An Afghan woman living in Texas, whose son and son-in-law were convicted of plotting an Election Day mass killing in 2024, had a public removal hearing Thursday, the first case before the Alien Terrorist Removal Court. The Justice Department says Nazira Haji Zada, 47, of Fort Worth, Texas, is being removed for her role in a plot involving her son, Abdullah Haji Zada, and son-in-law, Nasir Ahmad Tawhedi. The pair were arrested in October 2024 after buying guns and ammunition from an undercover FBI employee that to be used in an Election Day attack. The Justice Department asserts the planned shooting was inspired by the terrorist group ISIS. Zada, a legal permanent resident, is challenging the constitutionality of her deportation order. The case marks the first public session of the Alien Terrorist Removal Court, a specialized federal court that Congress established in 1996. The court has jurisdiction to remove foreign terrorists from the United States when the government establishes by a preponderance of the evidence that an alien is a terrorist. The secretive court allows the government to produce classified information to use in prosecution. Judge Joan Ericksen, the chief judge of the court, denied a request that Haji Zada be immediately released after a 45-minute hearing, CNN reported. But the issue of the constitutionality of the court could likely drag on. Matthew Farley, a federal public defender representing Zada, said, “This entire scheme is in violation of due process and is unconstitutional.” Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said in a public statement ahead of the hearing, “Congress created the Alien Terrorist Removal Court three decades ago to remove from the United States alien terrorists who never should have been here in the first place.” “The allegations in this case show the matriarch of an ISIS-sympathizing family aiding in a plot to launch a mass-casualty attack on American voters on Election Day,” Blanche continued. “The Department’s application in this court makes clear that terrorists have no place in the United States of America.” Zada’s son Abdullah was 17 at the time of his arrest. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 15 years in prison. As part of the plea agreement, Abdullah agreed to a judicial order of removal from the United States to Afghanistan after his incarceration. He acknowledged that the order of removal would terminate his lawful permanent resident status and waived his right to appeal. Her son-in-law Tawhedi, 28, pleaded guilty on June 13, 2025, to two terrorism-related offenses: conspiring and attempting to provide material support and resources to the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham, or ISIS. Tawhedi admitted that between June 2024 and October 2024, he conspired with at least one other individual to purchase two AK-47 rifles, 500 rounds of ammunition, and 10 magazines, with the intent to carry out a mass-casualty attack on or around Election Day, Nov. 5, 2024, on behalf of ISIS, according to the Justice Department. The criminal complaint said Tawhedi communicated with an ISIS facilitator about his plan.

On Thursday, Americans watched in stunned recognition as thousands of young men poured from Morocco into the Spanish enclave of Ceuta. Like Melilla, further to the east on the far northern shore of Morocco, the city is a relic of Spain’s once vast colonial empire. Nothing separates Morocco from these Spanish territories except shallow waters and light fencing. Ceuta’s local government has begged Madrid to declare a national emergency, but Spain’s interior minister said their law does not consider migration flows as a risk to national security. Illegal immigrants have long targeted Ceuta and Melilla, the Canary Islands, and even the mainland coast of Spain. Back in May 2021, more than 8,000 migrants illegally entered Ceuta in a few days. That looks like nothing compared to the current wave. Morocco won’t, or can’t, stop them leaving. In the year 711, armies of the Umayyad Caliphate crossed the Strait of Gibraltar and fought the ruling Visigoths. The Moors established the region of Al-Andalus on the Iberian Peninsula where they ruled for 700 years. But under a series of Christian rulers, Spain eventually drove the Caliphate out. The last Muslim state of Granada fell in 1492, the year Columbus set sail for America. Now the Moors are back, this time not by the sword. The EU has basically given up trying to end mass illegal migration. Instead, to share the burden of mass arrivals at the frontiers, the EU forces member states to accept a designated share of migrants per EU direction, regardless of what national voters want. In June, the European Union’s Directive on Migration and Asylum took effect. Under the new regime, EU countries can reject an asylum request if the applicant already could have received protection in a safe country they traversed. The EU considers Morocco to be safe. Member countries will be allowed to set up return hubs in safe third countries to return failed asylum applicants, instead of letting them hang around to loot, stab people, or attempt to torch schools. Countries will also be able to jail failed asylum applicants who don’t leave. But across Europe, lenient immigration judges favor the desires of intending migrants over the safety of natives. In May 2025, Denmark and eight other EU countries told the European Court of Human Rights that the court’s interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights has “limited our ability to make political decisions in our own democracies.” In 2025, the EU saw 669,365 first-time asylum applicants. Of these, 39% were approved. Of those rejected, a further 21% were approved on appeal. Of the rejected asylum applicants, the EU claims to deport 27%. That means an asylum applicant, even with a bogus claim, has at least an 82 percent chance of remaining in the EU. For millions, those odds are worth playing. In April, the socialist government of Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez announced a scheme to give one-year, renewable residence permits to illegal immigrants. The bar was incredibly low – applicants only had to prove they’d lived for at least five months in Spain and had no criminal records. The government claimed the program would apply to half a million people. When the amnesty window opened, over a million applied. Just as with illegal aliens released or paroled by President Joe Biden between 2021 and 2025, Spain has no way of checking the applicants’ criminal records back home in Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, and scores of other countries. Studies from Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, and elsewhere have consistently shown that crime rates by men from North Africa and the Middle East in Europe are far higher than among the native-born. That risk will be borne by Spanish, and later European, people. In August 2024, Sanchez went to the Gambia and announced partnership agreements to curb illegal immigration from West Africa to the Canary Islands. But in general, Sanchez is not opposed to mass migration, he just wants it better channeled and labeled. For globalists like Sanchez, there is no national identity worth protecting. People are interchangeable labor units. Differences in education, culture, worth ethic, and religion are immaterial. While visiting Mauritania in 2024, Sanchez said that “[d]espite the rhetoric that is growing in Europe, migration is not a problem…we must push formulas that allow us to manage the phenomenon of migration in a humane, safe and orderly way, to benefit our respective societies.” From a mix of motives–political advantage, globalist ideology, or sheer feckless surrender–this is the approach of the European Union, the United Nations, the World Economic Forum, the former Biden administration, and the growing Democratic Socialists of America. For Sanchez and the globalist Left that runs most of Europe, mass migration is an economic necessity to replace Europe’s aging population. Although it once peopled the Americas, Spain’s current fertility rate, measured in lifetime children per woman, is 1.4. That’s well below replacement level. China and India have turned the demographic corner to sustainable levels, but Africa’s average fertility level is still at 4 children per woman. Africa will not soon run out of unemployed young men to send, as long as Spain and Europe keep the borders open and the welfare taps flowing. Unemployment rates among migrants in Europe are high–twice that of natives in France and Spain. But even being jobless in Europe, with free housing, education, medical care, and more, is better than staying in countries with no such social benefits. With the reckless Sanchez amnesty, Spain has incentivized unlimited mass illegal migration. Medieval Spain was conquered by the sword. Modern Spain is  subjugating itself by choice.

A Christian mom and her husband are fighting back in court after Oregon’s Department of Human Services determined that they caused “mental injury” to her daughter by refusing to “affirm” her transgender identity. “It has destroyed our lives,” Nicole Calaway, the mother of two daughters who are now estranged because they both claim a transgender identity, told the Daily Signal in an interview Sunday. Child Protective Services took custody of her then-15-year-old daughter, K.A., on July 18, 2024, one day after Calaway and K.A. terminated the services of K.A.’s therapist, Jennifer Forster. According to court documents, Forster filed the complaint that resulted in K.A.’s removal. ODHS notified the Calaways that the agency considered them “responsible for the mental injury” of K.A. “Your adverse reactions to [K.A.] expressing their gender identity have caused serious harm to [K.A.’s] psychological functioning,” ODHS caseworker Rachel Woods wrote in a Sept. 13 letter. Calaway’s older daughter had already moved out. “I was so distraught, it felt like I was gutted,” the mother said. “Both my daughters were gone. I took myself to the hospital and admitted myself for a week because I couldn’t handle it.” The mother remains estranged from her daughters, and Oregon has ordered her not to contact K.A. Yet the state’s findings haven’t just affected her maternal relationship. A Black Mark on the Parents’ Records The “mental injury” finding constitutes a child abuse ruling on Calaway’s permanent record, and on the record of her husband, David. The stigma of a state agency finding the two guilty of child abuse has followed them across state lines after their move to Florida in July 2025. “In Oregon, if they were to do a background check, I could have lost my notary license, I still cannot—even here—volunteer with the church, anything to do with children,” the mother told the Daily Signal. The stigma may be even worse for her husband. Months after the two moved to Florida, the Oregon Department of Human Services determined that David Calaway had “exhibited a pattern of inappropriate grooming behaviors to include making inappropriate sexual comments while [K.A.] was in his care.” The husband vehemently contested the claims, saying he is innocent and was not given an opportunity to appeal. While the office made the determination in December 2025, he did not receive notification of it until May 12. The husband told the Daily Signal that his employment has yet to be affected by the matter, but he highlighted this message from the notice: “This abuse finding could have an impact on David Calaway’s ability to volunteer or to obtain or retain a professional license or certain types of employment.” “If I was being accused of sexual abuse, wouldn’t there be a police record? Wouldn’t I be arrested? Wouldn’t I be in jail?” the husband asked. “It’s like we’re guilty until proven innocent,” the mother said. The couple filed a lawsuit earlier this month, accusing the therapist, Forster, and ODHS agents of violating their rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Dissent From Transgender Orthodoxy Is ‘Mental Injury’ The lawsuit states that ODHS had previously screened out one child abuse referral against the Calaways and found a second referral unfounded, both in 2023. K.A.’s father, Keith Allison, who sought custody of the daughter, claimed that K.A. was in immediate danger, but the court denied two of his motions in 2024. “On essentially the same facts later used to remove K.A., a neutral court had twice declined to find immediate danger, and ODHS had already once found the mental-injury allegation unfounded,” the lawsuit states. On May 23, 2024, K.A. left school with a friend and did not notify her mother. She told school staff that she did not feel safe at home because her mother had showed her videos opposing transgender ideology the night before. School staff insisted she be taken to a stabilization center. Later, K.A. apologized to her mother and thanked her for helping her “acknowledge reality.” On July 17, Nicole Calaway and K.A. spoke on the phone with Forster, and terminated her services. Both K.A. and her mother accused the therapist of hiding information from the mother. According to the lawsuit, ODHS caseworker Rachel Woods recommended Forster call the Child Protective Services hotline shortly after this call. Forster called the hotline the next morning, and made many claims the lawsuit describes as false. The therapist said that the mother had “presented as aggressive and angry,” and that she said K.A. “would no longer have support.” Forster would also write that the mother terminated counseling out of a “desire to manage client’s mental health without counseling support.” The lawsuit claims these statements were false but gave ODHS a “fabricated appearance of urgency.” On July 18, ODHS and law enforcement officers removed K.A. from the Calaways’ home for “mental injury.” According to the lawsuit, ODHS concluded that Nicole Calaway’s decision to show her daughter videos presenting arguments against transgender ideology harmed her daughter’s psychological functioning. The Calaways dispute this, saying the agency treated disagreement with the ideology as child abuse. “When did the truth become mental injury?” David Calaway asked in an interview with the Daily Signal. The Calaways appealed the decisions, but ODHS stood by the finding. In November 2024, ODHS voluntarily withdrew the dependency petition, by which the department had removed K.A. from the Calaways’ home. While the department had dismissed the underlying claim, it nonetheless maintained the child-abuse findings against the Calaways. The plaintiffs argue the dismissal undercuts the state’s justification for removing K.A. from their home. “It began with them accusing us because we’re conservative Christians, and we don’t affirm her transgender ideology, that we provided hours of lectures to teach her daughter that this ideology isn’t right for her, and isn’t healthy for her, and they come and remove her from the home, and that was their reasoning,” the husband told the Daily Signal. Why Oppose Transgender Ideology? According to the lawsuit, the Calaways refused to “affirm” K.A. as “transgender” due to their conservative Christian convictions that “a person cannot change from one sex to the other” and their view “that so-called ‘gender-affirming care’—including ‘social transition’—is harmful to children and teens and has never been proven safe or effective.” The lawsuit cites the United Kingdom’s Kass Review and the Department of Health and Human Services’ study finding little evidence for positive impacts from sex-rejecting procedures. The lawsuit accuses Forster of engaging in therapeutic malpractice because she “knew, or in the exercise of reasonable professional care should have known, that so-called ‘gender-affirming care,’ including social transition, is not a proven, safe, or effective treatment for an adolescent girl and is psychologically harmful.” Nicole Calaway told the Daily Signal she presented multiple videos to her daughter, including testimonials of detransitioners, “because I wanted her to make an informed decision. I did not want her to ruin her body. I still do not want her to ruin her body.” The Lawsuit The Calaways’ lawsuit cited 42 U.S.C. § 1983, claiming deprivation of rights under the color of law. They claim that the therapist and ODHS official conspired to use the power of the state to interfere with Nicole Calaway’s right to direct the care, custody, and upbringing of her child under the Fourteenth Amendment. The Calaways also claim defendants violated their rights to free speech and religious freedom under the First Amendment by attempting to force them to support transgender ideology. The lawsuit also claims that ODHS directed school officials to deny Nicole Calaway access to her daughter’s educational records, even though no court order restricted her parental rights. The Daily Signal reached out to Forster, to ODHS, and to K.A.’s school district for comment and did not receive responses by publication time. The Christian couple seeks compensatory and general damages of at least $5 million, special and economic damages, punitive damages, a declaratory judgment in their favor, attorney’s fees, and an injunction removing them from a child abuse registry or a sex offender registry.

WASHINGTON, July 30 (Reuters) – Walt Disney-owned ABC said on Thursday that the Federal Communications Commission’s threat to revoke the network’s broadcast licenses is part of an unprecedented campaign of intimidation over broadcast content the Trump administration dislikes. ABC said that the Trump administration agency’s nearly unprecedented decision to order an early license review of the eight Disney-owned ABC stations is a warning from the government to other media companies. “The retaliation against ABC is a signal to every media company in the country: accommodate the administration’s view of what news coverage should look like or pay the price,” ABC said in a filing, adding that the agency’s objective is “a media industry too fearful of official reprisal to report the news freely.” FCC Chair Brendan Carr, who did not immediately comment Thursday, ordered the reviews in April, even though the stations’ license renewals were not scheduled to be considered until starting in October 2028. The FCC had not ordered an early review in more than 50 years before April. Carr could decide to take action after a final comment deadline on August 5. The reviews were ordered a day after Trump urged ABC to fire late-night host Jimmy Kimmel. ABC said over 150,000 comments have been filed and over 95% support the stations. Numerous local officials and groups in the eight states have filed in support of the stations. “From its earliest days, this administration has made clear its intent to punish ABC for its news coverage and to create a chilling effect on ABC and others,” ABC said. The FCC said the move stemmed from ​a year-long investigation into whether Disney’s diversity policies amounted to unlawful discrimination, an allegation the company denies. Carr and Disney did not ​immediately comment on Tuesday. Broadcast stations need FCC licenses to use public airwaves. While license revocations are exceptionally rare, critics say the prospect of losing a license ‌can pressure ⁠broadcasters and raise concerns about government interference in editorial and programming decisions. Networks have broad First Amendment rights to make programming decisions. Carr opened the investigation in March 2025 into Disney’s diversity practices, and said Disney submitted documents he viewed as insufficient. Trump has repeatedly urged broadcasters to drop comedy or news programs he dislikes or which have been critical, pressing regulators to revoke ​licenses of broadcasters he says are unfair. Trump ​demanded in November ⁠that the FCC revoke ABC licenses after he criticized an ABC News correspondent for asking Saudi Arabia’s crown prince about the 2018 killing of a Washington Post columnist, in a question he dubbed “insubordinate.” The FCC is also investigating ABC daytime talk show “The View,” which discusses U.S. politics, ⁠after saying ​it may be subject to federal rules requiring broadcasters to provide equal opportunities ​to political candidates. (Reporting by David Shepardson; Editing by Mark Porter and Nick Zieminski)

Sen. Ted Cruz is calling for Senate Republicans to do “everything humanly possible to pass the SAVE America Act.” With only one week left, the Texas lawmaker is intensifying pressure on his colleagues to act. Cruz appeared on “Mornings with Maria” on Fox Business today to urgently repeat a demand he has made for months: “We need to get this passed to preserve election integrity [and] to stop rampant voter fraud.” Last week, New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill admitted her state has more than 6,000 illegal immigrants registered to vote. According to the Department of Homeland Security, led by Secretary Markwayne Mullin, tens of thousands of illegal immigrants were found listed on voter rolls earlier this month in New Jersey, Nevada, and Pennsylvania, and close to 200,000 in California. “Democrats want illegal aliens to vote. That’s why they oppose the SAVE America Act,” Cruz claimed. “The Democrats, that’s how they stay in power. Look at the debacle in California; they may still be counting votes in California.” “What I’ve been arguing to my colleagues is we need to force the Democrats to do a talking filibuster—not just raise the finger and say, ‘I filibuster,’ but stand up and talk and talk and talk,” he added. Recently, SAVE America supporters ditched the talking filibuster idea after Senate Majority Leader John Thune refused to use the maneuver, which requires only 51 votes to pass legislation instead of 60. The Republican Party, President Donald Trump, House leadership, and even Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, have said that the budget resolution is the pathway to get proof of citizenship and voter ID passed into law. However, Thune is refusing to take the budget resolution up as well, claiming Republicans don’t have the votes for it. Cruz concluded his time on the morning program by urging Thune to cancel the upper chamber’s upcoming five-week recess and pass the provision. “We should stay here through August. We should keep going until we get it done,” Cruz said. He concluded by telling the Fox Business audience that he is “fighting tooth and nail” to get the 50 votes. “We need to get this done,” he said.