Every month, AI-powered cameras take 20 billion snapshots of cars in America. In almost every case, these photos capture drivers who did nothing wrong. These are regular folks on their way to work, picking up kids at school, or driving to church. Now, they are understandably asking what happens to the data captured by a network of more than 120,000 of these Flock cameras nationwide.
Even though this is new technology, it raises an issue older than our country itself. In 1761, a Boston lawyer named James Otis went to court to fight against something called writs of assistance, which gave customs officers virtually unlimited authority to search anywhere for smuggled goods. After the colonial court did not stop the writs, John Adams said American independence was born “then and there.” Otis never argued against law enforcement or the need for searches. He objected to open-ended authority without any limiting rules.
Today, Congress has not written any rules governing the data captured by national AI camera networks built by Flock Safety and similar companies. It may be governed by older statutes, and should have Fourth Amendment limits, but those are unsettled questions. For now, for practical purposes, the only privacy protections for hundreds of millions of Americans are those found in one company’s internal policies. I don’t know if Flock has broken the law, but I do know that technology is moving faster than Congress is keeping up. So I have opened an investigation in the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism, which I chair, into how this data is collected, retained, searched, and sold.
I heard about this issue in my home state of Missouri. The St. Charles County Police Department canceled its Flock contract this month, after an audit found a civilian employee running searches for personal reasons. Sadly, my state is not alone. In Milwaukee, prosecutors charged an officer with searching his girlfriend’s plate 124 times and her former boyfriend’s plate 55 times, typing the word “investigation” in the software’s justification field each time. Worse still, the system’s audit didn&#8217;t catch him; a private citizen did, after looking up his plate on a public website.
Adding insult to injury, the systems make mistakes. A Florida woman spent 13 days in jail on eight felony counts, three for vehicular homicide, after investigators searched Flock’s network for a vehicle description and arrested the owner. The prosecutors later dropped the charges because they had the wrong person. Los Angeles dropped its Flock contract after an audit found officers had stopped 161 drivers wrongly flagged as driving stolen cars. Another California police department found that 71 percent of its alerts were wrong.
Then we consider what happens to records generated by these cameras. Flock boasts an $8.3 billion valuation, which brings commercial pressures. Americans deserve to know whether and how their driving data is licensed, sold, and used. There are also concerns about whether data is sent or stored abroad. For example, reporters have described Flock using gig workers in the Philippines to classify data captured by cameras. Powerful AI models also automate parts of the process, supercharging these concerns.
All that said, I want police to have the tools they need. Cameras can help recover stolen cars, find missing children, and catch fleeing criminals. But people are concerned when private companies build unprecedented databases of personal information and want reasonable safeguards for that data. And the Supreme Court has found that people have a reasonable expectation of privacy against a “comprehensive” record of where they’ve been. Americans do not surrender all their privacy rights every time they leave the house.
So I have posed common-sense questions to Flock about how long it keeps data, who controls it, who can search it, what protections are in place, and who, if anyone, is buying what the cameras see.
I hope the company will commit to resolving these questions. But even if it does, Congress should not just take its word at face value; we should write protections into law. These safeguards must apply to every company and endure longer than the tenure of current CEOs. More fundamentally, the rules protecting Americans should be set by law and by the people, not by venture capital funds, AI executives, or big tech companies.
***
Josh Hawley serves as Missouri&#8217;s senior U.S. Senator.

Surveillance Camera against the background of digital code

Josh Hawley: Why I Am Investigating Flock

flock cameras

fourth amendment

josh hawley

license plate surveillance

politics

senate judiciary committee

Cities across the country are giving in as residents eagerly push for the removal of Flock cameras, but after the cameras were taken down in some cities, multiple crimes remain unsolved. 
The consequences played out in almost textbook fashion across three cities this summer after the cameras went dark. Beginning in June, California’s El Cerrito decommissioned 40 cameras after its city council voted 3-2 not to renew its contract with Flock. But just two days after the last cameras were removed in August, a <a href="https://www.ktvu.com/news/el-cerrito-slaying-happened-days-after-last-license-plate-cameras-removed">man was killed</a> in a fatal shooting, and the shooter and getaway driver fled the scene and remain at large. 
Authorities would typically have turned to the two Flock cameras positioned at the intersection, but they had been removed just 48 hours before the shooting. Instead, investigators obtained footage of the suspect’s vehicle from a resident’s home security camera, but the license plate was unreadable. They ultimately relied on a neighboring agency — whose cameras were still operating — to identify the vehicle.
Residents in Framingham, Massachusetts, weren’t so lucky. The city ended its Flock contract in June following a months-long campaign by residents. Months later, a 39-year-old man was struck and killed by a hit-and-run driver who remains at large. Investigators only have a description of the vehicle and have not identified the driver. 
The city’s own transparency records show that in past situations, Framingham police used Flock cameras as an investigative tool to find the city’s most wanted suspects. During the city’s four-year run with the cameras, authorities cited Flock cameras in more than 200 police reports. 
Similarly, Houston police hoped to use the city’s Flock cameras to identify a suspected child predator accused of trying to lure a child into his car. But vandals had disabled several of the city’s Flock cameras in the past month, including three that investigators <a href="https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/article/flock-camera-vandalism-22399562.php">said</a> could have potentially identified a man who attempted to lure a child into his vehicle. 
“Unfortunately, some person that’s not really cool with the license plate reader technology chose to cut the three down,” Houston Police Chief Noe Diaz said.
Flock founder Garrett Langley, who launched the company with a mission to eliminate crime, said the incidents demonstrate what happens when investigators lose access to the technology.
“Every day, Flock helps solve crimes that would otherwise go unsolved. From finding missing children, to solving murders, violent crime, and recovering stolen vehicles, Flock gives investigators leads they didn’t have before,” Langley <a href="https://fortune.com/2026/08/24/flock-8-billion-startup-backed-a16z-tiger-surveillance-camera/">said</a>. “That impact is why we started Flock, and it drives every decision we make about how this technology should be built and governed.” 
Langley and his company have come under the microscope this summer after reports showing that authorities can also use Flock’s network to commit crime. Between September 2024 and June 2026, police officer Christopher Goodson used Flock cameras in Florida to track his estranged wife’s car more than <a href="https://fortune.com/2026/08/24/flock-8-billion-startup-backed-a16z-tiger-surveillance-camera/">700</a> unauthorized times. 
To solve crime, Flock has built the most expansive surveillance system ever deployed in the United States with <a href="https://www.wsj.com/politics/flock-cameras-the-surveillance-state-and-a-political-reckoning-dd155412">120,000</a> cameras in 49 states. Criticism over the mass surveillance has emerged from both sides of the aisle as Americans digest whether the cameras are worth their benefit. 
Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) <a href="https://truthout.org/articles/sanders-vows-to-introduce-legislation-to-stop-flocks-ai-mass-surveillance/">said</a>, “Do we want to live in an America where AI companies like Flock can work with the government to track our every movement?” 
Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) echoed his statements, <a href="https://www.courthousenews.com/hawley-kicks-off-senate-probe-into-flock-cameras/">saying</a>, “Americans do not surrender their privacy rights when they drive to work, drop their kids off at school, or go to church.” Hawley called the network of cameras an “unprecedented national surveillance network.”
The White House has not released an opinion on the camera network. President Donald Trump told Daily Caller White House correspondent Reagan Reese earlier this month, “You know, you have pros and cons, right? It’s being studied right now. We’ll have an answer sort of as to our views on it over the next couple of weeks.”

Flock Safety camera at the intersection of West Sylvania

What Happened When Flock Cameras Went Dark

bernie sanders

license plate reader

surveillance

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) gave a rare nod of approval to President Donald Trump, praising his crackdown on defense contractors that prioritize shareholder payouts over weapons production, saying the move has worked so well that she wants Congress to make it permanent. 
“Since the executive order was issued, each of the four largest defense contractors that engaged in stock buybacks and dividend payouts in the first quarter of 2025 cut them dramatically in the first quarter of 2026,” Warren said. “This review reveals that the president’s executive order helped protect taxpayers and improve investments by defense contractors.&#8221;
Warren is now urging Secretary of War Pete Hegseth to support legislation codifying key portions of Trump&#8217;s executive order into law.
“Given the findings of our review, we urge your support for codifying the president’s executive order into law and ensuring that the order has lasting results,” she wrote in a <a href="https://static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2026/08/Warren__Lee_Letter_to_DoD_re_Prioritizing_the_Warfighter_in_Defense_Contracting_.pdf">letter</a> to Hegseth. 
Trump signed an <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/01/prioritizing-the-warfighter-in-defense-contracting/">executive order</a> in January, prohibiting defense contractors involved in business with the Pentagon from using capital for stock buybacks and dividend payments if the companies have not made critical investments in increased production and other Pentagon-related needs for the country’s national interest.  
“Effective immediately, they are not permitted in any way, shape, or form to pay dividends or buy back stock, until such time as they are able to produce a superior product, on time and on budget,” Trump wrote in the order. 
Trump said defense companies have the right to profit from their investments and hard work, but that “America’s warfighters have the best possible equipment and weapons.” Paying out dividends is a way for companies to distribute their profits to shareholders. 
Warren’s review found that combined stock buybacks and dividends among four of the largest defense contractors, Lockheed Martin, RTX, Northrop Grumman, and General Dynamics, fell from about $4.2 billion in the first quarter of 2025 to about $2.7 billion in the first quarter of 2026. The reductions were not uniform: Lockheed, Northrop, and General Dynamics all reported declines, while RTX&#8217;s payouts rose slightly year over year. 
Warren’s office also identified several contractors that it said had not meaningfully changed their behavior following Trump&#8217;s executive order, arguing that the results demonstrate why Congress should codify the policy rather than leave it solely to executive action. 
Warren and Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) introduced the Prioritizing the Warfighter in Defense Contracting Act in March, legislation intended to codify key provisions of Trump&#8217;s order. Warren, now joined by Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), is pressing Hegseth in the new letter to support that legislation.
“These contractors who did not respond to the president’s executive order reveal the need for legislation that emboldens the department to enforce accountability. Legislation also provides certainty, and ensures that these changes are part of a strategic shift to deliver more fiscal responsibility to the department instead of temporary changes that can be quickly reversed,” she wrote.

Screenshot 2026-08-11 at 1.42.36 PM

Elizabeth Warren Praises Trump’s Latest Move With Defense Contractors

defense contractor

donald trump

elizabeth warren

pete hegseth

The Senate is expected to vote Friday on a bipartisan bill designed to bring order to college athletics, but Republicans are divided over whether it could inadvertently undermine state laws barring biological males from competing in women&#8217;s sports. 
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) warned Wednesday that the legislation contains a “big, big problem,” arguing its federal preemption language could override Missouri&#8217;s law targeting transgender-identifying athletes.  
“I’m against men in women’s sports, and Missouri has a law that bans men in women’s sports that applies to collegiate eligibility,” Hawley said. “My concern is that this bill as it’s currently drafted would overturn Missouri law. Twenty-seven states have similar bans. This is something that needs to be fixed.” 
Hawley has filed an amendment with Sens. Jim Banks (R-IN) and Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) that would explicitly exempt state and local laws prohibiting biological males from competing in women&#8217;s sports from the bill&#8217;s federal preemption provision.
Tuberville called the protection of women’s athletics “the civil rights issue of our time.” 
Banks added, “As the father of three daughters, I can’t support any legislation that would preempt Indiana’s law. This amendment would make sure the Protect College Sports Act protects female athletes.” 
The bill was primarily written to establish national standards for name, image, and likeness (NIL) payments and preempt the patchwork of state NIL laws governing college athletics.
But Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), who coauthored the bill with Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA), rejected Hawley&#8217;s criticism.
“That’s simply inaccurate,” Cruz <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/6012731-senate-gop-internal-squabbles/">said</a>. “The legislation explicitly has language, number one, that nothing in the bill alters Title IX in any way. And, number two, it explicitly says on eligibility that you can be blocked from eligibility for violating a state law. That was written very deliberately to avoid disturbing the twenty-seven states that have acted to protect women’s sports.” 
Despite Hawley’s questions, Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) filed a cloture motion to advance the bill to a vote on Friday. 
&#8220;I&#8217;m hoping it can be worked out,&#8221; Thune said. “I know what it’s about and I think … some of our members have pretty good answers to some of the questions he’s raising,” 
Thune added, “I’m hopeful that we’ll have the bipartisan votes to get on the bill.” 
The legislation is backed by <a href="https://www.commerce.senate.gov/press/rep/release/committee-releases-revised-protect-college-sports-act/">28</a> collegiate athletic conferences and more than 370 colleges and universities across all 50 states.

NCAA Women’s Basketball Tournament – Final Four – Phoenix

GOP Split Over Whether College Sports Bill Threatens Women’s Sports

college sports

ted cruz

title ix

women in sports

Republican senators read Anthony Fauci the riot act at the recent Senate hearing about the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases’ personal and public machinations during the disastrous COVID-19 pandemic. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) was eloquent in blasting Fauci for saying one thing and doing another, all the while personally profiting from the global tragedy. But it was Sen. Josh Hawley’s (R-MO) words to Fauci that are most memorable:
<blockquote>
It wasn’t just about the money, really, was it? It was really about a power trip. I mean, through all of this, you want to be the most famous scientist in the world. You were so focused on getting every award and every drop of cash that you could, all because you wanted to be on TV. You wanted to be the Sun God of Science. You wanted to be the guy who was in charge of it all.
</blockquote>
The “Sun God of Science” comment resonates — and not just because Fauci previously boasted that “attacks on me, quite frankly, are attacks on science” and “they’re really criticizing science because I represent science.” It resonates because Fauci is emblematic of a breed of scientist whose scientific work takes a remote back seat to his overblown ego and non-science agenda.
Another area of science that has its share of sun gods is climate. Former chief NASA climate scientist James Hansen launched the climate hoax with his infamous June 1988 Senate <a href="https://junkscience.com/2023/06/wrong-again-james-hansens-1988-senate-testimony-edition/">testimony</a>, held during a heat wave and in a Senate room where staffers had left the windows open overnight. After launching climate hysteria and then two decades of promoting it, Hansen had the temerity to <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2006/02/11/censorship-is-alleged-at-noaa-span-classbankheadscientists-afraid-to-speak-out-nasa-climate-expert-reports-span/44e8063d-2f26-4c66-84cd-b2d3ec59bf08/">accuse</a> the Bush administration in 2006 of trying to censor him because it wanted to review his (a government employee’s) public statements on climate.
Another climate sun god for the books is Michael Mann, whose infamous “hockey stick” temperature graph and intrigues against climate skeptics were exposed by the 2009 <a href="https://commonwealthfoundation.org/commentary/2010/01/19/mann-made-global-warming/">Climategate</a> scandal. Subsequent criticism of Mann led to an ongoing 14-year defamation lawsuit, in which Mann wound up being <a href="https://x.com/JunkScience/status/2014399914126532914">sanctioned</a> by the trial judge for providing false evidence to the jury on the key issue (damages). Mann has even falsely <a href="https://junkscience.com/2021/01/michael-mann-still-fancies-himself-as-a-nobel-prize-winner/">claimed</a> to be a Nobel Prize winner.
Despite all this, Mann was nevertheless cited as a credible source by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) — a veritable museum of dubious Sun Gods of Science — in the now-exposed and discredited scientific reference manual for judges it prepared last year for the Federal Judicial Center.
The NAS allowed the manual’s chapter on climate science to be written by climate activists involved in pending litigation against the oil industry. Although the Federal Judicial Center removed the climate chapter from its own edition, NAS retained it in the copy on its website.
Scientists must be judged by the tangible scientific knowledge and gains they produce — not the size and marketing of their egos. Neither Fauci, Hansen, nor Mann has any Nobel Prize-level scientific accomplishment under their belts. They have never earned any special deference from the rest of us mere mortals. Instead, Fauci helped fuel the COVID pandemic, and Hansen and Mann promoted climate panic — both of which have been disastrous for science and the society that science is supposed to serve.
***
Steve Milloy is a senior legal fellow at the Energy and Environment Legal Institute and posts on X at @JunkScience.

US-POLITICS-VIRUS-HEALTH

Fauci And The Danger Of Following The Sun Gods Of Science

anthony fauci

climate change

michael mann

opinion

rand paul

A pro-union bill making its way through Congress with Republican support faces opposition from Christian business leaders who argue it could be used to advance a pro-abortion and transgender agenda without the consent of workers or employers.
The <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/5408/text" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Faster Labor Contracts Act</a>, which passed the House last week with support from 210 Democrats and 20 Republicans, stipulates that either side in a labor dispute may request federal mediation after a 90 day period. If an agreement is not reached within 30 days of federal mediation, the conflict goes to a 3-person arbitration panel that is then empowered to impose labor contracts that can be binding on the parties for up to two years.
The Senate version of the bill is sponsored by outspoken social conservative Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) who says that the bill will help workers assert their rights against woke corporations. But according to the Christian Employers Alliance, the bill could have significant <a href="https://x.com/JoinCEANow/status/2064348783203508259" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ramifications</a> for religious workers and employees.
The organization, which successfully <a href="https://adflegal.org/case/christian-employers-alliance-v-us-equal-employment-opportunity-commission-i/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">defeated</a> a Biden-era mandate for employers to pay for transgender procedures, sent a letter to House lawmakers last week urging them to oppose the measure. They say that the bill would allow arbiters to embed woke provisions into binding contracts without final consent from workers or employers.
“Christian employers are increasingly concerned that collective bargaining agreements are being used to advance provisions involving abortion coverage, gender-transition procedures, DEI mandates, pronoun policies, and other ideological requirements that directly implicate matters of conscience and religious belief,” Christian Employers Alliance President Margaret Iuculano told lawmakers in a letter obtained by The Daily Wire.
Iuculano told The Daily Wire that her organization is not opposed to the measure because it directly mandates any of the policies in question, but because of the binding arbitration provision that kicks in after 120 days if the two sides can&#8217;t make an agreement.
&#8220;Because the legislation relies on binding arbitration to impose first contracts when negotiations fail, provisions of this nature could become part of an arbitrator-imposed agreement without the consent of either the employer or the employees,&#8221; she told The Daily Wire. &#8220;For Christian employers, that raises serious concerns about religious liberty, conscience protections, healthcare freedom, and the ability of faith-based organizations to govern their workplaces consistent with their sincerely held beliefs.&#8221;
A Hawley spokesman told The Daily Wire that these objections were “absurd” and a way for big business to target the proposal.
“These absurd allegations about a strong bill to protect working people just show that giant corporations are desperate to kill legislation that would help American workers while they invest billions in DEI insanity,” a Hawley spokesman said. “Senator Hawley’s bill aims to put a shot clock on labor negotiations to stop corporations like Amazon from dragging their feet after workers win a vote to unionize fair and square.”
Hawley’s spokesman said that existing federal law protected religious employers.
“Federal law already shields religious employers, and under this bill any third-party arbitrators are mutually chosen by the bargaining parties, not by the government,” the spokesman said.
The terms imposed by the bill would allow the union and the employer to select one representative for arbitration. They would then have an opportunity to select a third arbitrator agreed to by both sides. If they can not agree on a third party within 14 days, the federal government would put in place the third person.
The Senate version is cosponsored by Republican Senators Roger Marshall (KS) and Bernie Moreno (Ohio) alongside 14 Democratic lawmakers.
Opponents of the bill argue that unions have historically promoted left-wing social policies, policies that could be imposed during the arbitration process.
For example, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, one of the unions supporting the legislation, once <a href="https://teamster.org/2019/11/teamsters-lgbtq-caucus-holds-annual-meeting" target="_blank" rel="noopener">promoted</a> a “Pride at Work” guidance <a href="https://teamster.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/caucuslgbtqprideatwork.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">document</a> steeped in transgender ideology that features the so-called “gender-bread person.”
The document features a section called “Five Reasons LGBTQ Working People Need a Union,” including that “people in unions help ensure LGBTQ working people have their healthcare needs met,” including “gender confirmation surgery.”
&nbsp;
<div id="attachment_1118015" style="width: 1526px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1118015" class="wp-image-1118015 size-full" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/06/Screenshot-2026-06-17-at-9.42.55-AM.png" alt="" width="1516" height="962" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/06/Screenshot-2026-06-17-at-9.42.55-AM.png 1516w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/06/Screenshot-2026-06-17-at-9.42.55-AM-300x190.png 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/06/Screenshot-2026-06-17-at-9.42.55-AM-908x576.png 908w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/06/Screenshot-2026-06-17-at-9.42.55-AM-768x487.png 768w" sizes=" (max-width: 1516px) 100vw, 1516px" />Teamster handout</div>
Some affiliate groups, such as the Teamsters Local 117 in Washington, proudly <a href="https://www.teamsters117.org/abortion_rights_are_worker_rights" target="_blank" rel="noopener">declare</a> that “abortion rights are worker rights.”
“In America today, I cannot think of a single healthcare procedure that elected officials have used the legislative process to take choice away from men. Abortion rights are worker’s rights. The labor movement must take a critical stand and continue the fight for equal access to healthcare for all its members,” the union said after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.
Kara Deniz, the assistant director of communications for the Teamsters, argued that complaints about abortion and transgender funding were attempts by companies to &#8220;misdirect&#8221; about the legislation.
&#8220;This is a complete misdirection to basically facilitate their goal to try to stampede and block a bill that is having tremendous bipartisan support. Republicans and Democrats are supporting this bill,&#8221; she told The Daily Wire. &#8220;I don&#8217;t think they even have those concerns. To be quite honest, I think that these &#8216;concerns&#8217; are being brought up on behalf of the corporations.&#8221;
Deniz said the goal of the Teamsters was to cut down on the lengthy negotiating process and would not impact the issues of abortion or transgenderism.
&#8220;I think it&#8217;s very unchristian to stand in the way of such legislation when it&#8217;s going to help people afford to live, and afford to be able to have a contract, and to not get hurt and injured on the job and be unsafe for 460 plus days because the employer refuses to give a contract,&#8221; she said. &#8220;I think that&#8217;s incredibly unchristian.&#8221;
The AFL-CIO, the largest federation of unions in the United States, has created model collective bargaining language demanding healthcare coverage for abortion and transgender procedures, including from out-of-state providers.
“All health plans offered to bargaining unit members shall cover comprehensive sexual and reproductive health care services, including contraceptives, abortion services (procedural and pharmaceutical), and gender-affirming care,” the <a href="https://aflcio.org/sites/default/files/2022-09/Abortion%20Model%20CBA%20Language.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">model language</a> says.
Similarly, the Service Employees International Union has called for local unions to bargain for so-called trans-inclusive healthcare.
Thomas Beck, a labor lawyer who previously served on the Federal Labor Relations Authority, said that the worries of organizations like the Christian Employers Alliance are legitimate.
“I think it&#8217;s absolutely a concern,” he told The Daily Wire, noting the track record of unions pushing for abortion and transgender coverage. “They&#8217;re all proudly staking out these very progressive positions on some of the highest profile social issues of our time. And essentially they&#8217;re making it clear that they want to argue for these protections in collective bargaining agreements.”
Beck believes that arbitrators would see abortion coverage or transgender procedure coverage as an easy win to hand unions and that the end result of the legislation would lead to a binding government regulation imposed via arbitration.
Vinnie Vernuccio, the president of the Institute for the American Worker, said one problem with the legislation is that union members did not get a final vote on the labor contract with it went to arbitration.
“It&#8217;s going a bridge way too far to say the remedy for contract negotiations taking too long is to invite government bureaucrats and take away the ability of workers to vote on a contract,” he told The Daily Wire.
Hawley’s spokesman said the broader objections to the bill were a cloak for woke corporations to oppose worker-friendly legislation. The spokesman noted that employers get to be part of the process in selecting the representatives to oversee arbitration.
“It’s ironic that some of the biggest opponents of this legislation also promote the trans flag on their websites. Senator Hawley is fighting for the American worker, rather than the same Big Business who stands with the radical left to push woke, transgender ideology,” the spokesman said.
When asked about concerns with the bill, Reagan McCarthy, a spokeswoman for Moreno, told The Daily Wire that the senator was “proud to be a part of the legislative effort to protect working families. Working class Americans helped elect President Trump, and Republicans must be the party of workers, not Wall Street.”
Some corporations have moved to push for abortion coverage without union pressure. Corporate giants like Amazon, Apple, and JPMorgan all came forward after the Roe decision and announced that they would pay for women to travel to end the life of their unborn child.
Before passing, the proposal likely would have to go before the Senate’s Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) committee, which could be an uphill battle with Republican control of the committee. It would also need to pick up around ten more Republican supporters to get past the filibuster and would need President Donald Trump&#8217;s signature.

Motor City Pride Parade

Republicans And Union Allies Could Force Abortion On Christian Employers, Critics Warn

abortion

Labor Unions

senate

transgender surgery

When the Supreme Court finally overturned Roe v. Wade — reversing the worst Supreme Court decision since Dred Scott — pro-life Americans rejoiced. Little did we know the fight was only just beginning. Since then, abortion advocates have dumped millions of dollars in dark money into our states to overturn state laws, and in some cases, state constitutional provisions, protecting life. They’ve relentlessly pushed for pro-abortion judges for state courts and the federal judiciary. But above all, they’ve turned to a drug called mifepristone to bring abortion on demand to every state in the union. If pro-lifers want to protect the innocent unborn, and the health and safety of women, there’s only one thing to do: ban the chemical abortion drug.
Mifepristone first came to market in the United States in 2000, courtesy of the Clinton administration. From the beginning, it was mired in controversy. The drug was a copycat of the infamous French RU-486, which works by essentially inducing a miscarriage. This isn’t contraception. It’s not the morning-after pill. It’s a full-on abortion: the drug’s purpose is to destroy a viable pregnancy.
It was controversial because the drug carries so many side effects. It doesn’t merely kill the baby. It can also cause internal hemorrhaging, infections, sepsis, and other life-threatening conditions in the mother.
The pharma company that introduced it in the United States knew that, and took unusual and extreme measures to protect itself from liability. The name of the company is Danco. It was incorporated in the Cayman Islands. Its board of directors is secret; its investors are secret. Its corporate structure is largely shielded from public view. We do know early backers included George Soros — surprise, surprise — and other far-left activists who loudly backed population control. Their goal was simple: to put a Planned Parenthood in every mailbox in America, by developing a drug that could be shipped anywhere and cause an abortion anytime.
The Clinton administration was also aware of mifepristone’s dangers, and its FDA approval came with significant restrictions. The drug had to be prescribed by a physician. That physician had to see the patient before prescribing it, dispense the drug in person, and conduct a follow-up assessment. The FDA was also required to keep track of major health events associated with the drug and report them. The agency even slapped a “black box” warning on mifepristone’s label, meant to alert women that the drug came with serious risks.
Over time, however, one liberal administration after another removed these safeguards. 
The Obama administration dropped many of the reporting requirements and allowed non-physicians to prescribe the drug. Obama’s FDA also discarded the required follow-up visit. 
The Biden administration went further and eliminated the in-person dispensing requirement altogether.
The result? Today, mifepristone can be ordered over the internet from anywhere in the world — many of the most trafficked websites are in India — and mailed to any address in the United States. No meaningful safety protocols remain to protect women’s health or even police the integrity of the drug itself.
And what you might have expected to happen has happened. The largest study of mifepristone ever conducted found that in nearly 11% of cases, women who take the drug experience a “serious adverse health event” such as sepsis or hemorrhaging. That’s more than one in ten women. Incredibly, this rate is 22 times higher than what drug maker Danco admits to on its label.
Mifepristone’s ubiquity has also led to other horrors. Women across this country have been pressured into taking it by pro-abortion groups like Planned Parenthood, who routinely lie about the effects. And abusive partners — able to order the drug with a simple click — have intimidated or coerced women into taking it and killing babies they wanted to keep.
But of course, Danco doesn’t care: it’s making billions. Business is so lucrative, in fact, that mifepristone is the only drug the company makes. One recent piece of public reporting suggested investors’ returns top 450% — even as one in ten women who take the drug face health devastation. What has Danco done to compensate them? Nothing. They’re too busy raking in the cash.
And the far-left abortion crazies who funded Danco and worked for years to eliminate every last safety restriction, have gotten what they wanted, too. Mifepristone now accounts for 70% of abortions in the United States — a proportion that goes up every year. It is truly abortion on demand. And no matter what voters in the states decide, the number of abortions continues to grow: the drug is available by mail anywhere, irrespective of state laws.
Those harmed are women. And the innocent unborn. At least 7.5 million women have taken mifepristone since the year 2000. That means hundreds of thousands of women are sent to emergency rooms or left to cope with life-threatening conditions on their own. And millions of babies lost.
It is time for Congress to act. The last twenty years have made abundantly clear that this drug is inherently dangerous. And inherently prone to abuse. There is a direct solution: Congress should ban mifepristone for use in abortion. And Congress should give every woman harmed by the drug — and we’re talking thousands upon thousands of women — the right to sue Danco and the other drug makers who have lied to them.
Banning mifepristone in abortions is the only realistic way to end this epidemic. The FDA could theoretically reinstate some or all of the older safety restrictions, but as one recent study showed, even with safety restrictions in place, the drug still sends approximately 10% of women to the hospital with serious side effects. And it’s lethal to the baby nearly 100% of the time. Then, too, a future FDA under a liberal president could just take the safety protocols away again.
The real solution is for Congress to act, to permanently stop the drug trade in abortion by barring mifepristone from use in abortions. And to give women their voice back by finally giving them rights against the pharma kingpins.
This is not a sidelight to the fight for life. This is the fight for life. It is the fight of our time. And it cannot wait a day longer.
* * *
U.S. Senator Josh Hawley represents the state of Missouri and serves on the Senate Committees on the Judiciary; Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs; Health, Education, Labor and Pensions; and Small Business and Entrepreneurship.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

In new motherhood, fetal health monitoring through regular ultrasounds and check-ups enables constant monitoring of the fetus’s growth and development.

The Abortion Industry Simply Changed Tactics. Now Congress Must Act.

Time To Ban The Chemical Abortion Drug

Abortion Drug

congress

mifepristone

U.S. Senate

Urging Congress to take action against the abortion drug mifepristone, a woman named Elizabeth Gillete spoke out Wednesday about her horrific experience with the fatal pill.
Speaking at a press conference organized by Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO), Gillette gave her story of how the abortion drug had harmed her when she was in her 20s and ended the life of her unborn baby. After pressure from her boyfriend, she said she took an abortion pill and said when the baby was expelled from her body he had recognizable eyes, limbs, and earbuds.
“That was so different from the double period and the extra clotting that they told me that I would experience,” she said. “And in that moment, I had to decide if I was going to throw my child in the trash or flush my child down the toilet, and I chose to flush him into a septic tank.”
She said the whole experience gave her post-traumatic stress disorder.
&#8220;And instead of relief, I got horrible nightmares that started, where I would see people dying and people being murdered,&#8221; she said. &#8220;I would hear infants crying in the trash cans when I walked by them, I would hear infants crying in the toilet. I was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder, which I still suffer from this day.&#8221;
Her comments came as Hawley announced Wednesday that he had introduced a bill that would ban the use of mifepristone for abortion nationwide. He said the bill was inspired by how the abortion rate has increased despite the overturning of Roe v. Wade. 
“There are more abortions now in the United States than there were when Roe was still the law of the land,” Hawley said. “It is time for Congress to ban the use of mifepristone for abortion.”
“Only Congress can address this situation. Only Congress is placed to regulate the flow of interstate drugs,” he added. 
The proposal would also allow women who were harmed by the abortion drug to sue the manufacturers for damages. 
A companion bill was introduced by Tennessee Republican Diana Harshbarger in the House. 
Mifepristone has quickly become the most common method for ending the life of an unborn baby. The fatal drug, which ends a baby’s life by cutting it off from nutrients needed to survive, has largely fueled the nationwide increase in abortion. Abortionists and leftist activists, protected by so-called shield-laws, have shipped the drug through the mail bypassing red state laws banning medication abortions. 
Data released in December by the pro-abortion Society of Family Planning <a href="https://societyfp.org/research/wecount/wecount-june-2025-data/">revealed</a> that the number of monthly abortions continued to increase in 2025 from 2024, which was itself an increase from 2023. 
Pro-life advocates including Hawley have called for the Trump administration to repeal Biden-era regulations that allowed the drug to be shipped through the mail without an in-person doctor&#8217;s visit. 
The Food and Drug Administration has said that it is conducting a safety study of mifepristone and has kept Biden-era regulations in place that allow the fatal drug to be sent through the mail with no in-person doctor visits. 
Last month, Hawley <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/serious-crisis-hawley-says-congress-must-act-to-combat-rising-abortion-rates?author=Leif+Le+Mahieu&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=undefined&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=‘Serious+Crisis’%3A+Hawley+Says+Congress+Must+Act+To+Combat+Rising+Abortion+Rates">told The Daily Wire</a> that he thought it was time for Congress to get involved in the abortion fight. 
“I think Congress needs to be involved. Congress shouldn’t be a spectator and just outsource this to other people. I think it’s time for Congress to get involved,” he said. 
Those comments came after he attended a close-door briefing with FDA Administrator Marty Makary to discuss the regulation of mifepristone. He said he thought the safety study was a “dead end.”

MixCollage-11-Mar-2026-02-45-PM-5636

She Took The Abortion Pill — What Happened Next Is Changing The Fight Over It

Pro-Life Movement

Large majorities of Republican primary voters want the Trump administration to crack down on the distribution of the abortion pill by mail and say they would be less enthusiastic to vote in the midterm elections if GOP leaders shy away from pro-life policies, according to new polling. 
Over 70% of GOP primary voters oppose a Biden-era policy that allowed the abortion pill mifepristone to be shipped through the mail without any in-person doctor visit, according to <a href="https://sbaprolife.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/SBA_National_Memo_Final.pdf">polling</a> conducted by Cygnal. That included 77% of self-identified Trump voters and 76% of voters who said they supported the Make America Healthy Again movement. The polling surveyed 1,000 GOP primary voters across the country from February 8-10. 
The polling comes after lawmakers like <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/serious-crisis-hawley-says-congress-must-act-to-combat-rising-abortion-rates?author=Leif+Le+Mahieu&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=undefined&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=%E2%80%98Serious+Crisis%E2%80%99%3A+Hawley+Says+Congress+Must+Act+To+Combat+Rising+Abortion+Rates">Senator Josh Hawley</a> (R-MO) and pro-life groups have called for the Department of Health and Human Services and the Food and Drug Administration to end the Biden-era provision that has allowed abortion drugs to flood into red states where medication abortions are technically illegal. 
Mifepristone cuts off the nutrients that an unborn child needs to survive in the womb. Another drug is then taken to expel the deceased baby from the mother. 
Pro-life advocates say that failure to act could cause a lack of enthusiasm from pro-life voters, who constitute a significant portion of the GOP base. 
“The failure to rein in abortion drugs risks base enthusiasm this November,” said Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser during a Thursday press call attended by The Daily Wire, discussing the polling. “You cannot win without your base. You can&#8217;t bring together that handful of votes in battlegrounds that are required. The abortion drug problem is an electoral problem in addition to a moral problem in our nation, and it&#8217;s caused by the lack of leadership at HHS.”
Nearly a third (32%) of GOP primary voters said they would have decreased enthusiasm to vote in the midterm elections if Republican leaders weakened their stance on the issue of life. Another 34% said they would be less likely to volunteer and help out with campaigns. 
Cygnal pollster John Rogers said that a drop in enthusiasm could have a “dramatic effect across the board” in key midterm elections. 
When asked about the polling, White House spokeswoman Olivia Wales highlighted pro-life policies enacted by President Donald Trump.
“President Trump is the most pro-life and pro-family President in history. Thanks to the President’s appointments to the United States Supreme Court, Roe v. Wade was correctly overturned – a triumphant victory for life,&#8221; she told The Daily Wire. &#8220;The President has also enforced the Hyde Amendment and reinstated the Mexico City Policy to end taxpayer-funded abortion at home and abroad, expanded child tax credits, created Trump Accounts, and established a rigorous, Gold Standard Science safety review of mifepristone by the FDA.&#8221;
Wales added that the Trump administration would continue to pursue pro-life policies.
&#8220;President Trump and his entire administration will continue to boldly advance policies that protect the most vulnerable among us and promote the growth and success of America’s families,&#8221; she said. 
Both FDA Commissioner Marty Makary and HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/pro-lifers-demand-answers-from-trump-admin-after-shocking-abortion-pill-approval">said</a> that they are conducting a study on the abortion pill, but lawmakers and advocates have grown impatient. In September, the FDA shocked pro-life advocates by approving another generic brand of mifepristone. 
The Cygnal polling found that 80% of primary voters wanted the FDA to require in-person doctor visits to get the abortion pill, and another 72% oppose approving generic forms of mifepristone before the completion of a safety study. Sixty-five percent disapproved of HHS’s handling of the abortion issue. 
Despite the overturning of Roe, abortions across the country have <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/despite-dobbs-more-babies-are-still-being-aborted-in-the-united-states">increased</a>, fueled in large part by mail-order abortions. Data shows that there have been tens of thousands of abortions in states like Texas and Louisiana, where medication abortions are banned. 
“Pro-life protections passed at the state level are being completely undermined, stealing sovereignty away from pro-life states who have passed strong pro-life protections,” Dannenfelser said Thursday.
Last week, Hawley told The Daily Wire after a phone call with Makary that he thought it was time for Congress to take action.
“I think Congress needs to be involved. Congress shouldn’t be a spectator and just outsource this to other people,&#8221; he said. &#8220;I think it’s time for Congress to get involved.&#8221;

March for Life 2026

Republican Voters Want Action On Mail-Order Abortion Pill As Midterms Loom

department of health and human services

After a closed-door hearing this week with Food and Drug Commissioner Marty Makary, Senator Josh Hawley told The Daily Wire that Congress must take action against rising abortion rates largely fueled by the abortion drug mifepristone. 
Hawley and other senators on the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pension (HELP) Committee met with Makary on Tuesday for a private briefing on mifepristone. The briefing focused on the FDA’s handling of mifepristone and an ongoing study of the drug&#8217;s safety. 
Both Makary and Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. committed to conducting the study last year, but Republican lawmakers have grown impatient. 
“I think we&#8217;re at a dead end on this process with the safety review. I just don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s going anywhere, and I think the fact that 70% of abortions in this country now are done with the chemical abortion drug, there are more abortions in America now than there were when Roe was still the law of the land just a few years ago,” Hawley told The Daily Wire. “We have a serious, serious crisis around the chemical abortion drug, and we&#8217;ve got to do something about it.”
Data released in December by the pro-abortion Society of Family Planning <a href="https://societyfp.org/research/wecount/wecount-june-2025-data/">revealed</a> that the number of monthly abortions continued to increase in 2025 from 2024, which was itself an increase from 2023. Many of the pills have been sent through the mail to states where medication abortions are technically illegal. 
Hawley said he has not heard back from the FDA on any of the letters sent on the abortion pill and said he didn’t receive any new information on Wednesday. He said there was no “sense of urgency” to take any action.
“I think this study is just a dead end,” he said. “I think Congress needs to act.”
Hawley said he was still contemplating what the action might look like, but any pro-life proposal would face an uphill battle in the Senate. 
“I think Congress needs to be involved. Congress shouldn&#8217;t be a spectator and just outsource this to other people. I think it&#8217;s time for Congress to get involved,” he said. 
At a minimum, Hawley says the FDA should reverse a Biden-era decision that allowed mifepristone to be shipped through the mail without an in-person doctor visit. Pro-life advocates say that the policy effectively nullifies the laws of states that have cracked down on abortion pills. 
When reached for comment, the FDA pointed The Daily Wire to a <a href="https://www.fda.gov/drugs/postmarket-drug-safety-information-patients-and-providers/questions-and-answers-mifepristone-medical-termination-pregnancy-through-ten-weeks-gestation">Q&amp;A page</a> on mifepristone.

Telecommunications Executives Testify In Senate Hearing Examining Arctic Frost Investigation

‘Serious Crisis’: Hawley Says Congress Must Act To Combat Rising Abortion Rates

In an era of spiraling political absurdity, America finds itself squandering precious time and resources on what should be one of the most straightforward, apolitical facts of human existence: only women can get pregnant.
Even Democrat strategist James Carville recently <a href="https://x.com/GrabienMedia/status/2012559321582772621">mocked the absurdity</a> of today’s gender politics on Fox News, saying, “I’m not worried about getting pregnant. I have no idea why this is the number one issue in America.”
It’s time to stop pretending this point of view is controversial. As a mom, I’m calling for this political charade to end in 2026.
After many decades of modern scientific consensus, which follows centuries and even millennia of common sense on the subject, we’ve somehow devolved into laughably ridiculous disagreements over gender. This isn’t just science; it is the order of creation itself, designed by God with intention and clarity. But it is politically unserious to convene hearings where elected politicians and sitting Supreme Court Justices go through the motions of grilling so-called experts on a matter that, in terms of objective reality, isn’t even up for debate.
Imagine a congressional hearing on whether gravity affects everyone equally, or if some people can ‘identify’ as not being subject to such a narrow-minded and restrictive force. Or, imagine someone bringing a case before the Supreme Court to decide whether humans require oxygen to live, or if some could ‘identify’ as anaerobic and live on carbon dioxide alone. We, the serious masses, wouldn’t even entertain the conversation. We would turn our attention to real political issues like immigration, national security, or the economy, and not waste our time.
Speaking of which, I don’t have much time to waste these days. I just welcomed our third child in three years into this world. It was beautiful, painful, exhausting, and awe-inspiring; the kind of experience that reminds you just how extraordinary the female body truly is. God entrusted me to carry a child and give birth, something only a woman can do. A man is simply incapable of doing what I did. That isn’t opinion, it’s biological reality.
And as a mother who just gave birth, I’m exhausted that this ever became a political issue. Women shouldn’t have to fight to own something as fundamental as pregnancy.
Which is why I was so disgusted when I watched the congressional hearing where Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) questioned the so-called “expert,” and (somehow) certified OB/GYN, Dr. Nisha Verma.
Dr. Verma testified before the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee on abortion pill safety. She represented Physicians for Reproductive Health, and Sen. Hawley asked her a simple question that has an objective, biological, common-sense answer: “Can men get pregnant?”
Dr. Verma, who definitely knows the answer, repeatedly dodged the question — insisting instead that it was a “political tool” that “polarized” the discussion and failed to capture the “complex experiences” of her patients. I wonder if Dr. Verma would also dodge questions about whether people could choose to live without oxygen or decide that gravity doesn’t apply to them. Would she claim such farcical questions are political tools that polarize?
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
SPOILER ALERT: Men cannot get pregnant <a href="https://t.co/08JwHUlxIj">pic.twitter.com/08JwHUlxIj</a>
— Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) <a href="https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/2011480384467349892?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 14, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Credit: @HawleyMO/X.com
That is really the crux of the issue here; none of this should be treated as a political issue. A serious nation would not waste another moment nor another taxpayer dollar entertaining such an unserious conversation. The entire premise should be dismissed outright as unworthy of the time it would take to even ask such a ludicrous question. Stop indulging delusion and start governing in reality.
Incredibly, this Senate hearing came just days after the Supreme Court heard arguments regarding men in women’s sports. Ironically, this is the same thing that happened to one of the sitting Justices during her confirmation hearing, when she was unable to answer a similar question — “What is a woman?” More incredible still, she and every other person still hung up on this issue suddenly know what a woman is when it comes to breaking the glass ceiling and placing the first black woman on the Supreme Court of the United States.
Suddenly, they all know what a woman is? Suddenly, that distinction matters? No, not suddenly. They always knew because it’s an objective, reality-based fact that isn’t up for debate, unless we pretend along with those who want to bend reality.
Even James Carville wasn’t just stating a fact; he was calling out how absurd the debate itself has become. His joke on Fox News wasn’t about biology; it was about how fake and manufactured this entire controversy is. But Democrats keep entertaining fiction to pander to rabid extremists and then expect the rest of the country to play along.
The bottom line is simple: there is no debate, so entertaining one is foolish. Polling consistently shows that most Americans are willing to publicly admit that they understand the biological reality of sex. Voters aren’t confused, but Washington is pretending to be. Americans are tired of political grandstanding on issues that don’t matter. And 2026 should be the year this nonsense ends.
It’s time to stop coddling absurdity as though we owe irrationality an esteemed seat at every table. One might say that when you wrestle with a pig in lipstick, it’s still a pig, and you both get dirty. It’s not respect, and it’s not compassion. It’s suicidal empathy. If we let lunacy hijack constructive conversation, we all crash together.
###
Jillian Anderson King is a former Washington Redskins Cheerleader Ambassador and ABC’s The Bachelor and The Bachelor in Paradise contestant. She’s a Mombassador for Moms for America, an ambassador for Turning Point and Turning Point Faith, and a proud Christian Conservative mother and wife. Jillian is also the founder of The Kings Firm, a strategic communications firm.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

27th SCAD Savannah Film Festival – Portraits

Men Can’t Get Pregnant. Even James Carville Knows That.

Gender

gender ideology

Mothers

Pregnancy

SCOTUS

supreme court

transgender

women

President Donald Trump urged Congress on Wednesday to pass legislation capping credit card interest rates at 10% for the next year, a proposal that has drawn criticism from Republican lawmakers.
Trump pressed Congress to take action on credit card interest rates during a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. Last week, the president pressured banks and credit card companies to lower interest rates for one year, but he didn&#8217;t address how he would force them to comply. A deadline had been set for Jan. 20, but institutions have yet to follow Trump&#8217;s directive.
&#8220;The profit margin for credit card companies now exceeds 50%, and they charge Americans interest rates of 28%, 30%, 31%, 32%. Whatever happened to usury?&#8221; Trump <a href="https://x.com/RapidResponse47/status/2013983796039647649">said</a> on Wednesday. &#8220;So, to help our citizens recover from the Biden disaster all caused by this horrible president, I&#8217;m asking Congress to cap credit card interest rates at 10% for one year.&#8221;
&#8220;And this will help millions of Americans save for a home,&#8221; he added.
Leftist Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who has pushed for capping credit card interest rates, said last week that Trump <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2026/01/14/warren-trump-credit-card-interest-rate-affordability.html">called her</a> to discuss the issue. Warren said that she told Trump &#8220;he had not lifted a finger to try to get something through on credit card interest rate caps.”
Democratic socialist Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Republican Josh Hawley of Missouri also support the idea. Both senators introduced a bill last year to cap credit card interest rates at 10% for five years. Leftist Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Florida Republican Anna Paulina Luna introduced a similar bill in the House, but the legislation has not made any progress in Congress.
When Trump publicly floated the idea of capping interest rates last week, Republican leaders in the Senate and House poured cold water on the proposal. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) said last Tuesday, &#8220;The president is the ideas guy,” adding, “I wouldn’t get too spun up about ideas that are out of the box, that are proposed or suggested,&#8221; POLITICO <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/13/trump-credit-cards-congress-republicans-00725477">reported</a>.
&#8220;You&#8217;ve got to be very careful if you go forward in that,&#8221; Johnson continued. &#8220;In our zeal to bring down costs, you don&#8217;t want to have negative secondary effects. The problem is, if you do that, then the credit card companies, the negative secondary effect is that they would just stop lending money, and maybe they cap what people are able to borrow at a very low amount.&#8221;
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) said, “That’s not something I’m out there advocating for.&#8221; Thune told NBC News that he believes Trump is getting bad advice.
&#8220;He may be getting advice on some of those issues, like, for example, the 10% cap on credit cards,” he said. “Don’t know where that came from. I don’t know. I don’t know the answer.”
Now that Trump has called on Congress to act on capping credit card interest rates, Republican leaders could find themselves in a tougher spot if they continue to publicly oppose his plan.
JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, who is also in Davos, <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2026/01/21/jamie-dimon-trump-credit-card-rate-cap-vermont-massachusetts.html">said</a> on Wednesday that a cap on credit card interest rates &#8220;would be an economic disaster.&#8221;
“In the worst case, you’d have a drastic reduction of the credit card business” for 80% of Americans, Dimon said, according to CNBC. He then quipped that the United States should test the idea in Warren&#8217;s and Sanders&#8217; home states of Massachusetts and Vermont, &#8220;and see what happens.&#8221; The banker added that those on &#8220;the Left&#8221; who push for price controls “will learn a real lesson, and the people crying the most won’t be the credit card companies.&#8221;
“It’ll be the restaurants, the retailers, the travel companies, the schools, the municipalities, because people miss their water payments,” Dimon said. “It would be something else to watch.”

Donald Trump

Trump Urges Congress To Cap Credit Card Interest Rates As Republican Leaders Push Back On Plan

Trump Calls On Congress To Cap Credit Card Interest Rates As Republican Leaders Push Back On Plan

credit cards

economy

jamie dimon

Republicans

Menu