Noem names Charles Wall ICE deputy director following Sheahan resignation
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem announced Thursday via X that longtime U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) attorney Charles Wall will serve as the agency’s new deputy director as enforcement operations intensify nationwide. “Effective immediately, Charles Wall will serve as the Deputy Director of @ICEGov,” wrote Noem. “For the last year, Mr. Wall served as ICE’s Principal Legal Advisor, playing a key role in helping us deliver historic results in arresting and removing the worst of the worst criminal illegal aliens from American neighborhoods.” Wall replaces Madison Sheahan, who stepped down earlier Thursday to pursue a congressional run in Ohio. Her departure left ICE leadership in transition at a moment when the agency has faced increasing resistance to enforcement efforts and heightened threats against officers in the field. The move comes as the Trump administration intensifies immigration enforcement against murderers, rapists, gang members and suspected terrorists living illegally in the U.S., even as sanctuary jurisdictions and activist groups seek to block or disrupt ICE actions. DHS DEMANDS MN LEADERS HONOR ICE DETAINERS, ALLEGES HUNDREDS OF CRIMINAL ALIENS HAVE BEEN RELEASED UNDER WALZ ICE officials said Wall brings more than a decade of experience inside the agency. “Mr. Wall has served as an ICE attorney for 14 years and is a forward-leaning, strategic thinker who understands the importance of prioritizing the removal of murderers, rapists, pedophiles, gang members, and terrorists from our country,” Noem added. Wall most recently served as ICE’s principal legal advisor, overseeing more than 3,500 attorneys and support staff who represent the DHS in removal proceedings and provide legal counsel to senior agency leadership. He has served at ICE since 2012, previously holding senior counsel roles in New Orleans, according to DHS. ‘WORST OF THE WORST’: ICE ARRESTS CHILD PREDATOR, VIOLENT CRIMINALS AMID SURGE IN ANTI-AGENT ATTACKS DHS has described the appointment as part of a broader effort to ensure ICE leadership is aligned with the Trump administration’s public safety priorities. The leadership change comes as ICE operations have drawn national attention following protests in Minneapolis after the ICE-involved fatal shooting of 37-year-old Renee Good on Jan. 7. Administration officials have repeatedly emphasized that ICE’s focus remains on what they describe as the “worst of the worst” criminal illegal aliens, warning that local resistance and political opposition increase risks for officers carrying out enforcement duties. ICE has recently created a specific landing page where these ‘worst of the worst’ offenders can be viewed with names and nationalities attached. “I look forward to working with him in his new role to make America safe again,” Noem concluded. ICE did not immediately provide additional comment to Fox News Digital.
WATCH: ICE takes down illegal alien who allegedly rammed law enforcement vehicles, nearly running over officer
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrested an illegal immigrant who the agency said “weaponized” his vehicle by ramming two ICE vehicles, nearly running over an agent. Cuban illegal Robyn Argote Brooks rammed two ICE cars in a San Antonio parking lot in an attempt to evade arrest during a targeted vehicle stop, according to the Department of Homeland Security. Video captured of the incident shows Brooks, who is driving a sedan and is boxed in by agents’ vehicles, defying law enforcement directions and suddenly reversing, narrowly missing an agent and hitting a federal SUV. After unsuccessfully accelerating into the larger vehicle, Brooks then speeds into another ICE vehicle in front of him, a sedan, and continues to accelerate as agents attempt to stop him. Eventually, an agent breaks through Brooks’ window and pulls him out of the car to make the arrest. The incident occurred Tuesday and comes amid heightened concern about illegals and anti-ICE agitators violently attempting to disrupt federal law enforcement operations. THREE VENEZUELAN ILLEGALS ARRESTED AFTER ICE OFFICER ‘AMBUSHED AND ATTACKED’ DURING TRAFFIC STOP: NOEM DHS said ICE officers are facing a 3,200% increase in vehicular attacks. The agency said that, from Jan. 21, 2025, to Jan. 7, 2026, ICE officers experienced 66 “vehicular attacks,” compared to only two during the same time period the previous year. Assistant DHS Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said one of the ICE officers involved in the arrest was injured and said, “We are praying for him, his health and his family.” She placed the blame squarely on pro-sanctuary politicians she said “have encouraged illegal aliens to evade arrest.” “They have created an environment that incites violence against our law enforcement,” said McLaughlin, adding that agents are also facing a “more than 1,300% increase in assaults against them.” OFFICER INJURED AFTER SUSPECT RAMS LAW ENFORCEMENT VEHICLES DURING CHARLOTTE IMMIGRATION RAIDS “Secretary Noem has been clear: Anyone who assaults law enforcement will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,” she warned. According to the agency, Brooks entered the U.S. using the Biden administration’s CBP One app in 2024, which it said “allowed over a million unvetted aliens into the country.” Brooks is in ICE custody. Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons argued Tuesday that federal immigration agents are facing “constant impediments” and “constant attacks.” “When we hear elected officials calling upon individuals to impede or obstruct ICE law enforcement operations nationwide, you’re going to see incidents like this,” said Lyons. “You saw the officers and agents attempting to apprehend a criminally illegal alien, and there they are using their car as a weapon.” ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT INDICTED IN ASSAULT ON ICE AGENTS IN TEXAS Lyons said one of the agents involved later went to a hospital with neck injuries. “Every day, this is what the men and women of ICE are facing,” he said. “It’s constant impediments, constant attacks like this. And it’s not safe for my folks, it’s not safe for the public. It really needs to stop.”
Trump’s tariffs could be undone by one conservative doctrine: ‘Life or death’
The Supreme Court is poised to rule soon on President Donald Trump’s use of an emergency wartime law to unilaterally impose sweeping tariffs on most U.S. countries, which brought key questions over the “major questions doctrine (MQD),” or the limiting principle by which courts can, in certain circumstances, move to curb the power of executive agencies. During oral arguments over Trump’s tariffs in November, justices honed in on the so-called major questions doctrine, which allows courts to limit the power of executive agencies on actions with “vast economic and political significance,” and how it squares with Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to enact his sweeping global and reciprocal tariffs. Plaintiffs told the court Trump’s use of IEEPA to unilaterally impose his steep import duties violates the major questions doctrine, since IEEPA does not explicitly mention the word “tariffs.” Rather, it authorizes the president to “regulate … importation” during a declared national emergency, the plaintiffs noted, arguing it falls short of the standard needed to pass muster for MQD. “Congress does not (and could not) use such vague terminology to grant the executive virtually unconstrained taxing power of such staggering economic effect — literally trillions of dollars — shouldered by American businesses and consumers,” they told the court in an earlier briefing. TRUMP TARIFF PLAN FACES UNCERTAIN FUTURE AS COURT BATTLES INTENSIFY Lawyers for the Trump administration countered that the text of the IEEPA emergency law is the “practical equivalent” of a tariff. “Tomorrow’s United States Supreme Court case is, literally, LIFE OR DEATH for our Country,” Trump posted on Truth Social in November. “With a Victory, we have tremendous, but fair, Financial and National Security. Without it, we are virtually defenseless against other Countries who have, for years, taken advantage of us. “Our Stock Market is consistently hitting Record Highs, and our Country has never been more respected than it is right now,” he added. “A big part of this is the Economic Security created by Tariffs, and the Deals that we have negotiated because of them.” While U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer acknowledged to the justices that IEEPA does not explicitly give an executive the power to regulate tariffs, he stressed in November that the power to tariff is “the natural commonsense inference” of IEEPA. But whether the high court will back his argument remains to be seen. That was the conclusion reached by the U.S. Court of International Trade last year. Judges on the three-judge panel voted unanimously to block Trump’s tariffs from taking force, ruling that, as commander in chief, Trump does not have “unbounded authority” to impose tariffs under the emergency law. “The parties cite two doctrines — the nondelegation doctrine and the major questions doctrine — that the judiciary has developed to ensure that the branches do not impermissibly abdicate their respective constitutionally vested powers,” the court said in its ruling. The doctrine was also a focus in November, as justices pressed lawyers for the administration over IEEPA’s applicability to tariffs, or taxation powers, and asked the administration what guardrails, if any, exist to limit the whims of the executive branch, should they ultimately rule in Trump’s favor. Though it’s not clear how much the court will rely on the MQD in its ruling, legal experts told Fox News Digital they would expect it to potentially be cited by the Supreme Court if it blocks Trump’s tariff regime. US COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE SIDES WITH TRUMP IN TARIFF CASE The high court agreed to take up the case on an expedited basis last fall, and a ruling is expected to be handed down within the coming days or weeks. There’s little precedent for major questions as a formal precedent cited by the courts, the University of Chicago College of Law noted in 2024. The doctrine was cited formally by the Supreme Court for the first time ever in its 2022 ruling in West Virginia v. EPA, when the court’s majority cited the doctrine as its basis for invalidating the EPA’s emissions standards under the Clean Power Plan. Prior to that, the doctrine existed as a more amorphous strand of statutory interpretation, a phenomenon Justice Elena Kagan noted in her dissent in the same case. “The current Court is textualist only when being so suits it,” Kagan said then. “When that method would frustrate broader goals, special canons like the ‘major questions doctrine’ magically appear as get-out-of-text-free cards.” SUPREME COURT FREEZES ORDER TO RETURN MAN FROM EL SALVADOR PRISON One factor that could play in Trump’s favor is the fact that the tariff case is to some degree a foreign policy issue, which is an area in which executives enjoy a higher level of deference from the court. Still, if oral arguments were any indication, the justices seemed poised to block Trump’s use of IEEPA to continue his steep tariff plan. Justices pressed Sauer why Trump invoked IEEPA to impose his sweeping tariffs, noting that doing so would be the first time a president used the law to set import taxes on trading partners. They also seemed skeptical of the administration’s assertion that it did not need additional permission from Congress to use the law in such a sweeping manner and pressed the administration’s lawyers on their contention that EEPA is only narrowly reviewable by the courts. “We agree that it’s a major power, but it’s in the context of a statute that is explicitly conferring major powers,” Sauer said. “That the point of the statute is to confer major powers to address major questions — which are emergencies.”
Women’s sports on the line as Supreme Court wrestles with defining ‘sex’
The Supreme Court this week heard arguments in a landmark pair of cases regarding the future of women’s sports, but the real drama lies in whether the court will choose to answer an increasingly controversial question: What is a woman? The arguments in Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J. lasted an unusually long time — more than three hours — with tough questioning from the justices to both sides that mostly focused on highly technical legal standards. The national context, however, is simple. There has been a surge of biological boys identifying as transgender girls participating in girls sports across the country. The result? Girls and women are losing athletic competitions, losing scholarship opportunities and sometimes even sustaining physical injury from their physically stronger male counterparts. A recent United Nations report summed it up. As of August 2024, “over 600 female athletes in more than 400 competitions [worldwide] have lost more than 890 medals in 29 different sports” to “males who identify as women.” As a result, more than half of the states in the country have passed laws protecting women’s sports by keeping participation separated by sex. RILEY GAINES SLAMS DEMS AS SCOTUS SET TO HEAR ARGUMENTS ON WOMEN’S SPORTS CASES On Tuesday, there were two questions before the court. In the Idaho case, it was, “Do laws that seek to protect women’s and girls’ sports by limiting participation to women and girls based on sex violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?” In the West Virginia case, there was a similar first question and the addition of another: “Does Title IX prevent a state from consistently designating girls’ and boys’ sports teams based on biological sex determined at birth?” In 2020, Idaho became the first state in the nation to pass a law protecting women’s sports, Fairness in Women’s Sports. The law preserves women’s sports in public schools — elementary through college — by linking participation on an athletic team to biological sex. Lindsay Hecox, a biological male athlete identifying as a transgender woman who wanted to try out for the Boise State University women’s track and cross-country teams, sued, arguing it was unconstitutional. The 9th Circuit barred Idaho from enforcing the law. Subsequently, in the lead-up to the Supreme Court case, the transgender athlete attempted to have the lower court dismiss the case entirely, but the court rejected the request. In 2023, West Virginia also passed a law protecting female sports teams by keeping them biologically sex-specific, called Save Women’s Sports. Before the law took effect, B.P.J., then an 11-year-old biological male who identifies as female, sued, and the law was paused as it was litigated. West Virginia alleges that B.P.J. eventually went on to beat and displace female competitors in cross-country and track and field events and that five female athletes refused to compete against the athlete. Lainey Armistead, a former West Virginia State University female soccer player, intervened in the lawsuit to help defend the state’s law. The 4th Circuit ultimately blocked West Virginia from enforcing the law. REPUBLICAN GOVERNORS URGE JUSTICES TO DEFEND WOMEN’S SPORTS AS SUPREME COURT HEARS KEY CASE The bulk of the arguments in the Idaho case focused on whether Idaho’s law classifies on the basis of sex or status. The state argued that the law classified on the basis of biological sex, treating boys and girls equally by permissibly separating them in sports for fairness and safety reasons. The opposing side argued status, that the law impermissibly excluded boys who identify as transgender girls from participating in sports for discriminatory reasons, thereby warranting a higher level of scrutiny from the court. If that sounds confusing, it’s because it is. On classifications, Justice Samuel Alito asked the ACLU attorney representing the West Virginia transgender athlete a question. “You argue this is a status-based classification that targets transgender individuals,” Alito said. “But if a state law treats all biological males the same — meaning no biological male can play on the girls team — and it treats all biological females the same, how is that a status-based classification?” Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who notably refused to define what a woman was under questioning from Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., during her confirmation hearing, was sympathetic to the status argument and pushed for a case-by-case analysis where schools could create exceptions for boys who identified as girls but who did not pose an unfair advantage by having the transgender student medically prove they were not at an advantage. The transgender athletes in both cases had taken hormones, and the one in the West Virginia case had taken puberty blockers; the states argued the drugs do not undo the physical advantages that are natural to biology. Initially, Justice Neil Gorsuch also seemed sympathetic to the arguments from the transgender athletes, which was unsurprising given a 6-3 decision he authored in 2020 that found “sex” within Title VII’s prohibition against employment discrimination “because of sex” includes transgender individuals despite the law not mentioning sexual orientation or gender identity. But later in the Title IX arguments, Gorsuch suggested that sports and the history of Title IX made it different. “Javits [Amendment] changed Title IX, and it said, you know, sports are different,” he said. “And we’ve got these regulations that have been out there for 50-plus years. … Why doesn’t that make this case very different than Title VII?” IDAHO AG SAYS SUPREME COURT TRANSGENDER SPORTS CASE DEFIES ‘COMMON SENSE’ Cutting through the hyper-technical discussions about classifications, Alito asked, “How can a court determine whether there is discrimination on the basis of sex without knowing what ‘sex’ means for equal protection purposes?” Early on, the attorney for the transgender athlete in the Idaho case also raised the issue of mootness, reminding the justices his client had asked for the case to be dismissed. Justice Sonya Sotomayor appeared to be interested in this argument, but, notably, little time was spent on it overall. The second round of arguments in the West Virginia case focused on Title
EXCLUSIVE: HUD launches civil rights probe into Minneapolis over race-based housing priorities
EXCLUSIVE: The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) opened an investigation into the city of Minneapolis Thursday, alleging the city’s housing policies illegally prioritize resources based on race and national origin, Fox News Digital has learned. “Minnesota has been ground zero for fraud and corruption because it plays a cynical game of racial and ethnic politics,” HUD Secretary Scott Turner told Fox News Digital. “This goes against our values as Americans, united by a common heritage, language and commitment to equal treatment under law.” Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity Craig Trainor sent a letter to Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey Thursday evening informing him that HUD had launched a probe into whether Minneapolis violated the Fair Housing Act and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act through its housing plans, programs and internal equity directives. The Fair Housing Act is a federal civil rights law that prohibits discrimination in housing based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability or familial status. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination based on race or national origin in any program or activity that receives federal funding. SEC SCOTT BESSENT: HOW TO STOP FRAUD IN MINNESOTA AND ACROSS THE COUNTRY Minnesota has become the focal point of government fraud as details emerged regarding an alleged sweeping COVID-era scheme involving money laundering tied to multiple social-services programs. Nearly 100 people, most of whom are from Minnesota’s Somali community, have been charged, while federal prosecutors estimated that the total amount of fraud across various state-administered social services programs could reach more than $9 billion. Considering the alleged fraud involved taxpayer dollars, HUD officials said evidence suggests that racial politics also extended to Minneapolis’s housing policy. The letter argues that Minneapolis has “committed to making available and allocating housing resources based on race and nationality,” raising potential federal civil rights violations. HUD specifically cited language in the city’s “Minneapolis 2040” comprehensive plan, as well as the city’s Strategic and Racial Equity Action Plan, as cause for concern. Minneapolis 2040, adopted in 2020 under Frey, is the city’s comprehensive plan outlining the economic, infrastructure and environmental vision of the city across the next decade and a half. It includes a section focused on establishing “cultural districts,” which are described as “contiguous area with a rich sense of cultural and/or linguistic identity rooted in communities significantly populated by people of color, Indigenous people, and/or immigrants.” “This plan strives to eliminate disparities among people of color and indigenous peoples compared with white people,” Minneapolis 2040 states. MINNESOTA HEALTH CARE OWNER CHARGED WITH YEARS-LONG MEDICAID SCAM TOPPING $3M The letter also cited Minneapolis’ Strategic and Racial Equity Action guide, which instructs city departments to align racial equity goals with their plans, programs and budgets. “Minneapolis’s current Strategic and Racial Equity Action Plan claims to tangibly align ‘racial equity goals with department plans and budgets,’” the letter states. “For example, your Community Planning and Economic Development department will prioritize ‘rental housing for Black, Indigenous, People of Color and Immigrant communities’ by ‘leveraging (its) rental licensing authority.’” “That is not going to fly,” Trainor wrote in his letter to Frey. Turner told Fox News Digital he “will continue to deliver on President Trump’s promise to support affordable housing for American families, in part by dismantling illegal racial and ethnic preferences that deny Americans their right to equal protection under the law.” “I am committed to delivering on this promise by thoroughly investigating any housing discrimination involving the City of Minneapolis,” he said. Fox News Digital reached out to Frey’s office and the city of Minneapolis’ communications team Thursday evening for comment on the letter but did not immediately receive a reply. Fallout from Minnesota’s alleged fraud scandal spilled into the governor’s race in January, when Democratic Gov. Tim Walz ended his re-election bid. Walz, who has served as governor since 2019, said the wrongdoing unfolded on his watch. He took responsibility for oversight failures, while arguing Republicans had “sensationalized” the multibillion-dollar figures. Frey said earlier in January that “obviously, everybody could have done more to prevent” fraud, but that “you do not hold an entire community, any community, accountable for the actions of individuals,” referring to the Somali community. Minneapolis has been roiled by protests and agitators clashing with federal law enforcement deployed to the state amid the fraud investigations. The chaos heightened after the fatal shooting of a woman by an ICE agent in early January after she allegedly attempted to use her vehicle as a weapon against a federal officer. YOUTUBER TO TESTIFY BEFORE CONGRESS ON MINNESOTA’S MASSIVE $9B FRAUD NETWORK INVESTIGATION Turner joined Fox News at the start of the new year and said HUD officials were on the ground in Minnesota investigating funds delivered to public housing authorities. “We have investigators that are making sure that any HUD-funded programs in Minnesota are being carried out appropriately,” he said. “Also, we just launched an investigation and housing authorities, public housing authorities there in Minnesota. They receive about $108 million in Minneapolis and also about $46 million in public housing assistance there. So, we want to make sure that we’re being good stewards of taxpayer money.” Turner reported on X Monday that his department uncovered “up to $84 million in ineligible assistance during Biden’s final year, including $496,000 in improper assistance to 509 dead tenants.”
Biden DHS’s purchase of weapon linked to Havana Syndrome attacks leads House Republicans to demand answers
The Biden administration purchased a pulsed energy weapon suspected of being the type that may have caused “Havana Syndrome” which caused a series of mysterious ailments for U.S. diplomats and government workers in Cuba. The weapon was bought at the end of the Biden administration and has since been tested by the Pentagon, Fox News has learned. House Republicans are demanding answers amid reports of the purchase of the device. In a letter to Homeland Security Kristi Noem, House Committee on Homeland Security Chairman Andrew Garbarino, R-N.Y., is asking for information on the procurement process for the weapon, its costs and the findings associated with its year-long testing related to Havana Syndrome, officially known as Anomalous Health Incidents (AHI). HAVANA SYNDROME ‘PATIENT ZERO’ REJECTS INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY FINDINGS THAT FOREIGN ADVERSARY ‘VERY UNLIKELY’ “The device in question is described as capable of producing pulsed radio waves and containing Russian components, though it is supposedly not entirely Russian in origin,” the letter states. “Following HSI’s successful acquisition of the device, it was reportedly transferred to DoW, which spent more than a year testing the device and its capabilities.” Some U.S. intelligence agencies have said a foreign adversary could be behind the mysterious ailment. Fox News Digital previously reported that Adam, a former government employee whose identity Fox News agreed to protect, is considered to be “Patient Zero.” He was first attacked in December 2016 while living in Havana on assignment. During his time on the Caribbean island, Adam experienced multiple attacks and described pressure to the brain that led to vertigo, tinnitus and cognitive impairment. HAVANA SYNDROME: FOREIGN ADVERSARIES’ MICROWAVE WEAPONS CAPABILITIES EXPLAINED BY PHYSICIST “While assessments from the Intelligence Community (IC) do not conclusively identify the factors causing AHIs or any foreign actor responsible, an assessment from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) presented a majority view concluding that it was ‘very unlikely’ that a foreign actor ‘used a novel weapon or prototype device to harm even a subset of the U.S. Government personnel,’ with five out of seven agencies agreeing with that assessment,” Garbarino wrote in his letter. “However, two agencies dissented from the majority view and assessed that there was a chance that foreign actors may have developed some sort of ‘novel weapon or prototype device’ that could have harmed U.S. personnel,” he added. However, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) released the report and held a background call with reporters on Friday explaining that new reporting “led two components to shift their assessments about whether a foreign actor has a capability that could cause biological effects consistent with some of the symptoms reported as possible AHIs.” “This shift consequently led two IC components to subtly change their overall judgment about whether a foreign actor might have played a role in a small number of events,” the agency said. Fox News’ Liz Friden contributed to this report.
Trump admin relaunches key council after Biden admin shuttered it: ‘Ignorance and arrogance’
Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum reinstated the National Coal Council, comprised of dozens of stakeholders from energy firms, utilities, governmental and tribal interests, saying that no industry affects Americans’ lives more. The council, which will be chaired by Peabody Energy CEO Jim Grech and Core Natural Resources chairman Jimmy Brock, cut its proverbial ribbon at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building on the White House campus four years after then-President Biden dissolved the decades-old consortium. “It’s crazy that this Coal Council was disabled,” Wright said, calling it a “combination of ignorance and arrogance.” IN 2026, ENERGY WAR’S NEW FRONT IS AI, AND US MUST WIN THAT BATTLE, API CHIEF SAYS Burgum spoke to the importance of the coal industry to not just the local economies – like those in his own state of North Dakota – where the mineral is extracted, but across national security, economic and commercial fields. “No industry that does so much and means so much to every American,” he said. “But the regulatory red tape onslaught going into this industry was like no other. And so if you’re standing here today and your company is providing reliable, affordable, American, secure-base-load-dispatch of power, you’re a hero to me,” Burgum said. Wright added that people must only look at history to see what happens to societies that squander their coal reserves if they have them. He said that while much of the world was still relying on woodburning for energy, England had such a booming industry during the Glorious Revolution of 1707 that it comprised 50% of its energy industry. The rest of the world did not hit 50% coal power until 1900, when it finally surpassed wood, Wright continued. BURGUM CALLS CALIFORNIA A ‘NATIONAL SECURITY RISK’ AS ENERGY CHIEF WARNS BLUE STATES ARE SKEWING COST AVERAGES With the “barbarians at the wall,” the little island country held its own thanks in part to its coal industry, he said of England and later Scotland. By present-day, the United Kingdom decided to reverse all of that progress and shutter its coal industry, along with similarly-industrious Germany. BURGUM, ZELDIN, WRIGHT: THIS IS HOW AMERICA WILL ACHIEVE ENERGY DOMINANCE With the advent of the AI race, Wright said the need for a stable, booming American coal sector is paramount. “China opened up 93 gigawatts of coal… one gigawatt [can power the entire] Denver Metro,” he said. America needs between 50 and 100 GW of additional coal power to win the AI arms race with China, Wright said in response to a question from Fox News Digital. In September, Wright’s office also announced $625 million would be put toward reinvigorating the U.S. coal industry in response to Trump’s executive order calling for such, and another directive to “strengthen the reliability and security of the U.S. energy grid.” Wright’s office said in a release that the administration has saved more than 15GW of coal-powered electricity, in part through relaunching the council. Last July, a DOE analysis found that the loss of coal-fired power plants would make grid reliability unsustainable, while also finding that 100GW more peak-hour supply is needed by 2030.
Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado presents Nobel medal to Trump despite institute ban
Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado said she presented President Donald Trump with her Nobel Peace Prize medal, describing it as a historic gesture recognizing his commitment to freedom and the fight against tyranny. Machado spoke with reporters outside the U.S. Capitol Thursday, when she was asked whether she offered her Nobel Peace Prize to Trump. “I presented the president of the United States the medal … the Nobel Peace Prize, and I told him, ‘Listen to this, 200 years ago, General Lafayette gave Simón Bolívar a medal with George Washington’s face on it,” Machado said. “He kept that medal for the rest of his life. Actually, when you see his portraits, you can see the medal.” She said Lafayette gave the medal to Bolívar as a symbol of the partnership between the people of the U.S. and the people of Venezuela and their shared fight for freedom against tyranny. TRUMP PLANS TO MEET WITH VENEZUELA OPPOSITION LEADER MARIA CORINA MACHADO NEXT WEEK “Two hundred years in history, the people of Bolívar are giving back the heir of Washington, a medal, in this case the medal of the Nobel Peace Prize, as a recognition for his unique commitment with our freedom,” Machado said. Trump thanked Machado for the medal in a post on Truth Social on Thursday evening. “It was my Great Honor to meet María Corina Machado, of Venezuela, today,” Trump wrote. “She is a wonderful woman who has been through so much. María presented me with her Nobel Peace Prize for the work I have done. Such a wonderful gesture of mutual respect. Thank you María!” NOBEL PEACE PRIZE RECIPIENT MACHADO PLEDGES TO RETURN TO VENEZUELA, SEES ‘ALARMING’ INTERNAL CRACKDOWN Machado’s meeting with Trump came nearly two weeks after the U.S. captured Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro and amid lingering questions about her political future. The meeting also followed comments from Trump casting doubt on Machado leading the country rather than endorsing the Venezuelan opposition leader. “I think it would be very tough for her to be the leader,” Trump told reporters Jan. 3. “She doesn’t have the support within or the respect within the country. She’s a very nice woman, but she doesn’t have the respect.” The Washington Post previously reported Trump was annoyed Machado won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2025, an award he had hoped to receive and that Machado dedicated to him, though the White House said the president’s decisions were based on “realistic decisions.” KRISTI NOEM DELIVERS TRUMP’S ULTIMATUM TO VENEZUELA’S VICE PRESIDENT FOLLOWING MADURO CAPTURE OPERATION Still, Machado floated the idea of transferring the prestigious award to Trump last week during an appearance on Fox News’ “Hannity.” “Did you at any point offer to give him the Nobel Peace Prize?” Sean Hannity asked. “Did that actually happen?” Machado responded, “Well, it hasn’t happened yet.” “I certainly would love to be able to personally tell him that we believe — the Venezuelan people, because this is a prize of the Venezuelan people — certainly want to give it to him and share it with him,” Machado continued. “What he has done is historic. It’s a huge step toward a democratic transition.” Despite her intent, the Norwegian Nobel Institute shut down the idea last Friday. “Once a Nobel Prize is announced, it cannot be revoked, shared or transferred to others,” the institute said in a statement. “The decision is final and stands for all time.” Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House for a reaction. Fox News Digital’s Michael Sinkewicz contributed to this report.
DHS arrests armed man with extra ammunition for alleged assault of officer at late-night Minneapolis riot
FIRST ON FOX: The Department of Homeland Security says it arrested a man in Minneapolis Wednesday night who assaulted a federal immigration agent while carrying a gun and box of ammunition. The incident occurred several hours after DHS says a separate agent was attacked by an illegal migrant from Venezuela with a shovel. The illegal migrant was shot in the leg, prompting riots to escalate in the city shortly after. “Last night during a riot in Minneapolis, a U.S. citizen was arrested for assaulting officers while carrying a firearm,” DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin told Fox News Digital. “The individual showed up to the protest with a gun and a box of ammunition in a bag. The individual threatened violence against law enforcement officers while pointing at his bag. TRUMP DRUG CZAR RIPS DEMOCRATS OVER ANTI-ICE RHETORIC PUTTING ‘EVERYBODY’S LIFE IN DANGER’ “After law enforcement deployed crowd control measures to calm an increasingly volatile crowd, the individual kicked a metal smoke canister at officers. He then pushed an officer, and he was arrested for assault,” McLaughlin explained. “While being arrested, he stated he had a firearm, which was located along with a box of ammunition. He was not carrying his concealed carry permit. This is not the peaceful protesting that the First Amendment protects.” Tensions in Minneapolis have been high as days of riots ravage the city and federal law enforcement officers face off with agitators. Riots began shortly after 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good was killed by an ICE agent during an altercation in Minneapolis last week. ICE HEAD SAYS AGENTS FACING ‘CONSTANT IMPEDIMENTS’ AFTER MIGRANT SEEN RAMMING CARS WHILE TRYING TO FLEE Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem referred to the Good as a “domestic terrorist,” alleging she used her vehicle as a weapon after obstructing ICE agents on the roadway. Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey told ICE to “get the f— out of Minneapolis” during a news conference after Good’s death, and Gov. Tim Walz criticized DHS, posting to X that he saw the video, and referred to Noem’s explanation of the incident as a part of a “propaganda machine.” On Thursday, President Donald Trump threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act if people in Minnesota continue to disobey the law and endanger federal officers. “If the corrupt politicians of Minnesota don’t obey the law and stop the professional agitators and insurrectionists from attacking the Patriots of I.C.E., who are only trying to do their job, I will institute the INSURRECTION ACT, which many Presidents have done before me, and quickly put an end to the travesty that is taking place in that once great State,” Trump posted to TRUTH Social. Should President Trump invoke the legislation signed into law in 1807, he would be allowed to send National Guardsmen into the area to stabilize control and reduce violence.
Trump rolls out ‘Great Healthcare Plan,’ urges Congress to slash costs for Americans
President Donald Trump unveiled his new “Great Healthcare Plan” Thursday, and urged Congress to create and pass legislation with the provisions included in an attempt to lower healthcare costs for Americans. The plan, which comes amid a big push from the White House to focus on affordability issues for Americans, calls on Congress to get behind a series of provisions outlined in the plan that stem largely from previous executive orders the president has signed during this term. DEMOCRATS HOLD THE GOVERNMENT HOSTAGE OVER SUBSIDIES AMERICANS DON’T WANT Specifically, the “Great Healthcare Plan” calls on Congress to codify Trump’s most “favored nations drug pricing” initiative that instructs drug companies to lower costs and keep them in alignment with what drugs in other developed countries cost, according to a White House fact sheet. Trump issued an executive order on the matter in May. The plan also aims to maximize price transparency, and require providers or insurers to take Medicare or Medicaid to “prominently post their pricing and fees in their place of business and ensure insurance companies are complying with price transparency requirements,” according to the fact sheet. 17 REPUBLICANS REBEL AGAINST HOUSE GOP LEADERS, JOIN DEMS TO PASS OBAMACARE EXTENSION The plan also calls for ending taxpayer-funded subsidy payments to insurance companies, and instead of sending those funds to eligible Americans instead — a proposal that Trump has suggested previously. “The government is going to pay the money directly to you. It goes to you, and then you take the money and buy your own health care,” Trump said in a video the White House released Thursday. “Nobody has ever heard of that before, and that’s the way it is.” It’s unclear how the federal government plans to directly distribute funds to Americans, and an administration official told reporters Thursday that the administration is open to working with Congress on that front. “These are commonsense actions that make up President Trump’s Great Healthcare Plan, and they represent the most comprehensive and bold agenda to lower health care costs to have ever been considered by the federal government,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters on Thursday. “Congress should immediately take up President Trump’s plan and pass it into law.” Meanwhile, the Senate is prepared to vote on extending the Affordable Care Act subsidies, which were a sticking point during the government shutdown in October and expired at the end of 2025. The House passed extending the subsidies for three years Jan. 8.