At the State of the Union, Congress heard President Donald Trump urge them to pass a ban on members trading individual stocks “without delay.” But will Trump’s words make a difference after months of Congress talking about—but not passing—a stock trading ban? On Tuesday, Trump told members to pass the Stop Insider Trading Act, backed by Rep. Bryan Steil, R-Wis. “Let’s … ensure members of Congress cannot corruptly profit from using insider information,” he said. Several Democrats, including Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, stood up in applause. “If Donald Trump is serious about stopping insider trading in Congress, let’s pass a bill right now that truly bans lawmakers from owning and trading stocks,” Warren wrote in a social media post on Wednesday. Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., similarly said of Trump’s call for a ban, “Well, Donald Trump has said one thing so far that is true: We need to ban stock trading in Congress. I’ve been fighting for years to get it done. Just need Republicans to put it up for a vote.” Since December, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., has backed Steil’s bill. Steil’s bill is separate from the Restoring Trust in Congress Act, which also has several sponsors, both Democrat and Republican, in the House. This bill also would only apply to Congress. Some lawmakers still have reservations and questions about a stock ban after Trump’s speech. “I think as long as that applies to every single person and every single branch, I love it so much I want to marry it,” Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., told The Daily Signal of Trump’s call for a stock trading ban. Steil’s bill does not include a ban on members of the executive or judicial branches trading stocks. “I’m just saying that we’re coequal branches so we should have coequal restrictions,” Tillis added. The White House’s press office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on whether it would be open to applying a stock ban to other branches of government. In July 2025 Trump criticized the HONEST Act, a bill backed by Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., which would have banned the president and vice president from trading stocks as well. “I don’t think real Republicans want to see their President, who has had unprecedented success, TARGETED,” Trump wrote on social media at the time after the bill had passed out of committee. Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., asked by The Daily Signal what he felt of Trump’s call for a stock trading ban, said most in the Senate already avoid trading individual stocks. “I don’t know exactly what they’re talking about as far as how deep it goes or anything like that, but I personally think we get enough inside information to where most of us have already said we’re not going to do stock purchases ourselves other than index funds.” Insider trading is illegal and members of Congress are technically supposed to report trades after the STOCK Act of 2012. However, some in Congress have alleged these restrictions go unenforced. The post Will Congress Pass a Stock Trading Ban After SOTU? appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The following is a preview of Daily Signal Politics Editor Bradley Devlin’s interview with author Frank DeVito on “The Signal Sitdown.” The full interview premieres on The Daily Signal’s YouTube page at 6:30 a.m. EST on Feb. 27. Vice President JD Vance’s life has taken him from the hollowed out town of Middletown, Ohio to the halls of power. Between his challenging upbringing, his service in the Marine Corps, his stint in Silicon Valley, his Senate tenure, and now his vice presidency, it’s easy to lose sight of the two short days leading up to President Donald Trump picking Vance as his running mate. Reflect on those two days in the middle of July and you’ll see the distillation of a long career arc for such a young man.  Author Frank DeVito joins “The Signal Sitdown” this week to discuss his new book on the vice president, titled “JD Vance and the Future of the Republican Party,” and the role Vance was born to play in American political life. Trump came millimeters from death on the campaign trail in Butler, Pennsylvania, when an assassin’s bullet grazed the former president’s right ear on July 13, 2025. The Left had not been shy about their violent Trump fantasies, but the Butler assassination attempt proved some were deadly serious about killing Trump. With the Republican National Convention starting that Monday, Trump was in the final stages of choosing a running mate. But that debate now took on new meaning: What if our worst nightmare came true and they killed the president? The answer, as the president cried from the stage in Butler swarmed by Secret Service Agents, was to “fight, fight, fight.” But who could step into the ring? Who could maintain the coalition Trump built? Who could keep the MAGA movement alive? Trump’s near-death experience triggered an around-the-clock debate among the right’s most powerful players on who could fill that role. On July 15, 2025, Trump chose Vance. Vance, DeVito told The Daily Signal, is “the heir apparent to the Republican party at a really interesting time.” Trump has overseen “a complete overhaul of the Republican party’s views on everything from foreign policy interventionism to trade and labor policy,” DeVito explained. “Everything is shifting. Different demographics are coming in and going out of the Republican party. So, it’s a unique time of change in the party and Trump was uniquely the presider over all of that.” But “it’s been one man at the helm, a uniquely charismatic man, for over a decade,” DeVito added. Trump has had “so much power, so much influence over the last decade that there’s a unique question of who comes next that you don’t always have when you have a presidential changeover.” Over the course of the 2024 campaign, Trump built a broad electoral coalition that included the Teamsters and tech giants from Silicon Valley, disaffected liberals and social conservatives, health nuts and Hispanics, and nationalists and libertarians. All arrows in that coalition point to Vance, DeVito explains. “So I think the reason he’s so able to be kind of at the center of this, um, this coalition is, well, two things,” he said. “You have usually these dichotomies of the intellectuals and the people who do stuff in politics, right?” Some of intellectuals, DeVito says, “are just really not good at understanding how their theories play out in practical coalitional politics.” “On the other side, you have plenty of people who are involved in politics who don’t read or think very deeply about much of anything,” DeVito continued. “The unique thing about Vance, I think, is he’s very good at both,” DeVito suggested. “When you have somebody who’s that good at navigating coalitional politics and getting elected to office, but who can also tell you the theoretical differences between a West Coast Straussian and a Catholic integralist,” DeVito continued, “I think it’s a really unique mixture of political acumen and intellectual depth in the conservative movement that not a lot of people have.” The post The Critical Role JD Vance Plays on the American Right appeared first on The Daily Signal.

In the wake of President Donald Trump’s State of the Union, the Senate GOP says they “look forward” to getting straight to work implementing the aggressive legislative agenda the president laid out in the speech. Foremost among the president’s priorities is the SAVE America Act, which would secure America’s elections by requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote and nation-wide voter ID. Previously, the president had endorsed the idea of using the talking filibuster to get the SAVE America Act through the Senate and signed into law. But the Senate, under Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., seems to be shying away from using the talking filibuster. “If we were to go down that path, it’s very hard to pivot and get back to open up the government,” Thune said of the talking filibuster Wednesday. Thune claims there are not enough Senate Republicans to ensure success, either: “There just isn’t the support for doing that at this point.” Thune told reporters on Wednesday that “we need to be able to make sure that DHS, TSA, Coast Guard, FEMA, all those agencies are funded. And so I’m hopeful that will be a breakthrough on that.” But ending the shutdown is not the Senate’s sole focus, as Senate leadership is teeing-up a vote on a housing bill despite the continued shutdown. “[Our focus] is going to be safer streets, more money in people’s pockets, and new opportunities for working families to get ahead,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., told press Wednesday afternoon following a weekly GOP policy meeting.   “One of the things that will be immediately on that agenda is a housing bill, which gets at the heart of the affordability issue, particularly for younger Americans,” continued Thune.  Senate Majority Leader John Thune addresses the Democrats behavior last night at the State of the Union: “We are living literally in two Americas.”@DailySignal @LeaderJohnThune pic.twitter.com/lW2HElK6pL— Virginia Grace McKinnon (@virginiagmck) February 25, 2026 The ROAD to Housing Act of 2025, introduced in August by Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., is sitting in the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs and has been placed on the upcoming legislative calendar. “We’re going to try and get on that this week or at least set up a vote to get on it next week, and I think that will be, that would be a very substantial issue that we can deal with,” said Thune. Meanwhile, the future of the SAVE America Act, however, remains in limbo despite Thune’s promise to have the Senate vote on it because, without using the talking filibuster, the election integrity measure has little chance of making it out of the upper chamber. Speaker Johnson talks to press leaving the State of the Union tonight in Statuary Hall: “It’s shameful what the Democrats did tonight, the display, it should be beneath any member of Congress. I think it’s something they’ll regret.” @DailySignal @SpeakerJohnson pic.twitter.com/fwECEisKUD— Virginia Grace McKinnon (@virginiagmck) February 25, 2026 Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, has been leading the SAVE America Act which will secure American elections by requiring voter ID. “President Trump was clear at the State of the Union: the Senate should pass the SAVE America Act immediately, ‘before anything else happens,'” Lee told the Daily Signal. “I will continue to work with my colleagues on the best way to deliver this legislation demanded by the American people,” he continued. In the meantime, Thune hopes that Democrats will work with Republicans on “nonpartisan issues.” “Technology and innovation is also something. Artificial intelligence, I think there’s a path forward, perhaps on some legislation to deal with that,” Thune said Wednesday. “The issue of energy is a big factor in the cost of everything,” Thune added. “We’ve got some ideas proposal to deal with that.”  The post Future of SAVE America Act in Limbo as Senate GOP Turns to Housing appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Michele Blair opened up about her appearance at the State of the Union Tuesday, when President Donald Trump highlighted the story of her daughter, Sage, who reportedly became a human trafficking victim after her school hid her transgender identity from her mother. “Sage, can you even believe we are here with the president of the United States?” Michele Blair recalled telling her adopted daughter at the State of the Union. “The president picked my story.” The mother spoke with Laura Hanford, a senior policy analyst at The Heritage Foundation, the day after the speech. Michele Blair adopted Sage, her biological granddaughter, upon the death of her son, Sage’s father. Blair recounted the harrowing story of how the school’s decision to hide her daughter’s transgender identity made her daughter vulnerable. “She was 14 years old and she started at school and identified as a boy and the school glorified that point, but never told me, to the point where she got so severely bullied that she felt she needed to run away to save her life and her parents’ lives,” Blair recounted. Sage running away “led her into the hands of sex traffickers,” Michele said. She ended up in police custody in Maryland, where her transgender identity again separated her from her mother. “We did not know she was going by a boy’s name, so when we called her Sage, the judge and the public defender shut down that session, so that they could have [Child Protective Services] investigate me and my husband for abuse because we weren’t recognizing her or using her correct pronouns,” the mother recalled. Authorities put her in a boys’ home. “I sent her cards and presents, they did not give her anything,” Michele Blair added. “As a matter of fact, the lawyer told her that we didn’t want her anymore because she wanted to be a boy and she was arranging a foster home for her.” “She said, ‘Nana, I didn’t even know you were at the jail,'” the mother recalled. Sage ran away again, and law enforcement next found her in Texas. Michele Blair said she was glad to share her story at the State of the Union, to send the message to other parents that “it’s not just us,” and “we need to stand up together.” She expressed hope that her primetime appearance “may give lots of parents and children hope that there is a light at the end of the tunnel.” Virginia lawmakers wrote a law, HB 2432, requiring any school professional who reasonably suspects a student is at risk of suicide or “is self-identifying as a gender different from the student’s biological sex” to contact at least one of the student’s parents, to notify the parent, and to offer counseling. While the bill passed the Virginia House of Delegates, it failed in the state Senate. ?'PEDOPHILE!'A Democrat responds to President Trump's important retelling of Sage Blair's story—getting victimized by the transgender cult—by shouting "Pedophile!"Trump doesn't even dignify it with a response. pic.twitter.com/UbS44A1vSc— Tyler O'Neil (@Tyler2ONeil) February 25, 2026 The post Mother Whose Daughter Got Trafficked After School Hid Transgender Identity Speaks Out After SOTU Appearance appeared first on The Daily Signal.

A fundamental principle of international law is comity—the mutual respect sovereign nations afford one another in enforcing their laws. For the United States, comity is not an abstraction. It is the predicate for stable trade relationships and predictable cross-border enforcement. When that principle erodes, diplomacy becomes nearly impossible. Comity is central to the U.S. dispute with the European Union over the Digital Services Act and the Digital Markets Act. It is also the basis for the Trump administration’s Section 301 investigation. Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 authorizes the United States Trade Representative to investigate foreign government actions that are “unjustifiable,” “unreasonable,” or “discriminatory” and that burden U.S. commerce. If such findings are made, the U.S. Trade Representative may respond with tariffs, import restrictions, or the suspension of trade concessions. This authority is not novel. Presidents of both parties have invoked it—President Joe Biden in increasing tariffs on certain Chinese technology imports, and Presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton in resolving disputes with countries such as Japan. The question, then, is whether the EU’s digital regulations fall within Section 301’s ambit. The Digital Services Act raises serious concerns. Like the General Data Protection Regulation before it, the Digital Services Act projects regulatory authority beyond Europe’s borders. It exposes companies—overwhelmingly American—to fines of up to 6% of global annual revenue, subjects them to open-ended “systemic risk” investigations, and prescribes detailed obligations governing content moderation. When a regulatory framework disproportionately burdens foreign firms and carries penalties tied to global revenue, it strains credulity to describe it as neutral. That is leverage. To be frank, the Digital Markets Act presents an even clearer case. Marketed as a tool to promote “fairness” and “contestability,” it relies on quantitative thresholds that initially captured just seven companies. Six are American: Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta, Microsoft, and Booking.com. Only one non-Western company, ByteDance (TikTok), was designated. This outcome was not accidental—it was by design. In 2021, Andreas Schwab, the Digital Markets Act’s lead rapporteur, proposed raising the thresholds even further—an amendment analysts at the Center for Strategic and International Studies observed would have kept European-headquartered firms out of the law’s ambit while leaving American companies squarely in scope. That is not conjecture; it is legislative history. Other jurisdictions have addressed competition concerns in targeted ways—particularly in app store governance—without erecting sweeping structural obligations that conveniently spare domestic champions. By contrast, the Digital Markets Act’s architecture all but guarantees asymmetric impact. To be frank, this asymmetric lawfare is precisely what is driving U.S. concern. None of this is a defense of large technology companies. The U.S. brought its own competition and consumer protection cases against many of these firms. But those actions are grounded in neutral statutes and due process protections. We do not draft alleged consumer-protection statutes that just happen to neatly capture foreign competitors while shielding domestic firms. Indeed, U.S. policy has tended in the opposite direction. The SAFE Web Act encourages cooperation with foreign enforcement authorities. The CLOUD Act formalizes mechanisms for cross-border data access consistent with comity principles. These statutes reflect a commitment to reciprocity and rule-of-law norms. Reciprocity is not protectionism. When a trading partner imposes measures that distort trade and impose disproportionate burdens on foreign companies, the affected nation is entitled to examine whether those measures are discriminatory and to respond accordingly. That is precisely what Section 301 contemplates. The U.S. has allowed European firms to compete freely within our market. It is reasonable to expect comparable treatment. If that expectation is unmet, a Section 301 investigation is not escalation—it is the enforcement of fair dealing.  We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post Why Trump’s Tech Defense in the EU Is an America First Policy appeared first on The Daily Signal.