DAILY CALLER NEWS FOUNDATION—Department of Transportation (DOT) Secretary Sean Duffy on Friday threatened to withhold tens of millions in federal taxpayer highway funds for New York and other blue states that issue commercial driver’s licenses (CDLs) to illegal immigrants. Duffy said in a Wednesday press conference that among blue states allowing foreign nationals to receive CDLs, including California, New York is the “worst offender,” according to a nationwide audit his department conducted. The transportation secretary had announced on Sept. 26 that the DOT would be cracking down on non-domiciled CDLs, which states issue to non-citizens. “We will pull every dollar possible from every single state that’s unwilling to work with this administration and these longstanding rules to make sure that when American family gets in a car, they shouldn’t be worried that they have an unqualified foreigner operating an 80,000 pound big rig that could endanger their lives … or an unqualified driver operating a motor coach,” Duffy said at the press conference. “[Fifty-three percent] of New York’s non-domiciled CDLs were issued unlawfully or illegally,” Duffy added. “Now, what New York does is, if an applicant comes in and they have a work authorization for 30 days, 60 days, one year, New York automatically issues them an eight-year commercial driver’s license, that’s contrary to the law.” WATCH: “But we also found that New York many times won’t even verify whether they have a work authorization, they have a visa, or they’re in the country legally,” he continued. “So, they’re just giving eight-year commercial driver’s licenses to people who are coming through their DMV [Department of Motor Vehicles] and sending them out on American roadways, and again, they’re endangering the lives of American families.” “When more than half of the licenses reviewed were issued illegally, it isn’t just a mistake—it is a dereliction of duty by state leadership,” Duffy said in a Friday press release. “[Democrat New York] Gov. [Kathy] Hochul must immediately revoke these illegally issued licenses. If they refuse to follow the law, we will withhold federal highway funding.” Hochul’s office did not respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment. “New York must act immediately to comprehensively audit its CDL program and revoke every single illegally issued licenses,” Derek D. Barrs, Administrator of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), added in the same press release. The release specified that the state “has 30 days to respond to FMCSA’s enforcement action.” FMCSA is an agency within the DOT. “I’m going to give New York 30 days, because that’s what the law requires to come into compliance with the rules that have been long standing at the Department of Transportation,” Duffy also said at the press conference. “If they come into compliance, we’re going to work with them. If New York refuses to come into compliance, because Kathy Hochul, for some reason, believes that we should have unqualified truck drivers on American roadways. We are going to pull tens of millions of dollars.” Duffy specified that the DOT’s mission is not to have conflict with New York, California, or other blue states but instead to “get compliance, to make sure we have safe commercial drivers on American roadways and Americans are safe.” “If we’re going to have drivers on American roadways, they need to be the best trained, the best skills, because if operated incorrectly or inappropriately, these [vehicles] are lethal weapons on American roadways,” the secretary said during the press conference. California had issued a CDL to Jashanpreet Singh, an illegal immigrant truck driver accused of killing three people in a multi-vehicle crash, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told Daily Caller White House correspondent Reagan Reese on Oct. 23. Originally published by the Daily Caller News Foundation The post Trump Admin Says Blue States That Let Illegals Drive ‘Lethal Weapons’ Will Miss Out on Millions of Tax Money appeared first on The Daily Signal.

House Republican Leadership will soon be bringing a health care package to the floor—but first, they want to make sure the “five families” of the House GOP are on board. On Friday, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., met with what are known as the “five families” of the House Republican conference to iron out some of the health care package details. These factions include the fiscal hawks of the House Freedom Caucus, the swing district members of the Main Street Caucus, the Republican Study Committee, of which a majority of House Republicans are members; and the Problem Solvers Caucus and Republican Governance Group, blocs which pride themselves on bipartisanship. House GOP Health Care Plan Drops Next Week After the meeting, Republican leaders told reporters that health care legislation would be hitting the floor next week. “Stay tuned,” Speaker Johnson told reporters of the timing. “We’re excited about what we’ll put on the floor next week, and we’re putting the final components together.” Johnson’s comments come after days of speculation on whether or not Republicans would follow through on bringing forth a health care package. During a House press conference on Wednesday, Johnson had promised that a health care proposal would be coming despite the fact that the conference had shown signs of division with respect to health care solutions. The urgency for Republicans to pass a health care plan stem from continued debates over President Joe Biden’s boosts to health care tax credits that are set to expire.  Democrats shut down the government in October over demands to extend these credits, even though they had voted twice to make the enhancements temporary rather than permanent in party-line votes under Biden. Now, Republicans are faced with a sudden cut-off of the COVID-era credit levels. Republican Proposals So far, Republicans in the House have offered various proposals for an alternative to the credits which could help ease the cost of premiums and counter Democrat arguments that Republicans do not care about health care affordability. Many of these proposals involve setting up health savings accounts which would go directly to the consumer and allow them more flexibility in selecting their care than a premium tax credit. Republicans have kept mum about the details of the incoming package, although Speaker Johnson confirmed to The Daily Signal Wednesday that their legislation will include pro-life Hyde provisions against taxpayer funds going to abortions. But there is also a bloc of House Republicans, many from blue states, who are advocating for at least a short-term extension of the credits. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (left) and House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, both R-La. (Demetrius Freeman/The Washington Post/Getty Images) Republican leadership members confirmed that there was discussion Friday about whether to allow these House Republican moderates a vote on an amendment to extend the credits. “That’s still being discussed, but it was heavily discussed. We’ve just got to work a few things out,” House Majority Leader Steve Scalise said. Will a Discharge Petition Force Johnson’s Hand? There are now multiple discharge petitions to extend the premium tax credits. Discharge petitions are a tool used to bypass House leadership and force a bill to get a vote by getting the signatures of a majority of members. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., has his own discharge petition to force a vote on a bill to extend the credits for three years.  Additionally, there are two discharge petitions for a short-term extension of the credits picking up the support of several House Republicans. One comes from Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Pa., and would extend the subsidies for two years. The other was filed by Rep. Josh Gottheimer, D-N.J., and would also force a vote for a separate bill to extend the credits for two years. On Friday, Jeffries did not make clear whether he would consider lending his support to one of these bills.  “We’re actively reviewing those two discharge petitions, and we’ll have more to say about it early next week.” But Jeffries also told reporters that if the Republican package ends up including an amendment for a two-year extension of the credits, he likely would not back it. Jeffries suggests that a vote on the GOP health care bill + amendment vote on Fitzpatrick bill won’t be suitable for Democrats.“Their health care package, as I understand it, is likely to be a disaster and actually not enhance the health care of the American people. It will… pic.twitter.com/Sr6JbZE9zT— Mychael Schnell (@mychaelschnell) December 12, 2025 “Their health care package, as I understand it, is likely to be a disaster and actually not enhance the health care of the American people,” Jeffries told reporters. “It will take away from it. So it’s not clear to me that, even if it’s amended to include whatever Fitzpatrick has proposed, that it will actually solve the problem of addressing the Republican health crisis.” Will Republicans Scrap the Biden COVID Credits? Republicans do have to resolve difficult disagreements within their caucus about the credits.  Nevertheless, the vast majority of Republicans oppose a clean extension of the credits, viewing them as merely a way to mask the costs of a failed health care system. Republicans also argue these credits are inflationary and prone to fraud. One such Republican is Rep. Keith Self of Texas, a House Freedom Caucus member who called for allowing the expiration of the credits on Friday. “The Obamacare subsidy scheme drives up costs at the expense of the American taxpayer while using the American people’s hard-earned money to fund procedures like transgender surgeries and abortions,” Self wrote in a post on X.  The Obamacare subsidy scheme drives up costs at the expense of the American taxpayer while using the American people’s hard-earned money to fund procedures like transgender surgeries and abortions. No Republican has ever voted for these subsidies. We should keep it that way.…— Rep. Keith Self (@RepKeithSelf) December 12, 2025 “No Republican has ever voted for these subsidies. We should keep it that way. Let Biden’s COVID-era subsidies EXPIRE!” The post House Republicans Prepare for Health Care Blitz appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Sen. Jon Husted, R-Ohio, is officially running to keep his senate seat come 2026. The Daily Signal was on the ground in Columbus to speak to Husted as he filed his paperwork on Friday morning with Secretary of State Frank LaRose’s office. In the 2026 midterm election, Husted will likely face former Democrat Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown, who lost his seat in 2024 to Sen. Bernie Moreno. .@JonHusted has had a busy week! He filed this morning with Secretary of State @FrankLaRose and met with supporters after a press gaggle in Columbus. Stay tuned for my piece today with @DailySignal, including to do with a question asked by yours truly on polling. pic.twitter.com/1tFco9yNg1— Rebecca Downs????? (@RebeccaRoseGold) December 12, 2025 At an event after the filing, Husted met with campaign supporters and filmed a video expressing enthusiasm not only for next year’s election, but also next year’s 250th anniversary of America. A Tight Race While the once-purple Ohio has trended red in recent elections, a recent poll suggests races in Ohio could be tight. On Thursday, Emerson College released a poll that found Husted leading Brown 49% to 46%, which is 3% down from Husted’s Emerson College poll advantage in August 2025. In the August poll, Husted had led Brown by 50% to 44%. When asked by The Daily Signal if he was concerned about the shift, Husted pointed out he was still leading but also that he is “not going to get into the business of following every poll.” “At this point, we’re ahead. We’re in great shape, but understand, I never take the voters of Ohio for granted,” Husted continued. “We’ll go out and earn every single one of those votes next year and beyond, and we’ll come away victorious.” “Poll numbers will fluctuate,” Husted added, and that you “can’t depend on poll numbers.” Building Support The Emerson poll also found that Husted’s name identification lags behind other prominent politicians from the Buckeye state. When voters were asked if they had a favorable or unfavorable opinion of, or were unsure/had never heard of a group of Ohio politicians, 38% said they were unsure or had never heard of Husted. “Having everybody know you as somebody that’s been around forever is not exactly an asset,” Husted argued about such a poll finding. But the senator acknowledged that “there are a lot of people that I have to introduce myself to, that’s true.” In Husted’s mind, however, it’s an opportunity. “We have a lot of growth opportunity,” which he sees “as really good news, as a matter of fact.” In this effort. the Husted campaign hit the ground running this week, releasing a campaign video boasting his service record and announcing a list of county chairs for grassroots efforts. Husted Versus Brown Husted invoked Moreno during the press gaggle as well, pointing out that Moreno was down against Brown early on in the polls and ultimately emerged victorious. Moreno’s victory despite Brown’s status as a well-known figure in Ohio politics also came up. “Sherrod Brown just spent $300 million on his election… around a year ago, and lost by over 200,000 votes. He’s probably as well known as anybody in the history of Ohio politics, but he’s been there for 50 years. He was in Washington for 32 years, and the voters just sent him home, and they have a pretty good memory, and I’m confident that they know that I have fought for them,” Husted shared. As Husted told The Daily Signal about his race against Brown during an exclusive interview in September: “I’m an Ohio guy and he’s a D.C. guy.” Before being appointed by Republican Gov. Mike DeWine to fill now Vice President JD Vance’s seat, triggering next year’s special election, Husted served as Ohio’s lieutenant governor. Previously, Husted has also served as Ohio’s secretary of state, a state representative (which included time as speaker of the Ohio House of Representatives), and a state senator. The Daily Signal reached out to the Brown campaign but did not receive comment. The post Husted Officially Files for Race That Could Determine Control of the Senate appeared first on The Daily Signal.

 DAILY CALLER NEWS FOUNDATION—George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley said on Thursday that the evidence against Tyler Robinson, the alleged assassin of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk, is the “strongest” he has ever seen in a case. The case is moving more slowly than usual because Utah Fourth District Judge Tony Graf wants to ensure that this case remains fair, Turley said on “The Ingraham Angle.” He added that fairness has become a major concern for the judge since the evidence against Robinson is overwhelmingly strong. “But I think that reflects the fact that this judge wants to be very cautious. You know, the fact is, this is a case with overwhelming evidence. I mean, the prosecutors could probably lose 90% of this evidence in a suppression hearing and still secure an easy conviction,” Turley said. “He has a presumption of innocence, but the evidence here you can’t ignore. It’s just the strongest I’ve ever seen in a case.” “So the real concern for the court is not just, he has to protect the rights of the defendant, which is the primary concern on these questions, but also he doesn’t want to commit reversible error because that tends to victimize the family again because they have to go through this again,” Turley continued.  WATCH:  Before the arrest, Robinson’s parents recognized their son in security footage released by investigators and confronted him. Robinson confessed to the murder, prompting his parents to call a youth pastor who formerly served as a law enforcement official, who then contacted Washington County Sheriff Nate Brooksby. Brooksby said during a Sept. 18 press conference that law enforcement promised a “peaceful” surrender as a condition for Robinson turning himself in. Robinson then agreed and arrived at his office with his parents and the youth pastor. Prosecutors said that Robinson also confessed in text message conversations with his transgender boyfriend, Lance Twiggs, and stated that he “had enough of [Kirk’s] hatred.” He also told Twiggs to look for a handwritten note read, “I had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk and I’m going to take it.” The judge kept part of the hearing on Thursday closed to the public and to Robinson’s family while they discussed which parts of the trial should be made public and which parts should remain closed. He approved of the use of cameras in the courtroom, but imposed new restrictions after finding that media outlets violated the court’s standing decorum order. Kirk’s widow, Erika, has pushed for the trial to be open to the public to ensure transparency. “We deserve to have cameras in there,” Kirk told Fox News in November. “Why not be transparent?” Robinson is charged with one count of aggravated murder, one count of felony discharge of a firearm causing serious bodily injury, two counts of obstruction of justice for hiding the rifle and discarding his clothing, two counts of witness tampering for instructing a roommate to delete texts, and one count of committing a violent offense in front of children. Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty. In October, the judge granted Robinson’s request to wear civilian clothing, but stated that he be restrained due to the nature of the charges against him. Originally published by the Daily Caller News Foundation The post Jonathan Turley Says Evidence Against Charlie Kirk’s Alleged Assassin Is ‘Strongest’ He’s Ever Seen appeared first on The Daily Signal.

For years, climate activists have insisted that America must undergo a rapid, top-down “green transition,” pursuing sweeping mandates that Congress has repeatedly rejected. Unable to legislate their agenda, they have turned to the courts, a strategy that has broad national security implications. This week’s Washington Post blockbuster report reveals one particularly stark consequence of our rapid transition: China’s military can cause rolling blackouts across the United States by remotely manipulating green technologies they sell here. The U.S. Supreme Court is considering this week whether to take up Suncor Energy v. Boulder, a case that exemplifies how the legal system is being manipulated to drive national climate policy. In 2018, Boulder, Colorado, now joined by nearly three-dozen other Democrat-led state and municipal governments, sued America’s energy producers, claiming the sale of their products contributed to global climate change. The lawsuits argue the energy companies’ alleged role in climate change has caused a “public nuisance” in their localities and are seeking billions of dollars in damages to purportedly mitigate future local climate change costs. When activist plaintiffs weaponize public-nuisance lawsuits to undercut U.S. energy production, China is the geopolitical beneficiary. This flood of lawsuits has undermined American energy security. Orchestrated by progressive activists and their mass tort trial lawyers, scores of climate lawsuits effectively identical to Boulder’s have been filed in concert by left-wing states, cities, and counties around the country. This is a “flood-the-zone” effort designed to overwhelm energy producers through litigation rather than policymaking. In May, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled Boulder’s suit could proceed in state court, prompting a request from the energy defendants for the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene. This Friday, the Court will consider whether to grant the energy companies’ petition for review. If courts side with activists, energy policy will no longer be set by federal agencies or elected lawmakers accountable to voters. Instead, it becomes the province of judges and trial lawyers. Boulder makes that vision explicit, seeking massive damages to finance “green-fit” infrastructure and public-health spending. But the deeper security problem is that this litigation wave aligns perfectly with the strategic aims of the Chinese Communist Party. China has spent years running sophisticated influence operations inside the United States aimed at promoting policies that weaken American energy independence. Groups operating as CCP fronts, like Energy Foundation China, quietly fund research, convene activist networks, and shape state and local debates to push the U.S. toward green-technology dependence, knowing that China dominates the global supply chain for solar panels, EV batteries, and rare-earth minerals. By encouraging America to abandon reliable domestic energy sources, China strengthens its own geopolitical leverage while eroding one of America’s greatest economic advantages in our access to abundant, affordable energy. China’s motives are not hidden. It produces the vast majority of the world’s solar-panel components, more than 60% of global rare-earth minerals, and nearly all manufacturing equipment for solar PV technologies. These are the building blocks of the very technologies climate litigants want courts to mandate. Most alarmingly, as Washington Post revealed, companies tied to China’s military have been caught selling energy-grid components with undisclosed back doors that allow Beijing to remotely disrupt U.S. power systems. Beijing also imposed export controls on critical minerals, weaponizing supply-chain dominance for geopolitical leverage. Meanwhile, China continues to increase its own emissions and built a startling 95 gigawatts of new coal-fired power plants in 2024, all while promoting green-energy adoption abroad. Every step America takes toward dependency on Chinese-controlled technologies is a step toward vulnerability. Climate litigation accelerates that dependency. If courts impose billions in liability on American energy producers, production will shrink, prices will rise, and investment will shift away from domestic resources toward dangerous green technologies exported by Communist China. The Boulder lawsuit and its counterparts represent more than just a major national security risk. They hand China a strategic victory by undermining U.S. competitiveness, weakening domestic energy producers, and driving the U.S. toward reliance on foreign supply chains dominated by an authoritarian adversary. This is why China applauds aggressive climate activism in the U.S. even as it ignores its own environmental obligations. America’s energy policy should be made by elected officials, not outsourced to state-court judges acting on activist petitions. If courts refuse to take a stand it will become much harder to reverse the reckless momentum of America’s green-transition policies. CCP influence operations will succeed. The Supreme Court should take up Suncor and make clear that climate policy belongs in the hands of elected officials. If we fail to draw that line, we risk allowing America’s adversaries to exploit our legal system to shape a dangerous future of American energy dependence upon Communist China. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post Climate Litigation Hands China a Strategic Victory While Harming America appeared first on The Daily Signal.