GOP lawmaker warns that blue state’s likely move will make gas prices skyrocket: ‘Affordability issue’
Rep. Vince Fong, R-Calif., is one of the many voices sounding the alarm about a recent oil refinery closure announcement having a greater impact on American wallets. Valero Energy Corp. announced that it will likely close its Benicia refinery near San Francisco in April 2026, putting more than 400 jobs in jeopardy. “We understand the impact that this may have on our employees, business partners, and community, and will continue to work with them through this period,” Lane Riggs, board chair, CEO and president of Valero, said in a news release on April 16. Fong said the state’s energy policies are making it tough for the industry to survive. CALIFORNIA CAREER POLITICIAN BARBARA LEE WINS MAYOR RACE IN EMBATTLED OAKLAND “This is in addition to other refinery closures that have been announced. So, in totality, what we’re looking at is 20% of California’s refining capacity disappearing. And that’s significant,” Fong told Fox News Digital in an interview. Valero also operates a refinery in Los Angeles, but the move regarding the Benicia location is seen as a major hit. “It’s a warning that California’s fuel supply is in jeopardy, and it’s all caused because of [Democrat Gov.] Gavin Newsom’s poor energy policies. That’s the root cause, and the rigid regulatory environment, all the mandates, all the new regulations that have been put on these refineries, and now it’s putting our fuel supply in jeopardy. And this isn’t just an energy issue. This is an affordability issue. This is a jobs issue. This is a reliability issue,” he continued. ALASKA SENATOR LITERALLY SHREDS BIDEN’S ENERGY ORDERS, BOOSTS WH EFFORTS TO LEVERAGE ARCTIC GAS PIPELINE The Golden State’s policies are major contributors to higher gas prices in the state, according to a recent study by University of Southern California professor Michael Mische. “California’s energy policy is at a breaking point,” Fong said. “This is not a market failure. This is because of regulations and mandates that are pushing refineries to close. They can’t survive in this and make it economically feasible to function in California. And those who are going to suffer are everyday Californians.“ As the state is a major energy supplier, the congressman said its regulations have occasionally gained bipartisan scrutiny from neighboring Arizona and Nevada. “This is going to impact California drivers significantly,” Fong said. “When there’s gasoline shortages, what you’re going to see is the price of gasoline go up. And in California, you know, we pay the highest price of gas compared to the other states.” US, SAUDI ARABIA COULD CEMENT ‘LONG-TERM PARTNERSHIP’ ON NUCLEAR ENERGY As of Sunday, Californians are paying an average of $4.83 per gallon, which is significantly higher than the $3.15 national average, according to AAA. Fox News Digital reached out to Newsom’s office for comment, but it referred the inquiry to the California Energy Commission, which said Valero’s legally required advance notice will help the state better prepare for its next steps. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP “The California Energy Commission (CEC) is committed to its efforts to collaborate with the industry and stakeholders so that the state continues to have a safe, reliable and affordable supply while transitioning away from fossil fuels,” CEC Vice Chair Siva Sunda stated. “As required under Senate Bill X1-2, Valero Refining Company notified the CEC of its intent to idle, restructure or cease operations at its Benicia Refinery by the end of April 2026. This advance notification helps the state to continue to closely monitor the evolving conditions in the fuel supply market and proactively plan and take steps to support the transition in the state’s fuel supply.” “The CEC will continue to work in partnership with the industry and stakeholders to protect consumers during this transition,” he continued. Valero faces $82 million in fines from different governmental bodies in California over environmental regulations, according to KXJZ.
The Supreme Court appears to side with parents in religious liberty dispute over storybooks
The Supreme Court’s conservative majority offered strong support for parents seeking the religious liberty right to be informed about and opt their children out of reading material in elementary schools that they say conflicts with their faith. The Montgomery County, Maryland school board withdrew its original opt-out policy for books related to gender and sexuality, prompting a federal lawsuit. In a marathon two-and-a-half oral argument, the justices debated whether parents have been unfairly burdened in exercising their constitutional rights. It is one of three high-profile religious-themed cases the high court will decide this term—including disputes over tax exemptions for religious groups, and taxpayer funding for private religious charter schools—which will be argued next week. GORSUCH, ROBERTS SIDE WITH LEFT-LEANING SUPREME COURT JUSTICES IN IMMIGRATION RULING Justice Sonia Sotomayor and her liberal colleagues appeared to back the county’s position on the storybooks. She noted a lower appeals court had refused a preliminary injunction to temporarily reinstate the opt-out policy. “They never reached the issue of whether or not there was disruption, or what the motive was for taking away the opt out,” said Sotomayor. “What they decided was that there wasn’t coercion here, that there was mere exposure. I understood from the record that all that was required is that the books be put on the bookshelf. If that’s all that’s required, is that coercion?” But Justice Samuel Alito echoed the views of several of his conservative colleagues, about returning to the previous policy that he said most schools around the country permit. “What is the big deal about allowing them to opt out of this?” he asked. Alito also questioned the content of several of the books raised in the appeal dealing with same-sex marriage. “I don’t think anybody can read that and say: well, this is just telling children that there are occasions when men marry other men,” said Alito. “It has a clear moral message, and it may be a good message. It’s just a message that a lot of religious people disagree with.” Hundreds on both sides of the issue rallied outside the court, some carrying signs like “Let Parents Parent” and “Include All Families.” The suburban Washington county introduced new books with LGBTQ+ characters and themes into the elementary school curriculum in 2022, as part of the district’s “inclusivity” initiative. PROSECUTION CALLS THEIR SECOND WITNESS AT KAREN READ’S RETRIAL FOR MURDER One of the challenged storybooks raised in the appeals is “Prince & Knight,” described as a “modern fairy tale” for ages 4-8, of the two males falling in love after working together to battle a dragon threatening their kingdom, and later marrying. Another book mentioned repeatedly in the court’s public session was “Uncle Bobby’s Wedding,” about a little girl’s reaction to her favorite relative’s plans to marry a man. The school district refused to allow parents to opt out of their The school district refused to allow parents to opt out of their elementary school from the reading program – the same way older students can forego sex ed instruction. While the school board initially allowed parents to keep their children out of this curriculum, the plaintiffs say officials quickly reversed course, announcing in March 2023 that exceptions would not be granted and that parents would not be notified before the books were introduced into their children’s classrooms. Officials cited increased absenteeism as one of the reasons for the change. “We felt as parents that we would present these things to our children like we always have, when they’re ready to receive them. And especially a child with special needs, it’s even more difficult for her to understand,” said Grace Morrison, one of the plaintiffs. She and her husband, both Catholics, now homeschool their daughter, after the school refused an accommodation. “Starting to present issues of gender ideology to a child like this could be extremely confusing and damaging, let alone to the faith that we’re raising her in,” she told Fox News Digital. A federal appeals court ruled for the school district, concluding educators did not apply any pressure on children to abandon their religious beliefs, and “simply hearing about other views does not necessarily exert pressure to believe or act differently than one’s religious faith requires.” State officials told the court that parents who choose to send their children to public school are not “coerced” simply by their classroom exposure there to religiously objectionable ideas. The practical feasibility of an opt-out policy at was the key focus of the high court’s public session. “Once we articulate a rule like that,” said Justice Elena Kagan, “it would be like, opt outs for everyone.” SCOTUS HEARS ARGUMENTS OVER PARENTS’ FIGHT TO OPT CHILDREN OUT OF LGBTQ CURRICULUM But Kagan also raised concerns about young children being exposed to some of the books offered in Montgomery County. “I too, was struck by these young kids picture books and, on matters concerning sexuality. I suspect there are a lot of non-religious parents who weren’t all that thrilled about this.” Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who noted he grew up in the affluent county and still lives there with his wife and two school-age daughters, said he was “mystified” at the why the county canceled its original opt-out policy. Some on the bench raised concerns about a sweeping “a la carte” discretion parents would have to object to what goes in schools. “What about a trans student in the classroom?” said Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. “There’s a student who’s in the class. Must the teacher notify the parents of the student’s existence and give them an opt out to not be in the same classroom with this child?” Dozens of briefs were filed by advocacy groups on both sides of the issue, including competing coalitions of states and lawmakers. Many educators say they should be given deference to develop lesson plans that reflect the community at large, and that navigating a flood of individual religious rights claims would make classroom instruction and collaboration extremely problematic. Parents rights and religious groups
House Republican enters race for Mitch McConnell’s Senate seat, setting up high-stakes GOP primary
FIRST ON FOX: Rep. Andy Barr, R-Ky., is officially entering the race to replace longtime retiring Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. Barr, who has served in the House for over a decade, is expected to kick off his campaign in Richmond, Kentucky this evening. He’s also releasing a video to launch the campaign that paints him as a staunch ally of President Donald Trump and a fierce opponent of “woke” trends on diversity, transgender inclusion, and U.S. energy dominance. “The United States is the greatest country on Earth, and it’s not even close. But here’s the problem. The woke left wants to neuter America – literally,” the Kentucky Republican said in the video. MEET THE TRUMP-PICKED LAWMAKERS GIVING SPEAKER JOHNSON A FULL HOUSE GOP CONFERENCE “They hate our values. They hate our history. And goodness knows they hate President Trump. But here in Kentucky, that’s why we love him. I’m Andy Barr, and I’m running for Senate to help our President save this great country.” His candidacy sets up a high-profile primary race against former Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron. In the video, Barr promised to “deport illegal aliens, instead of putting them up in luxury hotels,” and “get rid of this anti-coal, do-gooder ESG garbage once and for all.” “Working with President Trump, I’ll fight to create jobs for hardworking Kentuckians, instead of warm and fuzzies for hardcore liberals,” Barr said in the video. “And as a dad, let me be clear. I’ll fight to lock up the sickos who allow biological men to share locker rooms with our daughters.” His Senate campaign has also been blessed by House GOP leaders, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., and House Republican Leadership Chair Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y. SENATE GOP PUSHES TRUMP BUDGET FRAMEWORK THROUGH AFTER MARATHON VOTE SERIES “There is no bigger supporter of President Donald J. Trump and our MAGA movement than my dear friend Andy Barr,” Scalise told Fox News Digital. “I am all-in for Andy in his campaign for the US Senate — proud to support him.” Stefanik said, “I am proud to call Andy a friend and I wholeheartedly endorse his campaign for US Senate. Kentucky needs a Senator who stands 100% with President Trump — that my friend, Andy Barr.” Barr said their support “is a strong signal to all Kentuckians that there is only one America First candidate in this race — and only one candidate with a proven record of getting our America First agenda across the finish line.” The conservative lawmaker has been known as a reliable leadership ally in the House and serves as chair of the House Financial Services Committee’s subcommittee on financial institutions. He’s also a leader of several groups in the House, including the Congressional Taiwan Caucus, the Congressional Bourbon Caucus, and the American Worker Task Force. McConnell is the longest-serving senator in Kentucky history and the longest-serving party leader in the upper chamber, only stepping down from leading the Senate GOP conference at the end of last year. His final years in office have been marked by his rocky relationship with Trump, who has called for an end to McConnell’s political career on multiple occasions. Trump and McConnell have also broken on matters of foreign policy and defense. McConnell opposed two major Trump nominees in the national security sphere, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and Pentagon Secretary Pete Hegseth. McConnell also opposed Trump’s Health and Human Services secretary, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Barr and Cameron’s campaigns are a stark departure from that – both have painted themselves as staunch Trump allies. And in Kentucky, where Trump outran former Vice President Kamala Harris by roughly 30%, the president’s endorsement will likely prove decisive.
‘Striking’: DC appeals court interrogates Trump admin on Pentagon’s transgender military ban policy
A three-judge appeals panel in Washington, D.C., grilled the Trump administration over its expected implementation of the Pentagon’s transgender military ban policy and a lower court’s finding of animus behind the ban. Judges Cornelia T.L. Pillard, an Obama-appointee, and Trump-appointees Gregory G. Katsas and Neomi Rao presided over Tuesday’s oral arguments over an order blocking President Donald Trump’s executive order banning transgender individuals from serving in the military from going into effect. “We have a sitting president issuing an executive order that has animus on its face, not directing anyone, any panel of experts, to study this issue, but simply directing the Secretary of Defense to implement a ban on transgender service by transgender persons,” Pillard told Justice Department attorney Jason Manion. “And within a month, the Secretary of Defense doing so with no further study other than the Mattis policy.” FEDERAL JUDGE DENIES TRUMP ADMIN’S EFFORT TO BAN TRANSGENDER PEOPLE FROM MILITARY D.C.-based District Judge Ana Reyes had previously blocked the Trump administration from implementing its ban in March, with Reyes writing in her opinion that the order was “soaked in animus” and discriminated based on a person’s transgender status. Rao asked Manion if the government conceded that there was animus behind the order, to which Manion said they did not. “The relevant question is whether the policy can be explained by any reason other than animus,” Manion responded. Counsel for the appellees, Shannon Minter, also focused on the finding of animus by the lower court, arguing that the policy at hand “does something that is so extraordinarily unusual.” “The government openly, just with complete transparency, expressing animosity towards a group of people and relying on that as a justification and the district court properly noted that,” Minter said. Pillard, who notably asked a majority of the questions, also honed in on the “irreparable harm” the government argues it will suffer if the appeals court does not stay Reyes’ order. HEGSETH SUGGESTS JUDGE REPORT TO MILITARY BASES AFTER RULING THAT PENTAGON MUST ALLOW TRANSGENDER TROOPS Manion argued that Reyes’ order not only affects the military’s competence and readiness as the ban is put on pause, but it also conflicts with the president’s constitutional powers. Manion argued that the “main injuries” include the inability to enforce what the Department believes “to be a valid policy.” Pillard responded back, asking why the government has not previously expressed such concerns of military readiness and competence in past years before the policy came about. “How has the military worked under a different policy?” Pillard asked. “It’s striking to me that the government…has not stymied that.” Katsas specifically asked the government how it expected to go about implementing the policy, asking what procedure would take place “on the back end when there is a servicemember serving who… is found to have some condition that would have been disqualifying at the exception stage.” “Is it a discretionary judgment by a military board? Is it administrative separation?” Katsas asked. Manion said he believed some conditions “undergo an individualized process” in those situations. Pillard expanded upon this line of questioning, asking if there were any other conditions that did not have to undergo a medical evaluation. Manion said he could not think of any at that moment. “This is a core area of presidential power,” Manion said. “[The military] has determined this will increase readiness and not being able to enact it will harm the military and all of those factors add up to irreparable harm here.” Minter likewise argued that there is “no other medical condition that puts a person automatically into separation,” saying “every other condition goes into a med process are you able to do your job.” SKEPTICAL JUDGE QUESTIONS EXECUTIVE ORDER BARRING TRANSGENDER SERVICE MEMBERS FROM JOINING THE MILITARY “We don’t talk about people with diabetes or heart conditions being dishonest… that’s just a red flag,” Minter said. No ruling was issued, but an opinion is expected in the coming days that will likely be appealed to the high court. Minter told Fox News Digital after the oral arguments that they were “encouraged by the argument and hopeful the court will deny the stay.” “The plaintiffs in this case are serving with honor and distinction. They have received medals and commendations, deployed worldwide, and been selected for positions of extraordinary responsibility and leadership,” Minter said. “Purging them from the military will not make our country, safer, stronger, or more secure.” At issue in the case is a Jan. 27 executive order signed by Trump requiring the Defense Department to update its guidance regarding “trans-identifying medical standards for military service” and to “rescind guidance inconsistent with military readiness.” In issuing her injunction, Reyes wrote in her opinion that the plaintiffs in the suit “face a violation of their constitutional rights, which constitutes irreparable harm” that would warrant a preliminary injunction.” The defendants in the suit, which include Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, filed a motion to dissolve the injunction on March 21. In the filing, the government argued that the policy is not an overarching ban but instead “turns on gender dysphoria – a medical condition – and does not discriminate against trans-identifying persons as a class.” After the government agreed to push the implementation deadline to March 28 upon Reyes’ request, Reyes denied the government’s motion to dissolve the injunction, prompting the administration to appeal shortly thereafter. Fox News Digital’s Diana Stancy contributed to this report.
Trump backs Republican rivals in Arizona governor’s race after Rep. Biggs enters contest: ‘I had a problem’
Faced with a dilemma following his endorsement of conservative Karrin Taylor Robson to run for governor of Arizona, President Donald Trump on Monday announced that he will also support Republican Rep. Andy Biggs after the lawmaker “unexpectedly” entered the contest. Robson, a small business owner and lawyer, received Trump’s endorsement when no one else was running, Trump said in a Truth Social post. “I like Karrin Taylor Robson of Arizona a lot, and when she asked me to Endorse her, with nobody else running, I Endorsed her, and was happy to do so,” Trump wrote. “When Andy Biggs decided to run for Governor, quite unexpectedly, I had a problem.” As a workaround, Trump decided to endorse both candidates. Biggs and Robson, both Republicans, have touted Trump’s backing. ‘I WILL NOT REST’: BORDER STATE GUBERNATORIAL HOPEFUL LAUNCHES CAMPAIGN WEEKS AFTER TRUMP BACKED HER “Two fantastic candidates, two terrific people, two wonderful champions, and it is therefore my Great Honor TO GIVE MY COMPLETE AND TOTAL ENDORSEMENT TO BOTH,” Trump said. “Either one will never let you down. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!” In a statement to Fox News Digital, Robson said she was grateful for Trump’s endorsement. “I am so grateful to have the President’s support! Today, President Donald Trump reaffirmed what he told me from the rally stage in December when he urged me to run: That he supports me and has fully endorsed my Arizona First campaign. I cannot wait to be in the Governor’s Office as a partner to his conservative, America First agenda. Onward!” TRUMP’S HOUSE ALLIES UNVIEL BILL ‘HAND IN HAND’ WITH DOGE CRACKDOWN “Thank you, @realDonaldTrump!” Biggs wrote on social media. “It’s been an honor to support you and fight for your agenda since 2016. I look forward to fighting along side you as Governor of Arizona, the greatest state in the nation!” Both candidates have pledged to focus on cutting taxes and stronger border security. “I thank President Trump for his strong endorsement and look forward to working with him to secure our border and make Arizona safe again,” Robson said in a statement at the time of Trump’s February endorsement. “Like President Trump, I know how to create jobs. And like President Trump, I will not rest until our border is secure and Arizona families are safe.” Arizona is currently led by incumbent Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs, who took office in 2023. The general election will be held on Nov. 3, 2026.
EPA chief Zeldin launches talks with Mexico to end sewage hitting San Diego, Navy SEALs: ‘out of patience’
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin visited San Diego Tuesday to address the Mexican sewage flowing into U.S. waters from Tijuana that has contaminated the California coast, including where Navy SEALs train. “The Americans on our side of the border who have been dealing with this … for decades, are out of patience,” Zeldin said at a Tuesday press conference in San Diego. “There’s no way that we are going to stand before the people of California and ask them to have more patience and just bear with all of us as we go through the next 10 or 20 or 30 years of being stuck in 12 feet of raw sewage and not getting anywhere.” “So we are all out of patience,” he continued. “There’s a very limited opportunity. We’re in good faith, both on the American side and also on the Mexican side, what’s being communicated by the new Mexican president is an intense desire to fully resolve this situation.” Zeldin said that he met with Mexican officials for about 90 minutes Monday night to discuss the sewage spewing into U.S. waters — and relayed that the Mexican environmental secretary wants to have a “strong collaborative relationship” with the U.S. to end the pollution. “I will be speaking with the chief of staff to the Mexican environmental secretary to ensure that over the course of the coming days, over the course of the next couple weeks, that we are able to put together a specific statement from both countries on a mutual understanding of what Mexico is going to do to help resolve this issue,” he said. EPA CHIEF TAKES ON MEXICAN ‘SEWAGE CRISIS’ FLOWING INTO US WATERS WHERE NAVY SEALS TRAIN Zeldin said that he is focused on the “specifics” of ending the issue, including drafting a “comprehensive list of everything that we believe with full confidence is going to end the crisis” for projects on both the U.S. side of the border and Mexico. “We did it yesterday during the meeting, where one particular project as it relates to diverting 10 million gallons per day of water from the Tijuana River Valley, sewage from the Tijuana River valley to the dam, will help relieve stress,” he said. “And they were saying it was going to take until the middle or end of 2027, and we started talking through it. It was a very good collaborative discussion where at the end of the back and forth, the Mexican officials were saying that they believe that we would be able to take off a year of that timeline.” MEXICO IS POISONING SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA IN A BORDER CRISIS ALMOST NO ONE KNOWS ABOUT The issue of sewage water flowing into U.S. waters is largely attributed to outdated wastewater infrastructure across the southern border. Zeldin said his Mexican counterparts cited three infrastructure projects that were completed to help address the crisis — including the recently updated San Antonio de los Buenos Wastewater Treatment Plant — but that a handful of other projects are still in the works, such as installing new “international collector floodgates on the Tijuana River” and rehabilitating pumping plants. “Now, if you don’t do all of the other projects and all you do is clean up the current contamination, that feel-good moment will last about a day,” he said. “We have to stop the flow in. Mexico needs to fulfill its part in cleaning up the contamination that they caused.” “We need Mexico to not just commit to all the projects that will stop the flow, but in order to actually finish this project, they’re going to need to commit to that final cleanup,” he said. MEXICAN SEWAGE GUSHING INTO NAVY SEAL TRAINING WATERS IS US’ ‘NEXT CAMP LEJEUNE,’ VETS WARN Zeldin was joined by local leaders during the press conference, including California Republican Rep. Darrell Issa and California Democratic Rep. Mike Levin, who recounted to the media that his fight to end the crisis was personal. “My wife’s nephew trained in Coronado as a Navy SEAL. And in his 20s, he wound up getting cancer,” Levin said. “We don’t definitively know whether that cancer was caused by his service. We know that he’s gotten a lot better. … But like so many Marines and others — our Border Patrol and members of the community — they’re impacted by toxic sewage in the water. We’re impacted in the air.” Zeldin said he was headed to meet with Navy SEALs after wrapping up the press conference. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt commended Zeldin for the trip during the White house press conference on Tuesday, adding that President Donald Trump is committed to having the “cleanest air and the cleanest water.” “I would also add from the president himself, he has always maintained he wants America to have the cleanest air and the cleanest water. And we want to do what’s right for our environment and for our earth,” she said. United States Naval Special Warfare Command headquartered in San Diego and is also where Navy SEAL candidates complete their arduous six-month Basic Underwater Demolition/SEAL (BUD/S) training at the Naval Amphibious Base Coronado. In February, the Department of Defense’s inspector general released a report finding that the Naval Special Warfare Center reported 1,168 cases of acute gastrointestinal illnesses among SEAL candidates between January 2019 and May 2023 alone. “Navy SEAL candidate exposure to contaminated water occurred because (Naval Special Warfare Command) did not follow San Diego County’s Beach and Bay Water Quality Program’s beach closure postings,” the inspector general report found. “As a result of Navy SEAL candidate exposure to contaminated water during training, candidates are presented with increased health risks and NAVSPECWARCOM’s training mission could be impacted.” Veterans who spoke to Fox News Digital earlier in April described the contaminated water a national security crisis. “This is a huge national crisis,” Navy SEAL vet Jeff Gum, who was sickened by the water when he was working through SEAL training in 2008, told Fox Digital in
‘Let us be the parents’: Supreme Court should let parents opt kids out of LGBTQ school lessons, lawyer argues
Counsel representing a coalition of parents fighting for the choice to opt their children out of LGBTQ-related curriculum says the case is about letting parents “be the parents.” “We’re just saying if the school board is going to make that decision, let us have the chance to leave the classroom,” Colten Stanberry, counsel at Becket and attorney for the parents bringing the suit, told Fox News Digital. “And so I think for my parent clients, they’re saying let us be the parents. Keep us involved in the school decision-making process. Don’t try to cut us out.” The Supreme Court heard oral arguments Tuesday in parents’ fight to opt their children out of LGBTQ-related curriculum. The issue at hand in the case, Mahmoud v. Taylor, is whether parents have a right to be informed about and to then opt their children out of reading books in elementary schools that conflict with their faith. MARYLAND MOM TAKING FIGHT TO OPT CHILD OUT OF LGBTQ STORY BOOKS BEFORE SUPREME COURT “Our case is not a book ban case,” Stanberry emphasized. “We’re not saying that these books can’t be on the shelves. We’re saying we want to be out of the class,” Stanberry continued. “And we’re also not saying that teachers can’t teach this material.” A coalition of Jewish, Christian and Muslim parents with elementary school children in Montgomery County Public Schools in Maryland brought suit against the school board after it introduced new LGBTQ books into the curriculum as part of the district’s “inclusivity” initiative. The curriculum change came after the state of Maryland enacted regulations seeking to promote “educational equity,” according to the petitioner’s brief filed with the high court. The school board introduced books that featured transgender and non-binary characters and storylines, according to the brief. The parents’ coalition stated in its brief that the Board “initially honored parental opt-outs in accordance with its own Guidelines and Maryland law” after parents raised concerns over the new curriculum. After the board issued a public statement in line with this stance, the petitioners stated that the board “reversed course” without prior notice. “Without explanation, it announced that beginning with the 2023-2024 school year, ‘[s]tudents and families may not choose to opt out’ and will not be informed when ‘books are read,’” the brief reads. SCOTUS RULINGS THIS TERM COULD STRENGTHEN RELIGIOUS RIGHTS PROTECTIONS, EXPERT SAYS The parents sued the school board, arguing that the denial of notice and opt-outs “violated the Free Exercise Clause by overriding their freedom to direct the religious upbringing of their children and by burdening their religious exercise via policies that are not neutral or generally applicable,” petitioners wrote. The parents cited Wisconsin v. Yoder, a 1972 Supreme Court case, to support their argument. In Yoder, the Court held that a state law requiring children to attend school past eighth grade violated the parents’ constitutional rights under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to direct their children’s religious upbringings. Stanberry says that while this case is much narrower than Yoder, the issue at hand is “a right parents have had from the Supreme Court for over 50 years.” The school board argued in its brief, “The record contains no evidence that teachers have been or will be ‘directed’ or ‘instructed’ to inject any views about gender or sexuality into classroom discussions about the storybooks.” The school board writes that the storybooks were “offered as an option for literature circles, book clubs, or reading groups; or used for read-alouds.” “Teachers are not required to use any of the storybooks in any given lesson, and were not provided any associated mandatory discussion points, classroom activities, or assignments,” the brief continued. The lower court denied the parents’ motion, finding that they could not show “‘that the no-opt-out policy burdens their religious exercise.’” On appeal to the Fourth Circuit, the appeals court affirmed the district court’s decision, with the majority holding that the parents had not shown how the policy violated the First Amendment. SUPREME COURT APPEARS LIKELY TO SIDE WITH CATHOLIC CHURCH AND TRUMP IN KEY RELIGIOUS EXEMPTION CASE Despite the lower court proceedings, Stanberry shared they are “hopeful and excited” as the high court considers the case. “We think this court will really consider the case,” Stanberry said ahead of Tuesday’s arguments. “Obviously, I don’t have a crystal ball. I can’t predict how it’s going to come out, but we’re feeling good going into it.” In a statement to Fox News Digital, the school board said its policy “is grounded in our commitment to provide an appropriate classroom environment for all of our students,” saying the board believes “a curriculum that fosters respect for people of different backgrounds does not burden the free exercise of religion.” “Based on established law, as discussed in our brief and by our counsel at today’s argument, we believe the Supreme Court can and should affirm the lower courts’ rulings,” Liliana López, Public Information Officer for the public schools, said. “Regardless of the outcome, we are grateful for the opportunity to have our case heard by the highest court in the land. We await the Court’s decision.” The case comes at a time when President Donald Trump and his administration have prioritized educational and DEI-related reform upon starting his second term. The Supreme Court has notably also heard oral arguments this past term in other religious liberty and gender-related suits. “I think that this case could be seen as people of faith coming forward and saying, ‘Hey, we want to be accommodated in this pluralistic society. So, I think it’s coming at an opportune moment,” Stanberry said. The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case in mid-January during its 2024-2025 term. Fox News’ Bill Mears, Shannon Bream, and Kristine Parks contributed to this report.
House Republican asks Trump DOJ to criminally prosecute ex-New York Gov Andrew Cuomo
House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chair James Comer, R-Ky., referred former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo to President Donald Trump’s Justice Department for criminal prosecution. Cuomo – the Democratic scion now considered the current frontrunner in the New York City Democratic mayoral primary in June – was first referred to the Biden Justice Department for criminal prosecution in October 2024. Former Rep. Brad Wenstrup, then-chairman of the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, said Cuomo made “multiple criminally false statements” to Congress about his handling of the 2020 COVID-19 nursing home death scandal. In a new letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi on Monday, Comer said “to our knowledge, the Biden Administration ignored this referral despite clear facts and evidence.” He requested that Bondi review the referral and “take appropriate action.” ANDREW CUOMO DENIED ALMOST $3 MILLION IN PUBLICLY MATCHING FUNDS FOR MAYORAL BID, CITES ‘SOFTWARE ERROR’ “Andrew Cuomo is a man with a history of corruption and deceit, now caught red-handed lying to Congress during the Select Subcommittee’s investigation into the COVID-19 nursing home tragedy in New York,” Comer said in a statement Monday. “This wasn’t a slip-up – it was a calculated cover-up by a man seeking to shield himself from responsibility for the devastating loss of life in New York’s nursing homes. Let’s be clear: lying to Congress is a federal crime. Mr. Cuomo must be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. The House Oversight Committee is prepared to fully cooperate with the Justice Department’s investigation into Andrew Cuomo’s actions and ensure he’s held to account.” Reached for comment by Fox News Digital, Cuomo’s spokesman, Richard Azzopardi, dismissed Comer’s letter as “nothing more than a meritless press release that was nonsense last year and is even more so now.” “As the DOJ constantly reminds people, this kind of transparent attempt at election interference and law-fare violates their own policies,” Azzopardi said. “Referrals like these – which have been also made against Planned Parenthood, Hillary Clinton and Anthony Fauci – don’t have to be resubmitted with a new administration, so the only point to doing this is politics.” NEW YORK REPUBLICAN CONGRESSWOMAN MAKES 7-FIGURE CAMPAIGN HAUL, AIMS TO FLIP DISTRICTS TO RED IN 2026 The Cuomo administration issued a directive on March 25, 2020, mandating that nursing homes admit or re-admit potentially COVID-19 positive patients “while simultaneously prohibiting nursing homes from testing these patients before admission or re-admission,” Wenstrup wrote to former Attorney General Merrick Garland in October. The New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) issued a subsequent report on July 6, 2020, titled “Factors Associated with Nursing Home Infections and Fatalities in New York State During the COVID-19 Global Health Crisis.” The report alleged nursing home staff – not the March 25 directive – caused excess COVID-19 deaths in nursing homes. Comer said witness testimony and new documents revealed in the select subcommittee’s referral showed Cuomo “personally drafted and edited portions of this purportedly independent and peer-reviewed report.” New York state Attorney General Letitia James said in a January 2021 investigative report of her own that the Cuomo administration may have undercounted the total number of nursing home deaths by as much as 50% The select subcommittee launched its investigation in May 2023. It issued a subpoena for Cuomo’s testimony in March 2024 after months of delays. Cuomo sat for a transcribed interview on June 11, 2024. He later testified in front of the select subcommittee on Sept. 10, 2024. Wenstrup noted that Cuomo claimed he was neither involved in the drafting nor the review of the July 6 report. Cuomo also testified that he did not have any discussions about the July 6 Report being peer-reviewed and that he did not know whether the July 6 report was reviewed by persons outside the NYSDOH. On all three accounts, Wenstrup said documents obtained by the select subcommittee demonstrate Cuomo’s statements to be false. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP It’s unclear if the Justice Department, now under Trump’s control, will pursue action against Cuomo. Fox News Digital reached out to the DOJ on Tuesday for comment. The DOJ motioned to dismiss an indictment brought under Biden against current New York City Mayor Eric Adams. A judge agreed to throw out the case with prejudice earlier this month. Adams is running as an independent in the mayoral primary.
Trump’s third term trial balloon gets resounding response in new poll
President Donald Trump has repeatedly teased a 2028 run for a third term in the White House, which is prohibited by the U.S. Constitution. Now a new poll indicates Americans are far from thrilled with the prospect. “It will be the greatest honor of my life to serve, not once but twice or three times or four times,” Trump said at rally in Nevada in late January, less than a week after his inauguration to his second term as president. TRUMP TEASES A THIRD TERM: ‘NOT JOKING’ After joking that his comment would make headlines, Trump clarified that “no, it will be to serve twice.” But Trump’s comments were far from a one-off, as he’s continued to flirt with a 2028 re-election run. HEAD HERE FOR THE LATEST FOX NEWS POLLING The president said in an interview late last month that he is “not joking” about making another run for the Oval Office. “A lot of people want me to do it,” Trump told NBC News in a phone interview. “But, I mean, I basically tell them we have a long way to go, you know, it’s very early in the administration.” POLL POSITION: HOW TRUMP’S APPROVAL RATINGS COMPARE TO HIS PRESIDENTIAL PREDECESSORS Standing in Trump’s way is the 22nd Amendment of the Constitution, which was ratified in 1951. The amendment prevents individuals from serving more than two terms as president. It was ratified after Franklin Delano Roosevelt was elected as president for four terms. Public opinion is also clear. Three-quarters of respondents in a Reuters/Ipsos national survey conducted April 16-21 and released on Monday said Trump should not run for a third term. And while the Republican president’s grip over the GOP is stronger than ever, even a majority of Republicans questioned in the poll, 53%, said Trump shouldn’t seek a third term. The poll, which questioned 4,306 U.S. adults, had an overall sampling error of plus or minus two percentage points. Fox News Digital’s Emma Colton contributed to this report
Democrats’ El Salvador trip lampooned by Senate GOP group in faux tourism ad: ‘¡Bienvenidos!’
The National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) lampooned Maryland Democratic Sen. Chris Van Hollen’s trip to El Salvador to aid deportee and alleged gang member Kilmar Garcia in an ad Tuesday, while appearing to foreshadow more potential trips from members of the upper chamber’s minority party. “¡Bienvenidos a El Salvador Senate Dems!,” the NRSC said in a statement. “Democrats should feel free to make their trip to hang out with MS-13 gangbangers one-way.” In the ad, a video mimicking a typical beachy tourism ad plays as the narrator begins, “Welcome to El Salvador.” NOT A MARYLAND MAN: GOP BLASTS DEMOCRAT SENATOR FIGHTING FOR RETURN OF SALVADORAN NATIONAL “Home to breathtaking sunsets, world-class surf breaks – and gangbanger Kilmar Abrego Garcia.” The narrator goes on to call the country “THE destination (emphasis theirs) for Democrats seeking the thrill of bringing violent criminal illegal aliens back to America.” Van Hollen had sought to negotiate the release of Garcia so he could accompany the lawmaker back to Maryland, where his family lives. Garcia is a Salvadoran citizen. “Come witness Trump Derangement Syndrome in its purest form,” the narrator adds. “From Chris Van Hollen to Cory Booker; you may even see Jon Ossoff.” KILMAR GARCIA NOW GETS 5 TOTAL DEM PROPONENTS IN EL SALVADOR Booker did not respond to requests for comment both last week and on Monday after the ad was released. A spokesperson for Ossoff told Fox News Digital: “Sen. Ossoff has not traveled and is not traveling to El Salvador.” The ad continued: “So what are you waiting for, Senate Democrats? Join your colleagues, and step into the rhythm of rescue today,” the ad concludes with “Rhythm of Rescue” in wavy blue text superimposed on a coastal scene. Nearby Colombia recently utilized the tourism slogan “Feel the Rhythm.” Since Van Hollen returned to the U.S. without Garcia, four Democratic House members: Reps. Yassamin Ansari of Arizona, Maxine Dexter of Oregon, Robert Garcia of California, and Maxwell Frost of Florida made a joint trip to San Salvador. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP Homeland Security released new documents this week that it says definitively prove Abrego Garcia, who is imprisoned in El Salvador after his deportation from the U.S., is a member of the notorious MS-13 gang, which his lawyers deny. Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele said at the White House earlier this month it would be “preposterous” to send Garcia to the U.S., which he did not originally enter legally.