Senate committee to vote on Dr. Oz’s nomination to run the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
The Senate Committee on Finance is set to vote later Tuesday afternoon on whether to advance President Donald Trump‘s pick to lead the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Dr. Mehmet Oz, to a full Senate confirmation vote. The vote follows two hearings by the committee that probed Oz over his plans for the federal healthcare programs, his views on abortion, potential conflicts of interest in the healthcare industry and more. If confirmed, Oz would be in charge of nearly $1.5 trillion in federal healthcare spending. Medicare, a federal healthcare program for seniors aged 65 and up, currently provides coverage for about 65 million Americans, according to the Center for Medicare Advocacy. Medicaid, which assists people with low incomes, covers roughly 72 million Americans, according to Medicaid.gov. HAWLEY SKEPTICAL OF TRUMP PICK OZ: ‘I HOPE HE’S CHANGED HIS VIEWS’ A former heart surgeon who saw his fame rise through his appearances on daytime TV and 13 seasons of “The Dr Oz Show,” Oz later transitioned into politics, launching an unsuccessful bid for Pennsylvania’s open Senate seat in 2022. He ultimately lost to John Fetterman, then the state’s lieutenant governor. Oz graduated from Harvard and received medical and business degrees from the University of Pennsylvania. As the administrator of CMS, Oz would make decisions related to how the government covers procedures, hospital stays and medication within the federal healthcare programs, as well as the reimbursement rates at which healthcare providers get paid for their services. DR. OZ BATS BACK DEMOCRATIC ATTEMPTS TO PAINT HIM AS A ‘SNAKE OIL’ SALESMAN IN SENATE HEARING Earlier this month, Trump’s pick to lead the NIH and FDA, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya and Dr. Marty Makary, respectively, were also approved in committee and are awaiting full confirmation votes in the Senate. Around the same time that Bhattacharya and Makary won committee approval, Trump withdrew his nomination of former Florida Rep. David Weldon to run the CDC, over fears he did not have the GOP support to clear full confirmation. On Monday, the Trump administration named Susan Monarez, acting director of the CDC, as its new nominee.
CT ballot fraud saga leads GOP to alert Bondi after 150 charges lodged, Dem reforms ‘miss the mark,’ they say
Ballot fraud concerns stretching back to a judicially-overturned 2023 election in Connecticut’s largest city have led state lawmakers to spar over how to reform the system after dozens of criminal charges were lodged in the latest cases there. On Monday, Republican leaders told Fox News Digital they have asked Attorney General Pam Bondi to probe whether “election crimes in Bridgeport” that led to the indictments are “part of a larger, coordinated effort to defraud voters statewide” – adding that Democrats’ two new election reform bills drafted in response to the latest case “miss the mark.” “Connecticut has made embarrassing international news for absentee ballot fraud caught on viral video,” state Sen. Rob Sampson of Wolcott and Senate Minority Leader Stephen Harding of Brookfield said in joint comments to Fox News Digital. Sampson is currently the ranking Republican on the bicameral Government Administration and Elections Committee considering the bills. 4 CT DEM OPERATIVES CHARGED IN ABSENTEE BALLOT MISUSE PROBE “Everyone saw it,” the Republicans said of various CCTV tapes from Bridgeport showing city Democratic Party official Wanda Geter-Pataky allegedly engaging in ballot-stuffing, inserting large numbers of ballots into a drop box outside city hall. Reports at the time characterized the effort as one seeking to benefit Mayor Joe Ganim against challenger John Gomes, and the controversy ultimately spilled into the 2024 court-ordered “redo” between the two men. Sampson and Harding said legislative Republicans wrote to Bondi to formally request a federal investigation into whether “election crimes in Bridgeport are part of a larger, coordinated effort to defraud voters statewide.” They added the two bills presented in committee on Friday – SB 1515 and SB 1516 – are woefully inadequate and do not meet the moment. SB 1515 would establish a Municipal Election Accountability Board, which would provide oversight of towns and cities’ elections and related referenda. SB 1516 would “expand certain post-election procedures” relating to the correction of ballot returns, and better regulate “curbside voting” – including prohibiting a worker from sitting in a voter’s vehicle while they fill out their ballot – and how soon certain criminal convicts could circulate nominating petitions. It also would install an election monitor for larger cities effective for the 2025 off-year elections and prohibit commercial use of certain voter registration information. “We have Democrats from Bridgeport traveling to the capitol to push for the state and individual campaigns to be removed from the absentee ballot process. Empowering the state government in this area is not the solution,” the GOP leaders said. “Connecticut Democrats have shown no appetite for adopting our commonsense reforms.” WATTERS: VOTER FRAUD NEEDS TO BE INVESTIGATED A representative for House Speaker Matt Ritter, D-Hartford, directed Fox News Digital to the Senate, where Senate President Pro-Tem Martin Looney of New Haven did not respond. Much of SB 1516’s recommendations mirror those of Secretary of State Stephanie Thomas, according to a Senate representative. In the lower chamber, House Minority Leader Vincent Candelora called election fraud a “serious problem” in the state, in comments to Fox News Digital. “Residents know it and so does this nation,” said Candelora, R-East Haven. Candelora said bad actors must be told they will face jail time if they commit electoral hijinks. “Until the legislature sends that message, those intent on cheating will always find a way,” he said. Earlier this month, five Democratic officials – including Geter-Pataky, who was repeatedly covered on Fox News Channel’s “Jesse Watters Primetime” – were charged with about 150 election-related offenses all-told, according to the Connecticut Post. In an exposé last year, Watters reported Geter-Pataky had participated in several “get out the vote efforts” over the years and was subject to at least two different election-related probes at the time. “Is Wanda a bug in the system or is Wanda the system? We need cameras everywhere. We need cameras on the drop boxes, in the election centers and in the countingrooms. They make police wear body cameras: We should strap body cameras to election officials,” the host suggested. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP In September, a “Jesse Watters Primetime” correspondent confronted Pataky, who did not offer comment. Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont, a Democrat, previously dismissed claims the “potential corruption” was tied to early voting and absentee balloting. “I think it’s people who do the corrupting,” Lamont said. According to the conservative Heritage Foundation’s “Voter Fraud Report,” Geter-Pataky made “10 drops either directly or indirectly” and another woman made five separate ballot drops during Bridgeport’s 2023 mayoral primary. Meanwhile, the judge who overturned the election ruled the “volume of ballots so mishandled is such that it calls the result of the primary election into serious doubt and leaves the court unable to determine the legitimate result of the primary,” and called videos of the situation “shocking.” A Connecticut Post report on the slew of charges from earlier this month said the “vast majority” are lodged against Geter-Pataky, while other defendants include council members Alfredo Castillo and Maria Pereira. Gomes appeared to disagree with Republicans’ aversion to the bills, telling the Hartford Courant the municipal accountability board outlined in SB 1515 is needed. He pointed to the criminal complaint, which reportedly outlined an allegation Geter-Pataky was permitted by town clerks to insert a ballot into a tote being used to empty a drop box. Fox News Digital reached out to the Justice Department for comment on the request for Bondi’s help.
Trump administration invokes state secrets act on high-profile deportation case
The Justice Department said this week that it has invoked the state secrets privilege in its ongoing court battle over the deportation of Venezuelan nationals to El Salvador, a national security tool that allows the government to withhold certain information from the courts for national security purposes. In the 10-page court filing submitted to U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, Attorney General Pam Bondi and other senior Trump administration officials said they chose to invoke the privilege because disclosure would pose what they described as a “reasonable danger” to national security and foreign affairs. “The Court has all of the facts it needs to address the compliance issues before it,” the Justice Department officials said, adding: “Further intrusions on the Executive Branch would present dangerous and wholly unwarranted separation-of-powers harms with respect to diplomatic and national security concerns that the Court lacks competence to address.” JUDGE CLAIMS ‘NAZIS GOT BETTER TREATMENT’ THAN VENEZUELANS DEPORTED BY TRUMP The news comes as Boasbeg has repeatedly pressed government lawyers for more information about its deportation flights last weekend, which sent around 261 migrants, including Venezuelan nationals and members of the gang Tren de Aragua, from the U.S. to El Salvador. The flights left U.S. soil around the time Boasberg agreed to temporarily block the Trump administration from using the Alien Enemies Act, or the little-used wartime immigration law passed by Congress in 1798, to immediately deport Venezuelan nationals. Hours later, however, planes carrying hundreds of migrants, including Venezuelan nationals removed on the basis of the law in question, arrived in El Salvador. In the days that followed, Boasberg ordered both parties back to court to testify over the removals, and whether the Trump administration knowingly defied his court order. The Justice Department had largely refused to comply with his requests for information – which included questions on how many individuals it deported “solely on the basis” of the Alien Enemies Act proclamation, where the planes landed, what time each plane took off from the U.S., and from where – citing national security protections. Boasberg previously warned the Trump administration of consequences last week if it were to continue to violate his order, noting that their options were to either file information under seal or invoke the state secrets privilege. WHO IS JAMES BOASBERG, THE US JUDGE AT THE CENTER OF TRUMP’S DEPORTATION EFFORTS? Should the Trump administration invoke the state secrets privilege, Boasberg noted at the time, the court “is obligated to ‘determine whether the circumstances are appropriate for the claim of privilege.’” This was disputed in the filing by Bondi and other senior Justice Department personnel, however, who said in the filing Monday night, “No more information is needed to resolve any legal issue in this case.” The legal back and forth comes as the Trump administration has repeatedly stressed that a federal judge, in their view, does not have the ability to rule on national security matters or immigration issues – putting Boasberg, and his ruling, directly in the crosshairs of the Trump administration. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP The Justice Department also appealed the matter to the U.S. Court of Appeals in D.C., which heard the case yesterday. The three-judge panel declined to immediately rule on the matter, though a decision is expected sometime this week. Attorney General Pam Bondi vowed Sunday to appeal the case to the Supreme Court if necessary.
Military ballots in spotlight in final unresolved race from 2024 election
Nearly five months after the 2024 elections, a legal fight is raging in battleground North Carolina in an unsettled and contentious state Supreme Court race. At stake – an eight-year term on the highest court in the nation’s ninth most populous state. After two recounts, incumbent Allison Riggs, a Democrat, leads Republican challenger Jefferson Griffin by 734 votes out of more than 5.5 million cast. Griffin, who sits on North Carolina’s Court of Appeals, has been arguing for months that more than 65,000 ballots from the election should be discarded because they came from what he claims are ineligible voters. FEDERAL JUDGE KICKS LEGAL BATTLE OVER NORTH CAROLINA STATE SUPREME COURT ELECTION BACK TO STATE COURT He says the North Carolina Board of Elections last December improperly dismissed his formal protests and certified the ballots following the recounts. The removal of those ballots from the vote tally could potentially flip the election to Griffin. A trial judge upheld the Board of Elections’ action last month, but the case is now in the hands of a three-judge panel on the state’s appeals court, which listened to arguments on Friday. Among the votes being contested are ballots cast by those with registration records that lacked either a driver’s license number or the last four digits of a Social Security number. Also being challenged are military or overseas voters who did not provide copies of photo identification with their ballots. Griffin’s lawyers argue that counting the contested ballots violates state laws or the state constitution, and the state elections board failed to follow them. However, lawyers for Riggs, as well as the Board of Elections, say the ballots in question were cast lawfully based on longstanding rules and can’t be altered after the fact. On Tuesday, as the state awaits the appeals court ruling in the case, a new ad charges that Griffin is “specifically targeting thousands of military voters.” The spot is by a group called Justice Project Action, which describes itself as a “nonpartisan organization dedicated to upholding the rule of law and the independence of American courts.” The group says their ad, which includes four self-identified military veterans raising “a lot of concerns about military votes being thrown out,” will run on the Fox News Channel in North Carolina. The release of the spot comes a week after more than 200 former judges and legal experts signed a letter urging Griffin to drop his lawsuit. Among those joining the effort were former general counsels for the North Carolina Republican Party and former GOP Gov. Jim McCrory. It is likely that, regardless of how the appeals court judges rule, the case appears headed for the state Supreme Court. AP reporting is included in this report.
D-Day in key battleground: Special election to determine if Democrats or Republicans control State House
It’s Election Day in a western Pennsylvania legislative district in a race that will determine whether the Democrats regain control of the battleground state’s lower chamber or if Republicans win back the State House majority. The Pennsylvania State House is currently deadlocked, with Democrats and Republicans each controlling 101 seats. Democrats lost their razor-thin majority in January after the death of state Rep. Matt Gergerly. Voters in District 35, located southeast of Pittsburgh, on Tuesday are choosing between Democratic candidate Dan Goughnour, a police officer, Republican Chuck Davis, a fire chief, and libertarian Adam Kitta. DEMOCRATS FAR FROM THRILLED ON POSSIBLE BIDEN POLITICAL REEMERGENCE If Democrats end up winning the election – the district leans blue – it will be the fifth time this year they’ve come out on top in a special legislative election with a state majority up for grabs. It comes as the Democratic Party tries to emerge from the political wilderness after November’s stinging election setbacks, when the party lost control of the White House and U.S. Senate and fell short in its attempt to win back the U.S. House majority from the GOP. POLL POSITION: DEMOCRATIC PARTY’S NUMBERS PLUNGE TO ALL-TIME LOWS And recent polling indicates the Democratic Party brand is in need of repair. The party’s favorable rating sank to all-time lows in separate national polls conducted this month by CNN and NBC News. Those numbers followed a record low for Democrats in a Quinnipiac University survey in the field in February. Additionally, the latest Fox News National poll, which was released last week, indicated congressional Democrats’ approval rating at 30%, near an all-time low. And Democrat activists are irate over their party’s inability to blunt President Donald Trump’s agenda. “State Democrats have been overperforming in specials this year because voters trust them to put working families’ needs above the chaos and dysfunction fueled by Trump and Republicans in Washington,” said Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee President Heather Williams in a statement. In a sign of the local election’s importance, Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin stopped by the district last month. “Sending Dan to Harrisburg isn’t just about what it means for this community,” Martin said in a statement to Fox News. “It sends a signal to Pennsylvanians. It sends a signal to Democrats around the country that we’re willing to fight for our values at every single level.” While Democrats are favored in the special election, Republicans have also put resources into the race. “No matter who looks good on paper, you’ve got to have the election,” Pennsylvania House Rep. Jamie Barton, who leads the state House GOP’s campaign arm, told the AP. “We’re not taking anything for granted.” On the side of Pennsylvania, voters will be heading to the polls to fill a vacant state Senate seat. GOP state Sen. Ryan Aument stepped down in December to work as state director for newly elected U.S. Sen. Dave McCormick, a fellow Republican. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP Republican Josh Parsons, a Lancaster County commissioner, Democrat James Andrew Malone, the mayor of East Petersburg, and libertarian Zachary Moore are running to succeed Aument in state Senate District 36, a red-leaning seat in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. Regardless of the election results, the GOP will continue to control the state Senate, where they currently hold a 27-22 majority.
Bihar CM Nitish Kumar takes a sharp dig at Rabri Devi: ‘Party belongs to your husband, not you’
Bihar CM Nitish Kumar and Rabri Devi clashed in the Legislative Council, exchanging sharp insults amid rising political tension before elections.
Iftar politics: Will Congress ditch RJD before Bihar Assembly Elections? What will happen to INDIA?
Will the Bihar Congress exert itself and try to regain its political base, that has eroded considerably over the years, giving space to the RJD?
Far-left Democrat slammed for ‘unhinged’ threat against prominent GOP senator: ‘Inciting violence’
Progressive Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Texas, is being slammed online as “unhinged” for using violent rhetoric implying that Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, “has to be knocked over the head, like hard.” Cruz responded to the controversy simply by posting a meme to X. Crockett was recently warned by U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi to “tread very carefully” after calling for Elon Musk to be “taken down.” Seemingly not heeding Bondi’s warning, another interview clip surfaced today of Crockett advocating for figuratively “punching” her fellow Texan, Cruz. In response to a question about how Democrats can win elections specifically in the red state of Texas, Crockett said, “I think that you punch, I think you punch, I think you OK with punching.” BLUE CITY MAYOR RIPPED BY LOCAL LEADERS FOR PRIORITIZING POLITICS OVER SAFETY: ‘UNDERMINING PUBLIC TRUST’ “It’s Ted Cruz,” she went on. “I mean, like this dude has to be knocked over the head, like hard, right? Like there is no niceties with him, like at all. Like you go clean off on him.” Responding to the clip, the White House’s “rapid response” X account, called Crockett “another unhinged Democrat inciting violence.” Popular conservative account “Libs of TikTok” also chimed in, calling for Crockett to be investigated. “Rep Jasmine Crockett: I am totally against violence! Rep Jasmine Crockett on the same day: Knock Ted Cruz over the head and punch your opponents,” the account said, adding, “The Democratic Party is the party of violence and hypocrisy.” DEMOCRAT MAYOR BLASTED FOR VOWING TO MAKE MAJOR CITY ‘SAFE HAVEN’ FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS “Rep Jasmine Crocket [sic] is explicitly calling for violence,” it went on. “She needs to be investigated.” Cruz responded to Libs of TikTok’s post about Crockett claiming to be against violence with a meme that read: “You keep using that word… I do not think it means what you think it means.” Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, commented: “Pro tip: don’t say things like this, whether you’re in Congress or not.” Conservative influencer Nick Sortor expressed concern that some mentally disturbed individuals could take this as a call to action. “Crockett says you should ‘punch’ your opponents, then says Senator Ted Cruz ‘has to be knocked over the head, like, hard.’ They know what they’re doing. Mentally ill leftists take this as a call to action,” he said. “Jasmine Crockett is ONCE AGAIN inciting violence against Republicans.” This comes amid a spate of violent attacks, vandalism and doxxing against Tesla owners and workers. DEMS FORECAST ‘TRUMP RECESSION,’ AS REPUBLICANS SAY IT’S TIME TO DOUBLE DOWN In some cases, individuals have set fire to Tesla vehicles. After several vehicles at a Tesla service center in Las Vegas were set ablaze in the early hours of Tuesday morning, FBI Las Vegas Special Agent in Charge Spencer Evans told reporters that the incident “certainly has some of the hallmarks” of a terrorist attack, but that it was still too early to say for sure. The FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force is currently investigating the incident. Crockett came under fire last week as well for saying during a “Tesla Takedown” online call that, “all I want to see happen on my birthday is for Elon to be taken down.” “I have learned, as I serve on the DOGE Oversight committee, that there is only one language that the people that are in charge understand right now, and that language is money,” she said. Crockett has said that her calls to action are “nonviolent” and are about figuratively “fighting” for democracy. Crockett and Cruz did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment. Fox News Digital’s Cortney O’Brien and Taylor Penley contributed to this report.
Trump DOJ invokes state secrets in Tren de Aragua deportation case
Attorney General Pam Bondi endorsed the Trump administration’s assertion of state secrets over details of the Tren de Aragua deportation flights on Monday. Bondi issued a court filing Monday night referencing claims from Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Homeland Security Sec. Kristi Noem claiming that specific details of how and when Tren de Aragua gang members were deported on planes last week are covered under state secrets privilege and do not need to be provided to the court. “The Secretary of State and Secretary of Homeland Security have each submitted a declaration asserting a formal claim of state secrets privilege regarding disclosure of the information sought in the March 18, 2025 Minute Order,” Bondi wrote to the court. “Those declarations reflect the studied and well-supported conclusion of each Secretary that disclosure of the information, even ex parte and in camera, would cause significant harm to the foreign relations and national security interests of the United States,” she added. ‘WOEFULLY INSUFFICIENT’: US JUDGE REAMS TRUMP ADMIN FOR DAYS-LATE DEPORTATION INFO Bondi issued the filing to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, which is hearing arguments in the Trump administration’s emergency appeal of a lower court ruling that temporarily blocked its use of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798. JUDGES V TRUMP: HERE ARE THE KEY COURT BATTLES HALTING THE WHITE HOUSE AGENDA Congress passed the Alien Enemies Act immigration law in 1798, and it has since been used only several times in U.S. history, most recently during World War II. The administration asked for a stay pending appeal shortly after an initial March 15 order was issued, calling it a “massive, unauthorized imposition on the Executive’s authority to remove dangerous aliens who pose threats to the American people.” COURT ORDER HALTING DEPORTATION FLIGHTS ‘UNCONSTITUTIONALLY IMPEDES’ EXECUTIVE BRANCH, TRUMP ALLIES ARGUE Last week, Obama-appointed, D.C.-based Judge James Boasberg issued an order to immediately halt any planned deportations of Venezuelan nationals to El Salvador. A plane carrying hundreds of U.S. migrants, including Venezuelan nationals removed under the law, arrived in El Salvador hours later despite the order. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP Boasberg held a fact-finding hearing on Monday night, where he ordered the Trump administration to submit more information on the flights, including information on how planes departed the U.S. that were carrying any people who were deported “solely on the basis” of that proclamation, how many individuals were on each plane, where the planes landed and what time each plane took off from the U.S., and from where. Boasberg imposed a Tuesday noon deadline to submit the information and also ordered the parties to appear in court again on Friday. Fox News’ Haley Chi-Sing contributed to this report
Congress ‘entitled’ to ‘regulating the conduct’ of visa holders, expert says amid deportation push
Reports that the Trump administration has begun to target some lawful permanent residents, better known as “green card” holders, with deportation has raised new legal questions about what rights U.S. legal residents have relative to citizens. “The notion that the United States Congress is not entitled to pass immigration laws regulating the conduct, including the speech of aliens … is close to frivolous,” William Jacobson, a Cornell University law professor and founder of the Equal Protection Project, told Fox News Digital. The comments come as President Donald Trump’s deportation efforts have reportedly spread to several green card holders, who are lawful permanent residents of the U.S., but not U.S. citizens. The green card holders have been targeted for reasons that include alleged support for terrorist organizations and anti-U.S. sentiment, raising questions about the constitutional rights of this group of lawful immigrants. While green card holders have rights protected by the Constitution, Jacobson said they are also subject to U.S. immigration law, a set of rules not faced by U.S. citizens. VIDEO SHOWS ARREST OF COLUMBIA ANTI-ISRAEL RINGLEADER MAHMOUD KHALIL “The focus is on free speech rights … green card holders, really anybody in the country, has First Amendment free-speech rights, but that’s only the first part of the equation,” Jacobson said. “The second part of the equation is that for non-citizens, they’re also governed by the immigration laws that do not apply to citizens. So to the extent the government is able to show grounds under the immigration laws for removal of an alien, whether here on a visa or a green card, the government is entitled to enforce those laws.” At the center of this debate is the case of former Columbia University student Mahmoud Khalil, an activist who was arrested by federal immigration authorities this month and faces accusations of support for the Palestinian terror group Hamas. Khalil, a 30-year-old green card holder who is married to a U.S. citizen, also faces accusations that he was not truthful about prior employment in the Middle East on his visa application. Jacobson said there are several avenues the government could take to remove Khalil from the country for violations of U.S. immigration law, though he will be afforded due process through the immigration law system. “I think there’s plenty of grounds to remove him, or at least potential grounds to remove him, if they’re able to provide proof,” Jacobson said. COLUMBIA STUDENT CLAIMS CLASSMATE ARRESTED BY ICE ‘HATES AMERICA’ These immigration rules apply to all visa and green card holders, and in some cases they can still apply to those who have become naturalized U.S. citizens, Jacobson said. He pointed to the case of Rasmea Odeh, a former American citizen who was convicted by Israeli military courts for involvement in the 1969 Jerusalem supermarket bombing. Odeh received a life sentence and spent 10 years in prison before being released in a prisoner exhange. She later immigrated to the U.S. in 1990 and became a U.S. citizen, but she was convicted in 2014 of immigration fraud for concealing her previous conviction and had her U.S. citizenship revoked. “So even if you come here, and you are naturalized as a citizen, but you have lied on your applications, that is a ground to strip your citizenship and deport you,” Jacobson said. He also noted that the immigration laws were passed by Congress and are being carried out by the president, a system unique to immigrants to the United States. Ultimately, Jacobson said, such laws are in place for good reason. “The notion that once we admit somebody into the country, they can come here, advocate for the destruction of our country, engage in conduct that deprives others of their constitutional rights, engages in an organization devoted to armed struggle and devoted to the destruction of Western civilization, and [that] there’s nothing we can do about it, I think it’s just contrary to the statutory scheme,” Jacobson said.