Trump’s court battles heat up as justices face ‘Calvinball’ accusation
The Supreme Court will launch its new term Monday with a focus on controversial prior rulings and a review of President Donald Trump’s sweeping executive agenda.
After a three-month recess, the nine justices met together for the first time this week to reset their docket, and discuss appeals that have piled up over the summer. The high court will resume oral arguments to confront issues like gender identity, election redistricting, and free speech.
But looming over the federal judiciary is the return of Trump-era legal battles. The administration has been winning most of the emergency appeals at the Supreme Court since January, that dealt only with whether challenged policies could go into effect temporarily, while the issues play out in the lower courts — including immigration, federal spending cuts, workforce reductions and transgender people in the military.
In doing so, the 6-3 conservative majority has reversed about two dozen preliminary nationwide injunctions imposed by lower federal courts, leading to frustration and confusion among many judges.
FEDERAL JUDGES ANONYMOUSLY CRITICIZE SUPREME COURT FOR OVERTURNING DECISIONS WITH EMERGENCY RULINGS
Now those percolating petitions are starting to reach the Supreme Court for final review — and legal analysts say the bench may be poised to grant broad unilateral powers to the president.
The justices fast-tracked the administration’s appeal over tariffs on dozens of countries that were blocked by lower courts. Oral arguments will be held in November.
In December, the justices will decide whether to overturn a 90-year precedent dealing with the president’s ability to fire members of some federal regulatory agencies like the Federal Trade Commission.
And in January, the power of President Trump to remove Lisa Cook from the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors will be tested in a major constitutional showdown. For now, the Biden-appointed Cook will remain on the job.
“A big fraction of the Supreme Court’s docket will present the question: ‘can President Trump do?’— then fill in the blank. And that could be imposing tariffs; firing independent board members; removing illegal aliens; sending the military into cities like Los Angeles,” said Thomas Dupree, a prominent appellate attorney and constitutional law expert. “So, much of what the Supreme Court is deciding this term is whether the president has acted within or has exceeded his authority.”
The tariffs dispute will be the court’s first major constitutional test on the merits over how broadly the conservative majority high court views Trump’s muscular view of presidential power, a template for almost certain future appeals of his executive agenda.
Presidential prerogative or power push?
In earlier disputes over temporary enforcement of those policies, the court’s left-leaning justices warned against the judiciary becoming a rubber stamp, ceding its power in favor of this president.
After a late August high court order granting the government the power to temporarily terminate nearly $800 million in already-approved health research grants, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said her conservative colleagues had “ben[t] over backward to accommodate” the Trump administration. “Right when the Judiciary should be hunkering down to do all it can to preserve the law’s constraints, the Court opts instead to make vindicating the rule of law and preventing manifestly injurious Government action as difficult as possible. This is Calvinball jurisprudence with a twist. Calvinball has only one rule: There are no fixed rules. We seem to have two: that one, and this Administration always wins.”
But some of Jackson’s colleagues have denied they are paving the way for Trump’s aggressive efforts to redo the federal government.
FEDERAL APPEALS COURT WEIGHS TRUMP BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP ORDER AS ADMIN OUTLINES ENFORCEMENT DETAILS
“The framers recognized, in a way that I think is brilliant, that preserving liberty requires separating the power,” said Justice Brett Kavanaugh earlier this month at a Texas event. “No one person or group of people should have too much power in our system.”
And Justice Amy Coney Barrett told Fox News’ Bret Baier three weeks ago that she and her colleagues “don’t wear red and blue, we all wear black because judges are nonpartisan … We’re all trying to get it right. We’re not playing for a team.”
Barrett, who is promoting her new book, “Listening to the Law,” said her court takes a long-term view, and is not reflexively on Trump’s side.
“We’re not deciding cases just for today. And we’re not deciding cases based on the president, as in the current occupant of the office,” Barrett told Fox News. “I think the judiciary needs to stay in its lane … we’re taking each case and we’re looking at the question of presidential power as it comes. And the cases that we decide today are going to matter, four presidencies from now, six presidencies from now.”
KAVANAUGH CITES 3 PRESIDENTS IN EXPLAINING SUPREME COURT’S BALLOONING EMERGENCY DOCKET
These sharp court fractures between competing ideologies will likely escalate, as the justices begin a more robust look at a president’s power, and by dint, their own.
Divisive decisions
“He who saves his Country does not violate any Law,” Trump cryptically posted on social media a month after retaking office.
Federal courts have since been trying to navigate and articulate the limits of the executive branch, while managing their own powers.
Yet several federal judges — appointed by both Democratic and Republican presidents — have expressed concernthat the Supreme Court has been regularly overturning rulings by lower courts dealing with challenges to Trump administration policies — mostly with little or no explanation in its decisions.
Those judges — who all requested anonymity to speak candidly — tell Fox News those orders blocking enforcement have left the impression they are not doing their jobs or are biased against the President.
TRUMP ADMINISTRATION TORPEDOES SCOTUS WITH EMERGENCY REQUESTS AND SEES SURPRISING SUCCESS
Those frustrations have spilled into open court.
“They’re leaving the circuit courts, the district courts out in limbo,” said federal appeals Judge James Wynn about the high court, during oral arguments this month over the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) access to Social Security data.
“We’re out here flailing,” said Wynn, an Obama bench appointee. “I’m not criticizing the justices. They’re using a vehicle that’s there, but they are telling us nothing. They could easily just give us direction, and we would follow it.”
Courting controversy
The president may be winning short-term victories in a court where he has appointed a third of its members, but that has not stopped him or his associates from criticizing federal judges, even calling for their removal from office when preliminary rulings have gone against the administration.
“This judge, like many of the Crooked Judges I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!!” Trump posted on social media, after a March court ruling temporarily halting the deportation of alleged Venezuelan gang members.
The target of the attack was DC-based Chief Judge James Boasberg, appointed to the bench by President Obama.
Top Trump White House policy advisor Stephen Miller, in interviews, has warned against some unaccountable and “communist crazy judges” “trying to subvert the presidency.”
TRUMP TURNS TO SUPREME COURT IN FIGHT TO OUST BIDEN-ERA CONSUMER SAFETY OFFICIALS
According to ananalysis by Stanford University’s Adam Bonica federal district judges ruled against the administration 94.3% of the time between May and June.
But the Supreme Court has in turn reversed those injunctions more than 90% of the time, giving the president temporary authority to move ahead with his sweeping reform agenda.
As for the rhetoric, the high court has walked a delicate path, reluctant to criticize Trump directly, at least for now.
“The fact that some of our public leaders are lawyers advocating or making statements challenging the rule of law tells me that, fundamentally, our law schools are failing,” said Justice Sonia Sotomayor at a recent Georgetown University Law Center event, without naming Trump by name. “Once we lose our common norms, we’ve lost the rule of law completely.”
Chief Justice John Roberts in March offered a rare public statement criticizing impeachment calls from the right.
But several federal judges who spoke to Fox News also wish Roberts would do more to assert his authority and to temper what one judge called “disturbing” rhetoric.
The U.S. Marshals Service — responsible for court security — reports more than 500 threats against federal judges since last October, more than in previous years. Law enforcement sources say that includes Boasberg, who, along with his family, has received physical threats and intimidating social media posts.
TURLEY: JUSTICE JACKSON SHOWS ‘JUDICIAL ABANDON’ IN LONE DISSENT ON TRUMP LAYOFF RULING
“I think it is a sign of a culture that has, where political discourse has soured beyond control,” said Justice Barrett in recent days.
“The attacks are not random. They seem designed to intimidate those of us who serve in this critical capacity,” said Justice Jackson in May. “The threats and harassment are attacks on our democracy, on our system of government.”
The administration in recent days asked Congress for $58 million more in security for executive branch officials and judges, following the assassination of Charlie Kirk, the conservative activist who led Turning Point USA.
Testy term awaits
A Fox News poll from this summer found 47% of voters approve of the job the Supreme Court is doing, a 9-point jump since last year when a record low 38% approved.
“Over the past decade, public confidence in our major institutions has declined,” says Republican pollster Daron Shaw, who helps conduct the Fox News survey with Democrat Chris Anderson. “The Court’s rebound could reflect its attempts to steer a middle course on politically polarizing questions or indicate an uptick in positive attitudes toward our more venerable institutions.”
Still, by more than 2-to-1, more voters think the court is too conservative (43%) than too liberal in its decisions (18%, a low), while 36% think the court’s rulings are about right. That continues a seven-year trend.
FEDERAL JUDGES ANONYMOUSLY CRITICIZE SUPREME COURT FOR OVERTURNING DECISIONS WITH EMERGENCY RULINGS
The public’s views of the court’s ability to steer clear of politics will be tested this term.
Besides the two Trump-related appeals, the justices are already scheduled to decide:
- At least two appeals involving LGBTQ+ rights: which public school sports teams transgender students can join; and state laws banning so-called “conversion therapy” for minors who may have gender identity or sexual orientation issues.
- Two election-related disputes involving partisan gerrymandering and federal campaign spending coordination that each could have major impacts on the 2026 midterms and beyond.
Precedent on a precipice
But court watchers are pointing to several hot-button pending appeals where “stare decisis” or respect for established landmark court rulings will be tested: same-sex marriage and communal school prayer.
The high court is expected to decide in coming weeks whether to put those petitions on its argument calendar, with possible rulings on the merits by June 2026.
But other cases are already awaiting a final ruling: the use of race in redistricting under the Voting Rights Act; and independent government boards.
“I think the likeliest candidates for being revisited are the ones that involve the power of the president to fire the heads of federal agencies,” said attorney Dupree. “This is an old precedent that’s been on the books really back since the New Deal, and it’s come into question in recent years. There’s been a long shadow hanging over these decisions, and I think the Supreme Court is poised to revisit those this term and in all likelihood overrule that.”
The court may have already set the stage, by using the emergency docket in recent weeks to allow Trump to temporarily fire members of several other independent federal agencies without cause. The court’s liberal wing complained that giving the president that power without explanation effectively unravels the 1935 precedent known as “Humphrey’s Executor.”
KAVANAUGH CITES 3 PRESIDENTS IN EXPLAINING SUPREME COURT’S BALLOONING EMERGENCY DOCKET
“Today’s order favors the president over our precedent,” said Justice Elena Kagan in a blistering dissent against Trump’s removal of Gwynne Wilcox from the National Labor Relations Board.
The court’s “impatience to get on with things — to now hand the President the most unitary, meaning also the most subservient, administration since Herbert Hoover (and maybe ever) — must reveal how that eventual decision will go” on the merits, added Kagan.
Sotomayor said recent overturned precedents were “really bad” for certain groups of people.
“And that’s what’s at risk, is in each time we change precedent, we are changing the contours of a right that people thought they had,” she said this month. “Once you take that away, think of how much more is at risk later. Not just in this situation.”
The conservative justices in recent years have not been shy about revisiting cases that had been settled for decades but now have been overturned: the nationwide right to abortion, affirmative action in education and the discretionary power of federal agencies.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Other pending issues the justices may soon be forced to confront which could upset longstanding precedent include libel lawsuits from public officials, flag burning and Ten Commandments displays in public schools.
One justice who has been more willing than his benchmates to overrule precedents may be its most influential: Justice Clarence Thomas.
“I don’t think that any of these cases that have been decided are the gospel,” Thomas said last week at a Catholic University event. If it is “totally stupid, and that’s what they’ve decided, you don’t go along with it just because it’s decided” already.
Former top Republican sounds alarm on left’s ‘secret sauce’ after lawmaker threats
EXCLUSIVE: Much has changed in the political landscape since former Rep. Dave Brat’s upset win over then-House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., though conservatives have repeatedly managed to gain ground over time.
Democrats have been lambasted as of late for heated political rhetoric that has led – whether directly or indirectly – to death threats and attacks on Republicans and conservatives.
Brat, now vice provost at Liberty University in Lynchburg, noted he was speaking for himself and discussed how the politics of “rage” made their way to Virginia in recent weeks.
FOX NEWS POLITICS NEWSLETTER: HEGSETH REJECTS ‘WOKE’ POLICIES
Recordings of former Rep. Abigail Spanberger, the Democratic nominee for governor, telling crowds to “let your rage fuel you” have made the rounds amid already heightened political tensions following assassination attempts on President Donald Trump, Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh and the murder of Charlie Kirk.
“I was on a radio show earlier this morning and Spanberger — all political views are my own again — gave out the secret sauce on the left: Let your rage out, right. That’s her new line,” Brat said, citing those remarks.
Spanberger dismissed any contention that she is encouraging violence, telling Fox News Digital through a spokesperson that she will “continue to condemn comments that continue to make light of or justify violence of any kind – full stop.”
Brat was unconvinced, adding that he has looked into “psychological underpinnings” of political movements including the nascent transgender rights issues that have been front-and-center in Virginia schools and public spaces.
“We (Republicans) believe in protecting the rights of all people. Life, liberty, pursuit of happiness for everybody. We’re the ones where the Judeo-Christian West is the tradition. They gave you human rights in the 12th century all the way up through protections in our Constitution. So that’s now what’s at stake.”
WATCH: LAWMAKERS WRESTLE WITH HOW TO APPROACH HATEFUL POLITICAL RHETORIC IN WAKE OF KIRK ASSASSINATION
Within the last week, multiple reports of death threats against Virginia lawmakers came to light.
Del. Geary Higgins, R-Lovettsville, told Fox News Digital a man allegedly threatened to shoot him at his next rally in response to a defense of GOP gubernatorial nominee Winsome Earle-Sears after she was faced with racist signage at a protest.
Del. Kim Taylor, R-Petersburg, faced a similar threat – telling Fox News Digital a man allegedly threatened to kill her while claiming Republicans are ruining the country.
Some on the left have harnessed such “rage” politics in their latest attempt to paint the Judeo-Christian right as the “judgmental, bad people” as they have in past elections, Brat said.
“When minority [groups] get to act like they’re the majority and put these crazy sexual stuff in kindergarten textbooks. That’s we’re against. And then when the trans folks are out with quotes saying ‘When we come alive and find out who we are, the emotions come out full force. And it ends up, you know, letting us, in a sense of rage’ — and this is in quotes out on the web all over the place, a bunch of other emotions as well,” Brat said.
EXPERTS WARN LEFTIST CELEBRATIONS OF CHARLIE KIRK’S DEATH SIGNAL A DANGEROUS MAINSTREAM SHIFT IN POLITICS
“And so, for the left to be using these folks as a political tool, for me, it’s just obscene.”
The right, he said, is the actual political wing that created the “protection of minority rights.”
Similar public derision by conservatives is not new, and is something he had to deal with during his own time in office, Brat contended, when asked what has changed in the decade-plus since.
“What else has changed: There’s been a MAGA revolution,” he said – adding it was much different even on the right when he was in office and conservatives were out of vogue.
WHO IS VIRGINIA’S NEXT GLENN YOUNGKIN: HOW THE GOP WINS STATEWIDE AGAIN
Brat spoke about the friction he and the new crop of conservatives had with the proverbial “old guard” during their time, remarking that now-Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard – then a Hawaii Democrat – was one of few to even acknowledge them.
“We were backbenchers. Tulsi Gabbard would come back and hang out with us because we were fun,” he quipped.
Brat also clashed with top Republicans including anti-Trump then-Rep. Charlie Dent, R-Pa., the leader of the House Ethics Committee.
Dent later denied Brat’s claim he wanted to kick the Freedom Caucus out of the GOP conference for not toeing the line.
The Freedom Caucus, which included Brat, also played a pivotal role in ousting then-House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio – a role for which the man Brat beat, Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va., was seen as heir apparent.
I’M A DEMOCRAT, AND CHARLIE KIRK’S MURDER MUST UNITE ALL AMERICANS AGAINST VIOLENCE
While the caucus remains, currently under the leadership of Rep. Andy Harris of Maryland, the “MAGA Revolution” and Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s split from the Silicon Valley establishment have greatly affected body politic, Brat said.
Those, he said, should be a boon to Earle-Sears and the Virginia GOP ticket.
“So nothing’s really changed, it’s the same ingredients.“
Brat said the one condition of U.S. politics that has changed since his own win or Youngkin’s win has been events like the murder of Charlie Kirk, which also connects to the theme of rage in politics.
Brat said that after 9/11, church attendance briefly rose and “nationalism kicked in” – but faded quickly.
Kirk’s murder and other recent threats against lawmakers are likely to stick longer in voters’ minds, Brat predicted. Kirk’s murder has also been linked by some to leftist “rage.”
Kirk combined faith with constitutional principles, Brat said, adding younger people are becoming educated in that way through people like the TPUSA leader.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“Charlie was all about faith and reason together in the university — that’s what a university is supposed to do is unite faith and reason,” said Brat.
“If that comes to fruition right now, we could see some shockers in Virginia and New Jersey.”
Federal court overrules president’s authority to send troops amid Portland unrest
A U.S. District Court on Saturday issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) to halt the Trump administration from deploying 200 National Guardsmen to Portland, Oregon, amid violent anti-Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) protests.
The lawsuit, brought by the State of Oregon and City of Portland, argued the deployment was unlawful, exceeding the president’s statutory and constitutional authority.
Judge Karin Immergut, appointed by President Donald Trump in 2019, granted the TRO blocking the federal action.
OBAMA-NOMINATED FEDERAL JUDGE MARRIED TO HOUSE DEM RECUSES HIMSELF FROM OREGON NATIONAL GUARD CASE
Trump in June issued a memorandum authorizing the federalization of National Guard troops, citing threats to federal employees and property during protests against immigration enforcement.
While violence was reported near a Portland ICE facility in June, the state alleged that, by late summer, protests had become small and largely peaceful.
On Sept. 27, Trump announced via Truth Social he was directing Secretary of War Pete Hegseth to deploy troops to “war-ravaged Portland” to protect against “Antifa and other domestic terrorists” and authorized “full force, if necessary.”
The following day, Hegseth ordered the federalization of 200 Oregon National Guard members over the objection of Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek, who insisted there was no public safety emergency.
Despite increasing violence and numerous arrests, the State of Oregon and the City of Portland filed suit, arguing that the deployment was unlawful and unconstitutional.
NATIONAL GUARD NOW IN PLACE FOR OREGON AMID ‘CHAOS, DEATH AND DESTRUCTION’: TRUMP
Immergut ruled Saturday that Trump’s federalization order exceeded his authority because the law only allows the president to call in the National Guard under exceptional circumstances, including invasion, rebellion or an inability to execute federal law using regular forces.
The court found none of those conditions existed in Oregon, determining that local and federal law enforcement were capable of maintaining order.
Further, because Immergut ruled Trump acted outside statutory limits, she found the order also violated the 10th Amendment by infringing on Oregon’s sovereign right to control its own National Guard.
In addressing irreparable harm, Immergut said the state faced constitutional injury from loss of control over its Guard, operational harm from diversion of troops trained for state emergencies and public safety risks.
The court held the public interest favored restraint, emphasizing the importance of maintaining civilian control and avoiding military intrusion.
TRUMP VOWS ‘FULL FORCE’ AS HE PLANS TO SEND TROOPS TO PORTLAND AMID ANTI-ICE PROTESTS
“This country has a longstanding and foundational tradition of resistance to government overreach, especially in the form of military intrusion into civil affairs,” Immergut wrote in her decision. “This historical tradition boils down to a simple proposition: this is a nation of Constitutional law, not martial law.”
In granting the TRO, the court blocked the federalization and deployment of National Guard troops to Portland.
The order will remain in effect for 14 days, until Oct. 18, unless extended.
Immergut also denied the government’s request to stay or pause the order.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Sandy Chung, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon, released a statement applauding the judge’s ruling, noting it is “consistent with the law and the facts on the ground in Portland.”
“Not only would deployment of our state’s National Guard members waste up to $10 million in taxpayer dollars, there is simply no basis to deploy troops into Portland,” Chung wrote. “The President’s attempt to do so is a dangerous abuse of power, and very disrespectful of our state, its people, and our National Guard service members.”
Teen allegedly denied Charlie Kirk bear name at Build-A-Bear Workshop store
A Washington teenager said she was stunned after a Build-A-Bear store manager allegedly refused to print the name of slain conservative commentator Charlie Kirk on her plush toy’s birth certificate.
Evi McCormick, 16, told Seattle’s KING5 that the incident happened Sept. 26 at the Build-A-Bear Workshop inside Southcenter Mall in Tukwila, Washington.
McCormick said she and her friends were at the mall when she decided to make a bear in honor of the Turning Point USA founder, who was assassinated last month. The idea has been trending on TikTok.
“I was just mesmerized and captivated that he could speak with such elegance,” McCormick said in the report. “He was a role model.”
OREGON HIGH SCHOOL STAGES WALK-OUT PROTEST OVER TEACHER ALLEGEDLY CELEBRATING KIRK’S DEATH
According to McCormick, after she finished making the custom bear, an employee refused to print Kirk’s name on its certificate.
Printing a birth certificate has long been part of the store’s in-person experience, allowing customers to name their new toy.
“She just didn’t agree with it. She didn’t support it, and she told me, ‘We’re not doing this,’ folded it up in a force and threw it away,” McCormick told KING5.
The teen said she was so rattled that she handed her card to a friend, Kailie Lang, to pay for the bear and walked away.
“It definitely made us all very uncomfortable,” Lang recalled.
FROZEN YOGURT JOINT ‘RECEIVING HATE’ AND DEATH THREATS FOLLOWING CHARLIE KIRK TRIBUTE
After another store manager at the Tukwila location declined to comment to the local news outlet, a customer service representative at Build-A-Bear’s corporate office told KING5 the matter was being handled internally.
Amber McCormick, Evi’s mother, said she also spoke with someone at corporate headquarters for nearly an hour and was offered a $20 gift card for the poor customer service.
Days later, the company reached out to McCormick again to apologize and admitted the incident should not have happened.
She said Build-A-Bear told her they would train employees in the Seattle area to avoid bringing politics into the workplace.
COFFEE SHOP THAT HONORED CHARLIE KIRK SEES HUGE SALES SPLURGE AFTER IT’S ‘FLOODED WITH RIGHTEOUS PEOPLE’
“She said that their goal is to try to prevent this sort of situation from happening to anybody else,” McCormick said.
Fox News Digital has reached out to Build-A-Bear for additional comment.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Israeli woman gives birth to miracle child conceived after fiancé killed in Gaza war
On June 11, Hadas Levy became the first woman to give birth to a child fathered by a soldier killed in Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza, sparked by the Oct. 7 massacre that claimed 1,200 lives.
Capt. (res.) Netanel Silberg, Levy’s fiancé, was killed in combat in Gaza in December 2023. The couple met on a blind date arranged by friends in May 2022.
“He was very handsome. He came to pick me up and waited for me outside his car, like a man from another era. He was tall — about 1.80 meters (approximately 5 feet, 11 inches) — well-built, and when he removed his glasses, he had the most beautiful green eyes. He was the whole package,” Levy told Fox News Digital.
ISRAELI SOLDIERS KILLED IN GAZA AFTER EXPLOSIVE DEVICE HITS THEIR VEHICLE
As the full extent of the Oct. 7 carnage emerged, Silberg answered the call to arms. Although his age and rank exempted him from serving in Gaza, he joined the first wave of soldiers deployed there.
“I kept telling him not to go, but he was restless. He went to pick up his army gear from his parents and said he would come back, but instead he went to the battlefield,” Levy recalled.
While on leave the following month, Silberg bought a ring and proposed.
“We got engaged around November, but we didn’t have a party. We never spoke about what I would do if something happened to him, because it wasn’t an option,” Levy said.
On Dec. 18, 2023, Silberg was killed in action.
“I was working that morning. I’m not a spiritual person, but I felt such intense nausea that I had to spit into a garbage can. I went home early, and it turned out the nausea struck at the same time he was killed,” Levy recalled.
Because the couple was not married, Levy received no official notification; she learned of Silberg’s death through a phone call from his mother. It was on that call when Levy asked his mother the question that would continue on his legacy.
“I just remember lying on the carpet and begging his mother on the phone to ask them to perform the procedure to collect Netanel’s sperm. She said yes immediately,” Levy said.
BODY OF ISRAELI HOSTAGE WHO WAS HELD FOR NEARLY 700 DAYS IN GAZA IS RECOVERED
The procedure of collecting the deceased male’s sperm, once rare, became common after Oct. 7, Dr. Eran Altman, director of the sperm bank and men’s infertility clinic at Rabin Medical Center–Beilinson Hospital, told Fox News Digital. The procedure is similar to one performed on infertile living men.
“In the week after Oct. 7, because of the mass killings, it took time to identify the bodies. We received them several days later and tried to retrieve sperm, but we found that after more than 72 hours, and usually after 48 hours, the sperm is no longer viable,” he said.
Since then, the Israeli army has become more efficient at transporting bodies quickly, ensuring casualties arrive in their uniforms and gear to avoid delaying the procedure.
The sperm is preserved in liquid nitrogen at –196 degrees Celsius, where it can remain viable for decades.
Previously, a court order was required to collect the samples from fallen soldiers. Since Oct. 7, the law has been temporarily amended: the procedure can now be performed without a court order, but the sperm cannot be used without one. Altman’s clinic at Rabin Medical Center–Beilinson Hospital collected eleven sperm samples from Silberg.
During shiva, the seven-day Jewish mourning period, Levy told Silberg’s mother that she would begin the process of conceiving using his samples.
“I felt like there was no life without him and that I couldn’t continue. I felt it was the only living thing that I could still get from him. I wanted something from him growing inside me,” Levy said.
ARMED FOR SURVIVAL: HOW OCT 7 HAMAS MASSACRE TRANSFORMED GUN CULTURE IN ISRAEL
Levy described the challenges of navigating her pregnancy without her partner. She said she had to take every test alone and explain his absence whenever asked about the father. With Netanel deceased, she was unable to undergo genetic screenings and often had to rely on his mother for information about his family.
In June, Levy gave birth to her son via C-section at Hadassah University Hospital on Mount Scopus in Jerusalem, where she had also undergone insemination accompanied by Dr. Efrat Esh-Broder from the IVF unit.
“I love him because he is who he is, not because he is his father’s son. I didn’t call him Netanel. He is not a gravestone,” she told Fox News Digital.
Three months later, her son has his father’s nose and ears. Levy said Silberg would have been upset, as he never liked his own features.
“We look at pictures of Netanel already. He needs to be proud of his dad, his dad’s story is one of bravery. He needs to know he has a dad and a family,” she said.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Levy is frequently approached by women seeking guidance on the process. In addition to her, around six other IDF widows are pursuing parenthood using sperm retrieved from their deceased husbands.
The IDF Widows and Orphans Organization (IDFWO) offers comprehensive support throughout the process, helping families navigate emotional, legal, and medical challenges.
“You must want the child for the child and not for his father who was killed. It’s something that is forgotten sometimes. The child can’t only be his father’s son, it’s not fair. To the girls who want to do it, I say do it. It’s continuity, it’s life and it’s amazing,” Levy said.
‘Little House on the Prairie’ castmates reflect on controversial and unsettling episode
Life on “Little House on the Prairie” wasn’t always so wholesome.
On the “Little House 50” podcast, Alison Arngrim (Nellie Oleson) and Dean Butler (Almanzo Wilder) revisited an episode that aired on Season 3 titled “Bully Boys.” In it, viewers see the Galender brothers — two adult men and a teenager — arrive in Walnut Grove and wreak havoc on the town.
“There is so much woman-beating in this episode,” said co-host Pamela Bob. “It’s crazy.”
‘LITTLE HOUSE ON THE PRAIRIE’ STAR MELISSA GILBERT SAYS HER BIRTH FATHER KNEW HER IDENTITY AFTER WATCHING SHOW
“They’re cowards,” said Arngrim, 63. “They don’t want to fight the men. They wanted to attack the girls.”
The star admitted the episode was “disturbing.”
“First of all, I was creeped out by all three,” she explained. “The minute they showed up and went to their cabin, I was creeped out. I didn’t say, ‘Oh, look at the two cowboys and their baby brother.’ I said, ‘This is giving ‘Texas Chainsaw Massacre’ vibes.’”
“I mean, is there inbreeding going on here?” she asked about the on-screen siblings. “They don’t seem right. There seems to be something the matter with these three guys. … Why are they so weird? I thought they [were] creepy and disturbing. I’m feeling ‘Texas Chainsaw Massacre’ … They are disturbing. There’s something wrong with them right away.”
“This plot is very simple,” said Butler, 69. “It’s really about how much people will take.”
Butler noted the Galenders were “an illustration of no moral guardrails of any kind.”
“There is nothing that they won’t do, and they think nothing of it because . . . no one is pushing back, until Mary [Ingalls, played by Melissa Sue Anderson] pushes back.”
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR THE ENTERTAINMENT NEWSLETTER
In the episode, Roy Jenson played George Galender, Michael LeClair played Bubba Galender and Geoffrey Lewis played Sam Galender.
“Let’s go back, though, to the schoolhouse,” said Bob. “They’re starting the grift, the intimidation factor. They’re basically robbing them blind, and there’s nothing they can do about it. Then we go to school, and we see Bubba, right? We’re introduced to Bubba, who’s also equally horrible in the school year. This was the craziest scene ever when he, out of the blue, punches Mary in the face over nothing.”
In the episode, Bubba purposely knocks a girl down with a dodgeball, People magazine reported. When Mary confronts him, he punches her, the outlet said.
“He could have killed this girl, by the way,” said Bob. “You could kill someone by hitting someone in the face with a ball like that. So he purposely knocks out this girl. And then when Mary confronts him, he punches her, zero warning. So freaking hard. It’s jarring to say the least. And as a viewer watching this, Laura [Ingalls, played by Melissa Gilbert] is surprisingly a little more nonchalant than I’d like her to be about it.”
People reported that for the rest of the episode, Mary has a black eye. However, she feels pressured to stay quiet. Meanwhile, Nellie tries to be Bubba’s girlfriend, an act Arngrim called “reprehensible.”
“She sees him beating women, and she’s cool with it,” said Arngrim.
LIKE WHAT YOU’RE READING? CLICK HERE FOR MORE ENTERTAINMENT NEWS
The breaking point, the outlet shared, is when Caroline “Ma” Ingalls [Karen Grassle] is attacked by the two older men.
“It’s all sexual innuendo. It’s horrible. It’s horrific,” Bob said.
“It’s really bad,” Arngrim chimed in. “They’re literally holding her and touching her. Nobody does that. And this is Caroline. I mean . . . That’s your mom. That’s everybody’s mom. And they’re touching her. They’re saying things . . . they won’t let her leave. They have a hold of her. … This is assault.”
WATCH: ‘LITTLE HOUSE ON THE PRAIRIE’ CHILD STAR SAYS SET WAS LIKE ‘MAD MEN’
During the discussion, Arngrim praised Grassle, 83, for her performance.
“Her portrayal of trauma from sexual assault is so dead on,” said Arngrim. “The desperation to say it wasn’t that.”
In the episode, Caroline later confides in Charles Ingalls [Michael Landon] about the assault.
Mary and Laura stand up to Bubba, and many of the children band together to fight back.
“The children have said, ‘We’re going to stand together, and we’re going to handle this,'” Butler said. “And this is the . . . powerful allegorical moment for everybody to see. It’s time to stand up together and be counted when someone is treating you wrong.”
In the end, Reverend Alden [Dabbs Greer], who had been sympathetic to the Galenders, calls them out during church on Sunday, the outlet reported. The men then help him eject them from the town. As they’re escorted out, Caroline leads the women singing “Onward, Christian Soldiers.”
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
“I’ve never seen more woman beating in any television show,” said Bob.
“It’s stunning,” said Butler.
“When I rewatch it, it’s like, holy moly, they actually went there,” said Bob. “Anyway, we’re all OK now.”
Major cause of child deaths worldwide goes unrecognized by many Americans
Globally, sepsis infection is the leading cause of death in children, taking more than 3.4 million lives per year, according to the Sepsis Alliance — and 85% of these deaths occur before age 5.
Sepsis among children is a very difficult and elusive problem for physicians to diagnose and treat, with almost 10% of cases being missed in the emergency room.
When children are admitted with the infection, the average length of stay is more than a month, per the above source.
A COMMON KILLER BUG IS ENDANGERING AMERICANS: ‘PANDEMIC IN PLAIN SIGHT’
Many people don’t know much about sepsis, according to Professor Elliot Long, team leader in clinical sciences and emergency research at the Murdoch Children’s Research Institute in Melbourne, Australia.
With sepsis, the immune system has an abnormal response to an infection — either too exuberant or too minimal.
“The immune response can be underactive, which leads to severe, overwhelming infection, or it can be overactive and the immune response itself causes damage to the body’s organs, which can be life-threatening,” Long told Fox News Digital during an on-camera interview.
The professor, who received a $5 million National Critical Research Infrastructure Initiative grant this year to test potential sepsis treatments across Australia and New Zealand, noted that sepsis is easily missed because parents don’t have a good understanding of how common or severe it is.
DOCTOR REVEALS THE SECRET WEAPON AGAINST GROWING VACCINE SKEPTICISM WORLDWIDE
The symptoms are often subtle — “and they overlap with the same symptoms you’d get for self-limited viral infections that are really common in kids,” Long said.
“The paradox is that sepsis in its late stages is very easy to pick up, but the treatments aren’t very effective,” he added. “And sepsis in its early stages is very tricky to pick up — but that’s when the treatments are most likely to be effective.”
Sepsis symptoms and treatments
The Sepsis Alliance uses the acronym T.I.M.E. to help people remember the primary warning signs, as follows.
T = Temperature: higher or lower than normal (fever or hypothermia)
I = Infection: signs of an infection (e.g. a cut, pneumonia, UTI)
M = Mental decline: confusion, sleepiness, difficulty awakening or arousing
E = Extremely ill: severe pain or discomfort, shortness of breath, feeling like you might die
Other warning signs may include shortness of breath, confusion, extreme pain, low blood pressure, fever, organ dysfunction, and clammy or sweaty skin.
Early detection and treatment of sepsis is essential to preventing life-threatening complications that damage the kidney, heart, liver, brain and other organs, according to Long. Sometimes, preventing this damage involves what seems like overtreatment with antibiotics.
Treatments for sepsis are evolving and a work in progress. Currently, all treatments are supportive, meaning the child is treated with antibiotics while doctors deal with the abnormal immune responses and wait for the return of normal function.
“We have a lot of work to do to try and develop treatments that help improve outcomes for kids with sepsis.”
“Those supportive treatments include simple things like receiving oxygen and fluids, and if kids need help with their breathing, if their oxygen levels are too low or their conscious state is impaired, then they get put on a ventilator,” Long said.
“We have a lot of work to do to try and develop treatments that help improve outcomes for kids with sepsis that are not just supportive treatments, but help to modify the immune response.”
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Despite children’s resilience, sepsis can have a long-term impact. Long and his colleagues are on the lookout for long-term problems with cognition, emotions and motor abilities.
“The impact isn’t just on the children, it’s on the parents as well, because they’ve had an extremely stressful life event,” Long said. “And sometimes that has meant that they’ve had to contemplate the possibility of their child dying … so parents and families are left with this kind of burden of survivorship.”
Listening to parents
Because early sepsis is so easy to miss, Long emphasized how important it is for doctors to listen closely to parents.
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR HEALTH NEWSLETTER
“If parents say, ‘this is a very abnormal response for my child to an infection or this is the sickest I’ve ever seen them,’ these are important red flags that this may be something more than just a minor infection,” he said.
Long told Fox News Digital that the most common age for sepsis patients is younger than 5 — and within that group, it’s especially prevalent for kids who are less than a year old.
“They’re often pre-verbal or can’t describe the signs or symptoms, so we’re relying a lot on the parents to go through what they think is going on or what they’ve observed in their child,” the doctor added.
“Martha’s Rule” is a universal principle that allows parents to advocate for their sick child, which is especially important with sepsis, where a young life may be easily lost.
“So if parents notice their child is getting worse or deteriorating over time, Martha’s Rule has been put in place to allow them to bypass local escalation procedures and get an independent opinion,” Long said. “[This allows them to] provide the appropriate level of care for their child in the event of deterioration.”
New theory could change what we thought we knew about Amelia Earhart
Following President Trump’s announcement that he has ordered his administration to declassify and release all government records related to Amelia Earhart, an aviation expert is speaking out about the pilot’s disappearance.
“I am ordering my Administration to declassify and release all Government Records related to Amelia Earhart, her final trip, and everything else about her,” Trump wrote last week on Truth Social. “Thank you for your attention to this matter!”
Earhart is widely known as an aviation trailblazer, becoming the first woman to fly solo across the U.S. nonstop Aug. 24, 1932.
RESEARCHERS ZERO IN ON AMELIA EARHART’S DISAPPEARANCE AFTER 88 YEARS
Earhart flew The Electra, which disappeared on July 2, 1937, while flying from New Guinea to Howland Island.
“I have been asked by many people about the life and times of Amelia Earhart, such an interesting story, and would I consider declassifying and releasing everything about her, in particular, her last, fatal flight,” Trump posted on Truth Social.
Earhart was traveling with her navigator, Fred Noonan, on the last trip when she communicated via radio that she was running low on fuel.
President Trump added, “Amelia made it almost three quarters around the world before she suddenly, and without notice, vanished, never to be seen again. Her disappearance, almost 90 years ago, has captivated millions.”
It remains unclear whether there are any files sealed. Fox News Digital was unable to reach out to the National Archives due to the government shutdown.
“Amelia made it almost three quarters around the world before she suddenly, and without notice, vanished, never to be seen again.”
Dorothy Cochrane, the Smithsonian’s National Air and Space Museum’s Earhart expert, told Fox News Digital that Earhart was an advocate for women’s rights, which was unique in the early 20th century.
“When [Earhart] became a pilot and built this successful career, you know, she fulfilled her personal interests, but she also then promoted the interests of women, both in aviation and in society in general. Part of that, and then her successes, are why she’s such an iconic figure,” she said.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Cochrane said “there’s no real mystery” surrounding the Electra’s disappearance.
“Amelia and Fred were on the right path. They had the course to get to nearby Howland Island. … It was such a small island in the middle of nowhere, and there were radio communications issues; they could not find it before they ran out of fuel,” she noted.
Many theories have circulated about the disappearance, such as Earhart living as a castaway on the island of Nikumaroro, being captured by the Japanese or serving as a “U.S. spy” observing Japanese activity in the Pacific.
Cochrane said she doesn’t buy into these theories, noting that “there are facts to be followed from the Coast Guard folks who were awaiting them at Howland, so it’s pertinent to search in and around Howland.”
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR LIFESTYLE NEWSLETTER
Mindi Love Pendergraft, executive director of the Amelia Earhart Hangar Museum in Atchison, Kansas, told the AP Trump’s order “is sure to pique the interest of those dedicated to uncovering the mystery of Earhart’s disappearance.
“If these records shed any light on Earhart’s fate, it is a welcome action for Earhart historians and enthusiasts.”
In July, the Purdue Research Foundation, based in Indiana, and Archaeological Legacy Institute, based in Oregon, announced an expedition to investigate satellite images that could be the remains of the famous aviator’s plane.
In November, researchers will head to the remote island of Nikumaroro, which is halfway between Australia and Hawaii, according to a joint press release from the two agencies.
While on the island, researchers will determine whether the “Taraia Object,” a visual anomaly captured by satellite, is the remains of Earhart’s plane.
Steven Schultz, chief legal officer of the Purdue Research Foundation, spoke about Trump’s order at a press conference Wednesday.
“One of the aspects of that message was he ordered the release of any classified material related to Amelia and her final flight,” he said. “To our knowledge, there are no records, there are no such records that remain to be unclassified.”
Man sent family photos of bear at campsite before his gruesome death
A Missouri man was found dead from a likely bear attack this week, just two days after he sent photos to his family of a bear at his campsite in Arkansas, according to officials.
Police found the 60-year-old man’s body several hundred yards from his campsite near Mt. Judea, Arkansas, on Thursday. The area showed signs of a struggle and had drag marks away from the camp.
The man’s son had asked for a welfare check because his dad hadn’t checked in for a couple of days since sending the photos.
His body has “extensive” injuries “consistent with those expected from a large carnivore attack,” the Newton County Sheriff’s Department said in a release.
ALASKA JOGGER DRAGGED 100 YARDS BY BEAR IN TERRIFYING PREDAWN ATTACK NEAR DRIVEWAY
Search efforts were still underway on Saturday to find the bear, which appeared to be a young male, according to the photos sent by the man. Officials said they weren’t sure the bear in the photos was the one that attacked.
“Until the Arkansas Crime Lab completes the autopsy, we can’t 100% say it was a bear, but everything strongly indicates it,” Sheriff Glenn Wheeler said in a statement. “We are attempting to find the bear and dispose of it so the Game and Fish Commission can test it for anything that may have led to the encounter.”
He added, “We know without a doubt that a bear was in camp with our victim and the injuries absolutely are consistent with a bear attack. This is a highly unusual case. We are very early in the investigation and search and will update as we can. If you are in the area, just be aware and use caution, especially with children. History tells us that once a bear becomes predatory, it often continues those behaviors.”
The campground, known as Sam’s Throne, has been temporarily closed to the public while the search for the bear continues. Wheeler warned people to be vigilant while enjoying the outdoors: keep food away from where you sleep, don’t approach bears even if they’re small and carry bear spray or some other way to defend yourself.
WOMAN SAVES HUSBAND’S LIFE WITH BEAR SPRAY DURING GRIZZLY ATTACK IN WILDERNESS
“I don’t want this to become open season on any bear that someone may see, as most bears fear humans and run away,” Wheeler added. “But, at the same time, don’t put yourself or others in jeopardy.”
This would be the second bear attack in the state in a month if confirmed.
A 72-year-old Arkansas man was mauled by a black bear in early September. He later died of his injuries.
Before that, the last fatal bear attack in Arkansas was in 1892, according to the Arkansas Times.
“I don’t even know how to put it into words, to tell you the truth. These things just don’t happen,” Keith Stephens, the chief of communications for the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission, told the newspaper. “It just seems so bizarre. It’s not even in my realm of comprehension. I’m really in shock today. Actually, when I was told about it, I thought they were kidding me just to give me a hard time from the last one. It’s obviously not a joking matter, but it just didn’t seem real.”
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
The bear in the first attack was previously euthanized.