The Biden administration’s aggressive regulatory stance towards big businesses has stymied growth, a cohort of entrepreneurs, venture capitalists and other business sector experts expressed to Fox News Digital. 

Earlier this week, Albertsons abandoned its $25 million merger with fellow grocery store chain Kroger, after the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), led by President Biden appointee Lena Khan, sought to challenge the buyout, arguing it would stifle competition and raise prices. The challenge and the merger’s eventual failure is the latest example of the Biden administration’s offensive against big business. 

“We have literally had offers from strategic buyers to buy us, and we go to our counsel and the counsel says, ‘Don’t even try. The FTC will absolutely flag this thing, and you will spend tens of millions of dollars and be stuck in a bureaucratic hell answering questions in court for a year,” said venture capitalist Ravin Gandhi, a former CEO who has been involved in multiple merger and acquisition deals and maintains a stake in a number of startups. 

“Lena Khan was explicit in talking about even mid-market M&A as a vehicle for monopoly. And anyone who has built a business and sold it, like I have, knows that’s ridiculous.”

The chilling effect described by Gandhi has been echoed by other analysts, who say that the Biden administration’s rhetoric and policies have required businesses to take matters into their own hands by abandoning or restructuring their transactions in the face of FTC and Department of Justice antitrust concerns. An analysis by international law firm Morgan Lewis found that under Biden, the vast majority — nearly three-quarters — of all transactions in which the government sought more details from companies about a proposed merger were subject to enforcement action.

“America wants a different choice,” said Cardone Capital CEO Grant Cardone. “This idea that Joe Biden is going to make the world more competitive is a red herring.”  

Cardone, too, expressed frustration over regulatory battles with the Biden administration, noting that they have made it “almost impossible for people to do business.” 

Several other business leaders, venture capitalists and people with detailed knowledge of mergers and acquisitions echoed the concerns shared by Gandhi and Cardone that business growth has been stymied.

“The FTC’s aggressive antitrust enforcement under the Biden administration has significantly dampened M&A activity, particularly in the tech sector,” said Kison Patel, a financial tech entrepreneur and the host of “M&A Science,” a podcast about mergers and acquisitions. “For example, one Fortune 10 tech company has scaled back its deal making from 30 to fewer than five transactions.” 

Armen Martin, a veteran merger and acquisitions attorney, added that in talking to venture capitalists, he had heard optimism about FTC Commissioner Khan’s exit. She will be replaced by President-elect Trump’s nominee for FTC Commissioner, Andrew Ferguson. 

“I think you will see a lot more M&A activity under the Trump administration as companies feel more confident that the government won’t get involved,” Martin said.

Meanwhile, in a statement to Fox News Digital, FTC spokesperson Douglas Farrar said that the recently blocked grocery store merger “makes it clear that strong, reality-based antitrust enforcement delivers real results for consumers, workers, and small businesses.”  

“Today’s win protects competition in the grocery market, which will prevent prices from rising even more,” he added.

Washington, D.C.-area restaurants once again will not be free from politics as the Trump team prepares to settle into the nation’s capital for a second term. 

Food workers inside the Beltway are prepared to refuse service and cause other inconveniences for members of the incoming Trump administration, but this is not the first time the administration and allies will have to deal with harassment while sitting down to dinner.

In September 2018, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and his wife were harassed at Fiola, an upscale Italian restaurant in Washington, D.C. Protesters confronted them over Cruz’s support for then-Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh during his contentious confirmation hearings. Videos circulated online showing demonstrators shouting at the couple, chanting, “We believe survivors.” Cruz and his wife eventually left the restaurant due to the altercation.

This incident was part of a broader wave of confrontations involving Trump administration officials and allies over the summer that year.

As such, in June 2018, then-Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen was confronted by protesters at MXDC Cocina Mexicana, a Mexican restaurant in Washington, D.C., over the Trump administration’s family separation policy at the U.S.-Mexico border. Protesters chanted, “Shame!” and called her a “villain,” forcing her to leave.

Senior Trump adviser Stephen Miller, known for his role in shaping immigration policy, recounted an incident when he went to pick up an $80 sushi order from a restaurant near his apartment that same month. As he left, the bartender followed him outside, called out his name and, when Miller turned around, gave him a double middle finger. He threw away the sushi out of fear someone in the restaurant had tampered with the food, the New York Post reported at the time.

Also in June 2018, the owner of The Red Hen restaurant in Lexington, Virginia, asked then-White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders to leave, citing opposition to the Trump administration’s tough immigration policies. 

Industry veterans, bartenders and servers in the nation’s capital told the Washingtonian this week that resistance to the Republican figures in the progressive city was inevitable and a matter of conscience. 

“You expect the masses to just ignore RFK eating at Le Diplomate on a Sunday morning after a few mimosas and not to throw a drink in his face?,” said Zac Hoffman, a Washington, D.C., restaurant veteran who is now a manager at the National Democratic Club.

Not every liberal hospitality sector worker in the report planned to protest the incoming administration while doing their job, however. 

A bartender named Joseph said while he was disappointed by the election results, he was looking forward to higher tips with more Republicans in Washington.

A controversial judicial advocacy organization funded by left-wing nonprofits continues to work with judges and experts involved in climate change litigation despite publicly downplaying the extent of those connections.

“CJP doesn’t participate in litigation, support or coordinate with any parties in litigation, or advise judges on how they should rule in any case,” the Environmental Law Institute Climate Judiciary Project President Jordan Diamond wrote in a recent letter to The Wall Street Journal in response to criticism of the project. 

The Washington, D.C.-based Environmental Law Institute (ELI) created the Climate Judiciary Project (CJP) in 2018, establishing a first-of-its-kind resource to provide “reliable, up-to-date information” about climate change litigation, according to the group. The project’s reach has extended to various state and federal courts, including powerful appellate courts, and comes as various cities and states pursue high-profile litigation against the oil industry.

A Fox News Digital review shows that several CJP expert lawyers and judges have close ties to the curriculum and are deeply involved in climate litigation.

Princeton University professor Michael Oppenheimer contributed to the CJP curriculum and presented “Evidence of Change: Judging Climate Litigation” with CJP’s Sandra Nichols Thiam at the 2022 Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference July 20, 2022. 

Oppenheimer has a long history of filing climate-related amicus briefs from 2019-2022 in litigation across several states.

Robin Kundis Craig, a professor at the University of Utah’s Law School, wrote a module for CJP in 2022 and has also filed several amicus briefs showing she is active in court cases. 

One example occurred in 2023, when Craig is listed on an order granting legal scholars’ request to file amicus, which was signed by Justice Mark Recktenwald, who, Fox News Digital previously reported, quietly disclosed last year that he presented for an April course in collaboration with the Environmental Law Institute Climate Judiciary Project. 

Recktenwald co-presented at a December 2022 National Judicial College webinar sponsored by CJP, “Hurricanes in a Changing Climate and Related Litigation.” In 2023, he co-presented with Professor Robert DeConto at a National Judicial College seminar, “Rising Seas and Litigation: What Judges Need to Know about Warming-Driven Sea-Level Rise.”

In October 2023, Recktenwald’s Hawaii Supreme Court denied an appeal from oil companies to toss a Honolulu climate misinformation suit.

Craig also filed an amicus in Hawaii state court in July 2022, where an order was signed by Judge Jeffrey Crabtree allowing the brief to be filed. Crabtree is a member of the National Judicial College Curriculum Development Committee, which creates curricula for “Environmental Law Essential for the Judiciary.”

“Don’t underestimate the importance of the role of state court judges in environmental law,” the curriculum’s website states.

Ann Carlson, who joined the Biden administration in 2021, served on ELI’s board of directors for years while also “providing pro bono consulting” for Sher Edling, an eco law firm representing a number of jurisdictions, on litigation against oil companies, financial disclosures showed. Sher Edling counsel Michael Burger has also participated in multiple ELI events, and former Sher Edling lawyer Meredith Wilensky was previously an ELI Public Interest Law Fellow.

Burger is the executive director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law and an ELI presenter who has filed amicus briefs in support of plaintiffs in climate cases across the United States. 

UCLA’s Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment hosted a talk in October 2017 with Sher Edling’s Vic Sher, “Suing Over Climate Change Damages: The First Wave of Climate Lawsuits.” Ann Carlson was the moderator for that discussion.

John Dernbach, listed as an expert on CJP’s website, filed an amicus brief in 2019 as part of a brief of legal scholars in support of plaintiffs in City of Oakland v BP. 

“Judges attending Climate Judiciary Project events are advised that they are walking into a left-wing lobbying shop,” American Energy Institute President Jason Isaac told Fox News Digital. “Under the guise of ‘judicial education,’ CJP uses activist academics to give a pro-plaintiff sneak peek at climate change lawsuits. This kind of politicking underlines that the climate change lawsuits themselves are a left-wing attack on our quality of life.

“The Supreme Court will have an opportunity early next year to hear a case asking whether blue states and far-left mayors like Brandon Johnson can sue energy providers for climate change. Let us hope the court takes the case and ends Green New Deal lawfare.”

Fox News Digital previously reported that since it was founded more than five years ago, the project has crafted 13 curriculum modules and hosted 42 events, and more than 1,700 judges have participated in its activities. And multiple judges serve as advisers at CJP, potentially having an impact on its curriculum and modules.

“So-called ‘climate change lawsuits,’ lawsuits claiming that private companies should be monetarily liable for damage to public infrastructure allegedly caused by climate change, have exploded in the past five years,” GOP Sen. Ted Cruz wrote in a letter to Environmental Law Institute earlier this year.

“In tandem with this unprecedented litigation, the Environmental Law Institute (ELI) launched a ‘first-of-its-kind effort’ to provide judges with ‘education on climate science, the impacts of climate change, and the ways climate science is arising in the law.’ It appears that ELI’s goal in providing this ‘education,’ however, may be to influence judges to side with plaintiffs in climate change cases.”

The letter went on to label Carlson as “one of the program’s architects” and requested “information to allow the Committee to evaluate the efforts of both Ms. Carlson and ELI to influence the federal judiciary in its adjudication of climate litigation.”

Cruz alleged that “ELI intends to accomplish via the courts what it cannot get enacted into law: a radical environmental agenda.”

“To help judges reach those ‘appropriate’ decisions, the Project developed the ‘Climate Science and Law for Judges Curriculum’ (the Curriculum). While ELI claims the Project is ‘neutral’ and ‘objective,’ the Curriculum reads like a playbook for judges to find in favor of plaintiffs in artificial climate change cases against traditional energy companies: it includes courses that ‘show how climate science is built on long-established scientific disciplines’ and ‘explore the human-caused component of [global] warming,’ such as the ‘causal connections between emissions’ and ‘changes in the climate.’”

An American Energy Institute report earlier this year alleges CJP “hides its partnership with the plaintiffs because they know these ties create judicial ethics problems.”

AEI says Sandra Nichols Thiam, an ELI vice president and director of judicial education, acknowledged as much in a 2023 press statement, saying, “If we even appeared biased or if there was a whiff of bias, we wouldn’t be able to do what we’re doing.”

“Taken together, it appears CJP made the thinnest possible disclosures to create the appearance of rectitude,” AEI states. “But their admissions confirm that CJP exists to facilitate informal, ex parte contacts between judges and climate activists under the guise of judicial education. And secrecy remains essential to their operation, whose goal, as Thiam has said, is to develop ‘a body of law that supports climate action.'” 

AEI, a group self-described as “dedicated to promoting policies that ensure America’s energy security and economic prosperity,” says CJP’s work is “an attack on the rule of law.”

“In America, the powerful aren’t allowed to coax and manipulate judges before their cases are heard,” the report states.

In a statement to Fox News Digital, an ELI spokesperson said, “CJP doesn’t participate in litigation, support or coordinate with any parties in litigation, or advise judges on how they should rule in any case. Our courses provide judges with access to evidence-based information about climate science and trends in the law.

“Of course, experts in the field are welcome to provide their expertise to CJP programs while separately and independently providing that same expertise in another setting that is unrelated to the CJP program. It is routine and encouraged for judges to participate in continuing education that exposes them to expertise in a wide variety of disciplines.”

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi suffered an injury and has been admitted to a hospital in Luxembourg, Fox News has confirmed.

The 84-year-old California representative was traveling to Luxembourg for Battle of the Bulge remembrances.

The extent of the former speaker’s injury is unknown at the time of this reporting. A person familiar with the incident told The Wall Street Journal that Pelosi tripped and fell following a group photo that she took with other lawmakers and officials there.

“While traveling with a bipartisan Congressional delegation in Luxembourg to mark the 80th anniversary of the Battle of the Bulge, Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi sustained an injury during an official engagement and was admitted to the hospital for evaluation,” Ian Krager, her spokesperson, said in a statement.

“Speaker Emerita Pelosi is currently receiving excellent treatment from doctors and medical professionals. She continues to work and regrets that she is unable to attend the remainder of the CODEL engagements to honor the courage of our servicemembers during one of the greatest acts of American heroism in our nation’s history,” Krager continued. “Speaker Emerita Pelosi conveys her thanks and praise to our veterans and gratitude to people of Luxembourg and Bastogne for their service in World War II and their role in bringing peace to Europe.”

“Speaker Emerita Pelosi was personally and officially honored to travel with the distinguished delegation, many of whom had family members who fought in World War II — including her uncle, Johnny,” he added. “She looks forward to returning home to the U.S. soon.”

The U.S. Embassy in Luxembourg posted an image of Pelosi on its X account on Friday.

“We welcome NASA [Administrator] Bill Nelson and Members of Congress to commemorate the 80th anniversary of the Battle of the Bulge in Luxembourg and Belgium,” it said. “The sacrifices of brave WWII soldiers echo from the past, reminding us that each generation must continue the fight for freedom and democracy.”

President Biden has sparked anger among Pennsylvanians after he commuted the sentence of a corrupt judge who was jailed for more than 17 years after he was caught taking kickbacks for sending juveniles to for-profit detention facilities.

In what came to be known as the kids-for-cash scandal, former Judge Michael Conahan shut down a county-run juvenile detention center and shared $2.8 million in illegal payments from the builder and co-owner of two for-profit lockups. Another judge, Mark Ciavarella, was also involved in the illicit scheme, the effects of which are still felt today among victims and families. 

The scandal is considered Pennsylvania’s largest-ever judicial corruption scheme with the state’s supreme court throwing out some 4,000 juvenile convictions involving more than 2,300 kids after the scheme was uncovered.

Conahan, 72, pleaded guilty in 2010 to one count of racketeering conspiracy but was released from prison to home confinement in 2020 because of COVID-19 health concerns with six years left in his sentence.

But Biden, the so-called favorite son of Scranton, commuted Conahan’s sentence Thursday as part of the largest single-day act of clemency in modern history in which he commuted jail sentences for nearly 1,500 people and granted 39 pardons.

“My Administration will continue reviewing clemency petitions to advance equal justice under the law, promote public safety, support rehabilitation and reentry, and provide meaningful second chances,” the president said. 

Sandy Fonzo, who once confronted Ciavarella outside federal court after her son was placed in juvenile detention and committed suicide, said that the president’s actions were an “injustice” and “deeply painful.”

“I am shocked and I am hurt,” Fonzo said in a statement, per The Citizens Voice. “Conahan‘s actions destroyed families, including mine, and my son’s death is a tragic reminder of the consequences of his abuse of power. This pardon feels like an injustice for all of us who still suffer. Right now I am processing and doing the best I can to cope with the pain that this has brought back.”

The decision has raised questions as to why Biden would choose to commute the sentence of a judge who is detested in the area. 

Fox News has reached out to the White House for comment but has not received a response. 

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro said that he opposed the president’s actions and insisted that the judge should have been given a longer prison sentence given the damage he inflicted on families. 

“I do feel strongly that President Biden got it absolutely wrong and created a lot of pain here in Northeastern Pennsylvania,” Shapiro said at a press conference in Scranton Friday while adding he was not privy to all the information about the decision. 

“This was not only a black eye on the community, the kids for cash scandal, but it also affected families in really deep and profound and sad ways. Some children took their lives because of this. Families were torn apart. There was all kinds of mental health issues and anguish that came as a result of these corrupt judges deciding they wanted to make a buck off a kid’s back.”

“Frankly, I thought the sentence that the judge got was too light, and the fact that he’s been allowed out over the last years because of COVID, was on house arrest and now has been granted clemency, I think, is absolutely wrong. He should have been in prison for at least the 17 years that he was sentenced to by a jury of his peers. He deserves to be behind bars, not walking as a free man.”

The scheme began in 2002 when Conahan shut down the state juvenile detention center and used money from the Luzerne County budget to fund a multimillion-dollar lease for the private facilities.

Ciavarella, who presided over juvenile court, pushed a zero-tolerance policy that guaranteed large numbers of kids would be sent to PA Child Care and its sister facility, Western PA Child Care. 

Ciavarella ordered children as young as 8 years old to detention, many of them first-time offenders deemed delinquent for petty theft, jaywalking, truancy, smoking on school grounds and other minor infractions. The judge often ordered youths he had found delinquent to be immediately shackled, handcuffed and taken away without giving them a chance to put up a defense or even say goodbye to their families.

In 2022, both Conahan and Ciavarella were ordered to pay more than $200 million to nearly 300 people they victimized, although it’s unlikely the now-adult victims will see even a fraction of the damages award.

During the case, one victim described how he shook uncontrollably during a routine traffic stop — a consequence of the traumatizing impact of his childhood detention — and had to show his mental health records in court to “explain why my behavior was so erratic.”

Several of the childhood victims who were part of the lawsuit when it began in 2009 have since died from overdoses or suicide, prosecutors said. 

The scheme, per The Citizens Voice, involved former Pennsylvania attorney Robert Powell paying Ciavarella and Conahan $770,000, who in turn funneled juvenile defendants to two private, for-profit detention centers Powell partly owned.

Powell served an 18-month prison sentence after pleading guilty to felony counts of failing to report a felony and being an accessory to a conspiracy.

Real estate developer Robert K. Mericle paid the judges $2.1 million and was later charged with failing to disclose to investigators and a grand jury that he knew the judges were defrauding the government. Mericle served one year in federal prison, per The Citizens Voice. 

Ciavarella is serving a 28-year prison sentence on honest services mail fraud charges, per the publication.

Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., claimed that people should be terrified that President-elect Trump will possess the power to initiate a nuclear attack. 

In a post on X, Markey noted, “Come January, Donald Trump will have the sole authority to launch a nuclear strike. This should terrify you. That’s why @RepTedLieu and I are urging @POTUS to put guardrails on presidential authority to start nuclear war.”

Trump — who trounced Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 White House contest by winning both the Electoral College and the popular vote — previously served as president from early 2017 through early 2021. And during his Oval Office tenure, he never used nuclear weapons.

He has also been outspoken about the massive danger posed by nuclear weapons.

“To me, we have one really major threat: That’s called nuclear weapons,” Trump said earlier this year. “This isn’t Army tanks going back and forth and shooting at each other. This is obliteration,” he said of the powerful weapons. “We have incredible stuff, so does Russia. China has much less but” will “catch up,” Trump said, calling the issue the “single biggest threat by far to civilization.”

Josh Barnett, who lost in a Republican primary for an Arizona state Senate seat earlier this year, responded to Markey’s post by writing, “LOL he had the authority the last four years he was in office.” 

Others made the point as well.

“Hey buddy, he was already president once,” Tom Gillis, who describes himself on X as a “Former PGA tour player,” declared in response to the lawmaker’s post.

“He had the power before and didn’t use it,” another individual, Shonathan Perrius, tweeted.

In a letter to President Biden, Markey and Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif., declared that during his waning time in office, the commander-in-chief could “safeguard the system against Donald Trump or any future unstable president, and make it constitutional.”

“We urge you to announce that henceforth it will be the policy of the United States that it will not initiate a nuclear first strike without express authorization from Congress. In a situation where the United States has already been attacked with nuclear weapons, the president would retain the option to respond unilaterally,” the two Democrats declared in their letter to the president.

The lawmakers have long advocated for the policy shift, repeatedly pushing legislation on the issue.

“As the coauthors of the Restricting First Use of Nuclear Weapons Act — proposed legislation that prohibits any U.S. president from launching a nuclear first strike without prior congressional authorization — we urge you, in your remaining time in office, to change this unconstitutional policy,” they said in their letter to Biden.

“We first introduced this act during the Obama administration not as a partisan effort, but to make the larger point that current U.S. policy, which gives the president sole authority to launch nuclear weapons without any input from Congress, is dangerous. As Donald Trump prepares to return to the Oval Office, it is more important than ever to take the power to start a nuclear war out of the hands of a single individual and ensure that Congress’s constitutional role is respected and fulfilled,” Markey and Lieu noted.

Sentences were commuted for inmates placed on home confinement during the COVID-19 pandemic and who “have successfully reintegrated into their families and communities,” according to the announcement. The 39 individuals pardoned were convicted of non-violent crimes, the White House said.

“The President has issued more sentence commutations at this point in his presidency than any of his recent predecessors at the same point in their first terms,” White House officials said in a statement.

Biden hinted that he plans to make more pardons an celemencies before he leaves office.

“I will take more steps in the weeks ahead. My Administration will continue reviewing clemency petitions to advance equal justice under the law, promote public safety, support rehabilitation and reentry, and provide meaningful second chances,” Biden said.

Thursday’s pardons come as the president faces bipartisan criticism for pardoning his son, Hunter, of felony gun and tax charges.

Biden vowed multiple times across several months that he would not intervene on his son’s behalf, only to go back on his word on Dec. 1. While public figures have criticized the move, it was also widely unpopular with the American people. A Wednesday poll from the Associated Press found just 2 in 10 Americans approved of the pardon.

The first son had been convicted in two separate federal cases earlier this year. He pleaded guilty to federal tax charges in September, and was convicted of three felony gun charges in June after lying on a mandatory gun purchase form by saying he was not illegally using or addicted to drugs.

The president argued in a statement that Hunter was “singled out only because he is my son” and that there was an effort to “break Hunter” in order to “break me.”

Reporters grilled White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre a day after the pardon, asking whether President Biden and his surrogates lied to the American people. Jean-Pierre responded, “One thing the president believes is to always be truthful with the American people,” and repeatedly pointed to Biden’s own statement on the matter.

The judge in Hunter’s case rebuked Biden for the pardon and for accusing investigators, prosecutors and himself of political bias.

This is a breaking news story. Check back for updates.

President-elect Trump was given a mandate by the American people to implement his full immigration agenda and needs to use leadership, relationship building and fidelity to the rule of law to accomplish the goals he has outlined, former House candidate Orlando Sonza told Fox News Digital. 

“The American people, they delivered a mandate to the next president of the United States, and to President Trump the mandate is that this illegal immigration problem is something that needs to be fixed, that it needs to be fixed now,” Sonza, an attorney and former Republican candidate in Ohio’s 1st Congressional District, said. 

He explained that one of the “biggest challenges” Trump will face in order to deliver that immigration mandate is public officials “continuing to defy the law” in liberal jurisdictions. 

“What we’ve seen is clear leadership in President Trump that he’s not going to go for it,” Sonza said. “The sanctuary cities and sanctuary jurisdictions that are trying to now protect illegal immigrants, many of them criminals that have broken our laws, not just on the southern border, but here within our border as well, tried to harbor them within their jurisdiction. No — that is what undermines our national security and our safety in our community. And in President Trump, holding those cities and jurisdictions accountable is exactly, again, what we need in order to go back to a land of laws, and so this comes down to leadership.”

Democrats across the country have announced their intentions to attempt to defy Trump’s plan to enforce immigration laws and deport criminals by pushing sanctuary policies or trying to “Trump-proof” their jurisdictions. Sonza told Fox News Digital that deportation is not only a useful tool, but a necessary one as well. 

“At the end of the day, it comes back to righting a wrong that we’ve seen in the last four years, going back to the way immigration should be, and that is the legal way when it comes to deportation,” Sonza said. “President Trump has been very clear on his strategy. There are priorities in terms of the prosecution and the deportation of dangerous individuals, including human traffickers, drug cartels, violent gangs like MS 13. They don’t belong in our country, and they certainly have tried to exploit the immigration loopholes that they’ve found on the southern border, smuggling people, drugs, weapons, inflicting devastating harm on our communities. They absolutely, first and foremost, have to be deported.”

“The next are those that have really tried to take advantage of the system, prosecuting individuals who have reentered the United States illegally after deportation. You know, many having criminal records themselves, blatantly disregarding U.S. sovereignty, posing ongoing threats to public safety. Look at visa overstays accounting for nearly 40% of illegal immigration. That is the very thing that President Trump in his plan is targeting by addressing violent criminals, addressing criminals that have broken laws within our community and then addressing overstays and fraudulent documentation. What President Trump is looking to do is to protect the integrity of lawful immigration, to ensure fairness for those that actually follow the rules,” he said.

Sonza told Fox News Digital that Trump will be able to overcome those who try to ignore federal immigration law not only by withholding federal funding to sanctuary cities, but also by “promoting accountability and a strong cooperation with law enforcement.”

“President Trump’s plan of fostering that strong cooperation between federal and local law enforcement is exactly what we need in order to ensure that communities are protected while upholding the rule of law,” he said. “So I think what we’re actually going to see is there is going to be, I think, much smoother cooperation than what a lot of people are expecting, because I think this plan of President Trump is shared by many, in that it’s going to fix a lot of the problems that we see regarding illegal immigration in our country.”

Trump’s critics have cited concerns about the cost of mass deportations, which Sonza, a West Point graduate and former officer in the U.S. Army, said was a concern he also once shared until he looked into it more deeply.

“It actually took research on my part and research of many Americans to realize the reality, and that is the long-term burden of keeping illegal immigrants in the United States costs taxpayers an exorbitant amount of money,” Sonza said. “Conservative estimates show that illegal immigration costs us taxpayers $151 billion annually.”

Sonza, the son of legal immigrants, told Fox News Digital that the “overwhelming number of Americans” who voted for Trump believe, as he does, that “illegal immigration poses one of the most pressing challenges to our country today.”

Sonza told Fox News Digital that voters resoundingly voted to “go back to law and order” by voting for Trump and that he is confident Trump’s leadership, coupled with aggressive implementation of his deportation plan, will yield results. 

“The illegal way of doing immigration has cost Americans,” Sonza told Fox News Digital. “It has put Americans in a less safe position. It has undermined our national security. It has forced the drugs like fentanyl, the opioid epidemic like we see here in southwest Ohio, to now continue to just exacerbate as a problem in our community.”

“We want to go back to a country of laws and one that keeps the American people safe and one that looks at the best interests, really of all people, whether it’s those that tried to come into the United States or are already here as citizens, their best interests in mind by upholding the rule of law and when it comes to immigration, doing it the legal way,” he said.

The House voted to pass its yearly defense bill Wednesday, adding about another $1 trillion to the $36 trillion national debt.

The 1,800-page bill known as the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), details how $895.2 billion allocated toward defense and national security will be spent.

On Wednesday, the bill passed 281-140, with 16 Republicans voting no. Only 81 Democrats voted yes, while 124 voted no.

The legislation now heads to the Senate for passage before heading to President Biden’s desk for his signature.

The bill’s passage comes as the U.S. national debt continues to climb at a rapid pace and shows no signs of slowing down.

As of Dec. 11, the national debt, which measures what the U.S. owes its creditors, fell to $36,163,442,396,226.61, according to the latest numbers released by the U.S. Treasury Department. The debt represents a decrease of $8.8 billion from the figure released the previous day.

By comparison, 40 years ago, the national debt hovered at about $907 billion.

The latest findings from the Congressional Budget Office indicate the national debt will grow to an astonishing $54 trillion in the next decade, the result of an aging population and rising federal health care costs. Higher interest rates are also compounding the pain of higher debt.

Should that debt materialize, it could risk America’s economic standing in the world.

The spike in the national debt follows a burst of spending by President Biden and Democratic lawmakers.

As of September 2022, Biden had already approved roughly $4.8 trillion in borrowing, including $1.85 trillion for a COVID relief measure dubbed the American Rescue Plan and $370 billion for the bipartisan infrastructure bill, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB), a group that advocates for reducing the deficit.

While that is about half of the $7.5 trillion that President-elect Trump added to the deficit while he was in office, it’s far more than the $2.5 trillion Trump approved at that same point during his first term. 

Biden has repeatedly defended the spending by his administration and boasted about cutting the deficit by $1.7 trillion. 

“I might note parenthetically: In my first two years, I reduced the debt by $1.7 trillion. No president has ever done that,” Biden said recently. 

That figure, though, refers to a reduction in the national deficit between fiscal years 2020 and 2022. The deficit certainly shrank during that period, though it was largely because emergency measures put in place during the COVID-19 pandemic had expired.

Despite adding to the national debt, the NDAA was strongly bipartisan, but some Democratic lawmakers were against the inclusion of a ban on transgender medical treatments for children of military members if such treatment could result in sterilization.

The bill also included a 14.5% pay raise for junior enlisted service members and a 4.5% increase for others as key to improving the quality of life for those serving in the military.

The defense act also includes measures to strengthen deterrence against China and calls for an investment of $15.6 billion to bolster military capabilities in the Indo-Pacific region. The Biden administration had only requested about $10 billion.

Fox News’ Eric Revell and Morgan Phillips, as well as The Associated Press, contributed to this report.