NationalWatch

ROCHESTER, N.H. – She traded fire for weeks ahead of the Iowa caucuses with Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, her Republican presidential rival.

But now that the 2024 GOP nomination race has shifted to New Hampshire, Nikki Haley says that former President Donald Trump “is the one I want. Trump is the one I’m going for.”

Haley was edged by DeSantis for a distant second place to the former president in Monday night’s caucuses in Iowa. Trump – the commanding front-runner in the Republican race as he makes his third straight White House run – grabbed 51% of the vote in Iowa as he obliterated the previous margin of victory in a GOP presidential caucus.

But the latest polls in New Hampshire – which votes second overall in the Republican schedule and holds the first primary next Tuesday – indicate Haley is competitive with Trump while DeSantis is a distant third in single digits.

DESANTIS CAMPAIGNS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE, BUT MOST OF HIS STAFF DECAMPS IN SOUTH CAROLINA

DeSantis, speaking to voters Wednesday afternoon in Hampton, New Hampshire, pointed to the caucus results and emphasized “I finished second. She didn’t, I mean, that’s just the reality, you know. So I don’t know how they’re going to spin that.”

Pushing back, Haley touted her Iowa finish.

“We started at two percent. We ended at 20,” she noted in a Fox News interview ahead of a campaign event at an American Legion post in Rochester, New Hampshire. “If anybody doesn’t see the momentum in that, then that’s their problem. It’s not mine. But we’re going to continue to go further. We’re way above 30% here.”

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST POLL NUMBERS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE’S REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY

Haley, a former two-term South Carolina governor who later served as U.N. ambassador in the Trump administration, has repeatedly said this week that it’s a two-person race going forward with Trump.

“Ron is invisible in New Hampshire and South Carolina. Everybody can see that,” Haley argued.

The latest polling in South Carolina, which holds the first southern primary on Feb. 24, indicates Trump with a large double-digit lead over Haley, with DeSantis a distant third in single digits.

TRUMP, HALEY, TURN UP VOLUME ON EACH OTHER AS GOP PRESIDENTIAL SLUGFEST MOVES TO NEW HAMPSHIRE

“He’s closer to zero than he is to me in either of these states,” Haley said of DeSantis. “So it’s more about his survival. We’re strong. It’s a two-person race here in New Hampshire. It’s a two-person race in South Carolina. So, we’re focused on Trump.” 

And looking to the former president, Haley said “you see how close it is with both of us in New Hampshire. Same in South Carolina. We’re going to try to make it closer. That’s the goal. So it’s Trump we’re going after.”

While Haley was finishing up her campaign event in Rochester, Trump was getting ready to take the stage at a rally in nearby Portsmouth, New Hampshire.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

The former president took numerous shots at Haley, claiming that she’ll “never secure the border” and that she “wants to gut Medicare and Social Security.”

A day earlier, Trump charged at a rally in Atkinson, New Hampshire that Haley “was not great” as U.N. ambassador and argued  that she wasn’t “tough enough” in dealing with adversaries.

Haley, speaking to the crowd in Rochester, accused Trump of lying about her and said that “he honestly thinks if he says something, it comes true.”

She told Fox News that Trump “knows we’re a threat” and is “throwing temper tantrums.”

And Haley’s campaign posted a video stocked with past clips of Trump praising her.

Get the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews and more at our Fox News Digital election hub.

 

Vice President Kamala Harris delivered a speech in South Carolina celebrating Martin Luther King Jr.’s legacy, while also comparing the 2014 Ferguson, Missouri, riots and the storming of a state Capitol building last year to the Civil War. 

“I do believe the true power behind the promise of America is in the faith of her people. The promise of America, I do believe, is in the faith of the people – our faith in the founding principles of our nation and our profound commitment to make those principles real,” Harris said at the NAACP South Carolina State Conference’s annual “King Day at the Dome,” held in the State House in Columbia.

“Generation after generation, on the fields of Gettysburg, in the schools of Little Rock, on the grounds of this state house, on the streets of Ferguson, and on the floor of the Tennessee House of Representatives, we the people have always fought to make the promise of freedom real,” she continued. 

Her speech argued that “freedom is under profound threat” in recent years, citing the Supreme Court decision in 2022 that effectively ended the recognition of a constitutional right to abortion, “active-shooter drills” in schools, and election laws that force “students to wait in line for hours because of laws that intentionally make it more difficult for them to cast a ballot.”

CORI BUSH BLASTED FOR ‘HOAX’ AFTER BLAMING MICHAEL BROWN DEATH ON ‘WHITE SUPREMACY’

On social media, Harris’ remarks comparing the Battle of Gettysburg, which is widely considered the turning point of the Civil War, to the protests and riots in Ferguson and gun control activists breaching the Tennessee Capitol last year raised eyebrows. 

“Kamala Harris says the Ferguson riots and the disruptions by a few far-left Tennessee state representatives are just like what happened ‘on the fields of Gettysburg’ and ‘in the schools of Little Rock,’” RNC Research posted. 

Buildings and businesses in Ferguson, Missouri, were left burned and in disrepair as protests calling for justice over the police shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown often turned violent in 2014, as rioters looted business, set cars on fire and attacked police officers. The city, which had still not recovered from the 2008 financial crash at the time of the protests, was left in a financial deficit, Reuters reported at the time, while local news reported the police response to the riots cost taxpayers an estimated $5.7 million. 

Brown, a Black man, was shot and killed by White police officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson nearly 10 years ago in an interaction that lasted roughly two minutes. The Department of Justice investigated, and detailed in its report that Wilson was on-duty and spotted Brown walking in the middle of the road with a friend on Aug. 9 after “Brown stole several packages of cigarillos” from a nearby liquor store. 

Wilson, aware of the reported theft, approached the men, told them to walk on the sidewalk and called for backup, the DOJ detailed. Brown then reached into Wilson’s car, sparking a struggle between the two. 

KAMALA HARRIS DEFENDS BIDEN’S INTELLIGENCE WHEN PRESSED ON MENTAL SHARPNESS: ‘HE IS EXTRAORDINARILY SMART’

“​​Wilson and other witnesses stated that Brown then reached into the SUV through the open driver’s window and punched and grabbed Wilson. This is corroborated by bruising on Wilson’s jaw and scratches on his neck, the presence of Brown’s DNA on Wilson’s collar, shirt, and pants, and Wilson’s DNA on Brown’s palm. While there are other individuals who stated that Wilson reached out of the SUV and grabbed Brown by the neck, prosecutors could not credit their accounts because they were inconsistent with physical and forensic evidence, as detailed throughout this report,” the DOJ said in its report, released in March 2015. 

Brown was unarmed at the time of the shooting, and tried to get a hold of Wilson’s gun, according to the cop’s testimony, leading to Wilson opening fire on Brown, the report explains. No witnesses could corroborate Wilson’s claim that Brown attempted to take the gun, but no credible evidence was found disproving the claim. 

IN 2014 SHOOTING OF MICHAEL BROWN, ST. LOUIS’ TOP PROSECUTOR ANNOUNCES NO CHARGES AGAINST DARREN WILSON

Following Brown’s death, activists chanted “hands up, don’t shoot,” referring to witness testimony, which was later discredited, that Brown raised his hands in surrender before his death. 

The Obama administration’s Justice Department ultimately declined to charge Wilson, clearing him in the case. 

“Federal statutes require the government to prove that Officer Wilson used unreasonable force when he shot Michael Brown and that he did so willfully, that is, he shot Brown knowing it was wrong and against the law to do so.  After a careful and deliberative review of all of the evidence, the department has determined that the evidence does not establish that Darren Wilson violated the applicable federal criminal civil rights statute,” the DOJ said at the time. 

Then-President Barack Obama defended the DOJ’s decision to not charge Wilson, while arguing the investigation showed Black residents and activists were justified in their concerns over the treatment of Black Americans by police. 

CHAOS ERUPTS AGAIN AT TENNESSEE CAPITOL AMID VOTE TO EXPEL DEM LAWMAKERS FROM OFFICE OVER HOUSE FLOOR PROTEST

“What happened in Ferguson is not a complete aberration,” Obama said at the time. “It turns out they weren’t just making it up. It was happening.” 

The Ferguson riots ultimately led to the arrests of 321 individuals, and 16 people, including police officers, were injured. 

TENNESSEE LAWMAKERS LOSE COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS AFTER STORMING STATE CAPITOL

Harris’ comment that Americans “make the promise of freedom real” through actions such as protesting on “the floor of the Tennessee House of Representatives” was in reference to protests that formed outside and within the Tennessee Capitol last year. 

​​A trio of Democratic state lawmakers led protesters on the House floor last March calling for stricter gun control measures following the Covenant School shooting in Nashville. The Christian school shooting killed three children and three adults last March, while the shooter, identified as transgender former student Audrey Hale, was fatally shot by police. 

More than 1,000 protesters gathered outside the state Capitol on March 30, before some of the protesters entered the building. Legislative business was halted as the three Democratic lawmakers, later known as “The Tennessee Three,” used a bullhorn to lead the protesters in calling for gun control. 

Two of three lawmakers were subsequently expelled for violating the chamber’s decorum rules. Amid votes to expel the members, chaos erupted again as porters stormed into the building and chanted, “No more silence, end gun violence.”

TENNESSEE HOUSE SPEAKER CALLS FOR EXPULSION OF THREE DEMS WHO LED GUN CONTROL PROTEST: ‘WE CANNOT ALLOW’ THIS

Republican lawmakers and pundits ultimately compared the protests to an “insurrection” and the event of Jan. 6, 2021, when supporters of former President Donald Trump breached the U.S. Capitol. 

“What they did today was at least equivalent, maybe worse, depending on how you look at it, of doing an insurrection in the Capitol,” Republican Speaker of the Tennessee House Cameron Sexton said of the first protest in March of last year. 

The expelled lawmakers later reclaimed their seats in August.  

Harris wrapped up her speech on Monday saying Americans will fight and win for freedom. 

“The great Coretta Scott King once said, ‘Freedom is never truly won.  You earn it and win it in every generation.’… At this moment in history, in the relay race of history, I say, then, let us not throw up our hands, because it’s time to roll up our sleeves. And we were born for a time such as this,” she said. 

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

The White House did not respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment on Harris comparing the Civil War to the Ferguson riots and the protests in Tennessee. 

EXCLUSIVE: Federal investigators asked banks to search and filter customer transactions by using terms like “MAGA” and “Trump” as part of an investigation into Jan. 6, warning that purchases of “religious texts” could indicate “extremism,” the House Judiciary Committee revealed Wednesday in a letter obtained by Fox News Digital.

Fox News Digital has learned the committee also obtained documents that indicate officials suggested that banks query transactions with keywords like Dick’s Sporting Goods, Cabela’s, Bass Pro Shops and more.

The House Judiciary Committee and its subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government have been conducting oversight of federal law enforcement’s “receipt of information about American citizens without legal process and its engagement with the private sector.” 

HOUSE GOP INVESTIGATING BANK OF AMERICA FOR ‘VOLUNTARILY’ GIVING FBI LIST OF CUSTOMERS RELATED TO JAN 6

House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, said the documents obtained by the committee indicate that after Jan. 6, 2021, the Treasury Department’s Office of Stakeholder Integration and Engagement in the Strategic Operations of the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, or FinCEN, distributed materials to financial institutions that outlined “typologies” of “various persons of interest” and provided the banks with “suggested search terms and Merchant Category Codes for identifying transactions on behalf of federal law enforcement.” 

The materials included a document recommending the use of generic terms like “Trump” and “MAGA” to “search Zelle payment messages” as well as a “prior FinCEN analysis” of “Lone Actor/Homegrown Violent Extremism Indicators.” 

“According to this analysis, FinCEN warned financial institutions of ‘extremism’ indicators that include ‘transportation charges, such as bus tickets, rental cars, or plane tickets, for travel areas with no apparent purpose,’ or ‘the purchase of books (including religious texts) and subscriptions to other media containing extremist views,’” Jordan detailed in a letter to the former director of FinCEN, Noah Bishoff, a career employee. 

“In other words, FinCEN used large financial institutions to comb through the private transactions of their customers for suspicious charges on the basis of protected political and religious expression,” Jordan wrote.

Jordan and the committee are requesting Bishoff appear for a transcribed interview on the matter, saying he may “possess information necessary for our oversight.” 

The Treasury Department declined to comment.

But a source familiar told Fox News Digital that “the effort by FinCEN to work with law enforcement to assist with their post January 6 efforts began under the previous administration.”

Jordan said the committee obtained documents showing that FinCEN distributed slides, prepared by Key Bank, to other banks to explain how they could use merchant category codes (MCC) to detect customers whose transactions may reflect “potential active shooters, and who may include dangerous International Terrorists/ Domestic Terrorists/ Homegrown Violence Extremists (‘Lone Wolves’).”

HOUSE INVESTIGATION INTO ‘WHAT REALLY HAPPENED ON JANUARY 6’ ENTERING ‘NEW PHASE’ WITH SPEAKER JOHNSON SUPPORT

Jordan said the slide instructs financial institutions to query for transactions using certain MCC codes like “3484: Small Arms,” “5091: Sporting and Recreational Goods and Supplies,” and the keywords “Cabela’s,” “Dick’s Sporting Goods” and “Bass Pro Shops,” among others.

Key Bank declined to comment.

Dick’s Sporting Goods, Bass Pro Shops and Cabela’s did not respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.

A source familiar with the documents told Fox News Digital that while Jan. 6, 2021, was the “impetus” for the queries and searches, none of the documents the committee has obtained reveal any specific time frames or limitations for banks searching customer transactions with the terms. The source said the federal government used the information for investigations beyond Jan. 6.

“Despite these transactions having no apparent criminal nexus — and, in fact, relate to Americans exercising their Second Amendment rights — FinCEN seems to have adopted a characterization of these Americans as potential threat actors,” Jordan wrote. “This kind of pervasive financial surveillance, carried out in coordination with and at the request of federal law enforcement, into Americans’ private transactions is alarming and raises serious doubts about FinCEN’s respect for fundamental liberties.”

Jordan asked that Bishoff contact the committee to schedule the transcribed interview by Jan. 31.

Bishoff did not respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment. 

Meanwhile, in a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray on Wednesday and obtained by Fox News Digital, Jordan requested a transcribed interview with the senior private sector partner for outreach in the Strategic Partner Engagement Section at the FBI.

Jordan said the committee has received testimony indicating that Bank of America provided the FBI “voluntarily and without any legal process” with a list of individuals who made transactions in the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area using a Bank of America credit or debit card between Jan. 5 and Jan. 7, 2021.

BANK OF AMERICA CUSTOMERS FURIOUS AFTER DATA SHARED WITH FEDERAL INVESTIGATORS

Fox News Digital first reported on that portion of the committee’s investigation last year. Bank of America, in November, said the bank “followed all applicable laws” in its interactions with the government. The bank noted that the Treasury Department on Jan. 15, 2021, “shared information regarding potential criminal activity that could disrupt the upcoming inauguration.” 

“We have cooperated with the committee as they evaluate whether the laws we complied with should be changed,” Bank of America said. 

But in the Wednesday letter, Jordan states that when that list was later brought to the attention of the FBI, the former section chief of the Domestic Terrorism Operations Section, Steve Jensen, acted to “pull” that Bank of America information from FBI systems because “the leads lacked allegations of federal criminal conduct.”

FBI INTERVIEWED PRIEST, CHURCH CHOIR DIRECTOR AHEAD OF ANTI-CATHOLIC MEMO, HOUSE GOP FINDS

Jordan said the committees obtained documents that show FBI personnel “made contact with and provided Bank of America with specific search query terms, indicating that it was ‘interested in all financial relationships’ of BoA customers transacting in Washington, D.C., and customers who had made ‘ANY historical purchase’ of a firearm, or who had purchased a hotel, Airbnb, or airline travel within a given date range.”

Jordan also said the committees obtained documents indicating that FBI personnel in the Office of Private Sector “prepared an official report that broadly characterized certain political beliefs as indicative of domestic violent extremism.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Jordan asked that the FBI make the senior private sector partner for outreach in the Strategic Partner Engagement Section available for a transcribed interview and requested it be scheduled by Jan. 31, saying his testimony “will help to inform the Committee and Select Subcommittee about the FBI’s mass accumulation and use of Americans’ private information without legal process; the FBI’s protocols, if any, to safeguard Americans’ privacy and constitutional rights in the receipt and use of such information; and the FBI’s general engagement with the private sector on law-enforcement matters.”

The FBI declined to comment.

The requests for interviews come as a separate House committee investigates “what really happened” on Jan. 6, 2021.

House GOP Conference Chair Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., is hitting back at a House Democratic bid to have her censured. 

Rep. Dan Goldman, D-N.Y., introduced a resolution to censure Stefanik on Wednesday, accusing her of “providing aid, comfort and support” to people who stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Stefanik responded by releasing a statement from top aide Alex DeGrasse blasting Goldman as a “corrupt radical,” pointing out that he’s been scrutinized for possible ethics violations in the past.

“Failed Far Left House Democrats are in absolute desperate free fall that Elise Stefanik continues to be one of the most effective Members of Congress going on offense every single day exposing Democrats and Joe Biden’s corruption and lies,” DeGrasse said.

MORAL ‘FAILURES’ OF ACADEMIC LEADERS WOULDN’T HAVE SEEN ACCOUNTABILITY IF NOT FOR CONGRESS: STEFANIK

He continued, “Dan Goldman is a corrupt radical New York Democrat who unethically traded tens of millions of dollars in stocks while failing to pay rent, took money from a Jeff Epstein associate, funds terrorist groups like Hamas through his family foundation, launders millions through his family foundation to attack Republican Members of Congress, and supports radicals like Tish James who are engaging in witchhunts against President Trump while releasing violent criminals on our streets.”

Past reports from the New York Post and Washington Free Beacon, as well as other outlets, have accused Goldman of raising questions with his stock trade activity. Last March, Fox News Digital found Goldman was tied to a left-wing dark money group funneling money into trying to impede the House GOP’s investigations into President Biden.

REP. LOUDERMILK BLASTS JANUARY 6 COMMITTEE FOR TARGETING HIM: ‘THERE IS A WAR ON THE TRUTH IN THIS COUNTRY’

DeGrasse also pointed to Goldman’s past comments calling for Trump to be “eliminated.”

“Dan Goldman and Democrats are desperate because they know Joe Biden is going to lose this November,” the Stefanik aide said.

Fox News Digital reached out to Goldman’s office for comment.

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., threw his support behind Stefanik as well, telling reporters that the censure resolution is “patently absurd.”

“She’s one of the best leaders and communicators in Congress. She’s doing an exceptional job. The idea that he would use a censure to attack a political opponent is just absurd,” Johnson said.

KEY MODERATE REPUBLICAN COMES OUT IN FAVOR OF IMPEACHING MAYORKAS, SAYS HE SHOULD BE ‘TRIED FOR TREASON’

Addressing reporters outside the Capitol on Wednesday, Goldman referenced Stefanik calling those jailed in connection to Jan. 6 “hostages” and claimed it downplayed the situation faced by Israelis being held captive by Hamas in Gaza.

However, he decided against introducing the resolution as privileged for now, a move that would have forced House leaders to take it up within two legislative days.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

“We plan today to file it without raising the privileges. Our hope is that there are other Republicans, especially those in New York, where both Ms. Stefanik and I come from, who recognize that this kind of rhetoric is unacceptable, and that the Republicans will bring it up on their own,” Goldman said.

“But if they don’t, we are prepared to consider moving forward with a privileged resolution.”

Republican lawmakers are galvanized for 2024 after former President Trump’s win in the Iowa caucuses this week.

Now, some GOP members of Congress are calling on the remaining Republican presidential candidates, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley, to drop out of the race.

“I thought it was great,” Wisconsin Rep. Derrick Van Orden told Fox News Digital.

NEW HAMPSHIRE GOP PRIMARY A 2-PERSON RACE BETWEEN TRUMP AND HALEY, NEW POLL INDICATES

“It’s time to coalesce behind President Trump,” Van Orden continued. “And [I] respect Nikki Haley and Gov. DeSantis a lot, but they’ve got to do the right thing: step out of the race and support President Trump, because we’ve got to do this collectively.

Indiana GOP Rep. Jim Banks, who is running for Senate, said Trump’s victory was a “landslide” and that the former president “won by the largest margin that anyone has ever won the Iowa Caucus before.”

“It should be a wake-up call to any other Republican candidates who are still in the race and any holdouts all over the country,” Banks said.

“Donald Trump is going to win every single state, and he will be the Republican nominee, and Republicans need to get behind it,” he continued.

Banks said that at “this point, it’s a binary choice: You’re either for Donald Trump or you’re for Joe Biden” and that Republicans “have to do everything we can to help Donald Trump beat Joe Biden to save our country in November.”

“Now is the time to do it,” Banks said. “Get behind him now. Drop out of the race if you’re still in the race; back him if you haven’t backed him yet.”

“Get behind him. He’s our best shot to save the country and beat Joe Biden,” he said.

Tennessee GOP Rep. Tim Burchett said Trump “dominated” in Iowa and that he “figured he would.”

“Every debate, everyone says, ‘Who won?’ and I say, ‘President Trump,’” Burchett said Wednesday. “… He’ll be the party’s nominee, no question.”

Burchett said DeSantis or Haley dropping out is “up to them” but noted he doesn’t “know why they’d stay in it at this point, unless they’re trying to get their points on some issues in his … radar.”

Other GOP lawmakers lauded Trump’s win, including Oklahoma Sen. Markwayne Mullin, who said Trump’s victory was “great” and that the large margin of victory “doesn’t surprise us.”

“I think it goes well for us going into New Hampshire and moving on to Super Tuesday, too,” Mullin said.

“I think the race is going to be pretty over before long,” Mullin said. “We all expected it, but the showing in Iowa came out so strong it codified it.”

Mullin said the Iowa caucuses results for Trump show an appetite to return to the former president’s policies and a dissatisfaction with the current White House resident.

Florida Reps. Matt Gaetz and Anna Paulina Luna, both Republicans, also weighed in on Iowa, with Gaetz calling it a “big victory” for Trump and saying he’s “proud” of him.

“Time to bring our party together and make sure we whoop the Democrats,” Gaetz said.

Luna said Trump “crushed it” in Iowa and called it “the largest recorded victory” at the famous caucuses.

“Look, I’ve always been a staunch supporter of President Trump. I think we need to consolidate around him, so why not?” Luna responded when asked if she believes the other GOP presidential candidates should drop out of the race.

“Anyone but Nikki Haley, that woman is terrible,” Luna added.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Haley’s campaign pointed to the candidate’s Tuesday comments on “Fox & Friends” where she said “70% of Americans” don’t want a rematch between Trump and Biden in response to an inquiry from Fox News Digital.

Fox News Digital reached out to DeSantis’ campaign for comment.

Who decides? That was the oft-repeated refrain from members of the Supreme Court on Wednesday, in a major dispute over the power of the federal administrative state.

At issue is the discretion of the Executive Branch to interpret and enforce congressional laws over a range of areas like the environment, health care, workplace safety, and consumer protections.

SUPREME COURT PREPARES TO DECIDE MAJOR CASES OVER POWER OF FEDERAL ADMINISTRATIVE STATE

A majority of conservative justices appeared ready to limit, but not entirely overturn, what has become known as “Chevron” deference — a 1984 high court precedent that says when congressional laws are “ambiguous” — federal judges should typically defer to “reasonable” federal agency interpretations.

That has since been used thousands of times by federal courts, including more than 70 Supreme Court cases to allow wide latitude over an agency’s power — spanning more than 170 pages of federal regulations. That tension between preserving the separate, but equal powers of the three government branches was at the heart of the appeals.

It has been billed as a fight between what one side calls unchecked government overreach and others see as necessary protection of a broad swath of federal agency oversight.

The lengthy arguments in two separate cases had the justices questioning their own authority.

“How do we determine how much deference is too much deference?” asked Justice Clarence Thomas. “How do we know where the line is?”

RAMASWAMY URGES SUPREME COURT TO OVERTURN COLORADO DECISION, FILES AMICUS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF TRUMP

Some conservative justices suggested the time to overturn the Chevron precedent was now.

“Maybe a dozen or more circuit judges have written asking us to overrule Chevron,” said Justice Neil Gorsuch. “And should that be a clue that something needs to be fixed here, that even the federal government at the podium can’t answer the question what triggers ambiguity?”

But others on the bench expressed concern that overturning the current system of agency statutory interpretation would put judges in the uncomfortable position of making policy — something that is left to the political branches.

“A new product designed to promote healthy cholesterol levels — is it a dietary supplement or a drug?” said Justice Elena Kagan, using a hypothetical. “I would rather have people at HHS [Health and Human Services Department] telling me whether this new product was a dietary supplement or a drug.”

“Judges should know what they don’t know,” added Kagan.

The high court heard two separate appeals involving the same issue: whether Atlantic herring fishermen must pay for federal officials to board their vessels to monitor the catches and collect data.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) implemented a revised federal mandate in 2020, even though Congress never gave the agency-specific authority to launch such a program.

The owners say the fees can exceed $700 daily and often exceed the money earned from catching low-priced herring. NOAA has waived the rule temporarily, saying it ran short of funds to administer the monitoring program.

“I’m concerned that it will make it harder, for sure,” Bill Bright, who runs his family seafood business Loper Bright Enterprises, told Fox News. The Cape May, New Jersey company is among those suing. “We’re survivors as an industry, but it’s certainly not going to make it any easier, adding more expense to it.”

FEDERAL APPEALS COURT REJECTS PETITION OVER SPECIAL COUNSEL JACK SMITH ACCESS TO TRUMP’S TWITTER FEED

The fishing fleets and business groups say their livelihoods are being threatened by onerous, expensive regulations that Congress did not specifically authorize. They say judges, not federal bureaucrats, should be interpreting what are admittedly often ambiguous congressional statutes.

In arguments, their lawyers for the small business people said you need a “secret decoder ring” to figure out what the Chevron deference precedent means.

Gorsuch called it a “recipe for instability.”

“This is what niggles at so many of the lower court judges,” he said. “You’ve left open the possibility that a judge, if left to his own devices, would say the fairest ruling is in favor of the immigrant, it’s in favor of the veteran, and it’s in favor of the Social Security Disability applicant, but because of a fictionalized statement about what Congress wanted when it didn’t think about the problem, the government always wins.”

Justice Brett Kavanaugh said the courts may be the better forum to decide whether federal laws passed by Congress are ambiguous, given the politics at play.

“The reality of how this works is Chevron itself ushers in shocks to the system every four or eight years when a new administration comes in, whether it’s communications law or securities law or competition law or environmental law, and goes from pillar to post.”

The Biden administration argues those federal agencies have the expertise and mandate to enforce federal laws to ensure consumers and the public have, among other things: clean air and water; safe food and medicine; and stable economic and financial institutions.

Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar told the court the fishing industry has long been subject to federal regulation, and that the current rules ensure “necessary and proper” management of limited seafood stocks.

Some left-leaning justices agreed. 

“Isn’t it sort of impractical and chaotic to have a world in which every undefined term in a statute is subject to litigation if you’re trying to govern?” asked Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. “I’m worried about the courts becoming uber legislators.”

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett asked tough questions of both sides, at times suggesting a scaled-back ruling — a “course correction” as was suggested in court — narrowly favoring the fishermen, might be the best approach.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Roberts drew courtroom laughter when he said giving the judiciary too much power might be problematic.

 “Judges are used to deciding things, and when they get around to doing it, they tend to think what they’ve come up with is not only the best answer, but it’s the only answer.”

The cases are Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce (22-1219) and Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (22-451). 

Rulings are expected by late June.

Top legal and ethical experts weighed in on art gallerist Georges Bergès’ revelation of Hunter Biden’s knowledge of his art buyers, saying the American people were “misled.”

Fox News Digital reached out to several legal and ethical experts on Bergès’ revelation during his closed-door, transcribed interview with the House Judiciary and Oversight Committees earlier this month.

Bergès told the committees that an agreement to shield the knowledge of Hunter Biden’s buyers from him was not put in place for months after the White House’s statement that a “system” had been “established” to do so.

HUNTER BIDEN KNEW 70% OF ART BUYERS, CONTRADICTING WHITE HOUSE NARRATIVE ON ‘ANONYMOUS’ COLLECTORS: GALLERIST

Hunter Biden’s gallerist said that the first son knew the identities of approximately 70% of those buyers.

“The White House effort was the ultimate example of closing the barn door after the horse has bolted,” George Washington University law professor and Fox News contributor Jonathan Turley told Fox News Digital.

“The clear message given repeatedly to Congress and the public was that an ethical plan was in place to prevent such knowledge,” he continued.

“The ethical claims of the White House proved as abstract as Hunter’s art pieces,” Turley said. “In reality, the breach had occurred long before the ethical plan was implemented.”

“The testimony that Bergès did not have interactions with the White House on the plan further undermines these claims. Indeed, Bergès admitted that he was reading these statements from the White House with no knowledge of what they were referencing. Yet, Bergès and the Bidens proceeded knowing that the public was being misled.”

Former Bush administration ethics chief Richard Painter told Fox News Digital that the White House’s “whole arrangement of keeping the buyers secret was completely the wrong way to go.”

Painter said the White House “should have had nothing to do” with Bergès, and that the “best approach” for Hunter Biden would have been to “not sell the art at all during his father’s presidency and certainly not sell it at those prices.”

“The worst option is what they chose, which is to keep it all, to say it’s all going to be confidential, and Hunter Biden won’t know and nobody will know,” Painter said. “And this is exactly what I said happens, is that the word gets around.”

“Of course you find out who bought the art,” Painter continued. “People hang the art on the wall.”

“They don’t stick it in closet,” he added.

Attorney Sol Weisenberg said that we “don’t know right now the full ethical implications, if any, of this latest White House falsehood regarding Hunter Biden’s special privileges and ethical/legal lapses.”

“It is simply another example of the Biden family’s leisurely approach to influence peddling,” Weisenberg said. “As a citizen, I would rather know who is buying the paintings and how much they are paying than operating under the false illusion that Hunter and the family are being kept in the dark about the source of this latest largesse.”

Fox News Digital reached out to Bergès and the White House for comment.

Bergès’ interview with the committees came as part of the House Republicans’ impeachment inquiry into President Biden.

House investigators, during his interview, showed Bergès a statement made by then-White House press secretary Jen Psaki on July 9, 2021.

“After careful consideration, a system has been established that allows for Hunter Biden to work in his profession within reasonable safeguards,” she said. “All interactions regarding the selling of art and the setting of prices will be handled by professional galleries, adhering to the highest industry standards. Any offer out of the normal court would be rejected out of hand.”

Psaki added, “The galleries will not share information about buyers or prospective buyers, including their identities, with Hunter Biden or the administration, which provides quite a level of protection.”

When pressed further, Psaki stressed that “it would be challenging for an anonymous person who we don’t know and Hunter Biden doesn’t know to have influence — so that’s a protection.” 

However, Bergès testified that at the time of the White House’s July 2021 statement, he had an agreement with Hunter Biden which called for him, instead, “to disclose to Hunter Biden who the purchasers of his art were.” Bergès said that contract was agreed to in December 2020. 

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Bergès said that it was not until September 2021 that a new agreement with Hunter Biden was created. That agreement stated that “the gallery will not disclose the name of any buyers of artist’s artwork to artist or any agent of artist.”

Bergès stressed, though, that there was not a “White House-involved agreement,” and that Hunter Biden did know the identities of approximately 70% of the buyers of his art. Meanwhile, Bergès testified that he had spoken to President Biden both on the phone and in person.

The art gallerist previously told Fox News Digital he “never violated the agreement we had with Hunter Biden.”

“If he knew the identities of some of the buyers — it’s because they were his friends or by happenstance,” Bergès said. “My obligation to Hunter is to not disclose the buyers — which I haven’t.” 

Fox News Digital’s Brooke Singman contributed reporting.

Republicans on the House Homeland Security Committee are seeking written testimony from DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas amid a lengthy back-and-forth with the agency over him potentially testifying at an impeachment hearing — as DHS is blasting what it says is a “bad-faith, predetermined and unconstitutional rush” to impeach him.

Chairman Mark Green sent a letter to Mayorkas offering him the opportunity to submit written testimony ahead of the second impeachment hearing on Thursday — which will focus on the victims of illegal immigrant crime.

“As stated in earlier letters to you, your perspective on the crisis at the border and actions you have taken as secretary are valuable for the Members of the Committee and the American public to hear. Regretfully, every invitation for almost half a year we extended to you to testify focused specifically on the border crisis has been rejected or subject to endless delay tactics,” Green said, requesting written testimony instead.

REPUBLICANS, DEMS SPAR AT MAYORKAS IMPEACHMENT HEARING AS STATE AGS DESCRIBE IMPACT OF MIGRANT CRISIS

Republicans, who held the first hearing earlier this month, have accused Mayorkas of a “dereliction of duty”  and a “willful violation of his oath” in his handling of the crisis at the southern border, where there have been record levels of migrant encounters. They have said that the expansion of “catch-and-release” and the rollback of Trump-era policies have fueled a historic crisis with devastating effects on the country.  

The administration says it is dealing with a hemisphere-wide crisis and needs more funding and reform from Congress. It has pointed to more than a million returns of migrants in FY 2022 and FY 2023 and a record seizure of fentanyl by officials at the border.

Green’s office had invited Mayorkas to testify in person at the hearing earlier this month. DHS replied, saying he could not testify at the hearing on Thursday due to other commitments including hosting a Mexican delegation, but was open to testifying at a future date and said it would work to find a date and hearing structure with committee members.

Republicans painted that response as a refusal to testify, arguing that they have been trying to get Mayorkas to testify at a border-specific hearing since August. DHS has fiercely denied that the letter counted as a refusal to testify and said that Mayorkas has testified 27 times in 35 months, more than any other Cabinet member, including at a Worldwide Threats hearing before the committee in November. DHS says that Republicans did not provide any alternate dates or options to DHS, nor did they respond to attempts to identify a date. 

Spokesperson Mia Ehrenberg tore into what she said was the “latest example of Committee Republicans’ sham process.”

“It’s abundantly clear that they are not interested in hearing from Secretary Mayorkas since it doesn’t fit into their bad-faith, predetermined and unconstitutional rush to impeach him. Last week, the Secretary offered to testify publicly before the Committee; in the time since, the Committee failed to respond to DHS to find a mutually agreeable date,” she said.

“Instead, they provided this offer of written testimony to the media before any outreach to the Department. CHS Republicans have yet again demonstrated their preference for playing politics rather than work together to address the serious issues at the border,” she said.

Homeland Republicans, in turn, said that Mayorkas has now “tacitly refused” three times despite what they say is flexibility.

HOUSE HOMELAND DEMOCRATS BACK MAYORKAS, SLAM GOP ‘SHAM’ AHEAD OF IMPEACHMENT HEARING 

“Secretary Mayorkas can object all he wants, but the paper trail is clear–he has consistently, tacitly refused to show up,” the majority said on X, formerly known as Twitter after accusing Mayorkas of “indefinite delays.”

Democrats on the Committee backed the administration and called the impeachment push “just another political stunt.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

“They refused to accept his offer to testify at a later date because it doesn’t fit with their arbitrary, rushed timeline dictated by extreme MAGA Republicans Illegitimate impeachment,” they said, calling the impeachment illegitimate.

Meanwhile, Fox confirmed that the hearing will be the last hearing and the next step will be for the committee to schedule a markup of the impeachment articles.

Fox News’ Kelly Phares contributed to this report.

All eyes will be on New Hampshire’s undeclared, or independent, voters next week for the first-in-the-nation presidential primaries following reports of cross-party voting by Democrats in support of former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley during Monday’s Iowa caucuses. 

Although former President Donald Trump achieved a historic victory in the Hawkeye State with more than 50% of the vote, well ahead of Haley’s third-place finish, it wasn’t for lack of trying by Democrats and independents opposed to the former president. They reportedly showed up at some caucus sites and caused a shortage of party registration forms. 

Even though registered Republicans were the only voters allowed to vote in Iowa’s caucuses, the state allows same-day party registration, meaning Democrats and independents could show up, register and vote all in one evening.

TRUMP, HALEY TURN UP THE VOLUME ON EACH OTHER AS GOP PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY SLUGFEST MOVES TO NEW HAMPSHIRE

At one caucus site in Johnson County, the only county Trump lost to Haley, by a single vote, caucus workers had to scramble for more printer paper to have enough forms to accommodate those trying to switch their party registration to Republican, according to CBS News.

Other reports also pointed to meddling by Democrats, including one voter who told Axios that switching party registration for a day was “a chance to diminish Trump’s inevitability.” Another said, “I believe all Americans should cast a vote against Donald Trump every chance we have.”

By contrast, David Barker, the treasurer of the Iowa Republican Party, told Fox News Digital that although there were some new registrations for the party from Democrats and independents, a vast majority of those registering on the night of the caucus were first-time voters ready to oust President Biden.

VIRGINIA VETERAN AIMS TO BE 1ST FEMALE MARINE ELECTED TO CONGRESS, JOINS RACE TO FLIP COVETED DEM-HELD SEAT

Despite any such effort to oppose Trump, it wasn’t enough to boost Haley ahead of her main challenger for second place, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who bested her by around 2,300 votes.

Looking ahead to next week’s New Hampshire primary, approximately 3,500 Democrats in the state switched their party registration to become undeclared voters, or independents, ahead of the October deadline. Part of that effort was led by former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who recently dropped out of the race, encouraging voters to take every opportunity to turn out against Trump.

Undeclared voters in New Hampshire, who make up a plurality of the Granite State’s electorate, can choose whether to vote in the Democratic or Republican primary, and have long played a crucial role in determining who will be the non-incumbent party’s nominee for president. The state does not allow intra-party voting.

WATCH: NEW CONSERVATIVE TECH COMPANY INSPIRED BY SWING STATE ELECTION LOSSES AIMS TO FLIP SCRIPT ON DEMOCRATS

Some argue New Hampshire’s undeclared voters who show up to vote on Tuesday will likely cast a ballot in the Republican primary considering President Biden isn’t facing any serious challenge to his likely nomination for the Democrats. As one New Hampshire voter put it, the GOP race is “where all the action is.”

Others, such as Dante Scala, a political science professor and researcher at the University of New Hampshire, say whether anti-Trump independents show up to vote for Haley “depends on their perception of Trump’s inevitability.”

“I think some of those voters would like to stick it to Trump if they could, but they really liked Chris Christie because he was purely anti-Trump. Haley is not. The question always is, will they show up? And I think they need a clear reason to do so. … If they’re looking at the polling in New Hampshire, and they’re listening to reports, and the vibe is ‘Trump’s got it in the bag,’ then I think there will be less interest in showing up,” Scala said. 

“If you’re a Democratic leaner, you’re not crazy about going to vote in a Republican primary in the first place. That kind of cuts against the grain. Haley’s a pretty mainstream Republican, and so you’re really uncomfortable with that. So, you would kind of need a good reason to do it.”

WATCH: VETERAN AIR FORCE COMMANDER JOINS RACE FOR CONGRESS, SAYS MOMENT ‘TOO IMPORTANT’ FOR CAREER POLITICIANS

Haley campaign spokeswoman Olivia Perez-Cubas told Fox News Digital the ambassador has “always believed that the Republican Party has to be about addition, not subtraction.” 

“Otherwise, Republicans will keep losing like we did in 2018, 2020 and 2022. If Republicans want to start winning again, we have to start bringing in voters who are fed up with Joe Biden, not pushing them away,” she said.

A senior Trump campaign official told Fox News Digital the “only people” voting for Haley are Democrats trying to interfere in the Republican primary because she “is a desperate globalist who wants higher taxes, open borders and China to dominate the United States.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Fox News Digital also reached out to the DeSantis campaign for comment.

According to a new poll released Wednesday by Suffolk University, the Boston Globe and NBC10 in Boston, Trump remains the clear frontrunner over Haley in New Hampshire with 50% support to her 34%. DeSantis stands at 5% and is expected to head to South Carolina, Haley’s home state, this weekend to start campaigning there.

Get the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews and more at our Fox News Digital election hub.

HAMPTON, N.H. – Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis spent part of Wednesday at this seaside community along the New Hampshire coast, making a pitch to voters six days ahead of the state’s Republican presidential primary.

“I’m asking for your support on Tuesday,” DeSantis told the crowd as he looked ahead to the New Hampshire primary, the first in the GOP nominating calendar and second overall contest after this week’s Iowa caucuses.

But as the Florida governor was speaking to supporters and undecided voters, Fox News confirmed that the DeSantis campaign was in the process of moving the majority of its staff from Iowa to South Carolina rather than New Hampshire.

DeSantis came in a distant second in Iowa to former President Trump, the commanding front-runner in the GOP nomination race who crushed his rivals as he won 51% of the vote in Monday’s caucuses. DeSantis, who had spent most of his time and resources in Iowa, narrowly edged former United Nations Ambassador and former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley for second place.

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST POLL NUMBERS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE’S REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY

But with polls indicating Haley a strong second to Trump and DeSantis a distant third in the single digits in New Hampshire — where moderates predominate and independent voters play a crucial role in the state’s storied presidential primary — the Florida governor is concentrating his efforts in the much more conservative South Carolina. The state holds the first southern contest in the Republican schedule on Feb. 24.

TRUMP, HALEY, TURN UP VOLUME ON EACH OTHER AS GOP PRESIDENTIAL SLUGFEST MOVES TO NEW HAMPSHIRE

The governor’s team sees the move to South Carolina as a chance to take down Haley on her home court and knock her out of the race.

“When Nikki Haley fails to win her home state, she’ll be finished and this will be a two-person race,” DeSantis campaign communications director Andrew Romeo said in a statement. “We’re wasting no time in taking the fight directly to Haley on her home turf.”

A source in DeSantis’ political orbit told Fox News that “it’s all about South Carolina.”

“They’re not completely giving up on New Hampshire. They are pursuing both states, but they’re really looking ahead to South Carolina,” the source added.

DeSantis was headed home to Florida later on Wednesday. He will return to New Hampshire for at least three stops on Friday before campaigning Saturday and Sunday in South Carolina. He may return to New Hampshire on Monday, on the eve of the first-in-the-nation presidential primary.

“He doesn’t want to write off New Hampshire publicly because that would mean his campaign is over,” longtime Republican consultant David Carney – who’s neutral in the 2024 nomination race – told Fox News. “They’ve got to go somewhere. They’ve still got more money to spend. So, they’ll make the case to go to South Carolina.”

IOWA’S OVER. NOW GOP PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY FIGHT TURNS TO NEW HAMPSHIRE

Carney, a veteran of numerous presidential campaigns and a New Hampshire resident, said that “it’s a good strategy – see what you can get out of South Carolina. And pretend you are campaigning in New Hampshire. If you’re absent for the entire week, your campaign is dead.”

Republican strategist Matthew Bartlett, who splits his time between New Hampshire and the nation’s capital, said DeSantis is “going through the motions. I applaud him and his team for doing it, but I think they would have been far better served doing this in the long hot summer rather than the waning days before the New Hampshire primary when the cake is baked.”

The two events DeSantis held in New Hampshire on Wednesday were organized by the aligned super PAC Never Back Down, which has taken over many of the traditional responsibilities of a presidential campaign.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

But as DeSantis was on the campaign trail on Tuesday, Never Back Down trimmed operations, laying off some staff, including nearly the entire ‘war room’ team, Fox News confirmed. The news was first reported by the New York Times.

Making his case to New Hampshire voters in Hampton, DeSantis didn’t address the new emphasis being placed on South Carolina. And he didn’t take questions from reporters after the event.

Neither the DeSantis campaign nor aligned super PACs have run TV spots in New Hampshire in two months, according to ad tracking firm AdImpact.

While the South Carolina strategy may allow DeSantis to live to fight another day, it plays into Haley’s argument that the GOP nomination is becoming a two-person race.

“When you look at how we’re doing in New Hampshire, in South Carolina and beyond, I can safely say tonight Iowa made this Republican primary a two-person race,” Haley said in West Des Moines on Monday night after finishing third in the Hawkeye State.

Get the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews and more at our Fox News Digital election hub.

Former President Trump said he will miss the E. Jean Carroll trial on Thursday so that he can attend his mother-in-law’s funeral, blasting the judge presiding over the case as “nasty” for not delaying court proceedings for the day.

“As you know, the first lady’s mother passed away. The funeral is tomorrow,” Trump said during a press conference in New York City Wednesday after spending the day in court. “And we would have assumed that for a trial like this, it’s not an emergency in terms of timing, the judge would have been very nice, and they would let me go because I want to be at every trial day because I saw what happened in the first one where I was asked not to go by the lawyers very much—they said it’s demeaning, there was no evidence, there was no anything— and so I didn’t go, and I understood exactly what he meant when he said it was demeaning. There was no reason to go and you shouldn’t go.”

MELANIA TRUMP ANNOUNCES PASSING OF ‘BELOVED’ MOTHER: ‘WE WILL MISS HER BEYOND MEASURE’

Trump said, this time, because the “the judge is a radical Trump hater,” he would “go to all days.”

“So, it happened very terribly as we asked to just delay the trial for one day so I could go to the funeral tomorrow and then we could start Friday or Monday or any time they want,” Trump explained. “And he said, absolutely not, the trial will go on just as it is.”

Trump said the judge said: “You can go to the funeral or you can go to the trial, but you can’t do both.”

“I thought it was terrible. I thought it was terrible,” Trump continued. “So he would rather have me miss the funeral or go to the funeral and miss the trial.”

Trump added: “That’s a nasty man. He’s a nasty judge. He’s a Trump-hating guy. And it’s obvious to everybody in the court it’s a disgrace, frankly, what’s happening. It’s a disgrace.”

Trump was referring to Judge Lewis A. Kaplan, who he said is a “Clinton appointee.” 

Former first lady Melania Trump’s mother, Amalija Knavs, passed away last week at the age of 78. 

MELANIA TRUMP SPENDS CHRISTMAS WITH AILING MOTHER, MISSING MAR-A-LAGO CELEBRATION

“It is with deep sadness that I announce the passing of my beloved mother, Amalija,” the former first lady wrote in a X post.

“Amalija Knavs was a strong woman who always carried herself with grace, warmth, and dignity,” Trump wrote. “She was entirely devoted to her husband, daughters, grandson, and son-in-law.”

“We will miss her beyond measure and continue to honor and love her legacy,” she added.

Trump, after winning the Iowa Caucuses Monday night, in his victory speech, thanked his mother-in-law. 

“I want to thank my incredible wife, first lady, I’ll say former and maybe future, but more important than Melania, I want to thank her incredible, beautiful mother who passed away a few days ago,” Trump said. “And she’s up there, way up there. She’s looking down and she’s so proud of us. And I just want to say to Amalia, you are special, one of the most special people I’ve ever known.” 

The funeral is expected to be held Thursday in Palm Beach, Fla. 

Trump has been in court this week as part of the the civil defamation damages trial stemming from E. Jean Carroll’s lawsuit claiming he sexually attacked her in a department store dressing room in the 1990s.

The second trial comes after a federal jury in New York City decided in May that Trump was not liable for rape but was liable for sexual abuse and defamation. The former president has been ordered to pay $5 million.

Carroll, 79, alleged that Trump raped her at the Bergdorf Goodman department store across the street from Trump Tower in Manhattan sometime in 1996. According to Carroll, the two had a chance run-in at the store, where Trump was shopping for a gift for “a girl.” She said he asked for her advice, and the two shopped together before he pushed her into a dressing room and assaulted her.

TRUMP CANNOT ASSERT PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY IN E JEAN CARROLL DEFAMATION LAWSUIT, APPEALS COURT RULES

Trump vehemently denied the allegation, and his denial resulted in Carroll slapping Trump with a defamation lawsuit, claiming that his response caused harm to her reputation.

Trump and his legal team insist that Carroll’s allegations are fabricated, with the former president’s initial reaction including an accusation that Carroll was motivated by wanting to sell copies of her book.

In an exclusive interview just after the jury delivered the verdict, Trump told Fox News Digital that he has “absolutely no idea who this woman is.”

“This verdict is a disgrace,” he told Fox News Digital at the time. “It is a continuation of the greatest political witch hunt in history.”

The former president told reporters last week that he plans to testify in his defense in the current trial, saying he will “explain I don’t know who the hell she is.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Carroll, 80, plans to testify about the damage to her career and reputation that resulted from Trump’s public statements. She seeks $10 million in compensatory damages and millions more in punitive damages.

Nine jurors were selected for the trial, which Kaplan said is likely to last three to five days. Testimony will begin Wednesday.

On Tuesday, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre claimed that President Biden does not insult voters, but he has made insulting remarks to them on several occasions.

“One thing that the president does not do is insult voters or American people,” Jean-Pierre said.

However, Biden has a long history of questionable remarks to voters and members of the media. 

In December 2019, as Biden was campaigning for president, he appeared at an Iowa town hall and derided a voter in a tense exchange.

BIDEN HAS BEEN SECRETLY MEETING WITH DONORS TO EASE CONCERNS, INCLUDING HIS AGE AND ENERGY: REPORT

“I’m not a Republican,” one man told Biden at the event. “I’ve got two problems with you. One is you’re damn near as old as I am. You’re too old. I’m 83, and I know damn well I don’t have the mental faculties I did [inaudible.]”

He went on to the topic of Ukraine — specifically the lucrative job Biden’s son Hunter held with natural gas firm Burisma Holdings during the Obama administration. 

“But on the other hand, you sent your son over there to get a job and work for a gas company where he had no experience… In order to get access for the president…you’re selling access to the president just like he was,” the questioner said.

Biden fired back: “You’re a damn liar, man. That’s not true, and no one has ever said that.” The claim that Biden “sent” his son to Ukraine for a job at Burisma is not accurate.

The man later told Biden he did not plan on voting for him. Biden said he knew that because he was “too old” to vote for him.

OBAMA INCREASINGLY WORRIED ABOUT TRUMP BEATING BIDEN, REPORT SAYS: ‘INCALCULABLE DAMAGE’

In May 2020, Biden appeared on Charlamagne tha God’s “The Breakfast Club” radio show and said anyone contemplating voting for him or Trump “ain’t Black” after the host said he should go to his New York studio for another interview.

“You’ve got more questions?” Biden said. “Well, I tell you what, if you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black.”

Three months later, in August 2020, Biden snapped at a reporter and asked him if he was “a junkie” after fielding a question about if he’d ever taken a cognitive test amid attacks from then-President Trump over his mental stamina.

“No, I haven’t taken a test. Why the hell would I take a test?” Biden said. “Come on, man. That’s like saying you, before you got on this program, you take a test whether you’re taking cocaine or not. What do you think? Huh? Are you a junkie?” he said while turning the question back around on CBS News reporter Errol Barnett, who is Black. Biden chuckled as he finished his response.

Biden later confronted an autoworker while campaigning in September 2020 and told him he “doesn’t work for him” before calling him a “horse’s a–.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

And in 2022, Biden was caught on a hot mic calling Fox News correspondent Peter Doochy a “stupid son of a bi—” after he had asked a question about inflation.

The White House did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment. 

Fox News Digital’s Paul Steinhauser and Brooke Singman contributed to this report.

Welcome to Fox News’ Politics newsletter with the latest political news from Washington D.C. and updates from the 2024 campaign trail. 

Subscribe now to get Fox News Politics newsletter in your inbox.

What’s Happening? 

– Sanders’ anti-Israel bill goes down in flames

– New poll shows Trump dominating New Hampshire primary

– Maine superior court stays decision to barring Trump from primary ballot

‘Alarming’ surveillance

FIRST ON FOX: Federal investigators asked banks to search and filter customer transactions by using terms like “MAGA” and “Trump” as part of an investigation into Jan. 6, warning that purchases of “religious texts” could indicate “extremism,” the House Judiciary Committee revealed in a letter obtained by Fox News Digital Wednesday.

Fox News Digital has learned the committee also obtained documents that indicate officials suggested that banks query transactions with keywords like Dick’s Sporting Goods, Cabela’s, Bass Pro Shops and more.

“This kind of pervasive financial surveillance, carried out in coordination with and at the request of federal law enforcement, into Americans’ private transactions is alarming and raises serious doubts about FinCEN’s respect for fundamental liberties,” Rep. Jim Jordan, chair of the Judiciary Committee, wrote in a letter asking for a briefing from FinCEN, a Treasury Department investigating bureau that looks at financial crimes …Read more

White House

VIVEK VS VP: Ramaswamy challenges Harris to debate focused on AI, as speculation swirls over Trump’s running mate …Read more

ANTI-TRUMP PLOT: IRS leaker sought consultant role with express purpose of releasing former president’s tax returns, DOJ says …Read more

‘BORDER, BORDER, BORDER’: Johnson to prioritize border crisis in meeting with President Biden …Read more

KEEP IT ‘SUBTLE’: Aide to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin asked EMS not to use lights or sirens, 911 call reveals …Read more

Capitoll Hill

PROTECTING CHURCHES: Rubio introduces bill to protect nonprofit institutions from federal regulations …Read more

GOV SPENDING: Senate clears 1st hurdle to pass short-term government funding …Read more

SWING AND A MISS: Sanders resolution that would freeze aid to Israel goes down in flames …Read more

Tale from the Campaign Trail

NO LABELS NO CHANCE: Judge says No Labels can block candidates from running for offices other than president in Arizona …Read more

WARNING TO BIDEN CAMPAIGN: Jamie Dimon says Trump ‘wasn’t wrong’ about critical issues …Read more

2-PERSON RACE: New poll shows where Trump, Haley stand in New Hampshire GOP primary …Read more

JOB FOR VIVEK? Trump teases future role for former GOP rival …Read more

Across America

CONTENTIOUS MOMENT: Judge threatens to throw Trump out of defamation trial …Read more

BORDER INSECURITY: California voters overwhelmingly say US-Mexico border is ‘not secure,’ poll finds …Read more

VOLUNTEER FUNDRAISER: Hollywood producer who introduced Hunter to art dealer raised major cash for Biden’s campaign …Read more

The Maine Superior Court issued a stay of the secretary of state’s decision to remove former President Trump from the state’s Republican primary ballot pending a decision from the United States Supreme Court. 

Trump appealed Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows’ ruling earlier this month, but the court on Wednesday said it will not consider the matter until the high court issues its own decision in a related case out of Colorado, saying it would be “imprudent” for the court to rule on it before then. 

TRUMP APPEALS DECISION TO BAN HIM FROM MAINE BALLOT

The court denied Trump’s motion to “supplement the record,” denied his motion to “stay proceedings,” but also “stays the secretary of state’s ruling, pending the decision by the Supreme Court.”

The court remanded the matter to the secretary “for further proceedings as necessary in light of the United States Supreme Court’s forthcoming decision in Trump v. Anderson.”

“As part of this remand, the secretary is ordered to await the Supreme Court’s decision in Anderson, and no later than thirty days after Anderson’s issuance, to issue a new Ruling modifying, withdrawing, or confirming her prior Ruling dated December 28, 2023,” the court ruled.

A ruling from the Colorado Supreme Court in December removed Trump from the ballot there under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. Colorado is a Democratic-leaning state that is not expected to be competitive for Republicans in November.

Trump is expected to appeal the ruling of the Colorado Supreme Court directly to the U.S. Supreme Court. The nation’s highest court has never issued a decision on Section 3 and the Colorado court’s 4-3 ruling that it applied to Trump was the first time in history the provision was used to block a presidential candidate from appearing on the ballot.

Similar battles are playing out in other states, where activists have asked election officials to remove the former president from their states’ primary ballots under Section 3 of the 14th amendment.

Fox News’ Andrew Fone, Greg Wehner and The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

Vivek Ramaswamy proposed that Vice President Harris debate him on the topic of artificial intelligence, as speculation over former President Trump’s choice of running mate swirls. 

“Kamala is in charge of AI policy right now. In a debate, I’d challenger [sic] her to see if she can spell ‘AI.’ I’d bet on the same blank stare I got from Nikki when I asked her to name 3 provinces in eastern Ukraine,” Ramaswamy wrote Tuesday night, referencing a moment from a GOP debate in December. 

Ramaswamy’s post challenging Harris came in response to Human Events senior editor Jack Posobiec writing, “Imagine what Vivek would do to Kamala in a debate.” 

In November, Harris notably gave a speech on the future of artifical intelligence in London, vowing that, the “United States will continue to work with the G7; the United Nations; and a diverse range of governments, from the Global North to the Global South, to promote AI safety and equity around the world.” 

VIVEK RAMASWAMY URGES DESANTIS AND HALEY TO DROP OUT OF RACE

Just days earlier, speaking from the East Room of the White House, Harris also warned, “AI can lead to discrimination, bias and other abuses,” vowing to work with civil rights leaders. 

Harris added that the “Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights,” an administration document that recommends “proactive equity assessments as part of the system design,” would establish “a minimum baseline of responsible AI practices” for private companies operating within the field.

KAMALA HARRIS: ADMIN HAS DUTY TO STOP AI ‘ALGORITHMIC DISCRIMINATION,’ ENSURE BENEFITS ‘SHARED EQUITABLY’

Her comments came after the American Accountability Foundation (AAF), a conservative watchdog group, had recently warned the Biden administration was actively seeking to use AI to promote woke, progressive ideology with left-wing activists leading the effort.

In another post on X on Wednesday, Ramaswamy reiterated his call for Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and Haley to join him in suspending their 2024 presidential campaigns following Trump’s commanding victory at the Iowa caucuses. 

“It’s time to move forward,” Ramaswamy wrote. “Running the race through Iowa was fair game. But the people have spoken loud & clear. The game is over. We have a country to save.” 

“Last night, I asked all my supporters across New Hampshire who’ve *run through walls* for me to do one LAST thing this week: volunteer all-out for the next 6 days to make sure Trump defeats Nikki by *as wide of a margin* as possible. End this primary & do what’s right for America,” he wrote in another post. 

Ramaswamy bowed out of the race after coming in fourth at the caucuses Monday night, and immediately endorsed Trump. 

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

The next day, he went to New Hampshire to campaign for Trump. Ramaswamy re-shared a clip on X of him and Trump embracing on stage together as the crowd was heard shouting, “VP.”

Trump has yet to announce his choice of 2024 running mate but told Fox News during a town hall last week his mind was already made up. 

Fox News’ Brandon Gillepsie contributed to this report. 

The chief prosecutor in Georgia spearheading the racketeering case against former President Trump has been having an illicit affair with a lawyer she hired, according to Michael Roman, a Trump co-defendant. Legal experts say the arrangement jeopardizes her legal future.

According to court documents filed earlier this month by Roman, Fani Willis, who brought election interference-related charges against Trump, has been having an “improper” affair with special prosecutor Nathan Wade, whom she hired to help prosecute the 2024 GOP frontrunner.  

According to the court documents, Wade, who has no RICO and felony prosecution experience, billed taxpayers $654,000 since January 2022.  

Roman’s filing alleges that Wade billed Fulton County for 24 hours of work on a single day in November 2021, shortly after being appointed as a special prosecutor, and that Willis financially benefited from her alleged lover’s padded taxpayer-funded salary by taking lavish vacations together on his dime. 

TRUMP DELIVERS UNIFYING MESSAGE AFTER LANDSLIDE CAUCUS VICTORY, RECEIVES BIPARTISAN PRAISE

However, John Shu, a constitutional law expert who served in both the George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush administrations, says that while Willis’ and Wade’s apparent improprieties could give her some PR or re-election trouble, it does not automatically mean that Trump’s Peach State legal troubles disappear. 

 “Her alleged romantic relationship with Wade, which pre-existed her appointing him, is totally improper if it is true,” Shu said.  

“It raises the serious question as to why Willis needed to appoint Wade as another special prosecutor and supposed RICO expert when she already had hired Georgia’s most prominent RICO expert, John Floyd, in March of 2021,” he added.

However, Shu said that “unless the people of Fulton County clamor for their recusal” he does not see them “voluntarily recusing themselves from the case because it would look like they’re admitting wrongdoing.” 

Shu noted that according to U.S. Supreme Court precedent, a prosecutor’s failure to disclose a romantic relationship with one of her appointees is not considered honest services fraud in and of itself.  

TRUMP BLASTS FULTON COUNTY PROSECUTOR FANI WILLIS AFTER ROMANTIC PARTNER ALLEGATIONS: ‘TOTALLY COMPROMISED’

“Hiring one’s romantic partner and knowingly paying his alleged fake bills, however, likely would be considered cheating the county, especially because he is not a RICO expert. Also, Wade would be in hot water if, as alleged, he overbilled fake billable hours and got paid for them,” Shu added. 

The New York Post reported that Wade was billing the DA’s office nearly double what another prosecutor and RICO expert on the team, John Floyd, billed per hour.

Willis addressed the allegations for the first time at Big Bethel AME Church in Atlanta on Sunday.

“They only attacked one,” she said. “First thing they say, ‘Oh, she’s gonna play the race card now.’

“But no God, isn’t it them that’s playing the race card when they only question one,” Willis asked.

“You cannot expect Black women to be perfect and save the world,” Willis said, adding that “we need to be allowed to stumble. We need grace.” 

She has not denied the allegations. 

Jonathan Turley, a practicing criminal defense attorney and law professor at George Washington University, told Fox News Digital that “these types of allegations are rarely resolved in the wholesale rejection of a criminal case.”

FULTON COUNTY PROSECUTOR, FANI WILLIS ROMANTIC PARTNER, MET WITH BIDEN WHITE HOUSE TWICE BEFORE CHARGING TRUMP

However, he said, there are various remedies that the court can order. 

“The most obvious is the substitution of the prosecutors. It can also include the removal of the case to a different district. It is rare for the court to treat the underlying criminal case as legally invalid due to the misconduct of the prosecutors,” Turley said. 

“I think it would be foolish to count on a dismissal of the case based on these allegations. I think it is more reasonable to expect a delay and a possible substitution of prosecutors on the case,” he added. 

An “interesting dynamic” Turley noted is whether a different prosecutor would pursue Willis’ “sweeping claims.” 

“Willis is viewed as a highly political district attorney who relished the opportunity to charged Donald Trump.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

“I think many prosecutors would have balked at making this type of racketeering case. I think it is a case of overreach. That’s not to say that the case itself is without foundation. Many of these defendants are facing credible charges. It’s the attempt to link all of these parties into an overarching racketeering conspiracy that has left many of us skeptical,” said Turley. 

“So the question is, would another prosecutor in good faith move forward on the racketeering claim.”

Turley added that the ultimate standard in deciding how the case moves forward is “what is in the public interest.”

“I can’t imagine how the continued role of either Willis or wade in this case would advance the public interest,” he said.

Fox News Digital’s Greg Wehner contributed to this report. 

President Biden will redesignate Yemen’s Iran-backed Houthis as a terrorist group — three years after removing them from the Foreign Terrorist Organizations list — in response to repeated attacks on shipping vessels in the Red Sea. 

The Houthis will be placed on the Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) list, which will trigger sanctions designed to prevent further attacks on global trade in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, according to senior administration officials. 

“These attacks are a clear example of terrorism and a violation of international law and a major threat to life, global commerce, and they jeopardize the delivery of humanitarian assistance,” a senior administration official told reporters on Tuesday.

The decision comes as the Houthis have launched dozens of attacks on commercial ships in the Red Sea. The group said the attacks are in response to Israel’s military campaign against Hamas in the Gaza Strip. On Tuesday, Houthi fighters launched anti-ship ballistic missiles from Yemen into the Red Sea.

BIDEN ADMINISTRATION TO RELIST YEMEN’S IRAN-BACKED HOUTHIS AS DESIGNATED TERRORISTS AMID RED SEA ATTACKS

“We’ve taken this action to pressure the Houthis to cease their terrorist activities, including missile and drone attacks against international shipping. The ultimate goal of sanctions is to convince the Houthis to de-escalate and bring about a positive change in behavior,” the official said. 

The terrorist designation is set to take effect in 30 days. Officials emphasized that commercial shipments of food, medicine and fuel into Yemeni ports will be exempted so as not to deny humanitarian aid to the Yemeni people amid the civil war between the Houthis and the country’s internationally recognized, Saudi-backed government,

“The administration is prioritizing the mitigation of unintended adverse impacts from this designation that may otherwise arise for the people of Yemen,” a second official said. 

Secretary of State Antony Blinken delisted the Houthis as both a foreign terrorist organization and as specially designated global terrorists in February 2021 as the Biden administration sought to make it easier to get humanitarian aid into Yemen.

US CARRIES OUT ADDITIONAL STRIKE IN YEMEN, OFFICIAL SAYS

The move was a reversal of former President Trump‘s decision to place the Houthis on the FTO list over the strong objections of human rights and humanitarian aid groups in the waning days of his presidency.

The foreign terrorist designation barred Americans and people and organizations subject to U.S. jurisdiction from providing “material support” to the Houthis, which the groups said would result in an even greater humanitarian catastrophe than what was already happening in Yemen.

An SDGT designation will also freeze Houthi assets, but unlike the FTO designation, it will not impose immigration restrictions on members, according to the State Department. The SDGT sanctions also will not touch people and organizations who provide “material support” to the Houthis. 

“It was the correct step in 2021 to revoke the foreign terrorist organization and SDGT designations for the Houthis,” an administration official said, adding that Blinken made that decision “in recognition of a very dire humanitarian situation in Yemen.” 

CENTCOM RELEASES STATEMENT AFTER HOUTHI ATTACK IN YEMEN: ‘ILLEGAL AND DANGEROUS ACTIONS WILL NOT BE TOLERATED’

According to officials, the SDGT designation is part of a “broader effort” to deter the Houthi attacks along with military action. 

The recent Houthi attacks in the Red Sea have disrupted global shipping. Linda Thomas Greenfield, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, said last week that 2,000 ships since November have been forced to divert thousands of miles to avoid the Red Sea.

Houthi militants have threatened or taken hostage mariners from more than 20 countries.

CLICK TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

On Tuesday, U.S. forces struck and destroyed four Houthi anti-ship ballistic missiles that were prepared to launch from Yemen, CENTCOM said.

“The recent attacks since November are really unacceptable,” the official said. “We cannot sit idly by and watch what the Houthis are doing in the Red Sea and not recognize their actions for what they are.” 

Fox News Digital’s Louis Casiano, Jacqui Heinrich and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Justice Department prosecutors say the man charged with leaking former President Trump’s tax returns sought his job as an IRS consultant specifically for the purpose of leaking the information.

Charles Littlejohn had done work for Booze Allen from 2008 to 2013, but he returned to the company as an IRS consultant in 2017. Prosecutors say the career move was meant to grant him access to private tax information that would allow him to leak Trump’s tax returns. The DOJ says Littlejohn considered Trump to be a threat to democracy, according to the Wall Street Journal.

“[Littlejohn] weaponized his access to unmasked taxpayer data to further his own personal political agenda, believing that he was above the law,” prosecutors alleged.

“A free press and public engagement with the media are critical to any healthy democracy, but stealing and leaking private, personal tax information strips individuals of the legal protection of their most sensitive data,” they added.

IRS CONSULTANT PLEADS GUILTY FOR LEAKING TAX RETURNS OF TRUMP AND NATION’S ‘WEALTHIEST INDIVIDUALS’ TO MEDIA

The DOJ went on to say that Littlejohn had a “sophisticated, detailed plan to secretly download” Trump’s returns and those of other wealthy individuals by 2018, according to WSJ.

IRS CONSULTANT CHARGED WITH DISCLOSING TAX RETURNS OF TRUMP AND NATION’S ‘WEALTHIEST INDIVIDUALS’ TO MEDIA

The DOJ says Littlejohn later uploaded the returns to a private website he owned, which allowed him to bypass IRS systems meant to detect large transfers of data.

Once in possession of the data, he allegedly made several copies of it and sat on the information for roughly six months before contacting the New York Times. The DOJ said one of the flash drives containing the information was hidden “inside the lining of a wooden leather box containing an ornamental camel,” according to the Journal.

The Times then published several articles about the content of Trump’s returns, and Littlejohn also shared the returns of thousands of wealthy Americans with the organization ProPublica. That led to a series of articles detailing the tax information of Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk and many others dating back 15 years.

Republicans on Capitol Hill were dismayed late last year when Littlejohn was only charged with one count of unauthorized disclosure of tax information, despite leaking the information of thousands of Americans.

“We write today to express concern abut the Department of Justice’s decision to charge Charles Edward Littlejohn with only one count of unauthorized disclosure of taxpayer information despite his admissions that he made two distinct disclosures to two separate news organizations impacting potentially thousands of taxpayers,” wrote House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith, R-Mo., along with other Republicans.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Lawyers for Trump have requested that Littlejohn receive the maximum sentence of five years in prison.

Fox News’ Brooke Singman contributed to this report