Newsom touts California’s numerous legal fights with Trump administration in final State of the State address
California Gov. Gavin Newsom used his final State of the State address Thursday to spotlight the state’s court fights with the federal government, saying the state has filed dozens of lawsuits against the Trump administration. The Democrat framed the legal battles as a dispute over presidential authority, telling lawmakers and attendees that “no one, particularly the president of the United States, stands above the law.” “We’ve gone to court and, of course, protect our people, pushing back against this executive overreach,” Newsom said. The governor pointed to litigation filed during a special session and tied the legal efforts to what he described as federal actions that harmed Californians. NEWSOM INVOKES SCRIPTURE IN ATTACK ON GOP OVER SHUTDOWN AFFECTING FOOD ASSISTANCE: ‘CRUELTY IS THE POLICY’ “Fifty-two lawsuits have been filed, funded by you, by the way, in this special session that all of you led,” Newsom said, adding that the cases involved “about $168 billion in illegally frozen federal resources that belong to our schools, that belong to our hospitals, that belong to our seniors.” Newsom said the court strategy has already produced results. “We have won the request for emergency relief,” he said, adding that California has “affirmed the Constitution of the United States as the supreme law of the land.” NEWSOM SAYS TRUMP IS ONE OF THE ‘MOST DESTRUCTIVE’ PRESIDENTS OF HIS LIFETIME: ‘THIS GUY IS RECKLESS’ Addressing President Donald Trump, Newsom said, “You can’t cut off critical food assistance for millions of people,” adding, “You can’t send the military into American cities without justification, and you cannot cruelly and illegally cut off funding for medical research, homeland security, or disaster response.” Newsom’s emphasis on legal challenges comes as the Trump administration has launched a federal probe into alleged fraud tied to California programs, including homelessness spending, with a top federal prosecutor publicly criticizing the state’s oversight. Newsom’s office has rejected those accusations, saying the governor has blocked fraud and protected taxpayers. Later in the address, Newsom turned to homelessness and urged counties to take a more aggressive approach. TRUMP ADMIN SUES OVER CALIFORNIA LAW BANNING ICE FROM WEARING FACE MASKS TO SHIELD IDENTITIES “So I say this with love and respect to the counties — no more excuses. It’s time to bring people off the streets and out of encampments,” he said. Newsom defended California’s high-speed rail project as well, calling it “the nation’s first high speed rail system.” “Full environmental clearance is done,” Newsom said, while claiming “more than 60 miles of guideway have been completed ready for immediate track lane in the Central Valley.” On housing, Newsom criticized large investors, warning about “institutional investors that are snatching up homes by the hundreds and thousands at a time.” “These investors are crushing the dream of homeownership,” he said, adding, “I think it’s shameful that we allow private equity firms… become some of the biggest landlords here in our cities.” Republican leaders responded critically to Newsom’s remarks. California Senate Minority Leader Brian Jones called the address an “airbrushed spin job,” accusing the governor of “working hard to pull the wool over the eyes of the nation.” Assemblyman James Gallagher likewise dismissed the speech as “more of the same,” arguing it was time for what he described as a “third wave politics” of both parties working together to solve California’s problems. The statewide election to replace term-limited Gov. Newsom is scheduled for November 2026. Newsom’s office did not provide additional comment beyond clarifying the lawsuit figure to Fox News Digital regarding Thursday’s State of the State address. Fox News Digital’s Madison Colombo contributed to this story.
Fox News Politics Newsletter: Jeffries slams Noem over Minneapolis shooting response
Welcome to the Fox News Politics newsletter, with the latest updates on the Trump administration, Capitol Hill and more Fox News politics content. Here’s what’s happening… -National security experts sound alarm over CCP-linked land ownership near US military bases: ‘Unthinkable’ -Mamdani adviser, Warren in the hot seat as collapse of Roomba maker shifts data to China -Trump backs ICE agent, reviews video with NYT reporters after Minneapolis shooting Democratic leaders in Congress condemned the fatal shooting of Renee Nicole Good in Minneapolis on Thursday, calling for immediate investigations and dismissing the narrative of the shooting provided by President Donald Trump’s administration. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., made the statement joined by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., during a Thursday morning press conference. Jeffries condemned Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem as a “stone-cold liar,” while Schumer said he doesn’t trust the current administration to adequately investigate the shooting. “Let me first say that the killing of Renee Nicole Good was an abomination, a disgrace. And blood is clearly on the hands of those individuals within the administration who have been pushing an extreme policy that has nothing to do with immigration enforcement connected to removing violent felons from this country,” Jeffries said…READ MORE. HOLIDAY ROUNDUP: DHS nabs sexual abusers, drug dealers in worst-of-the-worst Christmastime operation POLITICAL PILE-ON: Vance rips Walz after Civil War remarks following ICE shooting, claims governor ‘enabled fraud’ NATIONAL CRACKDOWN: JD Vance announces multi-state fraud task force in wake of Minnesota scandal ‘SIMPLE QUESTION’: Vance demand Democrats answer whether ICE officer in Minneapolis shooting was ‘wrong in defending his life’ RED LINE: AG Pam Bondi warns Minnesota protesters after ICE shooting: ‘Do not test our resolve’ LEVY LIMITS: Trump’s tariff boom hits record highs as Supreme Court showdown looms BIG BUILDUP: Trump calls for $1.5T defense budget to build ‘dream military’ GOP MUTINY: Dozens of House Republicans defy Trump, join Democrats in failed veto override effort SHUTDOWN CLOCK: House passes nearly $180B funding package after conservative rebellion over Minnesota fraud fears RULE OF LAW: House Dem introduces bill after Venezuela operation to block presidents from bypassing Congress GOP MUTINY: Trump blasts GOP war powers defectors, says they ‘should never be elected to office again’ $9 BILLION GONE: Senate Republicans eye reconciliation to address Minnesota fraud scandal DEM EXODUS: Hoyer won’t seek re-election, says House has strayed from founders’ vision ‘NO RETREAT’: Top Republican with ‘army’ of supporters makes major announcement as Shapiro launches re-elect campaign ‘UNCLEAN’ WALZ: Blagojevich tells Walz if he didn’t do it, ‘go down fighting’ in fraud case: ‘He’s quitting/Makes me think his hands are unclean’ BILLION DOLLAR BIAS: Legal experts warn of ‘biggest scandal in litigation’ if SCOTUS doesn’t end ‘hometowning’ of lawsuits against US oil NOT ‘LAWFUL’: Federal judge disqualifies US attorney, tosses subpoenas targeting NY AG Letitia James Get the latest updates on the Trump administration and Congress, exclusive interviews and more on FoxNews.com.
Supreme Court tariff ruling has Trump administration, US businesses bracing for impact
The Supreme Court could rule as early as Friday on President Donald Trump’s use of an emergency law to unilaterally impose sweeping tariffs on most U.S. trading partners, a closely watched case with major implications for businesses and the president himself. At issue is the president’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose two sweeping sets of tariffs, including the 10% global tariffs and the higher, so-called “reciprocal” tariffs in early April. Lower courts had ruled that Trump exceeded his authority in using IEEPA as a means of quickly enacting those import fees, prompting the Supreme Court to take up the case on an expedited basis last year. A decision is expected by June at the latest. US COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE SIDES WITH TRUMP IN TARIFF CASE But justices on the high court, including Trump’s own appointees, appeared skeptical of the administration’s claim during oral arguments that the IEEPA gives a sitting president the authority to unilaterally impose tariffs, leaving open the question of what might happen if the high court rules against the president. Trump, for his part, has described the matter as “life and death,” and senior administration officials have warned for months of dire economic consequences if the high court were to undo the tariffs enacted by Trump, which have remained in place as the courts considered the case on its merits. But the short answer, experts told Fox News Digital, is that not much would change immediately, and it would almost certainly involve more litigation. In the months since the high court reviewed the consolidated case, Learning Resources, Inc, and V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. Trump, hundreds of businesses have filed new cases against the Trump administration over IEEPA, aimed at clawing back the higher import duties they’ve shouldered since his tariffs took force. The U.S. collected more than $133 billion in IEEPA tariff duties as of mid-December, according to data published by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency last month. And, assuming the Supreme Court does not specifically outline a remedy portion of its ruling for the executive branch to follow, the cases will be punted back to the lower courts to chart a path forward, lawyers for the new plaintiffs said. “There’s a group of us working with the Department of Justice on getting a case management plan implemented,” Erik Smithweiss, a trade lawyer representing some of the companies that have filed the new tariff lawsuits, told Fox News Digital in an interview. SUPREME COURT TO WEIGH TRUMP TARIFF POWERS IN BLOCKBUSTER CASE “In the event the tariffs are found to be unlawful, the Court of International Trade (CIT) is going to manage these thousands of lawsuits and many more that may be coming.” Trump, for his part, has railed against that outcome, which he described in a Truth Social post as a “National Security catastrophe.” Lawyers for the Trump administration argued in court that the IEEPA law in question allows a president to act in response to “unusual and extraordinary threats” and in cases where a national emergency has been declared. Trump has claimed that deep and “sustained” trade deficits amount to a national emergency, allowing him, in the lawyers’ view, to invoke IEEPA. Plaintiffs counter that, in the 50 years since its passage, the law has never been used by a president to impose tariffs. They argue that permitting Trump to use the law to enact tariffs would drastically expand his powers at the expense of other branches of government. Others were more cautious about the possible impact. TRUMP WARNS SUPREME COURT TARIFF SHOWDOWN IS ‘LIFE OR DEATH’ FOR AMERICA “It’s a fascinating situation because it’s super important. But, in the short run, economically, this doesn’t matter a huge deal,” Philip Luck, the director of the economics program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), told Fox News Digital in an interview. “It matters in the sense that, yes, if this comes down, some goods will become cheaper,” Luck said when asked what would happen if the Supreme Court ruled against Trump’s use of IEEPA to impose his tariffs. “Some exporters will be able to export to the United States more cheaply.” On its own, though, the ruling is unlikely to stop the Trump administration from imposing the tariffs via other mechanisms at its disposal, including Section 232, by which the administration can enact industry-wide tariffs for a set period of time, or under Section 301, which allows the U.S. Trade Representative’s office to enact tariffs at a president’s direction in response to countries that are determined to have “discriminatory” trade practices towards U.S. businesses. “More broadly, so long as this administration is intent on raising barriers to a broad set of important goods, they will be able to do that again,” Luck said. “A few sectoral tariffs onto very broad sectors and a few country-level tariffs — if you levy tariffs on our large trading partners — cover some 90% of our trade.”
17 Republicans rebel against House GOP leaders, join Dems to pass Obamacare extension
The House of Representatives passed a bill to revive and extend COVID-19 pandemic-era enhanced Obamacare subsidies in a major victory for Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y. Seventeen House Republicans broke ranks with GOP leaders to support the legislation after Democrats were successful in forcing a vote via a mechanism called a privileged resolution. The bill passed 230-196. A discharge petition is a mechanism for getting legislation considered on the House floor even if the majority’s leadership is opposed to it, provided the petition gets a majority of House lawmakers’ signatures. CONGRESS FAILS TO SAVE OBAMACARE SUBSIDIES AFTER SHUTDOWN FIGHT, PREMIUMS SET TO SURGE Jeffries filed a discharge petition late last year, which was then signed by four House Republicans — helping it clinch the critical majority threshold. Five more House Republicans joined Democrats in a vote Wednesday evening to advance the legislation for final consideration Thursday. The 17 Republicans who voted for the legislation were Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Pa.; Mike Lawler, R-N.Y.; Rob Bresnahan, R-Pa.; Ryan Mackenzie, R-Pa.; Mike Carey, R-Ohio; Monica De La Cruz, R-Texas; Andrew Garbarino, R-N.Y.; Jeff Hurd, R-Colo.; Dave Joyce, R-Ohio; Tom Kean Jr., R-N.J., Nick LaLota, R-N.Y., Max Miller, R-Ohio; Zach Nunn, R-Iowa; Maria Salazar, R-Fla.; Dave Valadao, R-Calif.; Derrick Van Orden, R-Wis.; and Rob Wittman, R-Va. It underscores the perilously slim margins Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., is governing with. House Republicans hold just a two-vote majority with full attendance on both sides, numbers that could easily shift when lawmakers are absent for personal or health reasons. As Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., put to reporters on Wednesday morning, “We are one flu season away from losing the majority.” The successful vote on Thursday is a blow for Johnson, who argued for weeks that the majority of House Republicans were opposed to extending the COVID-19 pandemic-era tax subsidies. But a significant number of GOP moderates were frustrated that their party leaders in the House and Senate had done little to avert a price hike for millions of Americans’ insurance premiums. A Democrat-controlled Congress voted twice, in 2020 and in 2021, to enhance Obamacare subsidies to give more people access to federal healthcare during the pandemic. SEN JIM JUSTICE SAYS REPUBLICANS ARE ‘LOUSY’ AT KNOWING WHAT EVERYDAY AMERICANS THINK ABOUT HEALTHCARE Those subsidies were only extended through 2025, however. The vast majority of Republicans believe the subsidies are a COVID-era relic of a long-broken federal healthcare system. Conservatives argued that the relatively small percentage of Americans who rely on Obamacare meant that an extension would do little to ease rising health costs that people across the country are experiencing. But a core group of moderates has been arguing that a failure to extend a reformed version of them would force millions of Americans to grapple with skyrocketing healthcare costs this year. Those moderates were also frustrated with Jeffries for not working with Republicans on a bipartisan solution to the subsidies but felt they were left with little choice but to support Democrats’ bid in the end. House Republicans passed a healthcare bill in mid-December aimed at lowering those costs for a broader swath of Americans, but that legislation has not been taken up in the Senate. There’s also little chance the three-year extension will pass the upper chamber, however. Similar legislation led by Senate Democrats failed to reach the necessary 60-vote threshold to advance in December.
Cameroon vs Morocco: AFCON 2025 – team news, start time and lineups
Who: Cameroon vs MoroccoWhat: CAF Africa Cup of NationsWhere: Prince Moulay Abdellah Stadium in Rabat, MoroccoWhen: Friday, January 9 at 8pm (19:00 GMT)How to follow: We’ll have all the build-up on Al Jazeera Sport from 16:00 GMT in advance of our live score and text commentary stream. Few gave Cameroon much of a chance in the Africa Cup of Nations after off-the-field issues marred their build-up to the tournament but the Indomitable Lions stood firm in the face of adversity to reach the quarterfinals in Morocco. The five-time champions are up against the hosts in Friday’s last-eight tie, knowing the pressure is firmly on the North Africans as they look to win a first AFCON title in 50 years in front of their home supporters. With high-profile players such as Brahim Diaz, Achraf Hakimi, Bryan Mbeumo and Carlos Baleba involved, there will be no shortage of talent on display in Rabat. Here’s everything you need to know about Cameroon vs Morocco: What happened in Cameroon’s camp before the AFCON 2025? Cameroon have spent the last 18 months embroiled in a bizarre battle of wills between their federation, headed by four-time African Footballer of the Year Samuel Eto’o, and the sports ministry, which employs the coach. Head coach Marc Brys was employed against Eto’o’s wishes, and the pair sparred publicly throughout the 21 months that the Belgian managed the team. Brys had the backing of the government, which pays the team’s costs, leaving a frustrated Eto’o undermining his coach whenever he could but being unable to get rid of him. Advertisement Ultimately, Cameroon, who have been to more FIFA World Cups than any other African nation, had a dismal qualifying campaign and failed to make the cut for the 2026 edition. World Cup qualification failure, combined with a landslide re-election win for Eto’o at about the same time, saw support for Brys suddenly fade, and he was fired three weeks before the AFCON. In his place, the unheralded David Pagou was appointed new coach, and a squad for AFCON was selected without captain Vincent Aboubakar or goalkeeper Andre Onana, who had previously expressed support for the sports minister. How did Cameroon reach the AFCON quarterfinals? Cameroon finished runners-up in Group F with two wins and a draw. They were tied on seven points with the Ivory Coast, but settled for the second spot on account of fewer goals scored than the table toppers. In the round of 16, Cameroon beat South Africa 2-1, thanks to goals from Junior Tchamadeu and Christian Kofane. For Cameroon, reaching the last eight means their AFCON is already a success after a chaotic build-up [File: AFP] What happened in Morocco’s camp? Despite being tipped as overwhelming favourites, the World Cup 2022 semifinalists faced early criticism after a nervy opening-day win over minnows Comoros and a draw with Mali, before restoring confidence with a convincing 3-0 victory over Zambia in their final group match. Coach Walid Regragui had apologised to frustrated fans for the team’s underwhelming performance, saying, “Moroccans are naturally emotional, they need confidence.” Captain Hakimi urged fans to back them all the way through. “If the fans are behind us we can be champions of Africa together,” he said. How did Morocco reach the quarterfinals? Morocco topped Group A with a similar record, bagging two wins and a draw for seven points. They started their knockout campaign with a 1-0 win over Tanzania in the round of 16. Who will the winner face in the next round? The winner of the Cameroon vs Morocco match will face the winner of the Algeria vs Nigeria match in the semifinals. That game will be held on January 14 in Rabat. Who are Cameroon’s best players? Cameroon have not been among the most free-scoring sides, but a handful of individuals have stepped up to the task. Teenage forward Christian Kofane has been the standout player, scoring twice at the tournament, including a decisive strike in the round-of-16 victory, to underline his growing importance to the Indomitable Lions. Cameroon were also fortunate during the group stage, benefitting from two own goals that helped keep their campaign on track. Advertisement Beyond Kofane, goals have come from Tchamadeu and Etta Eyong, while established star Bryan Mbeumo and emerging talent Carlos Baleba have both impressed, earning Player of the Match awards for their influential displays. Who are Morocco’s best players? Right winger Brahim Diaz has been Morocco’s standout performer at the AFCON 2025. The Real Madrid player is the tournament’s top scorer with four goals, finding the net in each of Morocco’s four matches and underlining his status as their most decisive attacking threat. Striker Ayoub El Kaabi has also caught the eye, with his acrobatic finishes drawing admiration from fans and pundits alike, chipping in with two goals to bolster Morocco’s front line. Achraf Hakimi, widely regarded as the world’s best right-back, missed the first two matches due to an ankle injury, but is back to full match fitness, having made his first start of the tournament in the first knockout fixture. Although all eyes were on their popular right-back Achraf Hakimi before the tournament, it’s Brahim Diaz who has emerged as Morocco’s star performer at AFCON 2025 [Amr Abdallah Dalsh/Reuters] Cameroon and Morocco form guides Cameroon: W-W-D-W-L Morocco: W-W-D-W-W Head-to-head Cameroon and Morocco have met in 13 previous encounters across competitive and friendly games. Cameroon dominate the head-to-head record with seven wins, while four games ended in a draw. Morocco have won only twice. When did Cameroon and Morocco last meet? The teams last met in February 2021 at the Africa Nations Championship, commonly known as CHAN, in a semifinal tie. Morocco won that game 4-0. Have Cameroon ever won an AFCON title? Yes. Cameroon are one of Africa’s major forces in the tournament. They have won the title five times: 1984, 1988, 2000, 2002 and 2017. They are the second-most successful team in AFCON behind Egypt, who have seven titles. Have Morocco ever won an AFCON title? Yes. Morocco won their
Why Trump says getting Greenland is about defence
[unable to retrieve full-text content] President Donald Trump insists the US needs to take over Greenland as a matter of national security. Here’s why.
US Senate passes measure to restrict Trump’s military actions in Venezuela
Published On 8 Jan 20268 Jan 2026 Click here to share on social media share2 Share A resolution that would block US President Donald Trump from taking further military action against Venezuela without congressional authorisation has passed in the Senate by a vote of 52-47. With the measure receiving a simple majority in Thursday’s vote, it will move ahead to the House. Days after US forces abducted Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro in a dramatic military raid in Caracas, senators voted on the latest in a series of war powers measures introduced since the administration ramped up military pressure on the country with attacks on boats off its coast in September. Republicans have blocked all of the measures, but the last vote was just 49-51, as two senators from Trump’s party joined Democrats in backing a resolution in November. Administration officials had told lawmakers at that time that they did not plan to change the government or conduct strikes on Venezuelan territory. More to come… Adblock test (Why?)
Delhi-NCR’s cold wave continues as it records season’s lowest temperature at…, AQI reaches…
The minimum temperature recorded in the city was 5.8 degrees Celsius. The Air Quality Index (AQI) showed signs of improvement, recording 276 on Thursday morning, compared to 336 on Wednesday morning.
High-voltage drama in Kolkata: ED raids I-PAC, CM Mamata Banerjee accuses Amit Shah of ‘misusing agency’
ED raided I-PAC’s Salt Lake office and co-founder Pratik Jain’s Loudon Street home amid BJP-TMC tensions. Mamata Banerjee and Police Commissioner visited the residence and blamed Amit Shah.
Indian national Rakki Kisan Gopal safely evacuated from Yemen’s Socotra Island, returns on special flight, was stranded there due to…
An Indian national, Rakki Kisan Gopal was evacuated from Socotra Island in Yemen, who was stranded there for few weeks due to escalating violence and and military tensions in the country. Gopal returned to India via Saudi Arabia’s Jeddah on January 8, 2026.