Politics
Newsom’s stance on controversial data centers about to be tested. Again.
SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed legislation to require proposed data centers to provide estimates of their water usage last year, saying he was “reluctant to impose rigid reporting requirements” without understanding the impact on businesses and consumers.
Opposition to the mammoth tech hubs and their massive thirst of water, power and land has only escalated throughout the state and nation ever since. In just a matter of months, Newsom again could find himself in the political crosshairs.
Several bills to regulate the facilities and increase public transparency on their impacts are progressing in the California Legislature, which could create a conundrum for a governor who has long aligned with the tech industry but also paints himself as an environmental and social justice advocate.
“I think the governor is in a fragile position,” said Megan Mullin, a public policy professor at UCLA. “Tech has been a long backer of his, but at the same time there is this growing national outcry against data centers.”
Data centers have existed for decades but are rapidly expanding due to the worldwide boom in artificial intelligence. The newer centers built to power AI are far larger than their original counterparts and require immense amounts of water and energy.
The facilities also contribute to fossil fuel emissions, with Cornell University researchers estimating last year that AI growth could add 24 to 44 million metric tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere annually by 2030. Fossil fuel emissions are drivers of climate change and linked to a range of health conditions, including asthma, various cancers and birth defects.
Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin announced last week that the Trump administration will not set national environmental requirements or recommendations for the data center industry, leaving it to state lawmakers to determine best policies.
Thad Kousser, a political science professor at UC San Diego, said the nation will likely look to the Golden State for guidance.
“California’s laws will create a national model,” he said. “We’re the home of Silicon Valley and we’re just a massive state — the way we regulate data centers will set the tone.”
The political landscape around data centers has since changed since Newsom’s veto in October, said Dan Schnur, a political science professor who teaches at UC Berkeley and USC.
“No one should assume he will automatically act in the same way,” Schnur said. “Newsom is an incredibly savvy politician so he is clearly aware that voters are a lot more upset or concerned about data centers than they were a year ago.”
A Gallup poll released last month found 7 out of 10 Americans oppose data centers being built in their area.
The facilities can create thousands of jobs for construction workers and generate significant revenue for local governments due to sales and property taxes. The artificial intelligence they power is also — at least temporarily — boosting the stock market, leading to more tax dollars for California.
But residents who live near hyperscale centers have expressed outrage over a range of issues, including health impacts, spiking utility bills, constant noise, dropping water pressure and concerns about potentially losing their land through eminent domain. Meanwhile, community meetings about data centers are growing contentious, with police arresting a farmer in Oklahoma, three women in Wisconsin and a man in California.
Earlier this month, residents of Monterey Park voted overwhelmingly to ban data centers, making the San Gabriel Valley city the first in the nation to do so by public vote.
“Six months ago, politicians of both parties were falling all over each other to bring data centers into their states,” Schnur said. “Now that the public backlash has erupted, they are working just as hard to distance themselves from these projects.”
With Newsom eyeing a presidential bid in 2028, he might be reluctant to brand himself as a defender of an increasingly unpopular industry.
But Schnur said the governor likely also has concerns about angering one of his biggest backers.
“The tech community is a critical part of Newsom’s donor base, so he has to keep fundraising in mind when he makes these decisions,” Schnur said.
A spokesperson for the governor’s office declined to comment on data centers or pending legislation.
Newsom, during an interview at a Center for American Progress conference in May, said the concern that data centers may drive up electricity costs for Californians is a “legit issue,” but not the main one.
“The tech genie is not going to go back in the bottle,” Newsom said. “Just saying that you should not or cannot build a data center is not going to slow this technology down. What can be, will be. Nature of technology. And so we just have to steer it and not make the mistakes we made with social media.”
Among the measures in the Legislature are two bills from Sen. Steve Padilla (D-San Diego). SB 886 would create a corporate tariff to cover the cost of data center-related grid upgrades. SB 887 would ban data centers from receiving ministerial exemptions from the California Environmental Quality Act, known as CEQA.
Neither bill picked up support from Republicans, but both cleared the Senate and were recently referred to the Assembly Utilities and Energy Committee.
Padilla represents Imperial County, a farming community near the border of Mexico where plans for a 950,000–square–foot data center face fierce opposition from residents. The county exempted the proposal from CEQA, which requires projects to undergo an extensive state environmental review before breaking ground.
The city of Imperial sued the county earlier this year, arguing the project should not have received an exemption. The San Diego Chapter of the Sierra Club joined the lawsuit last month. The county board of supervisors last week approved a 45-day moratorium on all new data centers to allow the county to evaluate proposed data center development.
Two other data center-related bills recently passed the Assembly, each picking up support from a few Republicans. They now await action from the Senate.
AB 2619 from Assemblymember Diane Papan (D-San Mateo) would require data center owners to provide an estimate under penalty of perjury about expected water usage and sources before applying for a business license. AB 1577 from Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan (D-Orinda) would require data center owners to submit monthly information to a state commission about water and fuel consumption.
Ben Green, an assistant public policy professor at the University of Michigan who is researching how data centers impact communities, said reporting requirements are a “bare minimum” type of regulation, making it especially noteworthy that Newsom vetoed a similar measure last year.
For comparison, several states are weighing more restrictive bills — New York recently sent legislation to the governor’s desk that would enact a one-year moratorium.
“It seems that there was a ton of lobbying pressure that he was getting,” Green said. “The tech industry doesn’t want to have any restrictions.”
Green said data centers could be a hot topic in upcoming elections, as Americans on both sides of the aisle are expressing valid concerns.
“There’s not an easy fix for getting the public on board with data centers because their critiques are grounded in reality,” he said. “This is not just some sort of reactionary NIMBY-ism or pearl clutching.”
James Gagliano on anti-ICE protests and threats against agents
Retired FBI Special Agent James Gagliano discusses anti-ICE protests and threats against agents in Newark, New Jersey. A new curfew has curbed chaos after violent clashes, with one Brooklyn man arrested for threatening to kill an ICE agent. DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin vows ‘zero tolerance’ for attacks, while Sen. Cory Booker, D- N.J., calls ICE ‘out-of-control.’ Gagliano warns against allowing these protests to continue.
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
A Canadian national accused of slapping a teen wearing political clothing at the Jersey Shore has been turned over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement, a representative for the local jail told Fox News Digital on Wednesday.
Over the Fourth of July weekend, Kaitlyn Tracey, 33, was reportedly seen on surveillance video confronting a group of teens in Point Pleasant Beach, some of whom were wearing pants with the words “Trump” and “ICE” on them, local media reported.
Tracey, a Canadian national who entered the U.S. on a passport in 2024, then allegedly struck one of the girls and recorded the confrontation, according to court documents reported by NJ.com.
An official who picked up the phone at the Ocean County Jail in Toms River confirmed to Fox News Digital that Tracey had been released into ICE custody as of Monday.
ICE CLASHES WITH AGITATORS INTENSIFY OUTSIDE DELANEY HALL
She was reportedly taken to Delaney Hall in Newark – the site of months-long clashes between left-wing agitators and ICE.
NEW JERSEY GOVERNOR, DEMOCRATIC SENATOR SPEND MEMORIAL DAY PROTESTING ICE FACILITY
Billboard at Trump rally in Wildwood declaring historical blue New Jersey is “Trump Country.” (The Image Direct for Fox News Digital)
Tracey’s criminal charges include endangering the welfare of a child and simple assault, according to reports.
The alleged victim was reportedly uninjured.
NJ TAXPAYERS ON THE HOOK FOR $12M MORE AS DEM GOVERNOR PROTECTS ILLEGAL ALIENS BATTLING DEPORTATION
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
While New Jersey at a state level has adopted sanctuary-type policies, Ocean County is known as one of the few Republican strongholds remaining, and retains the state’s longest-serving lawmaker of any party: Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., in office since 1981.
People enjoy the Jersey Shore in Seaside Heights, N.J., as businesses prepare for the holiday weekend on May 23, 2025. (Asbury Park Press via IMAGN)
SIGN UP TO GET THE POLITICS NEWSLETTER
It was not immediately clear on what immigration basis ICE initiated proceedings against Tracey. Fox News Digital reached out to DHS for clarification and comment.
WASHINGTON — The Senate confirmation hearing Wednesday for Todd Blanche, President Trump’s pick for attorney general, will be a referendum on far more than his individual merits.
Blanche, the acting attorney general, served as Trump’s defense attorney before taking office and has been closely linked to many of the most consequential — and controversial — issues that have dominated the first two years of Trump’s second term.
Blanche is set to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee, which will decide whether to approve his nomination and send it to the full Senate for a confirmation vote. The committee hearing will continue Thursday.
“I would expect committee Democrats to treat Mr. Blanche’s hearing as an opportunity to conduct oversight of the Department of Justice,” said Phil Brest, president of the American Constitution Society, a progressive legal nonprofit and a former top Democratic staffer on the committee. “It’s a test of the Senate’s willingness to probe the department’s operations and to actually serve as a check on the department and the administration more broadly.”
Democrats on the committee are expected to push Blanche on a host of topics, including the $1.8-billion “anti-weaponization fund” that critics derided as a slush fund for the president’s allies, the Justice Department’s rollout of the so-called Epstein files, and the department’s prosecution of several perceived enemies of Trump, notably former FBI Director James Comey.
“While deploying the Justice Department as a shield for the president and his cronies, Blanche has also used our top law-enforcement agency as a sword against Trump’s political opponents,” said Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), the ranking Democrat on the committee last month. “The independence of DOJ has been decimated under Blanche’s authority.”
Blanche was confirmed by the Senate as deputy attorney general in March, 2025, and was elevated to his current role after Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi was fired in April.
More critical to the success of Blanche’s nomination will be whether he can win the support of two lame-duck Republican senators, Thom Tillis of North Carolina and John Cornyn of Texas, who expressed some reservations about Blanche soon after his nomination was announced.
Cornyn raised concern about Blanche’s independence from Trump, while Tillis said Blanche’s stance on protesters who violently stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, would be critical to his consideration.
Some of those Jan. 6 protesters were expected to be the beneficiaries of the $1.8-billion fund announced as part of a settlement to a lawsuit Trump and his sons and business brought against the IRS.
In a scathing ruling this week, the federal judge wrote that the lawsuit was improper and recommended sanctions against two Justice Department attorneys who worked on the case, though not Blanche himself.
Cornyn told Semafor on Tuesday that the ruling raised a number of issues, including “the potentially collusive nature of the lawsuit.”
He has said previously that he will hold off on making a decision about whether to approve Blanche until after the hearing.
Tillis, meanwhile, told CNN’s Manu Raju on Tuesday that the weaponization fund would need to be completely off the table for him to support Blanche’s nomination.
Trump touted Blanche’s record ahead of the hearing.
“Todd Blanche is doing a PHENOMENAL job as Acting Attorney General of the United States,” the president wrote on Truth Social. “He is a great lawyer, always very fair, and every Republican Senator should vote to CONFIRM Todd Blanche, ASAP!”
Sen. Lindsey Graham’s death means that Republicans currently only enjoy a one-seat majority, but a replacement for Graham on the committee could be in place before it votes on whether to move his nomination to the Senate floor, which will likely come two weeks after the hearing.
Blanche, 51, spent 12 years working for the U.S. attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York, working largely on drug and violent crime cases, and rose to the level of co-chief of the district’s White Plains division.
He left the office in 2014 for private practice and joined the prominent law firm Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft in 2017 as a partner. He left the firm in 2023 and went independent after other partners expressed concern when he took Trump on as a client.
Blanche went on to represent Trump in several criminal matters, including the New York case about hush money payments to porn star Stormy Daniels, and cases brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith about Trump’s alleged efforts to block the transfer of power after the 2020 presidential election and his alleged retention of classified documents.
He listed all three as among the 10 most significant cases of his career in the questionnaire he completed ahead of the hearing, along with his work at the Justice Department on a lawsuit challenging the construction of a new White House ballroom.
A group of more than 1,200 former Justice Department attorneys wrote a letter opposing Blanche’s nomination, asserting that his leadership has resulted in mass departures of career staff. That has “meant that much of the department’s vital work isn’t being done, or isn’t being done as well – leaving communities less safe, Americans’ rights less protected, and our national security more vulnerable,” the lawyers wrote.
Former Justice Department pardon attorney Liz Oyer is scheduled to testify as a witness for Democrats on Thursday. She has said she was fired for refusing to recommend the restoration of actor Mel Gibson’s gun rights.
Oyer will be joined Thursday by Dani Bensky, one of many victims of the deceased sex abuser Jeffrey Epstein who has criticized Blanche’s handling of the release of the so-called Epstein files — millions of pages of records detailing the Justice Department’s investigations into Epstein’s crimes.
Numerous victims have said that their names and other sensitive information were not properly redacted in the files and criticized Blanche and the department for failing to investigate Epstein’s potential co-conspirators.
Blanche has also come under criticism from survivors of Epstein’s abuse for the interview he conducted in July, 2025, with Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year prison sentence for her role in facilitating and participating in Epstein’s abuse.
Days after their interview, Maxwell was moved from her prison in Florida to a minimum-security prison in Texas.
Politics
Biden special counsel’s ‘runaway train’ scooped up sensitive lawmaker info: ‘Abuse of power’
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Former special counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into President Donald Trump swept up text messages from nearly 50 members of Congress, bypassing a required review process in what one victim alleged is a direct constitutional violation.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, said the situation is more proof Smith’s probe was a “runaway train” of abuses of power, and the elder statesman and Senate Investigations Subcommittee Chairman Ron Johnson, R-Wis., jointly released their filings Tuesday evening.
Grassley and Johnson’s findings were from a full-scale probe of Operation Arctic Frost, the code name for Smith’s endeavor to investigate Trump for alleged corruption and election malfeasance, an operation top Senate Republicans call “worse than Watergate.”
LEGAL WAR ON TRUMP’S AGENDA GAINS FIREPOWER AS FEDERAL LAWYERS DEFECT TO DEMOCRATS
Jack Smith, former U.S. special counsel, arrives for a closed-door deposition before the House Judiciary Committee in Washington, D.C., Dec. 17, 2025. (Getty Images)
Forty-four members of Congress had the contents of their text messages obtained and reviewed by Smith’s team in a way that bypassed protocol. A “filter team” was tasked with reviewing millions of documents in the case and should have had first crack at determining whether such messages were relevant or potentially violated statute or ethics.
Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., one of the lawmakers whose texts were swept up in this way, said Tuesday such reviews amounted to clear violations of the Constitution’s speech and debate clause that protects lawmakers from being questioned in “any other place” than the Capitol for legislative acts.
Internal communications have been historically included in that clause in the courts as technology has advanced.
SUPREME COURT JUSTICES HEAD TO CAPITOL HILL FOR FIRST CONGRESSIONAL APPEARANCE SINCE 2019
Stefanik said in a statement that the new records prove Smith’s team “unlawfully and unconstitutionally accessed my private text messages, along with 43 other Members of Congress, in clear violation of the Constitution.”
She said she long suspected there had been “unconstitutional spy[ing] on members of Congress.”
The records were provided by the Trump Justice Department to Grassley and Johnson, which the chairmen said indicated Smith’s team had “circumvented its own filter review process.” The process is additionally meant to protect attorney-client privilege, they said in a statement.
OBAMA-APPOINTED JUDGE TORCHES TRUMP ADMIN IN LATEST COURTROOM SHOWDOWN, REFERS ATTORNEY FOR BAR REVIEW
Former special counsel Jack Smith says the Pledge of Allegiance before he prepares to testify during a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee in the Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill Jan. 22, 2026, in Washington, D.C. (Al Drago/Getty Images)
The news also complicated some of Smith’s prior depositions under oath, including an excerpt in which he answered “no” to a question from a congressional counsel whether records he requested from congresspeople included text messages.
Johnson called the situation a “grotesque example” of Biden-era “weaponization” of the executive branch.
“Jack Smith’s criminal investigation of President Trump was a runaway train that had no brakes,” Grassley added Tuesday.
“Based on the information that’s been produced to me and Senator Johnson, Biden DOJ and FBI investigators apparently ignored their own routine investigative protocols to obtain and review work-related messages from me and dozens of my Republican and Democrat colleagues who were outside the scope of the government’s investigation.”
Grassley added that he hopes Democrats caught up in the otherwise bipartisan text tranche will finally discard their partisanship and recognize the severity of the alleged violations by Smith.
He also indicated he planned to recall Smith before Congress to “hold him accountable.”
Of the 44 members swept up in the text reviews, several were Democrats, including Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, Rep. Josh Gottheimer, D-N.J., Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., and the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Adam Smith of Washington.
Grassley, Johnson and Stefanik were also swept up in the situation, along with top figures like senators Mike Lee, R-Utah; Josh Hawley, R-Mo.; Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska; Rand Paul, R-Ky., former Senate Republican Conference Chairman Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn.; and the late Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.
SIGN UP TO GET THE POLITICS NEWSLETTER
Former House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., was one of the victims, along with current House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, as well as House Freedom Caucus member Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin of New York, Veterans Affairs Secretary Doug Collins of Georgi, and prominent Trump critic Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Several lawmakers sounded off on the news soon after Grassley announced his findings, including Hawley, who called for “everyone involved [to] be prosecuted.”
“Joe Biden’s DOJ not only tapped my phone; I just learned they illegally obtained my texts with members of President Trump’s administration,” the Missourian fumed.
Paul called the allegations a “blatant abuse of power and exactly what our Founders warned about,” while citing Smith’s past denial under oath.
Fox News Digital reached out to a representative for Smith for comment.
-
Florida15 seconds agoCyclosporiasis cases in Florida, US could be undercounted, health expert says
-
Georgia6 minutes agoCreated in a small Georgia town, a cup has become 1 of the World Cup’s biggest souvenirs
-
Hawaii12 minutes ago
Kilauea eruption’s Episode 51 begins
-
Idaho18 minutes agoIdaho AG warns Idaho renters about growing scam targetting home seekers
-
Illinois24 minutes ago‘Mini Nerf football’: Hailstone produced during severe storms breaks Illinois record
-
Indiana30 minutes agoIndianapolis firefighter hospitalized after battling fire at vacant home
-
Iowa36 minutes agoIowa State Basketball Will Have Work To Do Following Recent Bracketology Update
-
Kansas42 minutes agoKansas cases climb in ‘explosive diarrhea’ outbreak
