Fox News Latest Headlines
Bipartisan lawmakers want to strip Big Tech's legal immunity that can shield social media companies
It was the mid-1990s. And the world was online.
No doomscrolling for hours through Instagram and X.
But people were plowing through GeoCities. There were Hotbot searches – before the days of Google and AI. There was even Ask Jeeves, long before Grok.
Congress was on the precipice of adopting a landmark telecommunications law which would dictate the digital landscape for decades.
When signing the Telecommunications Act of 1996 into law, former President Clinton declared how the measure would plow "a superhighway to serve both the private sector and the public interest."
RAND PAUL SAYS PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WITH YOUTUBE AND GOOGLE CHANGED HIS MIND ABOUT PLATFORM LIABILITY
Yup. Back then, some still referred to the internet as "The Information Superhighway."
The 1990s were heady. Full of optimism and possibility. The. U.S. won the Cold War. The economy boomed and was "new." The internet linked the world.
But there was a serious debate about free speech. Who should regulate what was online? Should the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) address what was proper to post, the same way it oversaw the TV and radio airwaves?
In the early ‘90s, the National Security Agency (NSA) used a cryptographic backdoor to intercept phone calls called the "clipper chip." That raised questions about government surveillance. Would that carry over to what the government "watched" when people posted content online?
Congress ultimately decided to give the internet a lot of leeway – in the interest of free speech. Telecommunications firms persuaded lawmakers to grant them a legal shelter. "Carriers" weren’t responsible if "customers" posted questionable or offensive material.
"We said that the FCC would not regulate either the content or the character of the internet," said then- Rep. Chris Cox (R-Calif.) during a 1995 floor debate. "We can’t have the government in the interest of uniformity coming up with standards to regulate this industry."
Cox was a key player behind shaping policy in that 1996 telecommunications law. So was then-Rep. and now Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).
"The internet is the shining star of the information age," proclaimed Wyden in 1996.
RULING AGAINST META AND GOOGLE COULD SET THE STAGE FOR CHANGES IN HANDLING HATE CONTENT
But the Oregon Democrat fretted about some of the filth which was already permeating the internet in its earliest renditions.
"My wife and I have seen our kids find their way into these chat rooms which make their middle age parents cringe," said Wyden.
But like Cox, Wyden feared that "censorship could really spoil much of its promise."
So they fought to keep some government regulation out of the telecommunications law. And they inoculated internet providers with something called "Section 230" of that law. Section 230 shielded telecom firms with immunity from lawsuits and criminal charges based on what customers posted on their forums.
Rep. Jay Obernolte (R-Calif.) described the logic behind Section 230 and the role of service providers:
"If you, as a public service, put up a billboard in a hall and someone puts something on the billboard that says, ‘Congressman Obernolte beats his wife,’ the owner of the billboard is not responsible for the content of that message," said the California Republican.
But lots of people and entities post all sorts of things on today’s worldwide "billboard." That’s why some lawmakers want to fundamentally alter social media as we know it by paring back Section 230.
"Section 230 is absolute liability protection, immunity for the largest social media companies in the world. It's driving people to suicide. It is ruining our society," said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), one of the most ardent advocates for changing the law. "If you buy a bad car, you can sue. Every product you buy, the company has to stand behind it. This is the only area of the law I know where the largest companies in the world have absolute legal immunity."
Graham went as far to suggest that what is available online – and how people use social media – is "as dangerous as drinking."
WHY META AND GOOGLE ARE LOSING COURT BATTLES FOR DAMAGING KIDS BY TRYING TO GET THEM ADDICTED
"It’s putting profits over people," chimed in Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.). "(Social media) should not have this absolute shield when it is destroying the lives of young people by driving toxic content at them through its algorithms."
Bipartisan lawmakers are boiling about what social media firms allow users to post without legal consequences – even though Congress is partially responsible for creating this problem three decades ago.
"As long as these companies believe they're immune from liability, they're going to tell all of us to go to hell," said Graham.
UNDER OATH, META'S ZUCKERBERG SHOWED WHY BIG TECH CAN'T POLICE ITSELF
Some lawmakers want to strip legal immunity from Big Tech for what winds up on their platforms.
"What we ought to do is start by allowing victims of child porn and other child abuse material and sexual abuse material to sue these companies," said Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.)
Lawmakers believed that enhanced opportunities for voices and speech would enable the internet to flourish. They argued that the free market would create a rich environment online. So they sidelined their instincts to overregulate.
"Government is going to get out of the way and let parents and individuals control it rather than government doing that job for us," said Cox in 1995.
But lofty hopes for a lush "marketplace of ideas" online are dashed by some of the digital slop – and addictive nature of "phones" today.
"You talk to people and they're scared to death of social media. They're scared to death of AI," said
Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.).
That’s why lawmakers demand changes to Section 230.
One lawmaker says free speech safeguards are crucial for the people deciding what users see online. But not the technology behind it. Today, the technology makes many of those decisions about what we see and hear on our phones.
"If you just have an algorithm spewing all this information.." sighed Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.). "The First Amendment doesn't protect an algorithm."
In 1996, Ron Wyden told C-SPAN during an interview that "censorship could really spoil much of (the internet’s) promise."
And in 2026, Wyden is still leery of infringing on free speech through regulation. He says the hands-off approach helped the development of Wikipedia and the social media platform Bluesky. A more aggressive posture could stifle development.
"To get rid of (Section) 230, you're going to have to roll over me," said Wyden this year.
In 2026, people are struggling to harness the technology. Trying to ween themselves off addiction to phones. Figuring out ways to keep kids from phones in order to build reading and vocabulary skills.
The digital optimism of the mid-1990s is gone. And those who were there are nostalgic for the sound of an old, staticky modem and the delightful proclamation that "you’ve got mail."
'White Lotus' meets Stephen King: Apple TV's 'Widow's Bay' is the best show of the year
Picture "White Lotus" with a horror backdrop, tangled in a mystery. That’s the best way to describe Apple TV’s new series, "Widow’s Bay."
Though Rotten Tomatoes is hardly the final arbiter of quality streaming, the show’s 96% score is justified. The characters are eccentric, devious and mysterious. Together, it all works.
Starring Matthew Rhys and Stephen Root, the series centers on an ambitious mayor, Tom Loftis (Rhys), who tries to capitalize on a surge of tourists visiting the fictional island. His goal is to turn it into the next Martha’s Vineyard.
ZERO BS. JUST DAKICH. TAKE THE DON’T @ ME PODCAST ON THE ROAD. DOWNLOAD NOW!
There’s one problem. Residents of the northeastern town insist the land is cursed.
Still, the mayor refuses to bow to superstition. But, without getting into spoilers, that becomes harder the deeper he digs into the island’s past.
No character is more convinced of "Widow’s Bay’s" haunted nature than Wyck (Root). In Wyck’s view, Loftis is putting every tourist in grave danger by inviting them to vacation in the town, especially at the local motel.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE OUTKICK ANALYSIS
Forbes captured the dynamic well:
"Tom is the classic straight man in comedy terms. He doesn’t believe the hocus pocus surrounding the island’s history. He’s irritated by the outrageous Wyck, who wants Tom to shut the town down to outsiders, sound the alarms, and batten down the hatches. The island is waking up, Wyck warns, but even when he sees evidence of the supernatural, Tom refuses to bend."
The show is funny and supernatural, with a premise that feels like something Stephen King might have dreamed up before he suffered from a severe case of Trump derangement syndrome (TDS). (King used to be really, really good.)
For background, Katie Dippold serves as showrunner. She previously wrote for "Parks and Recreation" and penned the film "The Heat." That sharp comedic sensibility is evident throughout the series.
This strong blend of comedy and horror avoids the low-quality, gag-driven humor of something like the "Scary Movie" franchise. Instead, "Widow’s Bay" delivers sharp writing and elevated dialogue. (No knock on "Scary Movie.")
"Mare of Easttown meets Schitt’s Creek in this rich, wonderful, and laugh-out-loud series, in which a put-upon mayor tries to turn a cursed New England island into a tourist hotspot," is how The Guardian described the series.
That's accurate.
We understand that there’s no shortage of streaming options, so recommendations shouldn’t come lightly. That said, "Widow’s Bay" is worth your time. It’s elite and, so far, the best show of 2026.
New episodes air every Wednesday on Apple TV.
Christiane Amanpour points to 'hemorrhaging' at CBS to warn of David Ellison's potential takeover at CNN
Veteran CNN journalist Christiane Amanpour said Wednesday she was "concerned" about billionaire media executive David Ellison's potential acquisition of CNN through Paramount Skydance's proposed takeover of the network's parent company, Warner Bros. Discovery.
"Clearly, I’m concerned — and I’m not sure how much I’m allowed to say about the corporate thing that’s underway — but I am obviously, as a person, as a journalist with a record, concerned," Amanpour said during a panel discussion at the Sir Henry Evans Investigative Journalism Summit in London.
The veteran CNN anchor pointed to changes at CBS News under Ellison’s leadership as a warning sign for CNN employees and viewers.
"I’m concerned based on what’s happened to the other things that he’s taken over already, like CBS News, right?" Amanpour said. "I mean, do I have to list what’s happening there? I mean, hemorrhaging viewers, probably hemorrhaging money, this ideological realignment of CBS and the destruction, potentially, of ‘60 Minutes.’"
Amanpour, who has worked at CNN since 1983, said she hopes the network maintains editorial independence if the deal closes.
"I would like to think that we would have the very basic, which is editorial independence," Amanpour said. "I’m hoping for that. I know many of us at CNN are incredibly — including leadership — are very, very committed to that, clearly."
JAKE TAPPER RUEFULLY REVEALS CNN WILL BE AFFECTED BY PARAMOUNT'S LOOMING TAKEOVER OF NETWORK
Paramount Skydance, led by Ellison, the son of Oracle founder Larry Ellison, is pursuing a reported $111 billion acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery, CNN’s parent company.
Ellison last year acquired CBS News and installed journalist Bari Weiss as editor-in-chief, tasking her with expanding conservative viewpoints at the network.
The leadership changes at CBS News have sparked internal controversy in recent months, including backlash over the temporary delay of a planned "60 Minutes" report focused on El Salvador’s CECOT prison, where the Trump administration deported Venezuelan migrants.
CBS News correspondent Sharyn Alfonsi alleged the segment had been "spiked" in December for political reasons, while Weiss defended the decision by saying the report lacked sufficient sourcing and required comment from a Trump administration official before airing. The report eventually aired in January.
CBS, BARI WEISS FACING MOUNTING BACKLASH FROM LIBERAL CRITICS OVER YANKING '60 MINUTES' SEGMENT
President Donald Trump has also publicly criticized CNN and previously suggested Warner Bros. Discovery should divest the network as part of any broader corporate transaction, calling its current ownership "a very dishonest group of people."
Fox News Digital reached out to David Ellison for comment, but did not immediately hear back.
Fox News' Brian Flood and Joseph A. Wulfsohn contributed to this report.
UCLA sororities hire private security amid terrifying harassment by homeless men: report
Sororities at a prominent southern California university will now have private nighttime security after facing persistent harassment from homeless people that left some young women feeling unsafe, according to a report.
The UCLA Panhellenic Association, which describes itself as the school's largest women's association, hired private security officers to guard the university's sorority row, which spans several blocks on Hilgard Avenue of the urban Los Angeles campus, according to the California Post.
Young women have reported aggressive behavior from homeless people who continuously approach them and make lewd comments, and have chided campus police for being unresponsive to their concerns.
"We had a meeting with UCPD a few weeks ago and it didn’t go well," 20-year-old student Ani Hovanesian told The Post. "They seemed unaware of the issue and not really proactive. They kept turning it back on us like ‘why aren’t you calling 911 or reporting any of this’ and it’s like ummm, we are and that’s why we’re here."
REPEAT OFFENDER TERRORIZES SORORITY WITH BREAK-IN TO STEAL UNDERWEAR, SPY ON WOMEN IN SHOWER: POLICE
Another student, 20-year-old Catherine Nichley, said she doesn't feel "completely safe."
"The weird part is that it’s usually the same three homeless men hanging around this row, typically between 40 and 60 years old, often sitting at the bus stop," she told The Post.
She described one man, dubbed "The Hilgard Screamer," who randomly yells at all hours of the day and night.
WHEN EVEN OBAMA CALLS YOUR HOMELESS SITUATION AN ‘ATROCITY,’ IT’S TIME FOR NEW SOLUTIONS
"These men stare into your soul," Nichley told the outlet. "They make lewd comments, and I’ve actually yelled back, ‘What are you looking at?’ because it feels so creepy."
Another sorority member said she rarely sees campus police in the area, and that she feels safer walking near the fraternity houses, where there is a larger police presence. She added that sometimes, homeless people sleep on the lawns of the sorority houses.
The University of California Police Department said it conducts regular patrols in the area.
"UCPD takes seriously the concerns students have raised about harassment and unsettling behavior near Hilgard Avenue. Students should feel safe where they live, study and walk near campus, and we are listening closely," the department told Fox News Digital.
"UCPD conducts regular and directed patrols in the area, including increased evening presence, and continues to work with campus partners, student leaders and chapter stakeholders to address concerns and connect students with support," the department added.
Fox News Digital reached out to UCLA Panhellenic Association.
Man ‘framed’ in ‘satanic’ murder freed after 22 years wins $24M as real killer still unknown
A Kentucky man who spent more than two decades behind bars for a murder he says was built on fabricated evidence has been awarded more than $24 million, after a jury found he was wrongfully convicted in a case once described by prosecutors as a "satanic" killing.
Jeffrey Clark was 21 years old when he and his friend Keith Hardin were convicted in the 1992 stabbing death of 19-year-old Rhonda Sue Warford, whose body was found in a field in Meade County days after she disappeared from her Louisville home.
At trial, prosecutors argued the killing was tied to a ritualistic motive, pointing to witness testimony and forensic evidence that Clark later challenged as false or misleading in court filings.
Clark spent more than 22 years in prison before new DNA testing undermined key evidence used to convict him. His conviction was vacated in 2016, and charges were formally dismissed in 2018.
"I finally feel like I am able to wake up from a 34-year nightmare," Clark said after the verdict.
In a civil lawsuit, Clark accused investigators of engaging in misconduct to secure his conviction, including fabricating statements, pressuring witnesses and withholding evidence that could have supported his innocence.
According to the complaint, detectives attributed statements to Hardin suggesting the killing was part of a ritual, despite no independent evidence to support that claim.
The lawsuit also alleges authorities relied on testimony from a jailhouse informant who received benefits in exchange for cooperating, while failing to disclose information that could have undermined his credibility.
FOLLOW THE FOX TRUE CRIME TEAM ON X
An ex-girlfriend’s testimony portraying Clark as involved in satanic practices was also called into question, with the lawsuit alleging her statements conflicted with earlier accounts.
Investigators also failed to pursue another potential suspect who had allegedly confessed to the killing, according to the complaint.
LOUISIANA DEATH ROW INMATE FREED AFTER NEARLY 30 YEARS AS OVERTURNED CONVICTION UPENDS CASE
The case later drew attention from the Innocence Project, which said advances in DNA testing ultimately discredited the prosecution’s core forensic evidence.
Testing showed that hair presented at trial as consistent with Hardin did not belong to him, Clark or the victim. Additional testing confirmed that blood found on a handkerchief, which prosecutors had tied to alleged ritual activity, belonged to Hardin, consistent with his account at trial.
The organization also pointed to evidence that a jailhouse informant attempted to coordinate false testimony and that investigators did not follow up on another potential suspect.
Clark’s legal team has also highlighted the role of the lead detective in the case, who was later convicted in an unrelated matter involving perjury and evidence tampering, further raising questions about the original investigation.
LISTEN TO THE NEW 'CRIME & JUSTICE WITH DONNA ROTUNNO' PODCAST
The lawsuit further alleges investigators adjusted the timeline of Warford’s death to fit their theory of the case. Authorities initially believed the killing occurred days after she disappeared, when Clark and Hardin had alibis, but later focused on an earlier timeframe that weakened those alibis, according to the complaint.
A jury ultimately found in Clark’s favor, awarding him $24.35 million in compensatory damages along with additional punitive damages.
MARTHA MOXLEY CASE: KENNEDY COUSIN POINTS TO ‘BOLD-FACED LIES,’ MISSING EVIDENCE IN MURDER PROBE
Meade County officials said the verdict is under review.
"A verdict was rendered … and it is under evaluation as to our next course of action," the county said in a statement, adding it has no further comment pending legal review.
Despite Clark’s exoneration and the multimillion-dollar award, Warford’s killing remains unsolved, and no one has been convicted in the case.
Fox News Digital has reached out to the Kentucky Attorney General’s Office for comment.
New video shows Mike Vrabel and Dianna Russini on private boating trip during her pregnancy
TMZ Sports obtained documents this week showing that New England Patriots coach Mike Vrabel and former NFL reporter Dianna Russini signed a waiver for a private boating trip during her pregnancy in 2021. The report adds that Vrabel and Russini were the only two people on board for the two-to-three-hour excursion.
On Thursday, the outlet obtained video and photos of the two on a dock in Putnam County, TN.
See TMZ Sports' video below:
ARE WE SURE MIKE VRABEL WILL SURVIVE RUSSINI SCANDAL AND COACH PATRIOTS THIS SEASON?
According to the report, Russini gave birth to her first child with her husband, Kevin, later that summer. She was about six to seven months pregnant during the boating trip with Vrabel.
We cannot say for certain why Russini would be on a private boat with another man, a married man, while that close to giving birth to a child with her husband. But it raises obvious questions.
"We’re also told staffers at the company were specifically asked not to share photos from the outing because Coach Vrabel wanted to enjoy a private weekend," the report states.
Vrabel, however, did pose for a photo with employees. Russini declined.
ZERO BS. JUST DAKICH. TAKE THE DON’T @ ME PODCAST ON THE ROAD. DOWNLOAD NOW!
For a full recap, photos earlier this month showed Russini and Vrabel hugging and holding hands at a private "adults-only" resort in Arizona. Both downplayed the gathering as random and platonic.
However, additional photos have since emerged of the two gambling at a casino in 2024 and appearing to kiss at a bar in 2020.
Russini ultimately resigned from The Athletic in April following an internal investigation into her conduct related to the photos. Vrabel missed the third day of the NFL Draft for what was described as "counseling."
Vrabel is still expected to coach the Patriots this season, though the scandal continues to intensify and create a distraction for his team. At this point, there is an argument that the team would be better off if he took a leave of absence.
Not to mention, new photos suggesting an inappropriate relationship between the coach and a reporter seem to surface at least once a week.
As OutKick founder Clay Travis joked in response to the latest video, it feels like this story will never end.
On Wednesday, OutKick reached out to Russini personally and to Vrabel’s agent for comment on documents related to the alleged boating trip. Neither responded.
Harris backs releasing DNC's 2024 election autopsy despite leadership burying report
Former Vice President Kamala Harris supports the idea of releasing the Democratic National Committee's (DNC) 2024 election report despite party leadership refusing to release it.
"As former Vice President Kamala Harris considers another run for president, she is also signaling that she has no problem with a public airing of what went wrong last time — telling donors she believes the Democratic National Committee should release its buried autopsy of her failed 2024 campaign, according to a person who has heard the conversations," NBC News first reported on Thursday.
The report came after DNC Chair Ken Martin repeatedly dodged requests from within his own political party to release the report on where Democrats failed in the last presidential election.
KAMALA HARRIS TEASES SHE 'MIGHT' RUN FOR PRESIDENT AGAIN IN 2028
NBC News also clarified that Harris has not discussed her opinion with Martin despite discussing the report with donors.
"While she indicated to donors that she had no issue with releasing it, Harris has not discussed the postmortem with DNC Chairman Ken Martin and did not know about his decision to keep it under wraps until it happened, this person said," NBC reported.
Fox News Digital later confirmed the report with a source familiar with the conversation.
The autopsy, a 200-page analysis conducted from over 300 interviews across 50 states, was originally ordered by Martin in February 2025, shortly after he became DNC chair. However, by December, Martin announced that he had decided against making the results of the report public.
EX-DNC CHAIR COMPLAINS DEMOCRATS EXPECTED HIM TO 'JUST RUBBER-STAMP' PLANS DURING 2024 CAMPAIGN
This decision came after it was reported by The New York Times in July that the autopsy would not look at any strategic decisions made by the Democratic presidential campaign, such as whether then-President Joe Biden should have stayed in the race or dropped out sooner, and if Harris was the best person to run in his place.
In a recent interview on "Pod Save America," Martin downplayed the report's findings and insisted that the Democratic Party had already learned key "lessons."
POLLSTER NATE SILVER SHOCKED BY DEMOCRATIC UNWILLINGNESS TO 'ADMIT THEY F----- UP' IN 2024
"The reality is, is that there's no smoking gun here. And as much as people would like to keep focusing in on those pieces, what they're ignoring is that we're sharing out the lessons. We have been incorporating those, and we have actually been putting those lessons into action, which I'm most proud of," Martin said.
In the same article, NBC News reported that Harris has not yet decided whether to run for president again in 2028, though she is reaching out to colleagues like MS NOW host Rev. Al Sharpton about whether she should.
Pirro says US has ‘crossed the Rubicon’ as people travel to DC for political violence
Jeanine Pirro warned Thursday on "Fox & Friends" that the United States has "crossed the Rubicon" as she described what she said were increasing instances of people traveling to Washington, D.C., to engage in politically motivated violence.
Pirro, the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, said authorities were seeing "more and more" people come to the nation’s capital with the intent of committing such crimes.
"We’ve crossed the Rubicon because, for some reason, they think that they are allowed to violate the law, kill individuals if it satisfies what they think is their political moral compass," Pirro said.
JEANINE PIRRO WARNS RHETORIC FUELING VIOLENCE AFTER LATEST TRUMP ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT
Pirro referenced a shooting involving a Secret Service officer near the Washington Monument and said that political violence in the district is becoming more common.
"People, for some reason, think they can come here and that they can commit these acts," Pirro said. "That they'll get attention for — to exercise their right to complain about what they think is unfair politics."
"It’s not unusual in these cases to keep the grand jury and to continue the investigation," Pirro said. "This individual can be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, as will anyone who comes to the district to try to exercise some kind of violence to focus on their political beliefs."
GRAND JURIES IN WASHINGTON, DC DECLINE TO INDICT TWO ACCUSED OF THREATENING TO KILL TRUMP
Pirro also discussed an investigation into crime reporting practices within the Metropolitan Police Department, saying her office began investigating in August 2025 and reviewed more than 6,000 police reports.
"What we found was that there was an intentional downgrading of crime to make it look as though crimes are not as serious as they were," she said.
"They took assault with a dangerous weapon and turned it into reckless endangerment," Pirro continued. "They took burglary and turned it into unlawful entry. They took theft of property and turned it into lost property."
She said accurate crime statistics are non-negotiable because they affect public safety decisions and resource allocation.
"It involves the allocation of resources," Pirro said. "It involves making sure that victims are protected to the full extent of the law."
"President Trump, when he decided to make D.C. safe and beautiful, he came in, put the full resources that we needed to make this district safe," she added.
DOJ INVESTIGATING POSSIBLE DC CRIME DATA MANIPULATION AMID TRUMP'S CRACKDOWN ON VIOLENCE
CLICK HERE FOR MORE COVERAGE OF MEDIA AND CULTURE
The comments came as Pirro discussed the prosecution of Cole Allen, who authorities arrested in connection with the alleged assassination attempt on President Donald Trump at the White House Correspondents' Association Dinner.
She said prosecutors recently added a charge related to the alleged assault of a Secret Service officer.
"Cole Allen was very focused, very motivated, armed to the teeth," Pirro said. "He had guns, ammunition, knives, daggers, holsters, wires, cutters as well as needle-nose pliers."
She said investigators believe Allen intended to assassinate the President of the United States and said authorities are continuing to review his social media activity and possible contacts.
"He hated the President of the United States. He hated the administration," Pirro said. "Whatever that motivation might be, the truth is his intent is the only issue that I’m concerned about."
Pirro also said additional charges could still be filed in the Allen case as prosecutors continue presenting evidence to a grand jury.
Haitian illegal immigrant who fatally beat Florida store clerk with hammer will face the death penalty
A man who entered the U.S. illegally from Haiti and murdered a Fort Myers store clerk will face the death penalty, prosecutors said.
State Attorney Amira Fox announced Thursday that a Lee County grand jury returned an indictment against Rolbert Joachin, 40, in connection with the April 2 killing of Nilufa Easmın, a 51-year-old immigrant from Bangladesh, at a gas station in Fort Myers, Florida.
According to prosecutors, Joachin is accused of attacking the victim outside a gas station, striking her repeatedly in the head with a hammer and killing her.
DAYLIGHT HAMMER ATTACK SUSPECT IS ILLEGAL ALIEN RELEASED UNDER BIDEN POLICIES: DHS
Surveillance video captured the assault, which showed the victim being repeatedly struck in the head with a hammer after confronting the suspect for smashing her car window. Authorities described the video as "extremely brutal and incredibly violent."
Investigators say Joachin fled the scene following the attack, prompting a citywide search before Fort Myers police located and arrested him.
"This crime was so violent, so extreme, so unwarranted. It is something that once seen, is never to be forgotten. I want to thank the Lee County Grand Jury who watched and reviewed the gruesome evidence in this case and gave their full attention. I know it was not easy. This defendant entered the United States illegally and brutally ended the life of a mother simply at her job, working to provide for her family," State Attorney Fox said.
DA TO SEEK DEATH PENALTY AGAINST ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS ACCUSED IN NUNGARAY MURDER CASE
"He will be punished to the fullest extent of the law. We will seek the death penalty in this case," Fox said.
President Donald Trump condemned the violent video, and blasted the Biden administration for releasing the suspect in 2022.
"An Illegal Alien Criminal from Haiti, who was released into our Country by the WORST President in History, Crooked Joe Biden, and the Radical Democrats in Congress, just beat an innocent woman to death with a hammer at a gas station in Florida," Trump wrote in a Truth Social post. "The video of her brutal slaying is one of the most vicious things you will ever see.
BIDEN ADMIN MARKED ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT, ALLEGED MURDERER AS 'NON-ENFORCEMENT PRIORITY,' DHS REVEALS
"This one killing should be enough for these Radical Judges to STOP impeding my Administration’s Immigration Policies, and allow us to END THIS SCAM ONCE AND FOR ALL," he added.
WATCH:
Joachim first entered the U.S. in August 2022, and was released into the country under former President Joe Biden, according to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
A federal judge later issued a final order of removal against Joachim, but he was granted Temporary Protected Status, which Trump has described as "a massively abused and fraudulent program." He has also blamed what he called "radical liberal district court judges" for blocking efforts by his administration to end it.
While a federal judge issued a final order of removal against him, Joachim was reportedly granted Temporary Protected Status, a program Trump called "massively abused and fraudulent" and difficult to eliminate due to Democratic support.
The suspect then remained in the country after his status expired in 2024.
Fox News' Alexandra Koch and Bill Melugin contributed to this report.
FIRST ON FOX: Top Republicans take abortion pill fight to Supreme Court, citing coercion and safety risks
FIRST ON FOX: More than 100 Republican lawmakers are urging the Supreme Court to reinstate abortion pill restrictions, warning current policy allowing mifepristone to be mailed without in-person oversight has led to cases of women being coerced — and in some instances allegedly forced — to take the drug.
The amicus brief, led by Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., backs Louisiana’s legal fight to restore an in-person dispensing requirement for the drug.
At the center of the filing are allegations that loosened federal rules have enabled coercion, with lawmakers arguing the Biden-era policy "increases the risk of coercion," referring to changes to the FDA’s Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) that removed the in-person requirement.
The brief points to several alleged cases in which abortion pills were obtained online or administered without a woman’s consent, including plaintiff Rosalie Markezich, who says her boyfriend ordered mifepristone from a California doctor and coerced her into taking it.
ABORTION PILL MIFEPRISTONE SPARKS NEW PRO-LIFE DEBATE AS SOME DOCTORS STRESS SAFETY CONCERNS
"Had she visited a doctor in person, her boyfriend would never have been able to obtain the drugs he made [her] take," the brief says.
Lawmakers also cite additional reported incidents, including a case in which a Louisiana mother allegedly obtained abortion pills online for her teenage daughter, leading to a medical emergency, as well as another case involving a man accused of administering the drugs to a pregnant woman without her knowledge.
Lawmakers argue such cases are more likely under a system that allows abortion pills to be prescribed online and shipped without face-to-face medical screening.
‘ABORTION PILL’ FOUND TO HAVE ‘SEVERE ADVERSE EFFECTS’ FOR 1 IN 10 WOMEN, STUDY FINDS
They say the policy not only weakens safeguards but puts women at risk while removing protections designed to prevent abuse.
Cassidy said those safeguards should be restored immediately.
"Chemical abortion drugs kill innocent children and put mothers’ lives at risk," Cassidy said. "Safeguards protecting against coercion, such as the in-person dispensing requirement, must be reinstated immediately. The Fifth Circuit got this right, and I urge the Supreme Court to affirm that decision."
ABORTION PILL FIGHT HEADS TO SUPREME COURT AS MANUFACTURER WARNS OF ‘CHAOS’ AFTER RULING
The filing comes after the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with Louisiana and reinstated the in-person dispensing requirement while litigation continues.
Lawmakers argue the FDA "overstepped its authority" by allowing abortion drugs to be distributed through the mail, saying the policy conflicts with the Comstock Act, which prohibits mailing items "designed, adapted, or intended for producing abortion."
Smith also argued the drug poses serious risks, citing claims that more than one in 10 women experience complications such as infection or hemorrhaging.
They also contend the agency relied on insufficient safety data when it removed the in-person requirement, weakening adverse-event reporting standards and then using limited data to justify expanded access.
The brief further argues that eliminating in-person visits prevents doctors from screening for serious medical conditions, including ectopic pregnancies, and makes it more difficult to detect coercion or abuse.
The legal fight intensified over the weekend when mifepristone manufacturers Danco Laboratories and GenBioPro filed emergency appeals to the Supreme Court, warning the lower court ruling is already causing "immediate confusion and upheaval" across the country.
Danco argued the decision is disrupting access and forcing providers, pharmacies and patients to navigate rapidly changing rules, while GenBioPro said the order effectively eliminates mail-order access and upends a system relied on for years.
The companies are asking the justices to block the ruling while litigation continues, setting up a high-stakes legal battle that could reshape how the abortion drug is distributed nationwide.
The Supreme Court is now weighing emergency requests from the manufacturers, which are seeking to pause the 5th Circuit’s order while the case proceeds.
The outcome could reshape access to abortion pills nationwide, determining whether they remain widely available by mail or are once again restricted to in-person medical oversight.
"There are legitimate concerns about these drugs putting women and girls at significant risk," said Leader Thune. "I urge the Supreme Court to reinstate the safety guardrails that were in place before the Biden administration while the Department of Health and Human Services reviews these drugs."