This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Vaccine manufacturers can make, market and sell their products in America without any fear of a side effect that would harm someone.
They have no liability for damages or injuries from their products since the creation in the 1980s of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act.
That forces American taxpayers to pay individuals for those injuries, through the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.
But now that exemption could be coming to a close.
Patriot.TV reports U.S. Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., has introduced legislation that would repeal the legal protections that now shield vaccine makers from lawsuits.
It would allow injured people to sue the makers directly in state and federal courts.
"The bill arrives amid heightened concerns over vaccine safety, particularly regarding COVID-19 shots, and seeks to bypass the underperforming Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP), which has approved only 39 out of nearly 14,000 COVID-related claims," the report explained.
There already are 28 cosponsors.
A report from Natural News explained Gosar's HR 4668 is a derivative of an earlier plan by Gosar, who has stated, "Big Pharma should not be given a free pass for injuries caused by their dangerous vaccines."
The report noted since it was created, the VICP has paid about $5 billion to 25,000 claimants.
But Gosar said the system is "stacked" against those submitting claimants.
The report noted the debate was reinvigorated just days ago when, during a Senate hearing on vaccine injuries, when pro-vaccine lawmaker Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., admitted reform is needed.
"The government has decided that this particular industry gets a free pass," admitted U.S. Sen. Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio.
Gosar argued, to those who say liability would suppress research and innovation. that the move simply would incentivize transparency and safety.
A federal judge has ordered Medicaid to continue paying Planned Parenthood after blocking a provision in President Donald Trump's Big, Beautiful Bill defunding the abortion giant, Breitbart reported. U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, granted the preliminary injunction on Monday.
Taxpayers will continue to foot the bill for the abortion mill through Medicaid reimbursement while the litigation continues. Talwani decided that there was a risk of more babies being born, among other consequences, if Trump's defunding was allowed to stand while the courts hash out the issue.
“Patients are likely to suffer adverse health consequences where care is disrupted or unavailable. In particular, restricting Members’ ability to provide healthcare services threatens an increase in unintended pregnancies and attendant complications because of reduced access to effective contraceptives, and an increase in undiagnosed and untreated STIs," the judge wrote in her opinion.
The recent decision expanded last week's ruling that blocked part of the defunding based on the bill's wording about a "prohibited entity," which includes Planned Parenthood Federation affiliates that "do not provide abortions because of state law or those who received less than $800,000 in Medicaid reimbursements in 2023." The case will continue to make its way through the courts.
Trump signed his bill into law on July 4, which barred abortion providers from receiving reimbursement for one year. Although it was not mentioned by name in the bill, Planned Parenthood filed an injunction claiming that cutting off Medicaid funding would have "devastating effects" on its so-called treatment.
Three days after the president signed the BBB into law, Planned Parenthood sought a temporary restraining order (TRO).https://t.co/CbJaTyu5qM pic.twitter.com/wxg8zfdPTL
— The Truth-Seekers Tavern (@TavernTruth) July 16, 2025
Moreover, the organization said almost 200 of its abortion mills are "at risk of closure" because of the provision in the bill. Trump's Department of Health and Human Services countered their claims, pointing out that Planned Parenthood "has no right to taxpayer money" and that "the court should not invent such a right" in its decision.
"The Court should uphold Congress’s lawful exercise of its authority to decide to whom it will entrust taxpayers’ hard-earned dollars," the HHS filing said. Of course, Planned Parenthood is used to the open spigot that allows taxpayer dollars to freely flow to it, and they're not about to give up without a fight.
Planned Parenthood Federation of America's CEO and president, Alexis McGill Johnson, said the abortion giant was ready to continue its fight for what it calls "critical health care." HHS communications director Andrew Nixon responded that "[s]tates should not be forced to fund organizations that have chosen political advocacy over patient care."
The abortion debate has raged over the past half century in America over moral issues. Those who are pro-life feel it should be illegal, while the pro-abortion side has rabidly defended killing babies in the womb up until the moment of birth.
Within that also lies the issue of who should pay for these abortions, and many on the pro-life side have worked to keep taxpayer dollars out of Planned Parenthood coffers. The Hyde Amendment already prohibits abortion providers from receiving federal dollars except for cases of a child conceived in rape, incest, or when the life of the mother is threatened.
The logical argument is that a life is always a life, regardless of how it's created, which has led to the position that no federal money should pay for the slaughter of the unborn. Still, Planned Parenthood's annual report for 2023-2024 showed it killed 402,230 babies in the womb, which is an increase from the 392,715 reported the year before.
For its trouble, Planned Parenthood received an additional $100 million over the previous year and received a whopping $792.2 million in taxpayer dollars. Despite the current injunction, there may be hope yet that the defunding will stand as the Supreme Court ruled last month that South Carolina could block Medicaid funding to Planned Parenthood and said that the organization did not have civil rights protections under the law.
Abortion is a blight on humanity, and having taxpayers fund it makes the act all the more despicable. Trump has tried to do what he can to remedy the situation and right the wrong, but the courts have attempted to undo his progress at every turn, including this judge.
President Trump has locked down a major trade deal with Europe that favors the United States - bigly - and Trump haters are speechless.
Trump announced the historic agreement on Sunday opposite European Union commissioner Ursula von der Leyen at one of his golf courses in Scotland.
The deal has been widely described as a virtual surrender by Europe, America's largest trade partner, with the Trump-hating Washington Post calling it "lopsided." The prime minister of France slammed the agreement as a "dark day" and a capitulation to Trump, who launched a global trade war months ago to widespread skepticism.
The trade deal applies 15% tariffs on European imports, including automobiles, in addition to existing "sectoral tariffs" on goods like steel and aluminum.
Europe also agreed to buy $750 billion in American energy, to invest another $600 billion in the U.S and to lower tariffs on American cars from 10% to 2.5%.
The White House touted the agreement as a fundamental "rebalancing" of "the economic relationship between the world’s two largest economies."
It is the most significant deal yet to emerge from Trump's risky effort to realign the global trade system, which he has long said disadvantages the U.S.
"So we have a tariff of 15%, we have the opening up of all of the European countries, which I think I could say were essentially closed,” Trump said. “I mean, you weren’t exactly taking our orders, you weren’t exactly taking our agriculture, and then you would have smaller things, but for the most part, it was closed, and now it’s open.”
In exchange for making steep concessions, Europe got little in return except relief from the uncertainty of Trump's trade war.
Europe was facing a Friday deadline to make a deal or face tariffs as high as 30%. The final terms have left Eurocrats scrambling to save face, with Von der Leyen calling the deal the "best we could get."
"We should not forget where we came from,” von der Leyen said. “Fifteen percent is certainly a challenge for some, but we should not forget it keeps us the access to the American markets.”
Germany, Europe's largest economy, was similarly sanguine about the deal, which provided some small relief for Germany's largest industry: cars. The tariff of 15% is much higher than what Germany is used to, but lower than the 27.5% auto tariff that Trump imposed in April.
“A trade conflict has been averted that would have severely impacted the export-oriented German economy,” said German Chancellor Friedrich Merz.
Big news came out of the National Governors Association (NGA) Summer Meeting in Colorado Springs, Colorado this week, and many governors are thrilled.
According to Fox News, Secretary Linda McMahon of the Department of Education announced the unfreezing of $6.8 billion in previously frozen funds. She assured the attending governors that it would never happen again.
The previously frozen funds were set aside for K-12 programs, and the announcement comes on the heels of a lawsuit filed against the Trump administration by 20 Democratic attorneys general.
They argued that the federal funding freeze was crippling for states with the new school year just around the corner, insisting that states desperately need the funds to keep everything operational.
Department of Education spokesperson Madi Biedermann explained to Fox News that the funds were unfrozen after a review by the Office of Budget Management (OMB) was completed.
Biedermann said the OMB "has completed its review of Title I-C, Title II-A, Title III-A and Title IV-A ESEA funds and Title II WIOA funds and has directed the Department to release all formula funds. The agency will begin dispersing funds to states next week."
Sec. McMahon was thanked by many of the Democrats in the coaltion that sued the administration.
Fox News noted:
The bipartisan group of governors, including the NGA's outgoing chair, Gov. Jared Polis of Colorado, and its vice chair, Gov. Kevin Stitt of Oklahoma, thanked McMahon for unlocking the funding during the NGA's education session Friday.
Gov. Jared Polis asked, "How can we better communicate to make sure that this chaos and uncertainty doesn't occur again around funding and that people know things earlier?"
McMahon responded, "No guarantees from me that we will eliminate all the communications gaps that do happen, but I can say that part of it is just the transition aspect."
McMahon went on to assure the governors that the funds were frozen due to the review process.
Fox News added:
The education secretary said the other aspect of the federal funding freeze was that the OMB budget office "took some time to really review the title funding to look at all the programs, etc., before they were released. They were well satisfied. So, now, those funds are going to be going out."
The news comes also as Trump continues to do whatever he can to dismantle the Education Department.
Trump and his administration recently won a major Supreme Court ruling that allowed the firing of nearly half of the DoE's workforce.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The professional who just got laid off never expected this. They worked hard their whole life. Always had a plan B, C and D. Never without a job. Never needed a handout. Now, for the first time, they're facing the unknown, the unemployment line.
The recent college graduate, diploma in hand, who spent four years living on Top Ramen, buried in textbooks and study groups, was told the degree was the ticket to success. Stay in school, study hard, and there will be a future waiting for you.
The stay-at-home mom who's always believed in raising her children full-time would prefer to keep doing just that, nurturing her family, providing the care only a mother can give. But with food prices rising and their household on the edge, she's forced to return to work for the first time in years. Not because she wants to, but because she must.
These Americans all know the challenge ahead. They know they'll need to fight for the job that helps them keep their home, pay their bills, feed their families and contribute to their communities.
What they don't know is this: There aren't enough jobs for Americans anymore.
And worse, they're not just competing with each other. They're competing with millions of work-authorized foreign nationals who are now legally walking into the same job market.
In 2024, while the U.S. economy only created 2.2 million new jobs, the federal government approved over 5.56 million employment authorizations for foreign nationals. That's more than twice as many workers added to the job pool than jobs created.
And it wasn't an isolated year. From 2022 to 2024 America issued over 18 million work permits through a patchwork of visa programs, asylum cases, student extensions and executive actions. During that same three-year period, only 9.7 million jobs were created.
Millions of hardworking Americans, just like the laid-off parent, the young graduate and the mother returning to work, are entering a job market that's already saturated. Not because of natural supply and demand, but because the government is flooding the system with foreign competition.
The government's role
Many Americans assume that employment-based immigration is tightly controlled, limited in number and directly tied to job availability. In reality, that is not how the system works.
Each year, the U.S. government issues millions of work authorizations to foreign nationals through a variety of immigration categories. These include asylum applicants, individuals with Temporary Protected Status (TPS), recipients of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), H-1B temporary skilled workers, international students participating in post-graduation work programs such as Optional Practical Training (OPT) and STEM OPT and other similar work visa programs.
Most of these programs do not require a specific job offer to exist at the time of approval. In many cases, there is no legal obligation for employers to demonstrate that they attempted to hire a U.S. worker first. Additionally, several of these programs have no annual cap, meaning there is no fixed limit on how many individuals can receive work authorization each year.
As a result, foreign nationals may be granted the legal right to work in the U.S., sometimes for multiple years, without any link to actual job openings or confirmation that the U.S. labor market has unmet demand. There is no built-in labor market test, no requirement to prioritize American workers and no formal mechanism to align these approvals with the number of available jobs. In practice, this means that millions of work-authorized foreign nationals can enter the job market each year, even during periods of high unemployment or limited job growth for U.S. citizens.
American workers left behind
For American workers, whether they're behind the wheel of a truck, fixing engines, building homes, caring for patients, writing code, or stepping out of college with a degree, the impact is personal and immediate. When the federal government authorizes millions of foreign nationals to enter the workforce each year, it floods the job market and stacks the deck against American citizens.
This is no longer limited to so-called "low-skilled" jobs. The displacement is happening across the board, in white-collar careers, government contracts, hospitals, classrooms and tech companies. And because there's no hard limit on how many employment authorizations can be issued, the floodgates stay wide open.
Employers, enticed by lower costs and fewer obligations, are increasingly turning to foreign workers with temporary status. Americans aren't being passed over because they lack skills, but because the system itself has been rewired to favor foreign labor over American talent.
The result is a quiet restructuring of the U.S. labor market, one where citizenship, hard work and sacrifice no longer guarantee opportunity. The data makes this shift hard to ignore. According to the Federal Reserve's FRED database, foreign-born men have consistently been employed at higher rates than American-born men, a trend that persisted through 2024. In recent years, that employment gap has remained steady, averaging 15% to 17%. This pattern points to a deeper structural preference where foreign workers are being favored, while American workers are being pushed aside.
A betrayal hidden in plain sight
The numbers speak for themselves, American workers are now competing in a labor market reshaped by federal immigration policy, one that adds millions of foreign workers each year without regard to job availability.
Across the country, parents, recent graduates, veterans and working families are doing everything they were told would lead to success, earning degrees, gaining experience, showing up day after day, only to find fewer opportunities waiting for them.
Not because they lacked the skills or experience, but because millions of foreign nationals were approved to enter the workforce ahead of them, many of whom will work for lower wages, tolerate unsafe conditions, skip benefits and stay silent rather than risk losing their place. Not because they choose to, but because it's the only way to be more appealing than an American who can do the same job.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
President Donald Trump confirmed on Friday that it's possible that federal rebates – cash returned to the American public – are possible.
And it's because of the probable revenue to America of some $200 billion by the end of the year from his new tariffs on other countries.
Trump has been using tariffs, high and low, as a method of bringing those nations to the bargaining table and reaching fair trade agreements for American businesses and consumers.
Some deals already have been made final, but many have not been concluded.
The tariff income is from those other nations, and likely will continue even after deals are reached, as Trump has promised not to allow other countries to take advantage as they have in the past.
Trump said, "We're thinking about that [a rebate], actually. We have so much money coming in we're thinking about a little rebate, but the big thing we want to do is pay down debt. We're thinking about a rebate. That's a very good question. You just made a lot of news."
Sen. Josh Hawley responded immediately.
His plan is to introduce legislation in the Senate to do exactly what Trump discussed.
Others said Trump's first plan, paying down the national debt, is the higher priority.
President Donald Trump said he hopes Elon Musk's businesses do well as Tesla suffers its second straight losing quarter, the Washington Times reported. This comes after Musk fired parting shots as he was leaving as head of the Department of Government Efficiency.
The Tesla mogul supported Trump during the 2024 campaign and helped carry get him back into the White House. Then Musk worked to cut government waste through DOGE.
However, things grew tense after he denigrated Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill, which will slash electric vehicle subsidies starting Sept. 30. Meanwhile, Musk’s Tesla sales dipped 16% in market share over last year.
For his part, Trump said in a social media post Thursday that he hopes Musk will continue to do well. Later remarks from Musk demonstrate that he wasn’t convinced as it appears this feud will continue.
The president’s post to Truth Social championed Musk’s continued success regardless of the legislation. “Everyone is stating that I will destroy Elon’s companies by taking away some, if not all, of the large scale subsidies he receives from the U.S. Government,” Trump began.
“This is not so! I want Elon, and all businesses within our Country, to THRIVE, in fact, THRIVE like never before!” Trump continued.
“The better they do, the better the USA does, and that’s good for all of us. We are setting records every day, and I want to keep it that way!” Trump concluded.
Shortly after Trump’s overtures toward him, Musk posted a response on X, formerly Twitter. “The ‘subsidies’ he’s talking about simply do not exist,” Musk claimed.
He said Trump “has already removed or put an expiry date on all sustainable energy support while leaving massive oil & gas subsidies untouched.” He then went on to point out how one of his other companies helped the country while receiving government money.
“SpaceX won the NASA contracts by doing a better job for less money. Moving those contracts to other aerospace companies would leave astronauts stranded and taxpayers on the hook for twice as much!” Musk claimed.
According to the New York Post, Musk’s companies raked in $38 billion in taxpayer dollars since 2007 with the majority being awarded in the last five years. SpaceX alone has secured billions in Department of Defense and NASA contracts.
These two will likely continue to spar over government waste and the role of subsidies. However, it seems that saving money for the American people is never the losing bet, even if Musk doesn’t like it.
A recent Harvard-Harris survey has found that a majority of respondents believe former President Joe Biden intentionally left the borders wide open during his tenure, Breitbart reported. These results come as President Donald Trump makes significant headway in combating illegal immigration.
During the Biden administration, record numbers of illegal immigrants crossed the border. While it's possible that this was due to complacency or incompetence, a significant majority of those surveyed believe it was intentional.
In a poll conducted from July 6 to 8 among 2,044 registered voters, 67% of respondents believed that Biden kept the border open. On whether this was a "deliberate policy" or not, 69% agreed that it was.
This sentiment is more widespread when broken down by party affiliation, with 84% of Republicans believing it was a purposeful decision, while 68% of independents share the same view. Even Democrats could only muster a slight majority of 51% who believed the border was "secure" and 52% who thought it was "not deliberate."
Biden was squarely responsible for the open border mess, and 88% of Republicans and 60% of independents are calling it "deliberate" in the poll. This is far more than just opinion, as recent facts may indicate that they're right.
Trump has plugged up the leaks at the southern border, with May and June reporting that there were zero illegal immigrants brought into the interior of the U.S. In a post to his Truth Social, the president touted his success while contrasting it with Biden's failures.
"Zero Border crossings for the month for TRUMP, verses 60,000 for Sleepy, Crooked Joe Biden, a man who lost the 2020 Presidential Election by a 'LANDSLIDE!' Biden was grossly incompetent, and the 2020 election was a total FRAUD!" Trump wrote on June 20.
"The evidence is MASSIVE and OVERWHELMING. A Special Prosecutor must be appointed. This cannot be allowed to happen again in the United States of America! Let the work begin! What this Crooked man and his CORRUPT CRONIES have done to our Country in 4 years is grossly indescribable! MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!" Trump concluded.
One positive figure can be dismissed, but it appears Trump's success in reversing Biden's immigration trends continues across other metrics. According to Fox News, Biden paroled 27,766 illegal immigrants in June 2024 while Trump released exactly zero in June of this year.
His policies have also stopped illegal immigration at the source, as Border Patrol reported just 6,070 encounters with illegal immigrants for the entire month of June. During the Biden administration, there were as many as 10,000 illegal immigrants a day crossing the border.
U.S. Customs and Border Patrol Commissioner Rodney Scott credited Trump with this change in a news release last month. "From shutting down illegal crossings to seizing fentanyl and enforcing billions in tariffs, CBP is delivering results on every front," Scott said.
"Under this administration, we are protecting this country with relentless focus, and the numbers prove it," he added. Trump is certainly a skilled statesman, but it's clear the disparity has just as much to do with Biden's open-door policy as it does with Trump's crackdown.
For as inept as Biden was at being president, the record illegal immigration can only be explained through a willful decision to let it happen. It's clear as ever now that this was intentional, especially since Trump has been so successful so quickly after taking office.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
In a huge blow to one state's attempt to impose its own transgender ideologies on its residents, specifically adoptive parents, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that single mother Jessica Bate's First Amendment rights likely were violated in Oregon's orchestrated attempt to force her to embrace its gender campaign.
"No one thinks, for example, that a state could exclude parents from adopting foster children based on those parents' political views, race, or religious affiliations," the 9th Circuit wrote in its ruling in Bates v. Pakseresht. "Adoption is not a constitutional law dead zone. And a state's general conception of the child's best interest does not create a force field against the valid operation of other constitutional rights."
Bates had applied to become certified to adopt children from foster care two years ago. But the state agency overseeing child welfare programs denied her application based only on the fact Bates would not agree to lie about a child's gender by using inaccurate pronouns, or to take children to "Pride" parades.
The court decisions leaves Bates free to begin the process of adopting siblings from foster care without violating her religious beliefs while the legal fight continues.
Bates was represented by the ADF in her 2023 lawsuit challenging an Oregon Department of Human Services rule that categorically excluded her from adopting any child—no matter their age or beliefs—"because she would not lie to children and tell them that girls can be boys and vice versa," the ADF reported.
The ruling said Bates likely will succeed in showing that Oregon is violating the First Amendment.
"Every child deserves a loving home, and children suffer when the government excludes people of faith from the adoption and foster system. Jessica is a caring mom of five who is now free to adopt after Oregon officials excluded her because of her common-sense belief that a girl cannot become a boy or vice versa," said ADF lawyer Jonathan Scruggs.
"Because caregivers like Jessica cannot promote Oregon's dangerous gender ideology to young kids and take them to events like pride parades, the state considers them to be unfit parents. That is false and incredibly dangerous, needlessly depriving kids of opportunities to find a loving home. The 9th Circuit was right to remind Oregon that the foster and adoption system is supposed to serve the best interests of children, not the state's ideological crusade."
Bates had confirmed to the state she would love and accept any child placed with her, but she still was rejected.
The ADF also noted that earlier this year, a coalition of foster and adoptive parents, religious liberty organizations, free speech advocates and those who promote families, 20 states and others argued in support of Bates in documents with the 9th Circuit.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Federal Research chief Jerome Powell has been under pressure from President Donald Trump because of Powell's agenda to keep interest rates at current levels.
With the nation's economy booming, inflation low, mass revenue coming in from tariffs, and a series of international trade deals being developed, Trump wants the interest rates lower, to spur even more economic development.
Powell has resisted, and that resistance has been weaponized because of the hundreds of millions of dollars in cost overruns under his watch as the Fed refurbishes its HQ buildings in Washington.
That work was supposed to come in at $1.8 billion. Then it was estimated to be $2.5 billion.
Now it's at $3.1 billion, according to documentation that Trump handed Powell during a briefing to reporters.
The two were at the site Thursday to look at the progress being made for all those hundreds of millions of U.S. tax dollars.
Already, Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., has referred Powell to the Department of Justice for criminal charges, accusing him of two specific instances of lying under oath.
Her accusations include that last month Powell "provided testimony under oath before the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs regarding the renovation of the Federal Reserve's Eccles Building. In his statements, he made several materially false claims," she said.
Trump has said it is unlikely he'll fire Powell, although he apparently could.
In video from the tour of the construction site, Trump noted the new, and higher, estimated of $3.1 billion, which apparently came from Fed staff members.
Powell pointed out that it included a third building, while the lower estimate apparently was for work only one two.
At the press availability, Trump was asked what would happen if he, as a real estate developer, came across a project manager who was over budget.
"Generally speaking, what would I do? FIRE HIM!" he said.