Connect with us

Southeast

Pro-lifers blast Trump 'betrayal' with shifting abortion stance, answer on Florida Amendment 4

Published

on

Pro-lifers blast Trump 'betrayal' with shifting abortion stance, answer on Florida Amendment 4

Former President Trump’s recent comments on abortion, including remarks that sparked some initial confusion about where Trump stood on an amendment that would upend Florida’s ban on abortions after six weeks’ gestation, have sparked backlash from pro-life advocates on social media.

Trump’s latest – and clearest – comments about Florida’s Amendment 4, which would enshrine a constitutional right to abortion in the state, may blunt some of the criticism. After Trump made remarks on Thursday that appeared to indicate he might back the amendment, the former president told Fox News Channel’s Bryan Llenas on Friday afternoon: “I’ll be voting ‘no.’”

Still, the comment confusion, coupled with some other recent statements, have rankled the pro-life community.

“Trump has destroyed both the conservative movement and the pro-life movement. He’s done what even Barack Obama couldn’t do,” one user on X said.

Former Vice President Mike Pence also posted to X, saying, “I’m pro-life. I don’t apologize for it.”

Advertisement

HARRIS REPEATS DEBUNKED CLAIM TRUMP WANTS TO ‘BAN’ ABORTION DURING FIRST CAMPAIGN RALLY SINCE BIDEN QUIT RACE

Former President Trump speaks at a campaign rally at the Desert Diamond Arena in Glendale, Arizona, on Aug. 23. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

Georgia-based nationally syndicated radio host Erick Erickson also slammed Trump’s comments, saying on X, “Instead of having all the focus on the Kamala Harris interview tonight, Trump decided to further divide the GOP. Not a good strategy for winning.”

Other users expressed anger over Trump’s “betrayal” of the pro-life movement, which helped elect him in 2016. 

“If Pro-lifers had a spine and punished Trump for his betrayal by staying home in November, he would lose so badly that no Republican would ever dare to betray you on such an important issue,” one X user said. “Sadly, he knows most of you will still vote for him so the betrayals will intensify.”

Advertisement

Online political influencer and former police officer John Cardillo said he would be voting for Trump, but would “criticize him when he promotes Democrat policies.”

“I don’t care how you spin it. Trump told NBC he’s voting for a Soros funded unrestricted abortion amendment in FL,” he wrote on X. 

JD VANCE VOWS TRUMP WOULD NOT IMPOSE FEDERAL ABORTION BAN, VETO IT IF IT COMES ACROSS HIS DESK

Pro-life activists protest outside where Planned Parenthood has a mobile van offering free vasectomies and medicinal abortions near the Democratic National Convention In Chicago on Aug. 20. (Fox News Digital)

A spokesperson for Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis — who unsuccessfully challenged Trump in the 2024 primaries and who signed the abortion ban into law — also responded after Trump initially seemed to signal some support for Amendment 4.

Advertisement

“Donald Trump has consistently stated that late-term abortions where a baby can feel pain should never be permitted, and he’s always stood up for parents’ rights. Amendment 4 would allow late-term abortions, eliminate parental consent, and open the door to taxpayer-funded abortions,” Taryn Fenske said on X.  “It’s extreme and must be defeated.”

Conservative commentator David Limbaugh, brother of the late conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh, said he “wholeheartedly” supports Trump, but that he “needs some ardent pro-lifers in his campaign-advisory inner circle.”

REP. MAXINE WATERS DODGES QUESTION ON CONTROVERSIAL ABORTION PROCEDURE

People attend the annual March for Life rally outside the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 19. (Kent Nishimura/Getty Images)

“Unforced errors are worse than run of the mill errors. Appeasement strategies that alienate more supporters than impress non-supporters are just plain disappointing,” he said on X.

Advertisement

Last week, Trump also upset anti-abortion activists when he posted on his Truth Social platform, “My Administration will be great for women and their reproductive rights.” He has also indicated he would not restrict access to abortion prescriptions. 

This election cycle, Trump has countered Democratic attacks by stating he would leave abortion access to the states, as determined by the overturning of Roe v. Wade, and opposes a federal abortion ban. The Republican Party also abandoned its long-standing position of advocating for abortion limits in July. However, Trump has remained opposed to late-term abortions.

On Thursday, Trump also said he would subsidize federal IVF treatments, despite saying abortion would be considered a state issue. The Trump campaign did not directly respond to what constitutes a state issue versus a federal one when asked via email.

TRUMP RISKS LOSING SOME PRO-LIFE VOTERS UNLESS HE CHANGES ‘HIS TUNE’ ON ABORTION, ACTIVIST WARNS

“I think the six-week is too short, there has to be more time,” Trump told an NBC News reporter when asked how he will vote on Florida’s Amendment 4 that will appear on the ballot for November elections. “I’ve told them that I want more weeks,” he continued. 

Advertisement

The reporter then pressed if Trump would vote in favor of the amendment. 

“I am going to be voting that we need more than six weeks. Look, just so you understand, everybody wanted Roe v. Wade terminated for years, 52 years. I got it done. They wanted it to go back to the states. Exceptions are very important for me, for Ronald Reagan, for others that have navigated this very, very interesting and difficult path,” Trump responded. 

The Trump campaign pushed back on the notion that Trump had come out in favor of the abortion amendment, telling Fox News Digital on Thursday evening that the 45th president has not yet revealed how he will vote on Amendment 4. 

“President Trump has not yet said how he will vote on the ballot initiative in Florida, he simply reiterated that he believes six weeks is too short,” Trump campaign national press secretary Karoline Leavitt said. 

Advertisement

Get the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews and more at our Fox News Digital election hub.

Fox News Digital’s Emma Colton contributed to this report. 

Read the full article from Here

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Southeast

Experts warn of biggest ‘scandal in litigation system’ if SCOTUS doesn’t nix landmark energy pollution case

Published

on

Experts warn of biggest ‘scandal in litigation system’ if SCOTUS doesn’t nix landmark energy pollution case

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

FIRST ON FOX: A landmark Supreme Court case set to decide whether Big Oil entities can move coastal erosion suits out of local and state courts and cement them in federal courts, as localities continue to seek billions from domestic oil companies, will have far-reaching repercussions, experts said.

Last year, a jury in coastal Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana, ordered Chevron to pay more than $740 million for wetlands damage linked to operations by its former subsidiary Texaco in the mid-20th century.

While the Supreme Court case does not seek to overturn the fine and was filed before the Louisiana ruling, a decision by the high court could carry multibillion-dollar implications, several legal experts said.

TRUMP’S VENEZUELA OIL BLOCKADE PUTS CHEVRON IN THE MIDDLE OF A HIGH-STAKES SANCTIONS CRACKDOWN

Advertisement

A Chevron Corp. flag flies on the drilling floor of a Nabors Industries Ltd. drill rig in the Permian Basin near Midland, Texas, U.S., on Thursday, March 1, 2018. (Daniel Acker/Bloomberg/Getty Images)

As Chevron argues the suits it is facing in certain Gulf Coast communities — where critics claim some local and state officials are in cahoots against them and aligned with friendly attorneys for the municipalities — many damage claims stem from World War II-era fuel production carried out under federal contract. The companies say that the link to the federal government, along with alleged local bias, means future cases must be heard at the federal level.

Plaquemines Parish argued the claims involve environmental harm that is beyond the control of Washington — meaning that the high court’s decision could reshape where massive suits against Big Oil can be heard; as many companies also seek to ramp up production in line with President Donald Trump’s “energy dominance agenda.”

“There is thus no denying that these petitioners are being sued in state court for production activities undertaken to fulfill their federal refining contracts,” a brief filed by Chevron and ExxonMobil said, in part.

SCALISE LEADS GOP FIGHT AT SCOTUS TO STOP ‘RADICAL’ LEFT’S ‘WAR ON AMERICAN ENERGY’

Advertisement

Prominent NYU law professor Richard Epstein said Wednesday that Plaquemines Parish has pointed to massive erosion dating back to the 1920s amid increased wartime operations, while also citing hurricanes’ devastating impact on the bayou’s already fragile landscape.

Companies used the area to produce “AvGas” for wartime aircraft, and that Louisiana officials calculated the erosion in the billions of gallons, but added that comparisons made to the BP Oil Spill were different because “pollution is very different than erosion.”

“Nobody wishes to deny it, but it had nothing to do with it. So what you do is you have the Supreme Court dealing with a very technical question,” he said.

FIRM BEHIND CLIMATE LAWSUITS FACES DOJ REFERRAL AFTER COURT FINDS ‘MISCONDUCT BORDERING ON CRIMINAL’

“Local bias issue is extremely powerful, which is why you have that statute. It’s the same reason why we have diversity jurisdiction; the home court advantage is really huge and there’s no place where it’s worse than in Louisiana — so you get the bias, you get these jury verdicts, which are completely wacko as far as I can tell,” he said.

Advertisement

He faulted Louisiana officials for siding with plaintiff’s lawyers in the fine-related case to oppose “anything that they bring into court” on such matters, calling it an “outright mischarge of duty” that requires high court intervention.

CLIMATE LAWFARE CAMPAIGN DEALT BLOW IN SOUTH CAROLINA

Epstein said he is “reasonably confident” that the court will reverse a lower court’s ruling that the parish is the proper legal jurisdiction, warning that if not “it’s a bigger scandal than I think we’ve ever seen in terms of the litigation system.”

Mike Fragoso, an attorney at former Attorney General Bill Barr’s firm Torridon Law, said that there are more than 40 cases filed that allege oil and gas companies have caused erosion through exploration activities in the Gulf; totaling billions of dollars in claims.

Those hefty figures should be a warning against so-called “hometowning” — or the dynamic in which local juries tend to side with their neighbor plaintiffs and against “outsider” companies, Fragoso said.

Advertisement

TOP ENERGY GROUP CALLS FOR PROBE INTO SECRETIVE ‘NATIONAL LAWFARE CAMPAIGN’ TO INFLUENCE JUDGES ON CLIMATE

“The idea is to prevent local judges and juries from hometowning federal officials as they’re doing the work of the federal government,” he said.

“And Chevron’s view is that because they were in the AvGas business, at the direction of the federal government in World War II, they belong in federal court. The state of Louisiana and the plaintiffs disagree.”

While a supporter of U.S. energy development, Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry sided with Plaquemines as attorney general when the saga began.

CLIMATE GROUP SCRUBS JUDGES’ NAMES FROM WEBSITE AFTER UNEARTHED CHATS UNMASKED COZY TIES

Advertisement

Current AG Liz Murrill said in a statement that “virtually every federal court has rejected Chevron’s attempt to avoid liability for knowingly and intentionally violating state law.”

“I’ll fight Chevron in state or federal court — either way, they will not win,” she added.

John Carmouche, an attorney behind the Chevron case and other pending suits, said the appeal to the high bench doesn’t focus on the merits of the dispute itself.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“It’s more delay, they’re going to fight till the end, and we’re going to continue to fight as well,” he told The Associated Press.

Advertisement

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Read the full article from Here

Continue Reading

Southeast

Duffy exposes 54% of North Carolina truck licenses issued illegally to ‘dangerous drivers’

Published

on

Duffy exposes 54% of North Carolina truck licenses issued illegally to ‘dangerous drivers’

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy on Thursday revealed that 54% of North Carolina’s non-domiciled commercial driver’s licenses (CDLs) issued to foreign nationals reviewed by federal officials were issued illegally.

The discovery came amid the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s (FMCSA) ongoing nationwide audit of the state’s truck licensing systems. 

If North Carolina does not revoke all illegally issued licenses, the Department of Transportation (DOT) will withhold nearly $50 million in federal funding.

“North Carolina’s failure to follow the rules isn’t just shameful — it’s dangerous. I’m calling on state leadership to immediately remove these dangerous drivers from our roads and clean up their system,” Duffy wrote in a statement. “President [Donald] Trump and I are committed to keeping you and your family safe on our roads.”

Advertisement

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy warned that widespread fraud is allowing illegal immigrants to obtain commercial driver’s licenses, which he said poses safety risks. (Department of Homeland Security)

ICE ARRESTS ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT TRUCKER FROM UZBEKISTAN OVER ALLEGED TERROR TIES

In a letter to North Carolina Gov. Josh Stein and state Department of Public Safety Commissioner Paul Tine, the FMCSA said the state illegally issued non-domiciled CDLs to drivers who were ineligible, those whose licenses were valid long after their lawful presence in the U.S. expired and those whose lawful status in the U.S. was not verified by North Carolina.

FMCSA Administrator Derek Barrs said the level of noncompliance in North Carolina is “egregious.”

To retain its federal funding, North Carolina will be required to immediately pause issuance of non-domiciled CDLs, identify all unexpired non-domiciled CDLs that fail to comply with FMCSA regulations and revoke and reissue all noncompliant non-domiciled CDLs if they comply with the federal requirements.

Advertisement

ICE arrested more than 100 foreign national truck drivers in California’s Operation Highway Sentinel after deadly crashes linked to state-issued CDLs. (Department of Homeland Security)

DUFFY THREATENS TO YANK NEW YORK FEDERAL FUNDS OVER ILLEGALLY ISSUED COMMERCIAL DRIVER’S LICENSES

The state must also conduct a comprehensive internal audit to identify all procedural and programming errors, training and quality assurance problems, insufficient policies and practices and other issues that have resulted in the issuance of non-domiciled CDLs that did not meet federal rules. 

Duffy set his focus on CDL issues in early 2025 after an Indian national who held a California-issued CDL allegedly killed a car full of people on Florida’s turnpike.

ICE said Akhror Bozorov, 31, a criminal illegal immigrant from Uzbekistan, was issued a CDL from Pennsylvania. (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement)

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

California has since revoked 17,000 problematic non-domiciled CDL licenses as DOT conducts a nationwide audit initiated by President Donald Trump’s executive order on truck driver roadway safety.

Fox News Digital’s Charles Creitz contributed to this report.

Read the full article from Here

Continue Reading

Southeast

Naked woman allegedly assaults deputy while intoxicated, claims she was ‘trying to be a mermaid’

Published

on

Naked woman allegedly assaults deputy while intoxicated, claims she was ‘trying to be a mermaid’

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

A Louisiana woman’s attempt to go for a skinny-dip did not end swimmingly, authorities said, after she allegedly attacked a sheriff’s deputy responding to a trespassing complaint before finally surrendering to deputies Tuesday.

According to the Union Parish Sheriff’s Office, deputies were dispatched in November to a residence in the Linville community of Marion after a caller reported a neighbor standing in their driveway screaming and refusing to leave the property despite having been warned previously.

When a patrol deputy arrived, authorities said the suspect was found nude and swimming in a pond located on the caller’s property. 

The woman was later identified as Erin Elizabeth Sutton, 41, of Marion. Sutton initially refused to exit the pond or speak with the deputy, telling him she was “trying to be a mermaid,” according to a sheriff’s office Facebook post.

Advertisement

WILD VIDEO SHOWS SPEEDING CAR GOING AIRBORNE, EJECTS DRIVER INTO BACKYARD POOL

Erin Elizabeth Sutton, 41, is accused of threatening a sheriff’s deputy in Louisiana after being caught skinny-dipping in a neighbor’s pond. She claimed she was “trying to be a mermaid,” according to police. (Union Parish Sheriff’s Office / Getty Images)

After repeated commands, Sutton eventually exited the pond. Due to cold temperatures, emergency medical services were contacted to evaluate her, authorities said. 

A blanket was provided, and as the deputy attempted to escort Sutton inside a residence to warm up, she allegedly charged at him.

Authorities said Sutton ignored multiple commands to comply and resisted detention. A taser was deployed but had no effect, according to the sheriff’s office. Sutton was taken to the ground, where she allegedly continued to resist, kicking and punching the deputy before being restrained.

Advertisement

ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT BITES ICE OFFICER IN ‘GROSS ATTACK’ WHILE RESISTING ARREST: DHS

The Union Parish Sheriff’s Office in Farmerville, La., announced on Facebook that 41-year-old Erin Elizabeth Sutton had allegedly attacked and threatened one of their deputies after skinny-dipping in a neighbor’s pond, citing she was “trying to be a mermaid.” (Google Maps)

Sutton was transported to a hospital for further treatment. During the transport, she allegedly threatened to kill deputies and paramedics, authorities said.

Because Sutton required medical care at the time, deputies later sought arrest warrants, which were signed by a judge in Louisiana’s Third Judicial District Court, according to the sheriff’s office.

Sutton surrendered to deputies on Jan. 6, 2025, and was arrested on multiple charges, including three counts of resisting an officer with force or violence, two counts of public intimidation, two counts of battery of a police officer, disturbing the peace/drunkenness and criminal trespassing.

Advertisement

According to the Union Parish Sheriff’s Office, deputies were dispatched in November to a residence in the Linville community of Marion after a caller reported a neighbor was trespassing. (iStock)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Her bond was set at $62,000, authorities said.

Fox News Digital reached out to the Union Parish Sheriff’s Office for additional comment but did not immediately receive a response. It was not immediately clear whether Sutton has retained legal representation.

Advertisement

Read the full article from Here

Continue Reading

Trending