U.S. Supreme Court will hear challenge to Texas’ age verification requirement for porn sites
A state law passed last year requires pornographic websites to adopt age-verification measures, leading sites like Pornhub to block user access in Texas.
Judge denies Texas’ attempt to shut down El Paso migrant shelter
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s office has accused Annunciation House, which operates a network of migrant shelters, of human smuggling.
Democratic Congressman Lloyd Doggett calls on Biden to withdraw from presidential race
Doggett, 77, is the first Democratic member of Congress to call for Biden to withdraw from the ticket since his debate.
How to stay safe in the Texas heat
As climate change pushes temperatures higher, it’s even more important to remember how dangerous the heat is and take steps to protect yourself.
5 key lines from Supreme Court Trump immunity decision
The Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling Monday in Trump v. United States, concluding that a president has substantial immunity from prosecution for official acts committed while in office, but not for unofficial acts. The decision clarifies whether a former president can be criminally charged by prosecutors for acts committed while in office. Former President Trump brought the question before the court after Special Counsel Jack Smith accused him of various crimes related to Trump’s attempt to challenge the results of the 2020 presidential election. Smith has charged Trump following a months-long investigation into whether the former president was involved in the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot and interfered in the 2020 election result. Trump has pleaded not guilty to all charges and argued he should be immune from prosecution from official acts done as president of the U.S. Here are 5 key lines from the ruling: In a 6-3 decision in the case, the high court sent the matter back down to a lower court, as the justices did not apply the ruling to whether or not former President Trump is immune from prosecution regarding actions related to efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election. TRUMP IMMUNITY CASE: SUPREME COURT RULES EX-PRESIDENTS HAVE SUBSANTIAL PROTECTION FROM PROSECUTION Roberts, writing for the majority, said “The President enjoys no immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the President does is official. “The President is not above the law,” Roberts continued. “But Congress may not criminalize the President’s conduct in carrying out the responsibilities of the Executive Branch under the Constitution. And the system of separated powers designed by the Framers has always demanded an energetic, independent Executive. “The President therefore may not be prosecuted for exercising his core constitutional powers, and he is entitled, at a minimum, to a presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts,” he added. “That immunity applies equally to all occupants of the Oval Office, regardless of politics, policy, or party.” Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, wrote in a dissenting opinion that “in every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law.” “Let the President violate the law, let him exploit the trappings of his office for personal gain, let him use his official power for evil ends. Because if he knew that he may one day face liability for breaking the law, he might not be as bold and fearless as we would like him to be,” she wrote. “That is the majority’s message today. “Even if these nightmare scenarios never play out, and I pray they never do, the damage has been done,” Sotomayor added. “The relationship between the President and the people he serves has shifted irrevocably.” Roberts responded to the liberal justices: “Coming up short on reasoning, the dissents repeatedly level variations of the accusation that the Court has rendered the President ‘above the law.’” “Like everyone else, the President is subject to prosecution in his unofficial capacity. But unlike anyone else, the President is a branch of government, and the Constitution vests in him sweeping powers and duties. Accounting for that reality — and ensuring that the President may exercise those powers forcefully, as the Framers anticipated he would — does not place him above the law; it preserves the basic structure of the Constitution from which that law derives.” BIDEN SLAMS SCOTUS PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY RULING, IGNORES QUESTIONS ABOUT DROPPING OUT “The dissents’ positions in the end boil down to ignoring the Constitution’s separation of powers and the Court’s precedent and instead fear mongering on the basis of extreme hypotheticals about a future where the President “feels empowered to violate federal criminal law,” he wrote. Thomas, who was among the majority, wrote in the decision that “in this case, there has been much discussion about ensuring that a President ‘is not above the law.’ “But, as the Court explains, the President’s immunity from prosecution for his official acts is the law,” he continued. “The Constitution provides for ‘an energetic executive,’ because such an Executive is ‘essential to… the security of liberty.’” “Respecting the protections that the Constitution provides for the Office of the Presidency secures liberty. In that same vein, the Constitution also secures liberty by separating the powers to create and fill offices,” Thomas also said. “And, there are serious questions whether the Attorney General has violated that structure by creating an office of the Special Counsel that has not been established by law.” In her dissenting opinion, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote that she “simply cannot abide the majority’s senseless discarding of a model of accountability for criminal acts that treats every citizen of this country as being equally subject to the law — as the Rule of Law requires. “That core principle has long prevented our Nation from devolving into despotism. Yet the Court now opts to let down the guardrails of the law for one extremely powerful category of citizen: any future President who has the will to flout Congress’s established boundaries,” she added. Fox News’ Brooke Singman contributed to this report.
Biden’s ex-press secretary Jen Psaki to sit down with House GOP panel probing chaotic Afghanistan withdrawal
Former White House press secretary Jen Psaki has agreed to sit down with House GOP investigators probing the Biden administration’s withdrawal from Afghanistan, Fox News Digital has learned. Psaki will appear for a closed-door transcribed interview with the House Foreign Affairs Committee on July 26 as part of the panel’s long-running probe into the chaotic August 2021 operation, according to a letter sent to the chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, the content of which was obtained by Fox News Digital. White House deputy counsel Rachel Cotton wrote in the letter that the committee’s request to hear from Psaki “raises serious separation-of-powers and Executive Branch confidentiality issues.” “Nevertheless, as an extraordinary accommodation, we will authorize Ms. Psaki to participate in a voluntary transcribed interview accompanied by personal counsel and the White House Counsel’s Office subject to appropriate terms and conditions for the interview,” the letter said. “In order to allow the White House Counsel’s Office to assess possible Executive Branch confidentiality issues that may arise during Ms. Psaki’s interview, please provide a list of topics the Committee would like to raise with Ms. Psaki or arrange a call with the White House Counsel’s Office to discuss those topics.” GOLD STAR FAMILY SPEAKS OUT AFTER BIDEN FALSELY CLAIMS NO TROOPS HAVE DIED ON HIS WATCH: ‘SHAME ON YOU’ Cotton went on to say the White House expects the lawmakers “to follow the longstanding practice of engaging with the White House to help us better understand the scope of the testimony sought,” so they can best cooperate while remaining “consistent with Executive Branch confidentiality interests.” Fox News Digital reached out to Psaki’s personal attorney for comment. Psaki was President Biden’s first White House press secretary, serving in the role during the U.S. military’s two-week operation ending its presence in Afghanistan after 20 years. A source close to the committee’s Republican majority told Fox News Digital that investigators believe she made multiple untrue claims in that role, and want to find out how much blame she shares for making those allegedly false statements while performing her role as a spokesperson. The committee also plans to confront her with gaps in what she told reporters in the White House briefing room and information others involved in the withdrawal said they told the White House at the time, the source suggested. They will be looking into whether Psaki knowingly made misleading claims, as Republicans suggest, or whether inaccurate information was fed to her, the source said. BIDEN MAKES STUNNING OMISSION WHILE CLAIMING NO TROOPS DIED ‘ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD’ ON HIS WATCH Specifically, GOP investigators want to know whether the Biden administration – including the State Department and the Department of Defense – failed to provide accurate assessments to Psaki or, alternatively, was the information being channeled through national security adviser Jake Sullivan, who may have misrepresented agency inputs to the White House press secretary. The source said Republicans are looking into whether the Biden administration was choosing politics over policy, potentially hiding the truth from the American people. During last week’s presidential debate, Biden made the stunning omission of the 13 U.S. service members killed during the Afghanistan withdrawal, claiming: “Truth is I’m the only president this century that doesn’t have any – this decade – that didn’t have any troops dying anywhere in the world, like [President Trump] did.” Blasting Biden on the House floor the next day, McCaul said, “That is a lie, Mr. President. I’d like to remind President Biden of the 13 service members that died on his watch during a terrorist attack at Abbey Gate on August 26, 2021, during his deadly and chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan.” He then read the names of those killed: Marine Lance Cpl. David Lee Espinoza, Marine Sgt. Nicole Gee, Marine Staff Sgt. Darin Taylor Hoover, Army Staff Sgt. Ryan Knauss, Marine Cpl. Hunter Lopez, Marine Lance Cpl. Rylee McCollum, Marine Lance Cpl. Dylan R. Merola, Marine Lance Cpl. Kareem Nikoui, Marine Sgt. Johanny Rosario Pichardo, Marine Cpl. Humberto Sanchez, Marine Lance Cpl. Jared Schmitz, Navy Corpsman Maxton (Max) Soviak, and Marine Cpl. Daegan William-Tyler Page. In addition to those 13, three U.S. service members died in a drone attack in Jordan earlier this year. The investigation by McCaul has been viewed by Democrats as one of the less partisan probes launched by the House GOP majority in this Congress. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP McCaul authored a report that examined the Biden administration’s decisions and actions in detail after the president, on April 14, 2021, announced his decision to unconditionally withdraw all U.S. military personnel from Afghanistan by Sept. 11, 2021. “Over the following four months, the administration repeatedly delayed critical action that was necessary to mitigate the likely consequences of the decision,” according to the report’s executive summary. “The result of their inaction was a chaotic Non-combatant Evacuation Operation (NEO) where 13 U.S. servicemembers lost their lives and more than 800 Americans were abandoned behind enemy lines.” The report examines the aftermath, including “Taliban seizure of power, the chaotic and deadly evacuation, and the long-term impact the withdrawal has had on the United States and our allies.”
Trump Org blasts New Jersey’s ‘unjustified’ liquor license roadblock after mogul’s conviction
The Trump Organization decried New Jersey’s decision not to timely renew its liquor licenses as “unjustified,” as state officials pointed to former President Trump’s NY v. Trump conviction. In June, a spokesperson for the Trump Organization said rumblings of such a move ignored the fact Trump does not personally hold any liquor licenses in the Garden State. Trenton officials pointed to a prohibition against persons convicted of crimes involving “moral turpitude” from hawking booze. On Tuesday, Fox News Digital obtained two letters Division of Alcoholic Beverage Control interim Director Kirstin Krueger sent to Trump properties in Bedminster and Colts Neck, advising Trump Organization Executive Vice President Donald Trump Jr. of an upcoming renewal hearing. In response, a spokesperson for the Trump Organization reiterated its June contention and added the licenses affect many more people than the Trump family while also padding Trenton’s coffers: TRUMP ORGANIZATION FLAMES REPORTS NJ MAY PULL LIQUOR LICENSES AFTER CONVICTION: HE IS ‘NOT THE HOLDER’ “These liquor licenses support the livelihoods of many hundreds of hard-working New Jersey residents, including bartenders, waiters and waitresses, they service thousands of members, and they contribute millions of dollars to the revenue streams of the state of New Jersey,” the spokesperson said. “They are also relied upon by people for special life events, including weddings, Christenings, and Bar and Bat Mitzvahs, as well as charitable outings and events.” “We sincerely hope that this investigation is not political in nature, and given the foregoing, we feel confident that our licenses will remain unaffected.” The letters illustrated the state’s claim the elder Trump still plays into the equation despite his name being absent from the documents. BRAGG VIOLATED TRUMP’S 6TH AMENDMENT RIGHTS: LEGAL EXPERT “Dear Mr. Trump, Jr., The following notice of hearing is issued pursuant to authority vested in the [Division of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC)]. The director has determined that a hearing is necessary in order to make her determination on the pending application,” the letter regarding Trump National Bedminster read. “The Division has become aware of various public records containing facts that raise concerns as to whether this licensee remains qualified to hold said license,” the letter continued. The letter cited the same “moral turpitude” clause from June reporting on the matter, and said the former president “maintains a direct beneficial interest” in three New Jersey liquor licenses overall. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP Pine Hill, the community outside Camden where the third Trump Organization license is held, renewed that club’s certification in June, which the ABC said fell under “plenary consumption,” and appeared to differ from the other two at issue. Trump Organization officials will have to appear before Krueger in Trenton on July 19, which state officials noted falls after Trump’s July 11 sentencing in NY v. Trump. “During such a hearing, the applicant bears the burden of proof to demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that they remain qualified to maintain licensure, which includes a review of any beneficiaries of the licenses,” the letters read. A statement from New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin’s office noted Trump is not formally adjudged his conviction until sentencing, so a hearing could not be scheduled before the 11th. It also stated beverage services at Bedminster and Colts Neck will be able to shake or stir under “ad interim” permitting until the hearing date.
Supreme Court staying away from Illinois gun ban cases as Thomas seeks ‘more guidance’ on protected weapons
The Supreme Court announced Tuesday that it will not yet review challenges to an Illinois ban on certain types of semi-automatic weapons, attachments and magazines, effectively leaving the law in place while lower courts decide the cases. In its final order list before going on a summer recess, the Court denied petitions to hear six different cases over the so-called “assault weapons ban,” prompting a statement from Justice Clarence Thomas. Thomas noted that the Supreme Court was presented the case after the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit already rejected a request for a preliminary injunction against the law. That court held that the AR-15, among the most popular semi-automatic rifles in the country, does not enjoy Second Amendment protection. “The Seventh Circuit’s decision illustrates why this Court must provide more guidance on which weapons the Second Amendment covers,” Thomas concluded, adding that “if the Seventh Circuit ultimately allows Illinois to ban America’s most common civilian rifle, we can – and should – review that decision once the cases reach a final judgment.” SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS FEDERAL GUN BAN FOR THOSE UNDER DOMESTIC VIOLENCE RESTRAINING ORDERS “The Court must not permit “the Seventh Circuit [to] relegat[e] the Second Amendment to a second-class right,” Thomas said. The Illinois legislation came into effect following a 2022 mass shooting at the Highland Park Fourth of July Parade. Hannah Hill, the executive director of the National Association for Gun Rights – which is one of the organizations challenging the Seventh Circuit’s decision – wrote on X following the announcement, “We will definitely be back.” “But my heart breaks for the people of Illinois today,” she added. “Their rights have been denied by their own government and delayed by the Supreme Court, and the nation will suffer for today’s decision.” OKLAHOMA MAN PRAISES GOD, US LAWMAKERS IN RETURN HOME AFTER AMMO ARREST IN TURKS AND CAICOS Thomas said in his statement that the Supreme Court, in its ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller, “that the Second Amendment’s protection ‘extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.’” “And, we noted that ‘the Second Amendment does not protect those weapons not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes,’ recognizing ‘the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons,’” he wrote. “But, this minimal guidance is far from a comprehensive framework for evaluating restrictions on types of weapons, and it leaves open essential questions such as what makes a weapon ‘bearable,’ ‘dangerous,’ or ‘unusual,’” Thomas added. “In my view, Illinois’ ban is ‘highly suspect because it broadly prohibits common semiautomatic firearms used for lawful purposes,” he ultimately concluded.
New report highlights ‘booming’ transgender surgery industry that is raking in billions: ‘Damage being done’
FIRST ON FOX: A new report from a conservative think tank is shedding light on the size of the “booming” transgender surgery industry today that has swelled into the billions of dollars and continues to grow and raises a variety of concerns. The new report American Principles Project (APP) shows that the transgender “medicine” industry has exploded into a massive system where total revenues for transgender drugs and surgeries in 2023 were estimated to surpass $4.4 billion. That number, according to the study, could exceed $7.8 billion by 2030. “My organization, American Principles Project, has been concerned about the entire transgender agenda as it pertains to children for quite some time now,”APP President Terry Schilling told Fox News Digital. “We know that there are obvious physical and psychological consequences to it, but we wanted to figure out why the industry was growing so much, why such a small population was getting so much attention and media, you know, favorable attention in our cultural arena, and we figured out very quickly that there’s a lot of money here.” RESEARCHERS ARGUE ‘RAPID ONSET GENDER DYSPHORIA’ DOES EXIST, DESPITE NARRATIVE AGAINST IT The report outlines how lifelong use of cross-sex hormones could cost up to $300,000 with surgical transitions costing $150,000. Additionally, the potentially damaging side effects from transition surgery like cancer, nerve damage, chronic pain, sexual dysfunction and mental health issues lead to more medical expenses. The report explains that transgender surgery providers, including Cedars Sinai, the Regents of the University of Michigan, the Mount Sinai Health System and several others, are believed to have brought in over $100 million in revenue in 2022 from transgender surgeries, and pharmaceutical companies like Pfizer and AbbVie brought in $74 million and $51 million, respectively. “There’s so many physical bad things that happen to you and side effects that we’ve known about for a few years, but it didn’t really explain why people were still pushing them towards this,” Schilling told Fox News Digital. “I like to think that most human beings are normally good, and they don’t want to cause harm to people. So what would push people into these procedures and what would push people into encouraging other people to go through these painful procedures that cause so much dysfunction and harm to them? And it makes a lot more sense when you realize that there are billions and billions of dollars at stake.” The report states that 1.6 million Americans now identify as transgender, including 300,000 individuals between 13 and 17 years old. “Given the lucrative nature of this industry, it seems likely medical practitioners will continue to recommend and administer these drugs and procedures for as long as they feel safe from liability,” APP said in a press release. MEGAN RAPINOE SILENT AS SHE’S GRILLED ABOUT STANCE ON TRANSGENDER ATHLETES IN WOMEN’S SPORTS AT PRIDE PARADE “However, many detransitioners are beginning to emerge, facing regret as well as significant health issues resulting from their transition. Their public stories—as well as potential lawsuits— may eventually lead to a reckoning for the industry, resulting in transgender medicine going the way of the lobotomy.” Schilling told Fox News Digital that the estimates in the report are likely to be conservative and that pro-gender transition activists have boasted that the industry could surpass $200 billion per year, larger than the film industry. “We wanted America and the world really to know, just how much, money was being put into this industry,” Schilling told Fox News Digital. “It is vitally important that the American people see the reality of what is happening: the damage being done by these practices as well as the financial incentives which keep the industry going despite the consequences,” Schilling said in a press release. “And policymakers must recognize that we cannot afford to stand idle while the victims of this industry pile up. Although it is possible that growing liability will one day put an end to this malpractice, we should not wait for that to happen. Government action is necessary, and it cannot come a moment too soon.” Fox News reached out to Pfizer, Abbvie, Cedars Sinai, the Regents of the University of Michigan and the Mount Sinai Health System for comment.
Texas Congressman becomes first elected Dem to call on Biden to withdraw from election: ‘Too much is at stake’
Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas, became the first elected Democrat to call on President Biden to withdraw from the 2024 presidential race, saying the president “failed” to defend his record and reassure voters that he’s the man for the job during last week’s debate. Acknowledging Biden’s accomplishments for his party, Doggett said in a Tuesday statement that “many Americans have indicated dissatisfaction with their choices in this election.” “President Biden has continued to run substantially behind Democratic senators in key states and in most polls has trailed Donald Trump. I had hoped that the debate would provide some momentum to change that. It did not. Instead of reassuring voters, the President failed to effectively defend his many accomplishments and expose Trump’s many lies,” Doggett said. ‘IT’S TIME TO RIP THE BAND AID OFF!’: FORMER LONGTIME DEMOCRAT LAWMAKER URGES BIDEN TO STEP ASIDE FOR HARRIS “Our overriding consideration must be who has the best hope of saving our democracy from an authoritarian takeover by a criminal and his gang,” he continued. “Too much is at stake to risk a Trump victory — too great a risk to assume that what could not be turned around in a year, what was not turned around in the debate, can be turned around now.” “President Biden saved our democracy by delivering us from Trump in 2020. He must not deliver us to Trump in 2024,” he added. Amid his call for Biden to withdraw, Doggett reflected on the “painful” decision made by former President Lyndon Johnson not to seek re-election to the White House in 1968. “I represent the heart of a congressional district once represented by Lyndon Johnson. Under very different circumstances, he made the painful decision to withdraw. President Biden should do the same,” the Texas lawmaker said. “While much of his work has been transformational, he pledged to be transitional.” Doggett claimed the president “has the opportunity to encourage a new generation of leaders from whom a nominee can be chosen to unite our country through an open, democratic process.” “My decision to make these strong reservations public is not done lightly nor does it in any way diminish my respect for all that President Biden has achieved. Recognizing that, unlike Trump, President Biden’s first commitment has always been to our country, not himself, I am hopeful that he will make the painful and difficult decision to withdraw. I respectfully call on him to do so,” he concluded. Doggett’s remarks come less than a week after Biden’s disastrous debate against former President Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee for the 2024 presidential election. BIDEN TRIES TO FLIP THE SCRIPT ON NEGATIVE NARRATIVE COMING OUT OF DISASTROUS DEBATE WITH TRUMP Speaking with a raspy voice and delivering rambling answers, Biden struggled during many portions of the debate. Several political analysts noted, however, that the president sharpened his answers as the debate progressed. Biden’s uneven and, at times, halting performance grabbed the vast majority of headlines from the debate and sparked a new round of calls from political pundits, publications and some Democrats for the president to step aside as the party’s standard-bearer. Top Biden allies have pushed back against such talk as they defended the president and targeted Trump for “lying” throughout the debate. Biden, on the day after his debate performance, aimed to address Democratic Party panic. “I know I’m not a young man, to state the obvious,” Biden, at 81 the oldest president in the nation’s history, told cheering supporters at a Friday afternoon rally in the crucial battleground state of North Carolina. “Folks, I don’t walk as easy as I used to. I don’t speak as smoothly as I used to. I don’t debate as well as I used to,” Biden acknowledged. “But I know what I do know. I know how to tell the truth. I know right from wrong. And I know how to do this job. I know how to get things done. And I know, like millions of Americans know, when you get knocked down you get back up.” In a statement shared with Fox News Digital, National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) Communications Director Jack Pandol said, “The cowards in the Democratic Caucus have spent every day after the debate in witness protection, too afraid to say what they’re all thinking.” “Americans remember House Democrats were complicit in covering up and gaslighting the public about the president’s condition, and voters are primed to punish them in November,” Pandol added. Though it isn’t immediately clear who Democrats would rally around as the party’s nominee should Biden step aside, Rep. James Clyburn, a Democrat from South Carolina, said Tuesday that he “will support” Vice President Kamala Harris if Biden exits the race. Moderate Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia — formerly a Democrat but now an independent — is also reportedly set to break with Biden in the coming days, with the Washington Post calling the expected move “a high-profile defection that would underscore the president’s weakness.” Fox News’ Paul Steinhauser contributed to this report.