A federal judge appointed by Ronald Reagan has made headlines this year for penning some of the most blistering opinions against President Donald Trump’s executive orders — including in one case where he was criticized by two Supreme Court justices for failing to adhere to the high court’s emergency guidance. 

U.S. District Judge William Young, a Reagan appointee, has spent nearly four decades on the federal bench. He most recently authored a scathing, 161-page opinion on Tuesday in a case involving Trump’s attempts to deport and crack down on pro-Palestinian protesters and activists on college campuses.

Young said the Trump administration’s actions were illegal and an unconstitutional violation of free speech protections under the First Amendment. He also used the decision to criticize, at some length, Trump’s broader conduct, which he described as ‘bullying.’

Trump, Young argued, is a president who fundamentally misunderstands the country he was elected to serve. Young described Trump as focused largely on ‘hollow bragging’ and on ‘retribution’ at all costs.

‘Yet government retribution for speech (precisely what has happened here) is directly forbidden by the First Amendment,’ Young quipped.

It’s not the first time Young has raised eyebrows for his public dressing-down of the commander in chief. 

Young in June ruled that the Trump administration acted illegally when it slashed funding for research grants at the National Institutes of Health, siding with the grant recipients and ordering the funding be restored. He also used the opinion to describe the cuts as ‘appalling’ evidence of what he said was ‘racial discrimination’ and ‘discrimination against the LGBTQ community.’

‘That’s what this is,’ Young said at the time, adding that, in his decades on the federal bench, he had ‘never seen government racial discrimination like this.’

‘I would be blind not to call it out,’ he said, adding later, ‘Have we no shame?’

The Trump administration appealed Young’s injunction to the First Circuit Court of Appeals, which declined to stay the ruling while the case continued to play out.

However, the Supreme Court voted 5-4 in August to lift the injunction — and two justices took that opportunity to chastise Young, at least to some degree, for the manner in which he went about issuing the opinion.

Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh chastised Young for failing to adhere to an emergency ruling the court granted in April, which allowed Trump to follow through with slashing tens of millions of dollars in education grants for funding so-called diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. 

 ‘When this Court issues a decision, it constitutes a precedent that commands respect in lower courts,’ Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh said in the August opinion.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, in writing the dissent, appeared to sympathize with Young’s view, noting at one point: ‘Calvinball has only one rule: There are no fixed rules,’ she said. ‘We seem to have two: that one, and this administration always wins.’

Young, for his part, apologized for the error. But it appears to have done little to quell his desire to speak out on what he argued Tuesday is Trump’s apparent disregard for free speech protections. 

‘I fear President Trump believes the American people are so divided that today they will not stand up, fight for, and defend our most precious constitutional values so long as they are lulled into thinking their own personal interests are not affected,’ Young said Tuesday, before adding: ‘Is he correct?’

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., accused the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of endangering women’s health, saying the agency approved another chemical abortion drug without the thorough safety review it had promised.

Hawley argued the move shows both regulatory failure and the influence of a company that refuses to define ‘woman’ in its materials.

‘This is shocking. FDA has just approved ANOTHER chemical abortion drug, when the evidence shows chemical abortion drugs are dangerous and even deadly for the mother. And of course 100% lethal to the child,’ he wrote on X on Thursday afternoon.

Hawley added, ‘FDA had promised to do a top-to-bottom safety review of the chemical abortion drug, but instead they’ve just greenlighted new versions of it for distribution. I have lost confidence in the leadership at FDA.’

Evita Solutions describes its mission as to ‘normalize abortion’ and make it ‘accessible to all.’ On its website, the company says it ‘believes that all people should have access to safe, affordable, high-quality, effective, and compassionate abortion care, regardless of their race, sex, gender, age, sexuality, income, or where they live.’

It adds, ‘We know that you can make the best choice for your body.’

According to the FDA, Evita received approval in a Sept. 30 letter obtained by Reuters.

In an interview with Fox News Digital, Hawley said the FDA’s decision was even more troubling given that its promised safety review has barely begun.

‘I just, I can’t figure out what’s happening at the FDA. I’m totally baffled by it,’ Hawley said.

Fox News Digital has reached out to the FDA and Evita Solutions for comment on the matter.

In another post, Hawley blasted the FDA for partnering with a company that ‘doesn’t even believe there is such a thing as a ‘woman.’’

Evita Solutions now joins GenBioPro in producing the generic version of Mifepristone, the abortion pill originally made by Danco Laboratories. Mifepristone blocks progesterone, a hormone needed to sustain pregnancy, and is followed by misoprostol to complete the process.

The approval comes as abortion drugs face mounting opposition from conservative lawmakers, religious organizations, and pro-life groups.

Religious groups like Inspire Investing and Alliance Defending Freedom have campaigned against the drug, while the Restoration of America Foundation (ROAF) has pressed lawmakers for accountability.

Last month, ROAF called on the Senate Finance Committee to hold Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. accountable at a hearing, demanding answers about the removal of safety protocols for the abortion pill Mifepristone.

In a letter obtained by Fox News Digital, ROAF warned that the rollback leaves women more vulnerable and shifts costs to taxpayers. The group said the Biden-era changes endanger women by allowing abortion pills to be prescribed via telehealth and sent through the mail.

Hawley said the FDA should restore the safeguards put in place under the Trump administration.

‘What needs to happen is the FDA needs to get in line with the president’s policy and put back into place the safety regulations President Trump had. Ditch the Biden approach and go back to President Trump’s approach,’ Hawley said.

Under the Biden administration, the FDA for the first time allowed telehealth prescribing and mail-order delivery of abortion pills. Previously, the agency required Mifepristone to be dispensed in person to screen for complications such as ectopic pregnancy.

Fox News Digital’s Jasmine Baehr and Reuters contributed to this report.

A judge is set to sentence Nicholas Roske on Friday for attempting to assassinate Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in the weeks leading up to the high court’s landmark Dobbs decision.

The Department of Justice has asked for 30 years in prison, while Roske’s attorneys have asked for eight years.

In a sentencing memorandum, prosecutors said Roske showed up at Kavanaugh’s house on June 8, 2022, armed with a pistol, ammunition, a knife, a crowbar and tactical gear, intending to kill the conservative justice and three other justices.

The potential impact of Roske’s conduct was ‘immeasurable and staggering,’ prosecutors said.

‘By targeting and planning to kill ‘at least one,’ but ‘shooting for 3’ justices of the Supreme Court, the defendant sought single-handedly and irrevocably to alter an entire branch of the United States government through violence,’ they wrote.

Roske’s attorneys argued in their own memorandum that three decades in prison, which included terrorism and other enhancements, did not fit the crime.

Roske pleaded guilty in April to one count of attempting to murder a Supreme Court justice, which carries a maximum sentence of life in prison.

The defense attorneys noted how Roske called 911 soon after arriving at Kavanaugh’s house and ‘self-reported her plans, intentions, and actions’ instead of moving forward with attacking Kavanaugh.

Roske’s lawyers also said Roske suffered severe depression and that their client’s ominous online searches about mass shootings and various justices, which the DOJ factored into its sentencing recommendation, were not indicative of an intent to murder multiple justices.

‘As any internet user knows, Googling and doom-scrolling, even in dark corners of the internet, does not equate to criminal intent,’ the defense attorneys wrote. ‘A user’s internet content is voluminous, intensely personal, and can easily be taken out of context.’

Two weeks prior to the sentencing hearing, Roske’s attorneys also notified the court that while their client’s name had not formally changed, Roske wanted to begin going by the name ‘Sophie’ and female pronouns. 

‘Out of respect for Ms. Roske, the balance of this pleading and counsel’s in-court argument will refer to her as Sophie and use female pronouns,’ the footnote stated.

Roske’s sentencing comes at a time when judges have repeatedly raised alarms about threats they have received from ideologically-driven suspects across the political spectrum.

The attempted assassination in 2022 occurred just two weeks before the Supreme Court handed down its landmark decision overturning Roe v. Wade, an expected decision that had drawn protesters to the Supreme Court building and conservative justices’ houses for weeks leading up to it.

Last year, an Alaska man named Panos Anastasiou was indicted on charges of sending hundreds of messages to Supreme Court justices that included threats to murder them. 

Anastasiou stands accused of making specific threats toward six justices of shooting, strangling, ‘lynching’ and beheading them.

This is a developing story. Check back for updates.

Rep. Abe Hamadeh, R-Ariz., revealed to Fox News Digital that he is one of three Republicans in Congress who was surveilled by the Biden administration’s ‘Quiet Skies’ program, a program that has been shut down due to overreach concerns.

Earlier this week, Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Chair Rand Paul, R-Ky., convened a hearing examining alleged Biden administration abuse of the program, which was terminated by DHS in June, and revealed that three current Republican members of Congress were surveilled or monitored either as a sitting member or while seeking elected office.

GOP Rep. Abe Hamadeh tells Fox News Digital he was informed that he was one of those members of Congress and was surveilled in December 2022.

‘It sadly doesn’t surprise me,’ Hamadeh explained. ‘At the time, if you remember, I mean banks were shutting down accounts if they promoted conservative viewpoints, if they were selling ammo or guns and the banks were being pressured by the Biden administration. You had social media companies censoring political voices that they didn’t agree with. So it shows you the depths that the federal government, how much sway they have, not just within the bureaucracy of the government, but also with private organizations and private actors as well.‘

Hamadeh called the timing of his surveillance ‘interesting’ because ‘during the time period that I was challenging the results of my election in 2022 when I was running for attorney general, where that race was decided by 280 votes out of 2.5 million.’

Hamadeh continued, ‘You know, this is a very legitimate challenge. This is something that both sides of the aisle have done routinely. So you don’t know if that was a factor. And I would assume so, because at the time it was such a hostile environment with President Biden when he was in power. I mean, my God, they were calling MAGA fascists. They were calling us threats to democracy constantly.’

Hamadeh also called it ‘peculiar’ that he is a former U.S. Army Reserve intelligence officer with top secret clearance who traveled overseas both on deployment and in his personal capacity. 

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced in June it would be ending the Quiet Skies program, which left some Americans subject to additional screenings at airport security.

The department says the agency was overly politicized to either benefit or hurt specific people and ran a bill of roughly $200 million annually. According to DHS, the program kept a watchlist as well as a list of people exempted. The department says Quiet Skies has not prevented any terrorist attacks but will continue to use other methods to assure safe air travel.

‘It is clear that the Quiet Skies program was used as a political rolodex of the Biden Administration — weaponized against its political foes and exploited to benefit their well-heeled friends. I am calling for a Congressional investigation to unearth further corruption at the expense of the American people and the undermining of US national security,’ DHS Secretary Kristi Noem said in a statement.

The TSA’s ‘Quiet Skies’ program was established in 2010 to identify passengers for enhanced screening on some domestic and outbound international flights.

Paul said earlier this year that he received records confirming that federal air marshals surveilled now-Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard during domestic flights last year, ‘reporting back information related to her appearance and even how many electronics she was observed using.’ 

‘I’m glad to see that the Senate, Senator Rand Paul got to the bottom of it and also that Department of Homeland Security has now effectively terminated the Quiet Skies program as well,’ Hamadeh told Fox News Digital. 

‘Also, it’s odd that there’s only three Republican members of Congress that were targeted. I mean, I’m assuming, there’s Democrats who have a lot of interesting travel here that I serve with as well. I’m sure that there are things that would flag them. So it makes you question what the Biden administration, who they were focusing on, who they were targeting specifically. I mean look at Tulsi Gabbard. I mean what? What a complete 180 for now to have her be running the intelligence agencies as the director of national intelligence. And it goes to show you what we were fighting.’

In a press release earlier this week, Paul commended Noem for ending the program but said the work is ‘not done.’

‘We must make sure that this program does not come back under another name. Every official who directed or approved surveillance of Americans for protected speech must be removed from office. Full transparency must become the rule rather than requiring a year of investigation,’ Paul said. ‘The result will be a process that respects the Constitution, ends real life shadow bans against Americans and gives all of us the assurance that our government is focused on protecting us, not on chasing political ghosts.’

Fox News Digital reached out to Biden’s office for comment.

Fox News Digital’s Cameron Arcand contributed to this report

The federal government entered its third day of a shutdown without a clear off-ramp in sight as the Senate gears up to once again vote on a short-term funding extension Friday.

Lawmakers will again vote on the GOP’s continuing resolution (CR) and congressional Democrats’ counter-proposal on Friday. There’s been little movement on Capitol Hill since the last failed vote, given that some either left Washington, D.C., or did not come to the Hill, in observance of Yom Kippur.

In fact, the Senate floor was open for less than three hours on Thursday, with only a handful of lawmakers giving remarks to a mostly empty chamber.

Republicans hope that more Senate Democrats will peel off and vote for their bill, but it’s unlikely. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and most of his caucus are firmly rooted in their position that expiring Obamacare tax credits must be dealt with now.

And Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said he isn’t planning on keeping lawmakers in town over the weekend if the House GOP’s bill fails for a fourth time. Still, bipartisan talks are happening among the rank-and-file members to find some way to reopen the government.

‘I’m glad that people are talking,’ Thune said. ‘I think there are a lot of Democrats who want out of this, you know, grapple that Schumer is running now, so I’m hoping that perhaps that will lead somewhere. But it all starts with what I’ve said before, reopen the government, and I think that’s what we got to have … happen first.’

There are some ideas being tossed back and forth among Senate Republicans and Democrats, like agreeing to work on the subsidies until Nov. 21 under the GOP plan, or compromising on a shorter CR that lasts until Nov. 1 to coincide with the beginning of open-enrollment for Obamacare.

‘We’re not asking for a full repair of a broken system,’ Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., said. ‘We understand how badly the healthcare system is working, but it’s going to be so much worse if the Republicans continue on this path of cutting healthcare for millions of Americans.’

Thune threw cold water on the latter idea.

‘Well, and what’s the House going to come back and vote on, a one-month as opposed to seven weeks? I mean, think about this right now. We’re really kind of quibbling over pretty, pretty small stuff,’ he said.

Schumer made clear over the last several days that he wants bipartisan negotiations to craft a funding extension with Democratic and Republican input, but the GOP argues that their bill, which is backed by President Donald Trump, would unlock future bipartisan negotiations on spending bills.

But Republicans argue that his insistence on negotiating is more about political optics than actually finding a path out of the shutdown.

‘This Democrat shutdown is nothing but a cynical political shutdown, with Senator Schumer kowtowing to his radical left-wing extremists,’ Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan., said on the Senate floor. ‘He’s desperately recoiling, fighting to stave off a primary and to save his party from the piranhas in their own midst.’

And while talks at the lower level are ongoing, some contend that ultimately it will be Trump’s decision on what happens next.

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., said on the Senate floor, ‘Unfortunately, right now, our Republican colleagues are not working with us to find a bipartisan agreement to prevent the government shutdown and address the healthcare crisis.’

‘We know that even when they float ideas, which we surely do appreciate, in the end, the president appears to make the call,’ Klobuchar said. 

A Senate Republican wants to ensure that lawmakers feel the pain in their wallets as the federal government shutdown drags on.

Members of Congress, unlike other federal employees, are guaranteed to get paid during a government shutdown. But Sen. Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio, wants to impose a tax on lawmakers that would eat away at their paychecks.

Moreno plans to introduce the Stop Holding Up Taxpayers, Deny Wages On Washington’s Negligence (SHUTDOWN) Act, which would create a new tax specifically for lawmakers.

The shutdown has trudged on to a third day with no clear off-ramp in sight. The Senate is again set to vote on the GOP’s short-term funding extension on Friday, but Senate Democrats are again expected to block it.

‘Democrats like Hakeem Jeffries want to get paid for shutting the government down,’ Moreno said in a statement to Fox News Digital. ‘That’s ridiculous. If Congress can’t do the bare minimum, we don’t deserve a paycheck.’

Members of Congress on average make $174,000 a year. That number can fluctuate depending on whether a lawmaker is in a leadership position. Preventing lawmakers from getting paid during a shutdown is tricky, however, given that the U.S. Constitution requires them to receive a paycheck even if the government is closed.

Article I, Section 6 of the Constitution requires that ‘Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States.’

Then there is the 27th Amendment, which was ratified in the 1992, that prevents Congress from passing a law affecting its pay during the current congressional term.

Moreno’s bill could circumvent those guardrails by imposing a daily tax on lawmakers that would rise each day that members are in session and that a shutdown continues.

Meanwhile, the likelihood that the shutdown ends this week is low. Senate Democrats, led by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., are firmly rooted in their position that unless a deal is struck on expiring Obamacare tax credits, they’ll continue to block the GOP’s continuing resolution (CR).

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., plans to keep bringing the same bill, which the House passed last week, in a bid to chip away at Senate Democrats. So far, only three members of the Democratic caucus — Sens. John Fetterman, D-Pa., Catherine Cortez Masto, D-Nev., and Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, joined Republicans to vote for the bill.