Alabama Republican Gov. Kay Ivey has signed a new bill that she says answers a simple question: What is a woman?

The bill from state Rep. Susan DuBose, R-Leeds, and Sen. April Weaver, R-Alabaster, would adjust state law to explicitly define "man," "woman," "boy," "girl," "father," "mother," "male," female" and "sex."

It cleared the legislature in Montgomery on Wednesday.

"If the Good Lord made you a boy, you’re a boy. And if He made you a girl, you’re a girl," Ivey said in a signing statement from the Capitol.

"In Alabama, we believe there are two genders: Male and female. There is nothing complicated or controversial about it."

KETANJI BROWN JACKSON REFUSES TO DEFINE THE WORD 'WOMAN'

"Today, I was proud to officially answer the question "What is a Woman?" with my signature on Senate Bill 79. It did not take a biologist to figure it out."

In comments to Fox News Digital, Ivey said prior to the signing: "In Alabama, it does not take a biologist to answer the question: What is a woman?"

During Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s confirmation hearing, the jurist told Tennessee Sen. Marsha Blackburn she could not define the term "woman." "In this context – I’m not a biologist," Brown Jackson said. 

"There are only two genders: Male and female," Ivey told Fox News Digital.

The law would require the government to collect vital statistics to identify a person's sex at birth and "delete obsolete or unnecessary definitions and make nonsubstantive, technical revisions to update the existing code language to current style."

"For purposes of state law, a ‘female’ is an individual whose biological reproductive system is designed to produce ova, and a ‘male’ is an individual whose biological reproductive system is designed to fertilize the ova of a female," a draft of the bill published on a government site read.

WOMANHOOD IS NOT A GAME OF SEMANTICS, ATTORNEY SAYS

Alabama House Speaker Nathaniel Ledbetter told Fox News Digital on Thursday the Yellowhammer State is one that "refuses to back down from commonsense conservative values."

"We believe boys should play against boys and girls should play against girls. We believe that men have no business using the girls’ restroom," said Ledbetter, R-Rainsville.

Ledbetter said every human is made in the image of God and their gender is defined by Him.

"I am proud that the House has passed Rep. Susan DuBose’s ‘What Is a Woman Act’ and look forward to Governor Ivey signing it into law," he said.

DuBose told Fox News Digital she is grateful to know that her children and future generations in Alabama will not have to worry about losing opportunities to men:

"I couldn’t be more thrilled to see this bill pass the legislature," DuBose said. 

"Alabamians know what a woman is, and we have fought hard to ensure our laws do too. I am grateful to all my colleagues for their support in finally getting this bill to Governor Ivey’s desk, and I look forward to watching her sign it into law."

The bill does have its opponents, including the ACLU of Alabama.

"We oppose House Bill 405. The ‘What is a Woman’ Act seeks to answer a question that is contextualized by far more than biological gender norms that this bill seeks to codify," a statement from the group read.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

"The bill establishes a stringent assertion of the definition of a man or woman that completely cuts transgender people out of the picture. This bill attempts to place antiquated gender assumptions as a rule of law."

The group added that the legislation will make it more difficult for transgender people to "authentically" live life.

Democrats, including state Reps. Barbara Drummond of Mobile and Napoleon Bracy of Pritchard, also objected to the bill only being slated for 10 minutes of floor debate.

The Blackburn-Jackson incident and ensuing public debate also led conservative commentator Matt Walsh to produce a documentary on the matter called "What is a Woman?"

When the issue first came up in the Jackson hearing, Blackburn said the jurist being unable to give a "straight answer" about "something as fundamental as what a woman is" underscores the dangers of progressive education.

Blackburn suggested that biological male athletes should not be allowed to compete against women.

Lawyers for former White House chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon are reportedly in talks with prosecutors regarding a potential plea deal in a case accusing Bannon of defrauding donors in an effort to build a border wall, according to several reports.

The post Report: Steve Bannon Lawyers in Talks with Prosecutors for Plea Deal in Border Wall Fraud Case appeared first on Breitbart.

President Donald Trump mocked the relevance of news outlet HuffPost, suggesting he thought it "died," in an exchange with a reporter on Sunday over statements that Vice President JD Vance made about judicial interference.

"JD Vance suggested that if the Supreme Court rules in a way that you don't like, they could just enforce it by themselves," a reporter at a press conference on Air Force One said, addressing Trump. "Do you agree with that?"

The reporter's comments came after Vance stated that "judges aren't allowed to control the executive's legitimate power." 

TRUMP'S KEY TO CABINET CONFIRMATIONS: SENATOR-TURNED-VP VANCE'S GIFT OF GAB

"If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal," Vance wrote on X Sunday after a federal judge ruled that the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) would not be able to access the Treasury Department. "If a judge tried to command the attorney general in how to use her discretion as a prosecutor, that’s also illegal. Judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power."

But when confronted by the reporter about Vance's comments, Trump said that he wasn't aware of the controversy. 

"I don't know even what you're talking about," Trump responded. "Neither do you. Who are you with?"

JD VANCE TO ATTEND AI SUMMIT IN PARIS, FRENCH OFFICIAL SAYS

"HuffPost," the reporter said. 

"Oh, no wonder," Trump said. "I thought they, I thought they died. Are they still around? I haven't read them in years. I thought they died."

The HuffPost did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 

When asked directly about the court ruling blocking DOGE from accessing Treasury Department and data systems, Trump criticized the judge in question, U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of New York Paul Engelmayer. 

"No, I disagree with it 100%. I think it's crazy," Trump told Fox News host Bret Baier in an interview. "And we have to solve the efficiency problem. We have to solve the fraud, waste, abuse, all the things that have gone into the government. You take a look at the USAID, the kind of fraud in there." 

Fox News' Emma Colton contributed to this report.

A federal judge issued a ruling on Saturday, blocking Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from having access to Treasury Department data and records.

The post Judge Blocks Elon Musk, DOGE, Access to Treasury Department Data appeared first on Breitbart.

Democratic attorneys general from 19 states have filed a federal lawsuit against the Trump administration over the Department of Government Efficiency’s (DOGE) access to sensitive, personal data belonging to Americans at the Treasury Department. 

The lawsuit claims the Elon Musk-run agency illegally accessed the Treasury Department’s central payment system at the Trump administration’s behest. 

On Thursday, the Treasury agreed to limit the Musk team’s access to its payment systems while a judge hears arguments in a previous lawsuit filed by a group of employee unions and retirees. 

The lawsuit, filed Monday, claimed Musk’s team violated the law by being given "full access" to the Treasury’s payment systems.

FEDERAL JUDGE ORDERS LIMITED DOGE ACCESS TO SENSITIVE TREASURY DEPARTMENT PAYMENT SYSTEM RECORDS 

The payment systems have information about Americans’ Social Security, Medicare and veterans’ benefits, tax refund information and much more. 

U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told FOX Business Wednesday the concerns are not valid. 

"DOGE is not going to fail," he said. "They are moving a lot of people's cheese here in the capital, and when you hear this squawking, then some status quo interest is not happy.

"At the Treasury, our payment system is not being touched. We process 1.3 billion payments a year. There is a study being done — can we have more accountability, more accuracy, more traceability that the money is going where it is? But, in terms of payments being stopped, that is happening upstream at the department level."

ELON MUSK DUNKS ON SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER, DECLARING 'HYSTERICAL REACTIONS' DEMONSTRATE DOGE'S IMPORTANCE

DOGE was launched to root out wasteful spending in the government, and it has already come close to closing the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). 

The lawsuit was filed in New York by the office of New York Attorney General Letitia James, a vocal Trump critic. 

It includes attorneys general from Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin.

"President Trump does not have the power to give away Americans’ private information to anyone he chooses, and he cannot cut federal payments approved by Congress," James said in a statement. "Musk and DOGE have no authority to access Americans’ private information and some of our country’s most sensitive data."

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Treasury officials on Wednesday denied violating privacy laws, saying only two members of the DOGE team had been given "read-only" access to information in the payment systems. 

The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report. 

A group of transgender people is challenging the Trump administration's new policy that prevents the issuing of passports with sex designations that do not match an applicant's biological sex at birth.

Seven people represented by the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit claiming the policy violates privacy and First Amendment rights. In 2022, the State Department allowed passport applicants to select M, F or X for sex. 

"The plaintiffs in this case have had their lives disrupted by a chaotic policy clearly motivated by animus that serves zero public interest," said Sruti Swaminathan, staff attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project. 

"Our clients need to travel for work, school and family, and forcing them to carry documents that directly contradict what they know about themselves to be true — or withhold those documents altogether — is a blatant effort to violate their privacy and deny them their freedom to be themselves."

INDIANA JUDGE RULES PRISON MUST PROVIDE TRANSGENDER SURGERY FOR INMATE WHO KILLED BABY

The rule came after President Donald Trump signed an executive order promoting the "biological truth."

The order, "Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government," declares that the U.S. will recognize only two sexes — male and female — based on immutable biological characteristics. 

It prohibits the use of gender identity in legal and administrative contexts and mandates that federal agencies, including those overseeing housing, prisons and education, adhere to this definition when enforcing laws and issuing regulations. 

The order directs changes to government-issued identification documents, bans the promotion of "gender ideology" in federal programs, rescinds previous executive actions that promoted gender identity inclusion and instructs federal agencies to eliminate guidance or regulations that conflict with the new policy.

TRUMP SIGNS EXECUTIVE ORDERS BANNING 'RADICAL GENDER IDEOLOGY,' DEI INITIATIVES IN THE MILITARY

It mandated the requirement that government-issued identification documents "accurately reflect" the holder’s sex, defined as "male" or "female."

In a statement released by the ACLU, Reid Solomon-Lane, one of the plaintiffs, said he's lived his whole adult life as a man. 

"Everyone in my personal and professional life knows me as a man, and any stranger on the street who encountered me would view me as a man," Solomon-Lane said. "Now, as a married father of three, Trump’s executive order and the ensuing passport policy have threatened that life of safety and ease. 

"If my passport were to reflect a sex designation that is inconsistent with who I am, I would be forcibly outed every time I used my passport for travel or identification, causing potential risk to my safety and my family’s safety."

Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House and State Department. 

The ACLU said it's been contacted by more than 1,500 transgender people or family members, "many with passport applications suspended or pending, who are concerned about being able to get passports that accurately reflect their identity."

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor criticized the Court's 2024 presidential immunity case in her first public appearance since the start of the second Trump term, saying it places the Court's legitimacy on the line. 

Sotomayor made the comments during an appearance in Louisville, Kentucky, during which she was asked a range of questions, including the public's perception of the high court, according to the Associated Press. Sotomayor's comments are her first in public since President Donald Trump took office last month. 

"If we as a court go so much further ahead of people, our legitimacy is going to be questioned," Sotomayor said during the Louisville event. "I think the immunity case is one of those situations. I don’t think that Americans have accepted that anyone should be above the law in America. Our equality as people was the foundation of our society and of our Constitution."

'INTEGRITY OF THE COURT': CRUZ REINTRODUCES AMENDMENT TO COMBAT COURT EXPANSION EFFORTS

In a 6-3 decision in July 2024, the Supreme Court ruled in Trump v. United States that a former president has substantial immunity from prosecution for official acts committed while in office, but not for unofficial acts.

The case stemmed from Special Counsel Jack Smith’s federal election interference case in which he charged Trump with conspiracy to defraud the U.S.; conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding; obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding; and conspiracy against rights. 

Sotomayor notably wrote the dissent, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, saying the decision "makes a mockery of the principle, foundational to our Constitution and system of Government, that no man is above the law."

JUSTICE CLARENCE THOMAS SWEARING IN MULTIPLE TRUMP CABINET OFFICIALS RAISES EYEBROWS AT CNN

"Never in the history of our Republic has a President had reason to believe that he would be immune from criminal prosecution if he used the trappings of his office to violate the criminal law," the dissent continued. "Moving forward, however, all former Presidents will be cloaked in such immunity. If the occupant of that office misuses official power for personal gain, the criminal law that the rest of us must abide will not provide a backstop. With fear for our democracy, I dissent."

During her Louisville appearance, Sotomayor shared that she "had a hard time with the immunity case," saying the Constitution contains provisions "not exempting the president from criminal activity after an impeachment."

Sotomayor warned that if the Court were to continue down the same path, the Court's legitimacy would ultimately be at risk. 

SUPREME COURT DENIES TRUMP ATTEMPT TO STOP SENTENCING IN NEW YORK V. TRUMP

"And if we continue going in directions that the public is going to find hard to understand, we’re placing the court at risk," Sotomayor said. 

When asked for comment, a White House spokesperson told Fox News Digital, "This historic 6-3 ruling speaks for itself."

The justice suggested that one way to resolve the public's distrust in the Court would be to slow down in overturning precedent. The Court has, in recent years, overturned various landmark decisions, including Roe v. Wade in 2022, and striking down affirmative action in college admissions in 2023 and the Chevron doctrine in 2024. 

"I think that creates instability in the society, in people’s perception of law and people’s perception of whether we’re doing things because of legal analysis or because of partisan views," Sotomayor said. "Whether those views are accurate or not, I don’t accuse my colleagues of being partisan."

Sotomayor made similar comments in 2023, saying she had a "a sense of despair" about the Court's direction following the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision, which overturned Roe. Sotomayor did not name the case specifically. 

However, the justice said she did not have the luxury to dwell on those feelings.

"It’s not an option to fall into despair," Sotomayor said. "I have to get up and keep fighting."

Fox News Digital's Ronn Blitzer and the Associated Press contributed to this report. 

Justin Baldoni's team has launched a new website amid his ongoing legal battle with "It Ends With Us" co-star Blake Lively.

The website, thelawsuitinfo.com, which was published Saturday, featured a landing page with links to two PDF files, including a copy of a newly amended complaint that the 41-year-old actor filed against the 37-year-old actress and her husband, Ryan Reynolds, and another document with a 168-page "timeline of relevant events" that showcased new emails and texts related to the case. 

Both documents were filed Friday in New York federal court ahead of the case's first hearing, which is scheduled for Monday.

Lively has claimed she was sexually harassed on the set of "It Ends With Us" and filed a lawsuit against Baldoni, his Wayfarer studio and former PR representatives in December. The same day Lively filed her suit, Baldoni filed a $250 million suit against The New York Times for a December article about Lively's lawsuit and the alleged smear campaign Baldoni attempted to run against his co-star.

Weeks later, Baldoni then named Lively and Reynolds in a separate $400 million defamation lawsuit in which he accused the Hollywood power couple of attempting to hijack "It Ends With Us" and create their own narrative. 

Baldoni's amended complaint alleged Lively had been working with The New York Times weeks before the article was published in December. 

The documents stated that metadata embedded within The New York Times article indicated the outlet "had already begun building its defamatory Article no later than October 31, 2024." 

The lawsuit claimed that "careful observers reported that viewing the HTML source code for the Article revealed references to a 'message-embed-generator' that referred [to a] date of ‘2024-10-31.’" 

LIKE WHAT YOU’RE READING? CLICK HERE FOR MORE ENTERTAINMENT NEWS

According to the documents, The New York Times created a tool to display Lively's texts in the article Oct. 31, which Baldoni's legal team suggested was evidence the story was first generated on or before that date.

"It may seem unsurprising and even respectable that a news organization should work for weeks or months before publishing a purported investigative report," the documents say. 

"But the significance of the timing of these elements of the defamatory Article is that they strip away the legal shields that Lively, the Times, and the other Lively Parties were likely relying on to protect their malicious acts of defamation, such as the litigation privilege and the fair reporting privilege."

In a statement to Fox News Digital, Baldoni's lawyer, Bryan Freedman, addressed the amended complaint. 

"The decision to amend our lawsuit was a logical next step due to the overwhelming amount of new proof that has come to light," Freedman said.

"This fresh evidence corroborates what we knew all along, that due to a blind pursuit of power, Ms. Lively and her entire team colluded for months to destroy reputations through a complex web of lies, false accusations and the manipulation of illicitly received communications.

CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR THE ENTERTAINMENT NEWSLETTER

"The ongoing public interest in this case online has ironically shed light on the undeniable facts pertaining to The New York Times and how heavily Ms. Lively and her representatives were not only deeply involved in the attempted takedown and smear campaign of Mr. Baldoni, Wayfarer Studios and their teams but that they themselves initiated it."

In a statement to Fox News Digital, The New York Times Company's representative, Danielle Rhoades Ha, pushed back against claims made in the amended lawsuit.

"The Baldoni/Wayfarer legal filings are rife with inaccuracies about The New York Times, including, for example, the bogus claim that The Times had early access to Ms. Lively's state civil rights complaint," she said.

"Mr. Baldoni's lawyers base their erroneous claim on postings by amateur internet sleuths, who, not surprisingly, are wrong. The sleuths have noted that a version of the Lively state complaint published by The Times carries the date 'December 10' even though the complaint wasn't filed until more than a week later. The problem: that date is generated by Google software and is unrelated to the date when The Times received it and posted it."

Representatives for Lively did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment.

Fox News Digital's Tracy Wright contributed to this report.

Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni controversies prior to working on "It Ends With Us" have been called into question now, with the actors engaged in multimillion dollar lawsuits against each other. 

Lively filed a sexual harassment suit in December against Justin Baldoni, his Wayfarer studio and former PR reps. The same day Lively filed her suit, Baldoni filed a $250 million suit against the New York Times for a December article about the alleged smear campaign Baldoni attempted to run against his co-star.

Weeks later, Baldoni then named Lively and Reynolds in a separate $400 million defamation lawsuit in which he accused the Hollywood power couple of attempting to hijack "It Ends With Us" and create their own narrative.

TAYLOR SWIFT, BLAKE LIVELY FRIENDSHIP STRONG DESPITE CLAIM JUSTIN BALDONI LAWSUIT TEARING THEM APART: INSIDER

Baldoni, 41, apologized to Lively in a six-minute message seemingly sent after the pair met to discuss a now-infamous rooftop scene from the movie in which he claimed in legal documents that he felt pressured by Lively's husband, Ryan Reynolds, and her best friend, Taylor Swift, to use Lively's rewritten scene for the film.

Lively rose to fame in the 2000s thanks in part to "The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants" and her starring role on "Gossip Girl," where she portrayed Upper East Side "it girl" Serena Van Der Woodsen.

The show, which premiered in 2007 and ran for five years on The CW network, featured an all-star cast of up-and-coming actors, including, Penn Badgley, Chace Crawford, Leighton Meester and Ed Westwick.

JUSTIN BALDONI APOLOGIZES TO BLAKE LIVELY IN 6-MINUTE VOICE NOTE AFTER ‘IT ENDS WITH US’ ROOFTOP SCENE

On camera, Lively and Meester were sworn frenemies, and off-camera appeared to be no different for the actors, too. Lively and Meester reportedly "avoid each other like the plague" on set, which left their castmates to "choose sides," according to a New York Magazine piece published in 2008.

Executive producer Joshua Safran admitted that Lively and Meester were business as usual on set without unnecessary pleasantries.

"Blake and Leighton were not friends," Safran told Vanity Fair during the "Gossip Girl" 10-year anniversary. "They were friendly, but they were not friends like Serena and Blair. Yet the second they’d be on set together, it’s as if they were."

Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds said "I do" on Sept. 9, 2012, in South Carolina at Boone Hall Plantation. The location in Mount Pleasant had nine slave cabins and was referred to as "slave street."

JUSTIN BALDONI CLAIMS UNEDITED ‘IT ENDS WITH US’ FOOTAGE REFUTES BLAKE LIVELY'S SEXUAL HARASSMENT ACCUSATIONS

Nearly eight years after their wedding, the couple shared regret for hosting the nuptials on a plantation.

"We're ashamed that in the past we've allowed ourselves to be uninformed about how deeply rooted systemic racism is," they wrote on Instagram at the time, accompanied by a $20,000 donation to the NAACP. 

"It's something we'll always be deeply and unreservedly sorry for," Reynolds told "Fast Company" in 2020. "It's impossible to reconcile. What we saw at the time was a wedding venue on Pinterest. What we saw after was a place built upon devastating tragedy."

LIKE WHAT YOU’RE READING? CLICK HERE FOR MORE ENTERTAINMENT NEWS

Fans criticized Lively for seemingly using the "It Ends With Us" press tour to market her own personal endeavors. 

While the film includes challenging subjects of domestic violence and emotional abuse, Lively launched her own haircare line, Blake Brown Beauty, on Aug. 4, the week "It Ends With Us" was set to premiere theatrically.

Additionally, another business opportunity was blooming for Lively, and she released her Betty Blooms floral arrangements collection one day before the movie was released in US theaters.

Justin Baldoni previously admitted he was introduced to pornography at a young age and formed an "unhealthy relationship" with adult content.

"I was introduced to porn when I was 10 years old. Long before I ever, you know, could have an erection or even knew how I felt about anything," he told Sarah Grynberg on her "A Life of Greatness" podcast. "We’ve sexualized this thing, so of course it becomes fascinating and interesting, and you’re like, ‘Oh my God, boobs.’ And then, you know, hormones start raging."

Baldoni admitted he found comfort in porn when he was alone "or when I felt abandoned, or when I felt hurt or something like that, because it was a dopamine rush. I didn’t know that then. At an early age, I trained my brain to deal with pain with the dopamine hit."

CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR THE ENTERTAINMENT NEWSLETTER

While alcohol or drugs were never of interest to him, porn was something he could use in an "unhealthy" way.

"And I found myself, over the course of my life, going back to looking at images and videos of naked women when I was feeling necessarily bad about myself," he said. "And I knew that it was an issue for me when I would tell myself that I don’t want to do that."

Baldoni's "It Ends With Us" lawyer, Bryan Freedman, previously represented Travis Flores, who accused Baldoni of stealing his movie idea for Baldoni's directorial debut, "Five Feet Apart," which starred Cole Sprouse and Haley Lu Richardson.

Flores accused Baldoni of reading his script, which was inspired by his own struggles living with cystic fibrosis and centered around two teens with the genetic disease. Soon after, Flores allegedly discovered that Baldoni was working on a similar story through his Wayfarer production banner.

Baldoni never publicly spoke out about Flores' accusations. Freedman filed to dismiss the case in 2022, and the case was settled soon after, according to The Hollywood Reporter. The children's book author died in 2024.

The Supreme Court will weigh an effort to establish the nation's first religious charter school with implications for school choice and religious practices. 

The court agreed Friday to hear two cases on the matter, which will be argued together — Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board v. Drummond and St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School v. Drummond. 

In 2023, the Statewide Virtual Charter School Board voted to approve an application by the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Oklahoma City and the Diocese of Tulsa for a K-12 online school, the St. Isidore of Seville Virtual Charter School.

SUPREME COURT TO DECIDE IF FAMILIES CAN OPT OUT OF READING LGBTQ BOOKS IN THE CLASSROOM

Oklahoma parents, faith leaders and an education group sought to block the school after the approval. 

In a 7-1 decision, the Oklahoma Supreme Court found a taxpayer-funded religious charter school would violate the First Amendment's provision on "establishment of religion" and the state constitution.

"Under Oklahoma law, a charter school is a public school," Justice James Winchester wrote in the court’s majority opinion. "As such, a charter school must be nonsectarian.

"However, St. Isidore will evangelize the Catholic school curriculum while sponsored by the state."

Alliance Defending Freedom Chief Counsel Jim Campbell told Fox News Digital the case "is fundamentally about religious discrimination and school choice."

SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS LOOMING TIKTOK BAN

"The Supreme Court has been clear in three cases over the last eight years that you can't create a public program like that and then exclude religious organizations," Campbell said. "So, we're going to be arguing before the court that the state of Oklahoma should be allowed to open up the program to religious organizations."

Campbell says the decision would give parents, families and the state "more educational options." 

Oklahoma Republican Attorney General Gentner Drummond, who originally challenged the school's approval, has previously said the school's establishment is unconstitutional. His spokesperson told Fox News Digital in a statement the attorney general "looks forward to presenting our arguments before the high court."

"I will continue to vigorously defend the religious liberty of all 4 million Oklahomans," Drummond said in a statement released in October. "This unconstitutional scheme to create the nation’s first state-sponsored religious charter school will open the floodgates and force taxpayers to fund all manner of religious indoctrination, including radical Islam or even the Church of Satan. My fellow Oklahomans can rest assured that I will always fight to protect their God-given rights and uphold the law."

TENNESSEE AG OPTIMISTIC ABOUT SCOTUS CASE AFTER 'RADICAL GENDER IDEOLOGY' REVERSAL IN LOWER COURT

The Oklahoma case is one of several religious institution cases that have been filed in the Supreme Court. 

In 2017, the high court ruled in favor of a Missouri church that sued the state after being denied taxpayer funds for a playground project as a result of a provision that prohibits state funding for religious entities. 

Likewise, in 2020, the Supreme Court struck down a ban on taxpayer funding for religious schools in a 5-4 decision that backed a Montana tax-credit scholarship program. Most recently, in 2022, the Supreme Court ruled that a Maine tuition assistance program violated the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause for excluding religious schools from eligibility.

Campbell said given the court's previous considerations of cases involving religious educational institutions, he is "hopeful that the Supreme Court will recognize that the same principle applies here."

"You can't create a charter school program that allows private organizations to participate but tell the religious groups that they can't be included," Campbell said. "So, we're hopeful that the Supreme Court will make it clear that people of faith deserve to be a part of the charter school program as well."

Justice Amy Coney Barrett recused herself from the case, although an explanation was not given. The Supreme Court is expected to hear oral arguments in April. 

School choice has become a hot-button issue, particularly after the 2024 election cycle. President Donald Trump recently signed two executive orders on education, one to remove federal funding from K-12 schools that teach critical race theory and another to support school choice. 

Fox News Digital's Ronn Blitzer and the Associated Press contributed to this report. 

An aviation attorney predicts families of the midair collision victims will be filing lawsuits against both the U.S. government and American Airlines in the coming days. 

No survivors are expected after an Army Black Hawk helicopter on a training mission collided with an American Airlines regional jet carrying 64 people as the jet was preparing to land at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport on Wednesday evening. Three soldiers were aboard the Black Hawk. 

"Typically, right after — obviously, the families are dealing with a lot of shock and grief right now — a lot of times it’s really hard for people to wrap their minds around aircraft accidents because they’re just not supposed to happen," James Brauchle told Fox News Digital on Thursday, adding that air travel is "extremely safe."

"We haven’t had a commercial accident in the U.S. involving a U.S. carrier since 2009."

DC PLANE CRASH TIMELINE: MIDAIR COLLISION INVOLVES 67 PASSENGERS, CREW MEMBERS, SOLDIERS

Buffalo-bound Colgan Air Flight 3407 killed all 49 people on board on Feb. 12, 2009, after the plane stalled and crashed into a home, killing a person inside. 

Brauchle said the families’ main question as they struggle with their grief is "why did this happen? How did this happen? How could it have happened? And they really are seeking answers." 

He added that once they get through their "initial shock, that’s usually the next step is seeking the answers and wanting to know why this happened."

DC PLANE CRASH AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL AUDIO REVEALS MOMENT CONTROLLERS SAW DISASTER: ‘TOWER DID YOU SEE THAT?’

Brauchle said he doesn’t think there’s ever been a commercial aircraft crash in the U.S. that didn’t result in litigation. 

"So, I'm going to assume that that's going to happen," Brauchle said. "And that's usually done, obviously, through the filing of a lawsuit."

Based on his professional experience, he said, the airline and the government are both likely to be sued. 

Brauchle said the government’s accountability could be twofold.

"One for obviously operating the helicopter, because it was being flown by the Army, but also air traffic control that’s regulating and monitoring that airspace is FAA, which is again a government agency," he said. 

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Brauchle cautioned that it is early in the investigation.

Blake Lively’s brother-in-law this week "sincerely apologized" if he has said something that's "unkind" as the "It Ends With Us" actress continues her legal back and forth with former co-star Justin Baldoni. 

"Anytime I’ve said anything unkind about someone I’ve regretted it," Bart Johnson, a "Landman" actor, who is married to Robyn Lively, Blake’s older half-sister, wrote on X on Tuesday. "Fortunately that’s almost never and definitely not when I’m at my best."

He continued, "Regardless if it’s true or not, if it’s my opinion, even if I’m trying to speak truth or stand up for someone, it’s never good. Even in times where it might ‘feel’ justified and doing the right thing, it makes no difference. There’s a better way."

Johnson added that making cheap remarks is "below the standard I have for myself and I regret it. I do sincerely apologize to anyone I’ve hurt or let down by saying something that sounds mean. I’ll do better."

BLAKE LIVELY ACCUSES JUSTIN BALDONI'S LAWYER OF ATTEMPTING TO ‘TORPEDO’ ACTRESS' CAREER ‘FOR GOOD’

He said that any of his followers would be "hard pressed" to find more than one time when he’s criticized someone on social media. 

"You can easily find a million times I’ve uplifted, support, encourage and uplifted my family, friends, followers & strangers," he wrote. "That’s what I’m committed to and where I find my happiness. We all have flaws and I’m definitely a work in progress and doing my best to grow and be better. Sending ALL my love to ALL of you." 

Johnson didn’t give any specifics in the lengthy post, but it comes a month after he appeared to call Baldoni a "fraud" in a since-deleted post, according to USA Today. 

LIKE WHAT YOU’RE READING? CLICK HERE FOR MORE ENTERTAINMENT NEWS

"He’s a fraud. He puts on the 'costume' of a hero, man bun and all. Used all of the trendy catchphrases & buzz words for his podcasts. None of it’s genuine," Johnson reportedly wrote on X in late December. "It’s all theater. And everyone fell for it. For years." 

Baldoni hosts the "Man Enough" podcast, which "explores what it means to be a man today and how rigid gender roles have affected all people," according to the website. "The show creates a safe environment for a range of perspectives to meet and stay at the table, exploring how the messages of masculinity show up in relationships, body image, privilege, fatherhood, sex, success, mental health and so much more. Instead of polarizing and demonizing men and masculinity, it invites all humans to participate and thrive in the world."

CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR THE ENTERTAINMENT NEWSLETTER

Lively filed a sexual harassment suit in December against Baldoni, his Wayfarer studio and former PR reps that also alleged he had orchestrated a smear campaign against her. The same day Lively filed her suit, Baldoni filed a $250 million suit against the New York Times for a December article about the alleged smear campaign. 

Weeks later, Baldoni then named Lively and her husband, Ryan Reynolds, in a separate $400 million defamation lawsuit in which he accused the Hollywood power couple of attempting to hijack "It Ends With Us" and attempt to smear him with their own narrative. 

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Both Lively and Reynolds were producers on "It Ends With Us."

Fox News Digtial's Tracy Wright contributed to this report.  

A judge sentenced disgraced former Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., to 11 years in prison on Wednesday, concluding his trial for a "long-running bribery and foreign influence scheme of rare gravity."

The sentence is the harshest ever handed down to a U.S. senator. Breaking down in tears, Menendez pleaded with U.S. District Judge Sidney Stein for mercy in a New York City courtroom. 

"I have lost everything," he said. "Other than family, I have lost everything I care about. Every day I am awake is punishment. I am far from a perfect man… in half-century of public service, I have done far more good than bad."

Before handing down his punishment, Stein said: "I take no pleasure in this sentence."

DEMOCRATIC SEN. BOB MENENDEZ GUILTY ON ALL CHARGES IN FEDERAL CORRUPTION TRIAL

"You are quite right about your work. You worked your way up to a senator, to the chair of foreign relations committee," Stein told Menendez. "You were successful, powerful, stood at the apex of our political system. All letters are proof. Somewhere along the way, you lost your way."

Defense attorney Adam Fee told Stein to give Menendez credit for his lifetime of public service, asking for a sentence of no more than eight years. 

"Despite his decades of service, he is now known more widely as ‘Gold Bar Bob,’" Fee said.

Prosecutors had requested a 15-year sentence for Menendez, 71, after he was convicted in July 2024 on 16 counts of bribery, extortion, conspiracy and obstruction of justice. He is the first U.S. senator in American history to be convicted of working as a foreign agent. His co-defendants, Wael Hana and Fred Daibes, were also sentenced to eight years and seven years, respectively.

"As proven at trial, the defendants engaged, for years, in a corruption and foreign influence scheme of stunning brazenness, breadth, and duration, resulting in exceptionally grave abuses of power at the highest levels of the Legislative Branch of the United States Government," prosecutors wrote.

Prior to the announcement of his sentence, Daibes, 67, tearfully told Stein the jury verdict had left him "borderline suicidal," and requested leniency so that he could care for his 30-year-old autistic son.

Hana told the judge, "I am an innocent man."

"I never bribed Senator Menendez or asked his office for influence," he said.

The judge, though, said the jury's verdict was "very, very substantial."

A third businessman pleaded guilty and testified against Menendez at a trial last year.

BOB MENENDEZ TO RESIGN FROM SENATE AMID DEMOCRATIC PRESSURE AFTER GUILTY VERDICT

Outside the courthouse, Menendez proclaimed his innocence, calling his prosecution a "witch hunt" by the Justice Department. 

"President Trump is right. This process is political and it's corrupted to the core. I hope President Trump cleans up the cesspool and restores integrity to the system," he said. 

Menendez's conviction came after a nine-week-long trial. The former Democratic lawmaker was accused of accepting gifts totaling more than $100,000 in gold bars as well as cash.

The disgraced Democrat was accused and convicted of participating in a yearslong bribery scheme involving the governments of Egypt and Qatar. Menendez’s wife, Nadine, who is set to go on trial on March 18, also allegedly participated in the scheme. She is accused of receiving paychecks for a job that did not exist.

The indictment against Menendez came after co-defendant Jose Uribe — who allegedly gifted Nadine a Mercedes convertible — accepted a plea deal and agreed to cooperate with prosecutors. 

"Menendez, who swore an oath to represent the United States and the state of New Jersey, instead put his high office up for sale in exchange for this hoard of bribes," prosecutors wrote ahead of the sentencing.

Jamie Joseph, Rachel Wolf, Maria Paronich and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation, Elie Mystal, bashed White voters for helping advance a "disgusting" version of America during an interview Saturday about the first week of President Donald Trump's second term in office.

"This was all written down," Mystal said of Trump's agenda upon entering office. "I don’t like the shock and awe version of this because if you had been paying attention, they wrote it down. They told you exactly what they were going to do and exactly how they were going to do it and a majority of White people voted for this." 

Trump has caused consternation among Democrats in his first week after he pardoned over 1,500 prisoners charged for crimes related to the January 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol. 

TRUMP'S MOST VULNERABLE NOMINEES RFK JR, TULSI GABBARD GET BACK-TO-BACK HEARINGS

"This is the disgusting version of America that people want," Mystal said. 

"And, oh by the way, eggs are still more expensive, so you didn't even get that. Great job, White folks," he added, also referencing the importance of inflation during the election.

"In terms of how we cover it as a media group, we have to stop acting like any of these things have any basis in reality," Mystal continued.  

"There is no question about whether or not birthright citizenship is constitutional," he said. "It just is. There is no question about whether or not the Civil Rights Act should apply. It just does." 

AFTER RAUCOUS FIRST WEEK IN OFFICE, DONALD TRUMP TO KEEP HIS FOOT ON THE GAS

"Every time the media tries to sane-wash Trump, whitewash Trump, explain Trump, defend Trump, what they are doing is muddying the waters on these issues we have already decided," he continued. 

While Trump's first week in office has already been met with anger from Democrats over executive orders relating to Jan. 6 and the deportation of illegal immigrants from the country, his second also looks to be a busy one. 

Major policy initiatives that are likely to be addressed are the president's sweeping border security and ongoing deportation initiatives, increasing domestic energy production and advancing a new tax plan.

Immigration and deportation activities are expected to continue with border czar Tom Homan and the acting deputy attorney general, Emil Bove, traveling to Chicago on Sunday to witness the stepped-up enforcement actions.

Fox News' Matthew Richter contributed to this report. 

Justin Baldoni's support system is standing strong amid his ongoing legal battle with Blake Lively. 

Baldoni, who celebrated his 41st birthday Friday, received an outpouring of love on social media from two of his biggest fans — his wife, Emily, and mom, Sharon. 

"Happy Birthday Justin ~ remembering a wonderful moment after the final ending of ‘Jane The Virgin’- a moment where joy and love permeated the set, where friendships and family were born and kindness and integrity permeated the hearts of all the actors and crew, where sadness only entered because it was the final scene of a wonderful journey~ and the beginning of the rest of our lives," Sharon Baldoni wrote alongside a carousel of photos. 

JUSTIN BALDONI CLAIMS UNEDITED ‘IT ENDS WITH US’ FOOTAGE REFUTES BLAKE LIVELY'S SEXUAL HARASSMENT ACCUSATIONS 

"A happy loving and generous memory with hearts exploding with possibilities. Life has its moments and also its surprises- as you keep your integrity through it all Justice and truth will shine today and into eternity. I love you more than you will ever know! Happy Birthday my beautiful boy! May God continue to bless you in truth."

APP USERS CLICK HERE TO VIEW POST

On Friday, Baldoni's wife also shared her first Instagram post during the ongoing legal battle, writing, "Happy birthday my love. Celebrating the man, husband, and father that you are. I’d choose you again and again."

APP USERS CLICK HERE TO VIEW POST

The statements come one month after Lively detailed allegations of sexual harassment, retaliation, intentional affliction of emotional distress, negligence and more against Baldoni and film producer Jamey Heath in a complaint first filed with the California Civil Rights department and later in federal court.

Baldoni filed a $400 million lawsuit against Lively and her husband, Ryan Reynolds, accusing them of civil extortion and defamation. 

In the suit, Baldoni claimed Lively "refused to meet with the intimacy coordinator" to go over intimate scenes.

LIKE WHAT YOU’RE READING? CLICK HERE FOR MORE ENTERTAINMENT NEWS

This put Baldoni in "the awkward position of meeting alone with the intimacy coordinator and later relaying sex scene suggestions and plans to Lively in the intimacy coordinator’s absence," his suit states. 

"These meetings often took place, at Lively’s insistence, in the couple’s home, and often while Lively’s husband was present. Lively’s method of work was unconventional and uncomfortable for Baldoni. To suggest Baldoni was the one who created this scenario is knowingly false.

"As a result, many sex scenes were not written with simultaneous collaboration and input from both Lively and the intimacy coordinator, as Baldoni had long intended." 

Shortly after filing his suit, Baldoni's team released unedited footage from the set of "It Ends With Us" that it claims refutes Lively's previous accusations of sexual harassment. 

CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR THE ENTERTAINMENT NEWSLETTER

The video, shared by Baldoni's attorney, Bryan Freedman, and obtained by Fox News Digital, allegedly addresses the actress's claims about a slow dance scene.

WATCH: Justin Baldoni releases unedited 'It Ends With Us' footage featuring Blake Lively

After the release, Blake Lively's legal team demanded a gag order be issued against Baldoni's lawyer. 

Lively's team slammed Freedman for making multiple statements to the media that could taint a jury should the actress's sexual harassment complaints against Baldoni make it to a courtroom.

"As Ms. Lively’s counsel have attempted, repeatedly, to caution Mr. Freedman, federal litigation must be conducted in court and according to the relevant rules of professional conduct," a letter, obtained by Fox News Digital, stated. 

"His conduct threatens to, and will, materially prejudice both the Lively Case and the Wayfarer (Studios) Case by tainting the jury pool, because his statements are deliberately aimed at undermining the ‘character, credibility, [and] reputation’ of numerous relevant parties."

On Jan. 23, Baldoni's lawyers filed a response, calling Lively's gag order attempt an "intimidation tactic" and "tactical gamesmanship."

"Having publicly made ruinous allegations that the Wayfarer Parties can prove are false, the Lively Parties now invoke attorney disciplinary rules as an intimidation tactic," Baldoni's legal team wrote.

"The Lively Parties’ desire to force the Wayfarer Parties to defend themselves privately against allegations made publicly is not a proper basis for a gag order. It is tactical gamesmanship, and it is outrageous."

The filing says after a "bombshell" New York Times article included Lively's allegations of sexual harassment against Baldoni, releasing the unedited "This Ends With Us" footage has been vital to protecting Baldoni.

Fox News Digital's Lauryn Overhultz and Janelle Ash contributed to this report.

In his first week in office, President Donald Trump has charged ahead with a series of executive actions, fulfilling a key campaign promise to challenge "gender ideology" in American institutions and promote "biological truth" rooted in "fundamental and incontrovertible reality." 

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court is poised to rule on two significant gender-related cases this year, and Trump's new executive action could spell further controversy in the higher court.

Last week, SCOTUS agreed to hear Mahmoud v. Taylor, which would determine whether schools can force teachers to read LGBTQ books to elementary-age children despite parental objections. At issue is whether parents will have the right to opt their children out of such instructions.

"If the Supreme Court's doing its job, it shouldn't impact [the case decisions] at all," Heritage Foundation senior legal fellow Sarah Marshall Perry told Fox News Digital in an interview. "What Trump's executive order was is a statement of really what the policies are going to be for the executives going forward into the new administration. And he did exactly what [former President Joe] Biden did with his executive order expanding sex to include gender identity."

TRUMP SIGNS DOZENS OF EXECUTIVE ORDERS, FULFILLING MANY BUT NOT ALL CAMPAIGN PROMISES

Perry noted the separation of powers between the executive and judiciary branches, adding that while the executive is mostly a political entity, the judiciary is non-political. 

SCOTUS will be obligated to focus solely on the facts presented in the cases before them, she said, which "will include questions relative to the parameters of the parental rights guidance on school curriculums and exactly what constitutes curriculum for purposes of opt-out, whether gender medicine and age and medical-based restrictions that happen to impact individuals who are transgender is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause." 

She also pointed out that the executive order should not influence the Supreme Court's decision-making, adding, "The executive order should have absolutely no bearing on what the Supreme Court decides going forward."

PRO-LIFE ACTIVIST PROSECUTED BY BIDEN DOJ REACTS TO TRUMP PARDON: 'I WANT TO GIVE HIM A HUG'

In another case that already had their oral arguments heard last year, Skrmetti v. U.S., the higher court is weighing whether the equal protection clause, which guarantees equal treatment under the law for individuals in similar circumstances, prevents states from banning medical providers from offering puberty blockers and hormone treatments to children seeking transgender surgical procedures. 

The Biden administration joined the lawsuit by filing a petition to the Supreme Court in November 2023.

"I think the American people are gratified that they've got a president who is common sensical, who recognizes biological reality, who recognizes the text of civil rights law and the rule of law itself, and now they're going to say we have someone who was willing to stand in the gap for us, including through the Department of Justice, if the cases get all the way to the Supreme Court," Perry said. "But parents should, and I think will, be involved to be able to bring more legal challenges."

PRO-LIFE PROTESTERS PARDONED BY TRUMP, FOX CONFIRMS

"I think this election really sort of rises to shift, not just politically, but for many people philosophically as well, because we recognize that America was sort of pulled back from the perilous brink on even understanding what it meant to be male and female, even understanding what it meant to live amicably in a pluralistic society," Perry said. "We are now, I think, thankfully, seeing a rebirth of those long-standing beneficial ideas."

Trump's executive order, signed on Inauguration Day and titled, "Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government," declares that the U.S. will recognize only two sexes — male and female — based on immutable biological characteristics. 

It prohibits the use of gender identity in legal and administrative contexts, mandates that federal agencies, including those overseeing housing, prisons, and education, adhere to this definition when enforcing laws and issuing regulations. The order directs changes to government-issued identification documents, bans the promotion of "gender ideology" in federal programs, rescinds previous executive actions that promoted gender identity inclusion and instructs federal agencies to eliminate guidance or regulations that conflict with the new policy.

Trump's executive order reverses the Biden administration's executive order titled "Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation," signed in 2021, which directed federal agencies to interpret and enforce civil rights laws to prohibit discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation.

Justin Baldoni's legal team is not letting Blake Lively's gag order request go quietly.

Earlier this week, the actress demanded a gag order be enforced against Baldoni's lawyer, Bryan Freedman, after Freedman released unedited footage from the "It Ends With Us" set. 

In a court filing Tuesday, Lively's team slammed Freedman for making multiple statements to the media that could taint a jury should the actress's sexual harassment complaints against Baldoni make it to a courtroom.

On Jan. 23, Baldoni's lawyers filed a response, calling Lively's gag order attempt an "intimidation tactic" and "tactical gamesmanship."

JUSTIN BALDONI CLAIMS UNEDITED ‘IT ENDS WITH US’ FOOTAGE REFUTES BLAKE LIVELY'S SEXUAL HARASSMENT ACCUSATIONS 

"Having publicly made ruinous allegations that the Wayfarer Parties can prove are false, the Lively Parties now invoke attorney disciplinary rules as an intimidation tactic," Baldoni's legal team wrote.

"The Lively Parties’ desire to force the Wayfarer Parties to defend themselves privately against allegations made publicly is not a proper basis for a gag order. It is tactical gamesmanship, and it is outrageous."

The filing states that, after a "bombshell" New York Times article included Lively's allegations of sexual harassment against Baldoni, releasing the unedited "This Ends With Us" footage has been vital to protecting their client.

BLAKE LIVELY'S 'IT ENDS WITH US' COSTARS BRANDON SKLENAR, JENNY SLATE 'ADMIRE HER BRAVERY' AMID LAWSUIT

They called the backlash from the article "utterly calamitous," adding that Baldoni and his team have been "exiled from polite society" because of it. The letter also said Baldoni has suffered damages "totaling hundreds of millions of dollars due to Ms. Lively’s scorched-earth media campaign."

Representatives for Lively did not respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment.

The unedited "This Ends With Us" video, shared by Baldoni's attorney and obtained by Fox News Digital, allegedly addresses the actress's claims about a slow-dance scene.

WATCH: JUSTIN BALDONI RELEASES UNEDITED 'IT ENDS WITH US' FOOTAGE FEATURING BLAKE LIVELY

Lively claimed Baldoni "leaned forward and slowly dragged his lips from her ear and down her neck as he said, ‘It smells so good,'" while filming a slow dance montage scene, according to her Dec. 20 sexual harassment lawsuit obtained by Fox News Digital. 

"When Ms. Lively later objected to this behavior, Mr. Baldoni’s response was, ‘I’m not even attracted to you.’"

LIKE WHAT YOU’RE READING? CLICK HERE FOR MORE ENTERTAINMENT NEWS

However, Baldoni insisted the comment was made in regard to Lively's own admission about her spray tan. Throughout the video, nearly 10 minutes of raw footage, Baldoni is directing the scene while Lively engages him in conversation because she states that it's "more romantic" than just staring at each other. 

While Baldoni snuggled into Lively's neck, the actor jokingly asked, "Am I getting beard on you today?" She laughed and said, "I'm probably getting spray tan on you."

Baldoni then stated, "It smells good," to which Lively responded, "Well, it's not that. It's my body makeup."

The videos "captured on May 23, 2023, clearly refute Ms. Lively's characterization of his behavior," a statement shared at the beginning of the clip stated. "The scene in question was designed to show the two characters falling in love and longing to be close to one another. Both actors are clearly behaving well within the scope of the scene and with mutual respect and professionalism. These are all three takes filmed of the sequence."

Lively's legal team claimed the unedited video is "damning evidence" and "corroborates" her allegations of sexual harassment.

"Justin Baldoni and his lawyer may hope that this latest stunt will get ahead of the damaging evidence against him, but the video itself is damning. Every frame of the released footage corroborates, to the letter, what Ms. Lively described in Paragraph 48 of her complaint," Lively's legal team said in a statement provided to Fox News Digital. 

"The video shows Mr. Baldoni repeatedly leaning in toward Ms. Lively, attempting to kiss her, kissing her forehead, rubbing his face and mouth against her neck, flicking her lip with his thumb, caressing her, telling her how good she smells, and talking with her out of character.

CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR THE ENTERTAINMENT NEWSLETTER

"Every moment of this was improvised by Mr. Baldoni with no discussion or consent in advance and no intimacy coordinator present. Mr. Baldoni was not only Ms. Lively’s co-star, but the director, the head of studio and Ms. Lively’s boss.

"The video shows Ms. Lively leaning away and repeatedly asking for the characters to just talk. Any woman who has been inappropriately touched in the workplace will recognize Ms. Lively’s discomfort. They will recognize her attempts at levity to try to deflect the unwanted touching. No woman should have to take defensive measures to avoid being touched by their employer without their consent."

Last week, Baldoni filed a $400 million lawsuit against Lively and her husband, Ryan Reynolds. 

Fox News Digital's Lauryn Overhultz contributed to this report.

FIRST ON FOX: Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, is leading a bipartisan amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to validate a lower court ruling preventing nuclear waste from being deposited in his state.

Cruz, along with Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Rep. Jodey Arrington, R-Texas, wants the top court to uphold a lower court ruling that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) lacks authority to license nuclear waste storage facilities. 

They argue the proposed location of the nuclear waste sites poses "an enormous threat to the country’s security and economic well-being."

The case, NRC v. Texas, will decide "whether the Commission has authority to issue the license under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 or the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982."

TOP TRADE ASSOCIATION SENDS LETTERS CALLING ON BIG CHANGES IN THREE KEY DEPARTMENTS: 'UNLEASH AMERICAN ENERGY'

The Supreme Court in October agreed to take up the case after the Biden administration appealed a Fifth Circuit decision holding that the NRC lacked authority to license nuclear waste storage facilities. The license, which was granted to the Biden administration and a company to build a waste storage facility in western Texas, was challenged by Texas and New Mexico.

Interim Storage Partners planned on operating the nuclear storage facility in Andrews County, Texas, a decision that spurred backlash because of the facility's location within the Permian Basin. 

"The Permian Basin is our nation’s leading oil- and gas-producing region and a critical pillar of America’s energy security," Cruz told Fox News Digital in a statement. "I support the State of Texas in opposing the NRC’s federal overreach and will keep fighting to ensure West Texas remains the energy power house it is today."

The brief argues that placing the storage facilities near the Permian Basin makes the area "an enticing target for adversaries," therefore threatening the oil-producing region. The brief says neither the parties hoping to operate the facilities nor the NRC are "equipped to consider the broader ramifications" of placing the facilities in the area. 

ALASKA LEADERS CHEER TRUMP OIL AND GAS DRILLING EXECUTIVE ORDER

Texas Democratic Rep. Henry Cueller and Republican Reps. August Pfluger and Ronny Jackson have also joined Cruz's brief. 

"Energy independence is national security, which is why I support the scale-up of all reliable and economical energy sources, including nuclear, to meet our rising energy demand," Arrington said in a statement to Fox News Digital. "However, I will not allow Washington to impose its will on West Texas regarding the temporary disposal of high-level nuclear waste simply because the Nuclear Regulatory Commission can’t — or won’t — finalize permanent storage elsewhere."

Arrington said Texas "and the people of Andrews should make the decision" rather than "some nameless, faceless bureaucrat in Washington, D.C."

The amicus brief states that the location of the waste sites — while "remote" — "present an enormous threat to the country’s security and economic well-being."

"Energy security is national security. That adage remains as true now as it did in the 1970s, when OPEC strategically curtailed its oil supply to the United States," the filing continues. 

BIDEN HAD NO IDEA HE SIGNED NATURAL GAS EXPORT PAUSE, JOHNSON SAYS

"And although we’ve come a long way since then — building up domestic energy production capacity and decreasing dependence on fossil fuels — recent events are a vivid reminder of the importance of energy independence," the amicus continued. "They’ve also shown that the Permian Basin has global importance."

The high court is set to hear oral arguments in the case in early March.

An order barring commuted Jan. 6 defendants from entering Washington, D.C., and the U.S. Capitol could raise constitutional challenges, one legal expert says. 

In a filing Friday, Judge Amit P. Mehta specified the order applied to "Defendants Stewart Rhodes, Kelly Meggs, Kenneth Harrelson, Jessica Watkins, Roberto Minuta, Edward Vallejo, David Moerchel, and Joseph Hacket," whose sentences were commuted. Those pardoned are not subject to the order.

Rhodes, founder of the Oath Keepers, was previously seen in the Capitol complex's Longworth House Office Building. He was convicted of seditious conspiracy.

PRO-LIFE PROTESTERS PARDONED BY TRUMP, FOX CONFIRMS

The order states, "You must not knowingly enter the District of Columbia without first obtaining the permission from the Court." It adds, "You must not knowingly enter the United States Capitol Building or onto surrounding grounds known as Capitol Square."

The filing says the order is effective as of Friday at noon. Later that day, the Justice Department filed a motion seeking to lift the order.

"If a judge decided that Jim Biden, General Mark Milley, or another individual were forbidden to visit America’s capital — even after receiving a last-minute, preemptive pardon from the former President— I believe most Americans would object. The individuals referenced in our motion have had their sentences commuted — period, end of sentence," Acting U.S. Attorney Edward Martin said in a statement.

"This is a very unusual order," Jonathan Turley, Fox News Media contributor and the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University, told Fox News Digital. "The judge is relying on the fact that the sentences were commuted, but the defendants did not receive full pardons."

COMMUTED JAN. 6 DEFENDANTS BARRED FROM DC, CAPITOL BUILDING BY FEDERAL JUDGE

Ron Coleman, counsel at Dhillon Law Group, called the order "novel."

"It is unclear what basis the court would have to assert jurisdiction over someone who has been pardoned for the conviction that is presumably the basis for the order or what the legal grounds are for making Washington, D.C., the kind of national capital, like Moscow in the old USSR, that a citizen needs permission to enter," Coleman said.

NANCY PELOSI SLAMS TRUMP’S ‘SHAMEFUL’ PARDONS OF JAN. 6 DEFENDANTS

Turley said that although the new order could "prove a factor" in President Donald Trump extending a full pardon to those with commuted sentences, "it's not clear whether an order will prompt Trump to reconsider his decision to offer only commutations."

Turley noted that the order could raise constitutional challenges, including First Amendment implications. 

"I think the court is effectively barring these individuals from being able to associate or petition government officials without the prior approval of the court," Turley said. "That could raise questions under the First Amendment.

"I expect this will be challenged by these individuals."

Trump pardoned nearly all Jan. 6 defendants earlier this week after promising to do so at his inaugural parade.

DOJ CONSIDERS CHARGING 200 MORE PEOPLE 4 YEARS AFTER JAN. 6 CAPITOL ATTACK

Trump signed off Monday on releasing more than 1,500 people charged with crimes from the Jan. 6, 2021, attack at the U.S. Capitol. The order required the Federal Bureau of Prisons to act immediately on receipt of the pardons.

Those pardoned in his initial order included Enrique Tarrio, the former Proud Boys chairman who faced a sentence of 22 years in prison for seditious conspiracy.

Fox News' David Spunt, Diana Stancy and Jamie Joseph contributed to this report. 

FIRST ON FOX: When Joan Bell, 76, was given the news she was one of the pro-life activists pardoned by President Donald Trump Thursday afternoon, she was in disbelief.

"I didn't know if that meant we would get out in a few weeks or a few months, or what. I didn't really know, but I knew we got pardoned," Bell, a grandmother of eight, told Fox News Digital Friday. "Well, then I ran upstairs because I had a rosary every evening."

After finishing her prayers and Bible study with other inmates, Bell, a lifelong pro-life advocate, was told by several other inmates that her husband, Christopher Bell, was on Laura Ingraham's Fox News show saying she was indeed one of the 23 others pardoned.

PRO-LIFE PROTESTERS COULD FACE UP TO 10 YEARS IN PRISON: ‘POLITICAL WITCH HUNT’

"That was overwhelmingly beautiful," Bell recalled. "Everyone was clapping." She was then told by a guard to pack up her things for her release later that evening. 

"We are so grateful to Trump. And to just feel the fresh air, God's beautiful air, just wonderful," Bell said. "Just being out and being with my husband, my son, just glorious. There are no words to describe that kind of freedom." 

She added that she and her husband will take a "second honeymoon" soon. 

Bell, who lives in New Jersey, was sentenced to more than two years in prison in November 2023 for participating in a "blockade," conspiring with other activists at a Washington D.C. abortion clinic in October 2020, according to President Biden's Department of Justice (DOJ). 

PRO-LIFE ACTIVISTS FOUND GUILTY ON CONSPIRACY CHARGES FOR 2020 'RESCUE ACTION' AT DC CLINIC

Prosecutors from the DOJ's Civil Rights Division and U.S. attorney's office for the District of Columbia argued the pro-life activists violated the 1994 FACE Act, a federal law that prohibits physical force, threats of force or intentionally damaging property to prevent someone from obtaining or providing abortion services.

The activists were sentenced by Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, a Clinton appointee, and immediately detained.

While signing the pardons Thursday, just a day before Friday's annual March for Life rally, Trump said, "They should not have been prosecuted." 

PRO-LIFE PROTESTERS PARDONED BY TRUMP, FOX CONFIRMS

"Many, many of them are elderly people," Trump said in the Oval Office. "They should not have been prosecuted. This is a great honor to sign this. They'll be very happy."

Bell, along with Paula Paulette Harlow, Jean Marshall and John Hinshaw, were all around 70 years old when they were imprisoned.

"That he personally knew our case is so touching," Bell said of Trump. "I want to give him a hug."

Attorneys from the Thomas More Society formally requested pardons from the Trump administration earlier this month for the 21 pro-life advocates the law firm was representing. 

"The heroic peaceful pro-lifers unjustly imprisoned by Biden’s Justice Department will now be freed and able to return home to their families, eat a family meal and enjoy the freedom that should have never been taken from them in the first place," Steve Crampton, senior counsel of the Thomas More Society, said in a statement. 

"These heroic peaceful pro-lifers were treated shamefully by Biden’s DOJ, with many of them branded felons and losing many rights that we take for granted as American citizens."

In a previous interview with Fox News Digital, Crampton said it was hard to find a "fair jury" and that most of the jurors were either Planned Parenthood donors or pro-choice advocates in the cases. He called Washington, D.C., the "most pro-abortion city in America." 

"She can say her pro-death words, but we weren't allowed to say pro-life words," Bell said of the judge in the trial. Nonetheless, she said it was more "heartbreaking" to be prosecuted for her religious beliefs.

This week, Trump also took action to pardon over 1,000 Jan. 6 rioters who were imprisoned, along with numerous other executive orders related to immigration and cryptocurrency and orders to declassify the MLK and JFK files.

Fox News Digital has reached out to the DOJ's Civil Rights Division for comment.