A United Airlines plane was reportedly struck by a drone as it prepared for landing at San Diego International Airport. The Boeing 737, identified as Flight 1980 from San Francisco, reportedly hit the object at roughly 3,000 feet during its approach. Take a listen: United Airlines flight 1980 (Boeing 737) hit a drone over San Diego this morning around 3000 feet. Audio via @theATCapp pic.twitter.com/EFclpROOlL — Thenewarea51 (@thenewarea51) April 29, 2026 More from the New York Post: No injuries have been reported, and there were no immediate indications of damage to the aircraft. While confirmed midair collisions between planes and drones are considered rare, reports of close encounters have increased in recent years, raising ongoing safety concerns around unauthorized drone activity near airports. The reported incident quickly sparked alarm online, which some users questioning how a drone meant for consumer use could reach that altitude in controlled airspace. “United Flight 1980 reported a possible drone strike just prior to arriving in San Diego. The flight landed safely, and customers deplaned normally at the gate. Our maintenance team found no damage after thoroughly inspecting the aircraft,” the airline said in a statement, according to NBC 7 San Diego. “The FAA is investigating after a United flight reported a possible drone collision while on approach to land at SAN. UA inspected the aircraft and found no damage. This is sounding more like the drone passed under the plane but was well above the 400 feet max altitude for drones,” CBS News correspondent Kris Van Cleave said. The FAA is investigating after a United flight reported a possible drone collision while on approach to land at SAN. UA inspected the aircraft and found no damage. This is sounding more like the drone passed under the plane but was well above the 400 feet max altitude for drones — Kris Van Cleave (@krisvancleave) April 29, 2026 NBC 7 San Diego noted: United Flight 1980 took off from San Francisco International at about 7:14 a.m. and reportedly hit the drone shortly before it landed a bit before 8:30 a.m. What’s your judgment?

House Republican leadership has delayed a vote on the farm bill, which includes a controversial provision that critics say will shield pesticide manufacturers from lawsuits alleging they failed to adequately warn about potential harms of their products beyond EPA standards. House Farm Bill With Controversial Pesticide Provision Potentially Up For Vote This Week The agriculture policy package will return to House Rules Committee and continue negotiations. "The vote on the Farm Bill (with PRIME Act included!) is likely delayed two weeks now due to fight over E15. I look forward to voting for an amendment to strip the pesticide immunity/state labeling ban from the bill when it comes up. With public support, the amendment could pass," Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) said. The vote on the Farm Bill (with PRIME Act included!) is likely delayed two weeks now due to fight over E15. I look forward to voting for an amendment to strip the pesticide immunity/state labeling ban from the bill when it comes up. With public support, the amendment could pass. https://t.co/GjqpyVM3O5 — Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) April 29, 2026 POLITICO has more: Lawmakers hope to bring the farm bill back to the floor in May after the chamber is set to take a weeklong recess. Republican leaders faced fierce backlash from some GOP members who took issue with parts of the farm bill or were asking to add their amendments and priorities to the package. Other hard-liners fought against a plan to tack onto the farm bill a proposal to allow year-round sales of E15 fuel. The farm bill has not been reauthorized since 2018 and was due to be updated in 2023. "Due to issues with E15 (fuel), the Farm Bill has been pulled from a vote this week. I have spoken with the Chair of the Rules Committee, the Speaker, Rep. Scalise, and multiple members, and we will be voting on this when we return. This means our amendment to remove pesticide liability protections will be voted on at that time," Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) commented. Due to issues with E15 (fuel), the Farm Bill has been pulled from a vote this week. I have spoken with the Chair of the Rules Committee, the Speaker, Rep. Scalise, and multiple members, and we will be voting on this when we return. This means our amendment to remove pesticide… — Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (@RepLuna) April 29, 2026 "I have now been accosted by two Republican members of Congress for trying to remove pesticide liability protections. Both of which claim to be 'God-fearing' Christians, but are shilling for cancer causing pesticide companies. Yikes. One even claims to be pro-life, but is cool with pesticides killing kids," she said in another post. I have now been accosted by two Republican members of Congress for trying to remove pesticide liability protections. Both of which claim to be “God-fearing” Christians, but are shilling for cancer causing pesticide companies. Yikes. One even claims to be pro-life, but is cool… — Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (@RepLuna) April 29, 2026 USA TODAY noted: Rural lawmakers have been actively pushing to include a pro-pesticide provision in the upcoming farm bill. However, their more MAHA-oriented colleagues want no part of such an effort. Rep. Nancy Mace, R-South Carolina, even introduced an amendment to strip what she calls the "pesticide loophole" from the legislation. "South Carolina farmers, families, and communities deserve better," she posted on social media. Republican Reps. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, Anna Paulina Luna of Florida and Chip Roy of Texas are among the other conservatives who are openly at odds with some of their other GOP colleagues. Luna said the farm bill "must be stopped." "I think big ag needs to be body-checked," said Roy, who stressed the importance of warning labels for potential carcinogens and noted he’s a cancer survivor himself. "That labeling issue is very real." Several MAHA organizers told USA TODAY they've been discouraged with the state of their movement in a Republican-led Washington. Nora Kemmerer, a health care worker from northern Virginia who was donning a red MAHA hat outside the Supreme Court, wouldn't commit to voting for GOP candidates in November. "We'll see what happens," she said. "I don't know how I'm voting as of right now . . . I'm frustrated."

“Shark Tank” investor Kevin O’Leary plans to build an enormous data center in Utah to defeat China and others in the AI race. The multibillion-dollar ‘hyperscale’ project would be constructed on 40,000 acres in unincorporated Box Elder County, where every private landowner has agreed to the use of their land. The project would also utilize an additional 1,200 acres that include a section of the Utah Test and Training Range (UTTR), which is a Department of Defense site, and property owned by the Utah Trust Lands Administration. “It shows the Chinese and the rest of the world we’re not messing around,” O’Leary said, according to Fox News. “We’re going to get this done and move it forward and provide the computing power to our AI companies that defend the country,” he added. “The board that oversees the state’s Military Installation Development Authority, or MIDA, approved a series of resolutions Friday to move the multibillion-dollar project forward, agreeing to move fast and charge far lower taxes than usual to help O’Leary ‘lure the hyperscalers’ to Utah,” The Salt Lake Tribune wrote. At full scale, the data center would consume more energy than the entire state of Utah. Kevin O'Leary is planning on building a massive 40,000-acre hyperscale data center in Box Elder County, Utah. The data center is estimated to eventually consume 9 GW of power a year. The entire state of Utah consumes about 4 GW of power. The data center would be off-grid, with… pic.twitter.com/j87r2vpGPG — Merissa Hansen (@merissahansen17) April 29, 2026 More from The Salt Lake Tribune: MIDA projects must include military land. In addition to UTTR, all of Hill Air Force Base, its Falcon Hill research park, and 27 Utah National Guard properties across the state will be “associated,” Morris explained, which gives MIDA board members “flexibility” on how to use the funds they will receive from the development. Including the state trust land allows the state to also receive a share of the revenues, he said. MIDA can offer tax incentives to developers so as they build in a project area, they can claim decades-long rebates of the property taxes assessed on the increased value they’re creating. MIDA also can set special tax levies to raise funds and can issue bonds. Box Elder County commissioners, who said at a Wednesday meeting that they had first heard of the proposal a few weeks ago, had been scheduled to give the project the last approval it needs at a meeting late Friday. But late Friday afternoon, that meeting was rescheduled for 10 a.m. Monday. Commissioner Tyler Vincent said Wednesday that when he first heard Morris make his pitch for the project, “I felt like I was drinking out of a fire hose, and trying to digest all of this so quickly.” Vincent said Wednesday the commission had wanted to hear from residents about the proposed data center project before approving it, and to have the county’s lawyers read through the proposed agreement with MIDA. “We don’t want to just jump into something and down the road have it come back to bite us,” Vincent said. “Utah’s Military Installation Development Authority is trying to force through a data center in Box Elder County, practically on the shore of the Great Salt Lake, that will consume more electricity than the entire state combined. In the state senate, I proposed legislation to crack down on data centers and in Congress I’ll join with Bernie Sanders in supporting a moratorium on new data centers. In a time of skyrocketing energy prices and plummeting water levels, we cannot afford to spend trillions of dollars on industries like this,” Utah state Sen. Nate Blouin, a congressional candidate, wrote on X. Watch below: Utah's Military Installation Development Authority is trying to force through a data center in Box Elder County, practically on the shore of the Great Salt Lake, that will consume more electricity than the entire state combined. In the state senate, I proposed legislation to… pic.twitter.com/0b00RqI326 — Nate Blouin (@NateForUtah) April 28, 2026 “Its first phase is expected to require about 3 gigawatts of power — nearly matching Utah’s average statewide electricity use of roughly 4 gigawatts, he noted. At full buildout, Morris said, the campus would reach 9 gigawatts, more than double the state’s current total energy consumption,” The Salt Lake Tribune wrote. According to FOX 13 News Utah, residents packed the Box Elder County commission meeting on Monday to express their concerns about the proposed data center. About 80 people, some carrying signs reading “Where’s the research,” “People before profits” and “Say no to data center,” have packed a Monday morning meeting of the Box Elder County Commission. https://t.co/8TV3SNzfph — The Salt Lake Tribune (@sltrib) April 27, 2026 FOX 13 News Utah shared further: Many attendees were concerned that it was the first time they heard about the facility and felt as if it was being rushed towards final approval. “I was on Facebook for a second this morning before the kids woke up, and saw it on the local page that they were voting on it today,” explained Brigham City resident Savannah Mutz. Mutz rushed downtown with her kids during what should’ve been nap time. “It matters, like, you know, we need jobs, but for us to be bringing things to Utah that are using resources that we don’t have… we don’t have the water!” she said. Her worries and those of many others created tense moments during the meeting, before details of an interlocal agreement between the county and Military Installation Development Authority (MIDA) eventually emerged. “At its core, this project is about infrastructure that supports the military mission. Reliable energy and secure data systems are no longer optional. They are part of the foundation of how national defense operates today,” explained MIDA’s Hillary Venable. Our partners at the Salt Lake Tribune report that the project’s head developer is O’Leary Digital, owned by Shark Tank personality Kevin O’Leary. They added that at a recent MIDA board meeting, the authority approved multiple tax breaks for the proposal. At the commission meeting, Venable laid out the plan for the large data center to be constructed in a remote area of Hansen Valley, with plans of using on-site energy and a closed-loop water system. She claimed they have 100% consent from all private landowners in the area, and the rights to 3,000 acre-feet of on-site water, which is not from the Great Salt Lake. O’Leary claimed the proposed data center would not create a strain on the local power grid, which is a significant hurdle for many projects. “Most people don’t like data centers for good reason,” O’Leary said, according to Fox News. “You tap it to the grid and all of a sudden the electrical costs for their church and the community and the residents all go up, and that’s why there’s been a lot of pushback. Not in this case,” he added. Kevin O'Leary is building a 40,000-acre, 9,000-gigawatt AI data center. pic.twitter.com/NWxXPwoDAC — Yahoo Finance (@YahooFinance) April 28, 2026 Fox News has more: Instead, O’Leary explained, the Utah site will generate its own energy using a nearby natural gas pipeline, allowing it to operate independently while also potentially supplying excess power back to the grid. “That’s good for the community, but for the country, we need to compete with China. We need AI computing power, and so where do you put that? You put that in data centers.” O’Leary additionally suggested that the site could attract hyperscalers, or major tech companies, and potentially government partners. However, some remain skeptical that Utah has the necessary resources to power a data center of this magnitude without creating an immense strain on the local environment. Data centers don’t make any sense in #utah They suck massive amounts of power and water, cause light and noise pollution, and hardly produce any permanent jobs The companies are targeting rural areas and will end up damaging the quality of life in those areas. I hope people… pic.twitter.com/IPxt0rOUGB — GOUD Maragani (@goud4utah) April 27, 2026 According to FOX 13 News Utah, MIDA claims the data center could bring more than $100 million in annual revenue to the county and thousands of permanent jobs after full buildout. “Permanent jobs that will stay with the development, approximately 2,000,” Venable said, according to the outlet. Ultimately, commissioners tabled a vote to allow additional time for review of all the information. They scheduled another meeting next Monday. The Box Elder County Commission has tabled its decision on whether or not to approve a controversial data center project. Read: https://t.co/GT6yk5tfzb pic.twitter.com/Z27PntqrvQ — ABC4 News (@abc4utah) April 28, 2026 Watch additional coverage below:

The Florida House of Representatives approved a new congressional map that could potentially yield four additional U.S. House seats for Republicans in the 2026 midterm elections. The map, which Gov. Ron DeSantis unveiled on Monday, passed in an 83-28 vote during a special session. Gov. Ron DeSantis Reveals Proposed Congressional Map As Florida Legislature Nears Special Session Under the new map, Republicans would be favored in 24 of the state's 28 congressional districts. Republicans currently hold 20 of Florida's U.S. House seats. Roll Call has more: According to calculations by Inside Elections with Nathan L. Gonzales, the targeted Democrat-held seats include Rep. Kathy Castor’s Tampa-area district and Rep. Darren Soto’s seat in the Orlando area. A pair of blue South Florida seats would also shift toward Republicans, potentially jeopardizing the reelections of Democrats Jared Moskowitz and Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Democrats in the state House sought to recess debate Wednesday to process the Supreme Court ruling, but Republicans opposed such a delay. “This bill is not redistricting reform. It’s a partisan map drawn in secret, on demand from Washington, and shoved through this chamber on a clock designed to keep the public out of the room,” state House Minority Leader Fentrice Driskell said during debate. By a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court found that Louisiana should not have been forced to draw a second Black-majority district to comply with the Voting Rights Act and that the map it drew as a result violated the Constitution. "The SCOTUS ruling also invalidates the below provisions of the FL Constitution requiring the use of race in redistricting:  '…districts shall not be drawn with the intent or result of denying or abridging the equal opportunity of racial or language minorities to participate in the political process or to diminish their ability to elect representatives of their choice,'" DeSantis said. The SCOTUS ruling also invalidates the below provisions of the FL Constitution requiring the use of race in redistricting: ”…districts shall not be drawn with the intent or result of denying or abridging the equal opportunity of racial or language minorities to participate in… https://t.co/IqrLoWdO0L — Ron DeSantis (@RonDeSantis) April 29, 2026 Florida Phoenix shared further: DeSantis had said previously that the Legislature would be “forced” to redraw the state’s map if the court weighed in as he predicted. “Called this one months ago,” the governor posted on social media. “The decision implicates a district in FL — the legal infirmities of which have been corrected in the newly-drawn (and soon to be enacted) map.” If the Senate passes the map and DeSantis signs it into law, Florida would become the latest state to redistrict its congressional delegation in the middle of the decade, following red states such as Texas, North Carolina, and Missouri. Blue states such as California and Virginia have followed suit, all coming after President Donald Trump told Texas GOP lawmakers last year to do so to protect GOP control of the House in this year’s midterm elections. During debate on the House floor, Democrats seized on an admission made Tuesday by Jason Poreda, the governor’s staffer who drew the map, that he did use partisan data in creating it. Florida’s Fair Districts Amendment passed by the voters in 2010 bans partisan gerrymandering. “The man who drew this map testified under oath that he used partisan data to draw up every single district,” said House Democratic Leader Fentrice Driskell. “Every single one. And when the governor’s attorney was asked whether Democratic voters were being underrepresented in our congressional delegation, his answer was, ‘That this is a normative question.’

It took one governor, one post, and a few hours. The University of Nebraska at Kearney had been offering its faculty a voluntary training module titled “How Can I Move From Supporting to Empowering Trans-spectrum Students?” as part of its Monday Morning Mentor professional development series. The 20-minute program was developed by a North Carolina college and was designed to help professors build what it called a more inclusive classroom environment. It might have slipped by unnoticed if the internet had not gotten a look at the email promoting it. Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen did not wait for a committee meeting once the training came to his attention. This nonsense is completely irrelevant and destructive to the University of Nebraska’s teaching mission, and out of touch with the values of the state it serves. University leaders must immediately root out this and all other similar programming across the entire system. If the… https://t.co/f82WP7W8oV — Governor Jim Pillen (@TeamPillen) April 28, 2026 Pillen’s warning was as blunt as anything a sitting governor has directed at a state university in recent memory: if the system could not police its own ranks and root out what he called “the woke disease,” it risked investigations, cuts to funding, and a loss of public confidence. That is not the kind of language a public university can afford to brush off when its budget depends on the legislature and the governor’s office. The story exploded nationally after Libs of TikTok shared the university email on X, criticized UNK for spending taxpayer dollars on the program, and called for the school to be defunded. Pillen reposted that criticism and attached his own. Fox News covered the full chain of events, from the initial backlash through Pillen’s threat to the university’s rapid capitulation. The voluntary workshop, titled “How Can I Move From Supporting to Empowering Trans-spectrum Students?,” was part of UNK’s Monday Morning Mentor series and referenced a 20-minute program from a North Carolina college designed to help professors build a more inclusive classroom environment. The training drew online backlash after Libs of TikTok shared a university email about it on X, criticized the school for spending taxpayer dollars on such programming, and called for the institution to be defunded. Gov. Pillen reposted the criticism and wrote that the content was “irrelevant and destructive to the University of Nebraska’s teaching mission” and “out of touch with the values of the state it serves.” He called on university leaders to root out similar programming across the entire system, warning that the institution could face investigations, funding cuts, and a loss of public confidence if leadership could not police its own ranks. UNK later pulled the module, confirmed that the referenced content had been taken down, and said it had corrected its internal review process moving forward. Pillen then posted again, calling the removal “good news” and writing that education’s mission “is not woke indoctrination but growing critical learners and thinkers prepared to become leaders and business builders.” The confrontation unfolded rapidly, moving from the initial social media exposure through the governor’s public pressure campaign to the university’s decision to act, all within the span of a single day. Pillen framed the episode as part of a broader problem, saying the university needed to rid itself of what he called “the woke disease” before it eroded the public trust that sustains state-funded higher education in Nebraska. The speed of the reversal tells you everything you need to know about how seriously UNK took the threat. This was not a weeks-long policy review or a committee recommendation. The module was up one day and gone the next. UNK’s official response, obtained by KETV, leaned heavily on one point: the training was not homegrown. The university wanted it known that the content came from an outside vendor, not from its own faculty or administrators, and that it had already taken steps to prevent a repeat. The controversy began after a post claimed UNK wanted faculty to attend a session focused on empowering transgender students and building DEI-inclusive classrooms, with DEI standing for diversity, equity and inclusion. Pillen and the Libs of TikTok account both publicly denounced the university, and UNK moved quickly to distance itself from the material. In a statement, UNK said: “Our focus remains on rigorous academics and student success through effective teaching and creating a welcoming environment for all students. The module referenced has been removed. The content was from an external professional development series and was not developed internally by UNK. We have addressed the issue and corrected our review process moving forward.” The university emphasized that the training had not been created in-house but came through an outside professional development series, drawing a clear line between the institution’s own curriculum decisions and the third-party content that sparked the backlash. Pillen’s response played out across two posts on X, both dated April 28. His initial statement accused UNK of harboring what he called “the woke disease” and demanded that leadership take immediate action. Hours later, after the university confirmed it had pulled the material, the governor posted again to acknowledge that the objectionable content had been taken down. The local coverage tracked the full arc of the confrontation, from the social media callout through the governor’s public pressure to UNK’s decision to remove the module and tighten its review procedures. The speed of the episode illustrated how quickly online criticism, amplified by prominent accounts and elected officials, can force institutional responses at public universities. Notice the framing. UNK wants you to know this was an outside product, not something cooked up on campus. That is a fair distinction, but it raises its own question: who approved an external module called “How Can I Move From Supporting to Empowering Trans-spectrum Students?” and slotted it into the faculty development calendar without anyone flagging the obvious political problem? The “review process” that UNK says it has now corrected apparently did not catch a title that could not have been more on the nose. To his credit, Pillen followed up publicly once the university acted. Following my post last night, the University of Nebraska at Kearney took down the objectionable content. That is good news. I — and others in Nebraska and around the country — will continue to hold our higher education institutions accountable, keeping them true to the law and… https://t.co/w8qpEpTkhM — Governor Jim Pillen (@TeamPillen) April 28, 2026 There is a straightforward principle at work here. The University of Nebraska at Kearney is a public institution funded by Nebraska taxpayers. Those taxpayers, through their elected governor, get a say in whether their money goes toward teaching students mathematics and agriculture or toward voluntary seminars on “empowering trans-spectrum” identities. Pillen made the call, and UNK listened. That is how democratic accountability is supposed to function. It is worth being precise about what happened and what did not. This was not a required course imposed on students. It was a voluntary faculty training module. Nobody was forced to attend. But the fact that it was voluntary does not make it irrelevant. Faculty development programming signals institutional priorities. When a university chooses to offer training on “empowering trans-spectrum students” rather than, say, improving STEM instruction or helping struggling freshmen pass calculus, it tells you where the administration’s head is. The module may have been 20 minutes long, but the values it represented run deep in higher education’s administrative layer. What makes this episode notable is the speed and clarity of the outcome. Republican governors across the country have talked about reining in campus ideology. Some have signed executive orders. Others have proposed legislation that stalls in committee. Pillen posted on social media, named the problem in plain language, attached a credible threat about funding and investigations, and the content was gone before the news cycle turned over. No task force. No 90-day review period. Just a governor telling a state university that taxpayers are watching, and the university deciding it would rather keep the money than the module. Other governors paying attention should take notes. The leverage exists. Public universities depend on state appropriations, and state appropriations depend on the people who control the budget. When elected officials make clear that ideological programming has a price, universities move fast. When no one is watching, the Monday Morning Mentor series quietly slides another module into the rotation. The real question now is whether UNK’s “corrected review process” actually catches the next one, or whether it takes another round of public pressure to do the job.