Aggregator
Score 25% off celeb-worn jewelry at BaubleBar’s biggest sale of the summer
Score 25% off celeb-worn jewelry at BaubleBar’s biggest sale of the summer
These heels are classic with a twist, and celebrities can’t get enough
These heels are classic with a twist, and celebrities can’t get enough
ICE Planning New Detention Facilities For 5,500+ Detainees In Four US Cities
Authored by Bryan Hyde via American Greatness,
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is currently moving to open four new major detention facilities across the United States with a combined capacity to hold 5,500 detainees.
Just the News reports that ICE has sent out a request for information seeking contractors who could operate detention facilities near Denver, Miami and Seattle, and central Pennsylvania.
The request calls for 1,500 beds near Denver, 1,500 near Seattle, 700 near Miami, and 1,800 in Pennsylvania.
Trump administration plans four new ICE detention centers to expand capacityhttps://t.co/r1s5D1iYjT pic.twitter.com/u5wMR9S76z
— RSBN 🇺🇸 (@RSBNetwork) July 30, 2026According to federal solicitation documents, ICE wants turn-key existing facilities that would be ready to begin housing detainees within 30 days after a contract is awarded.
Each facility is required to be reserved exclusively for ICE detainees.
Solicitation documents indicate a massive shift toward centralizing legal proceedings directly inside the walls of these new facilities with each of the four facilities to include five immigration courtrooms and dedicated judges’ chambers.
Every site is also expected to feature at least 20 offices for ICE attorneys, allowing deportations and hearings to process rapidly without requiring the transit of detainees to outside federal buildings.
NBC News reports the solicitations require each facility to be operational within 30 days of a contract award, indicating the sites are expected to be largely staffed and equipped before opening.
A major point of contention that has surfaced is that ICE has published draft contract terms declaring that state and local laws “shall not apply” to these new facilities, according to Wired.
The legal maneuver is designed to shield the private prison operators from health, safety, and labor inspections mandated by individual states, coming on the heels of a massive legal battle over state oversight in Washington.
The push is part of the Trump administration’s broader immigration enforcement strategy, aiming to boost total agency bed capacity to 92,600 by November 2026.
Tyler Durden Fri, 07/31/2026 - 15:40Teen boy vanishes after alleged rape by California therapist — as mom fears he’s made a shocking decision
Mamdani admin blasted for tone-deaf victory lap over deadly Legionnaire’s outbreak: ‘We’re just left to die’
Vile flea-borne vomiting illness hits LA neighborhood as urgent warning issued
Terry Rozier uncovers text message he says clears him in NBA gambling scandal
Five States Make The Cut For $50 Billion Nuclear Campuses
The Department of Energy has selected Utah, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Louisiana, and Idaho as the first five potential hosts for Nuclear Lifecycle Innovation Campuses (NLICs), advancing an effort that forced states to decide whether they support the entire nuclear industry or merely the convenient parts.
Energy Secretary Chris Wright signed Memorandums of Understanding with the five states after the DOE reviewed 28 applications from 26 states. The agreements allow the federal government and the states to continue exploring potential campuses.
The potential prize is substantial, with NLICs potentially attracting up to $50 billion in capital investment, generating almost $10 billion in state and local tax revenue and creating 25,000 jobs each.
These would not simply be reactor parks. The campuses are intended to accommodate multiple parts of the nuclear fuel cycle, including uranium enrichment, fuel fabrication, reprocessing or recycling of used nuclear fuel, and the final disposition of material that cannot be reused.
Depending on the state and location, a campus could also include advanced reactors, power generation, manufacturing facilities, and co-located data centers.
The DOE is offering states the opportunity to build entire nuclear industrial ecosystems, rather than collecting federal reactor grants while expecting somebody else to deal with the fuel afterward.
That distinction may explain why some supposedly pro-nuclear states are conspicuously absent from the first shortlist.
Texas has spent years presenting itself as the future capital of advanced nuclear power. In 2025, the state established the Texas Advanced Nuclear Energy Office and appropriated $350 million for reactor development, construction reimbursement, and supply-chain projects. State officials called it the largest state investment of its kind in the country.
Yet when Orano USA and Waste Control Specialists proposed a consolidated interim storage facility for used nuclear fuel in Andrews County, the state's enthusiasm for nuclear technology suddenly became rather selective.
Gov. Greg Abbott urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to reject it, calling the location unsuitable and warning that the facility could threaten the Permian Basin. Texas legislators subsequently passed a law opposing high-level waste storage, and the state fought the NRC license all the way to the Supreme Court.
Apparently, nuclear reactors are an economic-development opportunity, while the fuel that actually ran through them is somebody else's problem.
New Mexico produced an even clearer example.
The state has supported nuclear technology when it generates investment and high-paying jobs. It committed $3 million in economic-development funding and another $1.8 million in workforce assistance for Kairos Power's expansion in Albuquerque, where the company is developing molten-salt coolant and fuel-manufacturing technology for advanced reactors.
But New Mexico's reception was considerably less cheerful when Holtec International proposed its HI-STORE consolidated interim storage facility in Lea County.
The NRC licensed the multibillion-dollar project in 2023, but New Mexico's governor and legislature fought it through legislation, permit threats, and litigation. Even after a favorable Supreme Court decision revived the federal licensing pathway, Holtec abandoned the project, describing the path forward in New Mexico as “untenable” and saying it would look toward states that were more amenable.
That history likely did not make New Mexico an especially convincing candidate for a federal program explicitly centered on the entire nuclear lifecycle.
As we have previously detailed, used nuclear fuel has been stored safely in pools and dry casks for decades. The United States has accumulated roughly 95,000 metric tons of it, much of which remains stranded at operating and decommissioned reactor sites because anti-nuclear activists have spent decades treating every proposed storage location like the opening scene of a disaster movie.
The NLIC program offers a different bargain. States willing to accept the responsibilities of the complete fuel cycle stand to enjoy tens of billions of dollars in investments and thousands of high-paying jobs for their constituents.
Texas and New Mexico may enjoy calling themselves pro-nuclear when reactors, research grants, and factory announcements are on the table. But supporting nuclear energy also requires dealing responsibly with what comes out of the reactor.
Tyler Durden Fri, 07/31/2026 - 15:20ESPN promotes Molly McGrath to NFL sidelines ahead of network’s first Super Bowl
California agrees to cut back on Colorado River water reliance in new Trump administration plan
Your fall candle haul is here: Bath and Body Works candles are 40% off for a limited time
Joe and Clara Wu Tsai — Nets, Liberty owners — divorcing after 30 years
Bunnie Xo eyeing reality show as she goes ‘full-blown Hollywood’ after Jelly Roll divorce: report
Bunnie Xo eyeing reality show as she goes ‘full-blown Hollywood’ after Jelly Roll divorce: report
Why Andre Drummond could be perfect fit for Knicks’ championship roster: ‘Such a needed skill’
FCC Chair Carr Defends License Review As ABC Cries Censorship
Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr is pushing back against Disney-owned ABC’s claims that his agency is engaged in “attempted censorship,” insisting the review of the network’s broadcast licenses stems from evidence of discriminatory hiring practices, not politics.
ABC leveled the censorship accusation in a 119-page regulatory filing posted Thursday, arguing the FCC’s scrutiny of its eight television licenses sends a chilling message to media companies nationwide. “The retaliation against ABC is a signal to every media company in the country: accommodate the Administration’s view of what news coverage should look like or pay the price,” the network’s lawyers wrote.
Carr has flatly denied that characterization. “I don’t view the FCC as the speech police,” he told Politico this week for an episode of the podcast “The Conversation.” The chairman has said the license review grew out of an ongoing investigation into ABC’s diversity, equity and inclusion policies, not a reaction to the network’s news coverage.
In the interview, Carr detailed the substance of that concern.
“The Disney case is about evidence coming to light, we haven’t made a final decision yet, that they had been discriminating inside the company based on race and gender, in terms of hiring, promoting, compensation, workplace opportunities,” he said.
“If that all ends up being true, based on all the evidence that Disney gets to put in, that’s a very concerning development, and it does raise fundamental questions about fitness to have a license.”
An FCC spokesperson echoed that stance, saying broadcasters must serve the public interest rather than “the narrow or partisan interests of a political party” and are barred from discriminatory practices, hoaxes and news distortion. “The FCC is going to hold broadcasters accountable to the full extent of the law, regardless of any disinformation campaign that some of them may choose to run,” the spokesperson said.
ABC’s filing leaned heavily on outside voices, citing more than 153,000 public comments and warnings from figures including Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch and Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, about regulatory overreach. Some conservatives and free-market advocates have separately raised concerns about handing an appointed federal agency sweeping authority over news content, regardless of which party controls the White House.
Not all conservatives are sympathetic to ABC’s position.
The Center for American Rights, which petitioned the FCC to deny the licenses, called Thursday for the case to proceed to an administrative hearing.
“Disney’s lawyers can wish upon a star, but they cannot make this record disappear,” said Daniel Suhr, the group’s president.
The dispute traces back to April, when Carr called up all eight Disney-owned stations for an early license review, and intensified this month after President Donald Trump publicly urged the FCC to strip both ABC and NBC of their licenses over their handling of a presidential address. ABC has hired prominent litigators, including former Solicitor General Paul Clement, to fight the review.
Tyler Durden Fri, 07/31/2026 - 15:00