(Maire Clayton, Headline USA) Not only did former First Lady Michelle Obama’s new embarrassingly low numbers; it also managed to start a potential trademark war with a U.K. podcast of the same name.
The individuals behind the U.K.-based “In My Opinion” podcast took to TikTok Thursday to attempt to plea with Obama over her podcast sharing the same name of “IMO.”
“Obviously we are aware that you launched your podcast, and we don’t think you did it maliciously but we are three young black boys from London who started a podcast five years ago,” the trio began in their roughly minute and a half speech.
The three go on to state that the name is trademarked in the U.K., but they failed to file it in the United States.
“Since five years ago we’ve trademarked the name ‘In My Opinion’ and ‘IMO’ podcast. And we don’t want our work to be drowned by your celebrity status, do you know what I mean – you’re big, you’re powerful and you’ve got a big machine,” the group continued.
@inmyopinionpod MRS MICHELLE OBAMA‼️ Sorry to disturb your regular programming but it has come to our attention that the Forever First Lady of the United States of America Michelle Obama is launching a Podcast with her brother named the IMO Podcast @IMO Podcast, which of course is the same name we use. We need your support and need you guys to spam her comments and let her know we already own this Trademark in the UK and currently working on other jurisdictions. our Trademark is only registered in the UK because at the time we launched, we never believed in ourselves enough to think we’d grow to where we’re at to TradeMark in the US and we couldn’t afford it. And we’re not accusing Mrs Obama of infringement because she was well within her rights to trademark the podcast in the US. PLEASE SHARE ON YOUR STORIES AND SPAM Michelle Obama’s COMMENTS ON HER PODCAST PAGE @imopodcasts As always, we appreciate your support 🙏🏾 #fyp#imopodcast#imopodcasts#inmyopinionpodcast#fypage#foryou#inmyopinion#explorepage#viral2025#xyzbcaaa#trending2025#reacttothis#reacts#stitchthis#tiktokstory#storytimestiktok#storytime#storytimes#michelleobama♬ original sound – IN MY OPINION PODCAST
They asked if Obama would reconsider changing the name as they didn’t want their years of effort to have gone to waste.
“So, we’re asking kindly, please share a thought for us three young black men that are just trying to make a better place,” they added. “We really hope you can reconsider the name you’ve chosen for your podcast as to not confuse our listeners and drown out our voice that we’ve worked so hard to build.”
They asked the former first lady if she would be willing to discuss the matter and come up with a solution to the problem.
The podcast, which Obama shares with her brother Craig Robinson, dropped Wednesday and has been ridiculed for its lackluster numbers.
As of the time of writing, the first episode only managed to get 192,000 views with the second taking a deep nosedive with only 81,000 views on YouTube. In addition, the account has only managed to get roughly 29,000 subscribers.
(Money Metals News Service) In a recent episode of the Money Metals podcast, host Mike Maharrey sat down with veteran journalist and author Stuart Englert to discuss gold revaluation, the manipulation of precious metals markets, and the broader implications for the financial system.
Englert, author of Rigged: Exposing the Largest Financial Fraud in History, has spent years researching how the monetary system has been distorted to favor fiat currencies at the expense of sound money principles.
A graduate of Indiana University’s School of Journalism, he has worked as a newspaper reporter, magazine editor, and investigative writer, focusing on financial market manipulation, media industry shifts, and societal transformation.
His book Rigged: Exposing the Largest Financial Fraud in History examines the hidden forces behind gold and silver market manipulation, offering critical insights for those questioning mainstream financial narratives. He has also explored themes of control and awakening in his Paradox novel trilogy, chronicled the decline of print media in Sold Out—How an American Magazine Lost Its Soul, and profiled notable figures in Sweat & Sawdust: The Life and Legacy of Victor J. Hedinger.
Understanding Gold Revaluation
Gold revaluation refers to a legal resetting of the official gold price. Historically, the U.S. government has revalued gold four times—1884, 1934, 1972, and 1973—each time increasing its official price. The current official price of gold, as established by the Par Value Modification Act of 1972 and approved by President Nixon in 1973, stands at $42.22 per ounce.
The market price of gold has since soared to around $2,900+ per ounce.
Englert explained that gold revaluation benefits the government by increasing the book value of its gold reserves, allowing it to expand its balance sheet, borrow more, and manage debt. It could also incentivize mining production and boost gold imports. However, such a move would further devalue the U.S. dollar, as gold is priced in national currencies.
The Federal Reserve and the Debt Machine
Maharrey and Englert explored how the Federal Reserve’s monetary policies have enabled an ever-expanding U.S. government, facilitating borrowing and spending through the persistent devaluation of the dollar. This, they argue, is a longstanding tactic dating back to ancient Rome’s practice of clipping coins to debase currency.
Gold revaluation and inflationary monetary policies serve government interests but often come at the expense of the average person. While gold holders might benefit, those relying solely on fiat currency experience diminished purchasing power as inflation erodes their savings.
The U.S. at a Financial Crossroads
Englert asserted that the U.S. is at a critical juncture with its monetary system, citing an unsustainable national debt combined with 50 years of trade deficits. He noted that a strong dollar hampers U.S. exports and that devaluation through gold revaluation could be a tool to address trade imbalances.
While estimates vary on how much gold would need to be revalued to reflect the true state of the financial system, some analysts, such as James Rickards, have projected figures such as $20,000 per troy ounce, or even higher. Englert himself refrained from pinpointing a number but agreed that as the money supply and debt continue to expand, gold’s value would inevitably rise.
Central Banks and the Move Toward Gold
The past three years have seen record levels of central bank gold purchases, surpassing 1,000 tons annually, more than double the previous decade’s average of 450–500 tons per year. Notably, emerging economies like China, India, and Eastern European nations are leading this trend, signaling declining confidence in the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency.
Maharrey pointed out that historical precedents—such as Franklin Roosevelt’s gold confiscation in 1933 and Richard Nixon’s closing of the gold window in 1971—were direct responses to government overspending and war debts.
Englert expanded on this, emphasizing that debt and war are often interlinked. Historically, governments have resorted to monetary manipulation to finance military endeavors, further indebting their populations.
Suppression of Gold and the Role of Paper Markets
One of the most contentious topics in the interview was the suppression of gold prices through paper markets. Englert argued that derivatives and gold ETFs are mechanisms used to keep gold prices artificially low, creating an illusion of stability for fiat currencies.
Additionally, a psychological campaign has been waged against gold ownership. Financial personalities like Dave Ramsey and Suze Orman have discouraged physical gold investment, promoting ETFs instead—an approach that Englert suggests serves the interests of those who benefit from market manipulation.
Inflation: The Unraveling of the Monetary Illusion
Maharrey and Englert also discussed how inflation has been misrepresented to the public. The official Consumer Price Index (CPI) fails to capture the real impact on consumers, especially as grocery prices have skyrocketed. Englert noted that the illusion of dollar stability is becoming harder to maintain, as everyday Americans witness firsthand the erosion of their purchasing power.
Maharrey cited personal examples, such as soda prices rising from $0.99 to nearly $4 per bottle in just a few years, demonstrating how inflation is outpacing official government statistics.
The 50th Anniversary of Gold Legalization
This year marks the 50th anniversary of private gold ownership legalization in the U.S. Until 1974, Americans were prohibited from owning gold bullion due to Roosevelt’s 1933 decree. Englert emphasized the irony that gold—explicitly mentioned in the U.S. Constitution as money—was banned while the fiat monetary system expanded unchecked. Meanwhile, central banks worldwide continued to accumulate gold, recognizing its value.
The Future: Debt, Bondage, and Financial Servitude
Englert is currently working on a new book, Debt Bondage and Financial Servitude, which explores how the debt-based monetary system has ensnared individuals, corporations, and governments. Maharrey echoed this concern, warning that while the system appears sustainable for now, history shows that financial bubbles inevitably burst.
Englert concluded by emphasizing that understanding history is crucial for predicting the future. As is often misattributed to Mark Twain, but remains true in spirit, “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes.” If the patterns of the past are any indication, the coming years may see significant shifts in the monetary landscape.
(Thérèse Boudreaux, The Center Square) Labor unions representing federal workers are facing another challenge to collective bargaining rights – and even their very existence – in a newly introduced Republican bill meant to prevent American taxpayer dollars from subsidizing union costs.
The Federal Workforce Freedom Act would prohibit federal employees from organizing or joining labor unions in order to collectively bargain, as well as forbid federal agencies from participating in collective bargaining negotiations with labor unions representing federal workers.
The bill, introduced Thursday, would also terminate any and all collective bargaining agreements between labor unions and federal agencies “established before, on, or after the date of enactment of this bill.”
The sponsors of the bill, U.S. Sens. Mike Lee, R-Utah, and Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., argue that these kinds of collective bargaining agreements harm worker efficiency, increase labor costs, and charge taxpayers in the bargaining process.
“Public servants are not like private sector employees. They should not be able to collectively bargain for leverage over their employers, because they work for the American people,” Lee said Thursday. “[I]t is time that we required all federal workers to spend their days working for the public instead of union business.”
The bill could positively impact taxpayers in the long run, who bear the administrative costs when the federal government collects union fees from member’s paychecks and then transfers the dues to the organizations. Public employee unions also largely fund Democrats during elections.
Additionally, the legislation could help the government save millions of taxpayer dollars annually by no longer having to pay the salaries of federal employees who work as union representatives.
According to a 2020 report from the United States Office of Personnel Management, federal employees spent roughly 2.6 million hours on union activities during work hours during 2019, costing taxpayers an estimated $135 million.
“This legislation would end federal labor unions and immediately terminate their collective bargaining agreements to ensure the federal government is working on behalf of the American people – not labor unions – by increasing the productivity of its workforce,” Blackburn said in a statement.
If passed, the bill would affect 25% of the federal employee workforce who are members of public sector unions, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
The same day Blackburn and Lee introduced their bill, a coalition of labor unions filed a lawsuit challenging Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem’s decision to terminate the DHS’ collective bargaining agreement, impacting thousands of federal transportation workers.
Several federal workers union lawsuits challenging Trump’s mass layoffs are currently working their way through the courts.
(Bethany Blankley, The Center Square) State Rep. Stan Gerdes, R-Smithville, introduced the FURRIES Act (Forbidden Unlawful Representation of Roleplaying in Education) on Thursday to prohibit Texas public schools from allowing furry subculture behavior in classrooms and on campuses. The furry subculture involves individuals adopting anthropomorphic animal identities who often dress in costumes and attempt to mimic animal behavior.
“I can’t believe we have to do this, but we cannot allow these types of role-playing distractions to affect our students who are trying to learn or our teachers and administrators who are trying to teach,” Gerdes said in a statement. “We just have to keep this nonsense out of our schools.
“No distractions. No theatrics. Just education,” he said. “While school mascots, theater performances, and dress-up days remain part of school spirit, this bill ensures that students and teachers can focus on academics – not on bizarre and unhealthy disruptions. Texas schools are for educating kids, not indulging in radical trends.”
Gov. Greg Abbott expressed support for the bill at a Texas Pastor Council event on Thursday in Austin. “In some small rural sections and school districts,” public schools are dealing with furries, he said. “Kids go to school dressed up as cats with litter boxes.” It’s become such a problem that Gerdes filed a bill “saying no furries in public schools in the state of Texas.”
“You have one expectation your child’s going to be learning the fundamentals of education: reading and writing and math and science,” Abbott continued, making his case for the need for school choice in Texas. The Texas Senate already passed its school choice bill; the House held a hearing on Tuesday and is expected to pass it, making history, Abbott said.
If children are “being distracted by furries, their parents have a right to move their child to a school of their choice,” Abbott said. “I’m not telling you anything other than what is just common sense, but common sense is very hard to deal with in this setting.”
LGBTQ Nation criticized the bill, claiming “anti-transgender Republicans” “want to punish students who act like non-human animals in schools.” The Houston Chronicle claimed Abbott “resurrected debunked rumors that public schools were putting litter boxes in classrooms for students dressed as cats.” Several news reports contradict this claim.
Gerdes says he filed the bill in response to concerns expressed by his constituents; a furry-related incident occurred at Smithville ISD, confirmed by the superintendent, he said.
“I fully expect the subculture to show up in full furry vengeance at the committee hearing,” Gerdes said. However, “they won’t be getting any litter boxes in the Texas capitol. They will have to use the regular restrooms like the humans they are.”
The bill would amend Texas education code to “prohibit any non-human behavior by a student, including presenting himself or herself, on days other than exempt days, as anything other than a human being.” Exempt days include holidays like Halloween.
Non-human behavior is defined as: “behaviors or accessories typically displayed by a member of the homeless sapiens species including using litter box for the passing of stool, urine, or other human byproducts;” an individual wearing “tails, leashes, colors, other accessories designed for pet,” including fur. “Barking, meowing, hissing or other animal noises that are not human speech and licking oneself or others for the purpose of grooming or maintenance” also would be prohibited.
The bill directs school boards to adopt student codes of conduct and penalties for violations, including removal, suspension, the disciplinary alternative education program or expulsion and specifies conditions for the penalties, according to the bill language.
It also would amend the Texas Family Code to define mental or emotional injury to a child to include “in an education setting, allowing or encouraging the child to develop a dependence on or belief that non-human behaviors are societally acceptable.” It defines mental and emotional injury, physical injury, sexual conduct harmful to a child’s mental, emotional or physical welfare, compelling or encouraging a child to engage in sexual conduct, including human trafficking, prostitution, child pornography, use of a controlled substance, child marriage and other acts.
It would allow citizens to file complaints with the Attorney General’s Office and authorize it to file a writ of mandamus requiring compliance with the law.
The criminal element was included as furry-related crimes, including with children, have been prosecuted in other states. A Sun Valley, Calif., man was convicted of three murders after becoming obsessed with a teenager involved in a furry subculture; a furry member was charged with murder and attempted murder in Portland, Ore.; a Pennsylvania man was charged with raping an 8-year-old boy dressed as an animal at furry parties.
U.K.-based Safer Schools Ecosystem has warned that online furry platforms create potential sexual exploitation of children.
(José Niño, Headline USA) Vicki Iseman, a prominent lobbyist and owner of Iseman & Associates, is accused of falsifying records to obtain ineligible Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans for her lobbying firm.
According to a report by Court Watch, prosecutors with the U.S. Attorney’s Office of Eastern Virginia filed a complaint claiming Iseman submitted IRS paperwork with several alterations to receive two PPP loans totaling $107,312.03 for her firm, Iseman & Associates.
The complaint against Iseman alleged that she changed her firm’s description from “lobbying” to “public affairs” on IRS forms to circumvent eligibility restrictions. The case is a civil matter, with no criminal charges filed.
Federal law dictates that firms generating 50% or more of their revenue from lobbying activities are barred from receiving PPP loans.
Prosecutors also asserted Iseman had disclosed in mandatory reports to Congress that the firm’s revenue from lobbying went over the 50% threshold.
The complaint claims that Iseman requested her staff in the fall of 2020 to investigate if the firm was eligible to receive a loan under PPP. A few months after the staff let her know that the firm was not eligible due to its lobbying practice, Iseman reportedly applied to receive a $55,687 loan at Bank of America. Court records highlight that one of the documents she submitted to receive the loan was the IRS form identifying “lobbying” as the firm’s main activity.
Per the court filings, when Bank of America did not initially approve the loan, Iseman allegedly believed that her application was rejected due to how the IRS form had “lobbying” as the firm’s primary source of revenue.
The complaint alleges she subsequently withdrew the application and submitted a second one the following day with an altered IRS form that listed “public affairs” instead. Prosecutors claim Bank of America gave the green light to the loan and an additional one for $51,625.03.
Court Watch submitted a request for comment to an online contact form from Iseman & Associates, but they did not receive a response. A public affairs official with the U.S Attorney’s office for the Eastern District of Virginia “respectfully declined to comment” when Court Watch reached out.
This case highlights potential abuse of the PPP loan system implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic and raises questions about the integrity of some lobbying firms in Washington, D.C.
Iseman began her career at the lobbying firm Alcalde & Fay, eventually becoming its youngest partner. Iseman primarily represented broadcasting and telecommunications clients such as PAX Network, Sinclair Broadcast Group, and the Hispanic Broadcasting Corporation.
In February 2008, The New York Timespublished an article suggesting an improper relationship between Iseman and Senator John McCain. The article implied that McCain’s aides were concerned about a potential romantic relationship and conflict of interest due to Iseman’s lobbying activities. Both McCain and Iseman denied any improper relationship.
“Convinced the relationship had become romantic, some of his top advisers intervened to protect the candidate from himself by instructing staff members to block the woman’s access, privately warning her away and repeatedly confronting him,” the newspaper reported at the time.
“Mr. McCain, 71, and the lobbyist, Vicki Iseman, 40, both say they never had a romantic relationship. But to his advisers, even the appearance of a close bond with a lobbyist whose clients often had business before the Senate committee Mr. McCain led threatened the story of redemption and rectitude that defined his political identity.”
As a response to the piece, Iseman filed a $27 million defamation lawsuit against The New York Times in December 2008. She alleged that the newspaper falsely implied a romantic relationship with McCain and unethical lobbying practices.
The lawsuit was settled in February 2009 without any payment. The parties released the following joint statement after the settlement: “To resolve the lawsuit, Ms. Iseman has accepted The Times’s explanation, which will appear in a Note to Readers to be published in the newspaper on Feb. 20, that the article did not state, and The Times did not intend to conclude, that Ms. Iseman had engaged in a romantic affair with Senator McCain or an unethical relationship on behalf of her clients in breach of the public trust.”
José Niño is the deputy editor of Headline USA. Follow him at x.com/JoseAlNino
(Headline USA) A representative for the estate of actor Gene Hackman is seeking to block the public release of autopsy and investigative reports, especially photographs and police body-camera video, related to the recent deaths of Hackman and wife Betsy Arakawa after their partially mummified bodies were discovered at their New Mexico home in February.
Authorities last week announced Hackman died at age 95 of heart disease with complications from Alzheimer’s disease as much as a week after a rare, rodent-borne disease — hantavirus pulmonary syndrome — took the life of his 65-year-old wife.
Hackman’s pacemaker last showed signs of activity on Feb. 18, indicating an abnormal heart rhythm on the day he likely died. The couple’s bodies weren’t discovered until Feb. 26 when maintenance and security workers showed up at the Santa Fe home and alerted police, leaving a mystery for law enforcement and medical investigators to unravel.
Julia Peters, a representative for the estate of Hackman and Arakawa, urged a state district court in Santa Fe to seal records in the cases to protect the family’s right to privacy in grief under the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, emphasizing the possibly shocking nature of photographs and video in the investigation and potential for their dissemination by media.
The request, filed Tuesday, also described the couple’s discrete lifestyle in Santa Fe since Hackman’s retirement. The state capital city is known as a refuge for celebrities, artists and authors.
The couple “lived an exemplary private life for over thirty years in Santa Fe, New Mexico and did not showcase their lifestyle,” the petition said.
New Mexico’s open records law blocks public access to sensitive images, including depictions of people who are deceased, said Amanda Lavin, legal director at the nonprofit New Mexico Foundation for Open Government. Some medical information also is not considered public record under the state Inspection of Public Records Act.
At the same time, the bulk of death investigations by law enforcement and autopsy reports by medical investigators are typically considered public records under state law in the spirit of ensuring government transparency and accountability, she said.
“I do think it does infringe on transparency if the court were to prohibit release of all the investigation records, including the autopsies,” Lavin said Thursday. “The whole idea of those records being available is to ensure accountability in the way those investigations are done.”
“There is also a public health concern given that hantavirus was involved,” Lavin said.
She said the preemptive request to prevent the release of government records on constitutional grounds is unusual.
Hackman, a Hollywood icon, won two Oscars during a storied career in films including The French Connection, Hoosiers and Superman from the 1960s until his retirement in the early 2000s.
Arakawa, born in Hawaii, studied as a concert pianist, attended the University of Southern California and met Hackman in the mid-1980s while working at a California gym.
(Ken Silva, Headline USA) Jack Rocker, a 19-year-old member of the Satanic pedophile cult 764, was sentenced Friday to seven years in prison and a lifetime of supervised release for possessing a cache of child pornography.
Rocker’s arrest stems from a search the FBI conducted on his electronic devices in January 2024. According to the Justice Department, agents found over 8,300 images and videos of child porn, including images and videos depicting the sexual abuse of infants and toddlers, masochistic sexual behavior, and bestiality.
For some reason, Rocker wasn’t charged until last November. His case is similar to that of Richard “Rabid” Densmore, another 764 pedophile who was found by the FBI to be in possession of child porn 11 months before he was finally arrested.
Leading up to Rocker’s sentencing on Friday, the DOJ asked a judge to put him behind bars for 12 years.
“Despite his age, Rocker’s actions are such that he presents a danger to the community. His focus on particularly horrific child rape videos, and the humiliation and victimization of the most vulnerable in our society, underscores this fact,” prosecutors argued in a Thursday sentencing memorandum.
“Further, 764 actors like Rocker weaponize the most horrific CSAM material and use it to desensitize others to groom them for further violence. This is evidenced by the images Rocker procured of girls with his social media handle drawn or carved into their bodies.”
The DOJ further explained the danger of the 764 cult.
“The 764 network’s accelerationist goals include social unrest and the downfall of the current world order, including the United States Government. Members of 764 work in concert with one another towards a common purpose of destroying civilized society through the corruption and exploitation of vulnerable populations, including minors,” the DOJ explained.
Rocker’s own sentencing memorandum remains sealed. Apparently, it convinced the presiding judge to give him a lesser sentence than what the DOJ wanted.
Rocker is the latest 764 member to be sentenced to prison.
The crackdown on the group began in 2021, when the FBI arrested 764 member Angel Almeida. Details of Almeida’s 764 activities weren’t made public until records about his case were unsealed in late 2023.
Almeida’s arrest was followed by charges against another 764 member, Kalana Limkin, in December 2023 for allegedly promoting child pornography, sexual extortion, and trafficking, animal cruelty and self-harm of minors.
Last November, the abovementioned Densmore was sentenced to 30 years imprisonment for sexually exploiting a child.
In May, yet another 764 pedophile, Kyle Spitze, is also set to be sentenced.
Ken Silva is the editor of Headline USA. Follow him at x.com/jd_cashless.
(Headline USA) A federal judge refused Friday to block the destruction of classified documents as part of the building cleanout at the U.S. Agency for International Development, finding that records slated for shredding or burning are old or no longer needed.
The documents don’t appear to be related to the ongoing court battles over the near-dismantling of USAID by the Trump administration, U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols found as he refused to grant a temporary restraining order.
The cases come as the Trump administration dismantles USAID, cutting off most federal money and terminating 83% of the programs abroad. All but a few hundred staffers are being pulled off the job and the agency’s Washington headquarters is being shut down. Those remaining bureaucrats were ordered earlier this week to get rid of classified safes and personnel documents from its D.C. headquarters.
“The only labeling required on the burn bags are the words ‘SECRET’ and ‘USAID/B/IO)’ in dark sharpie if possible,” an internal USAID email stated, instructing staffers to request for burn bags or sharpie if necessary.
A union for USAID contractors had asked Nichols, who was appointed by President Donald Trump, to intervene to stop the destruction of possible evidence after an email ordering staffers to help burn and shred agency records became public.
The Trump administration said the email had been taken out of context as trained USAID staff cleared out the agency’s building. The classified documents slated for destruction were largely copies of those held by other agencies or derived from other classified material, Erica Carr, acting executive secretary at USAID, said in court documents.
Any personnel records or those related to current classified programs are being retained, she said.
She also pledged to contact the plaintiffs before any more documents are destroyed.
The collection, retention and disposal of classified material and federal records are closely regulated by federal law.
The classified documents at USAID emerged as an issue last month when the Trump administration put the agency’s top two security officials on leave after they refused to grant members of Elon Musk’s government-cutting teams access to classified material.
(José Niño, Headline USA) Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, is apparently rolling out a plan to increase the flow of “high skilled” immigrants to the United States.
According to a report by Politico, Jordan is crafting this legislative proposal “on behalf of Elon Musk,” who has previously manifested views in favor of expanding legal immigration.
Jordan, the chair of the House Judiciary committee, revealed in interviews this week that the Republican party is pushing for a bill to expand legal immigration. The bill is allegedly focused on attracting immigrants with skills in engineering, science, and technology.
The Ohio congressman clarified that he wouldn’t be the primary force making those changes to H-1B visas, which allow tech companies to hire foreign-born workers. H-1B visas grant U.S. employers the ability to temporarily employ foreign workers in specialty occupations and even provide a potential pathway to permanent residency (green card).
These visas have become divisive within the Republican party, especially with the populist transformation it has undergone in the last decade.
These new realities prompted Jordan to admit that this legislation to reform the H-1B system would require Democratic support in both chambers of Congress for it to become law. In turn, it would require Republicans to make several concessions to ensure the bill’s passage.
“I think we got to come back and pass [the bill] and send that to the Senate,” Jordan stated. From there, both chambers can “start that debate on what happens with various visa programs we have — whether it’s the high-skilled one, whether it’s [agricultural] workers, whether it’s what happens to Dreamers.”
He also noted that a House-Senate conference committee dealing with the immigration bill would also let the White House to “weigh in” on the issue of expanding legal immigration.
“I think that’s the best play for it all to work, and to have the full debate on everything that impacts immigration policy,” Jordan stated.
Jordan’s support for expanding legal immigration will likely butt heads with the populist wing of the Republican Party.
Gabe Guidarini, the Ohio field representative for Turning Point Action, stated, “The correct amount of H-1B visa holders in our country is 𝙯𝙚𝙧𝙤. End the program. All of it. Put American workers first.”
The correct amount of H-1B visa holders in our country is 𝙯𝙚𝙧𝙤.
U.S. Tech Workers, an organization that has vocally opposed expansions to legal immigration, proclaimed on X “For those celebrating last week’s phony headline that tech elites were backing off the H-1B visa issue due to the Christmas MAGA revolt, here’s the truth: They aren’t backing down. Instead, they’re pushing feckless reform that will continue displacing American workers.”
For those celebrating last week’s phony headline that tech elites were backing off the H-1B visa issue due to the Christmas MAGA revolt, here’s the truth: They aren’t backing down. Instead, they’re pushing feckless reform that will continue displacing American workers.
In late 2024 and early 2025, Elon Musk sparked a controversy surrounding H-1B visas, which led to a heated debate among supporters of President-elect Donald Trump and tech industry leaders.
Musk, along with Indian-American entrepreneur and failed presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, vocally supported the H-1B visa program. Musk argued that there is a “dire shortage of extremely talented and motivated engineers in America” and that bringing in elite engineering talent from abroad is essential for America’s continued success.
This stance drew criticism from some of Trump’s supporters, particularly those aligned with the national populist wing of the his support base. Former White House advisor Steve Bannon called the H-1B program “a complete scam designed to undermine American workers.”
Despite his previous efforts to limit H-1B visas during his first term, President Donald Trump expressed support for the program, calling it “great” and noting his own use of H-1B visas in his properties.
José Niño is the deputy editor of Headline USA. Follow him at x.com/JoseAlNino
(Headline USA) A Republican lawmaker in Maine has sued the state’s Democratic House speaker over her censure that followed a social media post about a transgender athlete participating in high school sports.
Rep. Laurel Libby’s posted about a high school athlete who won a girls’ track competition. The post included a photo of the student and identified them by first name, with the name in quotation marks, saying that they previously competed in boys’ track.
The post went viral and touched off a spat between President Donald Trump and Democratic Gov. Janet Mills. It also led to the Democrat-controlled Maine House of Representatives censuring Libby in February and Democratic House Speaker Ryan Fecteau accusing her of violating the state’s legislative code of ethics.
Libby filed a federal lawsuit against Fecteau and House clerk Robert Hunt on Tuesday with a claim the censure violated her right to free speech. The lawsuit also states that the censure stripped her right to speak and vote on the House floor, and that disenfranchises the thousands of residents in her district.
“I have the constitutional right to speak out and my constituents have the right to full representation in the Maine House. Biological males have no place in girls’ sports. Our girls have every right, under federal law, to fair competition in sports,” Libby said in a statement.
The lawsuit seeks a judgment that the censure is unlawful. It also seeks the restoration of Libby’s voting and speaking rights on the House floor.
Spokespeople for Fecteau and Hunt declined to comment on the lawsuit and deferred to the office of the state attorney general. The attorney general’s office declined to comment on pending litigation.
At the time of the censure, Fecteau said Libby violated the code of ethics by sharing an image of a minor online.
“Sharing images of kids online without their consent is a clear violation of the bond of trust and respect between citizens and their Legislators. There is a time and place for policy debates. That time and place will never be a social media post attacking a Maine student,” Fecteau said in February.
Libby’s post preceded a public argument between Trump and Mills at a meeting of governors at the White House in February.
Soon after taking office, Trump signed an executive order designed to ban transgender athletes from participating in girls’ and women’s sports. Trump characterized Maine as out of line with the order and told Mills “you’re not getting any federal funding” during the meeting with governors.
Mills responded by saying: “We’ll see you in court.” The Trump administration followed by launching an investigation that found Maine in violation of Title IX, which prohibits sex-based discrimination in school programs.
