Newsom asks for nearly another $3B for state health program overwhelmed by illegal immigrants
California Gov. Gavin Newsom is requesting an additional $2.8 billion loan to address a bloated deficit in the state’s Medicaid program, which has surpassed budget expectations largely due to coverage for illegal immigrants. The new request comes after the Democratic governor asked lawmakers last week for a $3.4 billion loan from the general fund to cover outstanding costs for Medi-Cal, one of the state’s primary healthcare programs that takes both federal and state taxpayer dollars. “With tough fiscal choices ahead, Governor Newsom, jointly with Pro Tem McGuire and Speaker Rivas, will evaluate proposals to rein in long-term spending — including in Medi-Cal — while working to protect the core health and social services Californians rely on,” Newsom spokesperson Izzy Gardon told Fox News Digital in a statement Tuesday. TRUMP SURROGATE CORRIN RANKIN PICKED TO LEAD BLUE STATE’S GOP: ‘MAKE CALIFORNIA GREAT AGAIN’ The additional $2.8 billion would keep the health care program afloat through June. Newsom’s office pushed back on the skyrocketing healthcare costs being solely due to illegal immigrants on the programs. Instead, they attribute the increases to higher overall enrollment for all populations and pharmaceutical costs. The administration also pointed to other states, Pennsylvania and Indiana, which are also facing budget shortfalls in their Medicaid programs. However, Republicans in the legislature, who have been hounding against increased spending in the state for years, blame the state’s policies as the culprit for the under-projection. “That’s a staggering $6.2 billion over budget…and the costs keep climbing with no end in sight,” California Senate Republican Minority Leader, Brian Jones, wrote in a post on X on Monday. “Californians should not be forced to shoulder the burden of radical Democrats’ reckless financial mismanagement.” “Even Jerry Brown refused to expand Medi-Cal to all illegal immigrants because he knew it was fiscally irresponsible and unsustainable,” Jones wrote. “Now under Newsom, legal residents are paying the price both financially and in reduced access to healthcare. The public deserves answers: Why are the costs so much higher than what Newsom promised? What is Newsom’s plan to fix the financial disaster he created?” NEWSOM’S ‘UNFAIR’ REMARK ON GIRLS’ SPORTS BELIES RECORD AS GOVERNOR: ‘ABSOLUTE BULLS—‘ Last year, California expanded Medi-Cal to cover all low-income adults ages 26 through 49, regardless of immigration status, making it the first state to do so. Roughly 1.6 million illegal immigrants are enrolled in the state’s healthcare program, according to state data, and 15 million California residents are enrolled. “Both lawfully present and not lawfully present individuals can apply through Covered California to see if they are eligible for a health plan through Covered California or Medi-Cal,” the state’s healthcare marketplace, Covered California, says on its website. “There is no ‘waiting period’ or ‘five-year bar.’” The state initially estimated the program would cost just under $6 billion in FY 2024 to 2025. However, one year into the program, that budget has ballooned. In response, House Republicans recently advanced a proposal to cut $880 billion from a group of programs, mainly Medicaid, over the next 10 years. ‘NEEDS TO RESIGN’: BLUE STATE BLASTED FOR ASKING FOR LOAN AMID SKYROCKETING IMMIGRANT HEALTHCARE COSTS Newsom’s latest budget proposal projects that California will spend $8.4 billion to cover illegal immigrants in Medi-Cal for 2024-2025, followed by $7.4 billion in 2025-2026. During a budget hearing with legislators, Michelle Bass, director of the Department of Health Care Services – which manages Medi-Cal – the state significantly underestimated the number of illegal immigrant enrollees last year. Bass said during the hearing the department had just one month of data on the new “unprecedented” policies before it had to make projections for the budget signed by Newsom, “and all happened at once.”
Bipartisan bill seeks to stop pharmacy middlemen from driving up drug costs for financial gain
FIRST ON FOX: A bipartisan group of lawmakers is pushing to reform the incentive structure for Pharmacy Benefit Managers (PBMs), arguing that it drives up patient costs by encouraging them to favor higher-priced drugs while withholding potential savings. Led by physician and GOP Iowa Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks, the group introduced the “Delinking Revenue from Unfair Gouging (DRUG) Act” on Tuesday, requiring that PBMs in the commercial market only charge a flat fee for their services related to a specific prescription drug, versus letting them continue to charge a percentage of the drug price. PBMs are third-party intermediaries between insurance companies, drug manufacturers and pharmacies that serve to control drug prices and access. The current incentive structure for PBMs, according to the DRUG Act’s sponsors, encourages them to drive up the list price of drugs to increase profits. “Pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) have excessive influence over the prices patients pay at the pharmacy counter,” said Miller-Meeks. “Local Iowa pharmacies are closing due to greedy PBM practices, impacting proximity and access to medications for Iowans. The DRUG Act will put downward pressure on prescription drug prices and insurance premiums by removing the incentive for PBMs to drive up the list price of medications.” I’M A HEALTHCARE CEO WHO HAS FOUGHT MEDICATION MIDDLEMEN. THEN MY DAUGHTER’S CONDITION MADE IT PERSONAL. According to the Iowa Pharmacy Association, PBMs have been using opaque reimbursement models that often pay back pharmacies less than the list cost of a drug and the services provided to dispense it. As a result of these practices, pharmacies in Iowa and across the country have been forced to close, the association said in a January report. Twenty-nine Iowa pharmacies and 2,300 pharmacies nationwide closed their doors in 2024, according to the association. While PBMs have played important roles in making drugs more widely available, through decades of mergers and acquisitions, the three largest PBMs now manage nearly 80% of all prescriptions filled in the U.S., according to a 2024 report from the Federal Trade Commission. CALIFORNIA EXPLOITING MEDICAID ‘LOOPHOLE’ TO PAY BILLIONS FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS’ HEALTHCARE, STUDY SAYS The DRUG Act’s reforms serve to address this anti-competitiveness, which the bill’s sponsors say will also help lower costs. “Pharmacy Benefit Managers (PBMs) contribute to high drug costs because they are incentivized to steer patients towards drugs that are more profitable for PBMs, but may be less clinically effective for consumers,” said Rep. Nannette Barragán, D-Calif., one of the bill’s co-sponsors. “This broken system disproportionately harms low-income individuals, seniors, and those with chronic illnesses who rely on life-saving prescriptions to manage their health.” CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP Rep. Donald Norcross, D-N.J., another co-sponsor of the DRUG Act, said families in his district “are crying out for relief from high prescription drug prices.” “Americans deserve access to quality health care and affordable prescription drugs,” Norcross said. “The DRUG Act reins in prescription drug prices by removing the incentive for pharmacy benefit managers to drive up costs, increasing transparency and prioritizing patients over profits.”
SCOOP: Impeachment articles hit judge who ordered Trump to stop Tren de Aragua deportation flights
FIRST ON FOX: A House GOP lawmaker has filed impeachment articles against the federal judge who ordered the Trump administration to stop deportation flights being conducted under the Alien Enemies Act. “For the past several weeks, we’ve seen several rogue activist judges try to impede the president from exercising, not only the mandate voters gave him, but his democratic and constitutional authority to keep the American people safe,” Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, told Fox News Digital. “This is another example of a rogue judge overstepping his…authority.” Gill’s resolution, first obtained by Fox News Digital, accused U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg of abusing his power in levying an emergency pause on the Trump administration’s plans to deport illegal immigrants under a wartime authority first issued in 1798, which President Donald Trump recently invoked to get members of the criminal Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua out of the U.S. “Chief Judge Boasberg required President Trump to turn around planes midair that had aliens associated with Tren De Aragua, a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization,” the resolution said. “This conduct jeopardizes the safety of the nation, represents an abuse of judicial power, and is detrimental to the orderly functioning of the judiciary. Using the powers of his office, Chief Judge Boasberg has attempted to seize power from the Executive Branch and interfere with the will of the American people.” TRUMP ASKS SUPREME COURT TO REVIEW BAN ON BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP In a brief interview with Fox News Digital shortly before filing his resolution, Gill suggested he wanted the matter to go through the House in traditional form – which would first put the resolution in front of the House Judiciary Committee, where Gill is a member. “I’ll be talking to [Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio] about it,” Gill said. “I think the best way to do this…is to go through the judiciary committee, which is where impeachment of judges runs through. I think the more we can stick with that plan, the better.” A legal firestorm is brewing after Boasberg verbally issued a 14-day restraining order Saturday night to immediately halt the Trump administration’s Tren De Aragua deportation plan. It comes in response to human rights groups arguing that Venezuelan nationals with legitimate asylum claims are in danger of being swept up in the deportations, despite having no known connection to the notorious gang. The Texas Republican, who is class president for first-term members in the 119th Congress, first threatened to file impeachment articles against Boasberg on Sunday. Trump backed the move on Tuesday morning in a fiery post on his Truth Social account. Trump called him a “Radical Left Lunatic of a Judge, a troublemaker and agitator,” adding, “HE DIDN’T WIN ANYTHING! I WON FOR MANY REASONS, IN AN OVERWHELMING MANDATE, BUT FIGHTING ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION MAY HAVE BEEN THE NUMBER ONE REASON FOR THIS HISTORIC VICTORY.” “I’m just doing what the VOTERS wanted me to do. This judge, like many of the Crooked Judges I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!!” Trump wrote. Gill accused Boasberg of knowingly “tying the president’s hands so that Trump and his team, instead of executing on the mandate the voters gave him, are litigating every single action that the president is taking.” He said it was “unconstitutional” and a “usurpation of executive authority.” The Trump administration has pointed out that the judge’s written order was issued after two planes carrying alleged gang members were already in the air, arguing it was too late to turn the planes around at that point. A third plane that took off after the first two was not carrying any Alien Enemies Act deportees, the administration said. “All of the planes that were subject to the written order, the judge’s written order, took off before the order was entered in the courtroom on Saturday,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Monday. She said the administration did not run afoul of any court order. However, Boasberg pushed back in a court hearing later that day, according to The Associated Press, saying at one point to the Trump administration’s lawyer, “I’m just asking how you think my equitable powers do not attach to a plane that has departed the U.S., even if it’s in international airspace.” RUBIO HEADS TO PANAMA, LATIN AMERICA TO PURSUE TRUMP’S ‘GOLDEN AGE’ AGENDA The standoff could make it all the way to the Supreme Court and could have seismic repercussions on the bounds of lower-level federal judges’ authority. Gill’s move also comes after similar threats by other Trump allies in the House. Reps. Eli Crane, R-Ariz., Derrick Van Orden, R-Wis., and Andrew Clyde, R-Ga., have all vowed to file impeachment articles against U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer for blocking Department of Government Efficiency efforts. The court declined to comment when reached by Fox News Digital on Gill’s resolution.
Thousands of new JFK assassination files set to be released after Trump announcement
A new batch of approximately 80,000 unredacted files on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy (JFK) is set to be released Tuesday after President Donald Trump made the long-awaited announcement just one day earlier. “So, people have been waiting for decades for this, and I’ve instructed my people… lots of different people, [director of national intelligence] Tulsi Gabbard, that they must be released tomorrow,” Trump said during a visit to the Kennedy Center in Washington, D.C. “You got a lot of reading. I don’t believe we’re going to redact anything. I said, ‘just don’t redact, you can’t redact.’” TRUMP ANNOUNCES HE WILL RELEASE 80,000 JFK ASSASSINATION FILES ON TUESDAY, GOING TO BE ‘VERY INTERESTING’ Trump also commented that the files would be “very interesting.” Back in January, Trump signed an executive order to declassify files on the assassinations of JFK, his brother Robert F. Kennedy (RFK) and civil rights icon Martin Luther King, Jr. (MLK). The order requested that the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) and the attorney general submit a proposed plan for the JFK files release by February 7. Both offices, in coordination with the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs and the Counsel to the President, had until the end of the day to submit their proposed plan. DNI and other officials were expected to submit their proposed release plans for the RFK and MLK files on March 9. WEEKS AFTER EPSTEIN FILE FALLOUT, A NEW DEADLINE LOOMS IN THE RELEASE OF THE RFK AND MLK FILES The JFK files release comes just a few weeks after the Justice Department revealed a batch of Jeffrey Epstein files in late February. Many of the documents publicized then had already been released during the federal criminal trial of Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s former lover and convicted accomplice. The lack of new material prompted an outcry and criticism of the Trump administration’s handling of the Epstein files – and questions about what the RFK and MLK documents could hold upon their release. The FBI previously said in a February statement that it had conducted a new records search in light of Trump’s executive order, saying at the time, “The search resulted in approximately 2400 newly inventoried and digitized records that were previously unrecognized as related to the JFK assassination case file.” FBI UNCOVERS THOUSANDS OF UNDISCLOSED RECORDS CONNECTED TO JFK’S ASSASSINATION The promise of a JFK files release has been reiterated over the last several administrations, with Trump promising on the campaign trail to declassify the documents upon entering his second term. “When I return to the White House, I will declassify and unseal all JFK assassination-related documents. It’s been 60 years, time for the American people to know the truth,” he said at the time. Trump had also promised to release the last batch of documents during his first term, but such efforts ultimately dissipated. Trump blocked the release of hundreds of records on the assassination following several CIA and FBI appeals. Former President Joe Biden also released batches of documents during his term. In 2021, he postponed the planned release of several JFK documents, citing the delay to the coronavirus pandemic.
Checks and balances: Trump, supporters seek to push back against ‘activist’ judges
As the lawsuits filed against President Donald Trump have climbed well past the triple-digit mark less than three months into his presidency, some supporters are questioning what actions – if any – can either members of Congress or the White House take to check the power of the courts. Trump’s supporters have criticized so-called “activist” judges who have ruled against Trump. Notably, some have labeled U.S. Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a Trump appointee, as such after she sided with Chief Justice John Roberts and left-leaning justices to uphold a lower court decision that forced the Trump administration to unfreeze USAID payments previously authorized by Congress. More recently, the White House contested a federal judge’s order blocking the administration from using a 1798 wartime law to deport Venezuelan nationals, including alleged members of the violent gang Tren de Aragua. When U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg ordered the Trump administration to turn around any plane carrying deported foreign nationals, the administration sent hundreds of deportees to El Salvador anyway, seemingly in defiance of the judge. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told Fox News later that the plane in question had already “left U.S. airspace” and later added that the administration should not need to comply with the judge’s order. WHO IS JAMES BOASBERG, THE US JUDGE AT THE CENTER OF TRUMP’S DEPORTATION EFFORTS? “The order, which had no lawful basis, was issued after terrorist [Tren de Aragua] aliens had already been removed from U.S. territory,” Leavitt said, adding, “A single judge in a single city cannot direct the movements of an aircraft carrier full of foreign alien terrorists who were physically expelled from U.S. soil.” Boasberg ordered the parties back to court Monday for a hearing over the matter and set a Tuesday deadline for the Justice Department to provide the court with more information about what happened. However, Trump’s apparent defiance of the court demonstrates how the executive branch is looking to push back against judges whose opinions it does not respect, while supporters in Congress cheer on. “Judges targeting President Trump are political hacks and their decisions belong in my SHREDDER,” Rep. Andy Ogles, R-Tenn., wrote on X last week, sharing a video that criticized another judge, U.S. District Judge Amir Ali. Ogles called Ali a “Biden-appointed, woke judicial activist” after the judge, following the Supreme Court’s guidance, ordered the government to pay nearly $2 billion in “unlawfully” restricted USAID funds. Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, a frequent critic of the courts, shared Ogles’ post and wrote, “Judges aren’t presidents.” Lee, in recent weeks, suggested that some judges handing down defeats for the Trump administration “might warrant removal.” FEDERAL JUDGE ORDERS TRUMP ADMINISTRATION TO PAY ‘UNLAWFULLY’ RESTRICTED USAID FUNDS Congress indeed has the power to impeach and remove federal judges for misconduct, corruption or other offenses – Trump has called for Congress to do so – but two-thirds of the Senate would need to vote in favor of removal, and Democrats are unlikely to join Republicans in any such effort. Many judges, for their part, have taken umbrage at the sweeping nature of Trump’s executive orders, which have called for the gutting of government personnel, halted billions in foreign aid – including funds approved by Congress – and attempted to unilaterally end birthright citizenship, among other actions. “An American President is not a king – not even an ‘elected’ one – and his power to remove federal officers and honest civil servants like plaintiff is not absolute,” U.S. District Court Judge Beryl Howell said earlier this month in a court order reinstating a member of the National Labor Relations Board. Constitutional scholars say these separation of powers conflicts long predate Trump and are somewhat expected because of the recent lack of action from the United States Congress. Article I empowers Congress to “make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper” for the executive branch to function. However, when lawmakers focus more on their re-election campaigns or partisan fighting than enacting law, there is a vacuum that is filled by executive action – which faces tough scrutiny from the courts. HERE’S WHY DOZENS OF LAWSUITS SEEKING TO QUASH TRUMP’S EARLY ACTIONS AS PRESIDENT ARE FAILING Congress passed slightly fewer than 150 bills during the 118th session, according to data compiled by the firm Quorum and reported by Axios – making that session, which ended in December, the most unproductive since at least the 1980s. Recent presidents, including former Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden, have responded with a flurry of executive orders and actions to enact their agenda, analysts explained to Fox News Digital in an interview. According to the Code of Federal Regulations and the Federal Register, a president’s executive order can be revoked or modified only by the president or via the legislative branch, if the president was acting on authority that had been granted by Congress. In the Trump era, lawsuits have alleged that Trump has acted without authorization from Congress. In the absence of clearly written laws, judges wield enormous power to interpret the lawfulness of the executive’s action and have done so. Critics of the judiciary have advocated for Congress to curtail this power by either changing the size or structure of certain lower courts or taking similar action. Harvard Law professor Adrian Vermeule opined in a social media post Thursday that Congress, with its Republican majorities in the House and Senate, could simply move to cut off funding for judicial law clerks and other essential legal personnel, making the legislative branch’s “power of the purse” painfully clear. “If Congress simply refused to fund judicial law clerks, secretaries, or computers, one suspects that the TROs would come out more slowly – and perhaps even that the judiciary would gain a renewed appreciation for the limits of its role,” Vermeule wrote on X. However, given Congress’s difficulty in passing legislation, including days of infighting that have delayed the passage of recent stopgap spending bills, it is unclear how effective lawmakers of either party
Allowing judges to impede Trump on immigration poses national security threat: expert
Federal judges who have attempted to put up roadblocks to President Donald Trump’s deportation efforts could endanger national security, according to one expert. “It’s incredible that basically a rogue judge is putting our national security at risk when they block this enforcement action without any legal basis,” Alfonso Aguilar, a former chief of the U.S. Office of Citizenship and the director of Hispanic engagement at the American Principles Project, told Fox News Digital. “Swift enforcement of the law is essential to dissuade foreign actors from trying to engage in criminal behavior in our country.” The comments come after Judge James Boasberg, who was appointed by former President Barack Obama, issued an order Saturday halting one of Trump’s rapid deportation flights of alleged Venezuelan gang members. However, the order was not followed by the administration, who argued that the flight was already in the air before it got word of the judge’s order, prompting Boasberg to hold a hearing Monday that set a one-day deadline for the administration to provide more information on the flight, such as how many people it was carrying and how many of those were removed “solely on the basis” of Trump’s interpretation of the 1798 wartime-era Alien Enemies Act. WHO IS JAMES BOASBERG, THE US JUDGE AT THE CENTER OF TRUMP’S DEPORTATION EFFORTS? The act, which was last invoked during World War II, provides the president broad powers to imprison or deport foreign nationals during a time of war. A proclamation signed by Trump on Saturday claimed that gang members belonging to the Venezuelan-based gang Tren de Aragua (TdA) were “conducting irregular warfare and undertaking hostile actions against the United States,” a follow-up to Trump’s move last month to designate several drug cartels, including TdA, as “Foreign Terrorist Organizations.” That move prompted a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, eventually resulting in Boasberg’s decision to issue a 14-day restraining order halting deportations under the act. However, Aguilar believes the lawsuits are part of a broader strategy by opponents of the president to bog down his administration, arguing that left-wing groups have engaged in “forum shopping” for judges who they believe will be politically sympathetic to resisting Trump. “We’ve seen it since the beginning of the administration, on every single executive order, certainly on immigration enforcement actions, is to go forum shopping, they look for a federal district judge that they know is going to be sympathetic to try to block an order or action from the administration,” Aguilar said. William Jacobson, a Cornell University law professor and founder of the Equal Protection Project, told Fox News Digital that the trend of judges blocking Trump’s orders does raise serious legal questions. TRUMP POLICY ON BORDER JUMPERS EMPOWERS USE OF ‘MAXIMUM CONSEQUENCES,’ BORDER AGENT TELLS FOX “This has been an issue since the start of the Trump second administration,” Jacobson said. “There was a very highly organized effort to drown the administration in lawfare and tie it up and essentially freeze the executive branch.” Jacobson argued that there have already been a “number of rulings” that potentially “overstepped the boundaries of separation of powers,” something he noted has already caught the attention of four justices on the Supreme Court. “The courts are not supposed to rule on political issues,” Jacobson said. “The courts are supposed to rule on legal rights. And I think the administration’s argument is, and they make this argument in the DC Circuit, in the emergency state that’s being briefed right now, that if a judge can interfere in something like this, can a judge order the government not to issue drone strikes on terrorists abroad? Where is the limit in that the federal courts have no ability to interfere in the conduct of foreign policy, in the conduct of military action?” Jacobson believes that the only way to rectify the situation for the administration will be for the Supreme Court to step in, issuing clear guidance to lower court judges on what they can and cannot rule on. Aguilar also believes the Supreme Court will need to intervene, though he stressed that delays in the meantime could continue to spell trouble for national security. “If you send a clear message to these individuals that if you’re coming here to commit crime or engage in terrorism, we will detain you. We will remove you immediately,” he said. “That serves as a powerful form to dissuade this type of behavior. So it does have an impact on the administration’s efforts to protect the security of our country.” Fox News Digital’s Alec Schemmel contributed to this report.
University doctor boasts about finding loopholes to skirt anti-DEI laws: ‘That’s what we do’
FIRST ON FOX: A university doctor recently touted how he has been avoiding anti-diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) laws in Florida while attacking state and federal officials, including top White House official Stephen Miller. Dr. Haywood Brown, associate vice president of Academic Affairs at the University of South Florida, explained how he continues to implement DEI policies and how he has avoided state and federal discrimination laws, as well as a recent Supreme Court ruling that colleges cannot consider race in admissions decisions, during a recent presentation last month at Virginia Commonwealth University. “I really want to discuss the threat of the anti-woke movement to medical education and training and health equity,” he said in a video obtained and reviewed by Fox News Digital. FLORIDA EDUCATORS FILE FEDERAL LAWSUIT CHALLENGING STATE LAW UPENDING DEI POLICIES Haywood explained how his job title changed but revealed that his actual activities did not. “Even though I eliminated my title, I didn’t eliminate my job,” Haywood, who was previously vice president for Institutional Equity at USF, said. “That didn’t change anything that I was doing already.” He explained how at USF a DEI office was rebranded to focus on “cultural enrichment.” “As long as it works? That’s what we do,” he said. “So we changed our name to healthcare access,” Brown said in a presentation. “Who could argue against that? How do you get healthcare excellence? You only get healthcare equity. If you have a workforce that can meet those needs. So my office changed its name, and we’re able to do that to culture and enrichment. And we had it codified by our Faculty Council and a task force. And so the fact that it comes to codify this. And as a result, this is now how we address our issues. And who can argue against culture and environment. You know. But we no longer have a person who’s dedicated to it. We have a council that’s dedicated to it.” Brown added, “Isn’t that slippery? As long as it works. That’s what we do.” Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a bill into law in 2023 that barred colleges and universities from using government funds to promote, support or maintain DEI programs or campus activities. DEI is defined as “any program, campus activity, or policy that classifies individuals on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, gender identity, or sexual orientation and promotes differential or preferential treatment of individuals on the basis of such classification,” according to the State University System of Florida. Brown said in the presentation that people in the health community know best, and sometimes have to ignore the directives from “the big house,” while also explaining that he has “learned how slippery you need to be when you’re talking to legislators.” In his address, Brown also attacked White House official Stephen Miller, who has been critical of DEI initiatives. “Well, Stephen Miller has already tried to attack the University of South Florida,” he said of Miller. “He’s a Dookie [Duke University alum]. We don’t claim him. He’s also, and he also claims to be Jewish, but we’ll see.” He also said that the Supreme Court decision would not affect Florida as “race conscious” admissions have been banned in Florida since 1999. REV. AL SHARPTON THREATENS BOYCOTTS FOR COMPANIES ENDING DEI: ‘YOU TOOK EVERYTHING’ He also described his experiences on Capitol Hill and how “I’ve learned how slippery you need to be when you’re talking to legislators.” In a statement to Fox News Digital, the university said that it is reviewing the matter. “The University of South Florida is disappointed and troubled by the statements of Dr. Haywood Brown, who is set to retire from USF on July 1,” a University of South Florida spokesperson told Fox News Digital. “The university follows all state and federal guidance, policies and laws, and any suggestion otherwise by Dr. Brown is untrue. USF is reviewing this matter.” The revelations brought criticism from groups opposed to DEI in healthcare. “Woke DEI ideology is invasive at our university medical schools. The speech by former USF vice president for Institutional Equity Dr. Haywood Brown at Virginia Commonwealth University Health should raise alarm bells for state legislators, governors, attorneys general and anyone concerned about the state of medicine. Do No Harm will continue to work to expose administrators harming our healthcare system and we will not stop until this woke DEI ideology is fully eradicated.” Kristina Rasmussen, executive director of Do No Harm, told Fox News Digital. “This is just another example of how health systems across the country are intentionally prioritizing a woke agenda over patient care,” Will Hild, executive director of Consumers’ Research, told Fox News Digital. “The Trump Administration has made it crystal clear that woke ideology such as DEI is illegal and must be removed from our institutions. Organizations like VCU think they can pull the wool over Americans’ eyes by inviting speakers like Dr. Haywood Brown, who has been caught openly strategizing on how to break the law and continue DEI practices covertly. Dr. Haywood may be proud of his plan to rename DEI positions and offices, but someone should tell institutions like VCU who continue to allow illegal DEI practices that they are effectively begging the Trump Administration to investigate their discriminatory practices.” Fox News Digital reached out to Brown for comment but did not receive a response.
Trump now speaking with Russia’s Putin about ending Ukraine war
President Donald Trump is now speaking with Russian President Vladimir Putin about ending the war in Ukraine, the White House said. The call, which began at 10 a.m. ET, is “going well, and still in progress,” White House spokesman Dan Scavino said at 10:54 a.m. ET. It comes after Trump said last night that “Many elements of a Final Agreement have been agreed to, but much remains.” “Thousands of young soldiers, and others, are being killed. Each week brings 2,500 soldier deaths, from both sides, and it must end NOW. I look very much forward to the call with President Putin,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social account. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said Tuesday that the two leaders would speak about the war in Ukraine but that there are a “large number of questions” regarding normalizing U.S.-Russia relations, according to The Associated Press. WHAT TO EXPECT FROM THE TRUMP-PUTIN CALL ON UKRAINE WAR State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said Monday that “the ball is now in Russia’s court” to accept a U.S.-proposed ceasefire deal that Ukraine agreed to last week. The U.S.-backed proposal, which includes an immediate 30-day ceasefire and guaranteed resumption of U.S. military aid and intelligence to Ukraine, was finalized during diplomatic talks in Saudi Arabia last week. “Ukraine expressed readiness to accept the U.S. proposal to enact an immediate interim 30-day ceasefire to the Russia-Ukraine conflict. The ball is now in Russia’s court,” Bruce said during a State Department briefing. UKRAINE’S ZELENSKYY REPLACES TOP MILITARY OFFICIAL AHEAD OF TRUMP-PUTIN CALL The last time Trump and Putin spoke was in mid-February. “I just had a lengthy and highly productive phone call with President Vladimir Putin of Russia. We discussed Ukraine, the Middle East, Energy, Artificial Intelligence, the power of the Dollar, and various other subjects,” Trump said at the time. “We both reflected on the Great History of our Nations, and the fact that we fought so successfully together in World War II, remembering, that Russia lost tens of millions of people, and we, likewise, lost so many!” Trump continued. “We each talked about the strengths of our respective Nations, and the great benefit that we will someday have in working together. But first, as we both agreed, we want to stop the millions of deaths taking place in the War with Russia/Ukraine,” he also said. This is a developing story. Please check back for updates. Fox News’ Alec Schemmel contributed to this report.
Trump’s DOJ to tackle ‘barbaric Hamas terrorists’ with new Oct 7 task force
The Justice Department is cracking down on Palestinian militant group Hamas with a new task force aimed at providing justice to the victims of Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023 attack on Israel. Attorney General Pam Bondi said the group, known as Joint Task Force October 7, would focus on identifying, charging and prosecuting those who conducted the 2023 attacks, which took the lives of roughly 1,200 people — including 47 U.S. citizens. Hamas also took more than 250 people hostage, including eight U.S. citizens. Specifically, the task force will investigate acts of terrorism and civil rights violations by those who have provided support to and financially backed Hamas, other related Iranian proxies, and antisemitism from these groups. “The barbaric Hamas terrorists will not win — and there will be consequences,” Bondi said in a Monday statement. WHO IS MAHMOUD KHALIL, THE ANTI-ISRAEL COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY ACTIVIST ICE ARRESTED? A senior counterterrorism prosecutor from the Justice Department’s National Security Division will lead the task force, along with a senior FBI special agent serving as the task force commander, and an FBI intelligence analyst as deputy task force commander, according to the Department of Justice. FBI agents, analysts, forensic accountants, data scientists and linguists will all serve on the task force and will work on investigating and prosecuting domestic and extraterritorial terrorism cases. Likewise, the FBI will start to embed agents within Israel’s National Bureau of Counter Terror Financing and will coordinate with foreign counterparts with the FBI’s Legal Attaché office in Israel under the task force. The task force’s efforts will expand upon the Justice Department’s ongoing investigations into those involved in the Oct. 7 attack and advance the agency’s efforts to hold “Hamas supporters accountable,” the Justice Department said in a news release. The Justice Department’s announcement of the new task force coincides with the arrest of anti-Israel activist Mahmoud Khalil, who played a major role in the protests against Israel at Columbia University. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents took Khalil, a Palestinian raised in Syria and a permanent U.S. resident, into custody on March 9. FEDERAL AGENCIES TO REVIEW COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY’S CONTRACTS, GRANTS AFTER ‘FAILURE’ TO PROTECT JEWISH STUDENTS The Department of Homeland Security said that Khalil “led activities aligned to Hamas, a designated terrorist organization,” and Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that the administration would revoke the green cards of any Hamas supporters in the U.S. and deport them. White House officials told Fox News Digital following Khalil’s arrest that the Justice Department, the Department of Homeland Security and State Department are investigating Khalil as a possible national security threat. The investigation has detected “antisemitic and hateful” posts on Khalil’s social media, and determined he organized multiple antisemitic protests on Columbia’s campus, the officials said. Meanwhile, Khalil’s attorneys have challenged the Trump administration’s actions and filed motions asserting that ICE violated Khalil’s constitutional rights.
Trump calls for judge in deportation legal battle to be impeached
President Donald Trump called for the impeachment of a judge in a Truth Social post on Tuesday, apparently referring to U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg who recently sought to block deportation flights to El Salvador. “This Radical Left Lunatic of a Judge, a troublemaker and agitator who was sadly appointed by Barack Hussein Obama, was not elected President – He didn’t WIN the popular VOTE (by a lot!), he didn’t WIN ALL SEVEN SWING STATES, he didn’t WIN 2,750 to 525 Counties, HE DIDN’T WIN ANYTHING! I WON FOR MANY REASONS, IN AN OVERWHELMING MANDATE, BUT FIGHTING ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION MAY HAVE BEEN THE NUMBER ONE REASON FOR THIS HISTORIC VICTORY,” Trump declared in the post. “I’m just doing what the VOTERS wanted me to do. This judge, like many of the Crooked Judges’ I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!! WE DON’T WANT VICIOUS, VIOLENT, AND DEMENTED CRIMINALS, MANY OF THEM DERANGED MURDERERS, IN OUR COUNTRY. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!” the president added. This is a breaking news story. Check back for updates.