Alteration may include a potential 'weighted selection process' for foreign applicants to replace lottery system
The often-controversial H-1B visa foreign-worker program may be getting updated under President Trump's Homeland Security Department.
The program was meant to provide American firms more options to hire qualified workers, including those from foreign countries. However, as WND has covered extensively, the H-1B system has been used countless times to replace Americans with less expensive immigrants.
For example, while U.S.-based Microsoft workers have faced multiple waves of layoffs, including a recent round targeting the Xbox division, the company has already cut more than 10,000 employees across various divisions, including 6,000 in May alone, and hundreds more in June.
As reported at the National Pulse, Thursday DHS filed a notice of a possible change in H-1B requirements with the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.
According to the report, the proposal includes a "weighted selection process" for applicants under the capped portion of the program. The filing, however, provides no further details as to how the new system would function. The statutory cap for H-1B visas is set at 85,000 per year.
During the 2024 presidential campaign, prominent supporters of Donald Trump publicly disagreed about the value of the H-1B program, with both Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy expressing support. Opinion polls on the program, however, have shown that a majority of Americans disapprove of the visa program.
Trump had previously argued that H-1B visas are "unfair" to American workers, saying in 2016, "I know the H-1B very well. And it's something that I frankly use, and I shouldn't be allowed to use it. We shouldn't have it."
As the National Pulse points out, critics of the program argue that the current lottery system disproportionately benefits larger companies such as Amazon, Meta and Microsoft, and leaves American workers at a disadvantage, having to compete with cheap foreign labor.
A weighted system could potentially replace the random lottery system as a means to prioritize better qualified visa applicants.
In a major political development, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries refrained from endorsing socialist mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani after their Brooklyn meeting, the New York Postreported.
Despite having a "constructive" one-hour discussion on several societal issues, Jeffries did not extend his endorsement to Mamdani, a leading mayoral hopeful.
The key issues discussed during their meeting involved housing affordability, public safety, rising antisemitism, and the impacts of gentrification—a common concern among New Yorkers.
Discussion Focused on Community and Electoral Strategies
Justin Chermol, spokesperson for Jeffries, remarked, "The conversation was direct and community-centered, particularly emphasizing the urgency of addressing affordability in housing." He noted that the discussions were broad and included plans on regaining Democratic control of the House in 2026.
Perhaps indicative of the complex dynamics within the Democratic party, Jeffries, although supportive of Mamdani's resistance against harsh criticisms from figures like President Trump, has urged Mamdani to clarify his position on the contentious phrase "Globalizing the Intifada."
Mamdani has shown an intention to distance himself from past controversies to focus more on pressing city-wide issues, according to Chermol's narrative.
Broader Engagement in Future Discussions
Plans for a subsequent meeting have been set, aiming to include a wider circle of New York City's congressional delegation and several high-profile community leaders, indicating a broader discussion platform in the near future.
Senior Democratic figures like Senator Chuck Schumer and Governor Kathy Hochul have maintained silence on the endorsement front, aligning with a cautious approach amidst the evolving political discourse in the city.
It is anticipated that Schumer will engage with Mamdani soon, although no definite date has been established, maintaining a veil of uncertainty in the political endorsement arena.
Progressive Figures Support Mamdani's Campaign
Not all have held back; Mamdani has garnered support from influential progressives such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Bernie Sanders, symbolizing a potentially shifting paradigm within parts of the Democratic party towards more progressive stances.
This progressive endorsement could play a pivotal role in shaping the public's perception and potentially influencing more endorsements as the mayoral race progresses.
The upcoming elections will likely spotlight this dynamic, as Mamdani continues to navigate the complex waters of New York City politics with a progressive yet controversial platform.
A Politically Charged Non-Endorsement Meeting
The absence of an explicit endorsement from Jeffries could be seen as a strategic hold-back, given the politically charged environment surrounding New York City's upcoming mayoral race.
The discussions between Jeffries and Mamdani might pave the way for future alignment or divergence within the Democratic party, highlighting a careful political balancing act in the face of diverse electorates.
As momentum builds, the political endorsements and stances from figures like Jeffries, Schumer, and Hochul will be intensely scrutinized, potentially influencing broader political outcomes not just in New York City but nationally.
President Donald Trump's promise to end birthright citizenship has experienced multiple court challenges, only to be blocked once again by the federal judiciary.
According to the Associated Press, the effect of a federal judge's order blocking the Trump administration from ending the program kicked in on Friday, with another judge eyeing a similar outcome.
U.S. District Judge Joseph LaPlante, a New Hampshire-based federal judge, "had paused his own decision to allow for the Trump administration to appeal, but with no appeal filed in the last week his order went into effect," the outlet noted.
According to the report, the judge's decision could still be appealed by the Trump administration, or it could ask the court to narrow the judge's order. Neither have happened as of yet.
What's going on?
Cody Wofsy, the ACLU attorney representing children who would be affected by Trump’s restrictions under his plan to end birthright citizenship, released a statement.
“The judge’s order protects every single child whose citizenship was called into question by this illegal executive order,” Wofsy said. “The government has not appealed and has not sought emergency relief so this injunction is now in effect everywhere in the country.”
On the same topic but another legal front, about a dozen states have reportedly taken action against the administration, with a Boston-based federal judge hearing arguments that the plan to dismantle the program is "blatantly unconstitutional."
Because of the multiple federal battles, the issue is expected to "quickly" move back to the hands of the Supreme Court, though it's not clear when that might happen.
The AP noted:
U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin was asked to consider either keeping in place the nationwide injunction he granted earlier or consider a request from the government either to narrow the scope of that order or stay it altogether. Sorokin, located in Boston, did not immediately rule but seemed to be receptive to arguments from states to keep the injunction in place.
The legal actions come in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling that federal courts can't really issue nationwide injunctions.
The exception
The high court "didn’t rule out other court orders that could have nationwide effects, including in class-action lawsuits and those brought by states" in its most recent order.
The language of the ruling is clearly being taken advantage of by the activist federal judiciary.
Trump and his administration have battled federal judges since Day One of his second term in the White House.
Only time will tell if they're able to overcome the latest legal hurdle.
Ken Langone, co-founder of The Home Depot, has returned to supporting President Donald Trump after previously criticizing his tariffs, The New York Post reported. Now, the billionaire GOP donor is singing Trump's praises and is optimistic about the direction of the country.
Langone appeared on CNBC's Squawk Box on Tuesday. The chairman of the NYU Langone Health board of trustees said Trump was not happy with him after he called Trump's tariffs "bullsh---" in April.
Prior to the election, Langone said he worried that Trump would "engage in retribution" if he retook the White House. Langone is backing down on all of it and says Trump's "big, beautiful" bill will "trigger significant economic growth, that we might see tax revenues going up from the profitability."
Winning Him Over
Like many Republicans who were skeptical that Trump could pull out a victory after 2020, Langone openly criticized him. Now appears that the president’s success is winning him over.
“If I tell you how bullish I was, you wouldn't believe it. I have never been more excited about the future of America than I am right now, right this moment, for a lot of reasons,” Langone told hosts Joe Kernen, Becky Quick, and Andrew Ross Sorkin.
“Number one. Like it or not, this guy is getting things done,” the 89-year-old billionaire said.
Langone said that Trump was upset by comments he makes about the president using the White House to get back at his enemies. “I'm happy to say I'm comfortable he's not doing that,” Langone said.
“He's acting presidential. I'm impressed with the people he's got around him,” Langone noted, including Kevin Warsh, former Federal Reserve Board of Governors of the United States, who backs the Trump agenda.
On the Upswing
Many of the dire predictions made about the Trump agenda have failed to materialize. In fact, the markets have been on the upswing even amid Trump’s sweeping Liberation Day tariffs.
“I was worried about inflation and I was worried about the deficit. I think there's a lot of merit to the notion that it's going to trigger such significant economic growth, that we might see tax revenues going up through the profitability bracket,” Langone predicted.
“And the other last thing is you can't keep America down. Don't forget that we're the greatest country on earth, and we'll always will be,” Langone said before mentioning he would be turning 90 in September.
Aside from the positive economic news, Langone also praised Trump for reportedly striking Iran’s nuclear program and knocking it out. He said it signaled to the world “that America’s here and when our interests are at risk we’re going to do something about it.”
Trump is by no means a perfect leader, but Langone is correct that he’s moving America in the right direction. It was a bold move for him to criticize Trump before the election, but it’s an even more courageous thing to publicly admit he was wrong in that.
Steak 'n Shake has announced it will soon sell Coca-Cola made with cane sugar instead of high fructose corn syrup, Breitbart reported. This is in line with the wishes of President Donald Trump and the Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
The Make America Healthy Again agenda has notched another win with this announcement. Steak 'n Shake had previously announced it was switching from seed oils to beef tallow earlier this year and is now focusing on the soda it serves.
"Starting August 1, Steak n Shake will offer Coca-Cola with real cane sugar in glass bottles," the company posted to X, formerly Twitter, on Wednesday. America deserves the best! We continue on our MAHA journey…"
Starting August 1, Steak n Shake will offer Coca-Cola with real cane sugar in glass bottles.
Trump campaigned on his "MAHA" movement, spearheaded by Kennedy, and now he's following through. The president announced Wednesday on his Truth Social account that he had persuaded Coca-Cola to switch to sugar in its signature product.
"I have been speaking to Coca-Cola about using REAL Cane Sugar in Coke in the United States, and they have agreed to do so," Trump boasted. "I’d like to thank all of those in authority at Coca-Cola," the president added.
"This will be a very good move by them — You’ll see. It’s just better!" Trump wrote. Meanwhile, Kennedy is busy implementing the agenda in other parts of the food industry.
He has succeeded in getting companies like Kraft Heinz, Nestle, and J.M. Smucker Co. to commit to removing food dyes, along with about 35% of the industry. Kennedy stressed this is in addition to the 35% of the food supply that is organic and thus already dye-free.
The International Dairy Foods Association has also agreed to remove food dyes from ice creams. "Since we came in about five and a half months ago and started talking about eliminating dyes and other bad chemicals from our food, we’ve had this extraordinary response from the industry," Kennedy said earlier this week.
Holding Out
Amid the good news about the voluntary action is the reality that some companies, such as MARS, are pushing back. According to Fox Business News, the candy giant is resisting the movement.
This comes after a 2016 pledge the company made "to remove all artificial colors from its human food portfolio globally." MARS has backtracked, citing its customer data that suggested that treats like candy are less of a concern to customers.
"We are aware of the administration’s request, and our technical experts are exploring alternatives that satisfy scientific safety criteria, technical requirements, and consumer preferences. At this time, we have not yet identified fully effective solutions and believe it is premature to make commitments until we are certain they can be fulfilled," a company spokesperson to Fox News Digital.
"We will continue our efforts and anticipate being able to offer consumers more choice in the near future. Meanwhile, it is important to underline that all of our products continue to be safe to enjoy and meet the high standards and applicable regulations set by food safety authorities," the spokesperson added.
Regardless of what MARS has to say, the fact that any of these companies would voluntarily do this is something I never expected. Consumer demand and a little bit of government pressure were all it took to help make America healthy again indeed.
President Donald Trump has cut off $4 billion in federal funding for California's high-speed "train to nowhere," sparking a furious response from the state's Democrat governor, Gavin Newsom.
The Trump administration says California has breached the contract the federal government reached when it initially agreed to help build the high-speed rail project, which was first approved by voters in 2008.
“The Railroad we were promised still does not exist, and never will,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “This project was Severely Overpriced, Overregulated, and NEVER DELIVERED."
"Train to nowhere"
The original plan was to build an 800-mile track connecting the state's two biggest cities, San Francisco and Los Angeles, by 2020.
Newsom later downsized that ambitious vision to a 171-mile stretch of the Central Valley. The California High-Speed Rail Authority now hopes to connect Merced and Bakersfield by 2033, but a 300-page compliance review by the Federal Railroad Administration determined that even that small portion of the original plan is underfunded and has "no viable path" to completion.
Calling the bullet train saga a “story of broken promises," the administration pointed to ballooning costs -- from roughly $33 billion in the beginning to $135 billion -- and repeated delays that have slowed progress to a standstill. To date, not a single track of rail has been laid down.
“After over a decade of failures, CHSRA’s mismanagement and incompetence has proven it cannot build its train to nowhere on time or on budget,” said Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy. “It’s time for this boondoggle to die.”
The federal government's $4 billion share accounts for about a quarter of the total funding. The total projected cost would pay for roundtrip flights for every resident of San Francisco and L.A., Duffy said.
Newsom furious
The governor, who took office in 2019, has repeatedly sparred with Trump over California's left-wing policies.
Trump last month signed a resolution that blocks California from implementing its first-in-the-nation ban on gas-powered cars.
Newsom is now suing to block Trump from canceling the federal government's share of bullet train funding, calling it a "heartless" act of retaliation that will hurt residents of the Central Valley, one of the state's poorest regions.
“Trump’s termination of federal grants for California high-speed rail reeks of politics. It’s yet another political stunt to punish California. In reality, this is just a heartless attack on the Central Valley that will put real jobs and livelihoods on the line. We’re suing to stop Trump from derailing America’s only high-speed rail actively under construction," Newsom said.
California authorities have defended the slow progress, citing over 50 structures built, including viaducts, bridges, and overpasses.
But skepticism is widespread, with Democratic Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan telling a recent budget hearing that her constituents "overwhelmingly believe” the state has been reckless with its spending on the project.
'BILLIONS OF DOLLARS A YEAR WERE WASTED. REPUBLICANS HAVE TRIED DOING THIS FOR 40 YEARS, AND FAILED….BUT NO MORE. THIS IS BIG!!!'
The U.S. House has passed President Donald Trump's $9 billion rescissions bill, sending it to his desk, and he immediately praised the action
"HOUSE APPROVES NINE BILLION DOLLAR CUTS PACKAGE, INCLUDING ATROCIOUS NPR AND PUBLIC BROADCASTING, WHERE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS A YEAR WERE WASTED. REPUBLICANS HAVE TRIED DOING THIS FOR 40 YEARS, AND FAILED….BUT NO MORE. THIS IS BIG!!!" he posted on Truth Social.
The plan pulls back money, about $8 billion, from previously approved handouts to foreign interests, and another $1 billion or so from Public Broadcasting System and National Public Radio, which he has condemned often as tax-funded mouthpieces for leftist agendas.
The $8 billion had been for foreign disaster relief, health projects and agriculture, while the $1 billion was to be used for 1,500 NPR and PBS stations.
Commentaries said the plan "reverses years of wasteful globalist spending that has funneled billions overseas while neglecting American families at home."
The final vote was 216-213 on the plan that earlier was adopted by the House, then sent to the Senate where there were minor revisions before it was adopted there.
The bill now heads to the president's desk for his signature.
The Daily Caller News Foundation described the move as "a significant victory for Trump who was the first commander-in-chief to have a clawback funding request approved by Congress in more than 25 years."
The vote delivers on the president's promise to close down the United States Agency for International Development and defund NPR and PBS, which Republicans have long accused of being biased against conservative viewpoints.
USAID now essentially is closed, with a handful of selected responsibilities being assigned to the State Department. Its employees largely are gone from the government.
The $1 billion for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which partially finances NPR and PBS, was for the next two years.
"I'm not sure how NPR helps the public safety of our country, but I do know that NPR unfortunately has become, really just a propaganda voice for the left," White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said Thursday.
The plan becomes the first of what is expected to become a stream of legislative moves to codify cuts identified by Trump's Department of Government Efficiency.
The Daily Caller News Foundation reported, "There is still roughly $164 billion in federal spending pinpointed by Trump's cost-cutting department as wasteful that Congress has yet to claw back."
Speaker Mike Johnson noted taxpayers now no longer are being forced to pay for "politically biased media" and "outrageous" expenses overseas.
Russ Vought, White House Office of Management and Budget director, earlier said the administration will be sending Congress more plans to claw back more funds.
Democrats have been united in their opposition to cutting even 0.1% of the federal governments $7 trillion spending.
Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., documented the bias found at NPR as only he can:
Just a day before the Senate adopted the recissions package on a 51-48 vote following a 13-hour vote-a-rama.
In a surprising turn of events, President Donald Trump hinted at dismissing Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, which may trigger legal and financial turbulence.The potential firing of Powell by President Trump after his repeated criticism could create significant unrest in market dynamics and governmental operations.
During a recent gathering at the White House, specifically last Tuesday evening, President Trump conveyed his thoughts to a group of Republican lawmakers. He expressed his inclination towards firing Powell, citing dissatisfaction with his performance.
Initial Market Reactions and Presidential Backtracking
The news of Trump's possible action against Powell had an immediate negative impact on financial markets. By Wednesday morning, noticeable declines were observed in both the stock market and the dollar's value.
In response to swirling rumors and the market’s reaction, Trump addressed the media in the Oval Office. While he criticized Powell's handling of his duties, he toned down the urgency of firing him anytime soon.
Trump outlined his thoughts about a potential timeline, stating that changes could be expected in about eight months, which could align with the appointment of a new chair if he decided to proceed with Powell's dismissal.
Fraud Concerns Over Fed Renovations Introduced
Trump acknowledged that while firing Powell was not off the table, it was "highly unlikely" unless absolutely necessary. He linked this necessity to potential fraud concerns related to ongoing renovation projects at the Fed’s headquarters, which have encountered financial overruns.
These concerns about the renovation costs were echoed by other Trump administration officials who hinted such grounds could be plausible for Powell's dismissal. The renovation project became a focal point of contention within the administration.
By law, the Federal Reserve Chairman can only be removed from office for cause, making any decision to fire Powell legally complicated and unprecedented in recent history.
Legislative Response and Financial Uncertainty
Following Trump’s hints at firing, the lawmakers present at the meeting reportedly agreed with his point of view, possibly foreseeing a shift in economic leadership that aligns more closely with the administration's financial strategies.
The president, when pressed by reporters in the Oval Office, candidly criticized Powell, saying, "He’s doing a lousy job," but he suggested firing him was not immediately forthcoming.
Trump’s remarks reflect both a direct challenge to Powell’s authority as well as an indicator of ongoing tensions between the administration and federal monetary policymakers.
The Balance of Power and Economic Oversight
This situation has put a spotlight on the delicate balance between the U.S. government's executive branch and its independent financial institutions, such as the Federal Reserve. The unfolding events could very well dictate future economic policy and leadership.
The potential eight-month timeline till a new chairman might be considered indicates a strategic approach by Trump to reshape the Fed closer to his administration’s economic policies and perspectives.
As the situation evolves, all eyes will remain on the White House and the Federal Reserve for any developments that might affect not only U.S. financial markets but also global economic stability.
Trump said the soft drink giant has agreed to use cane sugar, replacing the high-fructose corn syrup that has been used as a sweetener since the 1980s.
"I have been speaking to Coca-Cola about using REAL Cane Sugar in Coke in the United States, and they have agreed to do so," Trump wrote.
"I’d like to thank all of those in authority at Coca-Cola. This will be a very good move by them — You’ll see. It’s just better!"
Original Coke is back?
High-fructose corn syrup is widely used in processed foods that Americans eat, including soft drinks, snacks, and fast food. It is the second ingredient in Coke, after carbonated water.
Health and wellness enthusiasts, including Trump's Health Secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., have criticized the high amount of high-fructose corn syrup and sugar in Americans' diet.
Medical research has found that the negative health effects of table sugar and corn syrup are substantially similar when either is consumed in excess.
While the health benefits of switching sweeteners may be insignificant, some prefer the taste of original Coke. Trump is famously fond of Diet Coke, which uses the artificial sweetener aspartame.
"We appreciate President Trump’s enthusiasm for our iconic Coca-Cola brand. More details on new innovative offerings within our Coca-Cola product range will be shared soon," Coca-Cola said.
Economic impacts
Changing sweeteners could have impacts on the economy. Corn syrup is cheaper than sugarcane because of corn subsidies in the United States, which produces more corn than any country in the world. For sugar, the U.S. relies on imports to supplement domestic production in states like Florida, where the industry is known as "Big Sugar."
Trump's Coke announcement was not well-received by the corn industry.
"Replacing high fructose corn syrup with cane sugar would cost thousands of American food manufacturing jobs, depress farm income, and boost imports of foreign sugar, all with no nutritional benefit," Corn Refiners Association President and CEO John Bode said.
The Coke in some countries, including Mexico, still uses cane sugar. Customers in the U.S. can buy "Mexican Coke," which comes in the classic glass bottle.
The CEO of Coke, James Quincey, previously said in April that "we continue to make progress on sugar reduction in our beverages."
He explained the company had changed recipes and shifted marketing strategies to "boost awareness" of other Coke products.
Under Joe Biden's open borders policy, which, effectively invited millions and millions of illegal aliens to come and break into the United States, then obtain health care and other benefits, they came.
Millions and millions.
But President Donald Trump campaigned on his plan to shut the border and deport illegal aliens, especially criminal illegal aliens.
And his plan is working.
According to a report from the Daily Mail, a key data point has come out of the Darien Gap, an expanse of rainforest with steep ravines and swamps through which 31,000 migrants, en route to America, came during June of 2024.
During June of 2025, under Trump's border security plan, that number was 10.
The report explained more than 520,000 migrants crossed through that remote section heading to America in 2023. In 2024 it was 300,000.
Last year, 55 migrants died during their crossings, and about 180 children were abandoned, and rescued.
The publication cited reports from the Spanish language report efe.com.
That report said normalcy slowly is returning to Bajo Chiquito, the town where migrants arrive after their crossings.
"Bajo Chiquito has transitioned from a bustling hub to a quiet community. With a population of around 400, this indigenous village on the banks of the Tuquesa River received over 2,000 migrants daily during peak migration periods," efe.com reported.
Where once stood makeshift lodgings, food stalls and clothing shops, there now are empty sites.
The result comes partly from the decision by Panamanian President Jose Raul Mulino to close jungle trails and reach an agreement with the United States for deportation flights.
"According to Panamanian authorities, only 2,927 migrants crossed the Darién into North America in the first half of this year," the report said. Most were in January, 2,229, just before President Trump took office.
White House spokesman Abigail Jackson told the Mail, "Word of the United States' secure border has spread so far around the world, that migrants aren't even willing to make the dangerous journey to get here because they know they'll be turned away."
She noted over the last two months, Border Patrol officers have released zero illegal aliens into the United States.
Patriot News Alerts delivers timely news and analysis on U.S. politics, government, and current events, helping readers stay informed with clear reporting and principled commentary.
