The Senate quietly passed legislation on Tuesday that would create stiffer penalties for explicit AI-manipulated images, known as deepfakes. 

The bill from Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., is designed to beef up federal penalties against the creation, distribution or solicitation of ‘non-consensual digital forgeries,’ or deepfakes. It’s geared to act as a companion to a previously passed bill targeting revenge porn.

Durbin’s Disrupt Explicit Forged Images and Non-Consensual Edits, or DEFIANCE Act, passed unanimously through the Senate on a fast-track vote. But it will still require the House to weigh in before it heads to President Donald Trump’s desk. 

His bill, which was co-sponsored by Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and introduced in the House by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., would allow victims of deepfake images to sue people who create, possess with intent to share, solicit, or share non-consensual items, and levy a fine of up to $250,000 per violation. 

‘Give to the victims their day in court to hold those responsible who continue to publish these images at their expense,’ Durbin said on the Senate floor. ‘Today, we are one step closer to making this a reality.’

It also allows courts to order takedowns, deletions and injunctions to stop further spread of the images, provide privacy protections for victims during litigation, and sets up a statute of limitations of up to 10 years. 

Durbin said the backlash of deepfake images can be long-lasting, and people may go through depression, anxiety and fear, ‘and in the worst cases, victims have been driven to suicide.’ 

‘Imagine losing control over your own likeness and identity. Imagine how powerless victims feel when they cannot remove illicit content, cannot prevent it from being reproduced repeatedly, and cannot prevent new images from being created,’ Durbin said. 

The DEFIANCE Act comes as lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have pushed for stiffer regulations and penalties for AI, particularly chatbots and potentially harmful interactions they have with children online. Notably, Durbin and Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., teamed up last year for legislation that defines AI as a product, allowing people to sue for liabilities that stem from using AI systems. 

Durbin’s successful effort in the upper chamber comes after lawmakers passed a separate bill, the Take It Down Act, last year geared to creating penalties for revenge porn. First Lady Melania Trump heavily lobbied for that bill, which was ultimately signed into law by Trump and is set to take effect in May. 

President Donald Trump unloaded on a cohort of Senate Republicans who voted to rein in his policing powers in Venezuela, arguing that they couldn’t give a good reason to vote against him.

During remarks at the Detroit Economic Club following a tour of a Ford plant in Dearborn, Mich., Trump harangued Republicans for not staying unified, while declaring that, though congressional Democrats have bad policy, they ‘stick together like glue.’

‘We got some real losers, mostly great,’ Trump said of Republicans before tearing into Sens. Rand Paul, R-Ky., Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Todd Young, R-Ind.

That foursome joined all Senate Democrats to vote in favor of Sen. Tim Kaine’s, D-Va., war powers resolution, which, if passed, would require Trump to receive congressional approval before further military force is used in Venezuela.

Lawmakers are expected to take a final vote on the resolution on Wednesday.

When Kaine’s effort initially advanced, Trump blasted the defectors and declared that they should ‘never be elected to office again.’ With the vote fast approaching, Trump didn’t hesitate to make clear that their votes were still fresh on his mind.

He panned Paul for routinely voting against GOP policies, and then turned his sights to Murkowski, Collins and Young.

‘Then you have Lisa Murkowski and you have Susan Collins, disasters,’ Trump said. ‘And you had a gentleman from Indiana that, I don’t believe it, Todd Young, he voted against.’

‘And you say, ‘Why are you voting against?’ They can’t give you an answer. They’re unable to give you an answer. It’s like, why are they against the attack on Venezuela? They’re against the attack,’ he continued. ‘After they found out who was the most successful attack. Probably the most talented, most brilliant tactical attack that we’ve had maybe in 100 years. And they’re against it. Why?’

Paul has routinely voiced opposition to military action with congressional oversight; he’s a co-sponsor of Kaine’s resolution. Murkowski, Collins and Young had no issue with the capture of former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, but they argued that their vote for the resolution last week was to ensure Congress’ authority to weigh in before future action.

The White House and Senate Republican leadership have been working to flip the lawmakers in order to prevent the resolution from passing, but it may not be the successful pressure campaign that they had hoped for.

Collins, when asked if she would still vote in favor of the resolution after leaving the Senate GOP’s weekly closed-door policy lunch, said, ‘Wes.’

There was also a fifth Republican, Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri, who voted to advance the resolution. Trump notably did not mention him during his speech.

That comes after Hawley spoke with several administration officials on what the next steps in Venezuela would be. Hawley said that he was told by officials that the administration would ‘abide by the statutory notification requirements, and also, if they took action that resulted in major ground operations would come back to Congress.’

Hawley didn’t say if that would flip his vote and noted that he was in ‘listening and receive mode at this time.’ Still, it did go a long way to address his biggest issue of boots on the ground in Venezuela.

‘The administration’s view is that the resolution is way broader than ground troops, and I said, ‘Well, you know, and I didn’t draft the resolution, but my concern is about ground troops in Venezuela without congressional authorization,’’ Hawley said.

President Donald Trump said his administration will cease federal payments to sanctuary cities and states with sanctuary policies starting Feb. 1, while citing jurisdictions that protect criminals and fuel fraud and crime.

Speaking at the Detroit Economic Club, Trump said the move was aimed at cities and states that refuse to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement and in the administration’s bid to stamp out fraud.

‘Starting Feb. 1, we’re not making any payments to sanctuary cities or states having sanctuary cities because they do everything possible to protect criminals at the expense of American citizens,’ Trump said.

‘And it breeds fraud and crime and all the other problems that come. So we’re not making any payment to anybody that supports sanctuary,’ he added.

Trump also criticized Minnesota officials while discussing what he described as widespread fraud in the state.

‘We have also suspended payments tied to suspected scammers in Minnesota, of which there are many,’ Trump said. ‘It’s a great state. It was a great state. Now it’s getting destroyed by that stupid governor.’

Trump went on to accuse Gov. Tim Walz of corruption and said the level of fraud could not have gone unnoticed by state leadership.

The administration’s actions come as a federal judge on Jan. 9 temporarily blocked the Trump administration from stopping subsidies tied to childcare programs in five states, including Minnesota, amid allegations of widespread fraud.

U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian did not rule on the legality of the funding freeze but said the states met the legal threshold to preserve the ‘status quo’ on funding for at least two weeks while legal arguments continue.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) also announced it would withhold funds for programs in five Democratic-led states, citing concerns over fraud and misuse of federal dollars.

As previously reported by Fox News Digital, those programs include the Child Care and Development Fund, the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program and the Social Services Block Grant.

‘Families who rely on childcare and family assistance programs deserve confidence that these resources are used lawfully and for their intended purpose,’ HHS Deputy Secretary Jim O’Neill had said in a statement.

The states that challenged the action include California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota and New York, which argued in court filings that the federal government does not have the legal authority to end the funding.

Former Trump lawyer Lindsey Halligan argued in a new court filing Tuesday that a judge’s November ruling dismissing two criminal cases does not undermine her authority to serve as U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia or to represent the federal government in ongoing cases.

The new filing, previewed exclusively to Fox News Digital, comes amid a swirl of leadership questions within the U.S. prosecutor’s office for the Eastern District of Virginia, dubbed the ‘rocket docket’ due to the court’s swift handling of federal cases, including many high-profile national security cases.

It also comes just hours after the news that Robert McBride, a longtime federal prosecutor and second-highest-ranking U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia, was dismissed from his role amid broader disagreements with DOJ.

U.S. District Judge James Currie in November ruled Halligan was unlawfully appointed to her role as interim U.S. attorney for the district, and ordered dismissed without prejudice the criminal cases she brought against former FBI director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James. (The Justice Department has appealed both dismissals to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.)

The back-and-forth over Halligan’s status came under fresh scrutiny last week, after U.S. District Judge David Novak issued an unprompted court order for Halligan to explain to the court, in writing, her continued representation as the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, and why that ‘does not constitute a false or misleading statement,’ which Novak suggested could be grounds for disciplinary proceedings.

Novak further asserted that Currie’s determination on the unlawful nature of Halligan’s appointment represents ‘binding precedent in this district’ and should not be ignored. 

The response filed Tuesday by U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, and Halligan, vehemently disputes those claims. 

‘The Court’s thinly veiled threat to use attorney discipline to cudgel the Executive Branch into conforming its legal position in all criminal prosecutions to the views of a single district judge is a gross abuse of power and an affront to the separation of powers,’ they said Tuesday.

‘Compounding those legal errors, the Court fails even to correctly identify the date of the indictment in this case – a factual mistake that forecloses the premise of misconduct on which the Court’s inquiry is based,’ they said.

They stated further that Halligan’s identification ‘is correct and consistent with the Department of Justice’s internal guidance, and at minimum reflects a contested legal position that the United States is entitled to maintain notwithstanding a single district judge’s contrary view.’

In addition, they said, Currie’s determination on the validity of Halligan’s appointment as it relates to Comey’s and James’s criminal cases is not binding – nor does it preclude the Justice Department from challenging that determination, or Halligan from legitimately heading up the U.S. attorney’s office on other cases and matters.

‘A contested legal position does not become a factual misrepresentation simply because one district judge has rejected it,’ the Justice Department said Tuesday. ‘In any event, this Court has no authority to strike Ms. Halligan’s title from the Government’s signature block.’ 

‘The bottom line is that Ms. Halligan has not ‘misrepresented’ anything and the Court is flat wrong to suggest that any change to the Government’s signature block is warranted in this or any other case – particularly where that suggestion rests on an objectively incorrect chronology,’ they said in the filing.

The new filing comes after months of back-and-forth over the decision to install Halligan, Trump’s former personal lawyer with no prosecutorial experience, as the interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia last fall. 

The Justice Department, for its part, has doubled down on its defense of Halligan, and senior Trump officials have blasted the judges in question for engaging in what they described as a ‘campaign of bias and hostility’ against Halligan.   

‘As Attorney General Bondi and President Trump know well, Lindsey Halligan is an effective U.S. Attorney who is prosecuting violent crime at the hands of illegal aliens, prosecuting the alleged distribution by a Democrat operative of child sexual abuse material, and even prosecuting alleged money laundering by a Venezuelan national, which is exactly why her opponents want to stop her,’ a spokesperson for the Justice Department told Fox News Digital. 

McBride’s dismissal from EDVA was confirmed to Fox News Digital by individuals familiar with the matter, citing what they described as a refusal to take on significant cases, such a immigration-related cases — involving sanctuary city policies and drug enforcement issues, which have long been priorities of the Trump administration — and other matters. 

Currie ruled in November that Halligan was unlawfully appointed to the role. Because Halligan was the sole prosecutor who secured the criminal indictments against Comey and James, Currie ruled that the indictments were invalid, dismissed Comey’s case and James’ case ‘without prejudice.’ 

That detail leaves the door open for the government to secure new indictments, should it choose to do so.

This is a developing news story. Check back soon for updates.

New York Attorney General Letitia James and a coalition of state attorneys general sued the federal government Tuesday, claiming a new Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) policy illegally pressures states to discriminate against transgender people or risk losing critical funding.

The lawsuit challenges a new federal policy that conditions billions of dollars in health, education and research funding on compliance with a presidential executive order regarding sex and gender-related treatments.

‘The federal government is trying to force states to choose between their values and the vital funding their residents depend on,’ James said in a statement. ‘This policy threatens healthcare for families, life-saving research, and education programs that help young people thrive in favor of denying the dignity and existence of transgender people.’

Last month, HHS announced a sweeping package of proposed regulatory actions to end ‘sex-rejecting procedures’ on minors as part of President Donald Trump’s January 2025 executive order calling on the department to protect children from ‘chemical and surgical mutilation.’

The HHS declaration warned doctors that they could be excluded from federal health programs, including Medicare and Medicaid, if they provide treatments such as puberty blockers, hormone therapy and gender surgeries to minors.

Failure to comply with the policy could lead to termination of grants, repayment of funds already spent, or potential civil or criminal penalties, according to the lawsuit.

The attorneys general argue that HHS lacks the authority to impose the conditions and is attempting to rewrite federal law through executive action.

The lawsuit claims that HHS has failed to clearly define what compliance requires, leaving recipients uncertain about which policies or actions could jeopardize funding.

James and the coalition further argue that the executive order conflicts with laws in several states that protect transgender individuals from discrimination.

The lawsuit asks a federal court to declare the policy unlawful and block HHS from enforcing it, allowing states and institutions to continue receiving federal funding without changing existing policies.

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

A series of corporations have shared new details about donations to President Donald Trump’s White House ballroom, in response to queries by Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and other lawmakers regarding contributions. 

Trump revealed in October 2025 that construction had gotten underway on the ballroom, which led to the demolition of the White House’s historic East Wing. He asserted the ballroom would be privately funded at an estimated cost of $300 million — up from the $200 million estimate first provided in July 2025 when the project was unveiled.

Meanwhile, Democrats have voiced concerns that organizations might have contributed to the project because they are seeking something in return from the administration. 

Microsoft said that a fundraiser contacted the tech giant about a possible donation, and Amazon said that it started communicating with a fundraising group in August, according to letters from several giant corporations released by Warren’s office.

Microsoft said that it was provided information on the Trust for the National Mall’s management of contributions as a partner of the National Park Service, how to donate, and an invitation to a dinner for supporters. Microsoft ultimately contributed to the Trust for the National Mall with the understanding that the funds would go toward the ballroom. 

‘Microsoft understands that these funds (along with contributions from other donors) will be used to support the construction of the ballroom,’ Microsoft counsel Karen Christian said in a letter to lawmakers in December 2025. ‘As Microsoft has publicly stated, Microsoft supported this effort to update a home built more than 200 years ago so that it can meet the needs of the 21st century.’ 

‘The benefits of this project will redound not only to this presidency, but presidencies to come, as they welcome guests to the White House on behalf of the American people. Microsoft is proud to have supported this effort.’ 

Additionally, Amazon said that it started communicating with fundraisers about the project in August 2025, where potential giving amounts and the dinner for donors were discussed. 

‘We worked directly with the Trust for the National Mall to coordinate our payment, and attended the White House program commemorating the launch of the project on October 15, 2025,’ Amazon’s vice president of public policy, Brian Huseman, said in a letter in December 2025. ‘We did not review any construction plans or enter into an agreement related to the donation. Amazon chose to be listed as a donor because we remain committed to supporting projects that celebrate and promote our nation’s heritage.’ 

Warren and Min’s offices did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital about whether they still had concerns following the responses from corporations. 

Warren, along with other lawmakers, have sought to put limits on private donations, amid concerns about potential bribery. 

As a result, Warren and the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, Rep. Robert Garcia of California, introduced the Stop Ballroom Bribery Act, which would bar donations from organizations or individuals that present a conflict of interest, and would prohibit the president, vice president or their families and staff from soliciting donations.

Once donations have been made and are cleared by the directors of the National Park Service and the Office of Government Ethics, the measure would then bar displaying donors’ names in recognition of the donation, and would also require a two-year freeze for the donor to lobby the federal government.

Trump has spearheaded multiple renovation projects at the White House during his second term. This includes adding gold accents to the White House’s Oval Office and paving the Rose Garden.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., on Tuesday suggested that the ‘meat and bones’ of President Donald Trump’s message of ‘help’ to Iran’s anti-regime demonstrators should include ‘military, cyber and psychological attacks’ against the regime.

Graham issued the message in a post on X, describing Trump as ‘Reagan Plus’ and ‘certainly not Obama’ when it comes to protecting America’s national security interests.

‘There is no bigger threat to world order than the Iranian ayatollah’s religious Nazi regime that wantonly kills its people, supports international terrorism and has American blood on its hands,’ Graham wrote. ‘The death blow to the ayatollah is going to be a combination of the incredible patriotic bravery of the protestors, and decisive action by President Trump. The protestors go to the streets unarmed, risking their lives because they believe President Trump has their backs.’

Graham wrote that the ‘tipping point’ will be Trump’s ‘resolve.’

‘No boots on the ground, but unleashing holy hell – as he promised – on the regime that has trampled every red line,’ the senator wrote. ‘A massive wave of military, cyber and psychological attacks is the meat and bones of ‘help is on the way.’’

Graham said he would want to destroy the regime’s infrastructure that allows the killing of the Iranian people, and to ‘take down’ the leaders responsible for the killing.

‘The Iranian people’s long nightmare will soon be over,’ he wrote.

Graham was responding to an announcement Trump earlier made on social media.

Trump vowed that those responsible for killing anti-regime demonstrators will ‘pay a big price,’ saying he has canceled all meetings with the Iranian regime until its crackdown on unrest ends. Iran had previously claimed it was in contact with U.S. officials amid the protests.

‘Iranian Patriots, KEEP PROTESTING – TAKE OVER YOUR INSTITUTIONS!’ Trump wrote on Truth Social. ‘Save the names of the killers and abusers. They will pay a big price.’

‘I have canceled all meetings with Iranian Officials until the senseless killing of protesters STOPS. HELP IS ON ITS WAY,’ he added.

As Trump later toured a Ford factory in Detroit, FOX Business White House correspondent Edward Lawrence asked him what kind of ‘help’ he meant.

‘You’re going to have to figure that one out,’ Trump replied.

Since the unrest broke out, Iranian authorities have killed at least 646 protesters, with thousands more deaths expected to be confirmed. Fox News chief foreign correspondent Trey Yingst reported Tuesday that there are reports of at least 3,000 Iranians being killed, though the real number is likely to be higher.

Fox News Digital’s Anders Hagstrom contributed to this report.