A former deputy to Lois Lerner — who oversaw the IRS division accused of targeting conservative groups during the Obama years — was placed on leave after lawmakers raised alarms that a new sub-department she was leading was becoming politicized.

In 2013, Lerner was hauled before Congress, where it was revealed her agency had wrongfully scrutinized tax-exempt applications related to the phrases ‘Tea Party,’ ‘9/12’ and ‘Constitution.’ The Treasury’s inspector general later confirmed ‘inappropriate criteria’ was used to target conservative groups and criticized ineffective oversight of systemic bias.

IRS Commissioner of Large Business and International Division Holly Paz – Lerner’s then-deputy – was placed on leave last week as lawmakers drew attention to a subordinate work-unit aimed at auditing pass-through businesses that Biden-era Commissioner Danny Werfel had created and assigned her to lead.

Werfel called the new work-unit a big step in ‘ensur[ing] the IRS holds the nation’s wealthiest filers accountable,’ and Paz called it an ‘important change’ in the IRS structure.

However, by 2025, lawmakers, including Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., warned that the pass-thru-business compliance unit had transformed to be ‘motivated by ideology rather than principles of sound tax administration.’

‘Pass-through entities form the bulk of Main Street businesses across the country. This includes countless family businesses, professional services firms, and real estate ventures that serve as the backbone of our local economies,’ Blackburn and Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso, R-Wyo., wrote to the Treasury in May.

Around that time, Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa., warned Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent that Paz’s team ‘has made tongue-in-cheek political comments,’ including their stated wish to ‘make basis great again’ – a phrase regarding taxation loss/gain that hearkens to President Donald Trump’s MAGA slogan.

In that regard, Rep. Lloyd Smucker, R-Pa., wrote to IRS Commissioner Billy Long in July that a Biden-era ‘basis-shifting transaction rule’ had ‘extended the scope’ of enforcement.

‘American taxpayers and businesses deserve clear and consistent tax rules that allow them to confidently comply with the law,’ Smucker wrote, adding he and Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Pa., are seeking to have that rule ‘reconsidered’ for the sake of unburdening ‘Main Street’ businesses.

Chuck Flint, a former top aide to Blackburn and president of the Alliance for IRS Accountability, told Fox News Digital on Tuesday that Paz’s past targeting of conservative groups makes her ‘unfit for government service.’

Flint said her statements to Congress and role as LB&I chief ‘places a cloud over the IRS.’

‘Paz’s Biden-era pass-through unit is now bludgeoning conservative businesses with fines and must be disbanded. Commissioner Long is flexing his muscles on the IRS Deep State and sending a signal to rogue bureaucrats by placing Paz on leave.’

Blackburn warned in her letter to Bessent that an IRS news release referencing targeting ‘complex arrangements’ lacked clear definitions and created the impression that legitimate business structures could be unfairly targeted based on legal structure versus actual tax compliance risk.

‘Even more concerning, the announcement explicitly states that the bureaucratic changes were designed primarily to ‘achieve its goal of increased audit rates in this complex area’.’

‘This focus on increasing audits rather than improving compliance suggests an agenda-driven approach to enforcement,’ Blackburn said.

In her letter, Ernst warned Bessent that Paz’s team members ‘have also undermined their appearance of impartiality by comparing legally acceptable transactions to obscene material, saying, ‘It’s one of those ‘You know it when you see it’ – a joking reference to [Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart’s] attempt to define pornography.

‘This team is reportedly acting independently and duplicating existing IRS processes, wasting taxpayer money, and not coordinating with the pre-existing offices,’ Ernst said.

‘Most concerning of all, the new pass-through auditors even use a new template for requesting taxpayer information they’ve deemed ‘The Art of the IDR,’ (versus ‘The Art of the Deal’) which treats taxpayers as guilty until proven innocent.’

‘Unfortunately, the Biden administration picked up right where Ms. Lerner and her team left off. On September 20, 2023, then-Commissioner Daniel Werfel announced, with language that resembled Democrat talking points, the creation of a duplicative new work unit [led by Paz] to specifically audit pass-through businesses and partnerships. The new office subjects these businesses to potentially two separate IRS examinations in the same year.

‘One would think Commissioner Werfel would go to great lengths to avoid hearkening back to previous scandals. Instead, he thumbed his nose at taxpayers by placing Lois Lerner’s deputy— Holly Paz—at the helm,’ Ernst wrote.

Lerner was front-and-center during the Obama-era scandal, testifying before Congress as head of the tax-exempt organizations division, as a deluge of reports of targeting right-leaning nonprofits abounded.

During the 2013 investigation by the House Oversight Committee, Reps. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and Darrell Issa, R-Calif., demanded Paz answer for ‘inconsistencies’ from a transcribed interview with committee staff involving statements about ‘intervention’ against Tea Party groups.

A 2015 report by then-Senate Finance Committee leaders Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Ronald Wyden, D-Ore., found that in other cases, some liberal terminology was also flagged, including ‘ACORN,’ ‘progressive’ and ‘medical marijuana.’

‘While handled poorly, groups on both sides of the political spectrum were treated the same in their efforts to secure tax-exempt status,’ Wyden said at the time, while then-Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas, said Democrats should be equally outraged as Republicans.

Fox News Digital reached out to Treasury, the IRS and an email connected to Paz for comment.

The Supreme Court on Friday ordered additional arguments in a major case centered on whether race can factor into drawing congressional maps, a clear sign that redistricting remains top-of-mind for the justices ahead of the 2026 midterms.

Justices ordered both parties in Louisiana v. Callais to return for additional arguments next term. At issue is whether Louisiana’s latest congressional map — which includes the creation of a second, majority-Black district — should be considered an unconstitutional ‘illegal racial gerrymander.’ 

The Supreme Court order comes months after justices first heard oral arguments in the case in March. It requires both parties to file supplemental briefs by mid-September, outlining in further detail their view of whether Louisiana’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority congressional district ‘violates the Fourteenth or Fifteenth Amendments to the U. S. Constitution.’ 

Reply briefs should be filed no later than Oct. 3, the Supreme Court said in the unsigned, single-page order — just three days before the high court gavels in for the 2025-2026 session. 

The order comes after the Supreme Court in June said they would not decide the case this term as had been expected — punting it to the fall for further consideration. At the time, the justices said they needed more information before ruling on the case.

The issue underscores the challenges states face with congressional redistricting. 

Louisiana has revised its congressional map twice since the 2020 census. The first version, which included only one majority-Black district, was blocked by a federal court in 2022. The court sided with the Louisiana State Conference of the NAACP and other plaintiffs, ruling the map diluted Black voting power and ordering the state to redraw it by January 2024.

The new map, S.B. 8, created the second Black-majority district at the center of the Supreme Court case. However, S.B. 8 was almost immediately challenged by a group of non-Black plaintiffs in court, who took issue with a new district that stretched some 250 miles from Louisiana’s northwest corner of Shreveport to Baton Rouge, in the state’s southeast. 

They argued in the lawsuit that the state violated the equal protection clause by relying too heavily on race to draw the maps, and created a ‘sinuous and jagged second majority-Black district.’

That map remains in place for now, until the Supreme Court can hear the additional information submitted to the court this fall.  

Oral arguments in March focused heavily on whether Louisiana’s redistricting efforts were narrowly tailored enough to meet constitutional requirements and whether race was used in a way that violated the law, as appellees had alleged.

The high court’s request for additional information comes at a pivotal time for the U.S., as new and politically charged redistricting fights have popped up in other U.S. states ahead of next year’s midterm elections. 

In Texas, tensions reached a fever pitch this week after Democratic state legislators fled the Lone Star State to block Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s ability to convene a legislative quorum needed to pass the state’s aggressive new redistricting map, which would create five additional Republican-leaning districts. 

Under the state’s constitution, two-thirds of the House legislators must be present for the body to conduct business. With an eye to this rule, Democratic lawmakers fled the state to Chicago, New York and Boston — beyond the reach of Texas authorities and of Abbott, who has little power in the near-term to compel their returns.

The governor has, however, threatened to take them to court to have them removed from office altogether.

In a press conference Monday, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul stressed the magnitude of the redistricting efforts, and vowed to explore ‘every option’ in redrawing state lines.

‘We are at war,’ Hochul said, speaking alongside the six Texas Democrats who fled to her state.

 ‘And that’s why the gloves are off — and I say, bring it on,’ she added.

The move is part of a broader redistricting push aimed at helping Republicans defend their slim House majority. As with most midterms following a new president’s election, 2026 is expected to serve as a referendum on the White House — raising GOP concerns that they could lose control of the chamber.

Former first lady Michelle Obama praised former President Barack Obama as her ‘everything’ and the ‘coolest guy I know’ on his 64th birthday after the longtime couple joked about divorce rumors that have been swirling for months. 

‘Happy birthday to my love, my best friend, my everything! @BarackObama, even after all these years, you’re still the coolest guy I know,’ the former first lady posted to Instagram Monday afternoon, accompanied by a photo of the pair. 

The former president turned 64 Monday, with the former first lady sharing the birthday post on both Instagram and Facebook. Michelle Obama’s birthday message followed months of speculation that the couple’s more than 30-year marriage was on the rocks before the couple joked about the rumors during a July podcast. 

‘It’s my husband, ya’ll!’ Michelle Obama said jokingly at the start of a podcast of ‘IMO’ in July when the former president first joined the set. ‘When we aren’t (in the same room), folks think we’re divorced.’ 

The former first lady hosts ‘IMO’ with her brother Craig Robinson. 

‘She took me back!’ Barack Obama quipped during his appearance, joking, ‘It was touch and go for a while.’ 

Speculation had mounted for months that the presidential couple was headed to divorce, which heightened in January when the former first lady did not attend high-profile events such as President Donald Trump’s inauguration or President Jimmy Carter’s funeral. 

‘There hasn’t been one moment in our marriage where I’ve thought about quitting my man,’ Michelle Obama said during an ‘IMO’ podcast in July. ‘We’ve had some really hard times. We’ve had a lot of fun times, a lot of adventures, and I have become a better person because of the man I’m married to.’

‘Don’t make me cry now,’ Barack said. ‘Don’t let me start tearing up now.’

Michelle previously had dismissed divorce rumors, including in April when she addressed questions as to why she did not join the 44th president at Trump’s inauguration or Carter’s funeral. 

‘But the interesting thing is that when I say no, for the most part, people are like, ‘I get it, and I’m OK,’ right?’ she told podcast host Sophia Bush in April about how she spends her time. ‘And that’s the thing that we as women, I think we struggle with, like disappointing people. I mean so much so that this year people were, they couldn’t even fathom that I was making a choice for myself, that they had to assume that my husband and I are divorcing, you know? This couldn’t be a grown woman just making a set of decisions herself, right? But that’s what society does to us.’

‘If it doesn’t fit into the sort of stereotype of what people think we should do, then it gets labeled as something negative and horrible,’ Obama continued.

Fox News Digital reached out to Michelle Obama’s office for any additional comment Tuesday morning but did not immediately receive a reply. 

Fox News Digital’s David Rutz and Hannah Panreck contributed to this report. 

Senate Republicans are mulling whether to go nuclear after negotiations with Senate Democrats to ram through President Donald Trump’s nominees fell apart over the weekend.

The path to confirming dozens of Trump’s outstanding nominees was destroyed when the president accused Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., of ‘political extortion,’ and charged that the Democratic leader’s asking price for nominees was too high.

Now, lawmakers have left Washington without a deal to bundle dozens of nominees that made it through committee with bipartisan support, and a change to how the Senate handles the confirmation process is on the horizon.

Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso, R-Wyo., berated Schumer and Senate Democrats for their ‘unprecedented’ blocks of the president’s nominees, and noted that every pick had been filibustered save for Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who glided through the Senate earlier this year.  

‘We have been working through the list, but there is still a large backlog because of the unprecedented filibuster by the Democrats of every nominee,’ Barrasso said. ‘And if they don’t change their behavior, we’re going to have to change how things are done here, because a president needs to have his or her team in place.’

Under normal circumstances, changing the rules in the Senate would require 67 votes, meaning that Senate Democrats would have to be on board with a change. However, there is a path that lawmakers refer to as the nuclear option, which allows for rules changes to only need a simple majority.

There is the political will among Republicans to change the rules, but doing so would open the door for Senate Democrats to do the same when they get into power once more.

‘I think that way is going to happen anyways, because of what Schumer has done. He’s forced this, and it’s ridiculous that he’s doing this,’ Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., said. ‘And so, whatever, we’re at this point, and we’ll do, you know what they say, every action requires an equal [reaction], and that’s what we’re at right now.’

Some of the options on the table include shortening the debate time for nominees, getting rid of procedural votes for some lower-level nominees, grouping certain civilian nominees ‘en bloc’ – something that is already done for military nominees – and, at the committee level, deciding whether to lower the number of nominees subject to the confirmation process.

Currently, over 1,200 positions go through Senate confirmation. Senate Republicans have been able to confirm over 130 of Trump’s picks so far, but had a loftier goal of doing at least 60 more before leaving town until September.

And there are over 140 nominees still pending on the Senate’s calendar. 

‘I think they’re desperately in need of change,’ Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., told reporters. ‘I think that the last six months have demonstrated that this process, nominations, is broken. And so I expect there will be some good robust conversations about that.’

As to when lawmakers will try to run with a rules change is still in the air. The Senate is gone from Washington until early September and will return to a looming deadline to avert a partial government shutdown.

Before leaving town, the Senate did advance a trio of spending bills – a first in the upper chamber since 2018 – but those same bills are unlikely to pass muster in the House, given that they spend at higher levels than the ones greenlit by the House GOP.

Ramming a rules change through without Democrats could also come at a price for government funding negotiations. Schumer said a possible rules change would be a ‘huge mistake’ for Republicans to do on their own.

‘Because when they go at it alone, they screw up for the American people and for themselves,’ he said.

When asked if there were any possible rule changes that he and Senate Democrats could agree to, Schumer said, ‘We should be working together on legislation to get things done for the American people.’

‘That’s the way to go, not changing the rules, because when they change the rules, they say, ‘Only we’re going to decide what’s good for the American people,’ and every time they do that, the American people lose,’ Schumer said.

Still, Republicans were unhappy with the way negotiations devolved after days of back and forth.

‘We actually, we wanted a deal,’ Mullin said. ‘And these people deserve to be put in position… they’re going to say that we’re trying to do a nuclear option. The fact is, they – Schumer – went nuclear a long time.’

Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., is calling on the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to revoke the nonprofit status of a Muslim advocacy group that he believes has ties to terror groups, including Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood.

In the letter, Cotton notes that ‘in the largest terrorism-financing case in U.S. history, [the Council on American-Islamic Relations] was listed as a member of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee.’ CAIR was listed as an unindicted coconspirator in the infamous Holy Land Foundation (HLF) terrorism financing case. The organization later attempted, unsuccessfully, to have its name removed from the list.

The Justice Department found that HLF and five of its leaders had, while working together and with others, ‘provided material support to the Hamas movement.’ In total, the groups provided Hamas with approximately $12.4M, according to the DOJ.

HLF was convicted on ’10 counts of conspiracy to provide, and the provision of, material support to a designated foreign terrorist organization; 11 counts of conspiracy to provide, and the provision of, funds, goods and services to a Specially Designated Terrorist; and 10 counts of conspiracy to commit, and the commission of, money laundering.’

‘The IRS has broad authority to examine whether an entity’s operations align with its exempt purpose. Tax-exempt status is a privilege, not a right, and it should not subsidize organizations with links to terrorism,’ Cotton wrote.

CAIR characterized Cotton’s demand as being ‘based on debunked conspiracy theories,’ and likened the senator’s request to the IRS to the McCarthy era.

‘We are an independent American civil rights organization that has spent over thirty years defending the Constitution, countering anti-Muslim bigotry, and opposing injustice here and abroad, including discrimination, hate crimes, terrorism, ethnic cleansing, and genocide,’ CAIR said in a statement to Fox News Digital.

‘We specifically condemned the Oct. 7th attacks on civilians, just as we condemn the ongoing genocide in Gaza. This is called moral consistency. Senator Cotton should try it,’ the organization added.

CAIR was disavowed by the Biden administration after the organization’s executive director appeared to praise Hamas’ Oct. 7 massacre. In November 2023, just weeks after the attacks, CAIR National Executive Director Nihad Awad said he was ‘happy to see’ Palestinians ‘breaking the siege and throwing down the shackles of their own land.’ Additionally, in his remarks, Awad appeared to further justify the attacks, saying that ‘the people of Gaza have the right to self-defense’ and that Israel does not.

The New York Times quoted then-Biden spokesperson Andrew Bates as saying that the administration condemned the ‘shocking, antisemitic statements in the strongest terms.’

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) slammed Awad’s recent remarks about the U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites. The national executive director said that ‘Netanyahu calls the shots. Trump pretends to be in charge.’ Additionally, the ADL pointed out that Hussam Ayloush, executive director of CAIR’s Los Angeles chapter, referred to Congress and the White House as ‘Israeli-occupied territories.’

A total of 22 mRNA vaccine development contracts totaling roughly $500 million have been canceled, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced Tuesday.

The mRNA investments were part of the government’s Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), a division of HHS that drives some of the country’s most advanced scientific research, such as the development of vaccines, drugs and other tools to fight national health threats. The termination of the 22 BARDA contracts follows a several-weeks-long internal review to determine a path forward when it comes to these investments.

‘We reviewed the science, listened to the experts, and acted,’ HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said Tuesday. ‘BARDA is terminating 22 mRNA vaccine development investments because the data show these vaccines fail to protect effectively against upper respiratory infections like COVID and flu. We’re shifting that funding toward safer, broader vaccine platforms that remain effective even as viruses mutate.’

In a short video explaining the move, Kennedy said the benefits simply do not outweigh the risks associated with mRNA vaccines. 

Kennedy went on to point out that not only do mRNA vaccines – as shown during the COVID-19 pandemic – not perform well against viruses that infect the upper respiratory tract, but they also do not defend against mutations of the viruses they are intended to go after.

‘This dynamic drives a phenomena called anogenic shift, meaning that the vaccine paradoxically encourages new mutations and can actually prolong pandemics as the virus constantly mutates to escape the protective effects of the vaccine,’ Kennedy said in the video.

For example, the HHS secretary pointed to the omicron variant of the COVID-19 virus, which infected many millions, including those who had been vaccinated against COVID. 

‘A single mutation can make mRNA vaccines ineffective,’ Kebbedy added, noting that the same risks also apply to the flu virus. 

The move to cancel the mRNA contracts under BARDA will not entirely cancel all mRNA vaccine research done by the government, a source familiar with the move indicated. In addition to allowing some final-stage contracts to run their course to completion in an effort to preserve prior taxpayer investments, ongoing mRNA research at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) will not be impacted by this latest move. 

Meanwhile, in lieu of the terminated mRNA research and investments at BARDA, HHS will focus on ‘safer, broader vaccine strategies,’ Kennedy indicated.

‘To replace the troubled mRNA programs, we’re prioritizing the development of safer, broader vaccine strategies like whole virus vaccines and novel platforms that don’t collapse when viruses mutate,’ Kennedy said in his video explanation about the terminated mRNA investments.

During the video, Kennedy reiterated his support for ‘safe, effective vaccines’ for any American who wants them.

‘That’s why we’re moving beyond the limitations of mRNA for respiratory viruses and investing in better solutions.’

On Monday, Brazil’s Supreme Court ordered former President Jair Bolsonaro to be placed under house arrest amid ongoing legal proceedings over his alleged attempt to overturn the 2022 presidential election results.

The case has gripped the nation since its inception in 2023 and has intensified international scrutiny, especially as it unfolds under the authority of a Supreme Court justice recently sanctioned by the Trump administration in the United States.

Justice Alexandre de Moraes, who is overseeing the case, accused Bolsonaro, 70, of violating court-imposed restrictions.

According to the ruling, first reported by the Associated Press, Bolsonaro used a Sunday protest in Rio de Janeiro to publicly address supporters using a cellphone owned by one of his three sons, all of whom are lawmakers.

Bolsonaro’s brief message, ‘Good afternoon, Copacabana, good afternoon my Brazil, a hug to everyone, this is for our freedom,’ was deemed a violation of his release conditions.

Bolsonaro’s legal team announced plans to appeal, arguing that the statement was symbolic, not criminal, and did not justify additional restrictions.

Mounting International Fallout

The political stakes have now extended well beyond Brazil. The case triggered backlash from President Trump, a longtime Bolsonaro ally, who tied newly imposed U.S. tariffs on Brazilian imports to what he called an ongoing ‘witch hunt.’ His remarks have further strained the already delicate diplomatic relationship between the two nations.

In a pointed statement on X, the U.S. State Department’s Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs condemned the Brazilian court’s actions, writing: ‘Putting even more restrictions on Jair Bolsonaro’s ability to defend himself in public is not a public service. Let Bolsonaro speak!’

The bureau also warned that individuals involved in what it described as ‘sanctioned behavior’ would be held accountable.

The statement marked a sharp escalation, particularly as it followed closely on the heels of sanctions imposed by the U.S. Treasury Department, under Trump’s administration, against Justice de Moraes. He was designated a ‘U.S.-sanctioned human rights abuser’ and accused of weaponizing the judiciary to silence political opponents.

The Basis for Sanctions

Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent accused de Moraes of leading an unlawful crackdown:

‘Alexandre de Moraes has taken it upon himself to be judge and jury in an unlawful witch hunt against U.S. and Brazilian citizens and companies. He is responsible for an oppressive campaign of censorship, arbitrary detentions, and politicized prosecutions—including those against former President Jair Bolsonaro,’ Bessent said.

These sanctions were imposed under Executive Order 13818, issued during Trump’s first term in 2017. The order declared a national emergency concerning global human rights abuses and corruption and expanded upon the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act passed in 2016. The law empowers the U.S. government to impose financial and travel sanctions on foreign officials accused of human rights violations.

Despite growing international pressure, the Brazilian government has yet to issue a formal response.

Details of the Case

Brazilian prosecutors allege that Bolsonaro led a coordinated effort to delegitimize, and ultimately overturn, the results of the 2022 election, including planning violent acts and even an alleged assassination plot targeting President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and Justice de Moraes. Bolsonaro lost the election by a narrow margin.

A panel of Supreme Court justices accepted the charges in March, ultimately ordering Bolsonaro to stand trial. Monday’s house arrest ruling builds on earlier restrictions: an ankle monitor, a nighttime curfew, and a travel ban keeping the former president confined to Brasília despite his deep political roots in Rio de Janeiro.

A former army captain and deeply polarizing figure, Bolsonaro now joins a short but consequential list of former Brazilian presidents arrested since the country’s return to democracy in 1985, a system he has frequently criticized and linked to the military dictatorship he once praised.

Justice de Moraes, defending the court’s decision, wrote: ‘The judiciary will not allow itself to be mocked. Justice applies equally to everyone. A defendant who knowingly violates precautionary measures—especially for the second time—must face legal consequences.’

Fox News’ Alec Schemmel and The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

Stepheny Price is a writer for Fox News Digital and Fox Business. She covers topics including missing persons, homicides, national crime cases, illegal immigration, and more. Story tips and ideas can be sent to stepheny.price@fox.com

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., is urging that President Donald Trump commute former Rep. George Santos’ seven-year sentence, calling the punishment ‘a grave injustice’ and an ‘abusive overreach by the judicial system.’

The former New York congressman was sentenced to 87 months, or just over seven years, after pleading guilty in 2024 to wire fraud and aggravated identity theft. Santos reported to prison on July 25 to begin serving his sentence.

Santos was assessed the maximum sentence in April by U.S. District Judge Joanna Seybert. He was also ordered to pay nearly $374,000 in restitution and forfeit more than $205,000 in fraud proceeds.

Santos’ guilty plea followed an investigation into campaign finance fraud, donor identity theft and false COVID-era unemployment claims.

On Monday, Greene said in a post on X that she sent a letter to the Office of the Pardon Attorney urging Trump to commute Santos’ sentence.

‘A 7-year prison sentence for campaign-related charges is excessive, especially when Members of Congress who’ve done far worse still walk free,’ she wrote in the post. ‘George Santos has taken responsibility. He’s shown remorse. It’s time to correct this injustice. We must demand equal justice under the law!’

Greene addressed her letter to the Honorable Edward R. Martin Jr., pardon attorney for the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), and she acknowledged the gravity of the actions by her former colleague.

‘As a Member of Congress, I worked with Mr. Santos on many issues and can attest to his willingness and dedication to serve the people of New York who elected him to office,’ she wrote. ‘He is sincerely remorseful and has accepted full responsibility for his actions. Furthermore, my office has spoken with a pastor of his who discussed the regret and remorse of Mr. Santos, agreeing that the sentence imposed is a grave injustice.

‘While his crimes warrant punishment, many of my colleagues who I serve with have committed far worse offenses than Mr. Santos yet have faced zero criminal charges,’ Greene continued. ‘I strongly believe in accountability for one’s actions, but I believe the sentencing of Mr. Santos is an abusive overreach by the judicial system.’

Prosecutors shared how Santos and his campaign treasurer, Nancy Marks, doctored donor reports to qualify for national Republican Party funding. They fabricated contributions from Santos’ family and falsely reported a $500,000 loan from Santos, though he had under $8,000 in his accounts.

He also stole credit card information from donors, including ‘victims he knew were elderly persons suffering from cognitive impairment or decline’ and made unauthorized charges to fund both campaign and personal expenses, according to the DOJ. Santos also used a fake political fundraising company to solicit tens of thousands of dollars, which he spent on ‘designer clothing.’

During the pandemic, Santos fraudulently claimed over $24,000 in unemployment benefits while employed at an investment firm. He also submitted false congressional financial disclosures to the House.

Santos was elected in 2022 after flipping New York’s 3rd District for the GOP. His resumé was easily debunked. He falsely claimed academic degrees, Wall Street jobs and family ties to the Holocaust and 9/11. 

He was expelled from Congress in December 2023 after a scathing ethics report, becoming just the sixth member ever removed from the People’s House.

Santos has remained publicly active after his sentencing, selling video messages on Cameo and making social media posts.

Unless pardoned, Santos is expected to remain incarcerated until at least early 2032. He has reportedly appealed to President Donald Trump for clemency. 

Greene and the White House did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.

Fox News Digital’s Jasmine Baehr contributed to this report.

Lockheed Martin is designing a space-based missile interceptor and aims to test the technology for potential integration into President Donald Trump’s ‘Golden Dome’ defense shield within the next three years.

The defense contractor revealed this week that it hopes to test a satellite defensive weapon capable of destroying hypersonic missiles by 2028.

If successful, this would mark the first time in history the United States has deployed interceptors in space to destroy enemy missiles before they reach the homeland. Lockheed is still weighing different technologies, ranging from lasers to kinetic satellites that could maneuver and strike high-speed targets in flight.

‘We have missile warning and tracking satellites made by Lockheed Martin in orbit today that provide timely detection and warning of missile threats,’ said Amanda Pound, mission strategy and advanced capabilities director at Lockheed Martin Space, told Fox News Digital.

‘We are committed to making space-based interceptors for missile defense a reality, leveraging our decades of experience, investments, and industry partnerships, to be ready for on orbit testing in 2028.’

Lockheed’s space interceptor project directly supports Trump’s ‘Golden Dome for America’ initiative, first unveiled in May 2025. The ambitious missile defense concept calls for a global constellation of satellites armed with sensors and interceptors, designed to detect, track and eliminate advanced missile threats – including hypersonic and ballistic weapons – before they can strike U.S. soil.

The idea echoes President Ronald Reagan’s 1983 Strategic Defense Initiative, often dubbed ‘Star Wars,’ which was dismissed at the time as science fiction. But today, the technologies once seen as far-fetched are rapidly advancing, according to defense leaders.

Gen. Michael Guetlein, appointed by the Trump administration to head Golden Dome, emphasized that key components of the system already exist, expressing confidence in achieving a test-ready platform by 2028. Still, it’s no easy feat.

‘Intercepting a missile in orbit is a pretty wicked hard problem physics‑wise,’ said Jeff Schrader, vice president of Lockheed’s space division. ‘But not impossible,’ he added, noting breakthroughs in maneuverability and guidance systems.

Analysts caution that to make the Golden Dome vision a reality, the U.S. may need to launch thousands of interceptors into orbit. Some have compared it to the Cold War–era ‘Brilliant Pebbles’ program, which proposed a similar space-based missile shield but was eventually shelved due to skyrocketing costs and technical hurdles.

Golden Dome is currently projected to cost $175 billion, with $25 billion already approved by Congress. But long-term estimates range anywhere from $161 billion to over $830 billion over two decades – raising questions about the program’s affordability and long-term sustainability.

Meanwhile, Lockheed is bolstering ground-based missile defense systems to complement the orbital layer. In March 2025, the company’s Aegis Combat System aboard the USS Pinckney successfully simulated the interception of hypersonic medium-range missiles during the FTX-40 exercise, codenamed Stellar Banshee.

The company is also advancing infrared seeker technology for interceptors, which would enhance the tracking and targeting of fast-moving missiles in their terminal phase.

Lockheed remains a central player in the Pentagon’s broader missile defense and hypersonic weapons development effort. It is the prime contractor for the Next Generation Interceptor (NGI), which is targeting an initial operating capability by the end of fiscal year 2028.

Simultaneously, the company is fulfilling Navy contracts for its Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) hypersonic weapons system. Sea-based deployment of CPS is expected to begin between 2027 and 2028.

President Trump has publicly stated he wants Golden Dome operational by the end of his term. But industry officials warn that supply chain limitations and the Pentagon’s slow-moving procurement system make full deployment by 2029 unlikely.