Fox News Latest Headlines
California realtor accused of spying for China caught at LAX and more top headlines
1. California realtor accused of spying for China caught at LAX
2. Yemeni government counters Iran-backed Houthis
3. OpenAI CEO says 'world should accept some bad things' for AI
SMALL TOWN SHOCK — Two killed, 35 injured after gunfire erupts at Georgia homecoming party. Continue reading …
LEGAL PRESSURE — Letitia James faces recusal call in Cornell student's alleged sexual assault probe. Continue reading …
THREAT RETREAT — Pentagon announces pivotal move following suspected Iran-linked terror plot. Continue reading …
SPY GAMES — Realtor accused of spying for China caught at LAX trying to leave US. Continue reading …
SWITCHING GEARS — Musk says 'no more AI' as SpaceX arm gets new name following Trump order. Continue reading …
--
PERSUASION PROBLEM — AI is supercharging political ad wars. But viral doesn’t mean victorious. Continue reading …
ON THE SPOT — Dem senators squirm when asked if they’d back Kamala Harris for president in 2028. Continue reading …
CASH & CAUTION — Tech powerhouse’s regulatory push bears similarities to a notorious Washington strategy. Continue reading …
FRIENDLY FIRE — Cruz-Vance rivalry heats up as Texas senator suggests VP is 'feeling insecure'. Continue reading …
BITING THE HAND — Rock icon's unwritten song 'Fat People With Guns' takes aim at America. Continue reading …
ENCORE OUTRAGE — Hayley Williams drops expletive-laced political rant at sold-out concert. Continue reading …
NO LABELS NEEDED — Hollywood actor Luke Evans rejects idea that sexuality should dictate politics. Continue reading …
CURIOSITY DRIVEN — New book on Elon Musk examines the billionaire’s mind, motivation and making life multi-planetary. Continue reading …
ENES KANTER FREEDOM — I know the price of silence and won't stop defending women's sports. Continue reading …
KATE MONROE — America must defend our digital infrastructure, here and overseas. Continue reading …
--
READING THE SIGNS — Tyreek Hill posts message after Chiefs receivers go down and fans are buzzing. Continue reading …
TALK IT OUT — Researchers reveal surprising vocal warning sign tied to cognitive decline. Continue reading …
THAT'S BASEBALL — Roof rule rocks MLB playoffs as one of the wildest calls in years stands. Continue reading …
AMERICAN CULTURE QUIZ — Test yourself on protein power and country chart-toppers. Take the quiz here …
Tune in to learn how AI-powered voice and image cloning are fueling increasingly sophisticated scams and costing Americans billions. Check it out ...
What's it looking like in your neighborhood? Continue reading…
Fox News Entertainment (FOX411)
Thank you for making us your first choice in the morning! We'll see you in your inbox first thing Tuesday.
After 47 years of confronting Iran, does America have a strategy for ending this war?
President Donald Trump stood before the United Nations and presented Iran with a choice: reach an agreement that would allow the country to rebuild or face the destruction of the Islamic Republic. The following day, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian rejected surrender while leaving the door open to negotiations.
More than seven months into the war, Washington still has not answered the question that has dogged American policy since 1979: What political outcome is America trying to achieve, and how will military force bring it about?
I was an Army officer serving in West Germany when Iranian militants seized our embassy in Tehran on Nov. 4, 1979. Fifty-two Americans endured 444 days of captivity. That crisis began a hostile relationship that has outlasted eight American presidents.
TRUMP KEEPS NEGOTIATING WHILE IRAN PLAYS THE LONG GAME AMERICA KEEPS MISSING
In April 1988, after USS Samuel B. Roberts struck an Iranian mine, President Ronald Reagan authorized Operation Praying Mantis. In a single day, American forces sank two Iranian ships and wrecked two surveillance platforms. Yet the confrontation continued.
The 2015 nuclear agreement sought to constrain Tehran through negotiated restrictions and international inspections. Trump withdrew from that agreement in 2018 and restored economic sanctions. Neither approach settled the wider confrontation.
TRUMP’S IRAN WAR NOW COMES DOWN TO ONE BRUTAL QUESTION: WHAT COMES NEXT?
Trump went much further. American strikes in June 2025 hit three key nuclear facilities. Then, on Feb. 28, 2026, the United States and Israel launched Operation Epic Fury, beginning the current war. Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei died on the first day.
Seven months later, Iran has sustained extensive military losses, as Trump emphasized in his Sept. 22 U.N. address. But damaging Iran’s forces is not the same as achieving the campaign’s political objectives.
TRUMP HAS 3 CHOICES TO DEFINE VICTORY IF HE WANTS TO BEAT IRAN. NONE OF THEM ARE EASY
As a retired Army officer and former Pentagon strategist, I spent much of my career on the relationship between military operations and national objectives. Destroying an adversary’s forces is a military result. Victory is the political outcome those operations were meant to produce.
Nowhere does that distinction matter more than in Iran.
THREE CHOICES NOW DEFINE TRUMP'S IRAN WAR AND ALL OF THEM HAVE A COST
What is the Trump administration trying to accomplish? Secretary of War Pete Hegseth put it bluntly in March: "no nukes, no navy, and a complete dismantling of their missile program and defense industrial base." Reopening the Strait of Hormuz joined the list later. The administration has never explicitly declared regime change a goal, yet the president now speaks of destroying the Islamic Republic.
Those are military tasks, not a political end state, and even the nuclear goal has wavered. In April, Trump said of Iran’s buried uranium, "I don’t care about that." Two weeks later he promised, "We’re going to take it."
IRAN NUCLEAR DEAL HINGES ON IAEA ACCESS TO LONG-BLOCKED ATOMIC WEAPON SITES, EXPERTS SAY
That matters because America has lost its best window into Iran’s program. Until Feb. 28, International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors were still working inside Iran, and the agency was tracking activity at the Isfahan tunnels where Tehran stored much of its enriched uranium. Iran had barred inspectors from the sites bombed in June 2025, but the agency still had eyes in the country. Since the war began, inspectors have been unable to visit any nuclear facility except the Bushehr power plant.
Before the June 2025 strikes, the agency estimated Iran held 440.9 kilograms (972 pounds) of uranium enriched to 60%, enough for about 10 weapons if refined further. The IAEA cannot verify where that material is today. On September 9, the agency’s board referred Iran to the U.N. Security Council. Without inspectors, no one can confirm what the bombing achieved.
AFTER 6 MONTHS OF WAR, US MUST PREPARE FOR A FUTURE AFTER IRAN’S GOVERNMENT FALLS
Beyond the bomb, the political objective is murkier. Is Washington trying to change how the regime behaves, or to end the regime itself? Those are different wars.
Changing a government’s conduct requires defined concessions and a means of verifying them. Replacing a government requires knowing who governs afterward. Iraq taught that lesson: defeating Saddam Hussein’s military proved far easier than establishing a durable political order.
IRAN REGIME CHANGE TALK RESURFACES AS TRUMP SAYS TEHRAN 'WANTS TO MEET' AMID US STRIKES
The Islamic Republic remains in power. Reuters reported in April that the Revolutionary Guards had tightened their grip on military strategy and major political decisions. The war has strengthened the institution most committed to continuing it.
Time favors Tehran. Iran’s leadership is prepared for a prolonged confrontation, while American presidents depend on public support, and that support is thin.
IRAN ‘MISCALCULATING’ BY BETTING ON MIDTERMS AFTER 3-HOUR TALKS, TRUMP OFFICIALS WARN
Americans who lived through the Cold War needed no briefing on the Soviet threat. Thousands of nuclear warheads were aimed at our cities. Iran’s threat is harder to see. The administration first cited an imminent danger, then shifted its rationale more than once.
A June Reuters/Ipsos survey found that only 24% of Americans considered the war worth its costs. In July, most said Trump had not clearly explained its objectives.
What Americans do understand is the price at the pump. Gasoline topped $4 a gallon in April for the first time since 2022, and AAA’s national average is about $4.43 today. The Strait of Hormuz helps explain why. Oil flows through the strait fell from 21.6 million barrels per day late last year to 4.9 million this spring. Crude shipments have since rebounded to near prewar levels, but shipments of refined fuels such as gasoline and diesel remain far below their prewar volume, helping keep fuel prices elevated.
Trump himself told the U.N. he believes Iran is waiting for the November midterm results before making a deal. On Sept. 29, the Revolutionary Guards issued a 25-page open letter urging American voters to reject Trump’s policies. Tehran is working the American home front.
Renewed negotiations have exposed the gaps. Tehran has proposed reopening Hormuz in exchange for relief from sanctions and the naval blockade, while Washington continues to demand restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program. Previous ceasefire arrangements have failed to hold. Any durable settlement will depend on verification, which brings the inspectors back to the center.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION
Nearly half a century after the hostage crisis, America’s military capabilities have changed beyond recognition. The strategic question has not. Military success can be measured in destroyed targets. A durable political settlement requires a different accounting.
The Cold War generation sustained a long and costly struggle because presidents explained the stakes in plain terms. Trump owes Americans the same plain talk now. He must tell them what victory in Iran looks like, and why it is worth $4+ gasoline.
7 everyday mistakes could be quietly damaging your vision, eye doctor warns
As Americans live longer, experts say everyday habits may be taking a toll on eye health earlier than expected.
Dr. Douglas Lazzaro, professor of ophthalmology at NYU Langone Health, warned that several everyday habits may be silently affecting eye health.
Age-related eye conditions include glaucoma, which damages the optic nerve, and cataracts, a clouding of the eye’s lens that can block light and blur vision.
POPULAR ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION DRUG LINKED TO EYE DISEASE THAT CAN CAUSE IRREVERSIBLE VISION LOSS
While genetics and aging remain major drivers of many eye diseases, avoiding the following common mistakes may help slow their progression and protect vision, Lazzaro told Fox News Digital.
While exposure to sunlight is beneficial for overall metabolic health and longevity, failing to protect the eyes from the sun may lead to accelerated damage.
Lazzaro pointed to research suggesting that long-term ultraviolet exposure may contribute to macular degeneration and the progression of cataracts.
POPULAR WEIGHT-LOSS DRUGS FACE NUMEROUS LAWSUITS OVER RARE 'EYE STROKE' LINKED TO VISION LOSS
In the doctor's own practice, cataracts are appearing five to 10 years earlier than they did three decades ago, which he believes may be linked to ultraviolet light exposure.
He recommends wearing sunglasses in bright, sunny conditions to help protect the eyes, including the lens and retina.
Reading in poor lighting can increase eye strain and make it harder to focus, particularly with age, according to Lazzaro.
"As we get older, our eyes have more difficulty seeing under certain lighting conditions," he told Fox News Digital, noting that older adults may have more difficulty adjusting to darker environments.
"If you're going be reading and it's not a bright, sunny day outside or you're not inside with bright lights, you should increase the lighting," he recommended.
Research suggests that a nutritious diet may protect eye health by reducing the risk of diabetes and cardiovascular disease, both of which can affect vision.
"Diet is important," Lazzaro said. "There's certainly a lot of known data about poor diets [contributing] to poor cardiovascular health, and that same thing can apply with the eye."
DIET CHANGE TIED TO ‘YOUNGER’ BIOLOGICAL AGE IN OLDER ADULTS AFTER 4 WEEKS
High cholesterol and high blood pressure can worsen diabetic eye disease, even when patients may not realize those conditions are affecting their vision, according to the doctor.
Researchers are also exploring whether gut health may influence retinal health, although that connection is still emerging.
Another condition that becomes increasingly common with age is dry eye, in which a lack of tear production and oil secretion causes red, itchy, irritated eyes.
This condition can be exacerbated by lifestyle factors like dehydration, Lazzaro noted.
Staying hydrated helps keep the cornea properly moisturized, he said. "We always tell our patients, particularly in the summer, if they're going out on a hot day … make sure to hydrate, because not only will it dry out the body … but it can dry out your corneas."
TEST YOURSELF WITH OUR LATEST LIFESTYLE QUIZ
Getting adequate sleep helps support overall health, and there’s "good evidence" that patients who don’t sleep well, particularly those with sleep apnea, may experience increased eye pressure, according to Lazzaro.
People with sleep apnea also appear to face higher rates of glaucoma and certain vascular eye conditions, similar to their increased cardiovascular risk, the doctor said. "They also have an increased incidence of vascular phenomena in the eye … People who don't sleep well have fluctuations in their circulation at night."
Eye rubbing is considered a risk factor for keratoconus, a progressive eye disease where the cornea begins to dome and bulge out in a cone shape, although experts' opinions differ on whether it can directly cause the disease, according to Lazzaro.
Patients with keratoconus often rub their eyes frequently, he noted, and repeated rubbing can potentially change the shape of the cornea — one reason he "strongly" advises against the habit.
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR HEALTH NEWSLETTER
Because glaucoma often develops without symptoms, a comprehensive eye exam is frequently the only way to detect it early, Lazzaro said.
Glaucoma is known as a "silent disease" that can lead to blindness, the doctor noted.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE HEALTH STORIES
"Its nickname is 'the silent thief of sight,'" he said. "Sometimes the only way you know you have glaucoma is by going to the ophthalmologist. It’s a disease that we see with increasing frequency as we get older."
Lazzaro recommends that adults get annual eye exams, rather than waiting until age-related vision changes begin. Presbyopia — the gradual loss of the ability to focus on nearby objects — commonly develops in middle age and often leads to the need for reading glasses.
"Patients will come in at some point, usually between 40 and 50, and say they can't see up-close anymore; it happened overnight," he said.
Annual visits should also include a scan for skin cancer and eyelid tumors, which occur more frequently with age, the doctor advised.
Sun exposure may contribute not only to cataracts and macular degeneration, but also to cancers of the eyelid, Lazzaro said. "Most of them can be removed locally without a big problem if diagnosed early," he added.
WATCH: GOP senators skeptical of Bill Gates’ ‘fearmongering’ AI warning as Dems sound alarm
Senators on Capitol Hill were split on Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates’ warning that artificial intelligence (AI) could lead to "a billion deaths" amid growing controversy over the technology’s direction and rapid growth.
Gates is one of several industry giants who have sounded the alarm on AI’s advancements, including Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman. President Donald Trump has pushed back on calls to slow down AI development, arguing a rollback could give an advantage to competitors in the AI race like China.
Gates made the claim on NBC’s "Meet the Press" last week when he was asked whether AI could wipe out humanity — as some in the industry have warned is a possibility that could happen within a decade.
GOP LAWMAKERS SMELL SOMETHING ELSE BEHIND BIG TECH'S AI DOOMSDAY WARNINGS: 'SOMETHING ELSE GOING ON'
"I think that's incredibly irresponsible," Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, told Fox News Digital.
"That's not as dire as some of the AI officials who have suggested that there was a 10 percent chance of wiping out all of humanity," Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, said. "This is something we have to take very seriously."
"What worries me about that prediction is that the Republicans who are in control of the House and the Senate say ‘everybody go home and let AI do whatever they want to do,’" Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., said.
Cornyn claimed that Gates’ warning risks fueling calls for regulations that could ultimately benefit the biggest players in the AI industry while crowding out smaller competitors.
"I mean, he's fearmongering," Cornyn said. "And I worry that it's in pursuit of what's sometimes called regulatory capture, that the government and the public will demand regulation while a handful of prime AI companies are in control and crowd out any competitors."
WATCH: AI SAFETY SCARE SPARKS CAP HILL FIGHT OVER GUARDRAILS: 'CHINA'S GOING TO EAT OUR LUNCH'
King, however, argued the competition between tech companies gives reason why the government should implement safeguards.
"The president seems to think, well, industry will regulate itself. The government shouldn't be involved," King said. "The problem with that is that these companies are engaged in an intense competition."
He claimed that companies could then be reluctant to voluntarily slow development or impose their own safeguards if doing so risks allowing competitors to pull ahead in the industry.
"They're gonna be forced to make a decision: Should we slow down and put in our own safeguards?" King explained. "But if we do, our competitor across the street won't and [will] get ahead of us, or China will get ahead of us."
Republican senators also warned about another concern surrounding the rapid development of AI: Could China pull ahead?
BEYOND KILLER ROBOTS: CHINA'S REAL AI THREAT TO AMERICA IS ALREADY HERE, EXPERTS WARN
"Look, I think we need to use common sense," Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D., said. "So we want to develop it. Obviously, we need to stay ahead of adversaries like China, but we need to do it safely. "
"I think the administration is generally on the right track in not trying to put a heavy hand on this technology, which is going to be fundamental to our economy and our national security," Cornyn said.
The conversations around AI ramped up this month, shortly before both the House and Senate went on recess leading up to the midterm elections. Many Democrats called for Congress to stay in session to address the concerns around AI and work to get legislation that enacts safeguards.
"We have a responsibility, but not the Republicans," Warren said. "They say ‘send everybody home,’ because Donald Trump doesn't want to do anything about AI."
WWE great Diamond Dallas Page 'would love to see' LA Knight capture title vs Roman Reigns at Money in the Bank
LA Knight has the best opportunity he has ever had at capturing a WWE championship.
He will go one-on-one with Roman Reigns for the World Heavyweight Championship at Money in the Bank on Saturday in New Orleans. Knight’s wave of popularity has still been extremely high since he caught on with the WWE Universe in 2023-24. And even through detours that included a U.S. title run, feuds with The Vision and Reigns’ Bloodline stablemates, he’s continued to be one of the wrestlers fans continually gravitate toward.
Knight got his first crack at a world title at Crown Jewel in 2023. He was supposed to be one-on-one with Reigns before Jimmy Uso interfered and cost him the title. He was then thrust into a fatal four-way match for the Undisputed WWE Championship at Royal Rumble in 2024 against Reigns, AJ Styles and Randy Orton. But Reigns would remain supreme.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE OUTKICK PRO WRESTLING COVERAGE
This time, it’s a little different. Reigns, as Knight has pointed out, hasn’t had The Bloodline in his corner as they’ve been preoccupied with Jacob Fatu’s dominance and the 946 faction. It might truly be a one-on-one bout between the two WWE superstars.
Who wins is anyone’s guess. But WWE Hall of Famer Diamond Dallas Page told OutKick Dropkick he’s backing Knight in the premium live event.
"I would love to see that. I would love to see that … LA and I have been, because of our careers, even though he started wrestling in his 20s, our career took off in our 40s and I would love to see that. Do I believe it's going to happen? I'm going to say yes because I want it to be out in the universe for LA," Page said in a recent interview, on behalf of Gambling.com, the guide to the best online sportsbooks.
Page said if Reigns lost the match it wouldn’t hurt him. He compared it to his own win over Randy Savage at World Championship Wrestling’s Spring Stampede in 1997.
"And Roman though, Roman’s Hulk. Roman's Rock, Roman’s Cena, he is, he's that guy. I mean, he's that guy if he did freaking put LA Knight over, it wouldn’t hurt him at all," he said. "Matter of fact, he Randy Savage’d him, which is what Randy did for me when he reached down and you tell me in 1997, April 6th, the day after my 41st birthday, that anybody thinks I'm going to beat Randy Savage. No one, no one. But Randy did. And Randy knew this guy has worked so hard, the people love him. I'm gonna really make him blast off.
"And I'll tell you, when I beat Randy Savage, it was more dramatic than even being the world champion. People acted different to me. I mean, the fans, everybody. It was like I stepped into a different dimension. And that's what Roman would be doing if LA night does go over. So, I'm putting that out in the universe and I would love to see it because I think he deserves it so much."
Page shared that he and Knight have had talks about getting to the pinnacle of professional wrestling. He likened it to his own conversations with Cody Rhodes when the "American Nightmare" was pursuing Reigns’ gold.
Rhodes failed to win it at WrestleMania 39 but came all the way back through a gauntlet of challengers to earn the title shot again and win it at WrestleMania 40.
THE CRAIG CARTON SHOW–UNFILTERED, UNAPOLOGETIC AND UNMISSABLE. DOWNLOAD HIS DAILY PODCAST NOW!
"Me and him have had talks, you know, and just, even getting there, you know, you don't have to win it, but it's gonna, if he doesn't, it might even get him over more," Page explained to OutKick Dropkick. "It’s kind of like with Cody and right over here at this table right here, when it's him and Roman, and he has been, you know, led to believe that it's your time. But then you start to hear the rumblings of maybe it's not yet. And he came here and we sat down and had a couple of beers and I brought him a set and I looked at him and I go, ‘Is it really so bad if you don't win this the first time?’ He goes, ‘I knew you were gonna say that.’ He goes, ‘No one said that.’ He goes, you say, I go, ‘Yes, because I know, like, the people love you, bro,’ and they love LA Knight, too. They love Roman too, but Roman can either reach down and pull him up or he keeps fighting, and he keeps fighting."
Still, if Knight loses on Saturday, Page didn’t think it would hurt Knight either.
He, still, would love to see Knight win because he knows how hard it is to achieve an almost impossible goal in professional wrestling.
"I don't think it hurts LA Knight either way," he said. "I'd love to see it because I know, like me, it was, it's a dream. It's a dream that you dream about, you want so bad and you throw it in the universe and you just gotta stay positive and keep going. And I'll tell you, boy, he has gotten himself so over with the people that you don't know what's gonna happen.
"And that's the spot that I wanted in 1994 and I thought I was ready for it, but I wasn't. I go out there and I don't care who it is, you don't know who's gonna win. That's where LA Knight is right now and so Roman, he's been in that spot for a decade. You know, like Cena, he has carried the gauntlet. So, I'd love to see it."
Nike CEO may have just admitted the company went too woke as stock hits 12-year low
The Nike CEO's memo to his employees was 860 words.
But here were the 33 that stuck out: "Over the past year, we've put sport at the center of everything we do. We're seeing encouraging signs of progress, but we have more work to do to win over the long term."
That was sent out on Oct. 1, one day before Nike's stock price closed at $33.87 per share — its lowest in over 12 years. The once unstoppable athletic titan expects more layoffs in 2027 after already cutting staff twice this year.
TED CRUZ TAKES VICTORY LAP AS ICONIC AMERICAN BRAND'S STOCK PLUNGES TO 12-YEAR LOW
And you have to wonder if those words above — "over the past year, we've put sport at the center of everything we do" — was as much a confession as it was a mission statement. Nike chose politics over its core identity, and it's desperately trying to course correct.
Last month, Outkick's Dan Zaksheske listed a series of decisions the company made over the past few years aimed at courting a left-wing audience. In 2019, it tapped Colin Kaepernick as the face of its 30th anniversary "Just Do It" campaign. In the wake of George Floyd's death in 2020, it ran its "For Once, Don't Do it" ad, which included lines like "don't pretend there's not a problem in America," and "Don't turn your back on racism." In 2023, it partnered with female-identifying male Dylan Mulvaney to promote women's leggings and sports bras — seemingly unfazed by the backlash Mulvaney's partnership with Bud Light sparked. There was also the "Equality" commercial in 2017 that featured phrases such as "the ball should bounce the same for everyone."
NIKE SHAREHOLDERS REJECT TRANSPARENCY PROPOSAL AS FAITH-BASED FIRM QUESTIONS DEI COMMITMENTS
Now, it wouldn't be fair to say that any one of these campaigns sunk the swoosh's stock on their own. Nike's stock hit an all-time closing high of $177.51 per share in November 2021.
But the fact that it has dipped 81% since then? It's hard not to tie a big chunk of that to the brand's regular offerings at the wokeness altar.
One of its more glaring gaffes within the past couple years is the delay of Caitlin Clark's signature sneaker. As sports writers such as Ethan Strauss and Dan Wetzel have pointed out, Nike didn't drop Clark's shoe until June of this year. Strauss wrote earlier that the company felt like it had to debut A'ja Wilson's sneaker before Clark's despite Wilson ranking fifth in WNBA jersey sales and Clark ranking first. Although A'ja is almost certainly the best player in the WNBA, nothing moves women's basketball fans (or hoop fans in general?) like anything associated with Caitlin.
CAITLIN CLARK UNVEILS NIKE CAITLIN 1 AS HER FIRST SIGNATURE SHOE WITH AN OCTOBER RELEASE DATE
THE CRAIG CARTON SHOW–UNFILTERED, UNAPOLOGETIC AND UNMISSABLE. DOWNLOAD HIS DAILY PODCAST NOW!
This wasn't necessarily a case of Nike putting sports on the back burner. But it did reek of identity politics, which has a way of becoming expensive when a company loses sight of what its customers actually want. Nike seems to have realized this, but it took it being knocked out of the S&P 100 for the brass to actually do something about it.
Which brings us back to the aforementioned memo. Nike CEO Elliott Hill didn't use that note to dwell on the company's past campaigns and advertisements. He mentioned Nike establishing a new campus in India. He emphasized accelerating supply chain modernization efforts. He discussed Nike's plan to organize into three geographic regions — Americas (North America and Latin America), APGC (Asia Pacific and Greater China) and EMEA (Europe, the Middle East and Africa).
But it's hard to overlook that one-sentence acknowledgment about prioritizing sport.
The injection of politics into athletics is almost always a guarantee to shift eyeballs elsewhere. The cratering of NBA ratings post 2020 certainly reinforced that notion.
Seems the injection of politics into athletic brands can be just as corrosive. Nike went woke a while ago, and it may finally be waking up to the damage that was caused.
OutKick reached out to Nike for comment but did not immediately receive a response.
NFL's dumbest moment of Week 4 goes to a referee now on the Mount Rushmore of angrily jumping to conclusions
Sometimes it's a defender that blows it, and sometimes it's a player on offense. There are even times when an NFL coach will say or do something really dumb that makes news. But when a referee does something ridiculous, well, we kind of have to pay extra attention.
Meet Adrian Hill.
First we noticed him on Sunday, he was on the ground after getting run over by players during the Minnesota Vikings game against the Miami Dolphins.
And he was evidently really peeved about it.
NFL'S MOST DEBATED WEEK 3 CALL HAS PEOPLE WONDERING HOW TO DEFY GRAVITY WHEN HITTING PATRICK MAHOMES
Hill and the play that drew attention to him are being reviewed by the NFL on Monday, a league official confirmed to OutKick.
The reason for the review is that Hill seemed to either:
Hill did all this without realizing one key detail:
Wilson was actually pushed into the official from behind by a Miami Dolphins player.
And Wilson merely tried to help Hill get up afterward, as the ref was aggressively pointing at him to get away.
Hill, you should know, is no rookie official. He's been in the NFL since 2010 and has been a referee since 2019. But despite that experience, he seemed to lose his composure after getting knocked down.
NFL AND REFEREES UNION CLOSE IN ON AVOIDING POTENTIAL REPLACEMENT OFFICIALS NIGHTMARE
The play happened in a regionally telecast game. But it drew national attention because of the NFL's review and the terrible optics of the moment online.
And since it was online, fans decided to have an opinion about it.
This is the part where you realize that fans having opinions does not include NFL referee fans. Because there are no known such beings on the planet.
We're talking fans of the Vikings, of Wilson, even of poise amid adversity. Hill and his officiating colleagues have no fans. So, the reactions online were predictable.
THE CRAIG CARTON SHOW–UNFILTERED, UNAPOLOGETIC AND UNMISSABLE. DOWNLOAD HIS DAILY PODCAST NOW!
One NFL reporter posted that Hill "flipped out" over an "unintentional collision."
"Officials have a hard job but their arrogance and opinions of themselves just make them so unlikable," former New York Jets offensive coordinator Scott Turner added.
"Very sad," NFL agent Peter Shaffer posted. "Would never see an NHL referee act like this. Pathetic."
Sunday was a bad day for NFL officials and the attention they drew.
In New York, the former son of the league's supervisor of officials was captured on television apparently cursing at Arizona Cardinals tight end Trey McBride.
The league is looking into that one also but there seems to be a theme in these two incidents.
It's men that are sometimes called zebras because of the stripes they wear acting like they're out in the wild.
NFL Week 4 Sunday takeaways: Cowboys get season-defining win over Texans, 49ers are league's best team
We've reached October, which means "it's still early" is starting to do a lot of heavy lifting for some NFL fan bases. There's plenty of football left, obviously, but at some point your team has to actually win a game instead of telling everyone it's going to be fine (it's not going to be fine, Chargers fans).
Meanwhile, I'm back with another round of opinions that could look brilliant or incredibly stupid by next Sunday (yeah, about that Drake Maye comment last Sunday ...). That's part of the fun. At least, that's what I tell myself.
Here's my biggest takeaway from each game on the Week 4 Sunday slate.
Takeaway: That Jonathan Taylor guy is pretty good.
It's hard to glean too much from a game where the Commanders were forced to go to their third-string quarterback after Marcus Mariota suffered a knee injury in the first quarter. Instead, I'm going to sing the praises of Jonathan Taylor, who has six rushing touchdowns in four games and plays a very old-school game. That's cool because a few years ago, we thought old-school running backs were done in the NFL. Taylor and Derrick Henry, in particular, aren't going to let that happen any time soon.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE OUTKICK SPORTS COVERAGE
Takeaway: How can any NFL fan not love Jameis Winston eating a W?
Without Jaxson Dart, the Giants aren't a threat to make a deep run in the postseason. They probably won't even make the postseason. But right now, who cares? The Giants are 3-1 and currently in first place in the NFC East. Plus, they've got the Commanders in Week 5, and Washington's uncertain QB situation could make that task quite a bit easier. It might not last, but Giants fans should enjoy the early success.
Takeaway: As soon as you think you know something, the NFL reminds you that you don't.
Of course, the 1–2 Patriots, who looked awful in Week 3, went into Buffalo and beat the previously unbeaten Bills as seven-point underdogs. Because of course. This is the type of game that makes the NFL great. Just when you think you have a handle on which teams are good and which teams are bad, the NFL says, "You don't know what you think you know."
Takeaway: Ben Johnson is a damn genius.
Look, I'm not going to overreact to the Bears beating the Jets. But regardless of opponent, Chicago head coach Ben Johnson just went 2-0 with Case Keenum starting in Week 3 and Tyson Bagent starting in Week 4. For the record, entering this stretch, neither Keenum nor Bagent had even started an NFL regular-season game since 2023. The defense deserves a lot of credit (and Johnson deserves credit for hiring Dennis Allen as his defensive coordinator), but scoring 50 points with those two QBs shows that Johnson is one of the league’s sharpest offensive minds.
SIGN UP FOR THE DAILY OUTKICK NEWSLETTER
Takeaway: If it's possible for an October game to be a season-defining game, this was it ... for both teams.
This is the type of win that the Cowboys can use to build momentum, especially with two winnable games coming up against the Buccaneers and Packers. Scoring 28 second-half points against one of the league's best defenses is exactly the type of thing that can instill confidence in an offense for the rest of the season.
On the other side, I don't know how the Texans recover from this. Not only did they fall to 0-4, but they blew a double-digit second-half lead and allowed the Cowboys to take the lead with an 11-play, 74-yard drive in just 1:43 right after Houston had retaken the lead. Only one team in NFL history has made the playoffs after starting 0-4: the 1992 San Diego Chargers. So, not only do they have to reverse a 34-year-old trend, but they have to do it coming off one of Houston's most heartbreaking losses in recent memory.
Takeaway: Speaking of heartbreaking losses, my goodness, Philadelphia.
The good news for the Eagles is that, unlike the Texans, their heartbreaking blown double-digit second-half lead dropped them to 2-2 instead of 0-4. The bad news is that it probably doesn't make them feel any better. I've said for three weeks that the Eagles are a deeply flawed team, but their record said otherwise. Now, their 2-2 record feels more appropriate.
Takeaway: Both of these teams are bad.
This felt like a must-win for the Packers against a bad Bucs team starting a backup quarterback. And, credit to them, they got it done. But they didn't make it easy on themselves, didn't look good doing it, and nearly blew it late. Todd Bowles is probably on his way out in Tampa, but Matt LaFleur's seat might start to heat up if Green Bay doesn't start playing better, particularly on offense, over the next month.
Takeaway: I got nothing.
It doesn't appear that Lamar Jackson's ankle injury is too serious, and it's hard to fault the Ravens for being careful with their star quarterback in a game they were never in danger of losing. Aside from that, I got nothing. The Ravens are pretty good, the Titans are pretty bad, and Sunday's game pretty much showed exactly that. Credit to Tennessee for fighting until the final whistle, though.
Takeaway: Neither team should be too excited about this game.
Yes, the Jaguars are obviously much happier after going into Cincinnati and upsetting the Bengals. But they committed 13 penalties for 125 yards and nearly allowed Cincinnati to pull off a miraculous comeback with some puzzling late-game decisions. The Bengals lost Ja'Marr Chase to a concussion early in the second quarter, and Tee Higgins left the game late after suffering an adductor injury. Oh, and they committed 11 penalties of their own for 108 yards. It was an ugly, ugly game, but the focus in Cincinnati turns to the health of their two star receivers.
Takeaway: Is Minnesota the most fraudulent 4-0 team ever?
Probably not, but I don't have time to go through every 4-0 team in NFL history. That being said, this team is not nearly as good as its record. They beat the Packers (who aren't good), the Bears (who are good, but that was a weird game played in a massive rainstorm), the Bucs (who aren't good) and the Dolphins (who, guess what? Aren't good). At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter, I guess. There are plenty of teams that would rather be a fraudulent 4-0 than have their current record.
Takeaway: The Raiders might actually be decent.
Yes, the Chiefs won to move to 4-0. It's fair to say that Kansas City is officially "back." But everyone is going to say that, so let's take some time to talk about the Raiders. Las Vegas had a lead in every quarter, including the fourth. But two plays changed everything: a 55-yard pass to Tyquan Thornton on third-and-5 with 3:35 left (to set up a go-ahead touchdown on the next play) and a Raiders fumble on the ensuing kick return. Those moments shouldn't distract from the fact that Las Vegas looked every bit as good as the Chiefs for most of the game, and at certain points, better. This isn't the 2025 Raiders anymore.
Takeaway: Things are going to get worse before they get better.
THE CRAIG CARTON SHOW–UNFILTERED, UNAPOLOGETIC AND UNMISSABLE. DOWNLOAD HIS DAILY PODCAST NOW!
Seattle bounced back from a surprising Week 3 upset loss against Washington, but the real test comes next week in a measuring-stick showdown against San Francisco. For the Chargers, there's just not much light at the end of the tunnel. They fell to 0-4, the season is basically over, and if that weren't bad enough, here's the upcoming schedule: Broncos, Chiefs, Rams, Texans, Ravens. For a team with Super Bowl aspirations coming into the season, Los Angeles could be staring down the barrel of an 0-9 start if they don't figure something out in a hurry.
Takeaway: The San Francisco 49ers are the best team in the NFL.
I'm not just saying that because they beat the overrated Broncos (and their insanely overrated head coach). Sure, the win helps bolster the case. But San Francisco is now 4-0 with three wins by double digits and a fourth that would have been a nine-point win if not for a virtually meaningless late field goal last week. Yes, they have played the Dolphins and Cardinals. But they also blasted the Super Bowl-favorite Rams and now boast a ridiculous +58 point differential. The Rams got all the preseason hype, but it was their NFC West rivals that everyone should have been worried about.
Takeaway: Sometimes a good benching is all you need.
It's crazy to think that the Bryce Young, who completed 29 of 41 passes for 329 yards, two touchdowns and no turnovers against the Lions on Sunday Night Football, is the same quarterback we saw two years ago. Entering Week 3 of the 2024 NFL season, it seemed like Carolina Panthers fans and the franchise were ready to give up on Young, the No. 1 pick in the 2023 NFL Draft. He had earned the dreaded "bust" label after posting a 2-16 record as a starter with more interceptions (13) than passing touchdowns (11). The team benched him for that Week 3 game in 2024 and he didn't return to the starting lineup until Week 8.
Since then, Young's been a different player. He led the team to an NFC South title in 2025 and has gone 14-16 in regular-season starts since his return, throwing 47 passing touchdowns against 19 interceptions. This year, Carolina has one of the most explosive offenses in the league. If Young can go from benched in 2024 to back-to-back division titles, it'd be one of the best career turnarounds in NFL history.
Prince William ‘incandescent with anger’ at Prince Harry as Diana anniversary deepens royal rift: Piers Morgan
Prince William isn't expected to reunite with his brother, Prince Harry, for a potential new documentary about their late mother. Asked about the reports, Piers Morgan argued the brothers' long-running rift makes any reunion unlikely.
"Well, they don't speak to each other and haven't done so for years," the host of "Piers Morgan Uncensored" told Fox News Digital.
Morgan went on to say that William is "absolutely incandescent with anger about what his little brother did in trashing the royal family," including "writing books, doing Netflix documentary shows, doing podcasts, always dumping on the family and attacking his wife, Catherine, attacking Camilla, attacking King Charles."
"Harry took out the spray gun," said Morgan. "And when you do that, then family members who are on the receiving end aren't going to like it. My sympathies are entirely with Prince William, who's a thoroughly honorable, decent young man who's just had it with his brother and wants nothing to do with him."
Fox News Digital reached out to Kensington Palace for comment.
Morgan has been outspoken about Harry and Meghan over the years, taking issue with their decision to step back from royal duties, their media projects and their public comments about life within the royal family.
WATCH: PIERS MORGAN SAYS PRINCE WILLIAM IS INCANDESCENT' WITH HARRY
Several royal experts previously told Fox News Digital that the brothers haven't been on speaking terms since 2022.
Most recently, The Times reported that the Prince of Wales will not make a film about Princess Diana to mark the 30th anniversary of his mother's death next year, in part because he wants to avoid further conflict with Harry. According to the outlet, William has declined multiple offers to make or appear in documentaries about his mother.
The Times also reported that William views his tributes marking Diana's 20th anniversary as his public "catharsis."
Meanwhile, Prince Harry is considering several projects to mark the 30th anniversary of Diana's death, People magazine reported. According to the outlet, the Duke of Sussex has been exploring how he can "most meaningfully" honor his mother and her legacy ahead of the milestone on Aug. 31, 2027.
While various ideas are under discussion, People reported that no documentary has been finalized or confirmed. Harry has reached out to family members and friends connected to his late mother, multiple sources told the outlet.
Fox News Digital reached out to Archewell for comment.
GET ENTERTAINMENT SCOOP DELIVERED RIGHT TO YOUR EMAIL BY CLICKING HERE
"Notably Harry and Meghan have remained reasonably quiet," royal broadcaster Ian Pelham Turner told Fox News Digital. "They are private citizens, as it has been stated numerous times now, while the Waleses have been burning the rubber across Britain with royal engagements."
Turner said the estrangement between the brothers has reportedly left their father, King Charles III, "scratching his head."
"His two sons appear to be as distant as ever," said Turner. "Perhaps this is Charles' personal annus horribilis."
Friends of William told The Times that next year is "a difficult situation for him" and that he remains "really emotional" about his mother's death.
The Times also reported that William has found his uncle Charles Spencer's newly published memoir, "Swan Song: Diana, My Sister," "difficult," after receiving little advance warning about the book. The book, about Diana, is highly critical of King Charles III, who is receiving treatment for an undisclosed form of cancer.
Turner wondered whether William had initially considered a project about his mother but scrapped the idea following the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's return to the U.K. in August. Turner suggested that William stepping aside could make it less likely that competing projects would pit the brothers against each other.
"William and Catherine have seemed to have increased their number of public events which, not surprisingly, have been well documented," he said.
LIKE WHAT YOU'RE READING? CLICK HERE FOR MORE ENTERTAINMENT NEWS
Friends of William believe he is likely to mark the 30th anniversary of his mother's death privately.
William and Harry previously teamed up for projects about their mother ahead of the 20th anniversary in 2017. During a screening of the ITV documentary "Diana, Our Mother: Her Life and Legacy," William told guests, "We won't speak as openly or publicly about her again."
William was 15 when Diana died. Harry was 12. Over the years, Harry has spoken publicly about how Diana's death has deeply affected him. In his 2023 memoir, "Spare," Harry recalled breaking down as Diana was buried at Althorp, her ancestral home.
"It was reported that Mummy's hands were folded across her chest and between them was placed a photo of me and Willy, possibly the only two men who ever truly loved her," he wrote, as quoted by People magazine. "Certainly, the two who loved her most."
"For all eternity we'd be smiling at her in the darkness," Harry wrote, describing how he was overwhelmed by grief as his mother's coffin was lowered into the grave.
"My body convulsed and my chin fell, and I began to sob uncontrollably into my hands," he wrote. "I felt ashamed of violating the family ethos, but I couldn't hold it in any longer."
PUT YOUR ENTERTAINMENT KNOWLEDGE TO THE TEST AND SEE HOW YOU SCORE
Harry, who has been estranged from members of his family following his exit from royal life in 2020, told the BBC in a 2025 interview that he wanted reconciliation.
"I would love reconciliation with my family," he said. "There's no point continuing to fight any more, life is precious. I don’t know how much longer my father has."
The Supreme Court is back. These five cases could reshape American life
The Supreme Court begins its new term on Monday. The justices have filled only part of their docket, with more cert grants still to come. It is not too early to predict another good term for defenders of the Constitution, thanks to an originalist majority that takes its text and history seriously. Here are five cases to watch closely.
1. Climate lawfare: Suncor Energy v. Commissioners of Boulder County
The term opens with a case that could end one of the left’s most brazen lawfare campaigns — or drive prices at the pump even higher. Boulder, Colorado, is suing Suncor and ExxonMobil in state court under Colorado tort law, seeking gargantuan damages for the effects of global climate change. In other words, Boulder wants Colorado law to punish these companies for emissions in every state and around the world. Dozens of states and cities have filed similar suits. An outside counsel for Boulder’s legal team has publicly described such climate litigation as effectively imposing a "carbon tax" and acknowledged that it could raise fossil-fuel prices and potentially push energy companies toward bankruptcy.
SUPREME COURT KICKS OFF NEW TERM WITH FRESH QUESTIONS OVER ITS LEGITIMACY AND ITS FUTURE
Having failed to win their policy argument in Congress, activists are hoping they will have more success in friendly state courts.
The principal question for the justices is whether federal law bars these claims; the court will also consider whether it has statutory and Article III jurisdiction to hear the case.
It does.
For more than a century, the court has treated emissions that cross state lines as a federal issue. The Clean Air Act includes provisions that allow a state to regulate pollution sources within its borders, but sources outside them are a different matter, as the court previously held in a case involving nearly identical Clean Water Act provisions.
Underneath all of this is a basic structural principle: The Constitution treats the states as equals, and none may govern beyond its own borders. A clear reversal would check every state or municipality that tries to set national policy in defiance of the structural Constitution.
2. There Colorado goes again: St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy
Colorado promised every family in the state free preschool at the school of its choice, public or private. Then it shut out Catholic preschools because they support Church teaching on sex and gender. In testimony highlighted by the Catholic schools, the program’s director said hypothetically that a participating preschool could seek preferences for "gender-nonconforming children" or members of "the LGBTQ community," provided the preference complied with the program’s nondiscrimination requirements. That double standard is the antithesis of neutrality and a constitutional nonstarter. The court has considered similar discriminatory systems in recent years and has struck them down every time.
SUPREME COURT CLIMATE SHOWDOWN JOLTED BY ALITO'S LAST-MINUTE DECISION
Three times since 2017 — in cases from Missouri, Montana and Maine — the court has ruled that the government cannot exclude people of faith from public benefits because of their religion. Colorado itself has lost three major First Amendment cases for showing hostility to a baker’s faith (Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, 2018), threatening to force a web designer to create wedding websites against her beliefs (303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, 2023), and censoring a Christian counselor’s viewpoint in talk therapy while permitting the opposite one (Chiles v. Salazar, 2026). The smart money is on another Colorado loss.
3. Second Amendment: Viramontes v. Cook County and Grant v. Higgins
The court consolidated two cases for argument asking whether the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect the right to own an AR-15, the most popular rifle in America. Viramontes challenges Cook County, Illinois’ ban on so-called "assault weapons," and Grant challenges a similar Connecticut law.
FEDERAL APPEALS COURT UPHOLDS CONTROVERSIAL ILLINOIS BAN ON SEMIAUTOMATIC GUNS
These cases will be a showcase for originalist interpretation. Under District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022), the Second Amendment protects arms in common use for lawful purposes, and a ban survives only if the state can point to historical analogues showing it fits the nation’s tradition of firearm regulation. This will be an opportunity for the Supreme Court to clarify how to determine which weapons are protected as "arms" and how common they must be to be part of the right to keep and bear arms.
4. Election integrity: Republican National Committee v. Mi Familia Vota
Arizona passed laws in 2022 requiring documentary proof of citizenship from people who register to vote using the state’s form and allowing officials to remove confirmed noncitizens from the rolls as a federal election approaches. The Ninth Circuit blocked both provisions as preempted by the National Voter Registration Act. It also found the proof-of-citizenship requirement to be barred by a 2018 consent decree settling a lawsuit by left-wing advocacy groups, in which a former secretary of state agreed to register applicants who submitted no proof of citizenship as "federal-only" voters.
THESE 11 UPCOMING SUPREME COURT DECISIONS COULD MAKE OR BREAK TRUMP'S SECOND TERM AGENDA
This case presents quite a spectacle: Arizona’s opponents will stand before the Supreme Court and argue that federal law forces a state to keep people it knows are noncitizens on its voter rolls. And part of their case rests on rules no elected representative ever passed. That decree lets a single official’s settlement do what only the legislature should, handing activists something with the force of law. Left standing, arrangements like this can cause mischief well beyond Arizona.
5. Parental rights: International Partners for Ethical Care v. Ferguson
Parental rights keep returning to the court, and this case illustrates why. Washington amended its runaway-youth-shelter law so that when a minor is seeking so-called "gender-affirming" services, shelters no longer have to notify the parents. Instead, they notify only the state, giving the parents the type of treatment normally reserved for abusers. The state may then keep them from locating their child and delay reunification until they accept the state’s approach.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION
The immediate question before the court is standing — whether these parents can sue at all because their gender-confused children, thankfully, have not yet run away. But parents are already affected by the new law, walking on eggshells, knowing the state would take their children’s side against them. The Ninth Circuit dismissed that harm as speculative and self-inflicted. But parents should not have to wait until a child disappears or undergoes irreversible procedures before they can defend their rights in court.
With so many important issues riding on this term’s decisions — from climate lawfare and religious liberty to gun rights and election integrity — it is a relief to know that they will be heard by an originalist Court. And with the court set to grant even more cases on Monday, this is only the beginning.