'Forced us in Europe to step up'

'Conspiracy to deprive rights'

'Americans are not buying it'

'This money should have gone to those in need'

'We are not going to solve homelessness'

Roe v. Wade would have turned 53 years old on Jan. 22 had the Supreme Court not overturned the decision in Dobbs v. Jackson. The Supreme Court justices, and the presidents who nominated them, deserve many thanks. But perhaps another unlikely figure deserves some thanks, too: the late Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid for his decision to nuke the filibuster on certain presidential nominees. Long before the the Dobbs v. Jackson decision was handed down in 2022, Reid laid the groundwork through the changes he made to Senate rules. Reid opened Pandora’s box, and the pro-life movement took advantage of it. Reid, who, like many other Democrats, became increasingly pro-choice over the course of his Senate career, supported nuking the filibuster on some presidential nominees in 2013. Frustrated with impediments to confirming then President Barack Obama’s nominees, Reid convinced enough of his fellow Democrats to invoke the nuclear option so that breaking a filibuster to confirm Cabinet officials and certain judicial nominees could be done by a simple majority, rather than the 60 votes typically required to end debate before the final confirmation vote. It was a narrow vote of 48-52 in the Senate on Nov. 21, 2013 that sealed the fate of Roe almost a decade later. No Republicans voted to nuke the filibuster that November day. They were joined by three Democrats—Sens. Carl Levin of Michigan, Joe Manchin of West Virginia, and Mark Pryor of Arkansas. Following the vote, then Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., issued his memorable reply: “I say to my friends on the other side of the aisle, you will regret this, and you may regret it a lot sooner than you think.” McConnell’s prophetic words came to fruition. Less than four years later, President Donald Trump was in office for his first term and looking to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court left by the late Justice Antonin Scalia. The Republican-controlled Senate blocked former President Barack Obama from filling Scalia’s seat. Obama had nominated Merrick Garland—who would later become former President Joe Biden’s infamous attorney general—for the high court. Neil Gorsuch was announced as the nominee on Jan. 31, 2017. On April 6, McConnell expanded Reid’s scrapping of the Senate filibuster to allow the nuclear option for Supreme Court nominees. Gorsuch was confirmed by a vote of 54-46, with no Democratic support. Still, more needed to happen before Dobbs. Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett would be nominated and confirmed to the court after the retirement of former Justice Anthony Kennedy in 2018 and the death of late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 2020. The justices nominated by Trump, and reviled and vilified by Democrats, would almost certainly have not gotten confirmed without the nuclear option. On May 17, 2021, after numerous delays, the justices finally decided that they would hear the Dobbs case, centered around Mississippi’s 15-week abortion ban. On July 22, Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch asked the justices to overturn Roe v. Wade, once thought unthinkable. Oral arguments were on December 1. While the decision wasn’t officially handed down until June 24, 2022, the draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito to overturn Roe was leaked on May 2, 2022. After the leak, conservative justices were targeted by radicals. Nicholas Roske even plotted to assassinate Kavanaugh and potentially other justices. He was convicted and sentenced last October. But the justices did not budge. Would Trump have been able to get other justices confirmed? Would other nominees have voted to overturn Roe? These are hypotheticals that the pro-life movement, fortunately, does not have to face. The movement has enough to keep busy with changing hearts and minds, as well as saving babies and their mothers from abortion. The path to overturning Roe was nothing short of miraculous. Some would even say providential. And while the justices, Trump, and the Republicans in Congress deserve credit for these pro-life victories, don’t forget Harry Reid. The post It Might Surprise You, But Here’s How Harry Reid Helped End Roe appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Assistant Secretary for Health and Human Services Brian Christine warned that the administration’s pro-life wins can be lost if pro-lifers don’t vote in November. “We have to always be vigilant,” he told The Daily Signal in an interview. “All the wins that we’ve had in this administration all of the great things that have been done, it’s only one election cycle away from losing these things.” "All of these victories we're having as a pro-life group can be lost if the elections don't go our way."Assistant Secretary for Health @ADM_Christine says if pro-lifers don't vote in November, the admin's pro-life wins can be lost. "All the wins that we've had in this… pic.twitter.com/ajaPIBQw0B— Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell (@TheElizMitchell) January 23, 2026 Christine spoke with The Daily Signal on the morning of the March for Life in Washington, D.C. The 53rd annual march was attended by pro-lifers from around the country advocating for the right to life of unborn children. “Every November is important. This November in 2026 is important. We have to vote,” he said. “We have to vote for those candidates and for those individuals supporting President Trump because all of these victories we’re having as a pro-life group can be lost if the elections don’t go our way.” Christine replaced the Biden administration’s assistant health secretary Rachel Levine, a man who identifies as a woman. “I stand here a man in a man’s uniform,” Christine said. “I stand here saying that little boys are little boys, little girls are little girls. And that can never change. And that is a seismic shift from my predecessor.” Christine said he agrees with President Donald Trump and Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy that abortion is a tragedy. “The respect for life that this administration has is amazing,” he said. “From conception until death, we respect life. We protect our children. We stand for life, and we stand strong for life.” Christine, whose office handles Title X family planning funding, said he is working to enforce the Hyde Amendment and stop taxpayer funding of abortion providers such as Planned Parenthood. “There has been a relinquishing of funds from Planned Parenthood, $2.3 million, because of the oversight of HHS,” he said. “They’ve relinquished these funds. That means $2.3 million is not going to that abortion mill. $2.3 million will not be going toward killing our children, and that is huge.” "?There has been a relinquishing of funds from Planned Parenthood–$2.3 million is being relinquished from Planned Parenthood of the Northwest.""This $2.3 million won't go toward killing children. It's gonna go toward life." "?That is such a seismic shift from the prior… pic.twitter.com/IMpldqcZEE— Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell (@TheElizMitchell) January 23, 2026 Last week, HHS released tens of millions in Title X family planning funds to Planned Parenthood and other clinics. But Planned Parenthood declined to accept the unfrozen funds, The Daily Caller reported. “We provided incredible oversight, and that’s why this $2.3 million is being relinquished from Planned Parenthood of the Northwest,” Christine said. “And so the point is we always watch our funds. We always oversight. This $2.3 million won’t go toward killing children. It’s gonna go toward life.” Veteran pro-life operative Tom McClusky previously told The Daily Signal that reinstating the Protect Life Rule, which prohibits Title X-funded counselors from recommending abortion, would be the best way to make sure funds don’t go to Planned Parenthood. When asked if HHS would reinstate the Protect Life Rule, which was rescinded by the Biden administration, Christine said “what we are gonna ensure in this administration and through my office and through HHS, is that federal funds are not gonna be going toward performing abortions or facilitating abortions, and that’s incredibly important.” Trump’s HHS marks a “seismic shift from the prior administration,” according to Christine. In 2026, HHS pro-life priorities include “ensuring federal dollars don’t go toward abortions or facilitating abortions, ensuring that funding for NIH grants doesn’t go toward those studies that use those embryonic tissues obtained from elective abortions, and standing again for mothers.” “This is one of the most pro-woman and pro mother healthcare administrations that the world has ever seen,” Christine said. “All of these things are gonna protect life.” When asked by The Daily Signal how he would respond to people who say the Trump administration is not doing enough to regulate the chemical abortion pill, Christine said the safety review of mifepristone is ongoing. “Commissioner of the FDA Dr. Marty Makary has that review ongoing,” he said. “They’re collecting data. I’m gonna defer to him on those things, but understand that that is ongoing, that data is being collected.” Pro-life leaders have expressed their frustration that the administration has not done more to regulate the chemical abortion pill, the predominant method of abortions. Makary has promised to oversee a robust safety review of the abortion pill, but after a year of the Trump administration, the review is still in the data acquisition phase. “There’s already ample evidence out there showing the dangers of this drug,” Live Action president Lila Rose told The Daily Signal. “The fact that it kills babies in and of itself, disqualifies it from being considered health care. What we are urging the administration do is pull the pull the drug immediately.” Christine promised to “keep his foot on the accelerator when it comes to protecting our children, protecting the unborn, doing the things that matter to the right to life movement and HHS.” The post ‘BE VIGILANT’: Assistant Health Secretary Warns What Can Happen if Pro-Lifers Don’t Vote appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Violent crime plummeted around the country this year, but the legacy media refuse to acknowledge that it has anything to do with the return of President Donald Trump. According to a report by the Council of Criminal Justice, over this past year the murder rate dropped to its lowest level since 1900. Other crimes dropped across 11 of 13 categories in the report. The study also noted that while FBI crime statistics won’t become available until later this year, there is a strong possibility that 2025 could mark “the largest single-year percentage drop in the homicide rate on record.” While crime was beginning to fall in 2024, the drop occurred most dramatically in the past year. Interesting timing, right? As most Americans outside the newsrooms of our most elite legacy media publications almost certainly know, crime spiked dramatically in 2020 immediately following the George Floyd riots. This coincided with a nationwide push by the Left to obliterate traditional policing in the name of anti-racism and social justice. To the shock of nobody with common sense, crime immediately spiked and stayed high for years until it finally began slowing down. Now it’s going down faster than ever before. That’s amazing and well worth celebrating. But don’t think that the media is going to give any credit to the Trump administration. This line from a New York Times piece on the crime drop sums up so much about the state of politics in recent years. “Experts said there is little to justify any claim that President Trump is responsible for last year’s drop in crime.” Oh those experts, they’re just so measured, nonpartisan, and correct about everything, right? FBI Director Kash Patel noted that while many outlets reported on the sudden crime collapse, they twisted themselves in pretzels to avoid giving a shred of credit to Trump and the policies of his administration. “Axios just reported the lowest murder rate since 1900, down 20% from 2024, and somehow forgot to mention President Trump or the historic results of this FBI,” Patel wrote on X. “Nearly 200% more arrests.  Violent gangs crushed. Fugitives hunted down. Media gymnastics can’t hide the reality that this administration brought law and order back, and Americans are safer because of it.” Axios just reported the lowest murder rate since 1900, down 20% from 2024, and somehow forgot to mention President Trump or the historic results of this FBI. Nearly 200% more arrests. Violent gangs crushed. Fugitives hunted down. Media gymnastics can’t hide the reality that… pic.twitter.com/48s9JPtXcw— FBI Director Kash Patel (@FBIDirectorKash) January 22, 2026 Dan Bongino, who just left the FBI, was even harsher on the media. “Axios is simply incapable of giving this President, and his administration, any credit for this incredible headline about violent crime. They’re propaganda pieces for the ‘defund the police’ democrats, nothing more,” he posted on X. Axios is simply incapable of giving this President, and his administration, any credit for this incredible headline about violent crime. They’re propaganda pieces for the “defund the police” democrats, nothing more I lived it, and here are the facts. The FBI mission had long… pic.twitter.com/f23c4GrUPl— Dan Bongino (@dbongino) January 22, 2026 Bongino wrote that the FBI made some significant changes to policing, “including clarifying UFAP (Unlawful Flight to Avoid Prosecution) warrant policies, we refocused personnel to investigate gang and VICAR (Violent Crimes in Aid of Racketeering) crimes, and we doubled down on using the Hobbs Act for organized robbery gangs. This led to dramatically enhanced cooperation with local law enforcement partners and a historic number of arrests.” There’s no question that President Donald Trump made crime stopping a huge part of his rhetoric and policies. He sent the National Guard to cities like Washington, plagued by an unacceptable amount of violent crime for years, and prioritized immigration law enforcement. Those may not have been the only reasons crime dropped, but you can bet that if in an alternate moral universe where defunding the police preceded a huge crime drop, you can bet that the media would be rushing to give Democrats the credit. That’s just how things work. In many ways, this crime spike, then dip, follows the pattern of the so-called Ferguson or Minneapolis Effect. This trend was first widely noted following the 2014 police shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. The media portrayed the shooting as police malfeasance, that they shot Brown in cold blood while he was trying to surrender to police. That narrative was bunk, but it sparked backlash, riots, and a retreat from proactive policing by many departments. In the wake of this incident, crime surged, though eventually petered out as departments returned to proactive policing. That cycle was repeated to an even greater extent post-George Floyd when the media was in the full swing of the Great Awokening and cities insanely decided it was a good time to “defund the police.” The result was one of the most acute crime surges in American history. The story the corporate media told was generally that this was all just a result of COVID-19, but many countries experienced a sharp drop in crime as it surged in the U.S. Now that the delusional moment has passed somewhat, some cities have come back to reason, and we have a federal administration committed to law and order. It’s easy to see why crime is coming back down. But as good as this all is, we should all still be wary. As much as crime has dropped in aggregate, it’s still unacceptably high. In many cities, there is still a huge problem with repeat offenders committing crime after crime and getting away with lenient sentences. New York City appears to be throwing away the lessons of the last few years because they wish to give true socialism another shot. So be thankful for the good news, but wary of how quickly crime can again spiral out of control.   The post Murder Rates Plummeted Last Year, yet Media Refuse to Give Trump Credit appeared first on The Daily Signal.

This September marks the 50th anniversary of the Hyde Amendment’s first passage in the House of Representatives — the annual appropriations rider that bars federal funding of elective abortion.No one should be surprised that Democrats would mark the moment by extending Affordable Care Act subsidies that help enable backdoor abortion funding in blue states. What did surprise pro-lifers was President Donald Trump’s recent declaration that Republicans “have to be a little flexible on Hyde.”Human lives aren’t negotiable. Neither is the Hyde Amendment.“We’re all big fans of everything, but you have to have flexibility,” Trump told House Republicans in Washington on Jan. 6. He urged them to “work something” out on health care, a line that seemed to suggest Hyde could become a bargaining chip.For millions of GOP voters, it cannot.Just one year ago, the president aligned himself with them. On his fourth day in office, he signed an executive order declaring that “consistent with the Hyde Amendment,” it is the policy of the United States “to end the forced use of Federal taxpayer dollars to fund or promote elective abortion.”The same president helped overturn Roe v. Wade, restored the Mexico City policy ending funding for overseas abortions, and declared himself the “most pro-life president” in history.If his position has changed, Americans have the right to know.The Hyde Amendment is estimated to have saved more than 2.6 million lives over the past five decades. It forbids the use of federal tax dollars for abortions except in cases of rape, incest, or a life-threatening medical emergency.Yet the abortion lobby found a work-around. Twenty state Medicaid programs cover elective abortions using state funds, and millions of enrollees in those plans receive federal subsidies to help pay their premiums.In plain terms, federal tax dollars indirectly support abortion in blue states, regardless of Hyde. It’s the same moral and fiscal problem that drove Congress to defund Planned Parenthood in Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act spending package last July. Why cut off one pipeline while leaving another one wide open?The Jan. 1 expiration of Biden-era enhancements to Obamacare subsidies offered Republicans a chance to close this loophole.RELATED: ‘Fraud ... for abortion’? Vance announces probe into Planned Parenthood's $88M taxpayer-funded loans at March for Life Photo by Kyle Mazza/Anadolu via Getty ImagesHouse Republicans, to their credit, tried. In December, they passed H.R. 6703, which would explicitly block federal dollars from helping pay for a Medicaid plan that covers elective abortion. The Congressional Budget Office projects that the bill would lower Obamacare premiums by 11% on average through 2035 — nearly double the estimated reduction in the Democrats’ plan — and shrink the national deficit by $35.6 billion.Then 17 Republicans defected.On Jan. 8, they voted with Democrats to force a “clean” three-year extension of Obamacare subsidies with no language protecting taxpayers from subsidizing abortion.Now the bill moves to the Senate, where negotiations reportedly continue on a bipartisan package. Thankfully, contrary to Trump’s calls for “flexibility,” Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) has signaled that Hyde will remain non-negotiable in any deal.“We want to ensure that, if we do anything, it’s done in a way that reforms these programs and ... ensures that those dollars aren’t being used to go against the practice that’s been in place for the last 50 years around here, when it comes to taxpayer dollars being used to finance abortions,” Thune told reporters on Jan. 6.The president — and any Republicans tempted to treat Hyde as disposable — should follow Thune’s lead. Trump may have a gift for “the art of the deal,” but the values at the center of the Republican coalition are not bargaining chips.The GOP has long cast itself as a party of abolitionists, freedom fighters, and defenders of the vulnerable unborn. It should not compromise those claims for short-term political convenience — and become what it says it opposes.Respectfully, Mr. President, human lives aren’t negotiable. Neither is the Hyde Amendment.

Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell of California says employees of Immigration and Customs Enforcement should be "unhirable" in his state in order to oppose deportation efforts.Swalwell made the comments while being interviewed on CNN, but his comments were posted to social media, where they were widely circulated.'If you're going to work for fascists, forget about working in this state. ... So we're not weak, we have to go on offense.'"I don't think anybody likes or wants what ICE is doing right now. We were told the most violent individuals would be deported," said Swalwell."Again, a child, U.S. citizen, battling stage-four cancer, deported," he added. "Once you shoot a mom in the face three times who has stuffies in her glove compartment and Cheerios, not a weapon, not a knife, you shot her in the face three times, and you claim that you were justified? Forget it! No one asked for this, and ICE as it exists today needs to be completely dismantled."Swalwell was referring to the lethal shooting of Renee Good in Minneapolis, but he conveniently failed to include that she had made her vehicle into a weapon when she swerved into an ICE agent.The other incident he cited was that of a child with kidney cancer who was sent to Honduras when his two parents, both described as "mothers," were deported. A lawsuit claims the government did not give his parents the option to let the boy stay in the U.S., but the Department of Homeland Security denies the allegation.Swalwell went on to say that he would ruin ICE agents' employment opportunities if he were elected governor."As governor, I would use the powers of the office. If you're going to wear a mask as an ICE agent in our state, I will take away your driver's license. If you work for ICE, you will be unhirable in the state," Swalwell added."If you're going to work for fascists, forget about working in this state," he added. "So we are not weak. We have to go on offense. Otherwise the most vulnerable in our communities are on defense, and I urge every governor to start protecting their people in their state that way."RELATED: Ocasio-Cortez gets crushed online for her comments about ICE — by outraged liberals CNN anchor Kasie Hunt pushed back on Swalwell's claim about "fascist" ICE agents. "Do you think every ICE agent on the streets is a fascist?" she asked, eyebrows briefly furrowed.In response, Swalwell doubled down, claiming that working for ICE is a "choice." "No one's forcing you to do that," he added.Swalwell's announcement to seek the governor's office in California has been mocked and ridiculed by Republicans. A November 2025 poll showed that only 24% of Californians had a favorable view of the candidate, 23% had an unfavorable view of him, and a majority of 53% were unsure or had not even heard of him.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!