The Environmental Protection Agency is on track to complete its draft risk assessment of glyphosate by the end of the year. Following the Supreme Court ruling that Monsanto/Bayer can be shielded from liability when users are harmed by their product, the EPA is working to determine if the pesticide is safe. “The EPA is going through our development of a draft risk assessment,” EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin told the Daily Signal. Monsanto produces Roundup, a grass and weed killer with glyphosate as the active ingredient. The 25-year-old glyphosate study that once found the pesticide safe, despite a cancer link, was retracted in December 2025 after researchers discovered the study was ghostwritten by Monsanto, the company that went on to make billions from the pesticide being labeled “safe.” WATCH: @epaleezeldin says China is the number one foreign country bringing illegal pesticides into the U.S. the @EPA administrator says he is also concerned about what is coming into the East coast from Africa.A recent bill from @RepLuna highlights how China is poising America… https://t.co/PhKhfETBB4— Virginia Grace McKinnon (@virginiagmck) June 25, 2026 Zeldin announced in 2025 the EPA would conduct a new study, ensuring there is “no bias.” “I have had multiple meetings with the career staff involved in that process. I have very strongly emphasized both publicly and privately, directly to them in these meetings, that I do not want to bias their work. I do not want to prejudge their work,” Zeldin continued. “I want to make sure that they are empowered with all the tools that they need to be able to complete a thorough scientific assessment of it,” he continued. While the Make America Healthy Again movement is calling for the EPA to temporarily ban glyphosate until the study is complete, Zeldin said he is letting the study play out. The House's bipartisan Paraquat Prevention Act would cancel all legal use of the herbicide paraquat, which has been linked to Parkinson's disease and is massively produced by China.The bill is authored by @RepLuna.@virginiagmck https://t.co/xnKHvssuv0— The Daily Signal (@DailySignal) June 22, 2026 “Whatever they find, I’m looking forward to communicating that to the public.
I don’t know what the conclusion of that research is going to show. Whatever it is, I’m the one who’s in a position to explain their work,” the administrator continued. He explained that he does not want the scientists involved to “cut corners” or to not review all the studies. He described the scientists working on this risk assessment, saying they are “dedicated career scientists who absolutely love their job, they love the mission, and they want to get it right.” He confirmed he is confident that the review and research will be completed by the end of 2026. “That has been the marker that was set from the first conversation that has been any conversation with timeline, and no one has indicated to me otherwise that the development,” Zeldin concluded.

A pro-life leader told the Daily Signal that returning the issue of abortion to the states was a strategic failure of the movement, adding that pro-life advocates must turn now to a federal strategy. Marjorie Dannenfelser, the president of SBA Pro-Life America, said the movement is “not better off” following the Supreme Court’s 2022 Dobbs ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade and returned the regulation of abortion to federal and state lawmakers. “The states-only experiment is a failure,” she said. Dannenfelser pointed to the rising abortion rate as evidence of the failure. The pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute reports 1,126,000 abortions in the United States in 2025, a 21% increase from the pre-Dobbs era. Even states with the strictest abortion laws are seeing abortion rates skyrocket. Texas, for example, banned nearly all abortion procedures in 2021, but saw a 40% increase in abortions from April 2022 to January 2025. Declaring abortion a “states’ issue” has allowed the federal government to wipe its hands clean of abortion legislation, Dannenfelser argued. She called out policymakers for shifting responsibility, accusing them of using states’ rights as a “cop-out.” Combating Abortion at the Federal Level Dannenfelser walked the Daily Signal through the pro-life movement’s plan to return abortion policy to the executive and legislative branches, listing four of the movement’s priorities. First, she said that the administration of President Donald Trump should enforce an in-person requirement for abortion pill prescriptions. In 2023, the FDA removed the in-person dispensing requirement, allowing for prescriptions via telehealth and for the pills to be shipped through the mail. In 2025, Louisiana sued the FDA for removing the mandate, arguing that it allowed thousands of abortion drugs to be sent by mail to the state, which has a “near-total ban” on abortion. According to a May 2026 opinion by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, “The policy now facilitates nearly 1000 illegal abortions in Louisiana per month.” “The battle is at this abortion pill,” Dannenfelser said. Second, Dannenfelser argued that the FDA needs to research the side effects of the abortion pill. “The drug itself is horrible,” she stated. “The FDA should be thoroughly investigating the after-effects.” Because of the FDA’s neglect to study the side effects and its insistence on making it widely available by mail, “there is no informed consent,” she said. She argued the abortion pill is harming women, calling it a “human rights disaster.” Third, she said the FDA needs to ease access to abortion pill reversal treatments. And fourth, she said pro-lifers need to fight at the polls to elect “bold and courageous leaders” to Congress and the White House in 2026 and 2028. “Our goal this cycle is to defend and expand our pro-life majorities in Congress. That is what drives our voter contact program. We invest in races where our efforts can make a difference between victory and defeat,” she said. SBA maintains a National Pro-Life Scorecard, which it says “assigns every member of Congress—House and Senate—with a pro-life ‘grade’ to better inform Americans about where their members of Congress stand on life.” “We’re prioritizing bills that eliminate or continue prohibitions on federal taxpayer funding of abortion, as well as bills that protect the unborn and their moms from dangerous abortion drugs,” the organization’s press office told the Daily Signal. The group noted a bill led by Sen. James Banks, R-Ind., and Rep. Mark Messmer, R-Ind., the Forced Abortion Prevention and Accountability Act, which “establishes federal penalties for the intentional administration of abortion-inducing drugs without a woman’s informed consent,” according to a press release from Messmer’s office.

Editor’s note: This is a lightly edited transcript of today’s video from Daily Signal senior contributor Victor Davis Hanson. Subscribe to our YouTube channel to see more of his videos. Hello, this is Victor Davis Hanson for the Daily Signal.   We’re watching a modern-day French Revolutionary-like takeover of the Democratic Party. We could call it the Reign of Terror or the Democratic guillotine.   What I mean by that, in 1793 and ’94, when the French Revolution was well on its way to fruition, a group of radicals called Jacobins, led by the Robespierre brothers, hijacked that revolution and decided that they were going to go far, far to the left of the effort to abolish the monarchy and rename the days of the week, the months, start with a year zero concept, go out and attack private property, and execute people.   Now, I don’t think the Democratic socialists are going to do that, but their takeover is similar to the Jacobin takeover. And what is their agenda? Their agenda is a radical Green New Deal, war on fossil fuels, open borders, no deportations, no deportations even for criminally convicted.  In addition to that, cut the defense budget, defund the police, institutionalize diversity, equity, inclusion, chauvinism.   We’re all going to go by our incidental affiliations.   If you’re trans or gay or female or Black or Asian, that’s going to be what you identify in as, a large group of the victimized with complaints against the white male, etc., victimizer class.   If you look closely at how that agenda manifests itself in the real world, it is anti-Semitic, pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel, anti— I’ll be candid, it’s anti-white if you look at the word white privilege, white chauvinism, white hate, all of this stuff.   So how is it manifesting itself in real terms? Well, we recently had midterm elections, as you know, and most of the Left-wing Democrats—and remember, this isn’t the Democratic Party of Hubert Humphrey or JFK or even Bill Clinton. It’s far to the left. But that wasn’t enough for the new Jacobins and their guillotine.   So I’ll give you a couple of examples. Dan Goldman was a Left-wing New York congressman. He’s famous for being probably the most recognized Trump hater in the House of Representatives. He got completely wiped out by Brad Lander, who was a declared Democrat socialist, but his agenda was a complete divorce from Israel, basically pro-Hamas, and confiscations in cases of private property, wealth taxes on unearned income or unrealized profits.   And this pattern keeps repeating itself.  We’ve seen the candidacy of Graham Platner in Maine, the one of Mr. [James] Talarico in Texas, Mr. [Abdul] El-Sayed in Michigan. And the result is it’s got the original revolutionaries scared to death, and they are moving as fast as they can away from the people that they used to court.   So the Nancy Pelosi endorsement, the Chuck Schumer endorsement, even the Hakeem Jeffries endorsement is no longer coveted. In fact, they don’t want any part of it.   Elissa Slotkin, the newly minted senator in Michigan who begged them all to come in—and she won a very close race against the Republican Mike Rogers last time around— she says we have to move on. She doesn’t want their endorsement anymore. No one wants their endorsement.   Why does no one want their endorsement? Because they don’t have the House or the Senate or the White House, and they feel they’re yearning for power, and they want to get in there and institutionalize their power by insisting we never have voter ID, we go to completely mail-in balloting, we pack the court, we get rid of the filibuster if they don’t win the Senate, of course.   We get rid of the Electoral College, we bring in new states and new Democrat senators, etc.   So this all presents a dilemma for a lot of these people. What do you do if you’re a Jewish American, Mr. Scott Wiener, and you want to take over Nancy Pelosi’s seat, and you are the most fanatical Left-wing state legislator that we’ve ever had in California?   And all of a sudden, this new Jacobin party says, Well, you’re for Israel. And then what do you do? You do what he does: No, no, no. Israel is genocidal. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea culpa.   Dan Goldman thought that he didn’t have to give the mea culpa for his Israel support, but he did, and he lost. His opponent was Jewish, but unlike Mr. Goldman, he said that he had nothing to do with Israel. He didn’t like it.  Got to remember that it’s emerging from these socialist Jacobins that their main interest, besides confiscation of property and redistribution of wealth, is a deep hatred of Israel.   And so where did they all come from? Why now? Well, we have 53 million people that weren’t born in the United States, and this is a time when we don’t acculturate or assimilate anybody. And then we had DEI that separated us by race.   We have a globalist economy that rewarded a particular group of people, and especially this movement is led by very wealthy people like [Zohran] Mamdani or George Soros or all of these candidates. Graham Platner is not poor. You look at them, they’re either affluent, upper-middle class, or very wealthy.   And their constituency are illegal immigrants, immigrants in general, the poor who they promise lavish entitlements, and the disaffected middle-class kids that bought the line they had to go to college, ran up $1.8 trillion in debt, and can’t get a job, and they blame, blame, blame somebody other than their own poor choices.   What else spiked them very quickly? Of course, they’re out of power. I mentioned that. And they’re angry they have no power except institutional. They control K-12, academia, corporations, and media, but that’s not enough for them.   Number two, they hate Donald Trump. They despise Donald Trump. And most of these people get on television or media and think of ways they can, I don’t know, like celebrities, poison him, set him on fire, shoot him when he’s almost killed. That’s the way things go.   They’re very, very radical in their hatred of Donald Trump. They hate everything he does.   If he has the pool in Washington, the Reflecting Pool, then they would like to put on costumes and say, we’re for algae, not the pool. We want algae to take over Trump’s pool.  And finally, on this 250th anniversary, they can’t say a good word about the United States. And remember, they don’t leave the United States. They’re like Joy Reid. You have a vacation home or, Sunny Hostin, you brag on TV about your son went to Harvard or how wealthy and refined you are.   They like consumer capitalism, but they don’t want it for the middle class, just themselves.   And then, like Trotskyites or Bolsheviks or any revolutionary period that we know of, the elite then carve out special exemptions for themselves, and they make everybody else, like lab rats, suffer from their experiment.   What will happen very quickly? One of two things will happen. It will either be kind of a wave like the Obama 2008 win, when everybody said suddenly, I want nothing to do with Hillary Clinton. She’s an old fuddy-duddy. I have to have Barack Obama and hope and change.   Well, you know how that went. As soon as he got elected, it was all race, race, race, divide, divide, divide, divide, apologize for America, but he won.  Or it could be like 1972, George McGovern. He had the largest popular vote loss, I think, in the modern period in 150 years. He lost to Richard Nixon, who won 60.8%.   Why? Because he hijacked the— He was a good man. He was a World War II veteran bomber pilot. He hijacked the Democratic Party and made them embrace a radical left agenda that, in the general election, turned off America.   And they voted for someone who everybody thought would have no chance at one point in 1968. He had a close race, Richard Nixon, and Richard Nixon destroyed McGovern in that election.  So one of two things are going to happen. I think it’s the latter, that they’re going to get into a big national election in 2026 and maybe as early as the midterms, and they’re going to lose a lot.   They’re going to lose big time in 2026 if they nominate these socialists. And if the Republican Party exposes who these socialists are in these House races in 2026, I think they have an even shot at even keeping the midterms for the Republicans. And that would be quite a feat, since 38 out of the last 41 midterms, the in-party has lost seats.   We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal.

Jessica Gorman, bereaved mother of Sheridan Gorman, shot back at Democrat members of Congress who complained about having to hear her testimony about illegal immigrants during a Tuesday congressional hearing on sanctuary cities. “No family should ever have to bury a child because public officials fail to put American lives first,” Gorman said in her opening statement before the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement. Venezuelan national Jose Medina has pleaded not guilty to murder charges involving the death of Gorman’s 18-year-old daughter. Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., who serves as the subcommittee’s ranking member, began her opening statement with condolences to Gorman and Joe Abraham, whose daughter died when an illegal alien drunk driver collided with her car. “Let me start by offering my deepest condolences to you, Mrs. Gorman, and to you, Mr. Abraham, for the loss of your children,” Jayapal said. But then her tune changed. “Unfortunately, this hearing is the fourth time in this committee that we’ve had a hearing on sanctuary cities. The fourth time,” Jayapal told Gorman and Abraham. “And there’s many other things we could be doing other than this.” Democrat Rep. Pramila Jayapal on a hearing with parents of those murdered by illegal aliens: “Unfortunately this hearing is the 4th time in this committee that we’ve had a hearing on sanctuary cities… There's many other things that we could be doing.” pic.twitter.com/YQeNucvOTC— America (@america) June 30, 2026 When Rep. Tom Tiffany, R-Wis., asked Gorman and Abraham whether Americans should be “concerned” about sanctuary city policies, Gorman took the opportunity to respond to Jayapal. “I just have to say one thing because it’s been plaguing me,” Gorman started. “I get so upset with your ‘buts,’ and you don’t want to talk about this. ‘This is the fourth hearing,’” she noted, citing Jayapal. “You know what I’m thankful for? I’m thankful that my daughter was just shot in the back of the head,” the mother added. “Not raped, murdered, dismembered, put in a garbage can.” “And you can actually dismiss the angel families; you can say ‘but.’ You don’t want to hear four sessions on angel families? I’m sorry: you need to. You need to,” Gorman insisted. "I'm thankful my daughter was only shot — not raped." Jessica Gorman, mother of murdered "Angel" Sheridan Gorman, testifying before Congress for the 4th time — while Democrats complain about having to hear it. pic.twitter.com/dJml2Npyip— Sean Hannity (@seanhannity) July 1, 2026 “How messed up is that?” the mother asked. “That I’m thankful every day that she was just murdered. Not raped and dismembered.” She also called out House Democrats for supporting sanctuary city policies during her opening statement. “Explain why people here illegally matter more than your American citizens,” Gorman dared. “Explain why sanctuary policies matter more than my Sheridan’s life. Explain why cooperation with ICE too much was to ask for, but asking our American parents to bury our children is somehow acceptable.” “My daughter paid for those failures—your failures—with her life,” she told House Democrats.

Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy announced on Tuesday afternoon that the Federal Aviation Administration is taking a “pivotal step” to make civil supersonic flights possible. The Department of Transportation says the flights will be fast, quiet, and coming soon. “Restoring supersonic flight over land isn’t just about speed, it’s about unleashing American innovation and ushering in a Golden Age of Travel,” Duffy said in a press release announcing the move. COMING SOON: SUPERSONIC FLIGHTS The @FAANews is clearing the way for supersonic technology to take the skies at MACH 1 SPEEDS The airspace is about to get faster… Welcome to the Golden Age of Travel pic.twitter.com/GK59TPQknR— Secretary Sean Duffy (@SecDuffy) June 30, 2026 “Thanks to President Trump’s leadership, we are working at lightning speed to safely enable the next quantum leap in aviation technology and deliver an exciting new way to fly to the American flying public,” Duffy continued. The department said innovations in supersonic technology will make it possible to safely operate the aircraft without a sonic boom. BOOM! @FAANews is helping bring SUPERSONIC FLIGHTS over America… with no sonic boom. GAME CHANGER. This means FASTER & QUIETER flights for YOU! @AmericaRpts pic.twitter.com/LmSWvjsemi— Secretary Sean Duffy (@SecDuffy) June 30, 2026 This will be possible “in the next several years, in our lifetime,” said Duffy, appearing on Fox News. He explained that, if done right, the sonic boom “can ricochet off of the atmosphere and not hit the ground and break windows.” According to the FAA, commercial flights generally fly between 550 and 600 mph. With supersonic speeds, they will be able to travel faster than 770 mph. A flight from Los Angeles to New York, which currently takes roughly 5.5 hours, could take only 3 hours. In the announcement, officials only reference flights in the United States, but by securing aviation safety agreements with foreign authorities, this could change. The FAA is collaborating with the International Civil Aviation Organization, NASA, industry, and academic institutions to deliver the flights.