A federal court on Sunday issued a temporary restraining order blocking the Trump administration from sending three Venezuelan immigrants held in New Mexico to the Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, detention camp as part of the president’s efforts to remove illegal immigrants from the U.S.
Lawyers for the trio said in a legal filing that the detainees “fit the profile of those the administration has prioritized for detention in Guantánamo, i.e. Venezuelan men detained in the El Paso area with (false) charges of connections with the Tren de Aragua gang.”
In the filing, the lawyers asked a U.S. District Court in New Mexico for a temporary restraining order to block the administration from flying them to the U.S. military base. The lawyers noted that “the mere uncertainty the government has created surrounding the availability of legal process and counsel access is sufficient to authorize the modest injunction.”
TRUMP DEPORTING CRIMINAL ALIENS TO GUANTANAMO BAY: MEET THE HARDENED TERRORISTS THEY’LL JOIN
The Trump administration has begun flying detained illegal immigrants from the U.S. to Guantánamo Bay in Cuba.(Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images, left, DOD via AP, right.)
Judge Kenneth J. Gonzales granted the temporary restraining order, according to attorney Jessica Vosburgh, who represents the three men.
“It’s short term. This will get revisited and further fleshed out in the weeks to come,” Vosburgh told The Associated Press.
The filing came as part of a lawsuit on behalf of the three men filed by the Center for Constitutional Rights, the American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico and Las Americas Immigrant Advisory Center.
FIRST 10 ‘HIGH THREAT’ ILLEGALS ARRIVE TO GUANTÁNAMO BAY ARE ALL TREN DE ARAGUA MEMBERS
A migrant prepares to board a flight to Guantánamo Bay.(Department of Homeland Security)
Last week, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt separately said that flights carrying detained illegal immigrants had been sent to Guantánamo.
Immigrant rights groups sent a letter on Friday demanding access to people who are now being held at the U.S. naval station, arguing that the base should not be used as a “legal black hole.” Guantánamo has been criticized around the world for its inhumane abuse and torture of detainees, including interrogation tactics.
The immigrants are being held in the Guantánamo detention camp that was set up for detainees in the aftermath of 9/11. The immigrants are separated from the 15 detainees who were already there, including planners in the 2001 terrorist attack.
In this April 17, 2019, photo, reviewed by U.S. military officials, the control tower is seen through the razor wire inside the Camp VI detention facility in Guantánamo Bay Naval Base, Cuba.(AP)
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Trump has promised to expand the detention camp to hold up to 30,000 “criminal illegal aliens.”
Leavitt said Wednesday that more than 8,000 immigrants have been arrested since Jan. 20 as part of Trump’s plan to detain and deport immigrants in the country illegally, although hundreds of those arrested have since been released back into the U.S.
President Donald Trump signed an executive order sanctioning the International Criminal Court (ICC) on Thursday, in response to its May 2024 arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The order unveils financial sanctions and visa restrictions against ICC officials and their family members who support ICC investigations against U.S. citizens and allies.
The ICC is an independent, international organization, based in The Hague, Netherlands, and established under the Rome Statute, an international treaty that took effect in 2002. The court oversees global issues including genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.
The Trump White House claims that the U.S. and Israel are not subjected to the jurisdiction of the ICC because the court poses threats to U.S. sovereignty and constitutional protections. Additionally, the White House has accused the ICC of politicization and said ICC has targeted Israel without holding regimes like Iran to the same standards.
In September 2018, Trump said that “as far as America is concerned, the ICC has no jurisdiction, no legitimacy, and no authority.”
In May 2024, ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan, from the United Kingdom, had asked for an arrest warrant for Netanyahu and his former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, whom Netanyahu fired in November 2024. The warrant paved the way for their arrest, should they visit any of the 124 countries that are party to the Rome Statute, including the United Kingdom, France and Austria.
Khan also issued arrest warrants for Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, Ismail Haniyeh and Mohammed Deif, who have all since been killed by Israeli forces.
Khan said he issued these warrants against Hamas leaders for war crimes including murder, taking hostages as a war crime, torture and other inhumane acts, following the Palestinian militant group’s attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.
Khan also said he issued the warrants against the Israeli leaders due to war crimes including starvation of civilians, directing attacks against a civilian population, persecution and other inhumane acts.
HOUSE PASSES BILL THAT WOULD SANCTION INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT FOR TRYING TO ARREST NETANYAHU
ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan, right, had asked for an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, which President Donald Trump, left, is now sanctioning the international organization over. (Getty Images)
In January, after Trump’s inauguration, the House also passed legislation that would sanction the ICC, but the measure failed to advance in the Senate Jan. 28.
Trump welcomed Netanyahu for a visit at the White House on Tuesday, where Trump signed an executive order reinstating his “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran. Trump also unveiled plans to rebuild Gaza, and described Netanyahu as the “right leader” for Israel.
“He’s done a great job and we’ve been friends for a long time,” Trump told reporters. “We do a great job also, and I think I think we have a combination that’s very unbeatable, actually.
Netanyahu also voiced appreciation for this friendship with Trump, and his support for Israel and the Jewish people.
“I’ve said this before, I’ll say it again,” Netanyahu said Tuesday. “You are the greatest friend Israel has ever had in the White House. And that’s why the people of Israel have such enormous respect for you.”
Trump previously issued sanctions against ICC officials in 2020, signing off on an asset freeze and family entry ban against them stemming from an ICC investigation into alleged U.S. actions in Afghanistan.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Fox News’ Morgan Phillips contributed to this report.
Diana Stancy is a politics reporter with Fox News Digital covering the White House.
FIRST ON FOX: Sen. Ted Cruz, R-TX, is reintroducing a constitutional amendment to cap the number of Supreme Court Justices at nine, amid calls to expand the court.
Cruz, now joined by 15 cosponsors including Republican Sens. Bill Cassidy (LA), Chuck Grassley (IA), Mike Crapo (ID), Thom Tillis (NC) and John Cornyn (TX), previously introduced the amendment in 2021 and in 2023.
In a statement to Fox News Digital, Cruz said Democrats are seeking to “use the Court to advance policy goals they can’t accomplish electorally.”
SUPREME COURT TO CONSIDER AN EFFORT TO ESTABLISH THE NATION’S FIRST PUBLICLY FUNDED RELIGIOUS CHARTER SCHOOL
“Such a move would be a direct assault on the design of our Constitution, which is designed to ensure the Supreme Court remains a non-partisan guardian of the rule of law,” Cruz said. “This amendment is a badly-needed check on their efforts to undermine the integrity of the Court.”
Sen. Ted Cruz, R-TX, is reintroducing a constitutional amendment to cap the number of Supreme Court Justices at nine, amid calls to expand the court.(Reuters)
Likewise, Grassley said the amendment would ensure the Court’s independence from political pressures.
“Democrats’ radical court packing scheme would erase the legitimacy of the Supreme Court and destroy historic precedent,” Grassley said in a statement. “The Court is a co-equal branch of government, and our Keep Nine Amendment will ensure that it remains independent from political pressure.”
The nine-justice court currently has a conservative supermajority. Following various landmark decisions in recent years, including the overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022, Democrats have re-upped calls to impose court reforms, including expanding and packing the court as well as imposing term limits.
TRUMP’S ‘TWO SEXES’ EXECUTIVE ORDER COMES ON HEELS OF SCOTUS ACCEPTING ANOTHER CHALLENGE TO LGBT AGENDA
In October, then-Vice President Kamala Harris entertained the notion of imposing court reforms during a CNN town hall. Harris was asked if she would support expanding the number of justices from the current nine to 12.
“There is no question that the American people increasingly are losing confidence in the Supreme Court and, in large part, because of the behavior of certain members of that court and because of certain rulings, including the Dobbs decision and taking away a precedent that had been in place for 50 years, protecting a woman’s right to make decisions about her own body,” Harris said during the event.
In October, then-Vice President Kamala Harris entertained the notion of imposing court reforms during a CNN town hall.(Screenshot/CNN)
“So, I do believe that there should be some kind of reform of the court, and we can study what that actually looks like.”
PORN CASE IN THE SUPREME COURT THIS WEEK IS ABOUT PROTECTING CHILDREN, SAYS REPUBLICAN AG
Rep. Ilhan Omar, a Democrat from Minnesota, also called for reforming the Court that same month, saying in social media posts, “We need to radically reform the broken Supreme Court.”
Democrats have consistently proposed legislation to expand the Supreme Court to a 13-justice bench.
Sen. Ted Cruz’s amendment reintroduction comes in light of calls from the left to expand the Supreme Court as well as impose term limits on the justices.(Saul Loeb//Pool via REUTERS)
In May 2023, Georgia Democrat Rep. Hank Johnson joined Democratic Sens. Ed Markey of Massachusetts, Tina Smith of Minnesota, and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, as well as Democratic Reps. Jerry Nadler of New York, Cori Bush of Mississippi, and Adam Schiff of California, in reintroducing the Judiciary Act of 2023.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
“We want to prevent this kind of rot and decay from ever overtaking a Supreme Court again,” Johnson told Fox News Digital in October.
Haley Chi-Sing is a Writer for Fox News Digital. You can reach her at @haleychising on X.
The climate change movement was issued a massive blow on Wednesday after a trial judge permanently closed a Democrat-charged lawsuit claiming that big oil was to blame for climate-caused damages in the state.
In 2022, New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin filed a lawsuit against the country’s largest oil companies, ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Phillips 66, Shell, as well as the American Petroleum Institute, claiming that the fossil fuel industry was worsening the effects of climate change, and therefore, causing damage to the state.
However, the case was tossed out on Wednesday by New Jersey Superior Court Judge Douglas Hurd, who ruled that lawful oil companies could not be held liable for worldwide emissions. The case was dismissed with prejudice, meaning it cannot be reopened.
“Plaintiffs seek to regulate the nationwide—and even worldwide—marketing and distribution of lawful products on which billions of people outside of New Jersey rely to heat their homes, power their hospitals and schools, produce and transport their food, and manufacture countless items essential to the safety, wellbeing, and advancement of modern society,” said Hurd, who issued the ruling.
ENERGY SECRETARY WARNS AGAINST TREATING CLIMATE CHANGE AS ‘POLITICAL FOOTBALL’: SLOW-MOVING PROBLEM’
The Chevron logo is displayed at a Chevron gas station in Los Angeles, California.(Mario Tama)
Hurd said that the plaintiffs could not justly claim damages caused by nationwide emissions.
ENERGY SEC. WRIGHT OUTLINES DAY 1 PRIORITIES: REFILLING SPR, PROMPTING ‘ENERGY ADDITION, NOT SUBTRACTION’
“Because Plaintiffs seek damages for alleged harms caused by interstate and international emissions and global warming, their claims cannot be governed by state law. Under our federal constitutional system, states cannot use their laws to resolve claims seeking redress for injuries allegedly caused by out-of-state and worldwide emissions,” Hurd said in the decision.
NJ AG Matthew Platkin sued big oil on claims that they were causing climate change.(Getty Images)
Energy experts told Fox News Digital that the dismissal sends a clear message that “energy policy should be set by elected officials, not litigated into existence by activist lawyers.”
“This ruling is a major victory for common sense and the rule of law. Climate activists have been using the courts to push their radical agenda, but judges are increasingly rejecting these baseless lawsuits that threaten energy security and economic stability,” Jason Isaac, CEO of the American Energy Institute and former Texas representative, said in a statement shared with Fox News Digital.
An Exxon gas station is seen on Aug. 5, 2024 in Austin, Texas.(Brandon Bell/Getty Images)
Steve Milloy, senior fellow at the Energy & Environment Legal Institute and former Trump EPA transition team member, said that similar lawsuits could face the same fate because “the climate controversy is a political, not a legal one.”
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
“Although Democrats don’t really understand this, political issues are on the ballot box, not the courtroom,” Milloy said.
Fox News Digital reached out to Platkin’s office for comment.
FIRST ON FOX: Republican attorneys general from 18 states are pushing back against lawsuits filed by Democrat AGs and legal groups nationwide challenging the Trump administration’s executive order on birthright citizenship through an amicus brief filing set to be filed Monday, Fox News Digital has learned.
“If someone comes on a tourist visa to have an anchor baby, they are not under that original meaning of the United States Constitution,” Iowa AG Brenna Bird told Fox News Digital in an interview Monday. Bird is the lead AG leading an amicus brief filing in support of the executive order on Monday.
“Oftentimes, when this has happened. It’s the taxpayers that are paying for the health care through Medicaid or through hospitals, paying for care for someone to have a child, or the state child health insurance system as well,” Bird said. “Each state has a system that helps kids without insurance, and so the taxpayers are on the hook here for all the costs.”
TRUMP ADMIN HITS BACK AS ACLU LAUNCHES LAWSUIT ON BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP: ‘READY TO FACE THEM’
Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird, alongside more than a dozen state AGs, filed an amicus brief supporting President Donald Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship.(Getty Images)
Bird’s amicus brief comes in response to 18 Democrat-led states who launched their own lawsuit, claiming the order is unconstitutional and “unprecedented.”
“The President has no authority to rewrite or nullify a constitutional amendment or duly enacted statute. Nor is he empowered by any other source of law to limit who receives United States citizenship at birth,” the lawsuit reads.
Attorneys general from California, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine and others signed on to the suit, along with the city and county of San Francisco and Washington, D.C.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration the same day he signed the order “on behalf of organizations with members whose babies born on U.S. soil will be denied citizenship under the order.” The ACLU also claimed the order is unconstitutional and against congressional intent and Supreme Court precedent.
TRUMP’S HOUSE GOP ALLIES PUSH BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP BILL AFTER PROGRESSIVE FURY AT PRESIDENTIAL ORDER
ICE agents arrested seven illegal immigrants during a workforce operation raid.(U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement)
Bird’s brief – signed by Republican AGs from Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming – focuses on several arguments.
The first part of the 13-page brief claims that President Donald Trump’s executive order complies with the “original meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment.” The second portion claims Trump’s order “reduces harm to the states.”
The brief states that the “Plaintiffs’ erroneous Citizenship Clause interpretation will continue the powerful incentive for citizens of foreign countries to give birth on American soil, even if they must illegally enter this country to do so.”
“The lure of American citizenship motivates pregnant women to travel to America to give birth,” the brief reads. “Some women, desperate to give birth in the United States, cross the border the day they deliver their baby.”
A border hospital administrator described witnessing pregnant women arriving at the hospital in active labor, still wet and shivering from crossing the river, determined to give birth in the U.S., the brief, which will be filed in the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts, says.
PRESIDENT TRUMP’S BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP EXECUTIVE ORDER FACES LEGAL CHALLENGES FROM 22 STATES
President Donald Trump, right, signs executive orders on stage at an indoor Presidential Inauguration parade event in Washington, D.C., on Monday, Jan. 20, 2025.(AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein)
Trump’s order, titled the “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship” states that “the privilege of United States citizenship does not automatically extend to persons born in the United States” when the individual’s parents are illegal immigrants living in the U.S. or if their presence is lawful but temporary. It was among the first orders he signed after taking office in early January.
“President Trump is restoring the meaning and value of American citizenship, and also making sure that if someone is breaking the law, they won’t be rewarded for that by getting citizenship,” Bird said. “And so it’s following the Constitution and making sure that we’re upholding our immigration laws.”
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Fox News Digital’s Haley-Chi-Sing contributed to this report.
Jamie Joseph is a writer who covers politics. She leads Fox News Digital coverage of the Senate.
The Supreme Court will weigh an effort to establish the nation’s first religious charter school with implications for school choice and religious practices.
The court agreed Friday to hear two cases on the matter, which will be argued together — Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board v. Drummond and St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School v. Drummond.
In 2023, the Statewide Virtual Charter School Board voted to approve an application by the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Oklahoma City and the Diocese of Tulsa for a K-12 online school, the St. Isidore of Seville Virtual Charter School.
SUPREME COURT TO DECIDE IF FAMILIES CAN OPT OUT OF READING LGBTQ BOOKS IN THE CLASSROOM
Oklahoma parents, faith leaders and an education group sought to block the school after the approval.
In a 7-1 decision, the Oklahoma Supreme Court found a taxpayer-funded religious charter school would violate the First Amendment’s provision on “establishment of religion” and the state constitution.
The Supreme Court will weigh an effort to establish the nation’s first religious charter school.(Olivier Douliery/AFP via Getty Images)
“Under Oklahoma law, a charter school is a public school,” Justice James Winchester wrote in the court’s majority opinion. “As such, a charter school must be nonsectarian.
“However, St. Isidore will evangelize the Catholic school curriculum while sponsored by the state.”
Alliance Defending Freedom Chief Counsel Jim Campbell told Fox News Digital the case “is fundamentally about religious discrimination and school choice.”
SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS LOOMING TIKTOK BAN
“The Supreme Court has been clear in three cases over the last eight years that you can’t create a public program like that and then exclude religious organizations,” Campbell said. “So, we’re going to be arguing before the court that the state of Oklahoma should be allowed to open up the program to religious organizations.”
Oklahoma Republican Attorney General Gentner Drummond originally challenged the school’s approval.(Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
Campbell says the decision would give parents, families and the state “more educational options.”
Oklahoma Republican Attorney General Gentner Drummond, who originally challenged the school’s approval, has previously said the school’s establishment is unconstitutional. His spokesperson told Fox News Digital in a statement the attorney general “looks forward to presenting our arguments before the high court.”
“I will continue to vigorously defend the religious liberty of all 4 million Oklahomans,” Drummond said in a statement released in October. “This unconstitutional scheme to create the nation’s first state-sponsored religious charter school will open the floodgates and force taxpayers to fund all manner of religious indoctrination, including radical Islam or even the Church of Satan. My fellow Oklahomans can rest assured that I will always fight to protect their God-given rights and uphold the law.”
TENNESSEE AG OPTIMISTIC ABOUT SCOTUS CASE AFTER ‘RADICAL GENDER IDEOLOGY’ REVERSAL IN LOWER COURT
The Oklahoma case is one of several religious institution cases that have been filed in the Supreme Court.
In 2017, the high court ruled in favor of a Missouri church that sued the state after being denied taxpayer funds for a playground project as a result of a provision that prohibits state funding for religious entities.
Likewise, in 2020, the Supreme Court struck down a ban on taxpayer funding for religious schools in a 5-4 decision that backed a Montana tax-credit scholarship program. Most recently, in 2022, the Supreme Court ruled that a Maine tuition assistance program violated the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause for excluding religious schools from eligibility.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett recused herself from the case, although an explanation was not given.(AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)
Campbell said given the court’s previous considerations of cases involving religious educational institutions, he is “hopefulthat the Supreme Court will recognize that the same principle applies here.”
“You can’t create a charter school program that allows private organizations to participate but tell the religious groups that they can’t be included,” Campbell said. “So, we’re hopeful that the Supreme Court will make it clear that people of faith deserve to be a part of the charter school program as well.”
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Justice Amy Coney Barrett recused herself from the case, although an explanation was not given. The Supreme Court is expected to hear oral arguments in April.
School choice has become a hot-button issue, particularly after the 2024 election cycle. President Donald Trump recently signed two executive orders on education, one to remove federal funding from K-12 schools that teach critical race theory and another to support school choice.
Fox News Digital’s Ronn Blitzer and the Associated Press contributed to this report.
Haley Chi-Sing is a Writer for Fox News Digital. You can reach her at @haleychising on X.
A federal appeals court on Thursday ruled a nationwide ban on handgun sales to young adults is unconstitutional.
A three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans found a federal law that prohibits adults aged 18-20 from buying handguns violates the Second Amendment. The ruling comes as key firearms regulations have been struck down across the country following a landmark Supreme Court decision that expanded gun rights in 2022.
“Ultimately, the text of the Second Amendment includes eighteen-to-twenty-year-old individuals among ‘the people’ whose right to keep and bear arms is protected,” the opinion of the court states. The decision refers the case back to a lower court judge.
MASSIE AND OTHER REPUBLICANS PUSH ‘NATIONAL CONSTITUTIONAL CARRY ACT’ TO PROTECT AMERICANS’ GUN RIGHTS
Customers shop for handguns at the Des Moines Fairgrounds Gun Show at the Iowa State Fairgrounds in Des Moines, Iowa, in March 2023. (Reuters/Jonathan Ernst)
Previously, the appeals court had upheld the requirement that adults must be at least 21 to purchase a handgun. But since the Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen, judges are required to determine if a firearm restriction being challenged is firmly rooted in the nation’s historical traditions. Judges in Minnesota, Virginia and Texas have already found that state laws restricting handgun sales to young adults do not pass that test.
The Biden administration fought those rulings, but the Trump administration is expected to be friendlier towards gun rights. At a National Rifle Association event last year during the presidential campaign, President Donald Trump said, “no one will lay a finger on your firearms.”
Constitutional law attorney and Fox News contributor Jonathan Turley observed that the Trump administration may not appeal the fifth circuit’s decision, which could mean the Supreme Court will not have a chance to review it.
“For gun rights advocates, it may have been better if this decision had been handed down during the Biden Administration,” Turley posted on X. “The Trump Administration will likely support the ruling and not appeal to the Supreme Court. Such an appeal could have extended this precedent nationally.”
BIDEN ADMIN DROPS ITS ‘ZERO TOLERANCE’ POLICY TARGETING GUN DEALER LICENSES OVER PAPERWORK ERRORS
Federal law prohibits handgun sales to young adults under 21 years of age. (Reuters )
The Supreme Court, meanwhile, decided to keep a federal gun law on the books last year. The high court overturned a different ruling from the 5th Circuit and upheld a law intended to protect victims of domestic violence.
“Today’s ruling is yet another critical FPC win against an immoral and unconstitutional age-based gun ban,” said Firearms Policy Coalition President Brandon Combs in a statement. Two FPC members sued to overturn the law, along with the Second Amendment Foundation and the Louisiana Shooting Association.
SUPREME COURT MAKES DECISION ON GUN LAW CHALLENGES IN DELAWARE, MARYLAND
The U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C. (AP Photo)
“We look forward to restoring the Second Amendment rights of all peaceable adults throughout the United States,” Combs added.
Federal law requires a person to be 21 to purchase a handgun from a licensed firearm dealer and 18 to buy a long gun from a dealer, according to Everytown for Gun Safety. There is an 18-year-old minimum for handgun purchases from unlicensed sellers and no minimum age for long guns, according to the group’s research.
CLICK TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
“The law that prohibits dealers from selling handguns to those under twenty-one is both constitutional and crucial for public safety,” said Janet Carter, senior director of issues and appeals at Everytown Law. “Firearms are the leading cause of death for children and teens, and 18-to-20-year-olds commit gun homicides at triple the rate of adults 21 and over, according to FBI statistics.”
“We hope the federal government will fight this reckless ruling by seeking rehearing en banc, or taking the case directly to the Supreme Court. We look forward to supporting the defense of this common sense law.”
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Chris Pandolfo is a breaking news reporter for Fox News Digital. Send tips to [email protected] and follow him on Twitter @ChrisCPandolfo.
Freshman GOP Rep. Gabe Evans spoke to Fox News Digital about the critical need for new energy policies in the United States and how he plans to push forward to overcome harmful green energy mandates like the ones in his home state of Colorado.
“We know that we need more energy, not less, for our modern lifestyle, and all of the different emerging technologies, for example, United Power, they’re actually my local electric co-op that supplies my energy, and United Power is forecasting a double to triple increase in the amount of power that they’re going to need over the next 10 to 20 years, driven not only by population growth, but driven also by a lot of the new technologies that we’re seeing,” Evans told Fox News Digital.
“Everybody knows about electric vehicles and the power that’s required there, and so whether that’s, you know, the switch to electric vehicles is driven by the free market or whether it’s driven by some heavy-handed government mandates, if you plug in something into the power grid, we need more power, and we need to make sure that we have a more robust power grid to deliver that and that all ties back to baseline energy generation,” he continued.
Evans explained that “there’s also mandates in Colorado around things like electrifying drill rigs for a lot of the oil and gas, which is going to consume massive amounts of energy.”
AMERICA’S ENERGY CRISIS IS HIDING IN PLAIN SIGHT AND IT’S WORSE THAN YOU KNOW
Fox News Digital recently spoke to GOP Rep. Gabe Evans(Fox News Digital/Getty)
“So we have massive new demands for electricity around AI or computing, and these are things that are of critical national security importance, because if we’re not making sure that we’re the dominant power in AI and a lot of this advanced computing, a lot of our international competitors are going to move into the first place position in those spaces. And so really, our entire modern way of life revolves around energy and having more energy.”
Evans told Fox News Digital that the United States, particularly Colorado’s 8th Congressional District which he represents, makes “some of the cleanest and most environmentally responsible energy anywhere on the planet.”
“So being able to advocate for that, all of the above approach to meet the demands that we have for our modern way of life is something that I’m super excited to work on and on,” Evans said.
ENERGY EXPERTS WEIGH IN AFTER CANADIAN PREMIER SAYS SHE WANTS TO DISCUSS KEYSTONE PIPELINE 2.0 WITH TRUMP
Former State House of Representative Gabe Evans works at the Colorado State Capitol (RJ Sangosti/MediaNews Group/The Denver Post via Getty Images)
Evans told Fox News Digital that Democrat-led energy policies in Colorado, along with other places, are actually causing a larger carbon footprint from green energy policies.
“Follow the science,” Evans said. “So we’ve talked a lot about electricity. The question that often doesn’t come up in the space of electricity is what is the carbon footprint required to produce electricity? And in Colorado right now, the carbon footprint of our electrical grid is actually about 40% higher than the carbon footprint for pure natural gas,” Evans explained.
“So if there is a natural gas school bus versus an electric school bus, if there’s a natural gas RTD as in our local mass transit system in the Denver metro area, if we have a natural gas RTD bus versus an electric bus, the electric buses are actually contributing 40% more carbon to the atmosphere because of the carbon footprint required to generate and transmit that electricity than just pure natural gas.”
Evans told Fox News Digital it is imperative that Republicans work hand in hand with the Republican secretary nominees, who are yet to be confirmed, at the Department of Energy, Department of the Interior, and Environmental Protection Agency.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Crude oil pump jack(REUTERS/Angus Mordant)
“Chris Wright is the energy nominee, he’s also from Colorado, and so we have a preexisting relationship based on my time in the state legislature where I was the ranking member on our State Energy and Environment Committee,” Evans said. “But we really do have to work hand-in-hand together, and I think the American people understand that, which is why the American people gave majorities in the House and the Senate and then obviously the presidency to my party, because they understand that we need to have a full court press to be able to deliver these solutions.”
Evans continued, “And it’s not just the House or the Senate or the presidency and the administration. We all have to be able to work together. And so being able to continue, you know, specifically in the energy space, the existing relationship that I have with some of these nominees is going to be critically important to achieving that ultimate goal of empowering energy producers, getting the good jobs that come from that industry, protecting our environment by actually producing responsible energy and then ultimately providing the good paying jobs that are so critical to solving the affordability crisis that we have right now.”
Andrew Mark Miller is a reporter at Fox News. Find him on Twitter @andymarkmiller and email tips to [email protected].
Storch Advisors CEO and former Toys”R”Us and Target executive Gerald Storch reacts to a strong November retail report and explains how industry winners are ‘value-based’ players.
Costco has officially confirmed a month-long rumor that the wholesale club will officially swap out Pepsi for Coca-Cola products at its food courts, prompting excitement among some of its customers.
“This summer, we will be converting our food court fountain business back over to Coca-Cola,” Costco CEO Ron Vachris said during the company’s annual shareholders meeting on Thursday.
Rumors that Costco will swap out its fountain drinks were first reported last month by Costco Insider.
“After over a decade, Costco is switching back from Pepsi to Coke products in their stores,” Costco Insider said in a post on Instagram. “The change will bring Coke, Coke Zero and Diet Coke, as well as Sprite instead of Starry.”
COSTCO FOOD COURT CHATTER SUGGESTS SODA SWITCH COMING IN 2025: ‘SUPER HAPPY’
Customers fill cups with PepsiCo. Inc. brand beverages in the food court of a Costco store. Costco reportedly has had Pespi products at its food courts for decades. (Callaghan O’Hare/Bloomberg / Getty Images)
FOX Business reached out to Costco for comment, but they did not immediately respond.
The new change will reportedly undo a previous 2013 decision that swapped out the store’s Coca-Cola products for Pepsi.
COSTCO MUFFINS APPEAR TO BE CHANGING, RANKLING SOME CUSTOMERS ON REDDIT
Customers wait in line at Costco’s food courts. (Patrick T. Fallon / AFP / Getty Images)
According to Costco Insider, the 2013 switch was “a cost-saving measure to keep their famous $1.50 hot dog and soda combo.”
Costco’s hot dog prices, often praised for remaining so affordable over the years, reportedly haven’t changed since the 1980s.
COSTCO GIVES UPDATE ON $1.50 HOT DOG, SODA COMBO STAPLE
Costco switched from Coca-Cola to Pepsi products in 2013 as part of a cost-saving move, according to the website Costco Insider. (iStock / iStock)
Last year, CFO Gary Millerchip also reassured that Costco’s hot dog prices are expected to remain the same, Fox Business reported at the time.
“I also want to confirm the $1.50 hot dog price is safe,” Millerchip said during a quarterly earnings call last May.
Ticker
Security
Last
Change
Change %
COST
COSTCO WHOLESALE CORP.
939.68
-2.48
-0.26%
While some Pepsi fans expressed their disappointment in the new swap, many customers shared their excitement about the prospect of Coke returning to the food courts.
Plus special access to select articles and other premium content with your account – free of charge.
By entering your email and pushing continue, you are agreeing to Fox News’ Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive.
Please enter a valid email address.
In a move that some critics say was intended to influence the Trump administration and Congress, Karim Khan, controversial prosecutor for the International Criminal Court (ICC), filed applications for arrest warrants against Taliban senior leader Haibatullah Akhundzada and Taliban chief justice Abdul Hakim Haqqani for crimes against humanity.
The timing of the move came as the U.S. Senate prepares to vote on a bill to sanction the ICC over its request for arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former defense minister, Yoav Gallant. The House bill passed on Jan. 9 with bipartisan support.
Khan’s “move is no doubt a Hail Mary pass to deter the Senate vote,” Richard Goldberg, a senior advisor at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told Fox News Digital. He added that some in Washington “might fall for the charade… Khan and the ICC have already shown us who and what they are. They are still investigating Americans, they are seeking the arrest of Israelis, all red lines have been crossed and there’s no evading the consequences.”
LINDSEY GRAHAM DEMANDS ICC REVEAL DETAILS OF PROBE INTO PROSECUTOR KHAN’S MISCONDUCT ALLEGATIONS
The International Criminal Court (ICC) building in The Hague, Netherlands, on April 30, 2024.(Selman Aksunger/Anadolu via Getty Images)
The Illegitimate Court Counteraction Act would sanction foreigners attempting to arrest, detain, prosecute or investigate citizens of the U.S. or its allies, including Israel. It would also attempt to regain funds designated to the ICC and stop further court contributions. The U.S. is not party to the Rome Statute.
Rebecca Hamilton, formerly a lawyer in the ICC’s prosecutorial division, wrote in Just Security about the double standard the U.S. is forced into by opposing the ICC following the Taliban arrest warrants. Given the timing of the Senate’s impending vote on a bill that “potentially threatens the ICC’s very survival,” Hamilton wrote, “One might argue then, that the ICC Prosecutor’s announcement on Thursday was less about pursuing his mandate, and more about trying to save his job.”
In addressing the matter she added, “The discretion that the ICC Prosecutor has to determine when to go public with the announcement of an arrest warrant application is often used strategically, and surely has been in this case. But investigations of international crimes cannot be put together overnight.”
Karim Khan is the ICC’s chief prosecutor.(Getty Images)
Israel’s ambassador to the U.N., Danny Danon, told Fox News Digital, “Prosecutor Karim Khan has a myopic obsession over Israel with the war crimes charges leveled at Israel’s democratically elected prime minister and former defense minister. Equating the leaders of a democracy with leaders of the Hamas terrorist organization – and more recently, with the Taliban – is an insult to the principles of justice.”
INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT: 20 YEARS, BILLIONS SPENT, LIMITED SUCCESS AS US CONSIDERS SANCTIONS
Danon said, “The ICC has lost its credibility, and it’s about time for a review of the ICC’s – and Prosecutor Khan’s – true motivations for focusing so intensely – and so distortedly – on Israel.”
Fox News Digital reached out to the ICC to ask why warrants against Taliban leaders have taken so long to issue, as well as about whether there is equivalence between the crimes for which the ICC seeks to charge Taliban leaders, and those for which the ICC has charged Netanyahu and Gallant.
The Office of the Prosecutor told Fox News Digital that announcements in Afghanistan “marked the culmination of significant work between the Office and affected communities in seeking accountability for alleged crimes committed in Afghanistan.” The office stated that its investigation into Afghanistan had only resumed on Oct. 31, 2022, after being deferred due to “an admissibility challenge by the former government of Afghanistan.”
A Taliban fighter stands guard as women wait to receive food rations distributed by a humanitarian aid group in Kabul, Afghanistan, May 23, 2023.(AP Photo/Ebrahim Noroozi, File)
Khan’s office said it follows the same protocol for the filing of all warrants, including those in Afghanistan and for Palestinians. It noted that in the past year, the ICC has “sought or obtained warrants for arrest in situations including Afghanistan, Ukraine, Myanmar/Bangladesh, State of Palestine, Libya and Mali as well as taking forward trials in the situations in Mali, Central African Republic and Darfur.”
PENTAGON ‘FUNDAMENTALLY REJECTS’ ICC DECISION TO ISSUE ARREST WARRANT FOR NETANYAHU
A spokesperson from the European Union said that “the EU respects the court’s independence and impartiality.”
While the spokesperson did not speak to charges against Israeli officials, they said, “The EU and its Member States support initiatives that ensure accountability and regularly recall that systematic and systemic violations against women and girls in Afghanistan may amount to gender persecution, which is a crime against humanity under the Rome Statute of the ICC of which Afghanistan is a state party.”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and then-Defense Minister Yoav Gallant with senior military officials during the strike on Iran.(Avi Ohayon/ GPO)
A spokesperson for United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, did not respond to Fox News Digital’s questions about the equivalence between warrants for Taliban and Israeli leaders.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., Tweeted on Jan. 24 that he plans to vote for the ICCA, explaining that “the ICC’s treatment towards Israel and equivocating to Hamas was unacceptable. We should absolutely sanction the ICC.”
Goldberg, a former national security advisor during President Donald Trump’s first term, warned “the sanctions coming out of Congress will certainly make life difficult for the officials and groups who are waging lawfare against us, but to actually cripple ICC operations and end the lawfare, we will need the Trump administration to impose sanctions directly on the ICC. I’m not sure American service members are safe until that happens.”
