Fox News Latest Headlines
Scammers are coming for your money. Here’s the one thing you must never do
Imagine getting a phone call from your bank. The bank's name is listed on the caller ID with the correct phone number. They know key details about you—your name, your account numbers, maybe even your Social Security number or mother's maiden name.
They warn you that you have fallen victim to a financial scam. But the plot twist is that they are the scammers!
YOUR FAMILY COULD BE ONE PHONE CALL FROM A BANK SCAM
This is happening across the country at an alarming rate.
Technology can help increase our productivity, but it also can boost scammers by enabling increasingly sophisticated tactics that allow them to impersonate companies, access sensitive information, and create a panic that causes even the savviest people to unwittingly help them complete their scams.
FRAUD EXPERT WARNS AI IS HELPING CRIMINALS OUTPACE THE GOVERNMENT: 'DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TOOLS'
So, how can you protect yourself from these growing scams, including those in which the scammer is impersonating your bank?
If you see your bank, credit card company, Amazon, Microsoft, or any other company with whom you do business calling, and you aren't immediately expecting that call, do not answer your phone.
Scammers are "spoofing" phone numbers so that the phone number shows up on your phone with the name of a big company even though they are not affiliated with it. Sometimes, it even shows the correct phone number even though they are calling from another number.
If you don't answer your phone, you take away a huge tool for scammers: their ability to create urgency and panic. When you are told that you are the subject of fraud, that your money is at risk, or something similar, and you need to take action, you panic.
APPLE PAY TEXT SCAM THREATENS $8,250 LOSS IN 35 MINUTES
In a state of panic, you do not think clearly, and this can lead you to take actions that you would never undertake in a calm state.
I personally suggest not answering any phone calls. If you receive a call, try calling the person or business back using the number in your contacts if they leave a message.
AMAZON'S ALEXA CAN NOW VERIFY SUSPICIOUS MESSAGES
If you get a voicemail message about an issue (such as supposedly being the victim of a scam) or a text or email, again, do not panic.
Instead, find a trusted touchpoint.
THE SCAM TEXT TEST: SPOT DANGER BEFORE YOU TAP
For banks, credit card companies, and other financial providers, find their phone number on the back of your bank card or on an old paper statement that you know is legitimate.
You can also go to their website and look for a phone number or customer service email address.
HI MOM TEXT SCAM: HOW TO SPOT FAKE EMERGENCY TEXTS
This puts you in control of the contact, and you can safely find out if there is legitimately an issue or if you have been contacted by a scammer.
Controlling the contact instead of letting the scammer be in control is key to fighting scams.
If you do let a text or phone call break through (and you shouldn't, but I know it happens), do not respond or give out sensitive information in response to their requests.
For example, they may send you a text and ask for a security code sent to your phone.
Again, this is them trying to scam you, not help you. Giving up codes like this could help them drain your bank account.
Instead, again, seek out a trusted phone number and call the company to verify whether there is a problem. If there is, they can help you directly. Much of the time, you will find out it was a scam attempt.
Creating urgency is key for scammers. They make you worried. As noted above, you get into a state of panic, and you take action without thinking.
If you are asked to take any urgent action, such as going to a bank immediately, withdrawing or moving funds, buying gift cards, immediately giving out information, or anything else, stop and take a beat.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION
The same goes for secrecy. If they tell you not to contact the police or not to tell the bank teller what is going on because they might be in on it, do not listen. You are not James Bond, and you are not caught up in an international stakeout—you are simply a person whom a fraudster is trying to trick.
Reset and call your financial institution or the police for guidance.
This may sound obvious while you are reading it, but thousands of well-meaning people have fallen victim to the psychological manipulation of scammers.
Finally, with AI technology, even voices are being spoofed. Have a family code phrase among your family members that isn't published anywhere. Then, if someone calls using your loved one's voice as part of a scam, you can ask for the code phrase. If it isn't given, you will know it is not your family member.
Scammers are everywhere. They are relentless, and they will stop at nothing to try to fleece you. Be diligent, take control of your communications, and defuse urgency so that they do not succeed.
Kavanaugh throws Trump 'a lifeline' on mail ballot rules despite Supreme Court loss before midterms
Brett Kavanaugh, President Donald Trump's "hero" Supreme Court justice, isn't closing the door on the United States Postal Service (USPS) enacting Trump's ballot-mail rules in the future, although he agreed with the majority that implementing them ahead of the 2026 midterm elections is too soon.
"In my view, based on the briefing the Court has received at this interim stage, there is at least a fair prospect that the final rule falls within the Postal Service’s statutory authority," Kavanaugh wrote in his concurring opinion in United States Postal Service, et al. v. California, et al.
The concurrence comes roughly three months after Kavanaugh laid out a legal pathway for Trump to implement his executive order curtailing birthright citizenship in his concurrence in Trump v. Barbara. Kavanaugh also offered a blueprint for implementing Trump's sweeping tariffs in his dissent in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump.
"I would note though that Justice Kavanaugh threw the government a lifeline by saying that he views it as likely that they do have the statutory authority. And I think if you read the dissent, you can see where Justices Thomas and Alito are on questions like that as well," Jason Snead, executive director of Honest Elections Project, told Fox News Digital.
TRUMP BLASTS SUPREME COURT 'DISASTER' AFTER JUSTICES RULE AGAINST HIM ON MAIL-IN VOTING
The Supreme Court on Monday denied the Trump administration’s emergency request to lift a lower court injunction blocking the U.S. Postal Service rule, ruling that the government was "unlikely to succeed on the merits" of its challenge.
The decision leaves the rule blocked for the 2026 midterms after ballots have already been sent. But as the litigation continues, the case could return to the Supreme Court.
"I think there's a fair chance that it winds back up in front of the Supreme Court eventually," Snead told Fox News Digital.
A dissent written by Justice Samuel Alito and joined by Justice Clarence Thomas also raised questions about whether the policy could ultimately survive the legal challenge and take effect before 2028
"I do think that as a practical matter, the rule is not going to be implemented in time for the midterms. I think that's a done deal at this point. But I do hold out hope that there will be some additional litigation over this that could allow this rule to be implementing ahead of the 2028 presidential election," Snead said.
The Postal Service rule requires federal ballot-mail envelopes to include an election-mail logo, be scannable by high-speed processing equipment, and carry a specialized barcode unique to each voter. States would also have to upload certain voter information to a Postal Service portal.
A coalition of 24 Democratic state attorneys general sued the Trump administration, alleging the rule violates the Constitution's Elections Clause, which grants Congress the power to regulate elections. The Trump administration argued the USPS is regulating the mail, not election procedures.
TRUMP SCORES SUPREME COURT WIN ON MAIL-IN VOTING RESTRICTIONS BEFORE MIDTERMS
"So this case is still alive and well, and I think that Kavanaugh has given us all some hope that as it progresses eventually, this rule might be allowed to go into effect hopefully in time for the 2028 election since the left has successfully killed it for 2026," Snead continued.
Iowa Solicitor General Eric Wessan also pointed to timing as a major factor, noting that earlier litigation and an injunction in Massachusetts delayed the Postal Service’s ability to publish the final rule.
"So I'm not surprised now, close to the deadline when ballots have to go out to people that the Supreme Court took the approach of maintaining the status quo, although I think that Justice Alito's dissent highlights a lot of issues with the approach taken by the majority, and I would not be sure that the same result would be what the Supreme Court reaches in advance of, for example, the 2028 election," Wessan said.
Alito, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, dissented, arguing that the government had made the necessary showing for a stay. He also questioned whether some plaintiffs had standing and described that those plaintiffs relying on a "Hail Mary pass" the Supreme Court has previously said "rarely succeeds."
FEDERAL JUDGE AGAIN BLOCKS TRUMP'S MAIL BALLOT ORDER JUST BEFORE MIDTERMS
"The hail mary passes seem to be succeeding to a certain extent," Wessan said. "So the president's executive order was issued five months ago, and the injunction followed pretty shortly after. And as the Supreme Court recognized in the litigation earlier, that injunction against the executive order was improper."
"But the amount of time that it took to get that resolved by the Supreme Court put the Postal Service in a very tough spot timing-wise with rolling it out for the election coming up in November, especially because states are on the verge of having to send ballots out, whether to the armed services or otherwise," Wessan continued.
Abhishek Kambil said the lack of a fuller explanation from the court’s majority stood out to him.
"I think the biggest surprise was the fact that it came with an unreasoned order, especially right after they granted a stay in Missouri, which was also on an unreasoned order. So, in cases like this, where there's a lot at stake, you would hope that in in in a stay opinion that the Supreme Court would explain its reasoning," Kambil said.
JACKSON RIPS INTO SUPREME COURT COLLEAGUES' 'SERIOUS LEGAL ERROR' ON TRUMP MAIL-IN VOTING ORDER
"So, I think the biggest thing that surprised me was the lack of explanation, especially given Justice Alito had a pretty methodical dissent explaining all the ways the majority got wrong, and we don't know exactly how the majority decided to deny the stay," Kambil told Fox News Digital.
Wessan said that he expects the rule to remain sidelined this year while leaving open the possibility of a different outcome later.
"This rule won't be in effect for the 2026 election, but it very well may end up in effect for the 2028 election, and this is just one of many actions the administration is taking to help with voter integrity," Wessan said.
Snead argued that without a looming election, Democratic states may have a tougher time fighting against implementing the USPS rules.
SIGN UP TO GET THE POLITICS NEWSLETTER
"So they're going to have a difficult time and a steeper hill to climb if they're trying to explain in 2027, for instance, why they can't possibly comply with basic rules like this over a two-year time frame," Snead told Fox News Digital. "And just so folks understand what we're talking about. We're talking about taking best practices about mail ballot envelope design that have been long standing and making that mandatory guidance."
"And we're also talking about getting lists of eligible mail voters that states already have so that the Postal Service can essentially create manifests and that will allow them to know who they're sending ballots to and it will allow those ballots to be tracked. So this is a very basic, very simple thing," Snead continued.
MORNING GLORY: Five Senate races show why Democrats may regret their primary choices
Abdul El-Sayed. James Talarico. Peggy Flanagan. Troy Jackson. Chris Pappas.
These are not your parents’ Democrats. They aren’t even the 2016 or 2020 Democrats.
They aren’t even Kamala Harris Democrats.
MEET THE FAR-LEFT INSURGENTS WAGING WAR ON THE DEMOCRATIC ESTABLISHMENT IN 2026 MIDTERMS
Across five battleground Senate races, Democrats have nominated "outliers"—hard-left radicals whose appeals to voters have sent their would-be constituents headed toward the GOP’s alternatives in each state where the races are being waged.
In Michigan, radical Abdul El-Sayed beat Rep. Haley Stevens—an old-school, big-government liberal—by 1 percentage point in a race that pollsters often had him up by double digits, and his smallest projected margin had been seven points. Voters were turning on him even then as they learned more about his radical views.
SCANDALS, SOCIALISTS AND TRUMP ROIL PRIMARIES, SEND INCUMBENTS PACKING AT NEAR-RECORD PACE
El-Sayed eked out a win in the primary, but mainstream Republican Mike Rogers, who served 14 years in the House of Representatives, including a term as chair of the House Intelligence Committee, quickly established himself as a normal, pro-American Michigander with a love of football, Mackinac Island and Ford trucks—all of which El-Sayed had disparaged. Meanwhile, El-Sayed tried without effect to delete radical Hasan Piker from his bio, even though everyone in Michigan had seen Piker carry El-Sayed over the primary’s finish line and campaign with the self-proclaimed America-hater on the last day of the primary campaign. "Advantage Rogers," especially as early absentee voting begins in Michigan next week.
In Texas, Democrat James Talarico insists on driving off independents and moderates from his Senate campaign with wacky statements and positions that just keep coming. This week, a friendly questioner caught Talarico exiting a campaign event stage and asked, "Who is your favorite drag queen?"
SHOCK POLL: TALARICO TIES PAXTON IN TEXAS SENATE RACE, THREATENING GOP STRONGHOLD
Talarico didn’t miss a beat or take a breath: "Oh, my gosh. Probably Alyssa Edwards."
Talarico’s Texas opponent, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, will no doubt be using that clip in ads blanketing the Lone Star State soon. There just are not that many Texans who can quickly name their favorite drag queen as they would a restaurant, a pizza topping or a Dallas Cowboys player.
In Maine, Sen. Susan Collins is always an electoral powerhouse, and never more so than this year as the chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee—probably the most coveted seat in the entire Senate for a senator who wants to make sure his or her state’s critical priorities are funded.
DEMOCRATS WHO ‘NEVER VOTED REPUBLICAN’ BACK ROGERS OVER EL-SAYED IN RAZOR-CLOSE RACE
Voting against Collins in any year would be unusual—she embodies Maine’s moderation on political matters—but this year her seniority and 10,000 consecutive roll call votes have brought her to the top of the Senate’s food chain. She first drew Graham Platner as her challenger, but he had to quit the race after being engulfed in scandals. Democrats then turned to Troy Jackson, a perennial candidate who finished third in this year’s Democratic primary for governor in the Pine Tree State and whose charisma deficit is immense, made more difficult by the unusual features of his personal and political journey.
In Minnesota, cresting fraud scandals drove Gov. Tim Walz from the governor’s race, but his partner in failing to pay attention to alleged fraud schemes, Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan, slipped through a crowded field and brought her DSA-adjacent and Bernie Sanders-endorsed politics to a Senate campaign in which she is matched against "super-normie" Michele Tafoya, the longtime NFL reporter who has earned five Emmys. Tafoya surged to a tie in deep-blue Minnesota because the state is simply weary of progressive indifference to crime and fraud, and Tafoya is the definition of a "smart moderate."
Finally, New Hampshire Democrats turned to left-wing political lifer Chris Pappas to run for the seat being left open by the retirement of moderate Democrat Jean Shaheen. Pappas has been running for office since he graduated from Harvard in 2002. With each step up the Democratic organizational chart, he’s gone further to the left. Now he’s finally getting close to the Senate (and no doubt sees himself in the White House in a few years), only to run into a massive roadblock: John Sununu.
NEW HAMPSHIRE CANDIDATE JOHN SUNUNU BLASTS DEMS FOR NOVING ‘FIRST IN THE NATION PRIMARY’ ON RUTHLESS
The Sununu family has been serving New Hampshire voters in every sort of way for decades. They are all MIT engineers, and they are all moderates. Their political brand is among the best in America, and John Sununu’s decision to leave the success he has achieved in the private sector to serve Granite State citizens again is a sharp contrast to the forever-in-government Pappas. With moderate New Hampshire Gov. Kelly Ayotte also up for re-election, Sununu has the wind at his back and is running the classic New Hampshire retail campaign, where voters expect to see their Senate candidates everywhere.
NEWT GINGRICH: REPUBLICANS CAN WIN THE 2026 MIDTERMS — IF THEY FOLLOW THE PLAN
There are four other competitive Senate races of note: in Georgia, Iowa, Ohio and North Carolina. All four states were carried by President Trump in 2024, so every Republican has a good shot, especially incumbent Ohio Sen. John Husted, who is running against former Sen. Sherrod Brown, who had been in office for five decades until Buckeye voters finally tossed him out two years ago as too liberal for Ohio.
All four will be hard-fought through the close of polls on November 3, but the five described above, in which Democrats nominated radicals and ultra-progressives? Not so much.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION
In the Tea Party years, the GOP fell into the trap of nominating candidates who made moderates in both parties and independents shake their heads, and Democrats won again and again. Now the left has seized control of the Democratic Party, at least for a season, and Republicans are benefitting from the lack of discipline in the Democratic primaries.
This is how America always self-corrects against political excess. When El-Sayed, Talarico, and others get rejected in November, Democrats will have a chance to reset "between the 40s" of American politics.
The country needs two viable parties. It’s time for voters to send the Democrats a loud message, just as they did years ago to Republicans: Nominate normal people, or lose, lose, lose.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM HUGH HEWITT
Hugh Hewitt is a Fox News contributor and host of "The Hugh Hewitt Show" heard weekday afternoons from 3 PM to 6 PM ET on the Salem Radio Network, and simulcast on Salem News Channel. Hugh drives Americans home on the East Coast and to lunch on the West Coast on over 400 affiliates nationwide, and on all the streaming platforms where SNC can be seen. He is a frequent guest on the Fox News Channel’s news roundtable, hosted by Bret Baier weekdays at 6pm ET. A son of Ohio and a graduate of Harvard College and the University of Michigan Law School, Hewitt has been a Professor of Law at Chapman University’s Fowler School of Law since 1996 where he teaches Constitutional Law. Hewitt launched his eponymous radio show from Los Angeles in 1990. Hewitt has frequently appeared on every major national news television network, hosted television shows for PBS and MSNBC, written for every major American paper, has authored a dozen books and moderated a score of Republican candidate debates, most recently the November 2023 Republican presidential debate in Miami and four Republican presidential debates in the 2015-16 cycle. Hewitt focuses his radio show and his column on the Constitution, national security, American politics and the Cleveland Browns and Guardians. Hewitt has interviewed tens of thousands of guests from Democrats Hillary Clinton and John Kerry to Republican Presidents George W. Bush and Donald Trump over his 40 years in broadcasting. This column previews the lead story that will drive his radio/ TV show today.
American schools cost more than ever but our students still keep failing
The latest Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) scores confirm what parents have been living for years: the United States is falling even further behind academically. American 15-year-olds just posted among the lowest reading and math results this country has recorded in a generation. Reading dropped another 14 points and math sits near historic lows. The teachers union cartel and the one-size-fits-all government school monopoly have produced an international embarrassment.
Worse – and tellingly – that collapse followed a historic spending binge. According to the Census Bureau’s latest data, we now outspend every country on Earth: over $21,000 per student. Yet new Gallup polling shows satisfaction with K-12 education at an all-time low, with a whopping 67% of adults reporting dissatisfaction with the system.
School-choice momentum helps explain why so many people are finally willing to call the system a disaster. We knew it all along. Families have more options than ever, so they no longer have to live with the cognitive dissonance of pretending they were sending their kids to good schools. They are breaking free from their captors, and the Stockholm syndrome is going away.
NUMBER OF K-12 PUBLIC SCHOOL STUDENTS HAS DECLINED IN MORE THAN HALF OF STATES, REPORT INDICATES
Staffing trends show who the monopoly actually serves. Since 2014, government schools have added about 620,000 employees while student enrollment has dropped by about 775,000. The government school system has become more of a jobs program for adults than an education initiative for kids.
Take Frederick Douglass Academy High School in Chicago, which is about 97% empty. Built for more than 1,000 students, it now enrolls 27 children and employs 28 adults. Nearly two-thirds of those students are chronically absent. The school spends more than $90,000 per pupil and enjoys a better than one-to-one staff-to-student ratio, yet not a single child was tested as proficient in math or reading.
New York City runs the same model at industrial scale. Some 43% of kids in NYC public schools are stuck in failing campuses where more than half the student body is not proficient in math, reading or both. The city is spending north of $40,000 a kid, more than half a million dollars for each child’s 13-year K-12 "education," and still cannot get the basics right.
Parents started waking up to the teachers union insanity during COVID-19, and 18 states have passed universal school choice policies in the past six years as a result. Reopening the buildings did not restore trust. The political indoctrination has only worsened, and the unions learned nothing from the backlash. They doubled down and leaned into ideological warfare, using kids as pawns to advance their socialist agenda.
GOV HOCHUL'S PLAN TO OPT NEW YORK INTO FEDERAL SCHOOL CHOICE PROGRAM DRAWS UNION OPPOSITION
Families are already voting with their feet. New data show homeschooling in New York has exploded by more than 200% over the past 15 years, with 53,905 children now learning at home and a sharp rise inside New York City. The Home School Legal Defense Association ranks New York among the most restrictive homeschool regimes in the country. Government schools there must be a total disaster for parents to flee them even without meaningful school choice options on the books.
Texas proved demand is just as intense where choice finally exists. The state notched a major win in 2025, then immediately created a new bottleneck: more than 100,000 kids are stuck on a waitlist because the legislature allocated only $1 billion for the program. Comptroller Don Huffines has suggested doubling that funding next year, which is a step in the right direction.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION
But Texas should drop the arbitrary cap altogether. Each scholarship is only around $10,000 per student per year, while government schools in the state already spend about twice that amount according to the latest Texas Education Agency data. Hardworking families should not be left on a waitlist while the monopoly keeps the larger check.
Now is the time to put the pedal to the metal on the school-choice revolution. Fund students – not systems – and free families from the clutches of the teachers unions. No kid should be trapped in failing government schools any longer.
Explosive report exposes ‘dangerous imbalance’ in law school pipeline shaping how election cases are decided
FIRST ON FOX: A report released this week examining America’s election-law pipeline found law schools that are overwhelmingly left-leaning, leaving conservatives outnumbered in both law-school classrooms and election litigation, which has resulted in a real world effect on courtroom outcomes, the report says.
After reviewing election-law courses and faculty at all 198 ABA-accredited law schools, The Public Interest Legal Foundation, a conservative legal group, found that liberal professors outnumber conservative professors nearly 7-to-1.
"Among those few law schools that make election law classes available, leftist and liberal election professors outnumber right of center and conservative ones 76 to 12," the report states, adding that most of the election law centers are based in universities in blue states like New York and California.
"There are so many left-wing lawyers in election law that it creates policy outcomes, election law changes, adapts, and election integrity statutes get struck down because there's so many lawyers on the other side," PILF President J. Christian Adams told Fox News Digital.
INSIDE THE FAR-LEFT 'BREEDING GROUND' UNIVERSITIES ALLEGED WHCD SHOOTER CALLED HOME FOR YEARS
"So nobody ever studied what's going on in law schools. We just always assumed, oh, there's just so many of them, but we never asked why. So, for the first time ever, Public Interest Legal Foundation went in and quantified the election law professors in the country and figured out if they're liberal or conservative and it's overwhelming. An absolute dangerous imbalance."
PILF also examined curriculum at the top schools and characterized 70% of election-law classes as taught by professors with a left-leaning ideological bias.
The report argues that students are being trained to challenge voter ID laws, citizenship-verification requirements, redistricting maps, voter-roll maintenance and other election-integrity measures. As a result, the law school graduates then move into liberal nonprofits and major law firms that litigate those issues.
EXCLUSIVE: BAD BUNNY, MARXISM AND 'NASTY WOMEN' AMONG COURSES OFFERED AT IVY LEAGUE, ELITE COLLEGES
The report cites examples from course descriptions that include references to "voter suppression," racial and partisan gerrymandering, felony disenfranchisement, the Electoral College and "election subversion."
The report also highlights what it describes as ideological course offerings at several law schools, including Harvard’s "Bonobo Sisterhood" class, which examines what bonobos can teach humans about creating a society free of male sexual coercion. PILF points to election-law courses at Harvard, Michigan, UC Berkeley and other schools that address social justice, racial inequity, voter suppression, election subversion and proposals to restructure the Electoral College.
The report makes the case that the political imbalance in law schools makes its way into courtrooms across the nation. Adams, who litigated a redistricting case in Galveston County, told Fox News Digital that the left brings "a swarm of lawyers" to court, outnumbering conservatives "five, six, seven times" in some hearings.
"In that trial, it was so many lawyers on the other side, not only at the regular lawyer table, they filled the jury box," Adams said. "It was like 25 to five." Adams added that "anytime voter ID hangs in the balance, the left sends an army," while "conservatives defending election integrity just don’t have the horses."
Adams told Fox News Digital that the current political culture on campuses exacerbates the divide and that part of the solution is law schools in red states establishing election law centers.
"There’s definitely a culture on campuses that makes it hard," Adams said. "I’ve spoken at 75 law schools, and at many of them, conservatives show up as an anomaly rather than as active participants. But that’s not true everywhere."
"A lot of schools that aren’t ideologically driven still don’t have election law programs. There’s no reason almost none of the law schools in Texas should teach election law. That’s something the legislature could fix by funding an election law chair at one of the state’s public universities."
The report does not argue that every professor it identified as left-leaning advocates for a particular legal outcome or that ideology alone determines the result of election cases. Rather, PILF makes the case that the imbalance shapes the pipeline of students and lawyers entering election litigation, leaving conservative attorneys with fewer specialized colleagues, fewer academic resources and less experience to draw on when defending election-integrity laws.
The result, according to PILF, is a self-enforcing imbalance where left-leaning professors shape how students are introduced to election law, those students move into voting-rights nonprofits and major law firms, and they eventually become the attorneys challenging election-integrity laws in court.
According to report, that translates into more than just an ideological disparity on campus but a nationwide advantage in the lawyers, research and resources available to each side of election litigation.
"We can solve this problem of this dangerous imbalance in election litigation, but we have to start to solve it," Adams told Fox News Digital.
Fox News Digital reached out to Harvard, UC Berkeley, and University of Michigan law schools for comment.
Dems boost convicted radical-left candidate, reigniting tensions inside the party
The House Democrats' campaign arm is embracing a far-left candidate with a long trail of controversial and inflammatory comments — along with an arrest record — who won their party's nomination in a crucial congressional swing district in battleground Michigan, after holding off on helping him for over a month.
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) this week expanded its target list of GOP-controlled House seats it is aiming to flip as Democrats work to recapture control of the chamber in the midterm elections. One of the three candidates added to the committee's "Red to Blue" program is Will Lawrence of Michigan.
Lawrence was arrested in 2013 on charges of resisting police during a protest. Documents obtained by Fox News showed Lawrence was charged with trespassing and with resisting and obstructing an officer. He has said the conviction was later expunged.
Lawrence has also deleted hundreds of past controversial social media posts, including support for scrapping police and prisons, open borders, abolishing the Senate, calling for a Democratic Party "civil war" and bashing the nuclear family, which he characterized as part of a "violent way of organizing society."
HOUSE DEMOCRAT CANDIDATE'S 2013 ARREST RESURFACES IN PIVOTAL RACE FOR CONGRESS
A former Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) member who says he let his membership lapse, Lawrence has walked back many of his previous statements, including once calling for defunding the police.
He told Fox News Digital in a statement last month, "I don't support defunding the police. I follow the lead of first responders and gun violence prevention advocates I have met with here in the district, who support increased funding for youth programs, mental health resources, and community violence intervention, working in collaboration with law enforcement."
Lawrence has also distanced himself from some of his other comments, telling CNN, "Like many millennials, I’ve done my fair share of thinking out loud on the internet."
Lawrence, a co-founder of the progressive Sunrise Movement, topped two establishment-backed rivals in last month's Democratic primary in Michigan, in a heated nomination showdown that further fueled the party's civil war between the far-left and the center-left.
He's now challenging first-term Republican Rep. Tom Barrett in Michigan's 7th Congressional District, a Lansing-anchored seat that President Donald Trump carried by just one point in the 2024 election.
Lawrence's addition to the DCCC program came more than a month after his primary victory. That's not out of the ordinary, as the DCCC and the rival National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) sometimes take a few weeks before elevating primary winners, as they consider polling, fundraising, and other considerations
But Democratic sources told Fox News Digital that some progressives had grown frustrated with the delay. The DCCC waited, in part, out of deference to Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) leaders, according to a CNN report, as Lawrence faced criticism over past comments about Black politicians.
The CBC has yet to endorse Lawrence, in part because of his 2024 podcast comments criticizing Black political leaders, calling them a "pillar" of the "capitalist, imperialist" American establishment. Lawrence has apologized for those comments and for also charging that Black political leaders "defang the White left."
Fox News Digital reached out to the CBC, but didn't receive a response at the time this article posted.
Adding Lawrence to the DCCC list is getting some pushback by centrist Democrats.
"I think they waited so long because he is a pretty far-left candidate running in a swing district that is currently held by a Republican and two, he has said something very, very controversial about African-Americans and that’s not great combination when you’re trying to win a swing district," Matt Bennett, co-founder and executive vice president of the Democratic centrist think tank Third Way told Fox News Digital.
"It could further exacerbate tensions within the party" if Lawrence hasn't been able to patch up his relationship with the CBC, Bennett added.
SUNRISE MOVEMENT CO-FOUNDER DEFEATS ESTABLISHMENT-BACKED DEMS IN KEY MICHIGAN RACE
In making her announcement on Tuesday, DCCC Chair Rep. Suzan DelBene said that Lawrence and the two other candidates added to the 'Red to Blue' program, Democrat Mitchell Berman of Wisconsin and independent Bill Hill of Alaska, "represent the very best of their communities—unbought, practical leaders who know what it takes to win in tough districts."
"While Tom Barrett sides with Trump and the corporate special interests, Will Lawrence sides with the people. He stands up to anyone trying to take advantage of Michigan, and in Congress he’ll keep fighting to give the community that raised him a fair shot," DelBene added.
DEMOCRACY ’26: STAY UP TO DATE WITH THE FOX NEWS ELECTION HUB
But NRCC Spokesman Zach Bannon pilloried the move by the DCCC to add Lawrence to its list.
"D.C. Democrats are embracing Socialist William Lawrence, who wants to abolish the police, abolish prisons, ban fossil fuels, allow sex changes for kids, and advance every other far-left liberal policy in mid-Michigan," Bannon charged.
Meanwhile, NRCC National Press Secretary Mike Marinella took to social media to post a long list of Lawrence's past controversial comments.
With the additions of Lawrence, Hill, and Berman, the DCCC now has 40 races on its target list.
"This is just the latest sign that MI-07 is one of the most competitive races anywhere in the country," Lawrence said on X as he commented on the DCCC's move. "And it’s a vote of confidence that our people powered campaign fighting to bring down the cost of living and standing up to corporate power is gaining momentum."
Fox News' Liz Elkind contributed to this report.
West Virginia woman charged in death of ill husband she left on toilet for 19 hours
A West Virginia woman is accused of leaving her frail and ailing husband on the toilet for 19 hours, an act investigators say contributed to his death.
Margaret Rog, 75, was arrested on Tuesday in connection with the death of her 76-year-old husband. She was charged with abuse or neglect of an incapacitated adult.
Authorities allege Rog had left her husband, who suffers from dementia, Alzheimer’s and legal blindness, on the toilet overnight last month, leading to serious health conditions that contributed to his death, the Monongalia County Sheriff’s Office said, according to WDTV.
Her husband went to the bathroom at around 3 p.m. on Aug. 20, but when he was finished doing his business, Rog was unable to help him off the toilet.
According to investigators, instead of calling for help, the woman left her husband unattended and unresponsive for 19 hours without food, water or his prescribed medications, the sheriff's office said.
Deputies allege Rog watched her husband groan in pain but did not call anyone for help and later went to bed as her ailing husband remained stuck on the toilet, according to deputies.
At around 10 a.m. the following day, a speech therapist arrived for an in-home visit with Rog’s husband and found the man unresponsive and in dangerously poor condition, according to WDTV, citing court records.
The speech therapist then called an ambulance and the man was rushed to the hospital.
He was then diagnosed with several conditions, including heart failure, respiratory failure, pulmonary embolism, hypernatremia, sepsis and rhabdomyolysis.
The man was also found to have wounds on his backside, shortness of breath and an altered mental status, according to court records.
He died in the hospital on Aug. 31.
Investigators said the elderly man’s condition and injuries linked to being left on the toilet were "significant contributing factors" to his death, WDTV reported.
7 NEW DEMENTIA RISK FACTORS REVEALED — INCLUDING ONE MILLIONS STRUGGLE WITH
Rog allegedly made statements investigators described as self-incriminating to law enforcement, adult protection services and family members over the course of the investigation, according to court documents.
The woman allegedly suggested she was aware of her husband’s need for assistance but deliberately opted against offering any help.
She pleaded not guilty in court on Tuesday and posted a $75,000 bond.
20 states sue to block Trump admin rule that would make it harder for immigrants to obtain visas, green cards
More than 20 states are suing the Trump administration over a new Department of Homeland Security rule that would give immigration officials wider discretion in determining what constitutes a public charge, a statute that allows the government to deny visas or green cards to applicants it determines are likely to become dependent on government assistance.
The rule, which is set to take effect on Friday, would expand the list of possible government aid that officials could point to when deciding to disqualify an applicant.
New York State Attorney General Letitia James led a coalition of 21 states and Washington, D.C., in suing the administration over what they describe as punishment for immigrants' law use of public assistance. New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani led a separate lawsuit filed by a coalition of cities challenging DHS' rule.
James said the rule would allow immigration officials to consider an immigrant's use of benefits like Medicaid, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and participation in school meal programs when determining whether they could become dependent on government aid. She also said it could lead to more fear of interacting with the government for people who are part of an immigrant family.
TRUMP ADMIN PAUSES VISA APPOINTMENTS WORLDWIDE AMID HEIGHTENED SCREENING FOR APPLICANTS
"Hardworking families should not be forced to go without the support they need because they fear asking for assistance will get them deported," James said in a statement. "This rule preys on that fear and counts on families forfeiting the food assistance, health care coverage, and other public benefits to which they are legally entitled. My office fought this exact policy once before and won, and we are leading the nation to ensure the Trump administration cannot inflict this harm on families again."
The public charge ground applies to certain immigrants seeking admission or adjustment of status. Most undocumented immigrants are ineligible for federal means-tested public benefits, although limited exceptions exist under federal and state law.
The states argue they would lose billions of dollars in federal funding if immigrants pull from programs over fears about the public charge rule.
Immigration officials under the Biden administration's 2022 public charge rule generally considered only cash assistance for income maintenance, such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) or Supplemental Security Income (SSI), along with government-funded long-term institutionalization, when determining a public charge.
The rule does not specify a fixed list of public benefits that immigration officials may consider. Instead, it states that officers may consider the receipt of any means-tested public benefits as part of a public charge determination, giving them broader discretion in evaluating applicants.
The states' and cities' lawsuits asked the courts to declare the rule unlawful and prevent DHS from using it.
"It's very hard to predict how courts will look at this issue. It is very unusual regulation though," Cato Institute Director of Immigration Studies David Bier told Fox News Digital. "I think from that standpoint the states have a good argument that we had a well defined public charge rule and the administration didn't replace it with some other well defined rule, it replaced it with nothing. So now there's just discretion to the officers to do whatever they want with the underlying statute. There's no regulation that clearly says this is what it means to be a public charge in the United States."
"The rule as it was before this new regulation was you had to be primarily dependent on certain government benefit programs. This rule removes that definition and doesn't replace it with anything. So now people and applicants, lawyers who are applying to the government on behalf of applicants, they don't know really what the law is," he continued.
The states' lawsuit argues that DHS is exceeding its authority because Congress did not approve a broader interpretation of what it means to be a public charge. The states say the new rule is arbitrary and that the agency ignored the harmful consequences of the change.
DOJ THREATENS TO CUT BILLIONS IN WELFARE FUNDING FROM STATES FOR FAILING TO REPORT ILLEGAL MIGRANTS
"Cruelty is the point," James said at a press conference on Monday. "Having a chilling effect on immigrants is the point. Letting individuals know that they are not welcome here is the point. Immigration animus is the point. The fact that you’re going to deny individuals who are sick and hungry and homeless benefits just is beyond the pale."
DHS did not respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment in time for publication.
Bier said the rule does not prohibit immigrants from receiving welfare and is only used as an officer's projection about someone's likelihood of future welfare use in the U.S., warning that it could lead to self-sufficient applicants being denied.
"Whether someone is currently using benefits or not doesn't matter under this evaluation. It's this probabilistic determination of the future that they're using in order to deny people legal status and legal permanent resident status in the United States. That's a much more difficult assessment to make. That's going to result in arbitrary denials. It's just not possible to do this type of assessment and not result in people who would be self-sufficient being denied status," he said.
This comes as President Donald Trump pursues a broader immigration crackdown that has extended beyond illegal immigration to legal immigration pathways. While Trump campaigned in 2024 on curbing illegal immigration, his administration has also imposed additional restrictions on legal immigration, including higher fees for certain work visas and new limits on how long some foreign students and journalists can remain in the U.S.
The administration has also pursued visa revocations and removal proceedings in cases involving political activity and speech, including some anti-Israel activists. Those efforts have prompted court challenges in which plaintiffs allege violations of First Amendment free speech and Fifth Amendment due process protections.
"It's very clear that this administration wants to restrict both illegal immigration, which obviously it's done at the border, and through deportations, but also legal immigration," Bier said.
Last month, the administration directed U.S. embassies and consulates around the world to postpone immigrant visa interviews while consular officers complete training on new public charge guidance, temporarily stalling applications that had reached the interview stage.
"The primary population that's going to be affected by this public charge rule are spouses of U.S. citizens and their kids who are trying to receive green cards so they can live with their American spouse or parent here in the United States. That's the overwhelming majority of the people who are going to be affected by the rule. It's going to result in many of those immigrant families being separated from their American spouse or parent," Bier said.
MAMDANI BLASTS FEDS FOR WAGING 'CAMPAIGN OF VIOLENCE AND TERROR' AGAINST NYC'S IMMIGRANTS
The public charge provision stems from the Immigration Act of 1882, when federal lawmakers sought to ensure that immigrants would be able to take care of themselves and not become a public burden.
After years of only considering cash benefits, the first Trump administration widened the categories of benefit programs that could be considered a public charge, including Medicaid, food stamps and housing vouchers. But the Biden administration in 2022 published a rule that returned to the previous guidance. The rule set to take effect this week would rescind the Biden administration's rule.
The new rule is more broad than the one from the first Trump administration, as it does not specify which safety nets should be considered and only states that DHS "will consider the receipt of any means tested public benefits."
"One of the most important things to understand is that during the first Trump administration, they had a public charge rule that was well defined that really did explain exactly what you were supposed to do in order to not be deemed a public charge or who was a public charge. This is completely different from that. It's essentially the Wild West. No one knows what's going on, no one knows what the law is now," Bier said.
WATCH: Handcuffed inmate breaks free, punches deputy in wild courthouse escape attempt
Wild courthouse video appears to show a newly sentenced Ohio man slipping out of his handcuffs, punching a bailiff and making a desperate run for the exit before deputies stopped his escape.
Timothy J. Reaggle, 20, of Wellsville, allegedly attacked two Columbiana County Sheriff's Office deputies Monday shortly after learning he would spend a year in prison in a separate case, according to local reports.
Columbiana County Sheriff Brian McLaughlin told WFMJ that both deputies suffered broken bones but have since been released from the hospital.
Video released by the sheriff's office shows a deputy escorting Reaggle down a hallway after his sentencing. Reaggle then suddenly breaks free of his handcuffs and allegedly punches the deputy before sprinting away.
ESCAPED INMATE'S BID FOR FREEDOM COMES TO CRASHING END AFTER COORDINATED MANHUNT CLOSES IN
As he runs down the hallway, Reaggle is seen crashing into another deputy, knocking him to the ground.
Reaggle then allegedly headed toward the courthouse exit, where video shows him sliding down the steps and racing toward the front doors before he was subdued with a Taser and taken into custody.
The video also shows people rushing to assist the injured deputies. One deputy was later seen lying on the floor, bleeding from the head and holding a paper towel against his face, according to WFMJ.
Reaggle had just been sentenced to one year in prison in a case dating to Feb. 14, 2025, according to WKBN.
He pleaded guilty in July to charges including aggravated burglary, aggravated assault, aggravated menacing, failure to comply and two misdemeanor counts of assault.
LOUISIANA SHERIFF CHARGED AFTER TOILET JAILBREAK LET 10 INMATES ESCAPE IN LOCKUP FIASCO
McLaughlin said Reaggle is being held at the Columbiana County Jail and will eventually be transported to state prison.
Reaggle is also awaiting potential new charges stemming from the courthouse incident.
According to WFMJ, McLaughlin said those charges are expected to include assault on a police officer and felony escape.
Sam Leavitt injury bombshell sends LSU-Ole Miss showdown into chaotic mode, as Kiffin's return looms
Just when you thought the upcoming showdown between LSU and Ole Miss could not get any crazier, the initial SEC availability report was released on Wednesday night with Sam Leavitt on it.
As the mood began to shift on Wednesday night around Oxford, with tension starting to increase around town ahead of Saturday's game, there was an audible gasp that could probably be felt from living rooms across the country.
If you were looking for additional drama between the Rebels and Tigers, it was Lane Kiffin that provided the smoke when starting quarterback Sam Leavitt was listed as 'doubtful' on the SEC's website pertaining to injuries.
ELLA LANGLEY, DISTRACTIONS AND LANE KIFFIN: PETE GOLDING CALLS OLE MISS-LSU ‘HIGH SCHOOL HOMECOMING’
After throwing for 366 yards and four touchdowns last week against Louisiana Tech, with three interceptions, everything around Leavitt seemed normal as the week began in Baton Rouge.
That changed when Leavitt was held to limited participation in Wednesday's practice because of an upper-body injury, according to sources who spoke with OutKick.
Would this be enough to keep him out of action come Saturday? That's a question being asked across college football on Wednesday night.
LSU'S LANE KIFFIN ADMITS HE LET TIGER STADIUM WEATHER DELAY DRAG ON IN ORDER TO HURT CLEMSON
During his press conference on Monday, head coach Lane Kiffin did not bring up any type of injury that Leavitt had sustained during the win over Louisiana Tech, although he wasn’t asked either. Did something transpire last weekend that we did not see during his four-touchdown game?
This could be answered on Thursday night, when Lane Kiffin is scheduled to hold his coaches show in Baton Rouge before the team leaves for the Oxford area on Friday afternoon.
For those unfamiliar, the SEC and other conferences began issuing availability reports several years ago, with the initial report coming out three days before a team is set to play.
On Thursday, there will be a second update to the report, and another on Friday, before the SEC requires a final availability report to be issued 90 minutes before the respective hits the field for warm-ups. Teams are fined if they do not adhere to conference protocol.
THE CRAIG CARTON SHOW–UNFILTERED, UNAPOLOGETIC AND UNMISSABLE. DOWNLOAD HIS DAILY PODCAST NOW!
And yes, a school can be punished for any type of gamesmanship when it comes to these reports. How seriously Sam Leavitt is injured — and whether that injury will sideline him for Saturday's highly anticipated game against Ole Miss — will remain unclear for as long as Lane Kiffin chooses to keep it under wraps.
Being designated as 'doubtful' means that the player is "unlikely to play due to significant concerns", according to the SEC handbook. If Leavitt had been designated as 'questionable', it would mean he is "uncertain to play due to injury or condition."
So, for LSU to put him near the bottom of their status monitoring, the Tigers are certainly at least concerned that he might not suit up for the game.
We will continue to monitor this situation, as the drama continues to build before this SEC showdown that has Lane Kiffin returning to Oxford as the LSU head coach.