Unsealed Court Docs Show The FBI Probing Possible Election Crimes In Fulton County
Meanwhile, The Washington Post runs cover for the Georgia county's 'extremely sloppy' election administration in 2020.Meanwhile, The Washington Post runs cover for the Georgia county's 'extremely sloppy' election administration in 2020.Here Are The Top 5 Takeaways From Georgia’s Suspect 2020 Election
The Election Oversight Group’s 250-page report points to incidents that appear to exceed election worker incompetence and 'clerical errors'.You Can’t Have A Secure Border Without Deportations
Abandoning deportations would be a capitulation to Democrat demands when doing so has the potential to do massive damage to the rule of law across the country.Democrats try to pull fast one with Biden-era child migrant's death — but it doesn't work
Senate Democrats were caught this week trying to rehabilitate an old grievance and use a three-year-old tragedy to mobilize more opposition to the Trump administration's enforcement of federal immigration law.
On Tuesday, Democrats on the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee shared a picture of 8-year-old illegal alien Anadith Danay Reyes Alvarez, noting she "died in government custody."
'It's really f**ked up how Trump let her die in 2023.'
"She had sickle cell and congenital heart disease but couldn't access timely and adequate medical care," said the Democrats' post on X. "We need to reform immigration detention."
However, Democrats neglected to mention that Anadith died on the Biden-Harris administration's watch in 2023, when the southern border was effectively open and border facilities were overwhelmed.
Anadith, a girl with a heart condition who was born in Panama to Honduran migrants, was brought illegally into the U.S. on May 9, 2023. While waiting for a deportation flight to Honduras with her mother, father, and two siblings in a Customs and Border Protection facility in Harlingen, Texas, the girl experienced a medical emergency and died.
CBP indicated that during her intake at the Donna Processing Facility in Donna, Texas, the girl was medically assessed and "did not complain of any acute illnesses or injuries." Days later, however, she "voiced complaints of abdominal pain, nasal congestion, and cough" and was "prescribed and administered doses of Oseltamivir (Tamiflu), as well as Ondansetron (Zofran)."
RELATED: Ilhan Omar accuses Trump of ulterior motive for ICE raids — and JD Vance shuts her down
Following agency protocols, the family was moved to Harlingen, which was used specifically for cases requiring medical isolation. At the Harlingen facility, the girl continued to receive medical attention and medication; however, her condition worsened. After her mother's unsuccessful requests for an ambulance, the girl suffered a seizure. She was taken to Valley Baptist Medical Center, where she was pronounced dead on May 17, 2023.
Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee — several of whom have advocated for cuts to Department of Homeland Security funding — claimed in a minority staff report last year that CBP facilities are chronically understaffed and that "the circumstances that resulted in Anadith’s death were unfortunately not an aberration, but indicative of systemic problems with the provision of medical care in CBP facilities and CBP’s broader failure to properly oversee that care."
Democrats concern-mongered in their report that "more individuals and children may die" under the Trump administration.
As with their January 2025 minority report, Senate Democrats' Tuesday tweet appears aimed at exploiting a tragedy that occurred under the previous Democrat administration — and under a homeland security secretary Democrats refused to impeach — to condemn the current administration.
One critic, EV Partners founder Robert Sterling, wrote in response to the Democrats' viral tweet, "Man it's really f**ked up how Trump let her die in 2023."
Conservative writer Brian Pfail noted, "I'm not one for party politics, but this is an outright disgusting grievance post to emotionalize views on border enforcement. Low-information liberals will attribute this to the Trump admin, yet it was Biden. To them, none of these deaths are valued beyond political fervor."
As other critics began to pile on, Biden's former deputy White House press secretary Andrew Bates reflexively worked on damage control, writing, "Not about Democrat or Republican/left or right. Just absolutely wrong."
Republican operative Tim Murtaugh said in response, "What’s remarkable, Andrew, is the level of pride you must have felt when posting this, completely unaware that it had happened while you worked in the White House yourself. Just remarkable. Top notch work from beginning to end."
Bates dug in his heels, writing, "I stand by what I said. It's horrible and shouldn't have happened."
"What makes me proud is that the American people are rejecting the cruelty that ICE is forcing on Americans and immigrants, putting all of us in danger," added the former Biden spokesman, who does not appear to have spoken out at the time of Anadith's death.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
A federal 'kill switch' for your car is coming — and neither Democrats nor Republicans will stop it
The federal government is moving closer to giving your car the authority to decide whether you are allowed to drive — without a warrant, without due process, and with no guaranteed way to reverse the decision once it is made.
And it is happening not because of one party alone, but because Congress, across party lines, has failed to stop it.
This is not about defending drunk driving. It is about stopping a government overreach that treats every driver as a suspect.
No accident
It's no accident that all this happened quietly. It was written into law under the Biden administration’s 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, buried deep in Section 24220 — a provision few lawmakers publicly debated, but one that now threatens to fundamentally alter the relationship between Americans and their vehicles.
Section 24220 directs the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to mandate “advanced drunk and impaired driving prevention technology” in all new passenger vehicles. In plain terms, it requires systems that continuously monitor drivers and can prevent a vehicle from operating if impairment is suspected. No breath test is required. No police officer is involved. The judgment is made by software.
Once flagged, a vehicle may refuse to start or restrict operation. Here is the most troubling part: Federal law provides no clear process for getting out of that lockout. There is no required appeal. No mandated reset timeline. No human review. Drivers can find themselves trapped in what critics have begun calling “kill switch jail,” with no guaranteed path to restore access to their own car.
This is not targeted enforcement. It applies to every driver, every time, regardless of driving history.
That alone should raise constitutional alarms.
Proven approach
Drunk driving laws already exist — and they work. Ignition interlock devices have long been required for convicted offenders, and there are 31 approved interlock systems currently in use nationwide. Those systems require a breath sample and are imposed only after due process. Section 24220 discards that proven, targeted approach and instead subjects all drivers to pre-emptive punishment, including those who do not drink at all.
To comply with the mandate, automakers may choose from a range of technologies: driver-facing cameras that track eye movement and head position; software that analyzes steering, braking, and lane-keeping behavior; or touch-based alcohol sensors embedded in the steering wheel or start button. None of these systems determine guilt. They calculate probability — and then deny access.
False positives are inevitable. Fatigue, prescription medications, medical conditions such as diabetes or neurological disorders, and even stress can trigger impairment alerts. Shift workers, caregivers, parents, and first responders are especially vulnerable. When the system is wrong, the consequences are immediate — and the driver has no guaranteed recourse.
Pre-emptive denial
This is not a passive safety feature like an airbag. It is a government-mandated, pre-emptive denial of mobility enforced by an algorithm.
Despite growing concern, Congress has chosen not to stop the mandate, with Democrats largely supporting continued funding and a number of Republicans also voting to keep the program intact.
In January 2026, the House voted on an amendment offered by Republican Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky that would have blocked funding for NHTSA’s implementation of Section 24220. That amendment failed, allowing the mandate to continue moving toward full enforcement.
Supporters argue the technology does not allow government agents or police to remotely shut down vehicles. While that may be technically true today, the mandate still requires continuous driver monitoring. Once that hardware becomes standard across the national vehicle fleet, expanding its use becomes a political decision — not a technical limitation.
RELATED: Dystopian future as misguided safety push sends drivers to 'kill switch jail'
Privacy risks
Privacy and cybersecurity risks only deepen the concern. Any system capable of denying vehicle operation must meet extraordinarily high standards of accuracy and security. Those standards have not been proven at national scale. A malfunctioning or compromised system could strand drivers during extreme weather, medical emergencies, or in remote locations.
Cost is another unavoidable consequence. Vehicles are already becoming unaffordable for many Americans. Adding cameras, sensors, software, and compliance infrastructure will only accelerate price increases and reduce consumer choice. Drivers who want simpler, more reliable vehicles will have fewer options — because mandates do not allow opting out.
Proponents often compare this mandate to seatbelts or airbags. That analogy fails. Seatbelts do not prevent you from driving. Airbags deploy after an accident. This system intervenes before any wrongdoing occurs, based on assumptions rather than certainty, and enforces compliance by denying access altogether.
This is not about defending drunk driving. It is about stopping a government overreach that treats every driver as a suspect and hands control of personal mobility to software.
If Americans want to prevent this future, Section 24220 must be defunded — before “kill switch jail” becomes the default setting for the next generation of cars.
The following are the Republican members who voted against the amendment to block funding for NHTSA’s implementation of Section 24220:
Mark Amodei (Nev.-02)
French Hill (Ark.-02)
Max Miller (Ohio-07)
Don Bacon (Neb.-02)
Jeff Hurd (Colo.-03)
Mariannette Miller-Meeks (Iowa-01)
Stephanie Bice (Okla.-05)
Brian Jack (Ga.-03)
Blake Moore (Utah-01)
Gus Bilirakis (Fla.-12)
John James (Mich.-10)
Tim Moore (N.C.-14)
Mike Bost (Ill.-12)
David Joyce (Ohio-14)
James Moylan (Guam-A.L.)
Ken Calvert (Calif.-41)
Thomas Kean Jr. (N.J.-07)
Greg Murphy (N.C.-03)
John Carter (Texas-31)
Mike Kelly (Penn.-16)
Dan Newhouse (Wash.-04)
Tom Cole (Okla.-04)
Jen Kiggans (Va.-02)
Zach Nunn (Iowa-03)
Mario Diaz-Balart (Fla.-26)
Kevin Kiley (Calif.-03)
Hal Rogers (Ky.-05)
Neal Dunn (Fla.-02)
Young Kim (Calif.-40)
Maria Elvira Salazar (Fla.-27)
Chuck Edwards (N.C.-11)
Kimberlyn King-Hinds (Northern Mariana Islands-A.L.)
Mike Simpson (Idaho-02)
Jake Ellzey (Texas-06)
Darin LaHood (Ill.-16)
Elise Stefanik (N.Y.-21)
Randy Feenstra (Iowa-04)
Nick LaLota (N.Y.-01)
Glenn “GT” Thompson (Penn.-15)
Randy Fine (Fla.-06)
Mike Lawler (N.Y.-17)
Mike Turner (Ohio-10)
Chuck Fleischmann (Tenn.-03)
Frank Lucas (Okla.-03)
David Valadao (Calif.-22)
Vince Fong (Calif.-20)
Nicole Malliotakis (N.Y.-11)
Derrick Van Orden (Wis.-03)
Brian Fitzpatrick (Penn.-01)
Celeste Maloy (Utah-02)
Rob Wittman (Va.-01)
Andrew Garbarino (N.Y.-02)
Brian Mast (Fla.-21)
Steve Womack (Ark.-03)
Carlos Gimenez (Fla.-28)
Dan Meuser (Penn.-09)
Ryan Zinke (Mont.-01)
Today's top stories
www.theblaze.com
thefederalist.com
Atheist Richard Dawkins now labels himself a 'cultural Christian': Here's why