. This decision is part of a bolder naval modernization plan that aims to host a regional NATO maritime command in the coastal city of Gdynia by 2028 to strengthen the Baltic’s security architecture with partners by keeping this crucial energy corridor safe, open, and free.

Hungary’s (and Slovakia’s) continuing reliance on Russia for their energy needs provides the Kremlin with leverage and a dangerous backdoor into one of Europe’s most pressing debates—how to ensure stable energy supplies when domestic production is limited without being overreliant and susceptible to political coercion.

Many Europeans are more cautious today when it comes to purchasing Russian resources. However, the ongoing Iran conflict and its implications for global energy supply has provided Putin an opportunity to flirt with Europe about once again satiating their demands by purchasing from Moscow.

While using Poland as a point of entry and future hub for American liquefied natural gas to Europe, Washington needs to maintain these sanctions to pressure the Kremlin to cease its aggressive foreign policy toward Ukraine and allies in Central Eastern Europe while curtailing Russia’s war waging capabilities. Completely phasing out Russian energy is in the U.S. national interest to keep American natural gas in and Europe strong.

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

The Smithsonian’s Failure to Tell the American Story

Today marks the first anniversary of the start of President Donald Trump’s war on the Smithsonian Institution. It is nothing less than a heroic clash between the forces of American continuity and those who seek foundational, ideological transformation of our country.

It was on March 27, 2025, that Trump issued Executive Order 14253, appropriately titled “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History.” It described a decade-long revisionist effort by the Smithsonian and other cultural institutions to replace objective facts with ideology-driven narratives that reconstruct America’s legacy as irredeemably racist, sexist, and oppressive.

The order warned that this approach only deepens societal divides and fosters national shame, rather than unity.

Among the best examples of this shift lies at the Smithsonian, in the heart of our American capital.

After the executive order, the White House sent a formal letter to Smithsonian Institution Secretary Lonnie Bunch III in August 2025, initiating a comprehensive internal review of selected Smithsonian museums and exhibitions to comply with the President’s directive in the March executive order. Bunch failed to comply.

Since then, follow-up letters and deadlines have been communicated to the Smithsonian, and there has still been very little cooperation.

To some, this may appear an unnecessary battle. However, this is perhaps one of Trump’s most noble efforts, for the woke agenda knows no limits. It will continue to infect our institutions unless we are bold enough to directly combat it and call it out for what it is: a lie.

What makes this agenda particularly effective are its subtleties. It festers like an uncleaned wound, rotting the core of whatever is attached. Though a grotesque analogy, it aptly describes the methods by which this agenda has permeated the U.S. and its institutions. And through this, our shared values, common understanding, moral foundations, and cultural heritage are all threatened.

Such subtle decay is precisely what has occurred across the Smithsonian’s 21 museums.

Consider the National Museum of American History—a museum whose very name promises to tell the story of America. One would likely expect, walking through its halls and exploring its exhibits, to encounter a coherent narrative of the nation. One may even expect to leave feeling informed and patriotic.

Instead, the experience is quite disorienting.

You will leave wondering why you learned about the diversity of American cuisine shaped by immigration, about subcultures like Mexican-American lowriding, and even participated in interactive polls on whether or not transgender athletes upset the competitive balance—yet encountered no clear account of the nation’s founding. You might pause and ask yourself: Did I miss it?

You did not. It simply isn’t there.

I encountered this firsthand, just a few weeks ago. After walking through exhibits including “America on the Move”; “Many Voices, One Nation”; and “American Democracy,” I kept waiting for a dedicated presentation of the Revolution and the founding fathers.

As I worked my way up to the third floor to see “The Price of Freedom,” I ran across a gentleman on staff at the museum.

“Excuse me, sir,” I asked, “is there an exhibit on the American founding?”

He hesitated. A few umms and stutters. And then, “No. There is not.”

No exhibit on the American founding—at the National Museum of American History.

I lingered for a moment, letting the absurdity settle. Seeing my dissatisfied expression, he followed up and quickly added, “Well, there’s a little bit in ‘The American Presidency,’ ‘American Democracy,’ and ‘The Price of Freedom’—though that last one is mostly military history.”

There are fragments, to be sure, but no central narrative. No coherent display of the ideas, sacrifices, and achievements that gave rise to the nation.

In other words, the founding of the United States—the defining event in our national story—is not presented as a story at all. It is scattered, diluted, and ultimately diminished. What remains is reinterpretation, and a framing of national history that satisfies only those who already believe that America is corrupt and oppressive.

Where the Declaration of Independence appears, it is immediately followed by, “Yet it was an unequal world.”

Even “American Democracy” is rendered uncertain, punctuated not with affirmation, but with a question mark (“American Democracy?”).

These interpretive choices can be found verbatim in museum didactics. And all that this accomplishes is casting doubt in visitors over the integrity of America and our founding—an entirely unproductive and even destructive effort.

This is how the culture wars are won—not through overt propaganda, but through cumulative framing. Over time, institutions entrusted with preserving national memory begin to deconstruct it. The result is a public increasingly disconnected from its own heritage and uncertain of its own legitimacy.

If our National Museum of American History won’t tell the American story, who will?

This is why Trump’s executive order matters. “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History” is a recognition that cultural institutions carry immense power.

They do not simply present the past. They also shape how future generations understand it. When that responsibility is compromised, correction is imperative.

The task ahead is to remove bias and restore clarity to teach Americans the truth about American history, our excellence, our enterprise, and our exceptionalism.

The Fragile Lifeline That Could Cut NATO in Half

NATO once centered planning around the defense of the Fulda Gap—the critical chokepoint through which Soviet tanks could push into West Germany. Today’s analog is the Suwalki Gap, a narrow corridor whose loss would amputate three member states from the rest of NATO. The military planning challenge is to prevent a Russian movement that would sever NATO’s Baltic allies before reinforcements could arrive by ground.

The Fulda Gap was dangerous because it was open. Its broad, flat terrain and dense network of roads created ideal conditions for massed Soviet armored thrusts pushing toward the Rhine within days. NATO responded by transforming this geography into a killing field, prepositioning U.S. V Corps units, mines, TOW missiles, and Apache helicopters to turn the lowlands into a no man’s land.

The logic was simple: hold the gateway or watch the alliance drown in a mechanized tide.

The Suwalki Gap flips this equation. This 65-km border between Poland and Lithuania is NATO’s only land bridge to the Baltic states, and the only strip of NATO territory separating Kaliningrad from Belarus. Rather than being a wide avenue into NATO’s heartland, it is a fragile lifeline to the Baltics. A rapid Russian-Belarusian snap operation, if unopposed, could close the corridor in days, forming a land bridge that leaves Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania stranded behind enemy lines.

Geography makes this risk even worse. Kaliningrad is supported by an offensive and defensive missile umbrella that includes Iskander missiles and advanced air defenses that can interdict convoys, ports, and airfields across the Baltics. Belarus hosts Russian maneuver units that could push through in a pincer as long-range fires and electronic warfare smother reinforcements.

Moscow regularly rehearses for the future, with migrant flows engineered at the Polish and Lithuanian borders, GPS jamming, airspace violations, and cyber pressure on the Baltics.

Both the Fulda and Suwalki Gaps prove that terrain still matters more than any single platform or technology. But where Fulda demanded that NATO blunt a frontal assault, Suwalki demands that NATO preserve connectivity at all costs. This requires treating the corridor not as a static line, but as a defended system blending hardened positions, preplanned fires, and mobile forces that can fight to keep the lifeline open even under heavy missile and drone attack.

The war in Ukraine has underscored the power of layered defenses by combining trenches, tank traps, and minefields with artillery, loitering munitions, and drones. Static obstacles can slow armor but are truly punishing when they trap attackers into pre-surveyed kill zones. At Suwalki, NATO should copy this playbook by building belts of fortifications and obstacles designed to work with mobile counterattack forces and multi-domain fires.

Some of this transformation is already underway. Germany’s decision to permanently station its 45th Panzer Brigade in Lithuania signals a shift from symbolic tripwire forces to credible armored combat power on the eastern flank. Paired with Poland’s East Shield fortifications and Lithuania’s efforts to harden bridges and roads, these forces can maneuver between fortified belts rather than behind a single Maginot-style line. The goal is to ensure that any attempt to close the corridor runs headfirst into obstacles, fires, and counterattacks from the outbreak of a crisis.

Yet presence and fortifications are only as reassuring as the exercises prove. During the Cold War, large-scale REFORGER drills tested whether the U.S. could rush divisions across the Atlantic in time.

Today, NATO should conduct annual, multi-domain Defender-style drills in and around Suwalki. These exercises must rehearse gap seizure and its subsequent reopening under missile barrages, cyber disruptions, GPS denial, and disinformation campaigns.

NATO defense planners often discuss “time to theater,” but what matters with Suwalki is “time to reopen the corridor.” Exercises should be ruthlessly evaluated against that metric: How long does it take to clear a blocked route, repair a cratered bridge, or push a combined-arms battlegroup through drone-directed fires? How quickly can logistics shift to alternative routes when primary roads are under Kaliningrad’s missile umbrella? Answers to these questions will decide whether the Suwalki Gap is a deterrent or a temptation.

The lesson of Fulda is that readiness and credible plans can turn a geographic vulnerability into a strategic asset. At Suwalki, this means blending static defenses with mobile forces, national initiatives with alliance-wide drills, and local resilience with reinforcement from the rest of NATO. Crucial to defending the gap will be joint planning and interoperability among the Lithuanian, Polish, and now German forces permanently stationed there.

If NATO treats the corridor as only one among many competing priorities, instead of as the primary priority it ought to be, it risks a crisis in which the Baltics become a detached limb. Conversely, if NATO concentrates planning around defending the Baltics, it will be able to successfully deter Russian aggression and prevent a conflict from starting in the first place.

Maryland Loves My Ratty Old Rug More Than It Loves Me

I just had to show ID at my county dump.

Yes, in order to get rid of my moldy, worn, faded, and generally disgusting old outdoor rug that my wife’s been bugging me for a year to dispose of, I had to hand the landfill worker my driver’s license.

“My license?” I blurted. “Well, that’s new.”

“Started last week,” he said before scanning the license into a newly installed contraption at road’s edge.

A few hundred yards away to the south, just on the other side of the tree line, rests our local community center. When I go there to fulfil my civic responsibility and American right to vote, nobody asks me for ID. And if Democrats have their way, nobody ever will.

I have to show ID to use the local dump but not the voting booth.

My ratty old rug means more in Maryland than my vote.

The thought’s enough to leave one down in the dumps.

But Wait, Isn’t Making Me Show ID Racist?

If I were a Democrat, I’d be framing my complaint differently. Demanding a driver’s license … or shall I say Garbage ID … to discard junk is racist. It’s “Jim Crow 3.0,” to borrow from Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. And sexist.

After all, the dump is a public facility. If you can’t provide an ID to prove you’re a local resident … and the Democrats assert that if you are black or a married woman, you are incapable of getting an ID … you must pay extra. The 2026 equivalent of a poll tax.

Maryland’s freshman senator, Angela Alsobrooks, is a black woman. Does she have any idea the oppression she’d face, the hardship she’d encounter, if made to show ID to use the Calvert County Appeal Landfill? It’s like Bull Connor himself is standing at the gate.

Democracy itself getting hosed.

I have a dream that one day, blacks and women will be marching as one, carrying to the red dumpsters their lumpy mattresses, broken down bicycles, cruddy carpets. We shall overcome the burden of getting an ID.

Clearly, I’m being ridiculous. No one beyond a booze-minded teenager actually believes that getting and presenting a valid ID is a problem. We are forced to identify ourselves all the time for all manner of minor things. The Home Depot up the road wanted my license the other day to return a couple bucks worth of tile spacers.

The black woman working customer service did not appear to believe I was enjoying white male privilege by handing over the ID.

And yet suggesting that we make folks prove they are who they say they are when exercising the sacred right to vote has sent the Democratic Party into an apoplexy.

Add to it their demand that Immigration and Customs Enforcement stay away from polling places—a demand so intense it’s a key reason they have Homeland Security shut down in the middle of a war—and you’re left with one conclusion: They want ineligible … in particular, illegal immigrants … to vote.

And why is that?

Maryland Loves Violent Young Illegal Immigrants More Than It Loves Me

It’s bad enough that my ratty rug means more to Maryland than I do, but the evidence has become overwhelming in the past year that Maryland loves illegal immigrants … including criminals … more than your law-abiding servant. (Could the state still be mad at me for leaving when I was young? It’s not my mother … as much as progressives try to be.)

The most famous example is Sen. Chris Van Hollen. I’m old enough to remember when local politicians wanted to lock up gangbangers, wife-beaters, and human traffickers, particularly those here illegally. Today, Sen. Van Hollen locks loving eyes at these thugs.

Last year, the Trump administration tried to deport alleged MS-13 gang member Kilmar Abrego Garcia. They sent the euphemistically dubbed “Maryland Dad” back to El Salvador. Van Hollen chased after him like Andrew Walker chasing down Lacey Chabert at the end of a Hallmark movie.

He fought to free Garcia like he’s never fought for the citizens of the state. And this was to set loose on our streets a member of a vicious, demonic gang that earlier this month saw four of its members—all illegal immigrants—indicted for allegedly murdering a 14-year-old boy in a Maryland park.

Gov.—and potential 2028 Democratic presidential candidate—Wes Moore—is little better. Last month, he signed a bill banning local law enforcement from cooperating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Again, this is an example of choosing to coddle criminal illegal immigrants over protecting legal citizens and lawful migrants. Practically guaranteeing more cases like Maryland mother-of-five Rachel Morin, who was abducted, raped, and murdered in 2023 while walking the Ma & Pa Heritage Trail. Her killer, an illegal immigrant who waltzed across Biden’s open border a few months earlier after reportedly killing a woman in El Salvador.

From their war on Voter ID to their vitriol against immigration enforcement, Van Hollen, Moore, and fellow Democrat leaders prove the cartels are more their constituents than card-carrying Americans. Can there be any other conclusion?

Democrats have collectively rejected the idea that protecting American citizens, their lives, their property, and their votes is a prime responsibility of government. And that is rubbish.

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

Federal Appeals Court Holds That DHS Can Detain Illegal Alien Without Bond

Earlier this week, a federal appeals court held that the Department of Homeland Security could detain an illegal alien without bond pending his removal proceedings after he was arrested in Minneapolis in 2025. In journeyman fashion, the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals interpreted the applicable immigration laws as written and applied common sense to reach its decision.

That law, 8 U.S.C. § 1225, a nearly three-decade-old statute, requires detention without bond for “an alien who is an applicant for admission if … an alien seeking admission is not clearly and beyond a doubt entitled to be admitted.” This case could be a game-changer in the administration’s efforts to hold illegal aliens pending their removal hearings.

Joaquin Herrera Avila is a Mexican national. He was arrested last August in Minneapolis and admitted he was in the country illegally. Avila had illegally entered the U.S. twice; once in 2006 and again in 2016. When he was caught in 2025, Avila was held without bond, and DHS initiated removal proceedings for lacking valid entry documentation.

Avila requested a bond redetermination before the immigration judge, who denied his request. Avila’s attorney then filed a habeas petition in federal district court seeking his immediate release or a bond hearing. Avila argued that since he was not “seeking admission” while in the U.S., the statute simply didn’t apply to him.

Avila’s argument goes like this: As long as an illegal alien in the U.S. just sits back and does nothing to adjust his status in the country, such as seek asylum, 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A) did not apply to him.

The district court ruled in favor of Avila, claiming the statute did not apply because he had lived in the country for years without “seeking admission” to the U.S.

But the text of the statute itself, as the 8th Circuit noted in its de novo review of the law, is unambiguous. You don’t have to be a lawyer to understand it.

Section 1225(a)(1) is clear as a bell: “An alien present in the United States who has not been admitted or who arrives in the United States … shall be deemed for purposes of this chapter an applicant for admission.”

So, whether you actively apply for admission while you’re illegally in the country, or pull an Avila and do nothing, you’re still considered an “applicant for admission.” No further legal reasoning is required beyond the text of the statute itself.

Avila’s argument hinged on the concept that “seeking” requires an affirmative act occurring in the present tense. It was a creative argument but failed the sniff test with the appeals court.

Citing the 5th Circuit case of Buenrostro-Mendez v. Bondi, the 8th Circuit noted that adopting this logic leads to strange conclusions, among them that an applicant who has already submitted an application is no longer seeking admission.

The 5th Circuit concluded that “an applicant for admission to the United States is ‘seeking admission’ to the same, regardless of whether the person actively engages in further affirmative acts to gain admission.”

Under Avila’s reading, an alien who enters the country unlawfully and evades detection for years would be entitled to a bond hearing, whereas an alien who lawfully presents himself at a port of entry and seeks admission would not be entitled to a bond hearing.

Avila also argued that the Laken Riley Act, found at 8 U.S.C. § 1226, added an exception to the bond eligibility for people like him, but allows for detention without bond for aliens who commit certain offenses, including burglary, larceny, and theft. A plain reading of § 1225(b)(2)(A), Avila argued, would render the act superfluous. The 8th Circuit was unconvinced, for two reasons.

First, the reach of the Laken Riley Act is not wholly analogous. It applies not only to unadmitted aliens but also to those who were previously admitted and later lost their legal status, including immigrants who overstayed their visas.

Second, the Laken Riley Act eliminates the possibility of parole entirely for the aliens it covers. Its passage is best understood as a congressional effort to be “doubly sure” to deny parole to criminal offenders, not as evidence that § 1225 was ever limited to the border.

Finally, Avila argued that the majority’s decision ran counter to legislative history. But legislative history does not carry the same authority as the law itself. The Supreme Court has said as much repeatedly, and the 8th Circuit was right to decline the invitation to cloud a clear statutory text with speculation about what Congress might have intended.

The dissent’s first sentence raised our eyebrows: “Except for a single DUI, for nearly 20 years, Joaquin Herrera Avila had been living a law-abiding life in the United States.”

Law abiding? Apparently the two times Avila entered the country illegally did not count. No doubt, that’s why the majority cited 8 U.S.C. § 1325(a) at the beginning of their opinion.

That statute makes it illegal to “enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers” and carries a term of imprisonment of up to six months for the first offense and up to two years for subsequent offenses.

One of the stronger points made by the dissent is this: five previous presidential administrations (including the first Trump administration) had applied the statute only to nationals arriving at the border, rendering the majority’s reading a “novel interpretation.” That novel interpretation likely stems from a memo issued on July 8, 2025, by the acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement explaining that the agency had “revisited its legal position” by determining that the mandatory detention provisions of section 1225—not the discretionary detention provisions of section 1226—is the new policy of the administration.

Quoting from the 2001 Supreme Court decision in Zadvydas v. Davis, the dissent wrote: “The distinction between an alien who has effected an entry into the U.S. and one who has never entered runs throughout immigration law [because] once an alien enters the country, the legal circumstance changes, for the Due Process Clause applies to all ‘persons’ within the U.S., including aliens, whether their presence here is lawful, unlawful, temporary, or permanent.”

This issue has been litigated across the country in federal courts. As more circuit courts split on this issue, it’s only a matter of time before this issue finds its way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

How Radical Is the Virginia Abortion Amendment?

Gov. Abigail Spanberger is currently considering whether to sign a bill to codify contraceptive access in Virginia, but for progressive policymakers in the state, the real battle for “reproductive rights” will take place this November.

This is when voters in the commonwealth will decide whether to enshrine abortion on demand into the state constitution with House Joint Resolution No. 1. Similar ballot measures in other states have struck down pro-life laws, such as Ohio’s law for the proper disposal of fetal remains. But HJ1 is the most extreme of these ballot measures due to its vague legal wording.

Current Virginia law is already extremely permissive, allowing abortion all the way through the second trimester. In the third trimester, three doctors must certify that “the pregnancy is likely to result in the death of the woman or substantially and irremediably impair the mental or physical health of the woman.”

The proposed amendment would change this rule to only need one physician (namely an abortion provider) to determine if it would protect the “life or physical or mental health of the pregnant individual.”

Voters might mistakenly think that terms like “physical and mental health” provide real guardrails. But they don’t. Physical and mental health are not defined in the proposal. That means an abortion provider could decide that almost anything counts as a threat to someone’s “mental health.” For example, a late-term abortion could be approved simply because the mother says having a baby would be too stressful. The legislature could have clearly defined those terms, but it didn’t.

That’s not the only way this measure is extreme. Virginia Democrats never use the word “woman” in the resolution. Their decision to use “pregnant individual” suggests someone other than women can become pregnant.

Democrats also voted down an amendment to the ballot measure that would allow protections for babies who are born alive after surviving botched abortion attempts.

They also rejected another amendment that would have kept parental consent and notification laws in place. Right now, minors need a parent’s permission to get a tattoo, go on a school field trip, and play sports. But if this amendment passes, a child could undergo a surgical abortion or take dangerous abortion drugs without their parent being told. It could even be facilitated by a school without a parent’s knowledge or consent.

If you think schools would never facilitate abortions behind the parents’ backs, then you should know that it has already happened in Fairfax County.

According to The Family Foundation, Fairfax County school officials arranged and paid for abortions using school resources for two minor students last fall without informing their parents. If the amendment is ratified, similar situations wouldn’t just be allowed, they could become common across the commonwealth.

There are even concerns that the amendment goes beyond abortion. Take sex-rejecting sterilization procedures, for example. Right now, minors need parental consent for these kinds of procedures. The Family Foundation has pointed out that since “fertility care” includes sterilization procedures, individuals could have a right to sterilization, puberty blockers, and sex-rejecting surgeries.

Will the commonwealth be the first state in the country to remove parental consent for sex-rejecting surgeries for minors? Not even California and New York have gone that far.

Virginia state Sen. Glen Sturtevant said this amendment would be “the most extreme” in the nation. Unlimited, taxpayer-funded sex-rejecting surgeries and abortion till birth with no parental consent is radical. It’s dangerous for women, children, and unborn babies.

Let’s hope that as more Virginians learn how extreme this resolution is, they’ll say “no” in November.

Minnesota at Center of SNAP Fraud as Loophole Draws Federal Scrutiny

For the first time in more than a year, participation in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) has dipped below 40 million people. Yet fraud concerns and eligibility loopholes remain widespread—particularly in Minnesota, as one retired millionaire’s story demonstrates.

Minnesota Millionaire Exposes Loophole

Minnesota’s income-only eligibility rules have created room for millionaire Rob Undersander to become eligible for SNAP benefits because his retirement income falls below the threshold.

'SOMETHING IS WRONG': Retired millionaire Rob Undersander outlines a major oversight in how Minnesota hands out its SNAP benefits, pointing out that the system is based on income only, not assets.

Despite his significant savings and property, Undersander realized that he could… pic.twitter.com/gq984l4dk5
— Fox News (@FoxNews) March 24, 2026

He told Fox News Digital the system is “fraud by design” because he qualified based solely on income rather than assets. Undersander ended up donating all the money and benefits he received to charity.

“I strongly support SNAP benefits for truly needy individuals, but when we have nearly one in seven Americans receiving food support in the wealthiest nation on earth, with historically low unemployment rate, something is wrong,” Undersander said.

Policy experts say his experience highlights a flaw embedded in federal SNAP rules for decades. Rachel Sheffield, research fellow in welfare and family policy at The Heritage Foundation, told The Daily Signal, “A loophole that has been part of SNAP for more than two decades now allows people applying for SNAP to bypass asset limits.”

“While most people on SNAP don’t have the amount of assets Mr. Undersander has, his case shows how this loophole undermines the intent of the program and fails to ensure that benefits are going to those truly in need,” she added.

Minnesota’s SNAP System Under Attack

Minnesota’s SNAP policies have faced scrutiny before. KSTP’s 5 INVESTIGATES revealed the Minnesota Department of Human Services “repeatedly reported incorrect information” about SNAP to the federal government.

One federal report falsely showed a 173.9% spike in SNAP issuance between 2020 and 2021 after the state double-counted Pandemic EBT funds.

In December 2025, the agency said it had begun discussions about resubmitted corrected data, KSTP reported.

Nationwide Fraud Concerns

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said that “the Minnesota case is just one of many examples.” She explained that although SNAP participation recently fell, fraud remains widespread, including an estimated half a million people receiving benefits multiple times, about 200,000 cases involving stolen Social Security numbers of deceased individuals, and prior instances of illegal immigrants accessing the program.

?Breaking News?

From @USDA_FNS: December 2025 SNAP data is official — 3.3 MILLION fewer recipients since January 2025.

We’re now BELOW 40 million total for the FIRST TIME since 2020.

This isn’t just numbers, we’re simultaneously helping families move toward independence… pic.twitter.com/iNKmttHGCo
— Secretary Brooke Rollins (@SecRollins) March 25, 2026

“Minnesota, California, [and] New York are ground zero for massive fraud,” Rollins said. “But we’re working on it, and I think we’re going to make great progress in the years to come.”

The Trump administration has emphasized removing ineligible recipients and tightening oversight. Rollins said that “since the president was sworn in, we’ve moved 3.3 million people off of food stamps into work and into a better life of dignity.”

The SNAP Fraud Reporting Act, introduced this month by U.S. Rep. Dave Taylor, R-Ohio, and co-sponsored by several Republican lawmakers, would require every state to submit detailed reports on past and ongoing SNAP fraud cases to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Hardworking Ohio families deserve to access the benefits they’ve earned during times of need, not have them siphoned away by fraudsters using deceased individuals’ social security numbers.

Under the Biden Administration, SNAP was riddled with waste, fraud, and abuse, and it’s… pic.twitter.com/nZ2eH58OG5
— Representative Dave Taylor (@RepDaveTaylor) March 19, 2026

As federal officials continue reviewing Minnesota’s data and broader program vulnerabilities, the SNAP debate is likely to intensify. State and federal governments face mounting pressure to ensure the program serves those it was originally designed to help.

Republicans Divided on Budget Reconciliation Gamble for SAVE America Act

Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell / Katrina Trinko / David Azerrad / Fred Lucas / Rebecca Downs / David Shepardson / George Caldwell / Tyler O'Neil / Pedro Rodriguez / Christopher Motz / Virginia Grace McKinnon / Reuters Staff / Fred Lucas / Fred Lucas / Katherine Matt / George Caldwell / Maciej Olchawa / Pawel Markiewicz / Anna Gustafson / Ryan Moreman / Wilson Beaver / Al Perrotta / Cully Stimson / John Osorio / Melanie Israel / Jesse Castrinos / Reagan Campbell / Virginia Grace McKinnon / March 26, 2026

Republicans are turning to budget reconciliation to pass the SAVE America Act into law, but some doubt the process will result in the election integrity measures offered in the current version of the bill.

“There’s a lot of support for a budget reconciliation bill,” Majority Leader Thune, R-S.D., told press this week. While the budget reconciliation process, the process that resulted in the “One Big, Beautiful Bill” last year, circumvents the Senate’s 60-vote cloture rule, some Republicans doubt that the SAVE America Act would end up on President Donald Trump’s desk.

The GOP strategy to pass the SAVE America Act has changed rapidly this week.

NEW: @SenMullin tells @DailySignal the Trump administration wants to use reconciliation to fund ICE and, "most importantly," pass the SAVE America Act.

"There's a framework that we can do through reconciliation, paying for-put some of the policies that cost money in, because… pic.twitter.com/73HC4B3Ndk
— Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell (@TheElizMitchell) March 24, 2026

Over the weekend, Trump was pushing the Senate to pass the SAVE America Act using the talking filibuster, which would circumvent the Senate’s 60-vote cloture rule, before reopening the Department of Homeland Security.

After a meeting with Republican senators at the White House on Monday afternoon, however, Republicans have shifted to attempting to pass the SAVE America Act in a second reconciliation bill.

But budget reconciliation has rules that could prevent the SAVE America Act from being included in the legislation.

“I’m all for it, but I have not heard a single person make a cogent case that SAVE America Act is Byrd-able, that it will pass muster in the Senate,” Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, said on “The Signal Sitdown.”

Mosques popping up all over Red Texas?

It's one of the top concerns for @RepBrandonGill's constituents, and Congress needs to get real about the Islamization of America. pic.twitter.com/wpLZNQVgg5
— Bradley Devlin (@bradleydevlin) March 26, 2026

The Byrd Rule directs the Senate parliamentarian to block provisions unrelated to the budget from being a part of a reconciliation package. Conservatives are concerned that because the SAVE America Act’s provisions center around proof of citizenship to vote and implementing nationwide voter ID, it would not survive the parliamentarian’s “Byrd bath.”

“If it is, great. But I do not think that we should be getting our voters and the American people’s hopes up that that’s going to work,” Gill said.

“The purpose of all of this is not to message,” Gill continued. “It’s to get this on the president’s desk. And candidly, I don’t think reconciliation is the way to do that. I think that if it were, we likely would have done it in the first reconciliation bill, but we didn’t.”

Senate Republicans claiming they will pass the SAVE America Act via budget reconciliation are gaslighting you.

Enough failure theater — pass the bill! pic.twitter.com/gsqez8KeLw
— House Freedom Caucus (@freedomcaucus) March 25, 2026

The House Freedom Caucus also doubts that the SAVE America Act will survive reconciliation. “Senate Republicans claiming they will pass the SAVE America Act via budget reconciliation are gaslighting you,” the caucus posted on X.

Rep. Keith Self, R-Texas, and Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, two members who have been pushing hard for this legislation to reach the president’s desk, agreed that this is not a viable option. Self went as far as to say that anyone who says they can is “lying to you.”

The Republican Study Committee, chaired by Rep. August Pfluger, R-Texas, previously put out a framework for a second reconciliation bill in January, focused on housing, health care, and energy.

Pfluger suggests that reconciliation offers a path forward for these issues and for the SAVE America Act.

“When 84% of Americans support requiring proof of citizenship to vote and the Left is still blocking it, that tells you everything you need to know about why reconciliation is the only path forward,” Pfluger told The Daily Signal.

Pfluger acknowledges the argument that the Save America Act may be difficult to fit within the procedural confines of the reconciliation process, which is why he and the RSC have consistently called for the Senate to prioritize its passage as a stand alone bill.

David Sacks Out as AI and Crypto Czar

David Sacks will no longer serve as artificial intelligence and crypto czar in the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, an administration official confirmed to The Daily Signal.

As a special government employee limited to 130 days of service, Sacks’ term in the White House came to an end, he first indicated in an interview with BloombergTV. He did not serve the 130 days consecutively.

Sacks will now serve as co-chair of the Presidential Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, alongside Michael Kratsios, science and technology adviser to the president.

The White House announced Wednesday that the council will include Big Tech giants, including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Andreessen Horowitz co-founder Marc Andreessen, and Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang.

“Under President [Donald] Trump, PCAST will focus on topics related to the opportunities and challenges that emerging technologies present to the American workforce, and ensuring all Americans thrive in the Golden Age of Innovation,” the White House says.

Zuckerberg was appointed to the board one day after a New Mexico jury found Meta liable for failing to protect children from exploitation on its platforms.

On Friday, the White House unveiled its National Framework for Artificial Intelligence.

USDA Blocks Funds to States Pushing DEI, Gender Ideology

The U.S. Department of Agriculture is attempting to withhold funding from states that violate the Trump administration’s policies of dropping initiatives on gender ideology and diversity, equity, and inclusion.

However, Democrat attorneys general from 20 states and the District of Columbia are suing in federal court to restore what they say is a cumulative $74 billion for food stamps, fighting wildfires, and school nutrition.

Democrat AGs have led numerous lawsuits to block actions by the Trump administration in the president’s second term. They claim that requiring compliance to certain administration policies for funding is a violation of the spending clause and the Administrative Procedure Act.

The strings attached to federal funding didn’t come without warning. In December, the USDA issued new terms and conditions for federal funding. These cited President Donald Trump’s executive orders from January and February of 2025 that restricted federal funds to states promoting gender ideology, unlawful DEI initiatives, and biological males playing in female sports.

The lawsuit calls for the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts to block the USDA from imposing the funding conditions.

The complaint says this would affect several federal programs: the Women, Infants and Children, or WIC, program; the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, better known as food stamps; the Emergency Food Assistance Program; and the Volunteer Fire Capacity Program.

“These federal grant programs are a lifeline for families across Massachusetts. I know that firsthand, as my own family relied on these programs when I was growing up,” Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell said in a public statement.

“They ensure that children have access to meals at school, families can cover basic necessities, seniors can stretch limited incomes, and rural communities have critical support,” Campbell continued.

A USDA spokesperson told The Daily Signal the department does not comment on pending litigation.

But a spokesperson for the Justice Department, which is defending the lawsuit, said the Trump administration is fighting for common sense.

“This administration prioritizes merit over DEI, acknowledges biological reality, and puts American citizens first,” the Justice Department spokesperson told The Daily Signal. “Frivolous lawsuits will not deter this Department of Justice from fighting for common sense.”

States joining Massachusetts and D.C. in the litigation are California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin.

This story was updated to include a comment from a Justice Department spokesperson.

California’s DEI Obsession Derails Democrat Primary Debate

It’s amazing how much California does these days to roll into its stereotype as a dysfunctional, woke-ified political wasteland.

On Tuesday, the University of Southern California canceled its scheduled gubernatorial debate after several top Democrats reportedly waged a pressure campaign to put a halt to it.

The field is currently wide open with Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom being term-limited out of office. One would think that would be a reason to give voters a chance to learn about the policies of the new candidates, a mix of Republicans and Democrats competing in the state’s “jungle” primary that lumps the parties together.

Nope.

You see, the leading candidates set to appear on stage had a BIG problem. They were all WHITE. None of the non-white candidates crossed the polling and fundraising thresholds set ahead of time by USC.

“The ‘data-driven’ candidate viability framework produced a lineup of Republicans Chad Bianco and Steve Hilton, as well as Democrats Tom Steyer, Matt Mahan, Katie Porter, Eric Swalwell—all White candidates,” Fox News reported. “The same criteria, developed by a USC professor and defended by the university, ended up axing Xavier Becerra, Antonio Villaraigosa, Betty Yee, and Tony Thurman, all Democratic Party minority candidates, due to lower polling and fundraising scores.”

In modern California, democracy without DEI is canceled it seems.

It’s rather amusing to read USC’s defense of its criteria for those who would be allowed on stage. You can feel the creeping panic through the words of whatever committee put the statement together.

They knew they were going to be labeled racists for using a colorblind, nonbiased metric and getting undesirable diversity results.

“We want to be clear that we categorically, unequivocally deny any allegations that the debate criteria was in any way biased in favor or against any candidate,” the USC statement read. “ … The methodology was based on well-established metrics consistent with formulas widely used to set debate participation nationwide—a combination of polling and fundraising—and developed without regard to any particular candidate.”

That’s the sound of technocrats naively pleading their case in a kangaroo court.

Did they learn nothing from the COVID-19 years? The real pandemic was racism. You are supposed to believe in science up and until the moment that “science” collides with left-wing cultural narratives, then it’s flushed down the toilet along with self-government, constitutional rights, or any of that other fluff Americans bitterly cling to.

That’s the trick to staying on the right side of history and all that.

Just a few days after defending their reasonable debate rubric, USC folded and said that it couldn’t come to an agreement with the Los Angeles TV station KABC set to air the event.

“As a result, USC has made the difficult decision to cancel tomorrow’s debate and will look for other opportunities to educate voters on the candidates and issues,” it said in another statement, according to NBC News.

Incredible.

This primary is now set up to be a indictment of the failed governing ethos of the Golden State.

California voters have time and again overwhelmingly rejected affirmative action at the ballot box. Even in a state that practically defines the “Left Coast,” regular people don’t want race-based school admissions, quotas, and policies that fly in the face of equality before the law.

But the Left’s activist class and their ruling elites just can’t quit it, no matter what. So, they’re even willing to blow up the electoral process to ensure that something like a racial quota remains, even for an endeavor as narrow as running for governor.

Competence isn’t really a criterion for high office in California these days, but blowing up a debate for DEI-related reasons is a little too on the nose for why so much in the state seems broken.

DEI nonsense proves once again to be an un-American plaything for elites to play with in their manic scramble for power and recognition in institutions captured by the Left.

The California gubernatorial race is so filled with Democratic Party aspirants that the two Republicans in the race have a real chance to emerge as the two winning candidates in the primary, despite the deep blue hue of most statewide elections.

If that somehow holds, it would be one of the more hilarious self-owns in modern political history, but it’s a calamity the Left is pushing the party into.

Despite Democrat success in running vanilla, often white candidates who campaign like centrists and vote like Mao, they just can’t escape the gravitational pull of the Left’s toxic, identitarian ideology. And so, they end up with what happened on Tuesday.

The most absurd demands for DEI can never really be met, therefore a barely functioning political system grinds to a halt because too few people in power are willing to publicly question its fundamental premises.

That’s the world under Democrat one-party rule and left-wing institutional dominance. The whole nation practically fell under that model during the Biden White House years. Now, it’s just playing out in places like California that provide a harbinger for the stupidity to come if we follow that model toward oblivion.

The Democrats Have Descended Into Utter Nihilism

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

Hello, this is Victor Davis Hanson.

I’d like to talk a bit about Democratic nihilism. By that, I mean the Democratic Party, such as it is in the last 10 years, at least from the advent of Barack Obama, bears no resemblance to what we saw as lately as the 1990s, with the 1992 and 1996 Democratic platforms.

They seem like Republican platforms. So, what has happened? I think the answer is they’ve descended into utter nihilism.

Take Iran. Last year, when Donald Trump had not yet bombed the nuclear facilities in Iran, but had threatened to, and then had extended negotiations, the Democrats came up with a word, “TACO.” Trump Always Chickens Out.

And they presented the image of a fickle president that was too afraid to take on Iran, which they said had to be taken on. And then suddenly he did this. And now they’re calling him a warmonger that’s going to cause World War III and destroy the economy.

They have this idea that genocide is being committed by the Israelis at a time of war, but they’ve said nothing about the Iranian government that slaughtered over 30,000 of their own people. So, there’s no consistency.

A lot of it has to do with Trump Derangement Syndrome. There’s something about Donald Trump. I don’t know what it is entirely. His Queen’s accent, his appearance, his utter disdain for the media, the academic world, the deep state, the corporate boardroom, I don’t know what it is. But he drives the Left into, kind of, a state of madness.

And you can see it with some of their leaders.

Take California Gov. Gavin Newsom, for example. Gavin said he wanted to punch Trump in the mouth. He went over to Europe and said that the Europeans had knee pads, as if they were performing some, I guess, he meant foul sex act on Donald Trump.

He’s completely flipped out. He told a black audience that his test scores were low and, therefore no different than theirs. The subtext of that was that you, typically, as a group, have low test scores, and I am a white person who has lower than average. So, I don’t compare myself to people at large, but only to you.

It was a foolish thing to say.

From time to time, Sen. Cory Booker, “Spartacus,” resurfaced just to scream and yell. The latest manifestation of him is at the airports, where he is yelling and screaming about Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and you look at all the people’s faces and, as they pass the ICE officers who are filling in for the unpaid TSA employees, they’re happy. They’re delighted. And Booker doesn’t seem to understand that.

If you take the crazy left-wing protest out of the picture, ICE wouldn’t have to have masks on. They don’t have masks at airports because nobody is going around taking pictures of them and trying to dox them so that they could be killed or shot by their enemies, especially the cartels. People think they’re doing a great thing, and so they’re completely unhinged.

And think of what we see.

It’s just since Donald Trump came back, there has been nothing but the Tesla demonstrations. Remember that? Remember when Donald Trump had a military parade last summer, that there was an alternate one that the Left staged. It was kind of foul.

There was the “No Kings” protest. There was those congressional videos where female members of Congress were kickboxing. There were the ones that said we’re going to UN-FU word, foul mouth.

We had the other congressional [members] and senators making a video where they essentially advocated for military officers to disobey orders.

This is all the aftermath of the Trump collusion.

Even as I’m speaking today, new developments have come out that the Democrats under Barack Obama and later Joe Biden. They spied on U.S. senators. They spied on representatives. They spied on current FBI Director Kash Patel, all in an effort to create a hoax that Donald Trump had colluded with the Russians.

And then after that was exposed as a fraud, they went right into impeachment, and then they went right into Russian disinformation in 2020, which was exposed as a fraud. And then they went right into a second impeachment. And then they went into the first trial in U.S. history of a president when he was out of office.

And then they did the what? The raid on Mar-a-Lago. First time we’ve had a president’s home residence, for doing what? Doing what Joe Biden did for 30 years. Bringing a few classified files out and under his ownership or temporary ownership, but much more secure at Mar-a-Lago than it was in Joe Biden’s garage.

So, we had the five trials, we had the crazy Letitia James real estate trial. We had the crazy Alvin Bragg bootstrapping a campaign violation, it’s a federal matter, onto a state. We had Fani Willis’ circus in Georgia. We had Jack Smith, who’s always in the news for some unethical act that he committed, while he had this vendetta against Donald Trump.

We had the E. Jean Carroll trial, which was a fiasco. We had efforts to take him off the [2024 ballot].

What I’m getting at is there’s no consistent message. There’s no one in the Democratic Party saying, OK, here is our blueprint for a foreign policy, and it differs from the Republicans, and it’s more suited to the American interests.

OK, we’re going to have a new immigration policy, and we’re going to do the following: A, B, C, D.

OK, crime has risen under Donald Trump. It’s gone to historic lows, but it’s not because he’s stopped illegal immigration. We have a different theory, and here’s what it is.

Here’s our new Green New Deal. 2.0, 3.0. Here it is. They don’t even offer a left-wing agenda. It’s just nihilism, nihilism, nihilism. There’s no coherence.

So, what happened to them? What happened to the party of JFK and Harry Truman? Well, we saw what Jimmy Carter did to it. But Bill Clinton tried to restore and go back to the middle.

But I think there’s been three or four cosmic changes that have accelerated the destruction of the Democratic Party into a nihilist entity.

The first is we’ve opened, under a lot of administrations, the borders wide open. We have the highest number of foreign residents ever in the United States. 53 million, 16% of the population. And it comes at a time when our balloting laws have never been so suspect. That people, whether it’s mail-in or early balloting or voter ID, the Democrats have one consistent position: Get as many people to vote with as few reviews of their eligibility as possible.

And that is a new, big constituency. And that constituency came from places that were poor, autocratic, and need massive inputs of federal subsidies and state subsidies. And that’s a viable constituency.

We see it with questions of Israel. The new DEI constituency does not like Israel. It’s radically changed the Democratic Party. We see it with visiting students. We see it with green cardholders.

The second phenomenon was globalization.

Globalization from basically the millennia until now rewarded people with a 7 billion-person market. If you had skills that could cross borders. If you were in the media, if you could open a university in Dubai, if you had an insurance company that you wanted to have offices in Latin America, if you were a lawyer, in global legal terms, anything that dealt with information, finance, media, insurance.

You went from 340 million people, that’s today’s population in the United States, to 7 billion consumers and customers. And that enriched people, along the blue coast, that had those skills. And they made an amount of money that was staggering, and that gave the Democratic Party the billionaire class.

Go into the Fortune 400, look at two things, the size of the fortune and the political leanings of the billionaires. They were mostly left-wing, and that enriched the coffers of the Democratic Party, through foundations and PACs, and gave them these boutique issues from green energy to transsexuality that they pushed down our throats, all fueled by money, all without popular support.

And finally, there’s a blue state flight.

Their paradigm of high taxes, fraudulent entitlements, lax on crime. Overregulation leads to poor unsafe streets, poor schools. People who feel they can’t stay in the middle class because they’re taxed too high, they can’t afford a home. I’m talking about places that particularly like Massachusetts, New York, Illinois, and California, and people are leaving, and the Democrats are doing what?

They’re appealing to a shrinking constituency in local and state politics that has no national residency. It doesn’t resonate with the national population. So, if you can’t win an election because your agenda either doesn’t exist, but more likely, if it did exist, would offend people as a 70/30 issue—they being on the 30%—you go hysterical. You go nihilistic.

You do what the Democrats are doing today.

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

Trump Reveals ‘Present’ From Iran

President Donald Trump said that Iran’s “present” to the United States is letting eight oil tankers pass through the Strait of Hormuz.

“They said, ‘To show you the fact that we’re real … we’re going to let you have eight boats of oil,’” Trump said of the Iranians at a Cabinet meeting on Thursday.

Trump first mentioned a gift from the Iranians on Tuesday, but he did not specify it.

At his Cabinet meeting, he asked Special Envoy Steve Witkoff if he could reveal the present to the press.

“You can do anything you want,” Witkoff said, invoking laughs in the Cabinet room.

Trump said he didn’t think much of the gift until he heard a Fox anchor say the boats were seen traversing the Strait of Hormuz.

“I guess they were real,” he said. “I think they were Pakistani flags.”

Iran then agreed to allow two more boats through the strait, bringing the total to 10.

The tankers started sailing three days ago, he said.

Trump said this is evidence that negotiations are going well.

“I guess we were dealing with the right people,” he said.

Why Can’t the Senate Come to a Deal on DHS?

In the sixth week of the Department of Homeland Security shutdown, the Senate still cannot come to a deal to fund the agency, despite both sides having presented a wide spectrum of proposals.

On Thursday, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., announced he had sent Democrats “what I think is our last and final [offer], so let’s hope this gets it done.”

Thune did not go into detail on the content of the offer.

Democrats have continued to demand the codification of restraints on immigration law enforcement—such as blocking the use of masks and requiring judicial warrants to enter homes—in exchange for funding Immigration Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection.

Soon after Thune’s speech announcing the new Republican offer, Democrats continued to express their displeasure.

“We’re talking through it right now, but it’s not where we want it to be,” Sen. Andy Kim, D-N.J., said on Thursday of Republicans’ latest offer

“We have something that we put forward. … We just want to move forward on TSA [Transportation Security Administration], these other elements of DHS that we don’t have any controversy over,” Kim added.

Democrats have attempted to advance multiple bills by unanimous consent, which would fund individual agencies of DHS while excluding border security and immigration law enforcement.

The shutdown continues to place a strain on travel, with high call-out rates of TSA agents and delays at airports across the nation.

Earlier this week, Senate Republicans offered Democrats a deal to fund all of DHS except for deportation efforts, which have already received some funding from a separate party-line budget reconciliation bill passed in July.

Democrats rejected the offer, demanding legislative restraints on the activities of immigration enforcement agencies.

“We need strong, strong reforms, and we need to rein in ICE,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said in response.

Republicans such as Thune have challenged the notion of demanding reforms for an agency they do not wish to fund.

Thune on Tuesday said he doubted Democrats’ demand for reforms of DHS “were ever serious” due to “dragging their feet” and rejecting “plentiful offers” from the White House.

“If they’re not interested in funding, then I don’t know why they would get the reform,” said Thune on Tuesday.

A deal continues to evade the Senate, despite the fact that Democrats have expressed some satisfaction with changes pushed by the White House at DHS.

Sen. Peter Welch, D-Vt., citing the appointment of Markwayne Mullin to replace Kristi Noem at DHS, said this week that Democrats have “made significant progress” during the shutdown.

The Iran War Just Reopened the Caspian Energy Map

The war in Iran is already reshaping the global energy map. Disrupted oil and gas flows, damaged infrastructure, and heightened volatility are destabilizing international markets. But even more consequential and positive effects may lie ahead. Foremost among these is a renewed strategic logic for the Caspian region and particularly for a Trans-Caspian gas pipeline that was once considered politically and commercially unviable.

For decades, the idea of transporting natural gas from Turkmenistan across the Caspian Sea to Azerbaijan and onward to Europe has been held hostage to geopolitical tensions and economic uncertainty. Today, the convergence of war and market disruption is creating conditions that could finally break this impasse. In doing so, Turkmenistan, home to some of the world’s largest gas reserves, could emerge as a key energy supplier to offset war-constrained Middle Eastern flows.

The Iran war has demonstrated the fragility of global energy systems as strikes on regional infrastructure have emphasized the limits of the region’s supply chain infrastructure. Disruptions of Qatar’s liquefied natural gas production have already produced a significant tightening of global markets. Steady, long-term, pipeline-based LNG has been a key energy market stabilizer, particularly for Europe as it seeks to decouple from Russian gas supplies.

Middle East price shocks are prompting global recalibrations as energy security is once again being determined not just by cost but also by reliability, political alignment, and especially geography. Against this backdrop, the Caspian region to the north is being reconsidered. A westward route linking Turkmen gas to Azerbaijan and onward through the Southern Gas Corridor to Europe could transform both regional economies and contribute to European energy security.

With vast and underutilized potential, Turkmenistan is believed to hold the world’s fourth-largest reserve of natural gas, although it exports almost exclusively to China. The case for Ashgabat’s market diversification is evident but constrained by political and security concerns.

Russian opposition has played a central role, as Moscow has long considered a Trans-Caspian pipeline a direct threat to both its market share and geopolitical leverage. Despite miles of its own underwater pipelines, Iran also opposes trans-Caspian sub-sea piping that bypasses its territory. Together, Moscow and Tehran have represented a de facto blockade to Ashgabat’s pipeline development, reinforced by their naval presence in the Caspian. However, that deterrence is now waning.

Israeli strikes on Iran’s Bandar Anzali port in late March seriously damaged Iran’s naval capacity in the Caspian Sea. The sinking of Tehran’s warships put an end to joint Iran–Russia naval exercises for the foreseeable future and to Tehran and Moscow’s blunt demonstrations of their opposition to east-west pipeline projects in the Caspian.

Similarly, Russia’s ability to project naval power in the world’s largest inland sea has diminished. Successful drone attacks by Ukraine on a Russian freighter and missile cruisers in the Caspian in 2024 and 2025 weakened Moscow’s Caspian flotilla and reduced its maritime presence. Two wars have contributed to demilitarizing the Caspian Sea.

Infrastructure projects of this scale require not only financing and engineering, but also a reasonable security environment. For the first time in decades, the implicit threat of disruption from Russia and Iran has been significantly reduced. While risks still remain, the market calculus has shifted.

The Iran war and its constriction on global energy supply comes as Europe seeks to eliminate Russian gas imports by 2027. As a result, the economics of a Trans-Caspian pipeline are being reassessed in light of higher LNG prices and stronger demand signals. But the most realistic path forward is incremental.

While Azerbaijan supplies 14 European countries with gas, Brussels has in the past been skeptical of Trans-Caspian pipeline proposals. Long distances, high capital costs, and uncertain demand made investors cautious.

An initial step, instead of a full-scale pipeline, could be an interconnector to link existing Turkmen and Azerbaijani offshore derricks and infrastructure. Such a connection would enable several billion cubic meters of gas to flow westward into the Southern Gas Corridor.

A modest proof-of-concept effort, the interconnector would demonstrate feasibility and reduce upfront costs by leveraging existing infrastructure. Over time, the interconnector could scale into a larger pipeline, with a potential capacity of around 30 billion cubic meters annually.

This moment is reminiscent of the energy diplomacy of the 1990s, when projects like the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline put the Caspian region on the global energy map. Success was driven by capital and sustained political engagement, particularly from the U.S. A similar approach could now make a defining difference.

Washington has already signaled interest in developing long-term projects in both Central Asia and the South Caucasus. U.S. diplomatic engagement can help mitigate risk and attract investment for the interconnector. To be successful, pipeline projects require coordinated efforts by governments, financial institutions, and private actors.

The war in Iran has demonstrated vulnerability at the nexus of energy and geopolitics. In the Caspian, it has created a rare opening for a long-stalled project.

The logic is compelling: Europe needs a diversified gas supply. Turkmenistan needs new markets. Azerbaijan and Turkey seek to expand their roles as transit hubs. And the U.S. appears interested.

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

White House Unveils America250 Celebrations

The America250 Commission announced it will host five block parties across the country to commemorate the nation’s 250th birthday on July 4.

“America250 is creating the largest synchronized Fourth of July celebration in U.S. history
through America’s Block Party,” Rosie Rios, chair of America250, said.

“The Fourth of July has long been synonymous with neighborhood block parties—we’re turning up the volume on this beloved tradition by scaling it into a nationwide celebration anchored in live music.”

New York City will host a ball drop on July 3. This marks the first Times Square Ball drop outside of New Year’s Eve.

The commission is planning a July 4 family-friendly concert at the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum.

Milwaukee, Wisconsin, is hosting a block party along Lake Michigan. Fort Campbell, Kentucky, will also host a festival, and Charleston, South Carolina, will hold an Independence Day Celebration.

America’s Block Party events will be livestreamed on the iHeartRadio app. Americans can also register to host official neighborhood events at America250.org.

Major League Baseball is scheduled to host 15 games at 15 ballparks around the Fourth of July.

America’s Time Capsule will be publicly displayed in Philadelphia before being ceremonially buried at Independence National Historical Park on July 4, to be reopened in 2276.

The International Parade of Tall Ships hosted by Sail 4th 250 will feature more than 46 tall ships at the Port of New York and New Jersey on July 4.

America’s Birthday Cake will be unveiled in Washington, D.C., on July 4.

On July 5, the commission will celebrate America’s Day of Reflection with a potluck.

Finland Christian Convicted of ‘Hate Speech’ for Decades-Old Pamphlet on Sexuality

Attorneys are warning about the “severe chilling effect” of the Finnish Supreme Court’s ruling against Päivi Räsänen, a Christian member of Parliament who long faced hate speech charges for tweeting a Bible verse.

The Supreme Court upheld Räsänen’s acquittal for posting a Bible verse in 2019, but the 3-2 majority convicted her, along with Lutheran Bishop Juhana Pohjola, of hate speech for expressing their beliefs on Christianity and sexuality in a 2004 church pamphlet.

“It is right that the court has acquitted Päivi Räsänen for her 2019 Bible verse tweet,” Paul Coleman, executive director of ADF International, which represented Räsänen, said in a statement Thursday. “However, the conviction for a simple church pamphlet published decades ago—before the law under which she has been convicted was even passed—is an outrageous example of state censorship.”

“This decision will create a severe chilling effect for everyone’s right to speak freely,” Coleman added.

Speaking with reporters at a press conference after the ruling, Räsänen said the court’s decision “sends a troubling and contradictory message about the state of fundamental freedoms in Finland.”

She asked whether Fins are “truly free to express our opinions,” and noted that “without that freedom, there is no real democracy.”

A medical doctor and grandmother of twelve, Räsänen said she is consulting with her attorneys about a possible appeal to the European Court of Human Rights.

Coleman condemned the ruling, but noted that “vague and subjective hate speech laws” allow prosecutors a wide latitude.

Räsänen’s attorneys claimed the court “cherrypicked” passages from the 2004 pamphlet.

The court convicted her on the basis that she continued to share the 2004 pamphlet after authorities launched an investigation in 2019.

The conviction carries a 20-day fine, calculated according to Räsänen’s income.

The Prosecution’s Argument

When the Helsinki District Court unanimously acquitted Räsänen of the charges in March 2022, the prosecution appealed the case.

The prosecution argued the court “misinterpreted” Räsänen’s tweet, according to a translation of the Finnish documents. (Alliance Defending Freedom International, which represents Räsänen, provided the translation to The Daily Signal. The Daily Signal separately obtained the documents from the Finnish court.)

The prosecution claimed that the court failed to “fully perceive and understand” the “degrading and dehumanizing” message against “homosexuals and … their right to dignity and self-determination.”

“In order to protect the dignity and equality of homosexuals, it is necessary to exclude Räsänen’s statements from freedom of expression by interpreting them as punishable hate speech directed at them [homosexuals],” the prosecution wrote.

The Tweet and Pamphlet

Räsänen, 62, has served in the Finnish Parliament since 1995 and served as interior minister from 2011 to 2015. She is a member of the center-right Christian Democrats party.

Her case dates to June 2019, when she criticized the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland for supporting an LGBTQ+ Pride event.

“The whole case started when I criticized the leadership of the church because of its support for the ‘Pride’ event on Twitter,” Räsänen previously told The Daily Signal.

“The church has announced that it is the official partner of [the LGBTQ+ group] SETA in Pride 2019,” the legislator tweeted. “How does the doctrine of the church, the Bible, fit together with the fact that shame and sin are raised as a matter of ‘pride’?”

#kirkko on ilmoittanut olevansa #seta n #Pride2019 virallinen partneri. Miten kirkon oppiperusta, #raamattu sopii yhteen sen kanssa, että häpeä ja synti nostetaan ylpeyden aiheeksi? pic.twitter.com/cnjAQCrOc2
— Päivi Räsänen (@PaiviRasanen) June 17, 2019

Her tweet included a photo of the 2004 pamphlet titled “As Man and Woman He Created Them,” explaining the Bible’s position on sexuality and marriage with citations from the Old and New Testaments. The photo cites Romans 1:24-27, which reads, “women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones” and “men committed shameful acts with other men.”

‘Steadfast’

The member of parliament told reporters Thursday that she remains “steadfast” in her convictions, despite the seven-year legal battle.

“It has not been in vain to speak about these biblical issues,” she said. Strangers have reached out to her, thanking her for her stance and even stating that her courage inspired them to accept Jesus.

“I trust in God and I believe that this is also in God’s hands,” she concluded.

Trump to Pull Stefanik UN Ambassador Nomination to Protect Republican House Majority

Watch Our Live Inauguration Day Coverage

American Tea Parties, Greek Yogurt Parties

Trump DOJ Cracks Down on States Housing Biological Men in Women’s Prisons

Related posts:

Ohio Lawmakers Steadfast in Passing Pro-Life Legislation

Related posts:

DHS Orders Payment of 50,000 US Airport Workers in Emergency Action

Related posts:

‘ABSURD’: House Rejects Senate DHS Bill

Related posts:

GROTESQUE: Barack Obama’s Orwellian Push for Virginia Redistricting Is Something to Behold

Related posts:

House Republican Group Hijacks House Floor to Reject Radical Islam

The Root of the Caucus’ Concerns

A War Against the West

Europe’s Fight

Related posts:

The Air Force Is Finally Restoring Honor to the Faithful It Wrongly Punished

Related posts:

House Passes Legislation to Combat Mexican Government’s Seizure of American-Owned Port

Related posts:

Iran-Linked Hackers Breach FBI Director’s Personal Email, Publish Photos and Documents

‘Make Them Feel Vulnerable’

Related posts:

Judge, Longtime Thorn for Trump, Sides With Administration

Related posts:

‘Do Not Mention China’: Alleged AI Smuggling Conspiracy Rings Alarm Bells

Related posts:

What’s Driving the Rise in Catholic Conversions Across the US?

Americans to Convert to Catholicism

Stability in an Age of Chaos

A Rejection of Relativism

Related posts:

Senate Jams House With DHS Funding Bill in Dead of Night

Related posts:

Europe’s Blackout War

Diverging Steps

Diversify, Baby, Diversify: Poland’s Break With Russian Oil and Gas

Energy Security Challenges

Implications and Strategic Choices

Related posts:

The Smithsonian’s Failure to Tell the American Story

Related posts:

The Fragile Lifeline That Could Cut NATO in Half

Related posts:

Maryland Loves My Ratty Old Rug More Than It Loves Me

But Wait, Isn’t Making Me Show ID Racist?

Maryland Loves Violent Young Illegal Immigrants More Than It Loves Me

Related posts:

Federal Appeals Court Holds That DHS Can Detain Illegal Alien Without Bond

Related posts:

How Radical Is the Virginia Abortion Amendment?

Related posts:

Minnesota at Center of SNAP Fraud as Loophole Draws Federal Scrutiny

Minnesota Millionaire Exposes Loophole

Minnesota’s SNAP System Under Attack

Nationwide Fraud Concerns

Related posts:

Republicans Divided on Budget Reconciliation Gamble for SAVE America Act

Related posts:

David Sacks Out as AI and Crypto Czar

Related posts:

USDA Blocks Funds to States Pushing DEI, Gender Ideology

Related posts:

California’s DEI Obsession Derails Democrat Primary Debate

Related posts:

The Democrats Have Descended Into Utter Nihilism

Related posts:

Trump Reveals ‘Present’ From Iran

Related posts:

Why Can’t the Senate Come to a Deal on DHS?

Related posts:

The Iran War Just Reopened the Caspian Energy Map

Related posts:

White House Unveils America250 Celebrations

Related posts:

Finland Christian Convicted of ‘Hate Speech’ for Decades-Old Pamphlet on Sexuality

The Prosecution’s Argument

The Tweet and Pamphlet