Dem lawmaker calls for TSA to bring back shoes-off airport security policy
Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., is demanding that the Transportation Security Administration reintroduce its controversial policy requiring travelers to take off their shoes before going through airport security checkpoints. Duckworth called on the TSA to immediately reverse its move to end the “shoes-off” policy, calling former Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s decision last summer to scrap the policy a “reckless act” that may put travelers at risk. “Secretary Noem’s decision to implement a shoes on policy on July 8, 2025, likely without meaningful consultation with TSA, was a reckless act,” Duckworth wrote in a letter to Acting TSA Administrator Ha Nguyen McNeill. “Allowing a potentially catastrophic security deficiency to remain in place for seven months and counting betrays TSA’s mission,” she added. “At a minimum, TSA’s failure to swiftly implement corrective action warrants the immediate withdrawal of Secretary Noem’s reckless and dangerous policy that increases the risk of a terrorist smuggling a dangerous item onto a flight.” NEARLY 20-YEAR SHOE-OFF AIRPORT SECURITY POLICE IS ENDED BY TRUMP ADMINISTRATION This comes after a classified watchdog report found that TSA scanners cannot effectively screen shoes, according to CBS News. Duckworth said the inspector general flagged the issue as urgent to Noem but that no action was taken. Duckworth said that the inspector general found that Noem’s policy shift had “inadvertently created a new security vulnerability in the system.” The former secretary’s failure to take corrective action after the report’s findings was “outrageous, unacceptable and dangerous to the flying public,” Duckworth said. The senator argues that TSA’s lack of response may violate federal law, writing that the agency missed a legally required 90-day deadline to outline corrective actions after receiving the watchdog’s report. “Such inaction violates Federal law, Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance and DHS’s own directives,” Duckworth wrote. FLIGHT PASSENGERS SLAM AIRLINES FOR PUSHING EARLY BAG CHECKS EVEN WITH EMPTY BINS ON BOARD The previous policy requiring passengers to take off their shoes during TSA screening was implemented in 2006. The senator wrote that Noem’s policy change reflected a “willingness to gamble the American people’s security,” calling it a “stunning failure of leadership.” “We expect this change will drastically decrease passenger wait times at our TSA checkpoints, leading to a more pleasant and efficient passenger experience,” she said at the time. “As always, security remains our top priority. Thanks to our cutting-edge technological advancements and multi-layered security approach, we are confident we can implement this change while maintaining the highest security standards.” Duckworth accused Noem, who was removed by President Donald Trump last month and replaced by current DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin, of prioritizing politics over security. The senator wrote that Noem’s policy change reflected a “willingness to gamble the American people’s security,” calling it a “stunning failure of leadership.” “Secretary Noem’s willingness to gamble the American people’s security in an unsuccessful attempt to boost her popularity was, and remains, a stunning failure of leadership—particularly following President Trump’s decision to launch an unconstitutional war of choice against Iran that DHS has determined, “is causing a heightened threat environment in the United States,” she wrote.
Dem senator ripped for ‘smear’ of female activist advocating for Swalwell’s accusers: ‘Very bad look’
Sen. Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., is facing heat for attempting to discredit a user on X who said sexual misconduct allegations against Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., who is running for governor, will end up “kick[ing] his a–.” Gallego, who has been friends with Swalwell for many years, also defended Swalwell for being “targeted” in a separate post on social media, arguing he is the subject of sexual misconduct allegations because he is “in first place.” Swalwell has fiercely denied the allegations being elevated on social media by Democratically-aligned politicos, including Cheyenne Hunt, a former Capitol Hill staffer who is currently a nonprofit director at the group Gen-Z for Change, and Arielle Fodor, a “political content creator,” teacher and mother who dubs herself “Mrs. Frazzled” online. “This false, outrageous rumor is being spread 27 days before an election begins by flailing opponents who have sadly teamed up with MAGA conspiracy theorists because they know Eric Swalwell is the frontrunner in this race,” Micah Beasley, a spokesperson for Swalwell, said on Tuesday. SWALWELL THREATENS FBI WITH LEGAL ACTION AS PATEL REPORTEDLY WEIGHS ‘FANG FANG’ FILES RELEASE “Yeah I’m gonna be so real with you…Swalwell is a wrap. I’ve seen what I needed to see,” Fodor wrote on X under her “Mrs. Frazzled” pseudonym. “He isn’t going to sue ANYBODY over talking about this because discovery would kick his a–. Why this man ran for governor is BEYOND ME.” In direct response, replying to an X post quoting her comment, Gallego shot back: “This person started to posting for the first time 3 days ago…” Gallego’s post came in the early hours of the morning Tuesday, and was subsequently followed up with another post defending Swalwell: “When you are in first place, is when they target you,” Gallego said in the second tweet several hours later. “Eric is a fighter and he will win the Governors race.” “WHOA this is a very very bad look by Gallego. There is no reason for him to proactively smear Dem women and advocates when 1) he should just wait for the reporting to come out, and 2) the race isn’t even in AZ,” Democratic campaign strategist Bhavik Lathia said in a reply to Gallego’s initial remark. “Hey, I just got off the phone with a trusted friend. This is real. Take it seriously. Eric Swallwell cannot be our nominee. There is going to be a lot more coming out soon. I can’t say more right now, but stay tuned,” Lathia wrote in a separate X post earlier this week. ‘USEFUL PUPPET’: ERIC SWALWELL IN THE HOT SEAT AFTER TRAVELING TO DOHA ON SEVERAL QATAR-SPONSORED TRIPS When reached for comment, Gallego and Swalwell did not respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment, which included questions about whether they wanted to respond to critics who have suggested Gallego is trying to discredit women raising the allegations, as opposed to speaking to them directly. Gallego and Swalwell have been House colleagues and friends dating back at least a decade, and were paling around in Qatar in 2021 during a now-infamous Qatari Business Council-funded trip to the Middle East nation. They were infamously pictured taking a camel excursion along the Persian Gulf together with their spouses during the trip, which included a stay at a luxury Four Seasons hotel in Qatar and other activities and meetings. Gallego also served as the national campaign chair of Swalwell’s failed presidential campaign in 2019. A press release announcing Gallego as the campaign chair quoted Swalwell saying, “As two young dads, we babysit for each other’s kids, and share ideas on how to make child care and health care more affordable. Ruben is a dear friend, and I’m honored to have his support in this campaign,” referring to Gallego. “‘Believe all women until it’s politically inconvenient,’” conservative political strategist Alec Sears also said in response to Gallego. “Ah yes the recency of someone’s social media posts are definitely indicative of whether something’s true or false,” added Curtis Houck, who is the managing editor at the Media Research Center’s Newsbusters. A Substack website tied to Fodor, aka Mrs. Frazzled, says she has an entire subscriber base and runs a newsletter called “Frazzled About Education.” “If I were you, I’d be more worried about my own skeletons instead of trying to discredit women. And the for the record, Mrs. Frazzled has a storied internet platform, and dedication to amplifying Democratic organizations such as Defense of Democracy. You could’ve googled her,” Democrat political strategist, Simone Kathleen Rossi, said in response to Gallego’s post about how Fodor cannot be trusted. “In 13 years, no one in Eric Swalwell’s Congressional office has ever been asked to sign an NDA. Ever. In 13 years, not a single ethics complaint by any staff in his office or any other office has ever been lodged. Ever,” Beasley told media outlets Tuesday.
Top school district slapped with complaint alleging ‘elaborate system’ to keep kids’ gender transitions secret
FIRST ON FOX: One of the largest school districts in the country is facing allegations that it lets teachers decide if parents are sufficiently “supportive” enough to tell them about their child’s desire to switch genders. Trump-aligned America First Legal (AFL) filed a formal complaint against Montgomery County Public Schools, which is in the suburbs of Washington, D.C., with the Departments of Justice and Education, alleging it has been violating the constitution and other federal law through its “Gender Identity in Montgomery County Public Schools” handbook. AFL goes on to allege the school district repeatedly instructs staff to condition parental involvement on whether a parent is deemed “supportive” enough. Under a section of the plan titled “Communication with Families,” the handbook instructs that faculty should talk with a student to “ascertain the level of support” they receive at home to help make decisions on whether to share with parents that their child requested to change their pronouns, be called by a different name, or even sleep with the opposite biological sex during overnight field trips. Part of the “system” AFL also describes in its complaint guidance from the handbook that instructs educators to leave such gender-related information out of documents federal law allows parents access to. GOP LAWMAKER VOWS TO GIVE PARENTS MORE POWER AS SCHOOLS ‘BLATANTLY’ VIOLATE STUDENTS’ RIGHTS The watchdog claims Montgomery County Public Schools is violating the Free Exercise, Free Speech and Due Process Clauses in the Constitution, as well as the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), with their policies that keep parents in the dark. The district did not immediately comment on the complaint, citing policy not to comment on pending litigation. The non-grade specific, 14-page “Gender Identity” handbook, aimed at ensuring “a culture of respect and equity,” sets forth policies for any student wishing to identify as “transgender” or “gender nonconforming.” The handbook includes a section about developing a “Gender Support Plan” for students to ensure they have “equal access and equal opportunity to participate in all programs and activities at school” and to ensure they are protected from “gender-based discrimination at school.” An element of creating that plan includes filling out an intake form, called Form 560-80. “The completed form must be maintained in a secure location and may not be placed in the student’s cumulative or confidential files,” the plan states. “While the plan should be consistently implemented by all school staff, the form itself is not intended to be used or accessed by other school staff members.” AFL alleges in their complaint that the district “does not explain this directive,” but notes “the only apparent purpose is to prevent the form from being placed in records that parents are entitled to access under FERPA.” TRUMP ADMIN SQUASHES CONTROVERSIAL BIDEN RULE FORCING FOSTER HOMES TO AFFIRM CHILDREN’S LGBTQ+ STATUS There is also a section in the handbook on students’ permanent records, which parents have a right to access under FERPA. “All students have the right to be referred to by their identified name and/or pronoun” the plan asserts. However, it also notes, that “students are not required to change their permanent student records … as a prerequisite to being addressed by the name and pronoun that corresponds to their identified name.” “The school must protect the student’s previous identity once a change to a student’s gender and/or legal name has occurred,” the section continues. The plan cites students’ privacy directly after the section about communicating with families. “All students have a right to privacy. This includes the right to keep private one’s transgender status or gender nonconforming presentation at school,” the plan states. The handbook goes on to say that information about a student’s transgender status constitutes “confidential medical information,” and it argues that sharing such information with parents or guardians is a FERPA violation in and of itself. Meanwhile, in a different section of the handbook titled “Communication with Families,” educators are explicitly instructed that “prior to contacting a student’s parent/guardian,” they “should speak with the student to ascertain the level of support the student either receives or anticipates receiving from home.” “In some cases, transgender and gender nonconforming students may not openly express their gender identity at home because of safety concerns or lack of acceptance,” the section continues. “Matters of gender identity can be complex and may involve familial conflict. If this is the case, and support is required, Department of Student Conduct and Appeals (DSCA) should be contacted. In such cases, staff will support the development of a student-led plan that works toward inclusion of the family, if possible, taking safety concerns into consideration as well as student privacy, and recognizing that providing support for a student is critical, even when the family is nonsupportive.” In addition to communication, the plan also extends these parental notification policies to the use of intimate spaces typically reserved for the same gender, including sleeping arrangements for overnight trips. The plan effectively states, according to AFL, that students can both pick which facilities they want to use, including for overnight field trips, and teachers are not allowed to tell parents about it. “Montgomery County Public Schools has constructed an elaborate system designed to keep parents in the dark about some of the most consequential decisions affecting their own children,” said America First Legal’s Ian Prior. “Federal law and the Constitution are unambiguous: parents have the fundamental right to direct the upbringing of their children and to access their children’s education records. MCPS’s policies turn both of those principles on their head.”
Fox News Poll: Record number say taxes are too high; government spending seen as wasteful
With the deadline to file taxes a week away, a record number of voters say their taxes are too high, according to the latest Fox News Poll. They are also bothered by the rich not paying their fair share and how the government uses their money. In addition, three-quarters feel government spending is wasteful — up almost 20 points since last year. Last year, 57% said a great deal (44%) or almost all (13%) of government spending was inefficient; now that’s up 18 points, with 75% feeling that way (53% a great deal, 22% almost all). FOX NEWS POLL: BROAD ANXIETY ABOUT AI DOESN’T EXTEND TO JOBS The increase in those thinking spending is wasteful is seen among most demographics, with the biggest bumps among Democrats and independents. Three-quarters of Republicans think government spending is wasteful, down from more than 8 in 10 in March 2025. Voters are also down on how the Trump administration has handled identifying and cutting wasteful government spending, with nearly two-thirds, 64%, calling their efforts only fair (20%) or poor (44%), up from 56% last March (13% only fair, 43% poor). While there is broad bipartisan agreement that a significant share of government spending is wasteful and inefficient — with roughly three-quarters of Democrats, Republicans, and independents saying so — a sharp partisan divide emerges on the Trump administration’s handling of identifying and cutting that waste: nearly all Democrats (90%) and a large majority of independents (80%) say it is not doing a good job, while 7-in-10 Republicans (69%) give it a positive rating. A record 70% of voters think the taxes they pay are too high — up 11 points from last March and surpassing the previous high of 64% in March 2024. It also marks the largest year-over-year increase since the question was first asked in 2004, when 51% felt taxes were too high. A majority of voters have consistently said their tax burden is too much. FOX NEWS POLL: SOUR VOTERS SAY WASHINGTON IS OUT OF TOUCH Compared to last year, groups showing the highest increase in concern over how much they are paying include voters with graduate degrees (+24 points since 2025), very liberal voters (+20), Democratic men (+19), moderates (+19), rural voters (+17), White voters without a college degree (+16), and women ages 45+ (+16). What bothers people most about federal income taxes is the wealthy are not paying enough (38%), although that figure has dipped slightly from last year’s record high of 45%. Close behind is concern about how the government spends their tax dollars, up 3 points from a year ago to 29%. Other irritations are the amount of taxes paid (14%), feeling too many people don’t pay enough (10%), and the complexity of the system (9%). Democrats (57%) and independents (40%) are the most concerned about the rich not paying enough, while Republicans’ biggest issue is the amount the government uses (39%). “The data show why Democrats persistently frame budget, spending, and tax policy questions as a matter of the rich paying their fair share,” says Republican Daron Shaw, who conducts the Fox News survey with Democrat Chris Anderson. “It’s one of the only ways the party is competitive on these issues given public skepticism about government performance.” Disapproval of how President Trump is handling taxes has reached a record high of 64%, up 11 points from a year ago. CLICK HERE FOR CROSSTABS AND TOPLINE Dissatisfaction is up across the board, including among Democrats (+9 points disapproving since April 2025), independents (+14) and Republicans (+9). One more thing… AI use is on the rise, but not for tax prep. Nearly 9 in 10 voters (87%) say they are not using AI to help with their taxes this year, while roughly 1 in 10 (13%) say they will or already have. Those most likely to say they will use AI are Republicans under age 45 (29%), voters under 30 (23%), Hispanic voters (21%), Black voters (20%), and employed voters (19%). Conducted March 20-23, 2026, under the direction of Beacon Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R), this Fox News survey includes interviews with a sample of 1,001 registered voters randomly selected from a national voter file. Respondents spoke with live interviewers on landlines (104) and cellphones (641) or completed the survey online after receiving a text (256). Results based on the full sample have a margin of sampling error of ±3 percentage points. Sampling error for results among subgroups is higher. In addition to sampling error, question wording and order can influence results. Weights are generally applied to age, race, education and area variables to ensure the demographics are representative of the registered voter population. Sources for developing weight targets include the most recent American Community Survey, Fox News Voter Analysis and voter file data.
WATCH: Leavitt slaps down critics who called Trump’s Iran threat a bluff
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said that President Donald Trump’s threat to destroy Iranian civilization was not a bluff during Wednesday’s press briefing. A two-week ceasefire agreement was reached between the Iranian government and the United States and its allies on Tuesday, just before the 8 p.m. deadline Trump previously set in a Truth Social post. “It was a very, very strong threat from the president of the United States that led to the Iranian regime to cave to their knees and ask for a ceasefire and agree to re-opening the Strait of Hormuz,” Leavitt said. “So it was a very strong threat that led to results. As the Secretary of War stated at the Pentagon this morning, it was not an empty threat by any means.” TRUMP’S THREAT TO END IRANIAN ‘CIVILIZATION’ SPARKS UPROAR ON CAPITOL HILL Leavitt said that the Department of War had a targeted list ready to go if Iran did not meet Trump’s deadline to open the Strait of Hormuz. Trump first threatened Iran on Easter Sunday in a Truth Social post. He claimed that the Iranians would be “living in Hell,” if the Strait of Hormuz was not opened. On Tuesday, Trump posted that “a whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again.” “I don’t want that to happen, but it probably will,” Trump wrote. TRUMP AGREES TO 2-WEEK CEASEFIRE IF IRAN OPENS STRAIT OF HORMUZ A reporter asked Leavitt if the United States could be seen as a “moral leader” in the world given that Trump threatened the eradication of an entire nation. “The insinuation by anyone in this room that Iran somehow has the moral high ground is insulting considering the atrocities that they have committed against our people and our military over the past five decades,” Leavitt said. While Trump celebrated Iran’s ten-point peace agreement proposal on Truth Social, he garnered staunch criticism from Pope Leo. The leader of the Catholic Church called Trump’s threat to destroy Iran “truly unacceptable.” Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., posted a video on X Tuesday, pushing to invoke the 25th amendment to remove Trump from office. “He is threatening the entire destruction of a civilization,” Khanna said. “This is a moral crime. It is a war crime.”
Schumer blasts Trump’s Iran war as failure, moves to rein in his war powers amid ceasefire
The top Senate Democrat argued that President Donald Trump’s war in Iran has left the U.S. worse off, and plans to force another vote to handcuff the president’s war powers as a fragile ceasefire begins. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., announced that Senate Democrats will again force a vote on a war powers resolution to rein in Trump’s use of the military in Iran when the upper chamber returns. The Senate is slated to return Monday, but the exact day when Democrats will pull the trigger next week is still in the air. Schumer argued the war was “one of the very worst military and foreign policy actions that the United States has ever taken,” at a Wednesday press conference in New York City, and contended that the conflict has left the U.S. worse off in global credibility, left Iran’s nuclear ambitions unchecked, increased gas prices and hampered control of the Strait of Hormuz. TRUMP’S IRAN THREAT RATTLES GOP AS SOME REPUBLICANS BREAK RANKS His decision to again try to curtail Trump’s war authorities comes as the U.S. and Iran have entered a two-week ceasefire — a deal brokered just before Trump’s apocalyptic deadline Tuesday night. “Trump must end the war now,” Schumer said. “The only viable solution is a lasting diplomatic one. A two-week ceasefire, especially one as fragile as this, is not a strategy. It’s not a diplomatic solution. It’s not a plan.” Republicans lauded the ceasefire, however. Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., contended on X that it would be “Iran’s chance to do the right thing.” “Excellent news,” Scott said Tuesday night. “This is a strong first step toward holding Iran accountable and what happens when you have a leader who puts peace through strength over chaos and weak appeasement policies.” As the newly minted ceasefire enters its first day, Iran has already presented a 10-point plan for a broader peace agreement. The proposal includes demands to retain control of the Strait of Hormuz and continue a uranium enrichment program — conditions Trump swiftly rejected. TRUMP IRAN THREAT SPARKS CALLS FOR HIS OUSTER, BUT ONE DEM SAYS EFFORT ‘NOT REALISTIC’ “There is only one group of meaningful ‘POINTS’ that are acceptable to the United States, and we will be discussing them behind closed doors during these negotiations,” Trump said on Truth Social. “These are the POINTS that are the basis on which we agreed to a CEASEFIRE.” Vice President JD Vance, Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff, and Jared Kushner are slated to negotiate a broader peace deal in person in Islamabad over the weekend. But Schumer and Senate Democrats are calling for an immediate end to the conflict. IRAN REVEALS 10-POINT PLAN FOR PEACE WITH THE US – HERE’S WHAT’S IN IT “Congress must reassert its authority, especially at this dangerous moment,” Schumer said. “No president, Democrat or Republican, should take this country to war alone — not now, not ever. Republicans will once again have the opportunity to join Democrats and end this reckless war of choice.” His plan to again force a vote on a war powers resolution would mark the fourth such attempt in the upper chamber since the conflict began in late February. Senate Democrats had initially teed up five war powers resolutions to force Trump to withdraw forces from the region in a bid to grind the Senate to a halt and compel Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth to testify on Operation Epic Fury. The previous attempts have all been blocked by Republicans, despite growing unease within the GOP over Trump’s recent threats to bomb power plants and bridges, as well as his warning that a “whole civilization will die tonight.”
Mullin weighs using airport customs as leverage against sanctuary cities
Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin said the federal government could stop processing customs at airports in sanctuary cities as a way to pressure them on immigration enforcement. Such a move could effectively lock out global travelers from major cities like New York, New Orleans and Philadelphia, placing a damper on incoming commerce and economic benefits that could directly affect those cities’ business environments and tax bases. Mullin told “Special Report” that as sanctuary cities refuse to cooperate with DHS to enforce immigration law, the agency may need to consider that when providing services to those cities. “This one area we may take a look at is some of these cities have international airports,” he said. “If they’re a sanctuary city, should they really be processing customs into their city?” DEMOCRATS BROKE AIRPORT SECURITY. NOW THEY’RE CALLING THE SOLUTION DANGEROUS Many sanctuary cities did not respond to requests for comment, even as Mullin said such jurisdictions are on their face “not lawful” and should not consider themselves absolved of certain federal policies. International airports and their customs apparatus present a potential leverage point, given that DHS controls them and oversees enforcement agencies like ICE, CBP and USCIS that sanctuary cities oppose and hinder. Fox News Digital reached out Tuesday to the offices of New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani — whose city hosts both LaGuardia and JFK — Seattle Mayor Katie Wilson, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, Denver Mayor Michael Johnston, Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson, Newark Mayor Ras Baraka, Philadelphia Mayor Cherelle Parker and New Orleans Mayor Helena Moreno, as well as Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner, who recently held a conference at Philadelphia International Airport to again threaten to prosecute ICE agents. As of late Wednesday afternoon, none had provided comment. SEE IT: TRAVELERS SOUND OFF AS ICE AGENTS DEPLOYED TO AIRPORTS AS SHUTDOWN DRAGS PAST 40 DAYS In his interview, Mullin said that the subject needs to be given serious consideration. “If they’re a sanctuary city, and they’re receiving international flights, and we’re asking them to partner with us at the airport, but once they walk out of the airport they’re not going to enforce immigration policy, maybe we need to have a really hard look at that because we need a focus on cities that want to work with us,” he said. Mullin added that with Democrats continuing the partial shutdown of his agency, something must give. “We are going to have to start prioritizing things at some point,” he said. “[They’re] wanting to defund Customs & Border [Protection] — well, who processes those individuals when they come off the planes?” The secretary said he is not staking out any position outside of his congressionally mandated bounds, and that he is not trying to “push those” but that he is simply trying to convince all municipalities to partner with his agency. Fox News Digital’s Nora Moriarty contributed to this report.
Top GOP hawk Graham warns Iran deal has ‘troubling aspects’ as ceasefire begins
One of the Iran war’s strongest backers in the Senate said there were “troubling aspects” to the ceasefire deal announced hours ahead of President Donald Trump’s deadline. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., has long supported going after the Iranian regime and gave a full-throated endorsement of Trump’s military action in the region when it began. For now, the conflict has paused after both sides agreed to a two-week ceasefire. Graham said a “diplomatic solution” is the preferred outcome, but he is not sold on the ceasefire deal brokered Tuesday night. TRUMP’S IRAN THREAT RATTLES GOP AS SOME REPUBLICANS BREAK RANKS “The supposed negotiating document, in my view, has some troubling aspects, but time will tell,” Graham said on X Wednesday. Graham also is calling on Vice President JD Vance and other administration officials to explain the deal to Congress. The request echoes demands by congressional Democrats for Trump officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, to testify about the war before Congress. “I look forward to the architects of this proposal, the vice president and others, coming before Congress and explaining how a negotiated deal meets our national security objectives in Iran,” Graham said. VANCE WARNS IRAN WILL ‘FIND OUT’ TRUMP IS ‘NOT ONE TO MESS AROUND’ IF CEASEFIRE DEAL FALLS APART Whether administration officials will come to Capitol Hill to break down the deal remains unclear. A spokesperson for Vance referred Fox News Digital to the White House for comment. White House Press Secretary Anna Kelly told Fox News Digital that Trump has “been transparent with the Hill since before Operation Epic Fury began, and administration officials provided more than 20 bipartisan briefings for members of Congress to keep them apprised of military updates.” “As the president said, many points have already been agreed to during the diplomatic process, and we are far along on a definitive agreement to deliver long-term peace in Iran and across the region,” Kelly said in a statement. Vance, along with Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, are set to negotiate in-person in Islamabad for a broader peace agreement, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Wednesday. DEMOCRATS THREATEN TO GRIND SENATE TO A HALT TO FORCE PUBLIC IRAN HEARINGS “The first round of those talks will take place on Saturday morning local time, and we know we look forward to those in-person meetings,” Leavitt said. For now, Trump’s threat to bomb bridges and power plants in Iran is on hold while the broader peace agreement is negotiated. Iran publicly presented a 10-point plan to end hostilities that includes repayment for war damage, the ability to continue enriching uranium, full control of the Strait of Hormuz, and an end to all sanctions against the country, among other demands, in exchange for an agreement not to develop a nuclear weapon. Graham argued Iran should not be allowed to “save face” by maintaining even a small nuclear enrichment program. He said the only outcome he supports is “a deal that will stop their maniacal drive to a nuclear weapon, among other things.” Trump has already criticized that proposal on Truth Social. “There is only one group of meaningful ‘POINTS’ that are acceptable to the United States, and we will be discussing them behind closed doors during these negotiations,” Trump said. “These are the POINTS that are the basis on which we agreed to a CEASEFIRE.”
Trump admin scores Minnesota court win in Medicaid fraud crackdown
A federal judge declined to block the Trump administration’s Medicaid funding deferral to Minnesota, finding the state’s challenge was premature and giving the White House a temporary legal win as it expands its anti-fraud push. Judge Eric Tostrud, an appointee of President Donald Trump, concluded this week that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services could, for now, withhold more than $259 million in Medicaid funds from Minnesota and require the state to provide piecemeal evidence that Medicaid reimbursements were legitimate before receiving them. The order was a boon to the Trump administration’s new, aggressive anti-fraud campaign that was largely spurred by a recent multimillion-dollar welfare fraud scandal in Minnesota. Tostrud said in a 42-page order that Minnesota’s lawsuit challenging the deferral was premature and that a preliminary injunction was unwarranted for numerous reasons. VANCE ANTI-FRAUD TASK FORCE SUSPENDS 221 CALIFORNIA HOSPICE AND HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS SO FAR “Some of the legal theories Minnesota asserts are novel, and the law does not support them,” Tostrud said. The White House announced an anti-fraud task force in March, saying in an executive order that “staggering fraud and waste in Minnesota alone is a case in point.” Trump tapped Vice President JD Vance as the fraud czar, and the task force has taken a multi-agency approach to its crackdown. CMS, led by Administrator Mehmet Oz, was enlisted to be more proactive with Medicaid by temporarily withholding reimbursements to states over potential instances of fraud rather than proven fraud. In addition to Minnesota, CMS is also eyeing Medicaid deferrals in California, New York and Maine, meaning more litigation could arise and lead to federal judges across the country weighing in and a potential escalation to higher courts. Minnesota’s notorious $250 million Feeding Our Future fraud scandal first broke onto the national radar in 2022 and drew renewed national attention in 2025 as convictions piled up and the state became a flashpoint in the broader fight over public-benefits fraud. A state-commissioned review of Minnesota’s Medicaid program report became a major flashpoint this year in the Trump administration’s broader “war on fraud.” The report highlighted vulnerabilities in 14 “high-risk” Medicaid services during a four-year period and flagged that $1.7 billion could have been “potentially improper.” NEW AUDIT EXPOSES FLAWED SYSTEM CRITICS SAY LET MINNESOTA FRAUD TO SLIP THROUGH CRACKS: ‘DIDN’T ACT FOR YEARS’ In the state’s lawsuit against the Trump administration and CMS, Democratic Attorney General Keith Ellison alleged that “the federal government has … weaponized Medicaid against Minnesota as political punishment” in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act and due process under the Constitution. “Deferral has never been used to categorically deny funds to a state across entire service areas, as is being done here,” Ellison’s complaint read. Citing the 2019 Supreme Court case Department of Commerce v. New York, Tostrud said that even if the Trump administration’s motives were, in part, political, that would not necessarily deem the Medicaid deferral unlawful. “A court may not set aside an agency’s policymaking decision solely because it might have been influenced by political considerations or prompted by an Administration’s priorities,” Tostrud wrote, quoting a concurring opinion in the case. “Agency policymaking is not a rarified technocratic process, unaffected by political considerations or the presence of Presidential power.” Ellison’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Judge blocks Trump’s push to deport Abrego Garcia, rebukes DOJ for trying to ‘dictate’ court
A U.S. judge in Maryland rejected the Trump administration’s attempt to deport Kilmar Abrego Garcia to Liberia, using an otherwise procedural order Tuesday to scold the Justice Department for its conduct and for attempting, in the judge’s view, to “dictate” the actions of the court. U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis took umbrage at the government’s demand that she rule by mid-April on their request for her to dissolve her injunction keeping Abrego Garcia in the U.S. for now, and allowing them to deport him to Liberia. She sharply disputed the Justice Department’s assertion that the court “must” rule by that date, at risk of having the injunction ignored. “Respondents cannot dictate the Court’s schedule or the outcome of the motion,” Xinis said. “Nor can they appeal a judicial order that does not exist.” ABREGO GARCIA REMAINS IN US FOR NOW AS JUDGE TAKES CASE UNDER ADVISEMENT Ultimately, Xinis said Tuesday, the request was “not ripe” for the court to rule on the government’s removal of Abrego Garcia, and set new briefing dates for both parties. She also set a new briefing schedule, with filings due on April 20, and a new hearing date, scheduled for April 28. Lawyers for the Trump administration told the court during a hearing hours earlier that they still intend to deport Abrego Garcia to the African country of Liberia, despite a new agreement between the U.S. and Costa Rica that would allow him to be sent there. Acting ICE director Todd Lyons argued that allowing Abrego Garcia to be sent to Costa Rica, his preferred country of removal, would be “prejudicial” to the U.S., citing what Lyons described as the “significant” government resources and capital the U.S. has invested in negotiating his removal and the removal of certain other migrants to Liberia. Another official suggested Abrego Garcia could “remove himself” to Costa Rica, should he choose to live there, which the judge noted was a “fantasy.” ABREGO GARCIA LAWYERS ASK US JUDGE TO ORDER RETURN TO MARYLAND AMID ONGOING CRIMINAL CASE Abrego Garcia’s status has been at the center of a legal and political maelstrom since March 2025, when he was deported to his home country of El Salvador, despite a 2019 order from an immigration judge. He was returned by the Trump administration to the U.S. late last spring. Xinis, who has presided over Abrego Garcia’s civil cases for the last 13 months, has developed a reputation for her careful, methodological style of questioning — a process she previously likened to “eating an elephant, one bite at a time.” But the laborious review process has sparked criticism from Trump allies and Justice Department lawyers alike, who have expressed frustration with the lengthy timeline and what they argue are undue delays to removal efforts. ABREGO GARCIA REMAINS IN US FOR NOW AS JUDGE TAKES CASE UNDER ADVISEMENT The Justice Department has bitterly disputed Abrego Garcia’s current status in the U.S. for months, as well as the injunction keeping him in the country, for now. His case has been further complicated by several details, including the November 2025 determination that Abrego Garcia had not been issued a final notice of removal needed to deport him to a third country. Still, Xinis’s unusually pointed order lays out what the judge described as a “careful recapitulation” of the case history, before concluding that “if anyone, Respondents bear the responsibility for substantial delay.” Trump administration officials have for months sparred over the final notice of removal in question, as well as whether the court should consider a retroactive removal order that an immigration judge issued in December. Other hearings have focused on what, if any, assurances the four African nations previously identified for Abrego Garcia’s removal had provided, should he be deported there. Lawyers for the Trump administration have suggested on multiple occasions that Xinis lacks jurisdiction to review Abrego Garcia’s case, citing matters involving diplomacy and foreign sovereigns, an area where presidential powers are at their strongest. Senior Trump administration officials have assailed Xinis and other district judges as “activist” judges whom they say have overstepped their powers in halting or pausing some of the president’s biggest policy priorities, including on immigration issues and enforcement. Xinis, for her part, has proceeded unfazed. She said in February that the government had failed to provide the court with any “good reason to believe” that they plan to remove Abrego Garcia to a third country in the “reasonably foreseeable future.” Instead, she said, the government “made one empty threat after another to remove him to countries in Africa with no real chance of success.”