Supreme Court says Illinois congressman can sue over state mail-in voting laws
The Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that federal candidates have the right to challenge state election laws that govern the counting of ballots in their states, clearing the way for an expected flurry of new lawsuits in the run-up to this year’s midterm elections. Justices ruled 7-2 that candidates running for federal office have the standing to sue state election boards over their counting of ballots — including challenging laws that allow for the counting of late-arriving mail-in ballots. Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented, joined by Justice Sonia Sotomayor. The ruling from the high court is expected to be hailed as a victory for Republicans ahead of the 2026 midterm elections, and comes as the high court is slated to consider a case more directly involving mail-in ballots later this year. INSIDE THE SCOTUS HEARING BOUND TO BE TURNING POINT IN CULTURE WAR OVER TRANS ATHLETES IN WOMEN’S SPORTS At issue in the case is a lawsuit Rep. Mike Bost (R-Ill.), filed against the Illinois State Board of Elections in 2022 over its mail-in ballot policy, which allows for the counting of ballots received up to 14 days after Election Day. READ THE SUPREME COURT OPINION – APP USERS, CLICK HERE: A U.S. district court had originally concluded that Bost, who won the election, lacked the standing under Article III to challenge the election law. Federal courts require candidates to show that they have been individually harmed by the law. SWING STATE’S SUPREME COURT ISSUES PIVOTAL RULING ON MAIL-IN BALLOTS SENT WITHOUT POSTMARK That ruling was affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, prompting Bost to appeal the case to the Supreme Court for intervention. Bost and Republican plaintiffs urged the high court during oral arguments to allow candidates to sue even in cases where they cannot cite an individual grievance, or that the voting procedure caused them “concrete and particularized injury in fact.” Bost’s lawyer Paul Clement urged the Supreme Court to also allow plaintiffs to consider broader, more general grievances that expand their view of “harm.” Candidates, he said, are not “mere bystanders” in an federal election. Clement noted they spend “untold time and energy” on their campaigns, thus adding untold additional amounts of money needed to cover the 14-day time period. “If the campaign is going to be two weeks longer, you’ve got to keep the campaign staff together for two weeks longer, and that’s going to be more expensive,” he said. JUSTICE ALITO PINS DOWN LAWYER WHO WON’T DEFINE BOYS, GIRLS IN COURT Clement told the high court that preventing the case from moving forward risked turning “federal courts into federal prognosticators.” Though the ruling itself is somewhat narrow, it comes as the Supreme Court is slated to other, more consequential cases this year — including a case centered squarely on the issue of mail-in voting. That case, Watson v. Republican National Committee, which centers on states’ ability to count mail-in ballots that are received within five days of an election. The RNC and state GOP have argued that these laws break with federal voting laws — a point vehemently disputed by other states and the DNC, which noted the widespread use of mail-in votes across the country, and the fact that similar laws are in place in some 31 states, including the District of Columbia.
Voters sharply split along party lines over ICE agent’s fatal shooting: poll
One week after video of a fatal shooting of a Minnesota woman by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent went viral, sparking protests and a national debate, a new poll shows a wide partisan split over whether the shooting was justified. Fifty-three percent of registered voters nationwide questioned in a Quinnipiac University survey said they think the shooting was not justified, with 35% saying it was and 12% offering no opinion. While 92% of Democrats surveyed said the shooting was not justified, more than three-quarters of Republicans (77%) said it was. Independents, by a 59%-28% margin, said the shooting was not justified. An ICE agent shot and killed the 37-year-old Renee Good last Wednesday during a federal enforcement operation in south Minneapolis. Federal officials have said agents were attempting to make arrests when the woman tried to use her vehicle as a weapon against officers, prompting an ICE agent to fire in self-defense. NEW VIDEO SHOWS MINUTES LEADING UP TO DEADLY MINNEAPOLIS ICE SHOOTING President Donald Trump and leading members of his administration have strongly defended the shooting. TRUMP PLEDGES TO UNCOVER LEFTIST GROUPS COUNTERING ICE But top Democrats, including Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, criticized the federal account of the incident and rejected the claim that the officer acted in self-defense. Minnesota has since sued the Trump administration, claiming the immigration enforcement surge in the state is “unlawful” and “unprecedented.” Good’s death sparked widespread protests in Minneapolis and across the nation, with demonstrators calling for changes to federal immigration enforcement. According to the Quinnipiac poll, which was conducted Thursday through Monday and released on Tuesday, 82% said they have seen video of the shooting. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT ARGUES ‘NO BASIS’ FOR CIVIL RIGHTS INVESTIGATION INTO ICE SHOOTING Men questioned in the survey were divided, with 42% saying the shooting was justified and 44% disagreeing. Sixty-one percent of women surveyed said the shooting was not justified. Four in 10 said they approve of the way ICE is enforcing immigration laws, while 57% gave the agency a thumbs down on how it’s handling its job. That was largely unchanged since Quinnipiac University’s poll from last July. Quinnipiac questioned 1,133 self-identified registered voters in their new survey, which had an overall margin of error of plus or minus 3.7 percentage points. Fox News’ Greg Wehner contributed to this report.
Venezuela releases multiple American citizens from prison following military operation
The interim government in Venezuela has released at least four U.S. citizens who were imprisoned under President Nicolás Maduro‘s regime, Fox News confirmed. The release marks the first known release of Americans in the South American country since the U.S. military completed an operation to capture authoritarian Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, who is now facing federal drug trafficking charges in New York. “We welcome the release of detained Americans in Venezuela,” a State Department official said Tuesday. “This is an important step in the right direction by the interim authorities.” The release of American citizens was first reported by Bloomberg. TRUMP SIGNS ORDER TO PROTECT VENEZUELA OIL REVENUE HELD IN US ACCOUNTS President Donald Trump said Saturday that Venezuela had begun releasing political prisoners. “Venezuela has started the process, in a BIG WAY, of releasing their political prisoners,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “Thank you! I hope those prisoners will remember how lucky they got that the USA came along and did what had to be done.” Venezuela’s interim government has reported that 116 prisoners have been released, although only about 70 have been verified by the non-governmental organization Justicia, Encuentro y Perdón, according to Bloomberg. National Assembly President Jorge Rodríguez said prisoner releases would continue, according to the outlet. TRUMP ADMINISTRATION FILES SEIZURE WARRANTS TARGETING SHIPS TIED TO VENEZUELAN OIL TRADE: REPORT The U.S. government issued a new security alert Saturday urging Americans in Venezuela to leave the country immediately, citing security concerns and limited ability to provide emergency assistance, the U.S. Embassy in Caracas said. “U.S. citizens in Venezuela should leave the country immediately,” the embassy said in the alert. The warning pointed to reports of armed groups operating on Venezuelan roads. Following the military operation, Trump suggested that the U.S. would “run” Venezuela for an extended period. “We’re going to run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition,” he said.
Rand Paul says GOP colleagues ‘don’t give a s‑‑t about these people in the boats’: They ‘say they’re pro-life’
Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., accused his “pro-life” Republican colleagues of not caring about the people killed in boat strikes near Venezuela who the Trump administration, without providing evidence, claims were trafficking fentanyl. During an appearance on “The Joe Rogan Experience” released on Tuesday. Paul said GOP lawmakers “don’t give a s‑‑-” about the people who died on the vessels, blasting his colleagues for not granting the presumption of innocence. “I look at my colleagues who say they’re pro-life, and they value God’s inspiration in life, but they don’t give a s‑‑- about these people in the boats,” Paul said. “Are they terrible people in the boats? I don’t know. They’re probably poor people in Venezuela and Colombia.” “I guess what I don’t feel connected to my Republican colleagues is that those lives don’t matter at all, and we just blow them up. And against all justice, and against all laws of war, all laws of just war, we have never blown up people who were shipwrecked,” he added, referring to the administration’s reported targeting and killing of survivors of initial strikes who were clinging to wreckage. RAND PAUL SAYS TRUMP’S THREAT TO BOMB IRAN ‘IS NOT THE ANSWER’: NOT THE ‘JOB OF THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT’ The liberty-minded Republican said it is “against the military code of justice to do that.” “We’re doing it and everybody just says, ‘Oh, well, they’re drug dealers,’” he said. Paul criticized his fellow GOP lawmakers who have repeated the administration’s claims about the boats carrying fentanyl. He also took issue with colleagues who hold the position of, “Well, we’re at war with them. They’re committing war by bringing drugs into America.” “They’re not even coming here,” Paul explained. “They’re going to these islands in the south part of the Caribbean. The cocaine — and it’s not fentanyl at all — the cocaine’s going to Europe.” He emphasized that “those little boats can’t get here.” “No one’s even asked this common question: Those boats have these four engines on them. They’re outboard boats. You can probably go about 100 miles before you have to refuel. Two thousand miles from us, they’d have to refuel 20 times to get here,” Paul said. The senator accused the administration of conducting the boat strikes to create “a pretense and a false argument” ahead of the operation to attack Venezuela and arrest its president, Nicolás Maduro. “It’s all been a pretense for arresting Maduro,” he said. “So, we have to set up the predicate. We got to show you we care about drugs.” Paul helped the Senate advance a resolution last week that would limit Trump’s ability to conduct further attacks against Venezuela after the U.S. military’s recent move to strike the country and capture Maduro, which the Kentucky Republican said amounts to war. The Upper Chamber could pass the measure later this week, although it faces an uphill battle in the House despite some support from Republicans. “I think bombing a capital and removing the head of state is, by all definitions, war,” Paul told reporters before the procedural vote last week. “Does this mean we have carte blanche that the president can make the decision any time, anywhere, to invade a foreign country and remove people that we’ve accused of a crime?” SENATE REPUBLICANS BLOCK SCHIFF EFFORT TO FORCE RELEASE OF CARIBBEAN STRIKE FOOTAGE The lawmaker has repeatedly criticized the administration’s boat strikes on alleged narco-terrorists in recent months, often raising concerns about killing people without due process and the possibility of killing innocent people. The senator previously cited Coast Guard statistics that show a significant percentage of boats boarded on suspicion of drug trafficking are innocent. Paul said on “The Joe Rogan Experience” that he believes the administration might attack Mexico next, which Trump has signaled could be a future target. “They want to do that next. They want to bomb Mexico,” Paul said. Trump has said cartels are “running Mexico” and that “something’s going to have to be done” because Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum is “very frightened” of the cartels.
GOP senator suggests Fed chair Powell resign now to dodge potential criminal indictment
Sen. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D., suggested Tuesday that Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell should resign to avoid a potential indictment, arguing the move could prompt the Department of Justice (DOJ) to drop its investigation. The suggestion comes after the DOJ announced Sunday it has opened a criminal probe into Powell focused on the renovation of the central bank’s Washington headquarters and whether he was truthful in his congressional testimony regarding the project. “If you’re the attorney for Jay Powell and you want to avoid an indictment, how about you go to Jeanine Pirro and say, ‘I’ll make a deal. I’ll step down today if you’ll drop the investigation today,’” Cramer said on FOX Business’ “Kudlow.” Cramer added that his proposed legal strategy would be “a win-win for everybody.” THUNE WARNS DOJ’S PROBE OF FED CHAIR POWELL ‘BETTER BE REAL’ AND ‘SERIOUS’ AMID POLITICAL BACKLASH U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro said on X Monday that her office had contacted the Fed “on multiple occasions to discuss cost overruns and the chairman’s congressional testimony, but were ignored, necessitating the use of legal process — which is not a threat.” “The word ‘indictment’ has come out of Mr. Powell’s mouth, no one else’s,” Pirro continued. “None of this would have happened if they had just responded to our outreach. This office makes decisions based on the merits, nothing more and nothing less. We agree with the chairman of the Federal Reserve that no one is above the law, and that is why we expect his full cooperation.” Powell provided testimony before the Senate Banking Committee last year regarding a significant renovation to two main office buildings in the Fed’s headquarters in Washington, D.C. The project is expected to cost $2.5 billion and is being paid for by the central bank, not taxpayers. TRUMP INSISTS GOPERS ‘LOVE’ DOJ TARGETING JEROME POWELL, SAYS HE ‘CAN’T HELP’ IT IF IT LOOKS LIKE RETRIBUTION Powell confirmed in a video statement Sunday that the Federal Reserve had been served “with grand jury subpoenas” that threatened “a criminal indictment.” While Powell said he respected the rule of law and congressional oversight, he asserted that the Justice Department’s move was “unprecedented” and politically motivated. “This new threat is not about my testimony last June or about the renovation of the Federal Reserve buildings,” he said. He added that the threat of criminal charges is a “consequence of the Federal Reserve setting interest rates based on our best assessment of what will serve the public, rather than following the preferences of the president.” REPUBLICAN SENATOR VOWS TO BLOCK TRUMP FED NOMINEE OVER POWELL INVESTIGATION A spokesperson for the Fed told Fox News Digital the Fed would not have any comment beyond Powell’s video message from Sunday. Cramer cautioned on “Kudlow” that an indictment could negatively impact the economy. “I don’t want to do anything to disrupt this incredible rocket ship economy we’re enjoying right now,” he said. “We’ve got other big things to do that I’d rather focus on than an indictment.” The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment. Fox News Digital’s Amanda Macias contributed to this report.
Minneapolis-area leaders condemn ICE, call for removal amid Trump deportation campaign
Minneapolis-area leaders on Tuesday formally denounced federal immigration authorities and called for their removal from the region amid the Trump administration’s deportation campaign. The Hennepin County Administration, Operations and Budget Committee unanimously passed a resolution condemning ICE and calling for the removal of ICE personnel and assets from Minnesota. In a statement, the seven-member committee said it did “not take this action lightly.” MINNESOTA LAWSUIT OVER TRUMP’S ICE ‘INVASION’ WON’T SUCCEED: LEGAL EXPERT “It comes forward in the context of an additional 1,000 ICE agents due to arrive in the metro area during the largest deployment of DHS resources in our nation’s history, anywhere,” committee Vice Chair Debbie Goettel said. The committee framed the vote as a stand to protect residents. The board will vote to formally adopt the resolution in its Jan. 27 meeting. “We stand with our immigrant communities, our protesters and observers, and our neighbors standing together to bring accountability to this unconscionable show of force,” Goettel said. The vote came hours after President Donald Trump said his administration will withhold federal payments from sanctuary jurisdictions beginning Feb. 1. HOUSE REPUBLICAN CALLS FOR HEARING AFTER DEADLY ICE SHOOTING IN MINNEAPOLIS In a Truth Social post, Trump said sanctuary cities hamper federal immigration enforcement efforts at the expense of public safety. “And it breeds fraud and crime and all the other problems that come. So we’re not making any payment to anybody that supports sanctuary,” Trump wrote. Earlier in the week, the Department of Homeland Security said it would be sending additional federal agents to protect Minnesota immigration officers as they conduct enforcement operations while facing protesters. Minnesota has become a flashpoint in Trump’s deportation campaign following last week’s fatal shooting of Renee Good, who was shot by an ICE agent as she attempted to ram into him with her vehicle, officials said. The city of Minneapolis is suing the federal government over the law enforcement operations, which local officials said have been marked by racial profiling and excessive force.
White House says Trump gave ‘appropriate’ response after heckler confrontation caught on video at Ford plant
President Donald Trump was caught on video appearing to mouth an expletive and make an obscene gesture toward a heckler during a visit to a Ford factory in Michigan Tuesday, a moment the White House later defended as an “appropriate and unambiguous response.” The video, first published by TMZ, shows Trump briefly turning toward someone shouting from the crowd as he walked through the Ford River Rouge complex in Dearborn. In the video, Trump appears to mouth the words “f— you” twice and gestures with his middle finger. TRUMP TO CUT FEDERAL PAYMENTS TO SANCTUARY CITIES STARTING FEB 1 OVER IMMIGRATION POLICIES TMZ reported that the exchange followed a heckler shouting an insult at the president off camera. The outlet described Trump’s reaction as “flipping the bird” while continuing to walk away. White House communications director Steven Cheung defended the president’s reaction, telling Fox News Digital, “A lunatic was wildly screaming expletives in a complete fit of rage, and the President gave an appropriate and unambiguous response.” TRUMP WEARS ‘HAPPY TRUMP’ PIN ALONGSIDE AMERICAN FLAG DURING WHITE HOUSE OIL EXECUTIVE MEETING A Ford worker who identified himself as the heckler said he was later suspended from his job pending an investigation into the incident. TJ Sabula, a 40-year-old United Auto Workers Local 600 line worker at the factory, told The Washington Post that he was the person shouting at Trump during the visit and said he has been suspended pending an internal investigation. “As far as calling him out, definitely no regrets whatsoever,” Sabula told the outlet, while adding that he is concerned about the future of his job and believes he has been “targeted for political retribution” for “embarrassing Trump in front of his friends.” Sabula, who said he identifies as politically independent and has never voted for Trump, told The Washington Post that he has supported other Republican candidates in the past. He estimated that he was standing roughly 60 feet away from Trump at the time and said the president could hear him “very, very, very clearly.” Trump visited the plant as part of a scheduled appearance focused on U.S. manufacturing and the auto industry when the exchange occurred during a tour of the factory. “I don’t feel as though fate looks upon you often, and when it does, you better be ready to seize the opportunity,” Sabula said to the Washington Post. “And today I think I did that.” The White House did not specify who was shouting in the video, and Fox News Digital has not yet independently confirmed the identity of the individual who later claimed responsibility.
South Carolina GOP lawmakers introduce bill to criminalize abortion as murder
South Carolina Republican lawmakers have introduced a new bill that would criminalize abortion as murder, applying existing homicide and wrongful death laws from the moment of conception. The Prenatal Equal Protection Act, introduced in the South Carolina House of Representatives, would be the strongest anti-abortion law in state history if enacted. The legislation has been scheduled for a hearing in the South Carolina House Constitutional Laws Subcommittee on Wednesday. Supporters argue current heartbeat laws merely regulate abortion and still allow the procedure in certain cases, prompting Republican state Sen. Lee Bright to introduce the legislation as a way to extend full legal protections to unborn children. PRO-LIFE PREGNANCY CENTERS SEE CLIENT INCREASE AFTER SUPREME COURT DECISION: STUDY “These children deserve equal protection. I will be filing a bill of equal protection today. I know we’ve got hearts and minds to change,” Bright said Tuesday at a press conference at the South Carolina State House. South Carolina State Representative Rob Harris said that in 2023, the Legislature and the Governor revised the heartbeat law that regulates abortion and still allows the procedure under certain circumstances. SUPREME COURT RULES AGAINST PLANNED PARENTHOOD IN MEDICAID FUNDING DISPUTE “Incredibly, in one section of that bill, it asserts that life begins at conception, but in another section, it writes into law where, when, and how someone may legally murder a baby in South Carolina,” Harris said. The legislation would apply to all parties involved, including the pregnant woman. Republicans hold large majorities in both chambers of the South Carolina General Assembly, meaning the bill could pass if GOP lawmakers remain unified. But similar abortion legislation has previously stalled amid divisions within the GOP, raising questions about whether the bill can advance. SENATE PARLIAMENTARIAN OKS BAN ON PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERAL FUNDING IN TRUMP MEGABILL A November bill sought to further restrict abortion under existing law but stalled after some Republicans objected. The Prenatal Equal Protection Act goes much further, treating abortion as homicide from the moment of conception and applying criminal penalties, including for pregnant women — a shift supporters say is necessary to fully eliminate abortion. Supporters argue the earlier bill failed because it regulated abortion rather than abolishing it, and say incremental restrictions have repeatedly stalled or been struck down, leaving a full equal-protection approach as the only lasting solution. The new bill is backed by national anti-abortion activists who have warned Republican lawmakers they could face primary challenges if they do not support it. Critics are expected to raise concerns about criminal penalties, enforcement and constitutional issues.
Johnson: ‘No boots on the ground’ for Trump’s Greenland acquisition plans amid military speculation
House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., pushed back on the idea that the U.S. would intervene militarily in Greenland, saying he does not anticipate war or U.S. troops being deployed there. Johnson told The Hill there is no declaration of war pending for Greenland and said he does not expect any boots on the ground. “We’ve been very clear. I mean, the Article 1 branch is clear. There’s no declaration of war pending for Greenland,” Johnson said. “It’s just not a thing. I don’t anticipate any boots on the ground anywhere, anytime soon.” Johnson echoed the foreign policy objectives of President Trump, noting the administration views Greenland as strategically important to U.S. interests. STEPHEN MILLER DISMISSES THE IDEA DENMARK WOULD FIGHT FOR GREENLAND, CLAIMS IT SHOULD BE PART OF THE US “Look, there are negotiations. There is interest in Greenland. For U.S. interests, America’s first interest,” Johnson said. “It has to do with national security and critical minerals and many other reasons. And we’ve long acknowledged that,” he added. Trump has made acquiring Greenland a key strategic and national security objective, warning last week that if the United States does not acquire the territory, superpowers Russia or China could move in. He said Sunday the U.S. must acquire Greenland — not lease it — arguing the Arctic territory lacks adequate defenses and warning that Russia or China would move in if Washington does not act, a move he said is critical to U.S. and NATO security. Greenland has rejected Trump’s repeated advances, and on Tuesday the island’s prime minister said the country would prefer to remain part of Denmark rather than become a U.S. territory. “We face a geopolitical crisis, and if we have to choose between the U.S. and Denmark here and now then we choose Denmark,” Greenland Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen said while appearing alongside Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen at a joint press conference in Copenhagen. TRUMP ADMIN REPORTEDLY CONSIDERS PAYING EACH GREENLAND RESIDENT UP TO $100K AMID US TAKEOVER TALKS “We stand united in the Kingdom of Denmark.” Johnson’s comments come as bipartisan lawmakers move to restrict any unauthorized U.S. military action against NATO allies amid growing debate over Trump’s remarks about Greenland. Rep. Bill Keating, D-Mass., is leading legislation that would block funding for military action taken without congressional approval, arguing the effort is aimed at preventing U.S. intervention against allied nations. “This isn’t just about Greenland. This is about our security,” Keating said. The push follows Trump’s statement Friday that the U.S. would act on Greenland “whether they like it or not,” raising alarm among European leaders over a potential violation of NATO’s collective defense commitments. The developments also come as Denmark’s foreign minister, Lars Løkke Rasmussen, and Greenland’s foreign minister, Vivian Motzfeldt, are expected to meet Wednesday with Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Vice President JD Vance at the White House, according to Reuters. Fox News’ Greg Norman and Landon Mion, as well as Reuters contributed to this report.
11 House Dems buck party to side with Republicans in reversal of Biden-era shower regulation
The House of Representatives voted 226-197 along bipartisan lines Tuesday to reverse Biden-era regulations on shower heads, a move Republican lawmakers framed as a quick and easy way to return choice to homeowners. “Washington bureaucrats have gone too far in dictating what happens in Americans’ own homes,” Rep. Russell Fry, R-S.C., the sponsor of the legislation, said of his bill. “This is about defending consumer choice, pushing back on regulatory overreach and standing up for commonsense policy.” WHITE HOUSE ‘LASER FOCUSED’ ON AFFORDABILITY AS TRUMP SOFTENS TARIFF STRATEGY Asked what his thoughts were on the bill, Rep. Jared Golden, D-Maine., kept his thoughts simple. “Shower pressure is a good thing,” Golden said. Golden was one of 11 Democrats who joined Republicans to pass the Saving Homeowners from Overregulation with Exceptional Rinsing Act, or SHOWER Act. The bill looks to codify an executive order President Donald Trump issued in April of last year, directing the Department of Energy to repeal the way the Biden administration interpreted water pressure in showers. Under current law, shower heads can only produce a set amount of pressure. That Biden-era regulation interpreted that to mean that the combined flow of showers with multiple nozzles had to stay below that bar. In other words, the more shower heads, the less pressure the individual nozzles could have. JOHNSON WARNS OF ‘UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES’ IN TRUMP’S CREDIT CARD RATE CAP IDEA Rep. John McGuire, R-Va., characterized it as a way Democrats had gone out of their way to create unnecessary restrictions. “It seems like the Democrats want to tax you out of existence and overregulate you. So, [the bill] is a step in the right direction. Less regulation,” McGuire said. Fry, the sponsor of Tuesday’s bill, said the legislation would reinstate what he viewed as the common interpretation of what a “shower head” meant to most audiences. “That rule was widely criticized as overreach and emblematic of a broader regulatory agenda targeting everyday household appliances,” Fry said in a statement. “The SHOWER Act is a smart fix that reaffirms each shower nozzle is just that — its own shower head — and should be treated accordingly under the law.“ Rep. Brett Guthrie, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, echoed the comments from Fry. MIKE JOHNSON SAYS HOUSE GOP WORKING FULL STEAM AHEAD ON TRUMP’S ‘AFFORDABILITY AGENDA’ “For far too long, federal regulations and red tape have limited consumer choice and forced Americans to live with limited water pressure,” Guthrie said. “By codifying how different nozzles are categorized, the SHOWER Act offers a commonsense fix that will allow households to choose what meets their needs, not what Washington mandates.” The bill now heads to the Senate, where it must receive the support of at least seven Democrats before making its way to President Trump’s desk.