Democratic Sen. Chis Murphy of Connecticut faced backlash for his reaction to news of Iranian shadow fleet vessels bypassing a U.S. blockade before clarifying on Tuesday that his original social media post was “sarcasm.” On Monday, Murphy reposted a report on X of at least 26 Iranian shadow fleet vessels breaking through a U.S. blockade of the Strait of Hormuz and said, “awesome.” The post has since amassed 2.8 million views. awesome https://t.co/nRj1trI3rF— Chris Murphy ? (@ChrisMurphyCT) April 20, 2026 The United States on April 13 began a blockade of ships leaving Iranian ports through the strait. Murphy faced heavy backlash for the post. Rep. Randy Fine, R-Fla., called for the senator’s resignation and accused him of being a traitor. On Tuesday, Murphy clarified that his post was “sarcasm.” “Ok Twitter, I can’t believe I need to clarify this but obviously Trump’s bungled mismanagement of this war is not ‘awesome’,” Murphy wrote. “As I have said a million times here, it’s a disaster and he should end the war immediately. My tweet was something called ‘sarcasm.'” Murphy’s posts come after the senator has opposed the military operation in Iran. In March, Murphy was one of the original sponsors of the Iran War Powers Resolution, which eventually failed in the Senate. “If our Republican colleagues will not do their duty, if they are going to engage in an effort to hide the consequences of the war, if they are going to refuse to ask questions of our incompetent national security leaders at the White House, who have waged this war without planning for the foreseeable consequences, then we will force a debate and a vote on this floor,” Murphy said in a statement. “This war is not going to make more sense the longer it goes.” The post Dem Senator Clarifies ‘Sarcastic’ Post About Iran Breaking US Blockade appeared first on The Daily Signal.

FIRST ON THE DAILY SIGNAL—The State Department is enforcing President Donald Trump’s policy banning men from using women’s restrooms and other private spaces, according to a new memo obtained by The Daily Signal. The State Department issued a memo on Monday titled “Updates Regarding Biological Sex and Intimate Spaces, Including Restrooms,” which clarifies that the agency must abide by Trump’s executive order protecting sex-segregated private spaces. “The Administration affirms that there are two sexes—male and female—and that federal facilities should operate on this objective and longstanding basis to ensure consistency, privacy, and safety in shared spaces,” State Department Principal Deputy Spokesman Tommy Piggot told The Daily Signal. “In line with President Trump’s Executive Order this provides clear, uniform guidance to the department by grounding policy in biological sex as determined at birth.” “ACTION: Post must abide by the President’s directive in E.O. 14168, ensuring intimate spaces are designated by biological sex,” the memo reads. President Trump signed an executive order on his first day in office directing agencies to designate private spaces by biological sex. Last summer, the Office of Personnel Management issued guidance that federal bathrooms, locker rooms, and lactation rooms must be designated by biological sex. On Feb. 26, 2026, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ruled that “under Title VII, federal agency employers may lawfully exclude men from the women’s bathroom, and women from the men’s bathroom.” The ruling reverses an Obama-era EEOC decision from 2015 which required federal agencies to allow employees who identify as transgender to use bathrooms in accord with their “gender identity,” rather than biological sex. “When it comes to bathrooms, male and female employees are not similarly situated,” EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas said at the time. “Biology is not bigotry.” The new memo does not prohibit single-occupancy restrooms. The post EXCLUSIVE: Rubio Cracks Down on Men in Women’s Restrooms appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Most Supreme Court justices seemed to side with the government against a claim by telecom giants that the Federal Communications Commission violated the companies’ right to a jury trial by issuing fines. Justices heard arguments Tuesday in a case involving AT&T and Verizon over more than $100 million in fines that the government argues are warnings. Chief Justice John Roberts noted that, under the Telecommunications Act of 1996, FCC fines aren’t binding. “I’m just wondering, in terms of the substantive legal issue, though, you are not obligated to pay until you get a jury trial,” Chief Justice John Roberts asked. Arguing for the telecommunications companies, Jeffrey Wall replied, “If I get a parking ticket from the government, I can ignore it and make them come after me. But I still owe it.” The questions in the case could hinge on whether the FCC was “imposing” fines or merely “assessing” them. The FCC had found that both companies violated the 1996 law, which requires carriers to protect the confidentiality of customer data. The FCC fined AT&T $57 million and fined Verizon $46.9 million. Both companies sued, saying the fines imposed by an administrative body violate the right to a jury trial. The government argued that, as an indictment is only a notice of charges before a criminal trial, similarly, an FCC fine is an assertion that the government could proceed with a lawsuit. The high court ruled in 2024 that the Securities and Exchange Commission violated the Seventh Amendment by imposing heavy civil fines through administrative proceedings. However, the reason an FCC fine might be different from the SEC case is that the 1996 communications law specifically says a company can refuse to pay the fine. Furthermore, if it does so, the Justice Department has five years to file a lawsuit. The lawsuit would entitle the company to a jury trial, thus giving the FCC an effective loophole around a Seventh Amendment argument. Justice Brett Kavanaugh noted the government seemed to be “in retreat.” “It seems like you’ve won on the law going forward, one way or the other,” Kavanaugh said to Wall. “The government’s in retreat.” However, he suggested the government’s new grounding might be defensible. “But what you’re complaining about, and it’s understandable, is you think you were misled into paying the money without getting the jury trial,” Kavanaugh said to Wall. “Is there something we can do about that?” Wall said the first step would be requiring the government to return the money, but added the second step could be more important. “The second thing I want to say is, in effect, that the orders are toothless,” Wall argued. Previously, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit sided with AT&T and tossed the FCC fine. However, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit sided with the FCC against Verizon. When there is a circuit split, a case is decided by the Supreme Court. Justice Neil Gorsuch noted the statute says a carrier has the right to allow the Justice Department to chase the fine. “Are we saying it doesn’t mean what it says it means?” he continued, asking the court to assume the FCC fine is “a notice, a charge, a serious piece of paper, but it isn’t a final determination or adjudication of any liability.” Wall said that could be the “worst of all possible worlds” by allowing the government to allege an offense without having to adjudicate the matter. He later added, “It has occurred to no one for decades that orders were nonbinding.” The post ‘Toothless’ or Unconstitutional? SCOTUS Hears Case on $100M Fines for Verizon, AT&T appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The Justice Department has launched an investigation into the Southern Poverty Law Center over its paid informant program, the SPLC announced Tuesday. Bryan Fair, the group’s interim president and CEO, said in a video statement that the SPLC faces “a criminal investigation and possible charges.” “Although we don’t know all the details, the focus appears to be on the SPLC’s prior use of paid confidential informants to gather credible intelligence on extremely violent groups,” he added. ?BREAKINGThe Southern Poverty Law Center says it is under "criminal investigation" for its paid informant program?Journalists like me have long expected SPLC might have cultivated informants, but this explicit confirmation is new.?1/5https://t.co/75hLVqs9dQ pic.twitter.com/Yw6V6Irnrw— Tyler O'Neil (@Tyler2ONeil) April 21, 2026 Fair added that the use of paid informants was “necessary” because of threats the SPLC faced. Fair noted that in 1983, members of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan firebombed the SPLC’s offices, and he claimed staff have faced “countless credible threats” since. “For decades, we engaged in unprecedented litigation to dismantle the Klan and other hate groups,” he said. “In light of that work, we sought to protect the safety of our staff and the public. We frequently shared what we learned from informants with local and federal law enforcement, including the FBI. We did not, however, share our use of informants broadly with anyone, to protect the identity and safety of the informants and their families.” He insisted that the SPLC no longer works with paid informants, and noted that the center hired them “in the shadow of the height of the civil rights movement, which had seen bombings of churches, state-sponsored violence against demonstrators, and the murders of activists that went unanswered by the justice system.” Fair also criticized Republicans and the Trump administration for targeting the SPLC. “In October, FBI Director Kash Patel announced the bureau would sever its ties with the SPLC, and in December, House Republicans held a hearing to accuse us of being partisan and profitable,” he stated. Critics have long claimed the SPLC has weaponized its history of suing the KKK into bankruptcy to brand mainstream conservative and Christian groups “hateful” by putting them on a “hate map” with Klan chapters. A terrorist told the FBI he used the SPLC’s “hate map” to target the Family Research Council in 2012. The SPLC condemned the attack, but kept the council on the map. The Justice Department did not immediately respond to The Daily Signal’s request for comment. This is a breaking news story and may be updated. The post BREAKING: SPLC Under Criminal Investigation for Paid Informant Program appeared first on The Daily Signal.

With just weeks to go before the general election season begins in Ohio, several polls of statewide elections in the Buckeye State show close races. This includes the gubernatorial race to see who will replace term-limited Republican Gov. Mike DeWine. Vivek Ramaswamy is the frontrunner for the Republican nomination, having been endorsed by the Ohio Republican Party and President Donald Trump. Dr. Amy Acton is running unopposed as a Democrat. It may be a close race. The Cook Political Report considers it as “Lean Republican.” Multiple polls have been released in recent days regarding a Ramaswamy-Acton matchup, including those showing a race that’s within the margin of error. According to a poll from Bowling Green State University/YouGov, Ramaswamy leads Acton with 48% of the vote to her 47%. Ramaswamy and Acton are about even in their favorable ratings (33% and 32%, respectively), though more voters say they have neither a favorable nor unfavorable view of Acton than Ramaswamy, 41% versus 28%. The poll was conducted April 7–14 with 1,000 Ohio registered voters and a margin of error of plus or minus 3.9%. OHIO GOV BGSU POLL (Crosstabs)? Vivek: 48%? Acton: 47%? Other: 5%Recalled: Trump 51-40%——Apr ’25: Vivek 50–45Oct ’25: Vivek 50–47Apr ’26: Vivek 48–47——Net? Dem: Acton +95? GOP: Vivek +89? Indie: Acton +35? Didn't in 2024: Acton +47—? White: Vivek +15?… https://t.co/dhsl3QV70P pic.twitter.com/TZd24sCimk— InteractivePolls (@IAPolls2022) April 20, 2026 On Tuesday, Echelon Insights released a poll, conducted April 3–9, showing Ramaswamy leading 49% to 45% among likely voters. That poll included 413 voters and had a margin of error of plus or minus 5.8%. “Vivek is laser-focused on the issues that matter to Ohioans — lower costs, bigger paychecks, and better schools. These polls are just another indicator that his message is resonating with voters all across the state,” Ramaswamy campaign spokesperson Evan Machan said in a statement to The Daily Signal. “Meanwhile Amy Acton is pushing out an agenda that would bankrupt the state and cost Ohio’s families $21 billion in new government spending.” The Daily Signal reached out to the Acton campaign but did not receive a response in time for publication. Another poll conducted last month, from the Coalition to Protect American Workers, showed Ramaswamy leading Acton among union households, 48% to 41%. That poll included 500 union household members in Ohio with a margin of error of plus or minus 4.4%. The close margins could indicate that the race is tight. While speaking at an Ohio Young Republicans event in late January, Ramaswamy addressed the issue of running in a midterm year and how he sees “complacency as [the] top risk this year.” He warned attendees about Ohio in 2026 becoming like Ohio in 2006, when “state Democrats took [Republicans] by surprise and won the governor’s race and took back control of the Ohio House,” with Ramaswamy arguing such a move “sent this state back by decades.” The post Polls Show Ohio Gubernatorial Race Still One to Watch appeared first on The Daily Signal.