Donald Trump Poll News

The Trump administration is being sued over its efforts to collect and analyze sensitive voter data from across the country.

The complaint, filed in federal court in Washington, D.C., on Thursday, alleges the Department of Homeland Security has obtained voter files from at least 47 states and handled the data in a way that violates federal law.

DHS’ secretive probe of the voter data, which includes a policy to combine it with commercial datasets, ignores federal safeguards and the privacy rights of millions of Americans, the lawsuit says.

The case was brought by the League of Women Voters, the Electronic Privacy Information Center and the League of United Latin American Citizens and is the latest legal challenge to President Donald Trump’s efforts to combat noncitizen voting.

STATE DEPARTMENT CONSIDERS SHARING PASSPORT RECORDS FOR VOTER CITIZENSHIP CHECKS

The president has purported repeatedly argued that noncitizen voting poses a serious threat to election integrity, although studies and prosecutions have found documented instances of noncitizens casting ballots to be rare.

The administration has repeatedly sought a greater federal role in voter eligibility and election administration, areas traditionally overseen primarily by states under the Constitution and federal law.

Federal courts have repeatedly rejected administration efforts to compel states to turn over voter information.

The new lawsuit alleges the administration has obtained and processed voter records from at least 47 states, even though officials in 30 states have previously refused federal demands to turn over voter information.

The complaint urges the court to declare the administration’s collection of voter data illegal, block DHS’ policy and order the agency to delete and stop using the voter information it has already obtained.

The lawsuit comes less than three weeks before Election Day, and the administration continues to pressure states, alleging they are not doing enough to purge noncitizens from their voter rolls.

TRUMP SCORES SUPREME COURT WIN IN ELECTION INTEGRITY FIGHT AS STATES GAIN NEW VOTER ROLL TOOL

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The administration sued California election officials on Thursday, arguing they failed to act quickly enough to review names the federal government identified as “likely” noncitizens. The Justice Department asked a judge to block the state from counting mail-in ballots from those individuals unless their eligibility can be confirmed.

The California secretary of state’s office said it was given only 48 hours to review roughly 20,000 names and said the federal government had not provided the underlying evidence or methodology supporting its claims.

The Justice Department’s lawsuit, however, says U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services conducted a “multiagency and multilevel review” and determined with “high confidence” that roughly 20,000 people on California’s voter rolls were likely noncitizens.

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

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Alaska Democratic Senate hopeful Mary Peltola faced ridicule Thursday night after her use of notecards during a debate with Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan drew mocking responses from GOP critics — including a pointed jab from her incumbent opponent.

Sullivan is in an unusually close race with Peltola, a former congresswoman, that is further complicated by another candidate with his same name but a different middle initial, as Republicans fight to hold their narrow Senate majority.

“Really, Mary? Reading off a script? You can’t cue-card your way through the Senate,” Sullivan wrote on X after Peltola appeared to have a notecard-sized paper with bullet points that she looked down at for several seconds while responding to earlier questions.

GOP SENATOR, EX-HOUSE DEM EMERGE FROM ALASKA’S ‘JUNGLE PRIMARY’ DESPITE FAR-LEFT MEDDLING

The criticism quickly became a flashpoint in the candidates’ debate-night exchanges, with Republican commentators seizing on Peltola’s apparent use of prepared notes.

“Mary, blink twice if you are okay. It seems you can’t string a sentence together without reading from the talking points your Lower 48 handlers wrote you,” NRSC official Joanna Rodriguez posted on X.

Another social media user took aim at Peltola’s apparent reliance on notes even while discussing personal details.

“Mary Peltola can’t read her name or that she’s a grandmother without needing a cue card,” the user wrote, adding a laughing emoji.

After Peltola appeared to read from her card another time, Sullivan cut in that he had a question for the moderators.

‘THEY WERE SPYING’: SULLIVAN SOUNDS ALARM ON JOINT RUSSIA-CHINA MOVES IN U.S. ARCTIC ZONE

INSERT CLIP: 6389131701112

“We weren’t supposed to get these questions beforehand, were we?” he asked the debate moderators.

“No sir,” Alaska’s News Source reporter Wil Courtney replied. “Absolutely not,” added Alaska Public Media chief editor Lori Townsend.

“OK,” Sullivan said. “I’m just watching my opponent.”

Peltola defended herself, interjecting that she was better “prepared.”

The Republican Party’s research arm hit back on X, highlighting a clip of Peltola appearing to read from her card:

“Mary Peltola — who did not introduce a single bill to help Alaska fisherman during her first term in Congress — has to read off of a script when talking about Alaska’s fishing industry,” the party tweeted.

The debate also turned personal when Sullivan confronted Peltola over allegations that she mistreated former staffers, citing reporting by The New York Times and claiming that 25 employees had quit while working for her.

Peltola rejected the allegations as “outright fabrications or mass exaggerations of the truth,” arguing that the election should not be about her “worst day.”

The heated exchange prompted moderators to call for decorum and warn that microphones could be shut off if the candidates continued interrupting one another. Sullivan maintained that the allegations reflected a pattern of behavior, while Peltola accused her opponent of exploiting the controversy for political gain.

The candidates also faced questions over Alaska’s long-discussed liquefied natural gas pipeline after moderators reported South Korea had not committed to investing in the project despite President Donald Trump’s public promotion of a potential deal.

Sullivan defended the administration’s efforts, arguing Seoul had committed funding through a broader trade agreement while acknowledging that the specific investment amount remained under negotiation.

DEM SENATE HOPEFUL VOWS TO UNLEASH ALASKA OIL — BUT HER RECORD TELLS A DIFFERENT STORY

Peltola also expressed support for the pipeline but cautioned against raising expectations without firm commitments, saying Alaska should not be “promoting falsehoods that just have no substance.”

Both candidates emphasized the project’s economic potential, although the exchange exposed uncertainty over whether promised foreign investment would materialize.

Peltola previously became the first Democrat in decades to represent Alaska in the House after the death of Republican Rep. Don Young, and her Senate candidacy again carries potentially sweeping statewide and national repercussions.

SIGN UP TO GET THE POLITICS NEWSLETTER

The showdown comes as Republicans fight to defend their narrow Senate majority, with Sullivan’s seat emerging as a major Democratic pickup opportunity in a state President Donald Trump carried in 2024. The Cook Political Report rates the contest a toss-up, making Alaska one of several battlegrounds that could determine which party controls the chamber in January.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Fox News Digital reached out to Peltola’s campaign for comment.

FIRST ON FOX: Three top House Republicans are demanding a Chinese shipping giant be stripped of special privileges at American ports over concerns the vessels are allegedly spying on U.S. military communications, according to a letter exclusively obtained by Fox News Digital.

COSCO, a shipping and logistics company owned by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and based in Shanghai, has received favorable treatment under a Coast Guard program designed to reward trusted commercial operators. But China hawks in Congress want to revoke those privileges following a September report that the vessels are being used to gather intelligence.

In an Oct. 14 letter, three top Republican lawmakers identified that as of July 15, 2026, there were 11 COSCO vessels listed in the Coast Guard’s Quality Shipping for the 21st Century program, known as Qualship 21 — despite the Pentagon designating them as a Chinese military company.

House China Committee Chairman John Moolenaar, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Rick Crawford, R-Ark., and Rep. Carlos Gimenez, chairman of the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Transportation and Maritime Security, are pressing Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin to revoke COSCO vessels’ enrollment in the Coast Guard’s program.

It follows a September’s reporting that COSCO vessels used sophisticated, concealed equipment to intercept military communications and gather intelligence about encryption technologies off American coastlines.

The Coast Guard program was created to allow vessels with strong safety and compliance records to undergo fewer routine inspections when entering U.S. ports. But the lawmakers argue in their letter that COSCO’s alleged espionage activities and ties to China’s military raise serious questions about why its ships have qualified for preferential treatment.

CHINA ‘WIRETAPPED RED SEA’ WITH SPY HUB 6 MILES FROM US BASE: EX PENTAGON OFFICIAL WARNS

The allegations, attributed to senior U.S. officials, have fueled concerns that Chinese commercial vessels could serve as intelligence-gathering platforms while operating near sensitive American military facilities.

COSCO has denied the allegations, calling them unfounded and maintaining that its onboard communications and navigation equipment is used exclusively for legitimate commercial purposes. The company has said none of its equipment was used to intercept military communications or gather intelligence.

COSCO is one of the world’s largest shipping companies and is owned by the Chinese government. Its sprawling commercial fleet operates along major global trade routes, including routes serving American ports.

The Pentagon added COSCO to its Section 1260H list of Chinese military companies in January 2025, citing its ownership by a Chinese state agency, activities allegedly conducted on behalf of the People’s Liberation Army and contributions to Beijing’s military-civil fusion strategy, which seeks to harness civilian industries and technologies for military purposes.

WALL STREET BANKS HELPED CHINESE MILITARY-LINKED FIRM RAISE BILLIONS DESPITE RED FLAGS, LAWMAKERS FIND

The designation does not automatically bar COSCO vessels from entering American ports. But the lawmakers are questioning why a company identified by the Pentagon as having ties to China’s military should continue benefiting from a Coast Guard program that reduces inspection frequency.

The Coast Guard updated Qualship 21 eligibility rules earlier this year, expanding the circumstances under which vessels could be removed from the program, including certain associations with sanctioned entities. The lawmakers are now pressing DHS on whether Pentagon national security designations should also factor into eligibility decisions.

In the letter first obtained by Fox News Digital, the lawmakers urged DHS to revoke COSCO vessels’ enrollment, refuse future renewals and increase scrutiny of other shipping companies with ties to the CCP and Chinese military.

They are also demanding to know whether the Coast Guard received intelligence warnings about COSCO’s alleged surveillance operations before the allegations became public in September — and whether those warnings were considered when deciding if its vessels should retain their privileged status.

The lawmakers specifically questioned whether the Coast Guard reviewed COSCO’s eligibility following its Pentagon designation and whether intelligence officials have identified similar risks involving other Chinese or Hong Kong-based shipping operators.

Their concerns extend to what the Coast Guard is doing to detect potential espionage aboard commercial vessels already operating in American waters.

The letter questions whether authorities have conducted additional boardings of COSCO ships, investigated crew members potentially involved in intelligence collection or examined historical shipping routes for unusual movements that could indicate surveillance activities.

The lawmakers also questioned whether the Coast Guard has sufficient legal authority to counter suspected intelligence operations aboard foreign commercial ships, or whether additional coordination with other federal agencies is necessary.

The inquiry reaches beyond COSCO. The lawmakers raised the possibility of removing Hong Kong from the Coast Guard’s list of qualified flag administrations, citing concerns about Beijing’s control over the territory.

The letter was copied to the director of national intelligence and the Coast Guard commandant.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Fox News Digital reached out to COSCO, DHS and the Coast Guard for comment but did not hear back at time of publication.

BANGOR, Maine — Republican Sen. Susan Collins is warning that Maine could lose crucial federal funding if voters replace her with Democrat Troy Jackson, as a new poll shows the candidates statistically tied ahead of their final debate Thursday.

Jackson, a one-time logger and former Maine Senate president, edged Collins 49%-47% in a Suffolk University poll conducted Oct. 8-11 and released on the eve of the final debate. Jackson’s two-point edge over Collins among likely voters was well within the survey’s margin of error, and the poll was the latest to indicate an extremely close contest.

The face-off between Collins and Jackson in the blue-leaning Northern New England state is a top flip opportunity for the Democrats as they try to win back the Senate majority from the Republicans in the midterm elections.

The Fox News Power Rankings rate the race in Maine as a toss up, as do leading nonpartisan political handicappers the Cook Political Report, Inside Elections, and Sabato’s Crystal Ball.

CAN A FORMER NFL SIDELINE REPORTER HELP REPUBLICANS FLIP A SENATE SEAT IN BLUE-LEANING MINNESOTA?

“Maine voters lose out big time if Troy Jackson were to be elected,” Collins said in an exclusive Fox News Digital interview on Wednesday.

Collins, who is running for a sixth six-year term in the Senate, has showcased her nearly three decades of Senate experience and her leadership role as Senate Appropriations Committee chair as integral to her ability “to get so much done for the people of Maine.” She warned that if Jackson replaced her, “he’ll be 100 in seniority, and all of that essential federal funding targeted for the state of Maine, virtually all of it will go away.”

Jackson has argued that Collins has not used her Senate power to protect Maine families from soaring energy, food, and housing costs. “Sen. Collins has told us how powerful she is,” Jackson said during their first debate. “But power means nothing if you won’t use it when the people may need it.”

Jackson and Democrats have also repeatedly aimed to anchor Collins to President Donald Trump, whose approval ratings in Maine and across the country are cratering ahead of the midterms.

“That’s the choice on this stage — a senator who helps Donald Trump hurt Maine then tells us how concerned she is, or somebody who will stand up against him before another family in Maine has to pay the price,” Jackson said during Tuesday’s third debate.

DEMS SEE NEW CHANCES TO FLIP SENATE SEATS BUT GOP’S MASSIVE CASH ADVANTAGE AN OBSTACLE

Collins is known as a moderate Republican who at times has voted against the president. But Jackson and Democrats are targeting the senator over her comments that she didn’t regret her 2018 vote to confirm Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, whose crucial vote four years later helped overturn the landmark Roe v. Wade abortion ruling.

And following the fatal shooting in Maine this summer involving Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents, Democrats heavily criticized Collins for her support for ICE funding.

But Collins has broken with Trump numerous times in recent months, criticizing his tariff war with neighboring Canada and voting against Attorney General Todd Blanche’s confirmation.

“Troy and Chuck Schumer and their allies run ads saying that I’m somehow a puppet of the president. Believe me, that would come as a huge surprise to President Trump,” Collins told Fox News Digital.

Collins noted, “I opposed the deal that he made with Vladimir Putin to get a small amount of diesel, and in return lift the sanctions that we just passed into law, and the president is not following the law. I signed a bipartisan letter that urges the president to reconsider that. I opposed the president’s signature legislative accomplishment, the One Big Beautiful Bill, because it contained cuts in Medicaid that… I know would be harmful to Maine.”

DEMOCRATS THINK A BLUE WAVE IS BUILDING – HERE ARE THREE FACTORS THAT COULD STOP IT

The senator was interviewed in Bangor after landing the endorsement of the Maine chapter of the Fraternal Order of Police.

“I’ve secured funding for projects throughout Maine, $46 million to help our police and sheriff’s departments upgrade their equipment, facilities, and communications,” Collins told Fox News Digital.

And she took aim at Jackson, who won a special nominating convention in late July to fill the party’s Senate nomination, which was left vacant after primary winner Graham Platner ended his campaign following an explosive report containing an allegation of rape from a woman he previously dated. Platner denied the report but dropped out.

Jackson, who earlier this year unsuccessfully ran for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination, had campaigned alongside Platner during the primary campaign.

“Troy was Graham Platner’s biggest supporter and stayed with him to the very end of Graham’s campaign, and Graham repeatedly denigrated law enforcement,” Collins said. “I never heard Troy publicly condemn those disrespectful and horrible comments.”

Collins added, “During his gubernatorial campaign, Troy was endorsed and welcomed the endorsement of the Democratic Socialists of America. One of the key parts of the DSA platform is to defund the police.”

The Jackson campaign, responding, pointed out that “Jackson is not a Democratic Socialist” and has repeatedly said he does not support defunding the police. The campaign added that Jackson called on Platner to drop out and “has been clear he will not accept a Platner endorsement.”

“Susan Collins is lying about Troy’s record because she knows that Mainers are ready to retire her after she’s voted with Donald Trump 96% of the time to cut their healthcare, confirmed Brett Kavanaugh who overturned Roe v. Wade, enabled Trump’s war in Iran that’s raising energy costs, and failed to stop his reckless tariffs that are causing costs to skyrocket,” the Jackson campaign told Fox News Digital.

SIGN UP TO GET THE POLITICS NEWSLETTER

But Collins disputed the 96% figure, saying that it came from a study that only covered a third of her Senate votes.

“A study that looked at 90% of the votes showed that I supported the president 72% of the time,” she added. “The bottom line is, I support him when I think he’s right. I don’t when I think he’s wrong.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Collins, who is the only GOP senator seeking re-election in a state Trump lost in the 2024 election, has a history of surviving Democratic efforts to unseat her.

Six years ago, she trailed Democratic challenger Sara Gideon, the then-Maine House speaker, but the senator ended up winning re-election by nearly nine points while former President Joe Biden carried the state by a similar margin.

Bangor, Maine – A protester interrupted the final debate between Republican Sen. Susan Collins and Democratic challenger Troy Jackson in Maine, triggering a heated exchange after Collins suggested the demonstrator was a Jackson supporter.

The interruption came amid a debate that saw the candidates trade fire over numerous issues. The race between Jackson and Collins, who is seeking a sixth term representing the blue-leaning Northern New England state, is a top flip opportunity for Democrats as they try to win back the Senate majority from Republicans in the midterm elections.

The latest public opinion polls indicate a race within the margin of error between Collins and Jackson, a one-time logger and former state Senate president. The latest Fox News Power Rankings rate the race as a toss-up, as do leading nonpartisan political handicappers the Cook Political Report, Inside Elections and Sabato’s Crystal Ball.

DEMS SEE NEW CHANCES TO FLIP SENATE SEATS BUT GOP’S MASSIVE CASH ADVANTAGE AN OBSTACLE

The protester, who interrupted Collins as she spoke, yelled out, “I’m terrified. AI data centers are destroying our climate. They are poisoning our water.”

As security escorted the protester out of the debate hall, Collins suggested the man was a Jackson supporter.

“So, this is obviously one of Troy’s supporters,” Collins said.

Jackson quickly fired back, “Oh, shut up, I did not — I didn’t, I don’t even know who that kid.”

Another heated moment came a few minutes later when each candidate was able to ask a question of the other.

Jackson, who grew up in rural northern Maine in the same county as Collins, asked, “What I’m curious about — is it just me that you look down on, or is it working-class people overall?”

DEMOCRATS THINK A BLUE WAVE IS BUILDING – HERE ARE THREE FACTORS THAT COULD STOP IT

The senator shot back, “Troy, I do not look down on you or on anyone. I grew up in Caribou. My first job was picking potatoes.”

As he works to oust Collins from the Senate, Jackson has repeatedly tried to anchor the senator to President Donald Trump, who has seen his approval ratings in Maine and across the country drop further underwater.

“The reality is 100% of the time when Donald Trump needs her, Susan Collins is going to be there,” Jackson claimed.

But Collins pointed to what she described as a “major difference between Troy and me. I vote very independently. … I am the most bipartisan member of the Senate.”

SIGN UP TO GET THE POLITICS NEWSLETTER

And referring to Jackson, Collins said, “We don’t need more people who are going to vote a straight party line.”

Collins and Jackson spent much of the hour-long debate trading fire on issues, including the Iran War, immigration, rising fuel prices and electricity rates, budget deficits, Supreme Court reform, dark money in politics, an assault weapons ban and climate change.

DEMOCRACY ’26: STAY UP TO DATE WITH THE FOX NEWS ELECTION HUB

Jackson won a special nominating convention in late July to claim the party’s Senate nomination, which was left vacant after primary winner Graham Platner ended his campaign following allegations he raped a woman he previously dated. Platner denied the allegations but dropped out.

Jackson, who earlier this year unsuccessfully ran for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination, had campaigned alongside Platner during the primary campaign.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Collins, who is the only GOP senator seeking re-election in a state Trump lost in the 2024 election, has a history of surviving Democratic efforts to unseat her.

Six years ago, she trailed Democratic challenger Sara Gideon, the Maine House speaker at the time, but Collins won re-election by nearly nine points while former President Joe Biden carried the state by a similar margin.

Fox News’ Jessica Sonkin contributed to this report.

A Nigerian man forced to cook thousands of meals for the Unknown Gunmen, a militant group linked to political violence in Nigeria, is at the center of a Supreme Court showdown that could determine how broadly immigration authorities can apply a terrorism-related bar to asylum and how far the Trump administration can go in deporting immigrants accused of supporting terrorism.

The Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to hear the Trump administration’s challenge to a ruling that overturned Nigerian citizen Izuchukwu Ozurumba’s deportation order, setting up a legal battle over whether ordinary services provided to terrorist organizations, including cooking meals, can disqualify immigrants from receiving asylum even when those services are not directly connected to terrorist attacks.

Ozurumba was deported to Nigeria in April 2025 while his appeal was pending.

THE SUPREME COURT IS BACK; THESE FIVE CASES COULD RESHAPE AMERICAN LIFE

At the center of the case is a provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act that bars certain immigrants who provide “material support” to terrorist organizations from receiving asylum. The law lists examples of prohibited assistance, including transportation, communications, housing, money, weapons and training, but it does not explicitly define what constitutes material support.

“The biggest takeaway is that this is a case about who gets to draw the line on a law that affects national security,” Bryce Poole, a senior legal fellow with Advancing American Freedom, told Fox News Digital. “Congress wrote a broad rule, and the court interpreted it narrowly.”

The case also comes two years after the Supreme Court overturned Chevron deference, a legal doctrine that required judges to defer to federal agencies’ reasonable interpretations of ambiguous laws. The 2024 ruling gave judges greater authority to decide what those laws mean.

The 4th Circuit, in a 2-1 ruling, overturned Ozurumba’s deportation order and sent the case back to the Board of Immigration Appeals.

Judge James Wynn Jr., an Obama appointee, wrote the majority opinion, joined by Judge Nicole Berner, a Biden appointee. The judges concluded that, although Ozurumba prepared thousands of meals for the group’s leaders, his cooking did not provide resources that could be directly used or readily redirected toward terrorist operations.

Although Ozurumba said he was forced to cook under threat of violence, the 4th Circuit did not decide whether the law contains an exception for assistance provided under duress, an issue the court previously addressed in a 2012 ruling that relied on Chevron deference. Instead, the majority found that his cooking for the terrorist organization did not qualify as “material support” that would bar him from asylum, leaving the separate duress question unresolved.

The Trump administration argued that the 4th Circuit interpreted the law too narrowly, insisting that even ordinary services such as cooking meals can help sustain a terrorist organization and free its members to carry out attacks.

“Because he’s cooking the meals, one of the armed guards doesn’t have to cook the meals and can be an armed guard,” Poole said.

“That’s one guard who doesn’t have to come in off guard duty to cook meals, or that’s one bomb maker who doesn’t have to stop making bombs to go cook meals, because all this stuff is fungible.”

Ozurumba said he initially agreed to work as a chef at a “rural camp,” preparing three meals a day for 15 to 17 leaders. He later learned the camp belonged to the Unknown Gunmen.

An immigration judge determined that the Unknown Gunmen qualified as a “Tier III” terrorist organization under federal immigration law, even though the State Department had not formally designated the group as one.

Ozurumba said armed guards prevented him from leaving. According to court records, he cooked for the group’s leaders for roughly six months, including three months without pay, before escaping during a trip into town to buy groceries.

STATE’S LARGEST MOSQUE LEADER’S DEPORTATION FIGHT TAKES DRAMATIC TURN AS TRUMP ADMIN SCORES MAJOR WIN

Ozurumba said members of the Unknown Gunmen continued threatening and attacking him after his escape, prompting him to flee Nigeria for Venezuela and eventually the United States. He crossed the southern border without valid entry documents in July 2023 during the Biden administration and surrendered to Border Patrol agents.

An immigration judge denied Ozurumba’s asylum request and ordered his deportation, a decision upheld by the Board of Immigration Appeals after finding that his cooking violated the federal material-support rule. The 4th Circuit later rejected that interpretation and sent the case back to the immigration board.

Judge Julius Richardson disagreed with the majority, arguing in his dissent that cooking thousands of meals for terrorist leaders freed them to focus on their organization’s goals and therefore constituted material support.

“Ozurumba did not run a hot dog stand that the Unknown Gunmen happened to stop by once or twice,” Richardson wrote. “Rather, he acted as a private chef, providing three meals a day for over a dozen leaders of a terrorist organization — for months.”

Hans von Spakovsky, a legal expert with Advancing American Freedom, also argued that the majority misinterpreted the law.

SIGN UP TO GET THE POLITICS NEWSLETTER

“The idea that providing over 8,000 meals for the leaders of a terrorist organization and its members is not ‘material’ defies common sense,” von Spakovsky told Fox News Digital. “Richardson correctly cites Napoleon’s famous quote that an ‘army marches on its stomach.’

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“Other federal appeals courts have all held that providing food and shelter, even if unconnected to a specific terrorist event, constitutes material support within the statute,” von Spakovsky continued. “And doing so under duress, even if true, is not an excuse under the statute to avoid removal.”

Even if the Supreme Court rules in his favor, a victory would not automatically grant him asylum or guarantee his return to the United States. His case would still need to be reconsidered by immigration authorities.

The 4th Circuit previously declined to order the government to bring him back, instead leaving it up to officials to decide whether his presence in the U.S. would be necessary for further proceedings.

Maryland’s only Republican House member was heard telling a woman “you are rude” after she started laughing while he was speaking during a debate.

The clash between Rep. Andy Harris and the audience member unfolded Tuesday in Cambridge as the Republican was talking about rising diesel prices during the U.S.-Iran war.

“Let’s get the facts straight, the facts are that diesel is, the facts are that diesel prices have gone up, there is no question about it. Why has it gone up? Because the Democrats have environmental regulations…” Harris said before he was interrupted by a woman laughing in the audience.

“Ma’am, I gotta tell you. This is the problem, you all say you believe there is a First Amendment, but only if you agree with you,” Harris told the crowd. “You should let me finish the sentence, ma’am. You are rude. You’re rude, OK?”

AMERICA’S TRUCKERS ISSUE DIRE WARNING AS SOARING DIESEL COSTS THREATEN ‘DOMINO EFFECT’

Harris then turned to the debate moderator and said, “I’m sorry,” adding that if she wasn’t going tell the audience they were rude, he had to do it himself.

“Let me finish the sentence why there is a shortage of diesel in the world and in the country,” Harris continued, before another audience member started talking.

“You are rude too. So do you believe in the First Amendment? Do you believe in my First Amendment right to express myself? It’s my turn to express myself, not yours,” Harris said.

PRESS FREEDOM GROUPS THAT BLASTED TRUMP TURN FIRE ON DEMOCRAT GOVERNOR OVER ALLEGED MEDIA RETALIATION

Harris, who has represented Maryland’s 1st Congressional District since 2010, is running for re-election against Democrat challenger Dan Schwartz.

The debate moderator then asked both candidates to speak to their supporters and ask them to be “polite and respectful” during the debate.

“That is very important that you guys are able to hear from both of us tonight, so please if you don’t mind, let’s keep all reactions for later when you get home and let’s let the congressman speak,” Schwartz said.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

When it was Harris’ turn, he said, “You don’t need to hear it from me because my people aren’t interfering with Mr. Schwartz, it’s only one way.”

MINNEAPOLIS — Members of Minnesota’s growing Somali community, including a city council member, tore into President Donald Trump and his administration when speaking with Fox News Digital after Monday’s raid on Rep. Ilhan Omar’s Washington, D.C., residence.

“Somalis — we all feel attacked by President Trump,” Jamal Osman, the Somali-born vice president of the Minneapolis City Council, said of the impact of the raid carried out by Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) agents.

“Our president has broken the law many times. ICE [is] terrorizing our community … and we’re not surprised such action has taken place,” Osman continued in reference to the search of Omar’s home.

FEDERAL AGENTS RAID ILHAN OMAR’S DC HOME AMID IMMIGRATION FRAUD INVESTIGATION

“We have seen the threats, the horrific language he uses against my community. It’s unacceptable, and we’re hoping this could stop,” Osman said.

A 37-year-old social worker and Minneapolis resident named Abdi, who declined to give his last name or be interviewed on camera, had even harsher words for the president. He, like Osman, said he was born in Somalia.

“I feel like raiding a congresswoman — it feels like Donald Trump and his regime wanted to use their power to dehumanize and also humiliate someone that is part of the Congress,” Abdi said.

He claimed that Trump “hates Somali people because of Ilhan Omar.”

Abdi said Trump created “hate” and a “fight” with Somalis in America and claimed that they are being followed and harassed in the streets because of the president.

TRUMP RALLY CROWD CHANTS ‘DEPORT’ AS PRESIDENT RIPS ILHAN OMAR AFTER FEDERAL RAID

“It’s personal,” he said. “And Ilhan Omar — he doesn’t treat her as a congressmember — he treats her as someone who’s below him.”

“If they take the citizenship away from her, then I will say, ‘Are we in a dictatorship?’ That’s using power to use against an American citizen, then maybe the thinking we have for the United States is completely different.”

Osman said the raid is proof of what the Trump administration is willing to do.

“We live in the United States, which is the land of the laws. I don’t expect Trump or anyone in this matter to break the U.S. Constitution,” he continued. “There’s laws. He can, of course, threaten, but there’s a court process, there’s due process. He can’t say he’s gonna deport her, he’s gonna deport me, thousands of Somalis.”

OMAR RAID OUTRAGE GOES FROM BAD TO WORSE WHEN INTERNET NOTICES HER PAST 6-WORD CLAIM: ‘COULDN’T AGREE MORE’

Osman’s message to the president was simple: “Stop it.”

“We’re American citizens like everyone else,” he said.

A third person, a 22-year-old Somali American woman who declined to be named or filmed, told Fox News Digital that she wasn’t surprised about the raid on Omar’s home.

“I thought it was bound to happen soon enough,” she said. “They’ve been talking about her in a negative manner. The government [has been] constantly questioning her immigration status and her naturalization in the country. So it was bound to happen for them to investigate her soon enough.”

When reached about the comments from the Minneapolis Somali community, the White House pointed Fox News Digital to the president’s public reaction to the raid on Monday.

“I’ve always found her to be totally crooked, personally, but that has nothing to do with me,” Trump brushed off. “I think she’s a terrible person. Just a complainer. She comes from a country that is a non-country, and then she comes over here, and she complains about our Constitution.”

“I think she’s a terrible person, but that’s really up to the DOJ. I have nothing to do with it.”

ILHAN OMAR’S HUSBAND INSISTS HE HAS ‘NO CONCERNS’ AMID FEDERAL IMMIGRATION INVESTIGATION

HSI, the principal investigative arm of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), executed a search warrant at Omar’s home in the nation’s capital early Monday morning, as first reported by Fox News Digital.

Sources confirmed to Fox News Digital that the raid stems from an investigation into whether Omar or her late father, Nur Mohamed, fraudulently filled out her citizenship paperwork decades ago. The investigation, the sources note, could lead to the congresswoman’s denaturalization.

The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday that Omar’s phone, passport and computers were seized in the raid — it is not clear which other items or materials were taken from her residence, if any.

Omar has not been seen since the raid, but offered her reaction to the unfolding investigation on social media Monday afternoon.

“This raid by Trump’s DHS is an outrageous abuse of power and an unprecedented escalation in the weaponization of federal law enforcement to target political enemies. For a decade, Donald Trump has relentlessly targeted Congresswoman Ilhan Omar with inflammatory rhetoric, repeatedly putting a target on her back,” she said.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“Now, those attacks have escalated to a pointless federal raid. The Congresswoman has done nothing wrong. No president should be able to use the power of the federal government to intimidate his political enemies.”

President Donald Trump on Thursday linked Michigan Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed to the Muslim Brotherhood amid scrutiny over his alleged family ties to the Islamist organization.

“He’s a Muslim Brotherhood guy, 100%,” Trump said during a lunch in the White House Rose Garden. “He’s a Muslim Brotherhood guy. How about having him be on the Senate Intelligence Committee? How about that? The guy’s 100% Muslim Brotherhood.”

El-Sayed has come under scrutiny from Republicans over social media posts made by his half-sister, Eman Abdelhadi, alleging their mother was an active member of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt during the 1970s.

COUNTERTERRORISM EXPERT WARNS ABDUL EL-SAYED SENATE BID RAISES HOMELAND SECURITY CONCERNS

He has denied any family connections to the group. During a recent interview with NBC’s Meet the Press, El-Sayed rejected the assertions when asked to set the record straight.

“I have no ties; we have no ties,” El-Sayed said.

EL-SAYED ASKED IF HE BELIEVES AMERICA IS ‘READY FOR A MUSLIM PRESIDENT’ AHEAD OF SENATE RACE

He accused political opponents of engaging in anti-Muslim rhetoric rather than addressing his policy positions.

“[Opponent Mike Rogers’] only strategy is to point to me and my name and my faith and to say that we’re different, and that you should suspect people simply because they are different than you in how they pray,” he said.

EL-SAYED’S LIBERAL AGENDA CLASHES WITH MUSLIM VOTERS WHO BACK HIM ANYWAY: ‘MALE VERSION’ OF ILHAN OMAR

However, according to Abdelhadi, their mother was an active member of the Muslim Brotherhood.

“Had an amazing talk with my mom about her activism in the Muslim Brotherhood during the early 70s while she was in college #respect,” Abdelhadi wrote in a 2012 post on X.

In another 2012 social media post, she wrote: “My family has long been MB, but I’ve always felt that it has navigated the political sphere poorly/destructively.”

During his remarks, Trump said he looked forward to visiting Michigan to “expose this fraud that’s running.”

“He’s a fraud. He’s a con man,” Trump said.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Fox News Digital has reached out to El-Sayed’s campaign for comment.

While Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., has not been seen publicly since federal agents raided her Washington, D.C., residence on Monday, her political consultant husband was once again spotted emerging from their shared rental home this week.

Tim Mynett was seen Wednesday stepping out in the neighborhood to walk their Golden Labrador Retriever dog Teddy, a second time later that same day to take out the trash and a third time to walk out his wife’s staffer.

“There are rumors that the congresswoman left the country, is that true?” Mynett was asked while on an evening walk with Teddy.

“You guys are annoying the hell out of all the neighbors around here, man,” he told Fox News Digital when approached about the developments this week, including President Donald Trump weighing in on the saga.

One of Omar’s congressional staffers was captured the same day bringing into the couple’s home two large bags from fast food chain Burger King. Security escorted her to the door and staked out in front of the house after she entered with the meal.

ILHAN OMAR’S EMBATTLED HUSBAND APPEARS AT SCENE OF HSI RAID IN MIDST OF CRIMINAL FRAUD INVESTIGATION

Rumors swirled that Omar fled from the country following the raid carried out by Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) as part of a criminal fraud investigation looking into the Somali-born congresswoman’s immigration paperwork, as first reported by Fox News Digital.

Omar’s cellphone and passport were reportedly seized by federal authorities during the search.

The congresswoman’s staff helped to get her birth year adjusted from 1981 to 1982 in the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library, according to reporters. Omar gained citizenship automatically through her father’s naturalization since she was reportedly 17 years old at the time. If Omar was born in 1981, she would have been 18 years old, meaning the validity of her citizenship could be threatened because she was no longer a minor.

The altered birthdate was published during her entire time serving in Minnesota’s House and for months into her time serving in Congress.

When asked about the federal investigation earlier this week, Mynett told Fox News Digital he has “no concerns” about what federal authorities will find on his wife while investigating her immigration pathway.

“My wife came here when she was 12 years old as a child war refugee,” Mynett said. “No concerns.”

His comments to Fox News Digital come after Omar’s relatives were reportedly issued subpoenas as part of HSI’s investigation into the congresswoman’s immigration paperwork. At least two of Omar’s relatives were subpoenaed, one of which is reportedly Omar’s sister, Sahra Noor.

ILHAN OMAR’S HUSBAND INSISTS HE HAS ‘NO CONCERNS’ AMID FEDERAL IMMIGRATION INVESTIGATION

Fox News Digital asked Mynett about President Donald Trump publicly questioning Omar’s net worth by alleging on Truth Social that her accountant may have reported fraudulent money when her previous financial disclosure listed the couple’s shared net worth as high as $30 million.

“Why did Ilhan Omar report a Net Worth of up to 30 Million Dollars just a short time ago, and then immediately say, “Oh, I made a mistake! It’s really $100,000.” Could it be that her highly paid accountant actually reported the money that was stolen from her fraudulent activities in Minnesota? Would something like that be possible? Do you think the accountant actually gave the right number the first time, 30 Million Dollars, and then she was forced to disavow because she never would have been able to report where that much money came from? She must have freaked out when she saw that money!” Trump posted to Truth Social on Tuesday.

“Where did her house come from, where did her cars come from, and what about her lovely place in Washington, D.C.? I didn’t know that Congressmen and women made that kind of money, but I do know her husband, according to information and belief, makes almost nothing, so it couldn’t have come from him. How many people did she illegally bring into our Country from Somalia? America wants answers, and we want them, NOW!”

Mynett is at the center of yet another investigation into Omar — this time looking into her finances.

Following Monday’s HSI raid, U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro said Tuesday that her office is also investigating Omar’s financial disclosures about reporting of her and Mynett’s shared net worth.

OMAR FACES MOUNTING SCRUTINY AFTER FRAUD RINGLEADER SENTENCED TO 41 YEARS

Scrutiny of Omar’s finances intensified after her 2024 congressional financial disclosure listed business interests associated with Mynett valued between $6 million and $30 million. Omar’s office subsequently said the figures were incorrect and amended the filing.

The largest change in the documents was from Mynett’s assets. His reported ownership interests in both his winery and venture capital advisory firm, which were previously valued in the millions of dollars, are listed with no value now.

In Omar’s 2024 financial disclosure records, Mynett’s share in his winery was valued between $1 million and $5 million, and his share at the venture capital advisory firm was valued between $5 million and $25 million. Now, his equity interests are both listed at $0.

Omar’s office previously told Fox News Digital that Mynett has partners in both businesses and said the earlier disclosure mistakenly reflected the businesses’ total equity rather than his ownership interest. The office also said the original filing listed assets without accounting for liabilities.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Officials noted that the investigation into Omar’s financial disclosures is unrelated to the raid on her home.

Survivors of the 2009 Fort Hood massacre praised President Donald Trump’s decision not to livestream the execution of Nidal Hasan, after warning that broadcasting his death could turn the execution into a spectacle and hand terrorist groups a propaganda tool.

Hasan is still set to be executed by firing squad on Dec. 3, 2026, and Trump said the immediate families of his victims will be permitted to witness the execution in person. But it will no longer be broadcast to the general public as previously announced by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth.

Alonzo Lunsford, who was shot seven times by Hasan during the attack nearly 17 years ago, told Fox News Digital that Trump’s decision is a “positive move.”

“It proves that we are a better people, a better nation, and that we’re not barbaric,” Lunsford said in immediate reaction to the walk-back by Trump on Thursday. “We don’t glorify such actions.”

VETERAN SHOT 7 TIMES IN FORT HOOD MASSACRE HAS A WARNING FOR AMERICANS PLANNING TO WATCH EXECUTION

Lunsford said he supports Hasan’s death sentence and execution by firing squad but drew a line at broadcasting it to the public.

“For it to be made a spectacle for everyone to witness how they’re gonna do a tailgate or, ‘Hey, we’re gonna have a cookout and we’re gonna watch this man be put to death.’ No, it’s not about that,” Lunsford said. “It’s not a spectacle. It’s not a pay-per-view event or a WWE wrestling match or even a boxing match.”

He also warned that footage of Hasan’s execution could be seized upon by terrorist organizations.

“You don’t want that to be used as a tool for ISIS or al-Qaeda to recruit and say, ‘Hey, this is what happens to you if you do this against the infidel,'” Lunsford said.

Julia Wilson was a civilian employee at Fort Hood when Hasan went on his rampage. She was nine months pregnant during the attack, which was carried out on her due date.

FORT HOOD SHOOTER SHOULD BE EXECUTED ’13 TIMES OVER’ — BUT NOT ON LIVE STREAM, SURVIVOR SAYS

She was slammed against a wall amid the chaos of the shooting and has said that it was only by the grace of God that she and her then-unborn daughter survived.

Wilson was already against the livestreaming of Hasan’s execution because she didn’t want others to be traumatized like she was during the deadly attack.

“I’m ecstatic about that,” she told Fox News Digital, reacting to the news that the plan to livestream the event would not proceed.

“I’m worried about other people’s mental health,” she continued. “I don’t think the government… really put a lot of thought into how this was going to go down and how it was going to transpire until today.”

“I don’t think they really thought about how this may affect people,” said Wilson. “Seeing something like that affects your mental health. I don’t care who you are. I don’t care what you’ve seen. Seeing someone murdered in front of you or killed in front of you affects your mental health, whether they deserve it or not.”

Wilson also worried that if the livestream had proceeded, it would exist online forever, and that children might discover it while searching the web. “Once it’s on out there, it’s out there,” she said.

Trump said Wednesday that he believed publicly broadcasting Hasan’s death could have served as a deterrent, but ultimately sided with those who opposed making the execution available for anyone to watch.

“I think streaming the execution for all to see might have been a strong deterrent for the World to witness how America deals with Terrorists and SCUM like Hasan but, many very good and well meaning people would rather not watch him die, through streaming, or through any other visual device,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

“He will die, as scheduled, by firing squad, but this event will not be streamed,” Trump continued. “That said, the execution may be viewed in person by the immediate families of the victims, if they so choose. They deserve to witness JUSTICE!”

Lunsford pointed to warnings surrounding Hasan before the shooting and criticized the Army’s handling of the future attacker before he was transferred from Walter Reed to Fort Hood.

“We knew this guy had issues,” Lunsford said. “If you are privy to the ticking time bomb report, you will see what he was talking about. This guy had issues and they just passed the buck and moved him from Walter Reed to Fort Hood.”

Lunsford wondered what might have happened had Hasan deployed overseas before carrying out an attack.

“Suppose he would have did the deed once he got in country on a FOB, a forward operating base,” he said. “Imagine how many American lives would have been lost then.”

For Lunsford, allowing victims to witness Hasan’s execution remains important even without a public broadcast.

“It’s gonna be a traumatic thing for, at least for the families of the fallen,” he said. “They’ll be able to close the chapter and hopefully close the book.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Lunsford said survivors will continue to live with reminders of the attack long after Hasan is gone.

“Every day we get up, we come to the VA hospital or we have to take our meds in the morning or we get ready to do something that we normally would have been doing prior to 5 November ’09 that we’re no longer able to do now, that’s a constant reminder,” he said.

“I am no longer a victim of his,” Lunsford added. “I’m a survivor.”

Conservative Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch has joined forces with liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor to question the federal government’s prosecution of an illegal immigrant, marking the latest unlikely alliance between the two justices.

Gorsuch, appointed by President Donald Trump, and Sotomayor, appointed by former President Barack Obama, raised concerns about the government’s decision to prosecute a Mexican national twice for being found unlawfully in the United States — even after a federal court prohibited him from leaving the Eastern District of Oklahoma following his first conviction.

The unlikely pairing emerged Tuesday when the Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from Jesus Herrera-Salazar, who argued that his second prosecution violated the Fifth Amendment’s protection against double jeopardy. Although the justices agreed the Court should not take up the case, Sotomayor issued a separate statement, joined by Gorsuch, warning of serious constitutional problems with the government’s actions.

GORSUCH SAYS IDEOLOGICAL DIVIDES ON SUPREME COURT COME DOWN TO ‘HOW YOU READ LAW,’ NOT POLITICS

“From the moment he was released from custody after serving his first term of imprisonment, Herrera-Salazar was presented with a Hobson’s choice,” Sotomayor wrote in the statement joined by Gorsuch. “In the Government’s eyes, whether Herrera-Salazar remained in the Eastern District of Oklahoma or left the United States, he would be breaking the law.”

The two justices questioned how the government could punish someone for remaining in the country after effectively prohibiting him from leaving, with the pair’s joint statement describing the situation as a “constitutional absurdity.”

Their agreement is particularly noteworthy given their differing judicial philosophies, but it is not the first time the pair has found common ground over constitutional protections against government action.

In November 2024, Sotomayor and Gorsuch jointly questioned whether homeowners should be compensated when police destroy private property while carrying out law enforcement operations. A few months later, they again joined forces to raise concerns about warrantless misdemeanor arrests. In both cases, as in the latest immigration dispute, the Court declined to hear the appeals, but the justices issued statements highlighting constitutional questions they believed deserved attention.

The pair’s latest expression of joint public concern came after Herrera-Salazar, a Mexican national previously removed from the United States, was indicted in 2020 for being found in the country following deportation, a violation of federal immigration law.

‘UNPRECEDENTED’: JUDGES REVEAL BEHIND-THE-SCENES COORDINATION ON TRUMP IMMIGRATION CASES

He pleaded guilty and served a prison sentence before being placed on supervised release, during which he was expressly prohibited from leaving the Eastern District of Oklahoma without authorization under the terms of his release.

While still under those restrictions, Herrera-Salazar was stopped by police in Heavener, Oklahoma, and subsequently charged again under the same federal immigration statute prohibiting previously deported individuals from being found unlawfully in the United States. A jury subsequently convicted Herrera-Salazar, resulting in another prison sentence and additional supervised release.

The second prosecution prompted Herrera-Salazar to challenge his conviction on double-jeopardy grounds, arguing that the government had effectively punished him twice for the same continuous period of unlawful presence.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit rejected that argument, concluding that the offense is completed when authorities discover a person’s unlawful presence and that a subsequent discovery can support a separate prosecution without requiring another illegal entry.

Sotomayor and Gorsuch questioned that reasoning, pointing to Supreme Court precedent establishing that prosecutors cannot evade double-jeopardy protections simply by dividing one continuous crime into separate periods. Their concern was not whether Herrera-Salazar had violated immigration law in the first place, but whether the government could repeatedly prosecute him for remaining in the United States without evidence of a separate unlawful reentry.

The justices also highlighted that Herrera-Salazar’s supervised-release conditions restricted him from leaving Oklahoma, meaning the government was effectively preventing him from ending the conduct for which it later prosecuted him again. Sotomayor warned that, under the government’s interpretation, prosecutors theoretically could have brought separate charges against Herrera-Salazar for each day he remained imprisoned following his first conviction.

The statement was issued despite the justices’ agreement with the Court’s decision not to review the case. Sotomayor explained that Herrera-Salazar had already been removed from the United States and expressed hope that the unusual circumstances surrounding his prosecution would not arise again.

SUPREME COURT KICKS OFF NEW TERM WITH FRESH QUESTIONS OVER ITS LEGITIMACY AND ITS FUTURE

Rather than dissenting from the Court’s refusal to hear the appeal, Sotomayor and Gorsuch used what is formally known as a statement “respecting the denial of certiorari” to publicly identify constitutional concerns and urge lower courts to avoid similar problems in future cases.

The unusual collaboration follows two earlier cases in which Sotomayor authored statements joined by Gorsuch after the Supreme Court declined review.

In November 2024, the pair raised concerns in Baker v. City of McKinney, a Texas case involving a homeowner whose property was extensively damaged during a police operation to apprehend an armed fugitive.

Police had used tear gas, explosives and an armored vehicle during the standoff, leaving the home severely damaged. Although the justices acknowledged that officers acted properly to protect public safety, they questioned whether the Constitution permits the government to impose the financial burden of such damage on an individual homeowner without compensation.

Meanwhile, in February 2025, Sotomayor and Gorsuch again joined forces, this time questioning whether the Fourth Amendment permitted police to make warrantless arrests for misdemeanors committed outside an officer’s presence that they did not personally witness.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

That case involved a Florida man arrested for loitering and prowling after police responding to a report of suspicious activity encountered him walking through a residential neighborhood before dawn. A subsequent search uncovered stolen mail, leading to a federal criminal charge.

Fox News Digital reached out to the Supreme Court chambers for comment but did not hear back in time for publication.

The American military has largely operated on a familiar premise: combat the enemy overseas before the fight reaches home.

But as drones, cyberattacks and long-range weapons pose growing threats to U.S. military installations and critical infrastructure, Army leaders are preparing for a future in which American forces could come under attack before they ever deploy overseas.

“If we’re going against a pacing threat, power projection will be contested,” Gen. Christopher LaNeve, the Army’s acting chief of staff, told Fox News Digital on Wednesday.

He said the military is rethinking assumptions that were held during decades of fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, when American forces could largely count on secure bases and supply lines at home.

FBI WARNS BATTLEFIELD-STYLE DRONE ATTACKS COULD REACH US: ‘ONLY A MATTER OF TIME’

“During the Global War on Terror, we took a lot of things for granted, because we could,” LaNeve said during a small-group roundtable at the Association of the United States Army’s annual conference in Washington this week.

In a potential conflict with China, disrupting American military bases, transportation networks and communications could delay U.S. forces from reaching the battlefield. The Pentagon’s latest report on China’s military capabilities warns that Beijing has positioned cyber capabilities inside U.S. critical infrastructure networks that could be used to disrupt American military mobilization during a conflict.

The concerns come as the Pentagon places renewed emphasis on homeland defense and military installations as they prepare to potentially confront threats closer to home. U.S. officials have previously confirmed drone incursions over installations — including Joint Base Langley-Eustis in Virginia and Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey. Though those incidents have not been publicly attributed to China.

The warning of a future fight on American soil comes amid the How the Army Fights rollout. The new operational framework places greater emphasis on preparing American forces to deploy, communicate and sustain operations even when military bases, supply lines and communications networks are under attack.

The guidance places greater emphasis on the Army’s ability to deploy and sustain forces under threat, including when communications, supply lines and military infrastructure are disrupted.

US MILITARY BASES ARE ‘ILL-EQUIPPED’ TO STOP DRONE SWARMS, TOP COMMANDER REVEALS AFTER RUBIO’S UAP WARNING

LaNeve said the Army is using the framework to establish clearer priorities for how its formations train, fight and incorporate new technology.

“It was important to get this document out to provide a direction for our Army, a stake in the ground in where we’re moving,” LaNeve told Fox News Digital in an interview Wednesday.

The changes are being led by an Army leadership team serving in acting capacities following the departures of former Army Secretary Dan Driscoll and Chief of Staff Gen. Randy George. LaNeve remains the Senate-confirmed vice chief of staff.

LaNeve explained how the Army is preparing to keep fighting even when an adversary disrupts military communications.

“I think what you would see inside this command and control capability is the ability to operate disconnected and then reconnect when you have that capability, but to continue to be able to maneuver,” he said.

The Army is also rethinking how it protects military installations at home. LaNeve pointed to Joint Interagency Task Force 401, which is working with federal and local law enforcement to strengthen counter-drone defenses around military bases and critical infrastructure.

CARTELS USE DRONES TO SCOUT BORDER AGENTS AND MAP SMUGGLING ROUTES, EXPERT WARNS

Acting Army Secretary Adam Telle pointed to the southern border as an example of how soldiers are already confronting drone threats closer to home. He said soldiers are using the mission to test new counter-drone technology against real-world threats, gaining experience they can bring back to their units as the Army prepares for future conflicts.

The Army is also expanding its preparations for biological threats that could disrupt military operations. Officials announced this week that biological incidents will be incorporated into routine combat training as part of a broader effort to ensure soldiers can continue carrying out their missions through disease outbreaks or deliberate biological attacks.

During a separate panel Wednesday, Air Force Secretary Troy Meink warned that advances in surveillance technology could soon make it increasingly difficult for military forces to operate anywhere without being detected.

“We are rapidly heading to a point in time where, depending on what your signature is, how fast you’re moving, the enemy is going to have some sense to where you are no matter where you are on the planet,” Meink said.

He suggested that level of surveillance could emerge within five years, potentially sooner, as China and other adversaries expand their ability to track and target military assets.

Meink said the Pentagon is working to make its forces more survivable, including through autonomous systems capable of operating in dangerous environments where commanders might hesitate to send manned platforms.

War Secretary Pete Hegseth, speaking alongside Meink and the other service secretaries, criticized what he described as the Pentagon’s failure to keep pace with technological advances under the Biden administration.

“On hypersonics, they took a nap. On space, they took a nap. On weaponization of space, they took a nap. On drones, they took a nap,” Hegseth said.

LaNeve emphasized that despite the Army’s growing reliance on advanced technology, soldiers must still be able to carry out their missions when those systems are unavailable.

“Soldiers are our number one platform. It is the Army’s platform,” he told Fox News Digital.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The technology, he said, is intended to make troops more capable, but soldiers must remain grounded in the fundamental skills needed to fight without it.

The Clintons are back on the midterm campaign circuit — with Bill Clinton heading to Florida to stump for Democratic gubernatorial nominee David Jolly and Hillary Clinton taking to the podcast microphone as the party makes its final push toward Election Day.

The former president is scheduled to make his first public campaign appearance of the 2026 election cycle on Oct. 20 for Jolly, a former Republican congressman turned Democrat. Hillary, meanwhile, has teamed up with journalist Kara Swisher for a new midterm-focused podcast series and has been making campaign appearances of her own.

The moves bring two of the Democratic Party’s most recognizable figures into the midterm fight as the party grapples with competing visions for its future, raising questions about how much influence the Clintons still wield as progressive candidates challenge the Democratic establishment.

BIDEN CONSPICUOUSLY ABSENT FROM CAMPAIGN TRAIL AS OBAMA, HARRIS STEP UP FOR MIDTERM PUSH

While the Clintons remain prominent in Democratic politics, one party strategist says Democrats are more focused on winning elections than revisiting the party’s past.

“President Clinton remains one of the most gifted political communicators this country has ever known, particularly when it comes to connecting with working-class voters on the economic issues that matter most,” said Democratic strategist Kevin Walling. “But I don’t believe that Democrats are looking for a Clinton restoration — they’re looking for a path back to winning.”

Democratic strategist Mally Smith offered a more skeptical assessment of how much reach the Clintons have in the closing weeks of the election.

“Hillary and Bill are still relevant to some voters. However, they will mostly be useful in speaking to the Democratic base and those who are highly engaged in politics,” Mally Smith. “It is a hard media environment to breakthrough and even current elected officials, let alone former office holders, will struggle to get people’s attention.”

Clinton’s Oct. 20 appearance will take place at an interfaith event in Hollywood, Florida, alongside Jolly, who is facing Republican Rep. Byron Donalds in the race to succeed term-limited Gov. Ron DeSantis.

Jolly is campaigning on affordability, including lowering property insurance costs through a state-backed catastrophe fund, expanding Medicaid, increasing funding for public schools and protecting abortion rights.

Hillary Clinton, meanwhile, traveled to Omaha, Nebraska, on Saturday to rally support for Democratic candidates Lynne Walz and Denise Powell at a “Pumpkins, Pies, and Politics” fundraiser.

HILLARY CLINTON ISSUES ENDORSEMENT IN US MIDTERM ELECTIONS

Asked how she would address Democrats who feel their votes no longer matter, Clinton pointed to a series of national crises that have contributed to voter frustration – including her 2016 election loss.

“And you could kind of understand that, for people who feel like they’ve had a series of hard times. If you look back on the last 25 years in our country, I was a senator from New York on 9/11. That was a trauma. The terrible financial crisis of 2008 was horrific for people. We had an election in 2016 that, you know, raised a lot of questions that we’re still trying to find answers for about what, what kind of really went on, and then we had COVID,” she said during the Nebraska event.

Clinton teamed up with journalist and podcast host Kara Swisher for a six-week limited series titled “High Stakes,” which debuted Oct. 14 and will air weekly through mid-November, focusing on the 2026 midterm elections, key congressional races and issues.

The first episode, which aired Wednesday, centered on rising costs for gas, groceries and healthcare, Elon Musk’s political spending and how Democrats can make affordability a winning message, while also examining key Senate races in Michigan and Maine.

HILLARY CLINTON CONCEDES INFAMOUS 9/11 NEAR-FAINTING EPISODE IN 2016 WAS A ‘MISTAKE’ ON HER PART

“If the former president can help Democrats compete in a challenging state like Florida, and Secretary Clinton’s podcast can contribute to a substantive national conversation that motivates my party, that’s certainly a positive,” said Walling.

The Clintons’ increased visibility comes as Democratic Socialists of America-backed candidates have scored primary victories against incumbent or establishment-backed Democrats in states including Colorado, New York and Michigan.

MEET THE FAR-LEFT INSURGENTS WAGING WAR ON THE DEMOCRATIC ESTABLISHMENT IN 2026 MIDTERMS

“The challenge for Democrats is drawing on the wisdom and experience of the party’s past without overshadowing the next generation of leaders who will define its future,” he added.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Fox News Digital reached out to the Clintons and Jolly’s campaign for comment.

FIRST ON FOX: A new White House economic report warns that immigration policies backed by the Democratic Socialists of America could cost American taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars over the next decade, as the Trump administration sounds the alarm over the potential financial consequences of mass amnesty and expanded federal benefits.

As President Donald Trump touts 16 consecutive months without illegal immigrant releases at the southern border, a Council of Economic Advisers report estimates that mass amnesty and expanded federal benefits under Democratic Socialists of America-backed immigration policies could cost taxpayers between $440 billion and $613 billion over the next decade. 

Socialist-aligned candidates have gained ground in 2026, winning key Democratic primaries and expanding their influence within the party.

“President Trump … supercharged ICE to remove criminal illegal aliens from our communities, including murderers, rapists, pedophiles, gang members and terrorists,” White House spokeswoman Lauren Bis told Fox News Digital.

‘SQUAD’ DEMOCRAT FORMALLY INTRODUCES BILL TO ABOLISH ICE, BORDER PATROL AND DISMANTLE DHS

“Meanwhile, radical Democrats want to go back to their extreme open border policies and grant amnesty to the illegal aliens they released into our communities. Not only will these radical policies make America less safe, but they will cost the American taxpayer billions of dollars.”

With the midterms approaching and Democrats campaigning heavily on affordability, the White House is casting the DSA’s immigration agenda as a potential financial and public safety threat — warning that its policies could compound the very cost-of-living pressures Democrats have used to hammer Republicans.

DEMOCRATS SAY THEY’LL MAKE LIFE AFFORDABLE. YOUR WALLET MAY DISAGREE

The council’s findings go beyond the cost of mass amnesty, examining the potential impact of expanded federal benefits and reduced immigration enforcement, policies the White House warns could impose a significant financial burden on American families.

The council estimates that the average illegal immigrant carries a lifetime net fiscal cost of $166,716, with the current illegal immigrant population projected to account for between $1.4 trillion and $1.9 trillion in taxpayer costs under its model — figures the administration is highlighting as the “true costs of extreme open borders [and] mass-amnesty socialist policies.”

CALIFORNIA FACES UNLIKELY TAX REVOLT AMID BILLIONS IN ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT HEALTHCARE COSTS

The CEA’s estimated $166,716 lifetime taxpayer cost per illegal immigrant exceeds the roughly $124,000 it would cost to put a student through four years at an average in-state public university, including tuition, housing, food and other expenses, according to College Board’s 2025–26 figures — putting the figure in perspective as American families also grapple with college affordability.

The Council added that while illegal immigrants are generally prohibited from federal benefit programs, some on the left want to reverse that standard and provide subsidized healthcare and programs like food stamps to those in the country unlawfully.

SHOCKING PERCENTAGE OF DEMOCRATS IDENTIFY AS ‘DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISTS’ ACCORDING TO NEW POLL: ‘TOXIC POLICIES’

Beyond expanded federal benefits, the council estimates that ending Trump-backed immigration enforcement measures would wipe out between $227 billion and $287 billion in projected taxpayer savings, producing a net estimated cost of $79 billion to $139 billion over the next decade after accounting for reduced enforcement spending.

An interactive White House webpage released alongside the report allows Americans to explore the projected costs of “socialism” across several policy areas, with the council estimating that the Democratic Socialists of America’s broader agenda could cost $49 trillion over ten years — roughly $355,000 per American household. That sweeping projection extends far beyond immigration, which the council separately estimates could cost between $440 billion and $613 billion over the next decade.

DOJ THREATENS TO CUT BILLIONS IN WELFARE FUNDING FROM STATES FOR FAILING TO REPORT ILLEGAL MIGRANTS

If the immigration policies examined in the report were implemented, the White House estimates that expanded eligibility for SNAP, federal housing assistance and Medicaid would add between $361 billion and $475 billion in federal spending over the next decade.

The report estimated that expanding federal benefits under the proposed immigration policies would add $3.6 billion to $4.7 billion in annual food stamp costs, another $2.3 billion to $3 billion in federal housing assistance, and as much as $40 billion a year in additional Medicaid spending.

US STATE DEPARTMENT HAS YANKED MORE THAN 175K VISAS UNDER TRUMP ADMINISTRATION SO FAR

Along with the report, the White House highlighted a 73% uptick in drug interdictions through August 2026 compared with the same period in fiscal year 2024, while separately pointing to declining fentanyl-related deaths as evidence of its broader border enforcement strategy.

The administration also highlighted another key aspect of the immigration-cost paradigm that it changed — remarking that Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for certain foreign-national groups “returned … to its original purpose: temporary.”

TRUMP ADMINISTRATION SLASHES TIME REFUGEES HAVE TO CHALLENGE LOSS OF LEGAL STATUS

The administration’s efforts to terminate TPS designations for certain countries have faced legal challenges, underscoring the ongoing dispute over the scope of federal immigration authority.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The administration has also moved to end certain Temporary Protected Status designations and revoke more than 250,000 visas as part of its broader immigration crackdown, measures the White House has highlighted alongside its efforts to tighten enforcement and reduce what it says are substantial taxpayer costs.

Fox News Digital reached out to the DSA for general comment on the costs associated with their immigration platform.

President Donald Trump announced that the planned firing squad execution of convicted Fort Hood shooter Nidal Hasan will not be livestreamed, reversing an earlier Pentagon announcement that the public would be able to watch the convicted mass killer’s final moments.

Trump said in a Truth Social post that broadcasting the execution could serve as a powerful deterrent to terrorism but acknowledged that many Americans would rather not witness Hasan’s death. 

“He will die, as scheduled, by firing squad, but this event will not be streamed,” Trump wrote.

Hasan’s execution is scheduled for Dec. 3. Trump said immediate family members of the 13 people killed in Hasan’s 2009 rampage will be permitted to attend in person if they choose.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

This is a developing news story; check back for updates.

The Justice Department is threatening California with possible legal action after it says the state mailed ballots to noncitizens ahead of the midterm elections.

The DOJ sent a letter on Tuesday to California Secretary of State Shirley Weber informing her that federal officials provided Los Angeles County election officials with a list of names of individuals who authorities believe to be noncitizens.

Acting Deputy U.S. Attorney Trent McCotter warned that the state has 48 hours to confirm whether any of the individuals on the list were mailed ballots for the November 3 election. That deadline will expire later on Thursday.

“If you cannot implement this process by then, given the ongoing federal election, the United States will have no choice but to seek emergency relief,” the letter states.

MORE THAN A QUARTER-MILLION NONCITIZENS MAY BE REGISTERED TO VOTE IN 4 KEY STATES, DHS ALLEGES

Weber released a statement protesting the federal demands on Wednesday, connecting it to earlier efforts by the DOJ to expunge noncitizens from California’s voter rolls.

DOJ GIVES NEW JERSEY 5 DAYS TO HAND OVER VOTER DATA AFTER NONCITIZEN REGISTRATION SCANDAL

“In July of this year, President Trump and DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin made (still) unsubstantiated claims that California had 190,000 noncitizens on its voter rolls. Given the many high-profile examples of states purging U.S. citizens from their voter rolls based on DHS/SAVE data, SOS immediately requested written information about their methodology and data sources to back up their claims. They refused and provided California with nothing,” Weber said in a statement.

“Now the USDOJ, under threat of ’emergency’ litigation, demands that California blindly trust this administration without any evidence or legal authority to justify its request,” she continued.

WATCH: TRUMP DOJ VOWS TO PURSUE ‘EVERY SINGLE’ VOTING VIOLATION AFTER NJ ROLL SHOCKER

“The USDOJ’s relentless efforts to unlawfully gain access to states’ protected voter data and purge voter rolls serve only to cause chaos and fuel public distrust in our elections,” Weber added. “California has robust state law requirements that only U.S. citizens can register to vote and that any non-eligible registrants are removed from the State’s voter rolls. My office and California election officials remain committed — as always — to ensuring a fair and smooth 2026 General Election.”

President Donald Trump’s administration has heightened scrutiny on state voter rolls since gaining office, as part of the president’s wider interest in election integrity.

TRUMP SCORES SUPREME COURT WIN IN ELECTION INTEGRITY FIGHT AS STATES GAIN NEW VOTER ROLL TOOL

The administration received approval by the Supreme Court in late September to move forward with its massive voter verification system.

The September 25 emergency order allowed states, for now, to use a Department of Homeland Security program called Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) in their efforts to verify the eligibility of voters on their rolls, as the DOJ has done in the California case.

TRUMP SCORES SUPREME COURT WIN ON MAIL-IN VOTING RESTRICTIONS BEFORE MIDTERMS

The court’s order put on hold a federal judge’s June ruling that had deemed the Republican administration’s recently revamped version of SAVE illegal. U.S. District Court Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan had blocked the use of the tool, saying it violated Americans’ privacy rights and could result in voters being wrongly removed from the rolls.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The Trump administration moved to expand SAVE after the president signed an executive order directing the creation of a federal voter registration list and imposed new restrictions on eligibility for voting by mail as part of a broader effort to combat voter fraud.

Fox News’ Greg Norman and the Associated Press contributed to this report.

President Donald Trump delivered “a little breaking news” to supporters at a midterm campaign rally in Montana on Wednesday, announcing that the Pentagon would establish a new military “super range” in the state to test cutting-edge weapons and warfare technology.

The president said the range would support testing of potential autonomous weapons, space and electronic warfare technology, and supersonic and hypersonic systems, positioning Montana to play a greater role in the development of America’s next-generation military capabilities.

“I’m pleased to inform you and announce that right here in Montana, the Department of War is going to establish a new super range for testing advanced weapons and technologies,” Trump told supporters gathered at Majestic Valley Arena in Kalispell.

TRUMP PENTAGON LAUNCHES COMPETITION FOR AMERICA’S NEXT GREAT MILITARY BASE

Trump suggested the project had been highly sought after elsewhere in the country.

“The rest of our country maybe won’t be thrilled because a lot of other people wanted it also,” Trump said.

The president also credited persistent lobbying from Montana’s Republican lawmakers, joking that Sen. Tim Sheehy had repeatedly pressed him to bring the project to the state.

“You’re getting it, everybody, will you please leave me alone?” Trump quipped. “Leave me alone, Tim. Tim Sheehy would drive me crazy.”

The announcement places Montana at the center of a proposed military testing initiative involving some of the Pentagon’s most sophisticated emerging technologies.

Hypersonic weapons, which can travel at least five times the speed of sound, are among the advanced military capabilities under development by the Pentagon, according to the Government Accountability Office. The War Department has also identified autonomous systems and electronic warfare capabilities as areas of strategic importance.

ELON MUSK LANDS NEW TRUMP ADMINISTRATION ROLE IN SHAPING FUTURE OF AMERICAN WARFARE

Trump did not specify where in Montana the new range would be located, how much the project would cost or when testing operations would begin.

“Montana will help ensure the American military always reigned supreme,” the president told the crowd.

Trump made the announcement during his second campaign rally of the day and third stop on a Western swing aimed at supporting Republican candidates ahead of the midterm elections.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The president appeared in Montana’s 1st Congressional District to campaign for House candidate Aaron Flint and Senate candidate Kurt Alme, after holding a rally in Arizona earlier Wednesday. He also campaigned in Alaska on Tuesday.

A former pastor and candidate running to make history in deep-red Kansas once suggested that people should repent for their White privilege as protests against the death of George Floyd rippled through the country.

During the tumultuous summer of 2020, just days after Floyd’s killing in Minnesota, Adam Hamilton called on his congregation at the Church of the Resurrection to recognize their White privilege and repent.

“Like part of what I know is that, is that I grew up in a way that I’m blind to certain things in our society,” Hamilton said during a sermon dubbed “Jesus, Protests and Repentance.” “I just am. And I have certain benefits by virtue of being educated, White and male, right?”

KANSAS DEMOCRAT BEGS KAMALA HARRIS NOT TO CAMPAIGN WITH HIM, ‘PLEASE DO NOT COME TO MY STATE’

“And we don’t like to hear that, especially White folks don’t like to hear that. But there are benefits that come along with that,” he continued.

Hamilton is running against Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan., in what has become one of the tightest races of this midterm cycle, despite Kansas’ near-century-long history of not sending a Democratic candidate to the Senate.

“Roger Marshall wants to talk about anything other than his history of suing and jailing mothers and protecting predators by voting against releasing the Epstein Files,” Tyson Brody, a spokesperson for Hamilton’s campaign, told Fox News Digital. “Once again, he’s attacking Adam for something Roger said himself. Roger’s own pastor called Adam ‘middle of the road.’ Kansans are tired of high gas and grocery prices and ready for a senator who won’t divide us by race, religion, income, or ability to pay a medical bill at 18% interest.”

Republicans acknowledge that they are facing headwinds going into November’s election, but until recently, the contest between Marshall and Hamilton wasn’t of much concern for the GOP.

SCHUMER WARNS OF REPUBLICAN ADVANTAGE THAT COULD CHANGE THE BATTLE FOR SENATE CONTROL

Now, the race has taken a turn and been rated a toss-up by the Cook Political Report as voters fume over the cost of fuel, groceries and other economic pain. In response, national Republicans are beginning to dump more resources into the contest to ensure that they maintain the seat.

Throughout the race, Marshall has largely aligned himself with President Donald Trump, only rarely breaking from the administration on certain decisions — last month he called for more advance notice and cooperation between the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Kansas government after federal immigration agents descended on the southern part of the state.

Marshall has painted Hamilton as a “woke” megachurch pastor, delivering left-leaning ideals from the pulpit.

‘JESUS WAS A RADICAL’: PROGRESSIVES INVOKE CHRIST TO SELL LEFT-WING AGENDA ON CAMPAIGN TRAIL

So has an outside group based in Massachusetts, the Main Street Fund, which ran an ad in Kansas that spliced portions of two different sermons and charged that Hamilton was “way too woke for Kansas,” shortly after Hamilton won his primary, The Kansas City Star reported.

During the sermon from June 2020 amid the Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests, Hamilton pushed back against rioting and looting, and argued that while the BLM movement was the focal point at the time, all lives matters. 

“Of course all lives matter,” Hamilton said. “Everybody understands white lives matter, blue lives matter.” 

Hamilton continued in his sermon posted on the church’s YouTube page in June 2020 amid the Black Lives Matter protests, “When I’m stopped by the police, I’m never afraid that they’re gonna pull a gun on me.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“But every African American man that I know is worried about what might happen when a police pull him over,” Hamilton said at the time. “It’s not that all the police are bad, they’re gonna do something like that, but there’s this fear underneath there. And so the hands go on the steering wheel at 10 and 2. They’ve been taught that from the time they were children. Right?”

“I wasn’t taught that, because I don’t have to be afraid of that. Right? And there’s a whole host of other things that are just a part of life. You know, I can … well, you get the idea. There are benefits and privileges to my place in life. I have to recognize that,” he continued. “To see that. And then I have to listen. I have to listen and understand, and finally be able to see the brokenness in myself, and my indifference. Before I can do anything to help anyone else, I have to have a conversion. I have to repent.”

And Marshall, who was running for his first term in the Senate at the time, struck a similar somber tone as Hamilton six years ago. 

In various posts to social media and interviews with local outlets, Marshall condemned Floyd’s slaying and pushed for reforms that would ensure what happened in Minnesota and to federal Protective Services Officer Patrick Underwood, who was killed in a drive-by shooting just days after Floyd’s death. 

“Additionally, Republicans called on Congressional Democrats to work across the aisle to make sure that what happened to George Floyd and Patrick Underwood never happens again, and significant bipartisan reform can be passed,” Marshall said on Facebook following a House Judiciary hearing on police practices and law enforcement accountability. 

Tensions flared on the debate stage Wednesday night, where Rep. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., faced off against Democrat military veteran Cait Conley to represent their suburban New York district in Congress.

Lawler is vying for a third term representing the Empire State‘s 17th Congressional District.

One of the few swing seats left in Congress, the race could prove decisive for which party controls the House of Representatives for the latter half of President Donald Trump’s term.

Below are some of the most dramatic moments during their one-hour head-to-head on PIX11 News:

HOW ONE NYC SUBURB COULD DECIDE WHICH PARTY CONTROLS THE HOUSE

Lawler calls out moderator for ‘focus on gangbanger’ shot by ICE

While the debate was filled with the two political rivals criticizing each other, one tense moment came when Lawler turned his ire on moderator Dan Mannarino.

Mannarino had asked both Conley and Lawler what should be done to rein in Immigration and U.S. Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents who run afoul of their own guidelines, invoking the recent shooting of an illegal immigrant in the Bronx by federal officers while the man’s five-year-old was in the car.

Lawler pointed to the man’s rap sheet and accused Democrat state leaders of creating the situation with their sanctuary policies and Gov. Kathy Hochul’s recent bail reforms. He also accused Conley of supporting those policies.

The moderator began, “Mr. Lawler, I just want to follow up. The question was, how do you ensure if ICE agents do not follow through objectives, and what’s the discipline —”

“I understand the question,” Lawler said amid the cross-talk.

PROTESTS ERUPT IN THE BRONX AFTER ICE AGENT SHOOTS MAN DURING IMMIGRATION OPERATION

“But you didn’t answer the question,” Mannarino said.

“I understand the question. But here’s the problem, Danny,” Lawler shot back. “You guys want to focus on a gangbanger who has put people in harm’s way? I want to make sure that our communities are safe.”

ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT ACCUSED OF MURDERING COLLEGE STUDENT DIALS INTO HEARING FROM HOSPITAL BED

Lawler and Conley clash over Sheridan Gorman‘s killer

The GOP incumbent notably used the immigration standoff to pivot to the case of Sheridan Gorman, a teen from his district who was shot and killed near her college campus in Chicago earlier this year. The accused is an illegal immigrant who was previously arrested for shoplifting but was never turned over to ICE due to Chicago‘s sanctuary policies.

Conley called Gorman’s death an “atrocious crime,” while Lawler repeatedly said over her, “It was preventable.”

SHERIDAN GORMAN’S MOM SCORCHES DEM LAWMAKERS SHE SAYS REFUSED TO HEAR FAMILIES OF SLAIN AMERICANS

“Can I finish?” an irate Conley shot back. “It was an atrocious crime committed in Chicago. And that man should have been deported. And I do support federal agents and federal law enforcement, federal immigration enforcement, making sure that we deport violent criminals.”

Lawler then pointed out, however, that the man would only have been deported if the sanctuary laws were not in place — laws he has repeatedly accused Conley of supporting along with her fellow Democrats.

“This is important,” Lawler began as the moderator tried to regain control. “If you think he should have been deported when he was arrested for shoplifting, he should have been turned over to ICE. Under the new law that you support, he will not be turned over to ICE and he will be released under cashless bail.”

“Mr. Lawler, there’s not a cross-examination round, so thank you,” the moderator said.

Conley quipped at her GOP rival, “If you wanted to be the moderator, you should have volunteered.”

Conley accuses Lawler of ‘mansplaining’ on sexual assault

At another point, the candidates were asked whether there should be a federal definition or law for consent to help stop sexual assault.

Conley took the moment to attack Lawler for being allied with Rep. Max Miller, R-Ohio, a fellow House Republican who has been accused of domestic violence by his wife. Miller has denied the allegations.

Lawler said their matter was “tragic’ and should be dealt with in family court without blaming either side. He then accused Conley of taking money from former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer, who was revealed to be a client in a 2008 federal probe into a prostitution ring. Spitzer was never criminally prosecuted and resigned from his governorship amid the scandal.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“I’m sorry. I do not need — I do not need you to mansplain to me, domestic abuse and sexual assault against women,” Conley snapped. “Don’t start. I do not need you to mansplain to me, Mike.”