Amid India-Pakistan tension Jaya Kishori penned an emotional note: ‘I felt his presence…’
Her simple massage resonated with many as people felt the situation was like the Mahabharat, a great battle with difficult challenges.
As the Rio Grande runs dry, South Texas leaders look to new water supplies to sustain growth
Leaders hope to treat groundwater and capture more rain as the water from one of the nation’s most iconic rivers becomes less reliable.
Trump weighs in on SCOTUS birthright citizenship case: ‘The dysfunction of America’
President Donald Trump weighed in on the birthright citizenship case being argued in front of the Supreme Court Thursday, insisting the law originally was intended to benefit the descendants of slaves, not illegal immigrants. “Birthright Citizenship was not meant for people taking vacations to become permanent Citizens of the United States of America, and bringing their families with them, all the time laughing at the ‘SUCKERS’ that we are!” Trump wrote in a post Thursday morning on his Truth Social platform as the arguments were being heard. “The United States of America is the only Country in the World that does this, for what reason, nobody knows — But the drug cartels love it!” Trump added that birthright citizenship, which was adopted as a constitutional amendment in 1868, was primarily intended to benefit the babies of slaves. SUPREME COURT TAKES ON BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP: JUSTICES APPEAR OPEN TO CONSERVING STATUS QUO “It had nothing to do with Illegal Immigration for people wanting to SCAM our Country, from all parts of the World, which they have done for many years,” Trump said in his post. “It had to do with Civil War results, and the babies of slaves who our politicians felt, correctly, needed protection. Please explain this to the Supreme Court of the United States.” Trump cited the birthright citizenship issue as “yet another point that leads to the dysfunction of America.” “We are, for the sake of being politically correct, a STUPID Country but, in actuality, this is the exact opposite of being politically correct, and it is yet another point that leads to the dysfunction of America. ‘EVERY COURT HAS RULED AGAINST YOU’: SUPREME COURT JUSTICE ELENA KAGAN SPARS WITH U.S. SOLICITOR GENERAL JOHN SAUER IN BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP CASE’ While the case being heard Thursday resulted from disputes against the president’s effort to end birthright citizenship, the issue of whether it is permissible for lower courts to permanently block Trump’s executive actions will hinge on the justices’ decision. Through universal injunctions, lower federal courts can bar authorities from enforcing a Trump executive order. It is unclear when the justices’ final ruling will come out. It could take weeks or it could take just several hours if they decide to issue an emergency ruling.
Trump weighs in on SCOTUS case that’s making U.S. look like ‘SUCKERS’
President Donald Trump weighed in on the birthright citizenship case being argued in front of the Supreme Court Thursday, insisting the law originally was intended to benefit the descendants of slaves, not illegal immigrants. “Birthright Citizenship was not meant for people taking vacations to become permanent Citizens of the United States of America, and bringing their families with them, all the time laughing at the ‘SUCKERS’ that we are!” Trump wrote in a post Thursday morning on his Truth Social platform as the arguments were being heard. “The United States of America is the only Country in the World that does this, for what reason, nobody knows – But the drug cartels love it!” Trump added that birthright citizenship, which was adopted as a constitutional amendment in 1868, was primarily intended to benefit the babies of slaves. SUPREME COURT TAKES ON BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP: JUSTICES APPEAR OPEN TO CONSERVING STATUS QUO “It had nothing to do with Illegal Immigration for people wanting to SCAM our Country, from all parts of the World, which they have done for many years,” Trump said in his post. “It had to do with Civil War results, and the babies of slaves who our politicians felt, correctly, needed protection. Please explain this to the Supreme Court of the United States.” Trump cited the birthright citizenship issue as “yet another point that leads to the dysfunction of America.” “We are, for the sake of being politically correct, a STUPID Country but, in actuality, this is the exact opposite of being politically correct, and it is yet another point that leads to the dysfunction of America.” ‘EVERY COURT HAS RULED AGAINST YOU’: SUPREME COURT JUSTICE ELENA KAGAN SPARS WITH U.S. SOLICITOR GENERAL JOHN SAUER IN BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP CASE’ While the case being heard Thursday resulted from disputes against the president’s effort to end birthright citizenship, which is the right for any child born in the U.S. to automatically acquire citizenship, the issue of whether it is permissible for lower courts to permanently block Trump’s executive actions will hinge on the justices’ decision. Through universal injunctions, lower federal courts can bar authorities from enforcing a Trump executive order. The birthright citizenship case was set in motion after Trump signed a Day One executive order, meant to go into effect Feb. 19, reinterpreting the 19th-century amendment. But shortly after the order was signed, legal challenges ensued and Democratic-appointed federal judges began blocking the president’s action. Meanwhile, appeals of those decisions from the Trump administration failed before the Supreme Court decided to take up the case. It is unclear when the high court’s justices’ final ruling on the birthright citizenship case will come out. It could take weeks, or it could take just several hours if they decide to issue an emergency ruling right away.
UAE’s president bestows highest civilian honor on Trump
The leader of the United Arab Emirates gifted President Donald Trump his country’s highest civilian honor on Thursday. “In recognition of President Donald Trump’s exceptional efforts to strengthen the longstanding ties of friendship and strategic partnership between the United Arab Emirates and the United States of America, I am honored to announce that His Highness Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan bestows the Order of Zayed upon President Trump,” a woman was heard before Trump was presented the award. The UAE Ministry of Foreign Affairs said the “Order of Zayed is considered the highest civilian honor granted by the UAE, and is bestowed upon world leaders and heads of state.” “The award bears the name of the UAE’s Founding Father, the late Sheikh Zayed, whose legacy of humanitarianism, international cooperation and the pursuit of peace continues to have an impact throughout the world today,” the ministry added. TRUMP MAKES HISTORIC UAE VISIT AS FIRST US PRESIDENT IN NEARLY 20 YEARS Trump on Thursday arrived in the United Arab Emirates for his final stop on his Middle East trip this week in a visit that marked the first time a U.S. president has traveled to the nation in nearly 20 years, following President George W. Bush’s trip in 2008. TRUMP SIGNS AGREEMENTS WITH QATAR ON DEFENSE AND BOEING PURCHASES In March, the UAE pledged a $1.4 trillion investment in the U.S. economy over the next decade through AI infrastructure, semiconductor, energy and American manufacturing initiatives, including a plan to nearly double U.S. aluminum production by investing in a new smelter for the first time in 35 years. On the eve of the president’s visit to the Middle Eastern nation, the State Department also announced a $1.4 billion sale of CH-47 F Chinook helicopters and F-16 fighter jet parts to Abu Dhabi. Fox News’ Caitlin McFall contributed to this report.
Social media giant hit with scathing ad campaign amid anger over AI chatbots sexually exploiting kids
A nonprofit parents coalition is calling on multiple congressional committees to launch an investigation into Meta for prioritizing engagement metrics that put children’s safety at risk. The call is part of a three-pronged attack campaign by the American Parents Coalition (APC), launched Thursday. It includes a letter to lawmakers with calls for investigations, a new parental notification system to help parents stay informed on issues impacting their kids at Meta and beyond, and mobile billboards at Meta D.C. and California headquarters, calling out the company for failure to adequately prioritize protecting children. APC’s campaign follows an April Wall Street Journal report that included an investigation looking into how the company’s metrics focus has led to potential harms for children. FBI TARGETS 250 SUSPECTS IN ‘764’ NETWORK OF ONLINE PREDATORS MANIPULATING KIDS INTO VIOLENT, EXPLICIT VIDEOS “This is not the first time Meta has been caught making tech available to kids that exposes them to inappropriate content,” APC Executive Director Alleigh Marre said. “Parents across America should be extremely wary of their children’s online activity, especially when it involves emerging technology like AI digital companions. This pattern of bad behavior from Meta shows they cannot be trusted to self-correct, and we are urging Congress to take meaningful action in holding Meta accountable for not prioritizing child safety.” The April Wall Street Journal investigation not only reported on internal concerns that Meta was skirting ethical lines to make its AI chatbot system more advanced, but also shared how the report’s authors tested out the system themselves. The reporters’ test conversations found that Meta’s AI chatbot systems engaged and sometimes escalated sexual discussions – even when the chatbot knew the user was underage. The investigation found that the AI chatbot could also be programmed to simulate a minor’s persona while engaging with the end-user in a sexually explicit conversation. In some instances, the test conversations were able to get Meta’s chatbot to speak about romantic encounters in the voice of Disney movie characters. META LAUNCHES COMMUNITY NOTES FOR FACEBOOK TO REPLACE FACT-CHECKING “The reporting referenced in this letter doesn’t reflect how people actually experience these AIs, which for teens is often in valuable ways, like helping with homework and learning new skills,” a Meta spokesperson told Fox News Digital in response to the campaign. “We recognize parents’ concerns about these new technologies, which is why we’ve put additional age-appropriate guardrails in place that allow parents to see if their teens have been chatting with AIs, and to place time limits on our apps. Importantly, we don’t allow AIs to present as under 18s and we prohibit sexually explicit conversations with teens.” Per the Journal’s reporting, which Meta contests, the company made multiple internal decisions to loosen guardrails around its chatbots to make them as engaging as possible. Meta reportedly made an exemption to allow “explicit” content within its chatbot as long as it is in the content of romantic role playing. At the same time, Meta has taken steps to help improve its product safety for minor users, such as the introduction of Instagram’s “Teen Accounts” with built-in safety protections that came out in 2024 amid increased scrutiny over the company’s AI. In April, Meta announced the expansion of these accounts to Facebook and Messenger. On these accounts, minors are prohibited from conversations about sexually explicit content with chatbots. Meta also has parental supervision tools built into its AI chatbot system that are supposed to show parents whom their kids are talking to on a regular basis, including chatbot, and has tools to shut down accounts exhibiting potential suspicious behavior tied to child sexual exploitation. Coinciding with APC’s campaign attacking Meta, the group launched a new website titled “DangersofMeta.com” with links to APC’s letter to members of Congress, images of the mobile billboards they are deploying, a link to the new “lookout” notification system, and recent articles about Meta’s work pertaining to children’s safety.
Harvard updates lawsuit after Trump cancels additional $450M in funding
Harvard University on Tuesday filed an update to its lawsuit against the Trump administration after another $450 million of research funding was cut. The Ivy League school amended the lawsuit hours after the federal government’s Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism announced that eight federal agencies were terminating approximately $450 million in grants over what is described as Harvard’s “radical” and “dark problem” on campus. “Harvard University has repeatedly failed to confront the pervasive race discrimination and anti-Semitic harassment plaguing its campus,” the task force said in a statement. The latest freeze comes in addition to the already frozen $2.2 billion in funding to the university and threats by the Trump administration to revoke its tax-exempt status. HARVARD PRESIDENT CLAIMS ‘UNFOUNDED RETALIATION’ AMID TRUMP FUNDING FEUD Harvard filed the initial lawsuit in April to block the initial $2.2 billion freeze. In its amended lawsuit, Harvard said much of the funding that was initially frozen has now been terminated, apparently with no hope of restoring it. A May 6 letter from the National Institute of Health notified Harvard that grants were being cut over allegations of campus antisemitism. It said grants are typically suspended pending an opportunity to take corrective action, but “no corrective action is possible here,” according to the lawsuit. HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESIDENT TAKES 25% PAY CUT AMID TRUMP ADMINISTRATION FUNDING FREEZE Harvard later received similar letters from the Defense Department, Department of Energy, Department of Agriculture and other agencies, according to the suit. It’s seeking to have those cuts overturned. As the school faces funding challenges from the Trump administration, Harvard University President Alan Garber has agreed to voluntarily take a 25% reduction in pay for the 2025-26 school year. Other leaders at the institution are also making their own voluntary contributions, a Harvard University spokesperson told Fox News on Wednesday. Fox News Digital’s Greg Wehner and Fox News’ Kitty Le Claire, along with The Associated Press, contributed to this report.
US military would be unleashed on enemy drones on the homeland if bipartisan bill passes
FIRST ON FOX: Dozens of drones that traipsed over Langley Air Force base in late 2023 revealed an astonishing oversight: Military officials did not believe they had the authority to shoot down the unmanned vehicles over the U.S. homeland. A new bipartisan bill, known as the COUNTER Act, seeks to rectify that, offering more bases the opportunity to become a “covered facility,” or one that has the authority to shoot down drones that encroach on their airspace. The new bill has broad bipartisan and bicameral support, giving it a greater chance of becoming law. It’s led by Armed Services Committee members Tom Cotton, R-Ark., and Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., in the Senate, and companion legislation is being introduced by August Pfluger, R-Texas, and Chrissy Houlahan, D-Pa., in the House. Currently, only half of the 360 domestic U.S. bases are considered “covered facilities” that are allowed to engage with unidentified drones. The legislation expands the narrow definition of a covered facility under current statute to allow all military facilities that have a well-defined perimeter to apply for approval that allows them to engage with drones. PENTAGON LACKS COUNTER-DRONE PROCEDURE LEADING TO INCURSIONS LIKE AT LANGLEY, EXPERTS SAY The legislation also stipulates that the secretary of defense delegate authority to combatant commanders to engage drone attacks, cutting down on time to get approval through the chain of command in emergency situations. “Leaving American military facilities vulnerable to drone incursions puts our service members, the general public and our national security at risk,” Cotton said. For more than two weeks in December 2023, a swarm of mystery drones flew into restricted airspace over Langley, home to key national security facilities and the F-22 Raptor stealth fighters. Lack of a standard protocol for such incursions left Langley officials unsure of what to do, other than allow the 20-foot-long drones to hover near their classified facilities. To this day, the Pentagon has said little about the incidents, other than to confirm that they occurred. Whether it knows where the drones came from or what they were doing is unclear. “As commercial drones become more commonplace, we must ensure that they are not being used to share sensitive information with our adversaries, to conduct attacks against our service members, or otherwise pose a threat to our national security,” Gillibrand said. PLANES, STARS AND HOBBYISTS: LAWMAKERS INSIST NOTHING ‘NEFARIOUS’ IS HAPPENING IN NJ SKIES As defense-minded lawmakers sought more answers, Langley officials referred them to the FBI, who referred them to Northern Command, who referred them to local law enforcement, a congressional source told Fox News Digital last year. Gen. Gregory Guillot, chief of Northern Command (NORCOM) and North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), said in February that there were over 350 unauthorized drone detections over military bases last year. “The primary threat I see for them in the way they’ve been operating is detection and perhaps surveillance of sensitive capabilities on our installations,” he said during a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing. “There were 350 detections reported last year on military installations, and that was 350 over a total of 100 different installations of all types and levels of security.” A surge in mysterious drone activity over New Jersey late last year and early this year prompted mass confusion. Guillot said that regulations on UAV countermeasures created “significant vulnerabilities that have been exploited by known and unknown actors.” He advocated for what the new legislation would do: expand Section 130i of Title 10, which pertains to the protection of “certain facilities and assets from unmanned aircraft.” “I would propose and advocate for expansion of 130i [authorities] to include all military installations, not just covered installations,” Guillot said during the hearing. “I’d also like to see the range expanded to slightly beyond the installation, so they don’t have to wait for the threat to get over the installation before they can address it, because many of these systems can use side looking or slant range, and so they could … surveil the base from outside the perimeter. And under the current authorities, we can’t address that.”
Jeanine Pirro sworn in as interim US attorney
Former judge Jeanine Pirro was sworn in as interim U.S. attorney for Washington, D.C. on Thursday. Pirro, 73, will now lead a team of attorneys in defending President Donald Trump’s administration in court as well as prosecuting local crimes in the nation’s capital. “Congratulations Judge Jeanine who will soon make DC Great Again!” Sergi Gor, the director White House Office of Presidential Personnel, wrote on social media. This is a developing story. Check back soon for updates.
House Dems open investigation into Trump’s acceptance of $400 million jet from Qatar
FIRST ON FOX: House Democrats are opening an investigation into President Donald Trump and his administration’s acceptance of a $400 million private jet from the Qatari government. Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, led his fellow Democrats on the panel in a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi and White House counsel David Warrington on Thursday. They’re specifically asking Bondi to hand over a reported legal memo she wrote that is meant to assert the legality of Trump accepting the plane on behalf of the U.S. “Any legal memo purporting to make such a claim would obviously fly in the face of the text of the Constitution’s Foreign Emoluments Clause, which explicitly prohibits the President from accepting any ‘present [or] Emolument… of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State’ unless he has ‘the Consent of Congress,’” the letter reads. MEET THE TRUMP-PICKED LAWMAKERS GIVING SPEAKER JOHNSON A FULL HOUSE GOP CONFERENCE “Accordingly, we are writing to request that you provide the Committee on the Judiciary with these memos immediately as their analysis and conclusions are apparently the basis for the President’s decision to disregard the plain text of the Constitution.” Raskin and the other Judiciary Committee Democrats went so far as to accuse Trump or people in his orbit of soliciting a bribe from Qatar. “President Trump’s statements expressing displeasure with delays in the delivery of his new Boeing aircraft to serve as Air Force One and the timing of this ‘gift’ suggest that President Trump or a member of his Administration may have improperly solicited this ‘nice gesture’ from the Qatari government,” the Democrats said, citing Trump’s own comments. “The fact that, according to President Trump, the plane would not remain in service to the United States but would rather be donated to his presidential library after his term concludes further raises the possibility that this ‘nice gesture’ is intended as a bribe to Donald Trump.” Multiple outlets reported that Bondi and Warrington drafted a legal memo that said it was “legally permissible” for Trump to accept the plane and then have it transferred to his presidential library when he leaves office. A source familiar with the discussions told Fox News Digital the memo was drafted by the Office of Legal Counsel and signed by Bondi. But Democrats suggested the memo was likely not sufficient grounds for Trump to bypass Congress on the issue, and pointed out Bondi herself had previously lobbied on Qatar’s behalf. BROWN UNIVERSITY IN GOP CROSSHAIRS AFTER STUDENT’S DOGE-LIKE EMAIL KICKS OFF FRENZY “The Constitution is clear: Congress – not the Attorney General or the White House Counsel – has the exclusive authority to approve or reject a gift ‘of any kind whatever’ given to the President by a foreign government,” the letter said. “We would also note that, even if the Attorney General had a constitutional role to play here, Attorney General Bondi has a significant and obvious conflict of interest given her prior registration as an official agent of the Qatari government and earned no less than $115,000 per month lobbying on its behalf.” When reached for comment on the matter, a source close to Bondi said only that the letter was received by the Department of Justice (DOJ). In addition to looking for the memo itself, the Democratic letter also asked for any communications and other records regarding the Boeing plane’s transfer, and discussions of the gift’s legal justifications. Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee have little power to compel Trump administration officials to comply, given their status as the minority party in the chamber. But Raskin has been scrutinizing Trump and his inner circle over family foreign ties since the former president’s first term. The latest letter comes during Trump’s diplomatic visit to the Middle East, where Qatar was one of his stops. Trump has defended his acceptance of the plane on multiple occasions, arguing he would be a “stupid person” to not take it, while bashing Democrats for their criticism. “So the fact that the Defense Department is getting a GIFT, FREE OF CHARGE, of a 747 aircraft to replace the 40 year old Air Force One, temporarily, in a very public and transparent transaction, so bothers the Crooked Democrats that they insist we pay, TOP DOLLAR, for the plane. Anybody can do that! The Dems are World Class Losers!!!” Trump wrote on Truth Social this week. Senate Republicans said they knew little when asked by Fox News Digital earlier this week. Meanwhile, Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., skirted the issue during his most recent weekly press conference. “I’m not following all the twists and turns of the charter jet. My understanding is it’s not a personal gift for the president of the United States, and other nations give us gifts all the time, but, I’m going to leave it to the administration. They know much more about the details,” Johnson told reporters. Fox News Digital reached out to the White House for comment but did not immediately hear back.