Tag: donald trump

Fluoride Lawsuit Plaintiffs Push Back Against Trump EPA In Ongoing Litigation

On November 17, 2025, attorneys representing Food & Water Watch (FWW), Fluoride Action Network (FAN), and individual plaintiffs filed its response to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) appeal of U.S. District Judge Edward Chen’s September 2024 ruling, which held that fluoridation at the current U.S. level of 0.7 mg/L “poses an unreasonable risk of reduced IQ in children.”

The response comes nine years after the plaintiffs first filed a civilian petition under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) in November 2016. After the EPA denied the petition, the groups sued, triggering a nearly decade-long legal saga between the EPA, and parents of children impacted by water fluoridation, the FAN, and FWW. In September 2024, Judge Chen ruled in the plaintiffs’ favor and ordered the EPA to take regulatory action.

In the final days of the Biden administration the EPA filed their appeal, and now, under leadership appointed by President Donald Trump, the EPA has decided to continue fighting the judge’s ruling.

Michael Connett, the lead attorney representing the plaintiffs, responded to the three main arguments made by the EPA in its July appeal: that the plaintiffs lack standing, that the judge improperly considered new evidence, and that the district court went beyond its authority in its management of the case.

The EPA contends that at least one plaintiff’s water contains naturally occurring fluoride and that the plaintiffs therefore cannot prove injury caused by community water fluoridation. The agency also claims that the Judge’s decision to admit studies which were published after the original 2016 TSCA petition violated the act.

Regarding the question of standing, the EPA claimed in its appeal that plaintiff Jessica Trader cannot establish standing because her drinking water in Leawood, Kansas, “naturally contains fluoride at levels 0.4 mg/L, and her water utility adds only as much fluoride as necessary for her tap water to reach a concentration of 0.7 mg/L”. Essentially, the EPA is stating that the naturally occurring fluoride could be to blame for any harm caused to Trader.

Connett argues that the plaintiffs do indeed have proper standing and have demonstrated sufficient injury and connection to the case. “Even if the new “facts” are considered, Jessica Trader’s injury is still traceable/redressable: the district court found (and EPA does not dispute) that fluoridation poses a credible threat of neurodevelopmental harm to her children, and regulatory action would, at a minimum, reduce that threat, including the costs of avoiding it,” Connett wrote in his response.

He further noted that, even without Trader, the remaining plaintiffs also have standing based on credible threats of harm from fluoridation, as supported by findings from the National Research Council (NRC), National Institutes of Health (NIH), and National Toxicology Program (NTP).

When it comes to the EPA’s claim that the court improperly considered new evidence in the form of studies published after the original petition, Connett reminded the court that Section 21 of TSCA provides that petitioners “shall be provided an opportunity to have such petition considered by the court in a de novo proceeding”. A de novo proceeding is a legal process where a case is heard “fresh” or from the beginning, without considering the previous court’s decision.

Keep reading

Trump Says He Is Canceling All Biden Executive Orders Signed With Autopen

President Donald Trump announced on Friday that he is revoking all executive orders that were signed with an autopen under President Joe Biden.

“The Autopen is not allowed to be used if approval is not specifically given by the President of the United States,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

“I am hereby canceling all Executive Orders, and anything else that was not directly signed by Crooked Joe Biden, because the people who operated the Autopen did so illegally.”

According to Trump, 92 percent of documents signed by Biden were done so with the autopen.

​​The use of an autopen to sign legislation and executive orders is legal, provided the president has authorized its use.

Trump, however, claimed that Biden was not aware of the signatures.

“Joe Biden was not involved in the Autopen process and, if he says he was, he will be brought up on charges of perjury,” Trump said.

His announcement followed an intensified crackdown on illegal immigration after two National Guard members were shot—one fatally—on Thanksgiving Eve near the White House, in downtown Washington.

The suspect in the shooting has been identified as 29-year-old Rahmanullah Lakanwal, an Afghan national who had previously worked with U.S. government entities in Afghanistan, including the CIA. He entered the country in September 2021 under a Biden-era resettlement program launched after the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan.

Trump accused the Biden administration of not properly vetting these Afghan nationals before allowing them into the country.

“You can’t get them out once they come in. And they came in and they were unvetted, they were unchecked. There were many of them, and they came in on big planes, and it was disgraceful,” Trump told reporters on Nov. 27.

It is unclear whether Trump’s autopen message is part of his recent actions in response to the shooting.

According to legal scholars, U.S. presidents may revoke previously issued executive orders.

“The president, any president, has the power to revoke any and all prior executive orders that he sees fit,” legal scholar and commentator John Shu told The Epoch Times.

“President Trump has already started the process,” noted Shu, who served under Presidents George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush. “On his first day in office, he began reversing some of his predecessor’s executive orders. Presidents Joe Biden and Barack Obama did the same.”

However, he doesn’t believe a president has the power to reverse a predecessor’s pardon.

Keep reading

Trump Slammed Biden’s $52 Billion CHIPS Act. Then He Used It To Buy a Federal Stake in Intel.

In March, President Donald Trump blasted the Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors (CHIPS) and Science Act of 2022. He called it “a horrible, horrible thing.” Passed under President Joe Biden, the CHIPS Act was essentially a $52 billion industrial policy slush fund intended primarily to bolster domestic production of computer chips.

When the law passed in 2022, the Biden administration said it was a “smart investment” that would “strengthen American manufacturing, supply chains, and national security, and invest in research and development, science and technology” while bringing thousands of “good-paying manufacturing jobs back home.”

There was never much reason to believe in the previous administration’s industrial policy boosterism. Early grants largely went either to factories that were already in development and would have been built anyway or to facilities of questionable economic value that might not be completed even with the additional taxpayer funding.

So Trump was on solid ground when he told Congress, “You should get rid of the CHIPS Act, and whatever’s left over…you should use it to reduce debt, or any other reason you want to.” Yet in the months since, Trump has made use of CHIPS funding not to reduce the debt, but to pursue his own questionable industrial policy. His version is even less accountable and may well be even worse for taxpayers.

Among the recipients of CHIPS funding was computer chipmaker Intel, which was set to receive $11 billion to help fund the construction of semiconductor fabs in several states. By late summer, the company said it had already received more than $5 billion of the funds. But Intel struggled to fulfill those commitments, falling behind on factory construction in some places and laying off workers as it suffered from ongoing financial and managerial problems. By the middle of 2025, Intel looked very much like a failing business.

In theory, the CHIPS Act provided a mechanism for the federal government to retract the grant and get all or part of its money back should Intel fail to meet its obligations. It’s not clear whether the federal government would have exercised its option to take the money back, but it was an option—until Trump stepped in.

As the company flailed, Trump met with its CEO, Lip-Bu Tan. Trump first called for him to resign. Then in August, the Trump administration announced that the federal government would just take partial ownership of Intel. Essentially, the U.S. government would purchase a roughly 10 percent stake in the chipmaker, partially nationalizing the company. And funds from CHIPS would be used to do it.

Trump bragged about the deal, saying he planned to “do more of them.” The company’s stock price rose on the news, suggesting that investors liked it. But that’s probably because it was a good deal for the company, at taxpayer expense.

According to public financial filings, the federal government would disburse the remaining funds, about $6 billion, while clearing any obligations for the company to actually complete work on new domestic semiconductor fabs.

In exchange, the federal government would gain partial ownership—as well as all the financial risks stockholders usually have when they invest in companies. Those risks will now be borne by taxpayers. As Carnegie Endowment fellow Peter Harrell pointed out in a social media post, the move came with “a lot of downside risk.”

Fundamentally, Trump gave Intel a federal bailout, removing the company’s public obligations and accountability while loading more financial risk onto the public.

Keep reading

Trump’s New EO, “Genesis Mission”, Just Gave The Nation Over To Technocrats, Lock, Stock, and Barrel

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

Section 1.  Purpose.  From the founding of our Republic, scientific discovery and technological innovation have driven American progress and prosperity.  Today, America is in a race for global technology dominance in the development of artificial intelligence (AI), an important frontier of scientific discovery and economic growth.  To that end, my Administration has taken a number of actions to win that race, including issuing multiple Executive Orders and implementing America’s AI Action Plan, which recognizes the need to invest in AI-enabled science to accelerate scientific advancement.  In this pivotal moment, the challenges we face require a historic national effort, comparable in urgency and ambition to the Manhattan Project that was instrumental to our victory in World War II and was a critical basis for the foundation of the Department of Energy (DOE) and its national laboratories.

Editor’s note: America is in a race with itself, but declared with upmost urgency. America’s AI Action Plan was written by Michael J. Kratsios, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology and David O. Sacks, Special Advisor for AI and Crypto. The EO is undoubtedly ghost written by same two Arch-Technocrats. The phrase “accelerate scientific advancement” refers to “accelerationism”, which is part of the Dark Enlightenment. Marc Andreessen wrote in his Techno-Optimist Manifesto: “We believe in accelerationism – the conscious and deliberate propulsion of technological development – to ensure the fulfillment of the Law of Accelerating Returns. To ensure the techno-capital upward spiral continues forever.” – End Editor’s note.

This order launches the “Genesis Mission” as a dedicated, coordinated national effort to unleash a new age of AI‑accelerated innovation and discovery that can solve the most challenging problems of this century.  The Genesis Mission will build an integrated AI platform to harness Federal scientific datasets — the world’s largest collection of such datasets, developed over decades of Federal investments — to train scientific foundation models and create AI agents to test new hypotheses, automate research workflows, and accelerate scientific breakthroughs.  The Genesis Mission will bring together our Nation’s research and development resources — combining the efforts of brilliant American scientists, including those at our national laboratories, with pioneering American businesses; world-renowned universities; and existing research infrastructure, data repositories, production plants, and national security sites — to achieve dramatic acceleration in AI development and utilization.  We will harness for the benefit of our Nation the revolution underway in computing, and build on decades of innovation in semiconductors and high-performance computing.  The Genesis Mission will dramatically accelerate scientific discovery, strengthen national security, secure energy dominance, enhance workforce productivity, and multiply the return on taxpayer investment into research and development, thereby furthering America’s technological dominance and global strategic leadership.

Keep reading

Trump’s Afghan Entry Freeze Angers Leftists

President Trump’s immediate freeze on Afghan immigration requests, triggered by an Afghan national’s shooting of two National Guards members in D.C., has ignited anger among leftists decrying it as “collective punishment.”

The move, announced via U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), halts “processing of all immigration requests relating to Afghan nationals… pending further review of security and vetting protocols.”

It comes as a direct response to the attack by a 2021 asylum grantee, underscoring Trump’s push to “reexamine” all Biden-era imports amid zero-fatality hopes for the victims.

Mass immigration advocate Jill Filipovic blasted the move as “collective identity-based punishment and not how any fair processes should work.” 

Keep reading

Trump State Dept. declares abortions, euthanasia, transgender surgeries ‘human rights violations’

Federal officials will recognize the intentional destruction of innocent preborn babies as well as the surgical and chemical mutilation of children as human rights violations, according to the State Department.

Spokesperson Tommy Pigott told The Daily Signal that countries receiving foreign aid will be required to include “the mutilation of children” in their annual reporting to the United States.

“In recent years, new destructive ideologies have given safe harbor to human rights violations,” Pigott said. “The Trump administration will not allow these human rights violations, such as the mutilation of children, laws that infringe on free speech, and racially discriminatory employment practices, to go unchecked. We are saying enough is enough.”

“Racially discriminatory” practices include favoring non-white applicants for jobs or other benefits, a practice sometimes called “affirmative action.”

The human rights reports are a standard requirement for countries receiving taxpayer dollars.

“The State Department submits Human Rights Reports on all countries receiving assistance and all United Nations member states to Congress in accordance with the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and the Trade Act of 1974,” The Daily Signal explained.

Other human rights violations that must be tracked include sanctions for so-called “hate speech,” supporting mass migration into other countries, “attempts to coerce individuals into engaging in euthanasia,” “violations of religious freedom, including antisemitic violence and harassment,” and support for “forced testing, forced organ harvesting, and eugenic gene-editing practices on human embryos.”

A medical reform group that opposes transgender drugs and surgeries for minors thanked the Trump administration for “setting a clear moral standard” on this issue, as well as others, such as DEI.

“Do No Harm commends the Trump administration for highlighting toxic ideologies around the globe as the first step to eliminating them,” Executive Director Kristina Rasmussen told LifeSiteNews via a media statement.

“Engaging in racial discrimination or pushing irreversible gender medicalization on children is unacceptable – whether here at home or abroad,” Rasmussen said. “The State Department is leading the way in protecting the vulnerable and setting a clear moral standard for the world.”

Keep reading

The Dangerous, Unhinged Reaction to Trump’s Ukraine Peace Plan

President Donald Trump has magicked up some unexpected momentum in Russia–Ukraine peace talks by proposing a 28-point settlement to the war. You might think Ukraine’s Western supporters would welcome the chance for peace, considering how dreadfully the war is going for Ukrainians.

You might be wrong.

Blowhards on both sides of the Atlantic reacted with moral outrage, depicting the proposal as a forced capitulation for Volodymyr Zelensky and a wish list for Vladimir Putin. A rumor even spread that the plan was literally Russian, authored by the Kremlin and transmitted to Washington for delivery to Kiev (a rumor swiftly batted down by Axios and the White House). Thomas Friedman of The New York Times wrote that, if the “surrender” plan is imposed on Zelensky by Thanksgiving, then Turkey Day “will become a Russian holiday.”

This is laughable stuff. But it’s also maddeningly counterproductive. Trump’s peace plan is about as balanced as Ukraine could realistically hope, given Russia’s momentum on the battlefield. Even so, Zelensky may not have the political leeway to accept it, since doing so would risk a revolt by hardline nationalists. One idea that I heard while in Kiev last month is that Zelensky needs Trump to play the bad guy and force him to accept a deal.

If that’s right, then the Thomas Friedmans of the world—the people insisting that Trump’s plan surrenders Ukraine’s freedom, so Zelensky cannot possibly accept it—are acting as peace-spoilers, not democracy-defenders. 

They are reducing the political cover the White House is providing Zelensky to “reluctantly” make a deal. Unwittingly (I hope), they are raising the pressure on Zelensky to continue a war that Ukraine is losing, and on Trump to insert poison pills into the agreement that Moscow cannot accept. They just might succeed. As always, the ones who will pay the costs are the Ukrainians themselves.

If the Trump deal really was a giveaway to Putin, then the critics would have a stronger case. But it’s not.

The very first point—Ukraine’s sovereignty will be confirmed—alone makes it a good deal for Kiev. Under the agreement, Ukraine would remain a sovereign nation-state free to join the European Union and become the Western-style democracy that so many Ukrainians want their nation to be. As Anatol Lieven of the Quincy Institute writes, “An agreement that leaves three quarters of Ukraine independent and with a path to EU membership would in fact be a Ukrainian victory, albeit a qualified one.”

So, what are the critics carping about? 


Keep reading

An Unexpected Con To End Free Speech

Rooting out terrorism and antisemitism was the supposed reason that plainclothed ICE agents arrested doctoral student Rümeysa Öztürk on a street in Somerville, Massachusetts, after she coauthored an op-ed calling on Tufts University to divest from companies with ties to Israel due to the killing and starvation of Palestinian civilians. There is an international movement to boycott, sanction, and divest from Israel, but in the United States, President Donald Trump is imperiling the freedom even to publicly discuss such ideas, which should, in effect, be considered a test case for his larger attack on free speech. So far, the test is going well for Trump.

In what seems a long time ago, in 2024, the Heritage Foundation, a right-wing think tank, released a blueprint for what it called “a national strategy to combat antisemitism” by addressing what it described as “America’s virulently anti-Israel, anti-Zionist, and anti-American ‘pro-Palestinian movement.’” In essence, and in what’s amounted to an extraordinarily effective work of political theater that has been sold to my own state, Massachusetts, among other places, that foundation dubbed its political opponents “supporters of terrorism.” It also labeled organizations working in opposition to its agenda a “terrorist support network,” and claimed for itself the noble mantle of “combating antisemitism” — even as it deftly redefined antisemitism from hatred of Jewish people to criticism of the U.S.-Israel alliance. President Trump has put the Heritage Foundation strategy into action and gone even further.

It may be his most original idea. As political scientist Barnett Rubin put it in September, “President Trump always says he’s very creative and accomplishes things no one has ever done before. And now he is building a fascist regime which is legitimized by the fight against antisemitism. Nobody ever thought of doing that before.”

Keep reading

Zohran Mamdani and Donald Trump Prove That There Are Two Paths Toward Socialism

About five years ago, the comedian Ryan Long posted a video in which a woke progressive and an old-fashioned racist meet and, much to their astonishment, discover that rather than being bitterly opposed, they agree on pretty much everything.

There was a strong echo of that convergence in last week’s White House tete-a-tete between Republican President Donald Trump and New York’s new socialist Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani. Anticipated to be a grudge match, it instead turned into something of a lovefest. Well, of course it did. As fans of horseshoe theory accurately point out, control freaks from the political extremes might differ on details, but they have more in common with each other than they do with people who respect each other’s liberty.

Trump and Mamdani in ‘a Place of Shared Admiration and Love’

In reporting on the meeting, The Hill noted, “Trump and Mamdani answered questions from reporters, both striking a remarkably cordial tone, with the president indicating he agreed with many of the mayor-elect’s ideas.”

According to Mamdani, “It was a productive meeting focused on a place of shared admiration and love.”

Trump added that Mamdani would be “hopefully a really great mayor.” He also commented, “There’s no difference in party. There’s no difference in anything.”

So, how did two politicians who entered the meeting slinging epithets at each other like “communist” and “fascist” exit with the makings of a mutual admiration society? There’s a hint in a question a BBC reporter posed to the new mayor at the White House when he commented “you’re both populist” and asked, “to what extent the president’s campaign…inspired any part of your campaign?”

Mamdani eagerly brought up cost-of-living and economic concerns while Trump nodded and then chimed in with agreement about concerns over the price of energy.

That’s the key to this meeting of the minds. Trump and Mamdani are strongly focused on economic issues. They also share a taste for addressing those concerns with government direction.

Keep reading

Trump UFO Bombshell Incoming?

Documentary filmmaker Dan Farah has boldly predicted that President Trump could be the first world leader to spill the beans on UFOs, dropping a “major announcement” about non-human tech and extraterrestrial intel—sparking feverish speculation: Is this engineered hype to divert from global flashpoints, or a seismic shift toward transparency? 

Farah made the claim on Joe Rogan’s podcast while promoting a new documentary titled The Age of Disclosure. As Farah teases amnesty for black-budget insiders, is Trump poised to unmask aliens, or is this another misdirect?

Farah asserted: “I wouldn’t be surprised if it happens soon after the film comes out — the sitting president has to step to the microphone and say: humanity is not alone in the universe. We have recovered technology of non-human origin. So have other nations. There is a high-stakes, secret cold war race to reverse engineer this technology. We need to win this race.” 

Keep reading