The House Judiciary Committee is debating a bill that supporters say sheds light on dark money in the judicial system, but detractors say intimidates ordinary Americans who donate to nonprofits. The Litigation Transparency Act, introduced by Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., will undergo markups this week. If the bill became law, parties in civil cases would have to be transparent about who stands to make money off of a lawsuit. More specifically, parties would have to disclose the names of those who could “receive any payment or thing of value,” depending on the case’s outcome, as well as provide the agreement that would guarantee this payment. Alliance Defending Freedom founder Alan Sears, in a Monday letter to House Speaker Mike Johnson and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan provided to The Daily Signal, wrote, “This legislation will undermine the ability for conservative legal organizations and other allies to successfully litigate cases pivotal to protecting the rights of Americans.” “This proposal, much like other comparable compelled disclosure mandates before it, though drafted with some admirable intentions, is fundamentally flawed and would run afoul the well-established constitutional protections afforded to organizations and their donors.” In a February 2025 press release, Issa, who introduced the legislation, along with co-sponsors Reps. Scott Fitzgerald, R-Wis., and Mike Collins, R-Ga., stressed the need for transparency about court cases’ funding. “Our legislation targets serious and continuing abuses in our litigation system that distort our system of justice by obscuring public detection and exploiting loopholes in the law for financial gain,” Issa said in a statement. “We fundamentally believe that if a third-party investor is financing a lawsuit in federal court, it should be disclosed rather than hidden from the world and left absent from the facts of a case.”   “The Litigation Transparency Act will provide much-needed disclosure, safeguarding both businesses and consumers from the rising costs and legal abuse that result from secretive litigation funding,” Collins said in a statement at the same time. Other conservatives in Washington have criticized the bill. In November, several heads of conservative organizations signed onto a letter to Johnson, R-La., and Jordan, R-Ohio, alleging the bill would have a “chilling effect on free speech and association and directly threaten the privacy rights of Americans.” Signatories included Jenny Beth Martin, honorary chairman of Tea Party Patriots Action; Gene Hamilton, president of America First Legal; Ken Blackwell, former Ohio treasurer; and Mike Howell, president of the Oversight Project. “Critically, compelled disclosure of private financial arrangements would force litigants to unveil the identity of donors—violating donor privacy rights and exposing them to threats of harassment and retaliation,” wrote the conservative leaders. “It should not require reminding that conservative groups and religious organizations like ourshave historically been victim to such targeted disclosure tactics. One can imagine the seriousrisks posed in unveiling the identity of individuals supporting lawsuits over heated issues likereligious liberty, abortion, or transgender surgeries performed on minors,” continued the letter. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce Institute for Legal Reform praised the legislation in a February 2025 statement. “Rep. Issa recognizes the major risk third-party litigation funding poses to America’s economic and national security. His legislation will help protect the integrity of our judicial system by ensuring that outside financiers are not secretly directing or profiting from litigation they are funding. It is common sense that defendants, plaintiffs, and judges should know who is seeking to profit off litigation.” Issa’s office did not immediately provide comment to The Daily Signal. The post Judiciary Committee Debates Bill Against Lawsuit ‘Investors’ appeared first on The Daily Signal.

FIRST ON THE DAILY SIGNAL—Republican House candidates in purple districts who support changing the childhood vaccine schedule could pay the price in midterms, according to new data from President Donald Trump’s go-to pollster, FabrizioWard. “In the districts that will decide the control of the House of Representatives next year, Republican and Democratic candidates who support eliminating long standing vaccine requirements will pay a price in the elections,” says a Nov. 3 memo obtained by The Daily Signal. FabrizioWard, a polling firm led by Tony Fabrizio and Bob Ward, surveyed 1,000 voters in the 35 most competitive congressional districts on their attitudes toward recommended vaccines. This comes after the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services announced it has updated the childhood immunization schedule to recommend 11, rather than 17, shots for children. The generic Congressional ballot in the 35 most competitive districts was a “statistical dead-heat with Democrats holding a two-point edge.” But “If the Republican candidate supported the elimination of long-standing vaccine recommendations, the ballot margin shifts a net 12-points in the Democrat’s favor, with the GOP candidate trailing by 14-points,” the memo says. In the 35 districts in question, if the Democratic candidate is against the standing vaccine recommendations, their 2-point lead slides a net 20-points with the Republican leading by 18-points. “The negative movement for the candidate in either party scenario is even more dire among Swing voters – those voters who say they don’t typically vote along straight party lines –slipping a net 22-points for the Republican vaccine skeptic, and a net 31-points for the Democrat vaccine skeptic,” the memo says. “Vaccine skepticism is bad politics,” FabrizioWard concludes. FabrizioWard found that the Make America Healthy Again, or MAHA, movement is popular across party lines with the exception of vaccine skepticism. Voters in the 25 competitive districts resonated with MAHA food policy, with nine in 10 voters for both Trump and Kamala Harris saying the government should require labeling of harmful ingredients and chemicals in ultra-processed foods. “At the other end of the spectrum, vaccine skepticism, that is the removal of established childhood vaccine recommendations for diseases like whooping cough, measles, hepatitis and others is rejected by the overwhelming number of voters, resonates with just one-in-five voters, and just a third of self-described MAHA voters,” the memo says. “Vaccine skepticism is an outlier, not a defining policy, of the Make America Healthy Again movement, which has very popular elements with appeal across the political spectrum in these most competitive districts,” FabrizioWard writes. The polling firm found broad support for childhood vaccines, including Hepatitis B, Shingles, and whooping cough. More than seven-in-ten voters in these districts from across the political spectrum say the benefits of common vaccines like MMR (83%), TDAP (77%), Hepatitis B (73%), and shingles (73%), outweigh the risks. For each vaccine, this includes more than six-in-ten MAHA voters. Under the new guidance, the CDC recommends that all children get vaccinated against diphtheria, tetanus, whooping cough, Hib, pneumococcal conjugate, polio, measles, mumps, rubella, HPV, and chickenpox. The rotavirus, COVID-19, influenza, meningococcal disease, hepatitis A, and hepatitis B vaccines have been removed from the schedule. No vaccine has been banned due to the change, and insurance will continue to cover the previously recommended 17. FabrizioWard did not immediately respond to The Daily Signal’s request for comment. The post Trump Pollster Warns Anti-Vax Sentiment Could Spell Trouble for Republicans in Midterms appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Men should not be allowed to participate in women’s sports.  On Jan. 13, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in State of West Virginia v. B.P.J and Little v. Hecox, both of which involve the protection of women’s sports.  The West Virginia and Idaho laws differentiate between males and females based on physical and physiological differences between. In September, the American College of Pediatricians (ACPeds) filed amicus curiae briefs in both cases, supporting the states defending women and girls. ACPeds trusts the Supreme Court will restore common sense, fairness, and safety in women’s sports by recognizing the biological reality that men and women are different. Genetics is the primary driver of sex differences; these differences begin at fertilization when genes that are present on the X and Y chromosomes start to direct the development of the new individual.  Genes are expressed differently in males versus females, impacting athletic abilities. For example, there are over 3,000 genes that are expressed differently in male and female skeletal muscles. So, it is impossible to erase physical differences between men and women—even with drugs. In sports, biology matters. Our position statement on male participation in female sports makes this very clear. Testosterone plays an important role in regulating brain development, bone mass and shape, fat distribution, muscle mass, strength and density, heart size, lung capacity, and the production of red blood cells. The result is a clear male advantage in all these systems, even after adjusting for sex differences in height and weight.  Because testosterone is present during fetal life and early childhood, research shows differences between the athletic abilities of boys and girls even before puberty. One study of over 85,000 Australian children between 9 and 17 years old demonstrated differences between young boys and girls, with 9-year-old boys running faster than girls in short sprints, running faster in the longer distance 1 mile, and jumping farther from a standing start. In addition, the young boys could complete 33% more push-ups in 30 seconds than girls and had a more powerful grip.  Male athletes consistently outperform females in speed, strength, endurance and power, as demonstrated by world records; males have a 10%-30% advantage over females.  Estrogen use by males results in physiologic changes such as a redistribution of fat and reduction in muscle mass and hemoglobin levels, but it does not eliminate male athletic advantages. Research shows that males on testosterone suppressants (anti-androgens and estrogen) have athletic performance that is lower than males not taking them, but their performance still remains higher than women. It also endangers women’s physical safety. Science and common sense tell us that males are generally bigger, faster, and stronger than females. Women can get physically hurt when competing in sports where males are allowed to play. It is also unsafe for women and girls to be forced to share private spaces with males.  Women deserve their own private spaces and shouldn’t be forced to share women’s showers, restrooms, and locker rooms with males. Allowing men to compete in women’s sports also counteracts all advances made in the past 50 years for women’s equality. Title IX was designed to guarantee equal opportunity for women, but allowing men to compete against women has undermined and negated women’s successes. It has also displaced women and girls in sports competitions because of males’ biological advantage. It is not safe or fair to allow male participation in competitive female sports which require strength, power, endurance and speed.  We must respect biological differences between males and females and protect women’s and girls sports, privacy, and safety. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post The Supreme Court Must Save Women’s Sports appeared first on The Daily Signal.

While multiple reports indicate hundreds of protesters have been killed in Iran, the real death toll is likely much higher, according to a Middle East policy expert.   “I think that thousands, if not over 10,000, are probably dead,” Gregg Roman, executive director of the Middle East Forum, told The Daily Signal, pointing to images of makeshift morgues coming out of Iran.   The Guardian published a video Monday showing large numbers of body bags lining the grounds outside a medical center in Tehran, and France 24 reported similar images.   WARNING: The video below contains disturbing images.   “This is probably the worst violence that the regime has extracted on its people since the revolution,” Roman said, referring to the Iranian Revolution in 1979.   Anti-regime protests have gained momentum in Iran over the past two weeks, in response to Iran’s failing economy and rampant inflation.  Information on the protests is limited due to regime-imposed internet blackouts, Reuters reports, although some Iranians have been able to access the internet through Starlink. President Donald Trump says he plans to speak with Elon Musk about using Starlink to restore widespread internet access in Iran. Trump has acknowledged protester deaths, telling reporters Sunday that some were killed “through the stampeding … and some were shot.”   .@POTUS on Iran: "We're looking at some very strong options… I'm getting an hourly report, and we're going to make a determination very soon." pic.twitter.com/XnDOCZSMpv— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) January 12, 2026 Roman said that the regime has used “extremely violent” means to crack down on protests. Protesters “have sustained sniper bullets to their heads, they’ve been maimed by shotgun pellets, they’re choking on tear gas, and in cases in which they may have been trampled, it’s because they were probably fleeing regime security forces who were going after them with extremely violent means,” Roman said.   Trump threatened to act against the Islamic Republic over the killing of protesters, but had not specified what that action might entail. The Trump administration is in contact with Iran’s leaders, according to the president.   “Air strikes would be one of the many, many options that are on the table for the commander in chief,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters Monday, adding, “Diplomacy is always the first option for the president.”   .@PressSec Karoline Leavitt on Iran: "Air strikes would be one of the many, many options that are on the table for the Commander in Chief. Diplomacy is always the first option for the president." pic.twitter.com/UmqrhPD7JP— CSPAN (@cspan) January 12, 2026 Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told Al Jazeera Monday that the regime is ready for war.   “If Washington wants to test the military option it has tested before, we are ready for it,” Araghchi said.   In June, the U.S. carried out strikes on Iran’s three key nuclear facilities, damaging the regime’s nuclear capabilities.   If the U.S. chose to carry out another strike against Iran’s regime, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei does still have the capability of responding, according to Roman.   “They have their missile capabilities. They have the ability to still activate their proxies,” Roman said, referring to the Houthis and Hezbollah.   “But I think that the biggest thing that Iran did not activate in the June war, which they can do, is to activate their sleeper cells that they have that can target American embassies, synagogues—more soft targets that are not in Israeli territory, that are not U.S. bases in the region, but can hit the soft civilian underbelly of Western countries,” Roman said.   Regarding Trump’s “next move,” Leavitt says that is something “only he knows, so the world will have to keep waiting and guessing.”   The post Death Toll in Iran Protests Could Be ‘Thousands’ appeared first on The Daily Signal.

It’s hard not to notice the sharp contrast we witnessed over the weekend between the anti-Immigration and Customs Enforcement protests and the demonstrations taking place in Iran. Well, maybe it is hard for some. Here’s DNC Chairman Ken Martin doing his best to squeeze out a comparison between the two events. From Tehran to my birthplace of Minneapolis, people are rising up against systems that wield violence without accountability.In Iran, brave protestors confront a far-right theocratic regime that crushes dissent and denies basic freedoms. Here at home, tens of thousands are…— Ken Martin (@kenmartin73) January 11, 2026 “In Iran, brave protestors confront a far-right theocratic regime that crushes dissent and denies basic freedoms,” Martin wrote. “Here at home, tens of thousands are marching after the fatal ICE shooting of Renee Good- demanding justice, transparency, and an end to an unchecked federal force that takes lives and tears families apart.” This absurd statement was widely mocked on social media. In Iran, protesters are risking death fighting for freedom from a brutal Islamic terrorist regime.In Minneapolis, Radical Left lunatics and purple-haired schizos are melting down over law enforcement.The head of the Democrat Party thinks they are the same. https://t.co/J1wPAwD0HG— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) January 11, 2026 There’s a sharp distinction between the protests in the U.S. versus what’s happening in Iran. I wanted to say this was “needless to say,” but apparently it must be said with so many Westerners clearly divorced from reality. On the one hand, you have the obviously brave Iranian protesters who’ve taken to the streets even though their regime has been comfortable jailing and executing dissenters who have committed no other crime other than speaking out in opposition to their rule. The Iranian mullahs have, according to multiple reports, attempted to violently crack down on the protests engulfing multiple cities across their country. The number of protesters killed is over 600, according to estimates on Monday afternoon. Some of the videos and image coming out of Iran right now are remarkable. ? JUST IN: Absolutely MASSIVE Iranian protest happening in the streets of Tehran against Khamenei tonightJaw-dropping amount of demonstrators. THE PEOPLE MUST WIN! America stands with them! ??pic.twitter.com/b3eGMzu5GB— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) January 12, 2026 Nationwide unrest challenging Iran's theocracy saw protesters flood the streets in Tehran.Iran has faced intense nationwide protests for two weeks, marking the largest challenge to the country's ruling regime in years — and drawing vows from President Trump to intervene on the… pic.twitter.com/boGmJb7Tri— CBS News (@CBSNews) January 12, 2026 Even where protesters are only detained, they are very likely to be executed by a regime noted for jailing and killing religious and political dissenters. BREAKING:Islamic authorities in Iran have announced the imminent executions of participants in anti-regime protests.Officials said that following expedited court proceedings, the first group of convicted "ringleaders of unrest" will be executed on Wednesday morning.Among… pic.twitter.com/CnTFXr7ITu— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) January 12, 2026 Now, I genuinely don’t know where the Iran protests are going. This could be another moment of false hope. Accurately ascertaining the level of discontent in Iran is difficult given that information in and out of the country is tightly restricted. Not to mention, even if there is a popular turn against the regime, bravery is simply not enough to topple a government committed to staying in power that has mostly monopolized the use of force. There is no Second Amendment in Iran and little political freedom of any kind to speak of, and it seems the regime is willing to escalate violence to stay in power. We were able to connect with a source in Isfahan, Iran tonight to gather more information. He says demonstrations are ongoing with live ammunition being used against protesters. Will update with more soon.— Trey Yingst (@TreyYingst) January 12, 2026 What this means for the U.S. and what President Donald Trump’s response will be is still unclear, but it’s hard not to have sympathy for people putting their lives on the line against tyranny. It’s a different story here in the U.S., where woke mobs in Minnesota and elsewhere are not just protesting, but actively impeding law enforcement. Unlike the Iranian protesters, they’ve taken to the streets with the absolute support of cultural elites. The Golden Globes Sunday night was filled with leftist moral preening about standing in solidarity against ICE and the allegedly authoritarian Trump administration (which isn’t doing so good at “dictatorship” if it allows these events to take place on national television without interference). Judd Apatow hit out at Donald Trump at the Golden Globes by saying: "I believe we're a dictatorship now."https://t.co/bOV17S1uUr— Variety (@Variety) January 12, 2026 And isn’t it interesting that the people protesting Israel and the U.S. for apparently being so awful to Palestinians in Gaza have suddenly gone quiet about what’s happening in Iran? Yes, where is the pro-Pal crowd when ninety million people long since exploited and oppressed are under attack by the murderous regime ? https://t.co/FB1YpQZgZ0— Edward N Luttwak (@ELuttwak) January 11, 2026 Right now, according to them, it’s the anti-ICE protesters who are oppressed—even though in America they have the right to participate in elections, speak their mind without fear of arrest, and can lawfully protest policies they don’t like. Yes, you can’t hit a law enforcement officer with a 2,000-pound vehicle without potential consequences. I don’t see that right enshrined in the Constitution. Some Americans (and perhaps more than a few non-Americans) on the Left have decided that losing an election is intolerable and that a federal government enforcing immigration laws they don’t like is somehow illegitimate. It hasn’t helped that many prominent Democrat politicians and lawmakers signal it’s fine to impede law enforcement, creating the deadly situation leading to the ICE shooting of Renee Good. The Left’s activists have essentially, and maybe even unwittingly, courted death or serious harm by attempting to impede border enforcement. In one case that has led to tragic consequences and may lead to more. This is not meant as a dismissal of the Left’s current freak out. The rhetoric from Democrat politicians and their calls to essentially resist the federal government are dangerous and may have significant consequences. Theater kids larping out their fantasies can do terrible and consequential things sometimes. John Wilkes Booth proved that point. But comparing their protests to what’s happening in Iran is, for me, a little hard to stomach. The post While Woke American Mobs Protested Law Enforcement, Iranians Were Fighting for Their Lives appeared first on The Daily Signal.