The U.S. Supreme Court rejected an appeal from Virginia to honor gerrymandered districts that favor Democrats. This comes a week after the state’s high court issued a rebuke to the redistricting effort that would have created a map with a 10-1 party advantage. Democrats made an immediate appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. If the map had been left in place, Democrats would have likely picked up an additional four seats in the House of Representatives. Virginia currently has an independent redistricting committee that drew a congressional map with a Democrat advantage of 6-5. However, voters in April approved a change to the state constitution to allow the partisan redistricting in a narrow referendum last month. The state’s high court determined the state legislature violated the Virginia Constitution in bypassing normal procedures to pass a constitutional amendment. The one-sentence, unsigned decision said, “The application for stay presented to The Chief Justice andby him referred to the Court is denied.” There was no dissent. Generally, the high court has opted to stay out of redistricting cases, as a state political matter. While the court did strike down a Louisiana map that it determined was drawn based strictly on racial lines, it also declined to hear gerrymandering cases coming out of Texas and California. Virginia Democrats tried to convince justices that the state high court misread federal law and Supreme Court precedent, holding that, even if early voting is underway, an election does not happen until Election Day itself, the Associated Press reported. Earlier this week, Democratic Gov. Abigail Spanberger confirmed that the state will hold this year’s elections under the current districts established in 2021, after the 2020 Census.

Editor’s note: This is an excerpt of an interview of President Donald Trump’s border czar Tom Homan by The Daily Signal’s Senior National Security and Legal Analyst Mehek Cooke. Mehek Cooke: Well, let’s expand on that, because I look at sanctuary cities today, and the worst offenders—that’s who I really want to get down to.   I’m watching New York Democrats today, and they are moving to limit local cooperation with ICE. They’re moving to restrict you and ban you and ICE officers from even wearing masks, as I’ve seen a massive surge in the type of violence that’s coming out against ICE officers.   What can we do to ensure that ICE can do their jobs?   As we’re having Democrats in New York, even Boston… I mean, you talked about lawsuits. I’m seeing a lawsuit there where a judge is skeptical of authority. This clash between federal enforcement and local. How can we make sure that we can prevent a Minnesota?   Because that’s where we don’t need to be, but I’m telling you, we’re watching this. Democrats are trying to corner this administration to make another flashpoint and an issue in the next sanctuary city.  So what can we do to reduce that?  Tom Homan: A couple things. First of all, you know, good luck with the law of banning masks. Federal law always trumps state and local law. And while threats are up over 8,000%, masks is a non-starter, so good luck enforcing that.   Second thing is, you talk about New York. You know, I met with Governor Hochul a couple months ago, and I told her about what happened in Minnesota, that, you know, we were able to draw some resources out of Minnesota because the local jails cooperated with us.   And I told her the same thing, because I knew this legislation was coming. I said, Look, you end cooperation in the jails, we’re going to have to send more agents to do the job, because now rather than one agent arresting one bad guy in the jail, which is safer for the agent, safer for the alien, safer for the community, of course, you’re going to release him. Now we got to send a whole team, six or seven agents, to go find him. So it’s going to re- it’s going to result more agents in the community.  Totally briefed on the whole thing, but she decided to go ahead and do it anyways. Well, I made a statement that we’re going to send more agents to New York. We have to as a response to this to go arrest those public safety threats.  I also told her there’s going to be two things you [she] may not like.   Number one, in addition to more agents in your communities, that’s going to mean, one, that when we find the bad guy, and we usually do, they may be with others, that weren’t a criminal target, but they’re in the country illegally. Well, guess what? We’re going to arrest them, too. We’re not going to turn a blind eye to illegal immigration, which means there’ll be more collateral arrests because of your decision to force us in the community.   And, second of all, part of her legislation prevents ICE from leasing beds, from sheriffs across the state, which we use a lot of those beds.  That means every illegal alien we arrest, we’re simply going to fly out of state to New York or Arizona or Florida, one of those states, because we’re going to detain them. We’re going to arrest them, we’re going to detain them. And so you wanna lock us out of New York jails for detention, then we’ll simply fly them out.  And I explained to her, how does that benefit the people you’re saying you’re trying to protect? How does that protect the immigrant community, moving them away from their family and their attorneys while they go through the immigration proceedings? It doesn’t.   So look, this is just a political spitball and you know, it’s… They’re not going to stop us from doing what we’re doing. We’re just going to have to do more of it now because of those, the legislation that was passed.  Cooke: But what’s the motivation here, Director? What, is the true motivation here? Because you worked for the deporter-in-chief. You worked under President Obama.  Is it because we have a different president and his name is Donald J. Trump?   Like, what is the motivation where you’re going, to get so much pushback for common sense? If the truth is, whether it’s Governor Hochul or any other governor in America, their first duty is to protect citizens. Why are you getting so much pushback to remove illegal criminals off of our streets? What’s the real motivation for Democrats?  Homan: Well, you, just said it. They hate Trump more than they care about their communities. They don’t want President Trump to get a win.   Second reason is we’re spoiling their long-term plan. They got a long-term strategy here. Open the border up, release millions of people into the United States to go to sanctuary cities.  But remember, when Biden opened the border, he also overturned the Trump census rule, which illegal aliens would be counted in the next census. So they think, you know, send millions to sanctuary cities, the next census is done, it’s going to result in more seats in The House for the Democrats. They sold this country’s national security out for future political benefit.  Plus they think these millions will be, you know, future Democratic voters. That’s why they’re putting all the roadblocks up, because they’re hoping before we can move too many, another Democratic administration comes in, they award amnesty to millions of people they think are future Democratic voters.  They’re having a fit right now because we’re removing record numbers of people that they don’t want removed, because they, like I said, they’ve got a long-term plan.   So, well, I got a surprise for them. We’re going to keep removing people. We’re going to keep arresting record numbers, because that’s what President Trump was elected for.  And the reason there’s mass deportation operation, because there’s a mass illegal immigration crisis on the border, so the appropriate law enforcement response to that is a mass deportation program, and that’s why we’re doing it. They set the stage. We’re responding to their incompetence the last four years.  Cooke: So you’re saying there’s a clear choice today for any sanctuary jurisdiction. You either cooperate with ICE or you’re going to put more boots on the ground. Is that accurate?  Homan: Absolutely. And let me say this, because they like to say, sanctuary cities, we’re a welcoming community because we want illegal aliens who are victims and witnesses of a crime to feel safe coming to law enforcement to report those crimes without fear of working with ICE.  That is such a false narrative because we’re not looking to talk to the victim witness of crime. We’re looking to talk to the person you locked in a jail cell. That’s who we want access to.   But at the same time, this, they’re the ones that are pushing the false, narrative about ICE officers separating families, arresting people in churches, arresting people in elementary schools, arresting people in hospitals.  They’re putting fear in immigrant communities.  Mm-hmm.  If they’re honest with them, that ICE has never arrested somebody in a church. We’ve never arrested somebody in an elementary school. We’ve never arrested someone in a hospital.   They won’t say that because there’ll be less fear in the immigrant community, so they’re playing both sides.  They want to say, well, they’re afraid to come report crimes, but the reason they’re afraid is because the false narrative you put up against ICE.   Let’s be clear. If, they went to the immigrant community and asked them a simple question, Would you rather have ICE operating in the jail? Or would you want ICE in the community? The community’s going to say the jail every time.  Cooke: Right.   Homan: So they’re lying to the American people. Sanctuary cities are sanctuaries for criminals, hard stop. It isn’t about protecting victims and witnesses, it’s about protecting criminals, and that’s what you’re doing. 

When Republicans and conservatives gather these days, one topic quickly and predictably arises: Why can’t the GOP Senate pass the SAVE America Act? This measure has been President Donald J. Trump’s chief domestic-policy objective for 2026. He threatened not to sign any other bill until Congress placed this measure on the Resolute Desk. Trump had to step away from that statement, in order to end Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security and the odious, Democrat-led impoverishment of TSA agents, ICE personnel, and Border Patrol staffers. To advance SAVE, Republican senators launched what seemed like a half-hearted “standing filibuster.” This was meant to force Democrats to explain on the Senate floor why they so bitterly oppose photo ID at the polls, proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote, clean voter rolls, and a rollback of the COVID-era mass-mail-in ballots and other “temporary” procedures that corrupt Democrats converted into permanent electoral practices. In contrast, SAVE’s planks are popular across the political spectrum. Indeed, photo ID enjoys 71% support—among Democrats! As Democrat senators who stood up and defended their indefensible positions began to devolve into self-humiliation, the ever-accommodating Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., sent everyone home for a two-week Easter hiatus. This eased Republican pressure on Democrats and gave the latter a respite to regroup. Senator John Kennedy, R-La., deserves abundant credit for subsequently trying to attach SAVE language to Thune’s unforgivably desiccated reconciliation bill to pay TSA and Border Patrol personnel. Alas, on April 23, three GOP traitors joined Democrats and sabotaged Kennedy’s effort. Kentucky’s Mitch McConnell, Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski, and North Carolina’s Thom Tillis are not team players. They should hide their heads in shame. Susan Collins, R-Maine, voted with them. However, conservatives let her go her own way, given her very liberal state and uncertain re-election prospects. Graham Platner, her presumptive Democrat opponent, who previously described himself as a “communist,” farms oysters, and sported a Nazi Totenkopf tattoo. This death’s head symbol was the insignia for the SS murderers who operated the gas chambers and crematoria in Adolf Hitler’s extermination camps. For real. With the Republican Senate in maddening disarray, the GOP House should reinvigorate this vital battle with elegant simplicity: Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., should staple the SAVE America Act to each single piece of legislation that the House sends the Senate. From National Bacon Month to the farm bill, a burgeoning housing-affordability package, and the Pentagon budget, the House should push the Senate to cope with SAVE every time it considers anything transmitted from the lower chamber. For Democrats, this will become a time for choosing: Swallow hard and accept SAVE now, rather than combat it, in one legislative battle after another. Or Democrats can propose an amendment to pry the SAVE language out of each and every House-passed bill that the Senate considers. GOP Senators should make Democrats debate all such deletion amendments. Democrats then would expose themselves, on camera, opposing photo ID, slamming proof of citizenship, rejecting accurate voter rolls, embracing out-of-control mass mail-in ballots, and defending door-to-door ballot hustling. Republicans would compel Senate Democrats to reject these well-regarded GOP reforms—again and again and again and again and again.  Voters soon would wonder: “Why are Democrats so gung-ho about keeping our elections easy to steal?” This would include the Democrats’ relentless intransigence about election-integrity norms that are boringly common worldwide. The same photo ID to vote that Democrats call racist in America is widespread throughout Africa. Go figure. Watching Democrats pit themselves against these policies should focus voters’ attention on the Donkey Party’s never-ending treachery. With any luck, they will send pro-election-theft Democrats packing, come November. And, before then, if the House keeps hammering and Senate Republicans steady themselves and do their jobs, they finally will send the SAVE America Act to its rightful destination: immediately below President Trump’s big, beautiful signature pen. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal.

An Environmental Protection Agency lawyer and union leader has signed a dissent letter opposing President Donald Trump’s policy at the agency and has posted on social media attacking EPA Director Lee Zeldin, but appears to still be employed there. This activity raises questions as to whether she might be a “deep state” actor, working to undermine Trump’s policies from within the administration. Nicole Cantello serves as president of the American Federation of Government Employees Local 704, the EPA’s labor union. A verified LinkedIn profile lists her as an attorney at the EPA. Declaration of Dissent On June 30, 2025, Cantello signed a “Declaration of Dissent” addressed to EPA Director Zeldin. “EPA employees join in solidarity with employees across the federal government in opposing this administration’s policies, including those that undermine the EPA mission of protecting human health and the environment,” the letter states. “Today, we stand together in dissent against the current administration’s focus on harmful deregulation, mischaracterization of previous EPA actions, and disregard for scientific expertise.” This letter expresses a “deep state” attitude reflected in a poll from last year. An RMG Research poll found that 75% of Washington, D.C.-area federal employees who made at least $150,000 a year and who voted for Kamala Harris in 2024 would disobey a lawful Trump order if they considered it bad policy. The letter took a hostile stance to the new administration’s policy objectives, condemning Zeldin’s exposure of “green slush funds,” accusing the EPA of ignoring science, championing “environmental justice” against the administration’s priorities, and claiming the administration created a “culture of fear” by firing federal workers. Many of these complaints trace back to ideological disagreements with the Trump agenda. EPA Staff Names Disappear Cantello’s signing the letter wasn’t exactly a secret. Her name appeared as number 9 of the then-public list of signatories. The list mentioned her employment at the Chicago-based EPA Region 5, which serves Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin, and 37 tribes. She also spoke to Science Magazine about the letter. “Having folks speak up is contagious,” Science quoted her as saying. Yet the names disappeared from the website as Zeldin started taking action against employees who had personally stated their desire to oppose the administration’s policies. The EPA fired at least eight employees who had signed the letter. The declaration “contains inaccurate information designed to mislead the public about agency business,” EPA spokeswoman Molly Vaseliou said at the time. “Thankfully, this represents a small fraction of the thousands of hard-working, dedicated EPA employees who are not trying to mislead and scare the American public.” Cantello does not appear to have been among those fired, and news outlets have quoted her since then. In February, she told the online magazine bioGraphic that employees at the EPA are hunkering down, hoping for a new administration to reverse Trump’s policies. “I give the EPA employees here a lot of credit,” she said. “They want to survive this. They want to live to … rebuild this agency.” She said that when political support for her preferred policies resurges, “these people could really engage in environmental protection again.” An account on X that seems associated with Cantello has shared anti-Zeldin content. The account has reposted the activist group Moms Clean Air Force, which accuses Zeldin of “completely corrupting EPA’s mission” and calls for his resignation. ‘Resistance’ Operative “Nicole Cantello is a prime example of a ‘resistance’ operative in our federal government who believes her politics take precedence over the will of the voters,” Houston Keene, director of the watchdog group Democracy Restored, told The Daily Signal in a statement Friday. “Her social media offers plenty of evidence of that, let alone her signing the dissent letter against Lee Zeldin and the EPA and then scrubbing her signature when it became apparent there would be consequences.” “Cantello and her union must face serious scrutiny, especially if any of these actions were taken on official time,” Keene added. Neither the AFGE’s national union nor Local 704 responded to The Daily Signal’s requests for comment. The EPA declined to confirm or deny Cantello’s continued employment, but condemned bureaucrats who seek to undermine the agency’s policy from within. “The Environmental Protection Agency has a zero-tolerance policy for career bureaucrats unlawfully undermining, sabotaging, and undercutting the administration’s agenda as voted for by the great people of this country,” an EPA spokesperson told The Daily Signal on Friday.

The acting commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration has promised to prioritize a safety review of the abortion pill after his predecessor was accused of delaying it, pro-life leaders say.  Kyle Diamantas, FDA deputy commissioner for food, is serving as acting FDA commissioner in the wake of Dr. Marty Makary’s departure.  Though the Trump administration is reportedly soon picking a permanent commissioner to lead the agency, Diamantas promised he will be the “most pro-life FDA commissioner that the FDA has ever had” while in the role, Students for Life President Kristan Hawkins told The Daily Signal.  Within hours of Diamantas’ appointment, he called pro-life leaders including Live Action President Lila Rose, Hawkins, and March for Life President Jennie Lichter.  His engagement with the pro-life movement comes amid widespread conservative disillusionment with the agency. Makary was under fire for allegedly slow-walking a safety review of the abortion pill mifepristone and for a lack of transparency in the process. Much of the pro-life movement demanded his firing as a result.  Makary and Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. pledged to do a review of the safety of mifepristone following a study from the Ethics and Public Policy Center that showed 11% of women experience adverse effects after taking the pill regimen. Hawkins told The Daily Signal that Diamantis admitted the agency needed to be more transparent about the abortion pill review. He said that the FDA would soon provide the pro-life movement with more information about the status of the review. Similarly, Diamantis told Lila Rose that “reviewing the abortion pill is a top priority for him and the administration,” Rose said on X.  Immediately after Diamantis’ promotion was announced, the pro-life movement raised concerns that he represented Planned Parenthood of Greater Orlando in one court case as a young lawyer. Diamantis told Rose he regrets that work, she said.  “He shared that he was assigned to the case by his law firm, performed work on it, and ultimately regretted his involvement because of his moral opposition to abortion,” Rose wrote. “He then asked his superiors to remove him from the case. He said that he is pro-life and cares deeply about the pro-life cause.” Lichter said she’s optimistic that Diamantis will take the mifepristone safety study seriously in the role.  “@US_FDA, looking forward to working with you in this new era to make sure abortion drug companies can’t continue to lie to women about their drugs that are NOT ‘safer than Tylenol’ and that abusive men are stopped from ordering these dangerous drugs on the internet and force-feeding them to pregnant women,” Lichter said.