GOP hits back after judges demand Trump allies be condemned for targeting judiciary
FIRST ON FOX: The GOP lawmaker leading a collective response to more than 100 judges and attorneys who demanded condemnation of Trump allies said Tuesday she and her delegation won’t be “pushed around” amid ongoing attacks on left-wing judges. Wyoming’s congressional delegation responded to dozens of Cowboy State jurists, including a former governor who issued an open condemnation of lawmakers’ failure to defend judges under fire from conservatives over sweeping nationwide injunctions hindering President Donald Trump’s foreign policy and homeland security actions. The response, led by Sen. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., rejected the basis on which the jurists were calling for the state’s Republicans to vociferously intervene in support of what the White House describes as rogue judges, citing the Founding Fathers’ words. “In Federalist [Paper] 78… Alexander Hamilton wrote that “the judiciary, from the nature of its functions, will always be the least dangerous” and that judges “have neither force nor will,” the letter states. WYOMING SHERIFF’S BOLD BILLBOARD RECRUITING DENVER OFFICERS OUT OF LIBERAL CITY CREATES STIR “In recent years, we have become increasingly concerned with how our country has strayed from this Hamiltonian aspiration. We have seen judges across the political spectrum assume both “force” and “will” — Many Americans are worried judges are misusing their independence by imposing policy preferences on our country — all with no accountability.” They also noted Georgetown Law professor Brad Snyder “said it best” – “The Court does not have the last word on the Constitution.” ‘TRAITOR’ LIZ CHENEY WALLOPED BY WYOMING VOTERS FOR HARRIS ENDORSEMENT, BREAK FROM GOP In comments to Fox News Digital, Lummis said Americans elected Trump and did not select “liberal judges.” “I represent the people of Wyoming, and they have made it clear that they support President Trump’s agenda and want a government where their elected representatives make the laws,” she said. “Our delegation stands with President Trump and won’t be pushed around by far-left judicial activists who wish to further divide our country.” The jurists objecting to the Republicans’ silence cited calls to reject disinformation after the Jan. 6 Capitol riot and similarly recounted critiques from administration allies of judges, like James Boasberg, who have issued nationwide injunctions blocking Trump’s homeland security measures. In a missive entitled “The Rule of Law Matters,” they cited more virulent critiques of such judges, as well as a conservative op-ed decrying that “if impeachment is the remedy for every adverse judicial ruling, we wouldn’t have a judiciary left.” “These attacks are part of a growing effort to discredit, not just judges, but seemingly the American Rule of Law as we know it,” the original letter states. It was signed by about 100 jurists, including former Wyoming Democratic Gov. Michael Sullivan, former President Bill Clinton’s Irish ambassador. “Recent executive orders targeting prominent national law firms disfavored by the administration with severe retribution… has, as night follows day, resulted in yet more incendiary social media postings attacking the judiciary and openly encouraging the executive branch to disobey court orders.” In their response to the scores of jurists, Lummis, Sen. John Barrasso and Rep. Harriet Hageman condemned the fact the direct letter had also been distributed to the media and that the lawmakers would have collectively appreciated direct discussion. “We are disappointed you failed to express your concerns with us directly before rushing to publish your letter,” they wrote. “A robust discussion about addressing the challenges and concerns facing our nation would be more beneficial than attempting to score political points through the press.” CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP The complainants wrote that while there is populist sentiment for “radical change,” the “growing reckless disdain for the independence and security of our judiciary must be resisted by anyone sworn to uphold our Constitution. “That includes us, and it certainly includes you.” The lawmakers stood firm, however, on the idea that they are acting responsibly and within their legislative role. They cited their co-sponsorship of a bill that would ban most nationwide injunctions effecting change “across the ideological spectrum,” and not just those against Trump’s actions. Legislation highlighted by the lawmakers cited both conservative and liberal Supreme Court justices issuing criticisms of such nationwide injunctions. “The Supreme Court has consistently noted that political questions should be kept at arm’s length by the judiciary,” they wrote, as a Senate Judiciary Committee statement on the Judicial Relief Clarification Act quoted reservations from both Justices Clarence Thomas and Elena Kagan. Other jurists have, however, echoed Trump’s criticisms, including George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley, who told Fox News’ “The Ingraham Angle” that judges must remember they’ve been “appointed, not anointed.”
Social media erupts after AOC debuts another ‘strange’ accent at rally: ‘Kamala’s playbook’
Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez faced blowback from conservatives on social media this week after they accused her of putting on a fake accent at a rally. The progressive New York congresswoman held a rally in Nampa, Idaho, with Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., who caucuses with Democrats, on Monday where she reportedly drew over 12,000 people and caught the attention of conservatives with one particular clip where she was accused of deliberately changing her tone of voice. “Oh look, AOC is doing the interchangeable accents to fit the demographic she’s in front of,” conservative influencer account Gunther Eagleman wrote on X. “Did she take notes from Kamala?” “Kamala Harris just introduced yet another new accent,” conservative influencer Benny Johnson posted on X. “Sike, this is AOC. Seems to be using Kamala’s playbook. I guess she didn’t pay attention during the 2024 election.” AOC SLAPPED WITH ETHICS COMPLAINT OVER ‘TROUBLING EXPENSES’ MADE TO DANCE COMPANY “AOC is pretending to have some sort of strange accent,” Townhall.com posted on X. “This is exactly what Kamala Harris did on the campaign trail. Why do they do this?” “WATCH: AOC debuts new accent ahead of reported Presidential run,” Breaking 911 posted on X. “It’s worse than Kamala’s or Hillary.” FETTERMAN TAKES SWIPE AT AOC: ‘WE KEPT OUR GOVERNMENT OPEN. DEAL WITH IT’ Fox News Digital reached out to AOC’s office for comment. The comparisons to Harris originate from the presidential campaign trail last year when Harris was often criticized for using different accents while speaking to different crowds. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP Ocasio-Cortez has been touring the country with Sanders as part of a “Fighting Oligarchy” campaign criticizing Tesla CEO Elon Musk and the Trump administration overall. “Your presence here today is making Donald Trump and Elon Musk very nervous,” the 83-year-old Sanders said to loud cheers at a rally in Los Angeles, adding about 36,000 attended the event. The pair have also held rallies in Las Vegas; Tempe and Tuscon, Arizona; and Denver and Greeley, Colorado, and they have several upcoming rallies scheduled. Fox News Digital’s Brie Stimson contributed to this report
Top Trump agency reveals key reason why REAL ID will be enforced
EXCLUSIVE: Although the REAL ID deadline has been pushed numerous times, the Department of Homeland Security says stopping illegal immigration is a major reason why it’s holding firm to the current May 7 deadline. In a memo exclusively obtained by Fox News Digital, the department said part of the reason REAL ID will be enforced is to prevent those in the country illegally from flying – unless they are looking to self-deport on an international flight. “Under Biden, illegal aliens used non-compliant IDs from sanctuary cities to board flights, but REAL ID’s higher security standards make it nearly impossible to forge legitimate documents, ensuring only verified travelers can fly,” the memo states. BORDER CROSSINGS HIT RECORD LOW IN MARCH THANKS TO ‘VIGILANT’ WORK OF AGENTS: REPORT “This closes the gaping vulnerabilities Biden’s policies created, preventing criminals and potential terrorists from exploiting our aviation system, as seen during 9/11 when fraudulent IDs enabled attacks,” the memo continues. The agency emphasized that the measure prevents people in the country illegally from traveling within the U.S. “DHS and TSA are clear, the only place an illegal alien should be flying is home. Under Secretary Kristi Noem’s leadership, illegal aliens will be barred from domestic flights, with one exception: illegal aliens self-deporting on international flights will be allowed to board without a REAL ID, encouraging their exit from the U.S.,” it states. DHS said that during the Biden administration, 1.4 million “inadmissible aliens” were allowed into the country because of programs like CBP One and the Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans parole program, and over half a million flew into American airports as of August 2024, according to the memo. TOM HOMAN: MIGRANTS DEPORTED TO EL SALVADOR WERE ‘SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC SAFETY THREATS’ The department said 320,000 illegal immigrants were permitted to fly into 43 airports before flying to other parts of the country as a direct result of CBP One in 2023. DHS cited Fox News Digital’s reporting from 2022 where the Transportation Security Administration under Biden and former Homeland Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas allowed civil arrest warrants to be used as acceptable identification. CLICK HERE FOR MORE IMMIGRATION COVERAGE “For non-citizens and non-U.S. nationals who do not otherwise have acceptable forms of ID for presentation at security checkpoints, TSA may also accept certain DHS-issued forms, including ICE Form I-200 (Warrant for Arrest of an Alien),” a TSA spokesperson told Fox News at the time. Americans looking to fly domestically and enter some federal buildings will need a form of identification, and a passport can be used as an alternative. ANOTHER PRO-PALESTINE COLUMBIA PROTESTOR DETAINED BY ICE, SANDERS AND DEMS OUTRAGED The REAL ID Act was signed into law by former President George W. Bush in 2005. “These IDs keep our country safe because they help prevent fraud and they enhance security,” Noem said in a recent video. “Please do your part to protect our country, go today, and don’t delay.” The memo from DHS comes as sweeping changes have occurred under the Trump administration on immigration policies, including scrapping the CBP One app and replacing it with the CBP Home app meant for self-deportations. Meanwhile, federal immigration authorities have cracked down on alleged criminals who are in the country illegally, including sending many to El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center, which has led to numerous ongoing legal battles. Some have opposed the enforcement of REAL ID, which many people have gotten over the years if their license has a star or flag on it, for example. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP “As long as the pilot’s door is locked and no one has weapons, why do you care that someone who flies has government permission?” Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., tweeted on Monday. “Real ID provides no benefit, yet presents a serious risk to freedom. If a person can’t be trusted to fly without weapons, why are they roaming free?”
Trump directs agencies to follow Supreme Court rulings, as he continues to rein in administrative state
A new White House memo highlighting the top 10 Supreme Court rulings federal agencies must follow has legal experts optimistic about reining in the administrative state, while some litigators remain skeptical the directive will be enforced. “Any administration that really cares about making sure that they were following the law should be reviewing regulations,” Carrie Severino, president of Judicial Crisis Network, told Fox News Digital. “We want a government that isn’t just taking every bit of power that it can get away with, but one that wants to make sure the constitutional limits are guarded as well, which is why this memorandum is refreshing and novel in a good way.” The administration issued a memorandum on April 9 requiring agencies to rescind regulations not in line with 10 recent Supreme Court opinions on proper administrative agency functions. SUPREME COURT CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS SWOOPS IN TO SAVE TRUMP FIRING DECISION The memo, titled, “President Donald J. Trump Directs Repeal of Regulations That Are Unlawful Under 10 Recent Supreme Court Decisions,” says it is in line with a February executive order seeking to rein in the administrative state. The memo lists various Supreme Court cases aligned with Trump’s deregulatory agenda as well as the administration’s efforts to get rid of DEI initiatives. Among the cases listed are Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, West Virginia vs. EPA, and Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College. Both Loper Bright and West Virginia notably narrowed executive agencies’ authority in issuing rules and regulations affecting the American public. Likewise, Students for Fair Admissions rejected the use of affirmative action in university admissions. “The President is right: agencies must repeal regulations that the Supreme Court has deemed unlawful. The President continues to deliver on his promises to roll back regulations and government overreach crippling American enterprise,” White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers told Fox News Digital in a statement. Several of the cases listed are not retroactive, meaning regulations issued prior to these decisions being handed down will not be disturbed as a result of the opinions. However, experts say agencies can re-evaluate previous rules and regulations under the new standards imposed by the Supreme Court opinions. LAWSUIT TRACKER: NEW RESISTANCE BATTLING TRUMP’S SECOND TERM THROUGH ONSLAUGHT OF LAWSUITS TAKING AIM AT EOS “I think that that is good fodder, a good basis for a lot of agencies to go back and look, ‘Where have we created massive regulatory compliance burdens and structures that massively impact the economy or society on the basis of a very thin thread and where can we undo it?’” Daniel Huff, senior legal fellow at the American Path Initiative, told Fox News Digital. “And we can point to these elephants in mouse holes and when it’s reviewed in the future, they will say ‘Yes, that is a good rationale’ and it will be upheld.” Kara Rollins is a lawyer for the New Civil Liberties Alliance, the nonprofit organization that argued Relentless Inc. v. Dept. of Commerce in front of the high court – Loper’s companion case that sought to scale back the reach of the administrative state. Rollins told Fox News Digital the “retrospective look” these agencies will take toward previous regulations is not “misplaced.” However, Rollins raised concerns about the administration’s enforcement of the directive, noting that several related cases were already underway before the Supreme Court issued its rulings. “What happens to these cases that are currently active where DOJ or the agency is just taking the wrong position?” Rollins said. “Who’s looking at that? Who’s clearing out those cases and saying, in light of this memorandum, we’ve looked at our litigation position and we can no longer sustain it? And that’s the real sort of open question, particularly for litigators right now.” COURTROOM COMBAT: INSIDE THE FEDERAL JUDICIARY SYSTEM WHERE TRUMP’S AGENDA IS UNDER ASSAULT Rollins said that, as a litigator, her concern is agencies have yet to change positions when it comes to these Supreme Court opinions: “That sort of signals that there is a problem between what the president is saying he wants to have happen and what’s being effectuated on the ground.” In the memo, Trump directs agencies to employ the Administrative Procedure Act’s “good cause” exception “where appropriate,” which allows agencies to do away with the usual notice-and-comment rulemaking process in the interest of the public. The usual process requires time for public input on the proposed rule. Huff said there is “less of a need” to impose the regular notice-and-comment rulemaking process given that agencies will likely be reviewing previous rules rather than passing new ones. “They’re not adding new burdens. This isn’t new to people,” Huff said. “People already sort of know what’s there and it was there before. And we’re just turning back the clock. We’re putting it back to the way it was. We’re restoring the original status quo.” CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP Severino said there could be litigation over the use of the exception despite the fact that the language is “very broad.” “But I do think there are strong arguments for it because the laws must keep with the constitutional limits on government, and, of course, be in the public interest.”
Left-wing lawmaker calls Trump MAGA’s ‘buffoon of a leader’: ‘Thank me later’
Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Texas, who last week referred to President Donald Trump as a “mofo” — an abbreviated form of the profanity ‘motherf—er’ — has continued leveling colorful attacks against him. In a Monday night post on X she used words including “buffoon” and “orange.” “Y’all can keep wasting time on conspiracy theories aka lies about me OR start paying attention to things that actually impact your life like this,” she wrote when sharing a video in which wealthy investor Ray Dalio said he is concerned about the possibility of “something worse than a recession … ” LEFT-WING LAWMAKER CALLS TRUMP A ‘MOFO,’ SAYS SOME VOTERS ‘DISQUALIFIED’ KAMALA HARRIS FOR ‘HER RACE & OR SEX’ “PS Still Single, Childless, no granny drama, no new mysterious wealth (like those that may have engaged in INSIDER TRADING as Trump manipulated the market & produced more wealth for his rich friends), no random mansions, no shady donations (like Elon’s purchase of the Oval Office),” Crockett continued. “Unfortunately for MAGA… their buffoon of a leader is every ethical & criminal stereotype that they attribute to me, but the only one that fits the bill isn’t black, but instead orange,” she declared. “Thank me later for trying to educate you as your leader wants you left in the dark.” Fox News Digital reached out to Crockett’s office on Tuesday but did not receive a comment by the time of publication. The White House replied to a comment request on Tuesday by sending a previously reported statement from spokesperson Harrison Fields. “Crockett and her followers in the Democratic Party are simply all hammer and no nail. When she’s leading the Democrats in ‘oversight,’ that’s when you know the party is in shambles. Her constituents should DOGE her in the next election.” MEET THE ARMY VETERAN RUNNING TO UNSEAT EMERGING TRUMP RESISTANCE LEADER CROCKETT: ‘TEARING OUR COUNTRY DOWN’ Crockett said on MSNBC last week that “the fact that no one is questioning” Trump’s “mental acuity or fitness to serve is beyond wild to me.” Contrary to the congresswoman’s comments, a memo from the physician to the president states that “President Trump exhibits excellent cognitive and physical health and is fully fit to execute the duties of the Commander-in-Chief and Head of State.” However, the insults have been flying in both directions, with Trump blasting Crockett as well. REP. JASMINE CROCKETT SUGGESTS THE UNITED STATES NEEDS ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS BECAUSE ‘WE DONE PICKING COTTON’ CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP Trump called Crockett a “very low-IQ person and a lowlife” during an interview with radio host Vince Coglianese last month. “She can’t speak. She can’t get the words out of her mouth,” he said of Crockett, noting that he “can’t see her going very far in politics.” During remarks at a National Republican Congressional Committee event last week, the president said that if Crockett is the Democrats’ “new star” the party is in “serious trouble.”
President Trump weighs in on Senate primary between two GOP heavyweights in major red state
President Donald Trump weighed in on an already contentious Senate primary race in the most populous red state in the nation, saying he will make an endorsement decision “at the right time.” Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced his candidacy for the U.S. Senate while speaking on Fox News last week. Paxton, a conservative firebrand and outspoken supporter of Trump, is seeking to replace incumbent Sen. John Cornyn, an influential member of the GOP who previously served as the Party’s Senate whip and has held the seat since 2002. With both Paxton and Cornyn being considered leading members of the Republican Party, the race promises to be particularly messy. Paxton has accused the current senator of being a lukewarm supporter of Trump’s agenda, saying, “It’s time that we have another great senator that will actually stand up and fight for Republican values, fight for the values of the people of Texas and also support Donald Trump in the areas that he’s focused on in a very significant way.” TRUMP SAYS HE’S LOOKING AT CERTAIN TARIFF EXEMPTIONS FOR AUTOMAKERS: ‘THEY NEED A LITTLE BIT OF TIME’ For his part, Cornyn has dismissed the attorney general as a “fraud” motivated by “vanity and personal ambition.” Trump told reporters that both GOP senatorial candidates in Texas are “friends of mine” and “good men,” but he stopped short of issuing an endorsement of one over the other, at least for now. “Well, they’re both friends of mine,” said Trump. “They’re both good men, and I don’t know. We don’t, we don’t know who else is running, but these two, you know, Ken and John, they’re both friends of mine, so I’ll make a determination at the right time.” Since announcing his candidacy, Paxton has already garnered endorsements from Reps. Troy Nehls, R-Texas, and Lance Gooden, R-Texas, as well as around 250 state legislators and business leaders across the state, according to a spokesperson. TRUMP, OFFICIALS HAVE TENSE EXCHANGE WITH CNN REPORTER OVER DEPORTATION OF EL SALVADORAN NATIONAL Those endorsing Paxton are emphasizing his pledge to double down on his conservative agenda and “take a sledgehammer to the D.C. establishment.” One of Paxton’s supporters, conservative Texas Rep. Tony Tinderholt, called him “the most conservative attorney general in the nation,” saying he “will be a fantastic upgrade over John Cornyn.” Gooden, whose district is just east of Dallas, said he was endorsing Paxton because “it’s time for change in Texas,” adding that “Texans deserve a conservative champion who has a record of taking on the establishment, fighting to secure our border, and advancing the Trump agenda.” Meanwhile, Cornyn, who has been in the Senate for nearly 23 years, has the support of some of the Republican Party’s top leaders, including Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-South Dakota, Sen. Tim Scott, R-South Carolina, as well as the National Republican Senatorial Committee. TRUMP ORDERS MILITARY TO SEIZE PORTIONS OF SOUTHERN BORDER AMID IMMIGRATION CRACKDOWN Since Trump returned to the White House three months ago, Cornyn has been supportive of the president’s Cabinet nominees and agenda. Cornyn has emphasized previous corruption and bribery charges against Paxton, which in 2023 led to the attorney general being impeached by the Texas House of Representatives. Paxton was later acquitted of all charges by the Texas Senate. Paxton was indicted on securities fraud charges soon after taking office in 2015 and also came under investigation by the FBI over bribery and corruption allegations from former top staffers. The charges in the long-running federal corruption probe were dropped during the final weeks of the Biden administration. A spokesperson for Cornyn’s campaign asserted that Trump would be wise to endorse the senator, emphasizing his experience helping to lead the GOP. TRUMP’S ‘BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL’ FACES A TOUGH NEXT TEST IN CONGRESS “During his first term, John Cornyn voted with President Trump more than 95% of current Senators, securing the votes for his biggest accomplishments as his Whip,” the representative told Fox News Digital. “Democrats are trying to destroy President Trump,” the representative went on. “And he and Texas need a battle-tested conservative who knows how to protect his agenda in the Senate and won’t be outsmarted by [Minority Leader] Chuck Schumer.” Paxton, however, posits that Cornyn’s enthusiasm for Trump is all an act. “We’re all glad John Cornyn suddenly found religion and is embracing President Trump’s policies now that he’s facing a primary challenge,” Paxton told Fox News Digital. “But if he’s re-elected, he’ll immediately go back to being the same old John who said President Trump’s ‘time has passed him by’ and fought to stop the President’s America First agenda.” DOJ INDICATES TRUMP ADMIN NOT OBLIGATED TO RETURN MAN DEPORTED TO EL SALVADOR, PUSHING BACK ON JUDICIARY He pointed out that he was one of only two elected officials present with Trump when he announced he was running for president for a third time. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP “I was grateful to join my friend Troy Nehls as one of two elected officials at President Trump’s 2024 announcement and have always been proud to stand with him,” he said. “I will continue to support the President and work with him to secure our border, defend the integrity of our elections, and protect our 2nd Amendment—unlike John Cornyn who has tried to undermine President Trump every step of the way.” “I’m incredibly grateful to have the support of over 250 conservative leaders from across our great state,” Paxton went on. “While John Cornyn is relying on the Washington establishment to save him, I’m proud that my campaign is powered by the grassroots and the people of Texas.” As Cornyn and Paxton vie for the GOP nomination, former Democratic Rep. Colin Allred, who launched a surprisingly competitive but ultimately unsuccessful challenge against Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, in 2024, is weighing another run in 2026. Fox News Digital’s Paul Steinhauser contributed to this report.
Mark Zuckerberg back in US court amid push to break up Meta
The last time the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) was able to break up a major corporation was more than four decades ago, with the split-up of AT&T. The blockbuster antitrust case against Meta — the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp — has kicked off in Washington, DC, the United States. Founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg takes the stand for the second straight day today. The landmark case accuses Meta of taking over Instagram and WhatsApp before they could become competitors. The suit is the culmination of a nearly six-year investigation into whether the social media giant broke US competition laws in acquiring Instagram and WhatsApp. At stake is the future of Meta’s $1.4 trillion advertising business and the prospect of having to spin off its hugely popular services into separate companies. Zuckerberg takes political strategy The federal court trial in Washington has dashed Zuckerberg’s hopes that the return of US President Donald Trump to the White House would see the government let up on the enforcement of antitrust law against Big Tech. Zuckerberg, the world’s third-richest person, has made repeated visits to the White House as he tried to persuade the president to choose settlement instead of fighting the trial. Advertisement As part of his lobbying efforts, Zuckerberg contributed to Trump’s inauguration fund and overhauled content moderation policies. He also purchased a $23m mansion in Washington in what was seen as a bid to spend more time close to the centre of political power. But the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has shown no interest in letting up its push against Meta. Trump-appointed FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson said in an interview on Fox Business that the agency would not let a Meta-like monopoly arise again. Ferguson’s push is not a far cry from the previous FTC Chairwoman, Lina Khan, who under former US President Joe Biden was known to be tough on Big Tech. The case could see the Facebook owner forced to divest Instagram and WhatsApp, which have grown into global powerhouses since their buyouts. The suit was originally filed in December 2020, during the first Trump administration, and all eyes were on whether the Republican president, on his return to the White House, would ask the FTC to stand down. More than a decade of acquisitions Central to the case is Facebook’s 2012 $1bn purchase of Instagram — then a small but promising photo-sharing app that now boasts two billion active users. An email from Zuckerberg cited by the FTC showed him depicting Instagram’s emergence as “really scary” and adding that this was “why we might want to consider paying a lot of money for this”. Boxes of documents pertaining to Meta’s acquisitions arrive on the first day of a historic antitrust trial in Washington, DC, Monday, April 14, 2025 [Nathan Howard /AP Photo] In his first day of testimony on Monday, Zuckerberg downplayed those exchanges as early talk before plans for Instagram came together. Advertisement But the FTC argues that Meta’s $19bn WhatsApp acquisition in 2014 followed the same pattern, with Zuckerberg fearing the messaging app could either transform into a social network or be purchased by a competitor. Meta’s defence attorneys counter that substantial investments transformed these acquisitions into the blockbusters they are today. They also highlight that Meta’s apps are free for users and face fierce competition. FTC attorney Daniel Matheson said in opening remarks on Monday that “they decided that competition is too hard and it would be easier to buy out their rivals than to compete with them.” Meta pushes back Meta attorney Mark Hansen countered in his first salvo that “acquisitions to improve and grow an acquired firm” are not unlawful in the US, saying that is what Facebook did. A key part of the courtroom battle will be how the FTC defines Meta’s market. The US government argues that Facebook and Instagram are dominant players in apps that provide a way to connect with family and friends, a category that does not include TikTok and YouTube. But Meta disagrees. “The evidence at trial will show what every 17-year-old in the world knows: Instagram, Facebook and WhatsApp compete with Chinese-owned TikTok, YouTube, X, iMessage and many others,” a spokesperson told the news agency Reuters. If the FTC is ultimately successful in its efforts to break up Meta, it would be the first time in 40 years that the agency would have forced a corporate breakup. In the early 1980s, the FTC forced telecommunications company AT&T to split apart. Advertisement Adblock test (Why?)
Syria’s al-Sharaa meets with Qatar’s Emir in Doha
[unable to retrieve full-text content] Syria’s President Ahmad al-Sharaa met with Qatar’s Emir Sheikh Tamim al-Thani on his first official visit to Doha.
Texas House Democrats could hold GOP priorities hostage to force statewide school vouchers vote
From The Blast: More than 50 House Democrats have signed on to a plan to spike all constitutional amendments unless the House allows voters to decide whether school vouchers will be legalized.
Mayra Flores to challenge Henry Cuellar in the 28th District
Cuellar is awaiting a criminal trial later this year over charges including bribery and money laundering.