FIRST ON FOX:The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced on Wednesday thatImmigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had issued a detainer in Massachusetts for a criminal illegal immigrant charged with raping a child with force in a crime that was captured on video.Lorenzo Lopez Alcario, a 30-year-old Guatemalan national accused of tying up andbrutally sexually assaulting a young girl in a video that was ultimately found by the girls mother, had the ICE detainer placed on him this week, according to a press release from DHS.The press release states that Alcario first entered the United States illegally on an unknown date before being arrested in 2017 in Arlington, Virginia, for drug possession.Later that year, in September, Alcario was ordered by a judge to be removed by the United States and was deported by aircraft on Sept. 28, 2017.AOC FUNDRAISES ON TRYING TO ABOLISH ICE AMID TRUMP'S CRACKDOWN ON ILLEGAL IMMIGRATIONHowever, according to DHS, Alcario re-entered the United States in June 2022 and was released into the country by the Biden administration despite his criminal history and previous deportation.In a statement, Assistant DHS Secretary Tricia McLaughlin made the case that Alcario should never have been allowed back into the United States and that the ICE detainer is aimed at ensuring Alcario does not victimize anyone else in the future.TENNESSEE REP SAYS NASHVILLE MAYOR'S ICE POLICIES AMOUNT TO 'AIDING AND ABETTING ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION'"Lorenzo Lopez Alcario is a pedophile illegal alien from Guatemala who shouldve never been in the U.S. in the first place," McLaughlin said."Despite his previous criminal charges and deportation, President Biden released this barbaric criminal into American communities in 2022. Under President Trump and Secretary Noem, ICE lodged a detainer to ensure this criminal illegal alien will not be allowed to terrorize American citizens and will deport this child predator to prevent further victims."ICE has been active in Massachusetts in recent weeks, including via Operation Patriot, which resulted in the arrest of nearly 1,500 illegals, including murderers, rapists, drug traffickers and child sex predators, in the deep blue sanctuary city-heavy state.Sources at ICE told Fox News that 790 of those arrested had criminal convictions or charges and 277had final removal or deportation orders. The sources said that all the targeted criminals were roaming the streets of Massachusetts cities freely before being apprehended.Fox News Digital's Peter Pinedo contributed to this report.

Karen Read's defense team is looking to build on momentum yesterday from a surprise police witness who testified that her taillight was less damaged when he helped seize it with a warrant than it appears in photos taken after it arrived at the Canton Police Department, where authorities first towed it.Taillight fragments weren't found at the crime scene until later, too, and her defense's implication is that they could have been planted there.Wednesday marks the 27th day of Read's retrial on murder and other charges in the January 2022 death of her then-boyfriend, Boston cop John O'Keefe.KAREN READ'S SILENCE IN MURDER TRIAL RAISES STAKES FOR DEFENSEShe is accused of hitting him with her 2021 Lexus SUV and leaving the scene, where he died with head trauma and signs of hypothermia. The defense says no collision happened and something or someone else caused his injuries.On Tuesday, Dighton Police Sgt. Nicholas Barros testified that when he arrived at Read's parents' house to help state police confiscate the vehicle, fewer pieces of taillight were missing from the cracked taillight.KAREN READ JUDGE BLOCKS SANDRA BIRCHMORE MENTIONS; EXPERT SAYS CASES SHOULD BE WAKE-UP CALL FOR POLICEHe said that a photo of Read's SUV taken at the Canton Police Department's sallyport a secure garage did "absolutely not" show the taillight in the same condition it was in when he saw it in the driveway.Barros surprised the courtroom when he testified for the commonwealth during Read's first trial, which ended with a deadlocked jury last year. This time, he was a defense witness.FOLLOW THE FOX TRUE CRIME TEAM ON X"He was a devastating witness who has the [district attorney's] case on life support," said Mark Bederow, a New York City-based defense attorney who is closely following the case.KAREN READ'S SUV REACHED '74% THROTTLE' MOMENTS BEFORE JOHN O'KEEFE'S FINAL MOVEMENTS, CRASH EXPERT TESTIFIESHe said special prosecutor Hank Brennan conducted an "excellent" cross-examination, showing Barros and the jury images of Read's taillight taken over the course of the day, before police took her SUV, but defense attorney Alan Jackson performed equally well on redirect questioning.SIGN UP TO GET THE TRUE CRIME NEWSLETTER"The sum total is that Barros is 100% unequivocal: the taillight he saw on January 29 was not anywhere near as destroyed as when the [Massachusetts State Police] had it," he said.GET REAL-TIME UPDATES DIRECTLY ON THE TRUE CRIME HUBGrace Edwards, a Massachusetts defense attorney who is also following the case, called Barros' testimony a "bombshell" and said the surprise in trial 1 was "a clear Brady violation" referring to a rule that prosecutors must share exculpatory evidence with the defense."The fact that a police officer drove to the Omni Hotel to meet with the defense team of a defendant on trial for murder clearly indicates he wanted to tell his story," she told Fox News Digital.Dr. Judson Welcher, an expert for the prosecution, explained to jurors how he found that O'Keefe appeared to have been struck in the arm by the back corner of Read's SUV before he fell to the ground and fractured the back of his skull.Christina Hanley, an analyst with the state police's crime lab, testified that investigators recovered plastic fragments from O'Keefe's clothing that were a match with the broken taillight or something made of the same material.Read could face life in prison if convicted of the top charge, second-degree murder.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) sent an unprecedented letter to a Brazilian Supreme Court justice in May, admonishing the judge for ordering American-based video platform Rumble to restrict the free speech of a user on U.S. soil, describing the orders as international overreach that lack enforceability.Rumble, a popular U.S.-based video-sharing platform that bucks censorship efforts frequently found on other video and social media platforms, is at the center of an international battle to protect free speech that has been ongoing for months.Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes ordered the suspension of Rumble in the South American country back in February over claims the U.S. company did not comply with court orders, including removing the accounts of a Brazilian man living in the U.S. and seeking political asylum."If you look at whats happening around the world, its clear were living through a perilous moment for anyone who believes in freedom of expression a fundamental human right enshrined in the U.S. Constitution and recognized globally, even by the United Nations," Rumble CEO Chris Pavlovski exclusively told Fox News Digital Tuesday following the DOJ's May letter.RUMBLE, TRUMP MEDIA DECLARE COMPLETE VICTORY FOR FREE SPEECH IN WIN AGAINST BRAZILIAN JUDGE"The fact that Rumble has become a central player in this global fight for free speech is a powerful validation of our mission. Were proud to stand at the front lines of this effort and grateful that President Trump and his administration have made this battle a foreign policy priority."Moraes is now in the U.S. government's crosshairs after the DOJ sent a letter to him in May outlining his reported international overreach into U.S. law affecting the First Amendment, as well as Secretary of State Marco Rubio revealing in a congressional hearing that the Brazilian judge could face U.S. sanctions.Moraes had ordered Rumble to remove a user from its platform as he stands accused of spreading false information online and is considered a fugitive in Brazil. Rumble refused and was threatened with financial penalties for the lack of cooperation.TRUMP-BACKED MEDIA COMPANY SUES BRAZILIAN SUPREME COURT JUSTICE, CLAIMS HE'S ILLEGALLY CENSORING FREE SPEECHThe DOJ letter, dated May 7 and made public Thursday, argued that Moraes' orders are not enforceable in the U.S."These purported directives to Rumble are made under threat of monetary and other penalties," the letter, signed by DOJ official Ada E. Bosque, reads. "We take no position on the enforceability of the various orders and other judicial documents directing Rumble to act within the territory of Brazil, which is a matter of Brazilian law. However, to the extent that these documents direct Rumble to undertake specific actions in the United States, we respectfully advise that such directives are not enforceable judicial orders in the United States."The DOJ did not have additional comment to provide when approached about the letter Tuesday.Pavlovski described to Fox Digital that the letter is "unprecedented" and draws a clear line to foreign nations that they cannot attempt to thwart U.S. laws and the First Amendment."The letter from the U.S. Department of Justice to a foreign judge over censorship orders is unprecedented," Pavlovski said. "It draws a bright red line: foreign officials cannot issue censorship orders that violate the First Amendment or bypass U.S. law. That kind of extraterritorial overreach is incompatible with American sovereignty. And thats good news, not just for Americans, but for free societies everywhere."RUMBLE REVEALS CENSORSHIP DEMANDS FROM SURPRISING LIST OF COUNTRIES AS CEO TO TESTIFY ON FREE SPEECH THREATSThe letter continued that there are established channels for international legal proceedings, which the DOJ said the judge bypassed, and directed the Brazilian judge to various proper procedures he could take regarding the court orders.Rumble facing restrictions in foreign nations is hardly new, with the platform currently disabled in China, Russia and France, as well as Brazil. It has also previously received censorship demands in nations such as the U.K., Australia and New Zealand, but has maintained its free speech objective.The DOJ's letter comes as Rubio revealed in a House Committee on Foreign Affairs hearing in May that the State Department is considering sanctions against Moraes under the Magnitsky Act. The Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act authorizes the U.S. government to sanction individuals overseas if determined responsible for human rights abuses or corruption."We've seen pervasive censorship, political persecution targeting the entire opposition, including journalists and ordinary citizens," Republican Florida Rep. Cory Mills asked Rubio at the hearing in May. "What they're now doing is imminent, politically motivated imprisonment of former President Bolsonaro. This crackdown has extended beyond Brazil's borders, impacting individuals on U.S. soil., the 2023 Financial Times article actually talked about this. What do you intend to do? And would you be looking at Supreme Court justice sanctioning of Alexandre de Moraes under the Global Magnitsky Act?"BRAZILIAN EX-PRESIDENT BOLSONARO ORDERED TO STAND TRIAL OVER ALLEGED COUP PLANRubio responded, "That's under review right now, and it's a great, great possibility that will happen."Days later, Rubio posted to X that the State Department will roll out visa restrictions on foreigners found "complicit" in censoring Americans."For too long, Americans have been fined, harassed, and even charged by foreign authorities for exercising their free speech rights," Rubio wrote on X. "Today, I am announcing a new visa restriction policy that will apply to foreign officials and persons who are complicit in censoring Americans. Free speech is essential to the American way of life a birthright over which foreign governments have no authority.""Foreigners who work to undermine the rights of Americans should not enjoy the privilege of traveling to our country," Rubio added, not naming specific individuals responsible for such actions. "Whether in Latin America, Europe, or elsewhere, the days of passive treatment for those who work to undermine the rights of Americans are over."Moraes is also overseeing the upcoming trial of former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, who is accused of allegedly attempting to overturn his 2022 election results.Brazil President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva slammed the U.S. for threatening sanctions against Moraes in comment this week."It is unacceptable for the president of any country in the world to comment on the decision of the Supreme Court of another country," da Silva said Tuesday, according to Reuters.The Brazilian president added that the U.S. should understand the importance of "respecting the integrity of institutions in other countries."Fox News Digital reached out to Moraes' office Tuesday but did not immediately receive a reply.

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., clashed Tuesday with a University of Pennsylvania law professor over the number of nationwide judicial injunctions imposed by district judges against President Donald Trumps executive actions on matters including deportations, tariffs, and cuts to federal funding and the federal workforce.During the Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing titled "The Supposedly Least Dangerous Branch: District Judges v. Trump," Hawley displayed a bar chart to argue that nationwide injunctions against the executive branch, which had not been used until the 1960s, surged when Trump came into office for his first term and then dramatically dropped again during former President Joe Bidens time at the White House."Now, you don't think this is a little bit anomalous?" Hawley asked University of Pennsylvania law professor Kate Shaw.TRUMP CRITICIZES RAND PARL OVER TAX BILL OPPOSTION: VOTES NO ON EVERYTHINGShaw, a Supreme Court contributor for ABC News who previously worked for former President Barack Obamas White House Counsels Office, responded, "A very plausible explanation, senator, you have to consider is that [Trump] is engaged in much more lawless activity than other presidents. Right?""This was never used before the 1960s," Hawley said. "And suddenly Democrat judges decide we love the nationwide injunction. And then when Biden comes office, no, no."Shaw cited Mila Sohoni, a Stanford Law School professor, as suggesting that the first nationwide injunction came in 1913 and others were issued in the 1920s."The federal government was doing a lot less until 100 years ago," she said. "Theres many things that have changed in the last hundred or the last 50 years.""So as long as it is a Democrat president in office, then we should have no nationwide injunctions?" Hawley shot back. "If it's a Republican president, then this is absolutely fine, warranted and called for? How can our system of law survive on those principles?"Shaw said she believes a system where there "are no legal constraints on the president is a very dangerous system of law," but the Republican from Missouri contended thats not what the law professor believed when Biden was president."You said it was a travesty for the principles of democracy, notions of judicial impartiality and the rule of law," Hawley said. "You said the idea that anyone would foreign shop to get a judge who would issue a nationwide injunction was a politician, just judges looking like politicians in robes. Again, it threatened the underlying legal system. People are just trying to get the result they wanted. It was a travesty for the rule of law. But you're fine with all of that if it's getting the result that you want."JUDGE TO BLOCK TRUMP ADMIN'S HARVARD FOREIGN STUDENTS BANHawley cited Shaws stance in a specific abortion pill ruling during Bidens presidency. In April 2023, U.S. District Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk of the Northern District of Texas issued a nationwide injunction on the Biden Food and Drug Administrations mifepristone rules, which Shaw described at the time as "a travesty for the principles of democracy, notions of judicial impartiality and the rule of law."Hawley said she had failed to offer a legitimate principle for issuing nationwide injunctions now."I understand you hate the president," the senator told Shaw. "I understand that you love all of these rulings against him. You and I both know that's not a principle. You're a lawyer. What's the principle that divides when issuing a nationwide injunction is OK and when it is not? When the Biden administration was subject to nationwide injunctions, you said that they were travesties for the principle of democracy.""When it's Biden, it's OK. When it's Biden, oh, it's a travesty. When it's Trump in office, it's a no holds barred, whatever it takes," the senator added.Hawley said Shaw and his Democratic colleagues were raising "very principled injunctions" to nationwide injunctions issued against Biden just nine months ago and "all that's changed in nine months is the occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.""I realize that my colleagues on this side of the aisle very much dislike that individual," Hawley said, referring to Trump. "And I realize that you think that the rulings that he has lost are fundamentally sound.""I disagree with all of that, but we can put that to one side. The question we're talking about here is, Should judges, single judges, district court judges be able to bind nonparties who are not in front of them? And you used to say no. Now you say yes," he said. "Let's be consistent. I would just suggest to you our system of government cannot survive if it's going to be politics all the way down."Shaw responded that "democracy is not as simple as majority rule," but Hawley interjected, saying, "You would have it as simple as majority rule. When you get the majority you like, youre for the nationwide injunction. When you don't, you're not."

FIRST ON FOX: Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, is pushing to grant Congress vast new oversight powers over real-time federal spending to pick up where Elon Musk left off with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).A new bill that Roy is introducing on Wednesday would give lawmakers access to Treasury Department invoices larger than $25,000 in real time.It would also grant lawmakers the ability to see payments to individual recipients of federal benefits and federal employees, according to bill text previewed by Fox News Digital.HOUSE GOP TARGETS ANOTHER DEM OFFICIAL ACCUSED OF BLOCKING ICE AMID DELANEY HALL FALLOUTIt comes roughly a week after Musk announced he was stepping away from his federal government role followed by his criticism of congressional Republicans spending legislation on the way out the door."DOGE lifted up the hood of federal government spending and put on full display the massive programs and inefficiencies wasting American taxpayer dollars," Roy told Fox News Digital."Billions were splurged on waste, fraud and abuse but also on programs that clearly do not align with the core values of the American people. Regardless of which party controls the White House, the mission of DOGE in identifying wasteful spending must continue."He said his legislation would give Congress "the best tools available to identify this ridiculous spending in real time and allow us to reform government spending well into the future."Fiscal hawks like Roy are already looking to the next steps even as Congress begins consideration of a $9.4 billion spending cut proposal sent by the White House on Tuesday.MIKE JOHNSON, DONALD TRUMP GET BIG, 'BEAUTIFUL WIN AS BUDGET PASSES HOUSEThe mechanism, known as a rescissions package, gives Capitol Hill 45 days to approve the blockage of funds which were previously greenlit by Congress while lowering the Senates threshold for passage on it from 60 votes to 51.The package, which Republican leaders signaled could be the first of several, targets federal funding to NPR, PBS and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).House GOP leaders said that package would get a vote next week.

FIRST ON FOX: A man serving in prison for leaking President Donald Trumps and thousands of others confidential tax records recently asserted his Fifth Amendment right to the House Judiciary Committee and declined to testify before the panel, Fox News Digital has learned.A public defender wrote to the Republican-led committee on behalf of Charles Littlejohn, a former IRS contractor serving out a five-year sentence in Illinois, that because Littlejohn was appealing his sentence, he did not have to testify before Congress."The testimony that you seek from Mr. Littlejohn directly implicates his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination," the public defender wrote on Saturday. "Mr. Littlejohn validly exercises that Constitutional right in declining to testify."EX-IRS CONTRACTOR WHO LEAKED TRUMP'S TAX RETURNS SENTENCED TO FIVE YEARS IN PRISONThe Republican-led House committee is investigating a plea deal Littlejohn reached with the Biden administration's Department of Justice (DOJ) in 2023. Littlejohn admitted to prosecutors as part of the plea bargain that he carried out an elaborate scheme to access and disclose Trumps tax information and the tax returns of thousands of the wealthiest U.S. citizens to the New York Times and ProPublica.Among those targeted were Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and Warren Buffett.In return, Littlejohn was charged with and pleaded guilty to a single count of unauthorized disclosure of tax returns and received the maximum 60-month sentence for the charge.At the time, U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, questioned the wisdom of DOJs decision to charge Littlejohn with one charge when thousands had been affected by his actions, saying she was "perplexed" and "troubled" by the plea deal."The fact that he is facing one felony count, I have no words for," Reyes said during his sentencing hearing.IRS LEAKER SOUGHT CONSULTANT ROLE WITH EXPRESS PURPOSE OF LEAKING TRUMP'S TAX RETURNS, DOJ SAYSMany Republicans also piled onto the Biden DOJ for the perceived leniency of the plea agreement. Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) said during the sentencing hearing it "makes no sense" and "should be called the plea deal of the century."House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith (R-MO) criticized prosecutors for failing "to deter future IRS employees from leaking sensitive taxpayer information."House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) wrote a letter Tuesday to the Trump administration's DOJ, obtained by Fox News Digital, requesting all communications and other records surrounding Littlejohns prosecution and accusing the prior administrations DOJ of failing to provide "any substantive" information.Jordan said he learned from the IRS that Littlejohn's breach was far more expansive than what had been established in court."After President Trump took office, the IRS disclosed to the Committee that over 405,000 taxpayers were victims of Mr. Littlejohns leaks and that 89 [percent] of the taxpayers [we]re business entities,'" Jordan wrote. "While it is now clear that Mr. Littlejohns conduct violated the privacy of hundreds of thousands of American taxpayers, it remains unclear why the Biden-Harris Justice Department chose to allow him to plead guilty to only a single felony count."A DOJ spokesman declined to comment on Jordans request.

Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Texas, surprised a local reporter during an interview on Sunday with her claim that Republicans frequently say how much they like her."I think that people just have found a way to connect with me, and I think, you know, there was a point in which people in the party, well, within parties, not within our specific party, felt like, Oh, shes Black and shes proud, so only Black people will listen to her," said the liberal congresswoman."And then its like, well, wait a minute, maybe just liberals will listen to her, and now its become clear as I have been out in various cities throughout this country, where Ive had Republicans walk up to me and tell me how much they like me," Crockett told Jason Whitely, a reporter for Dallas ABC affiliate WFAA, on "Inside Texas Politics."Whitely responded, "No, you havent, are you serious?"SOCIAL MEDIA ERUPTS OVER JASMINE CROCKETT 'GASLIGHTING' ABOUT CALLING ABBOTT 'GOVERNOR HOT WHEELS'Crockett said she was and told the reporter, "You'd be surprised.""Come on!" Whitely added.Asked by Whitely about her political ambitions and if she was looking to do something bigger going into 2026 and looking ahead to the 2028 presidential election, Crockett said no."I want to do what I can to hopefully make sure that we win," she said. "Win the majority back in Congress, but also with the presidency."Crockett has been outspoken in her criticism of President Donald Trump and reportedly has her sights on becoming the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee.JASMINE CROCKETT SHARES BIZARRE SONG CLIP CALLING HERSELF LEADER OF THE FUTURECrockett agreed that "Republicans want poor people to die as quickly as humanly possible," during a town hall event on Monday.She has traded barbs with Trump and has alleged that the president is "terrified" of "smart, bold Black women" telling him the truth after Trump called her a "low-IQ person."Crockett also expressed some doubt about having an extensive career in politics, pointing to "death threats.""I did criminal defense work, and I worked with true blue criminals and never had to worry about death threats. And waking up and having to deal with death threats, having to think about where I go, how much security I have, because of all the hateful rhetoric that is circling, and a lot of it is spewed directly from the president of the United States himself," she said.CLICK HERE FOR MORE COVERAGE OF MEDIA AND CULTURE"I just don't know that that's really a life that I want to live for an extended amount of time," she added, noting that she would continue to serve as long as she could in her current role.

Barstool Sports owner Dave Portnoy was subjected to an antisemitic slur while recording a video in Toronto on Monday.Portnoy visited an Italian restaurant called Terrazza to film one of his "One Bite Pizza Reviews" videos. Before he was about to take his one bite, an unseen man shouted "f--- the Jews" towards Portnoy, who is Jewish."See? There we go," Portnoy remarked while some other young men behind him, none of whom made the remark, began snickering.Portnoy then turned back towards the men and chided, "What are you guys f---ing laughing about?"DAVE PORTNOY BLASTS TV STATION OVER CONTENTIOUS INTERVIEWThe young men immediately stopped laughing, with one of them replying, "terrible."Portnoy continued, saying that he would not let the slur get in the way."What is that Toronto hospitality there?" Portnoy commented."Thats terrible, terrible," Portnoys friend Bill the Greek remarked. "Theres old school and then theres no school.""There's no school," Portnoy agreed.He went on to compliment the restaurant and gave the pizza a 7.4 score.Portnoy was wrapped up in another antisemitic incident last month when a sign that read "f--- the Jews" was spotted at one of Barstool Sports bars in Philadelphia.CLICK HERE FOR MORE COVERAGE OF MEDIA AND CULTUREThough he initially described feeling "f---ing mad" and itching to "ruin these people," Portnoy later announced that he was sending the alleged culprits responsible to visit Auschwitz in Poland to turn the incident into a teaching moment on the Holocaust."These are young f---ing morons who did this. Theyre drunk. Do you really want to ruin somebodys life?" Portnoy said. "And let me be honest, I dont know whats going on in the world Ive been doing Barstool for 20 years, Ive had more hate, more antisemitism in the last year, year and a half, than Ive ever had doing it."However, he later revoked the offer to one of the accused men after he claimed the young man denied responsibility for what happened.CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Meghan Markle is celebrating a milestone in her family.The Duchess of Sussex, 43, shared a never-before-shown photo of her rarely-seen daughter, Princess Lilibet, for her 4th birthday.In black-and-white photos, Markle is seen holding Princess Lilibet on what appears to be a boat, as the wind flows through their hair.MEGHAN MARKLE ADMITS TO SHATTERED DREAMS OF ROYAL MOTHERHOOD WHILE EXPERTS QUESTION SUSSEX FAMILY CHOICESMarkle looked lovingly down at her daughter, as the 4 year old hid behind her mother's arms."Happy birthday to our beautiful girl!" Markle captioned the post. "Four years ago today she came into our lives - and each day is brighter and better because of it. Thanks to all of those sending love and celebrating her special day!"APP USERS CLICK HERE TO VIEW POSTLIKE WHAT YOURE READING? CLICK HERE FOR MORE ENTERTAINMENT NEWSThe second photo in the Instagram post showed Markle holding Princess Lilibet as a newborn baby.The Duchess of Sussex's sweet birthday tribute comes after she previously reflected on how royal motherhood could have been different for her.Last month, during one of her episodes on "Confessions of a Female Founder" podcast, the "Suits" alum admitted that things did not pan out how she would have liked.MEGHAN MARKLE SHARES NEW PHOTO OF RARELY SEEN DAUGHTER PRINCESS LILIBET AS CONTROVERSIAL SHOW IS RENEWED"I will say I've always wanted to be a mom," she shared at the time. "I was like, 'Oh gosh, I'm going to give a speech with a baby on my hip.' I had a whole vision. Granted, I had a lot of external things happening by the time I had both pregnancies and both babies. But it was not the way I envisioned it."Markle, a former American actress, became the Duchess of Sussex when she married Prince Harry in 2018. In 2019, they welcomed their son Prince Archie while they were still senior members of the royal family.CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR THE ENTERTAINMENT NEWSLETTERThen, in 2020, the couple announced they were stepping back as senior royals, citing the unbearable intrusions of the British press and a lack of support from the palace. That year, they moved to California. In 2021, they welcomed their daughter, Lilibet.Since their royal exit, Markle has shared limited photos and videos of her kids without showing their faces. The couple also does not take them to public events where they could be photographed by paparazzi.After Harry and Markle stepped down from their royal duties, the couple aired out their grievances in interviews and a Netflix series. Harry additionally published a 2023 tell-all memoir, "Spare."The Duke and Duchess of Sussex continue to raise their children in the wealthy coastal city of Montecito, California.CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Another member of Sen. John Fettermans staff is reportedly leaving his office, and the maverick lawmaker doesnt want to talk about it.Fettermans office has been plagued by a string of departures since he came to Washington in 2023, and his alleged erratic behavior, concerns over his health and decision to skip certain votes have led to a wave of scrutiny in recent weeks.FETTERMAN DEFIES PUNITIVE PUNISHMENT FOR BREAKING WITH DEMOCRATIC PARTY DURING BIPARTISAN DISCUSSIONAnd now, Fetterman, D-Pa., is set to lose another top staffer. Axios first reported that Krysta Sinclair Juris, who has been the lawmakers chief of staff since April 2024, is set to leave his office. Fox News Digital reached out to Juris and Fettermans office for comment.When pressed about the situation in his office, Fetterman didnt want to talk about it."Well, have you, have you spoken to the significant number of my colleagues that have much higher staff turnover?" Fetterman asked Fox News Digital.FETTERMAN ADDRESSES CALLS TO STEP ASIDE, SAYING RECENT ALLEGATIONS ARE NOT ACCURATEHe doubled down when asked again if Axios reporting was accurate."I think you should talk to my colleagues that have much higher turnover," he said after ducking into an elevator.Politico later reported that Cabelle St. John would take over the chief of staff position.SCHUMER, DEMOCRATS PLOT COORDINATED RESISTANCE TO TRUMP'S ONE UGLY BILLThe latest departure is not the first instance where staffers have left this year. Two aides left last month after a bombshell report from New York Magazine detailed rising concerns among his staff about his health.And in February, his deputy chief of staff and communications director hit the exits, too.Fetterman has been no stranger to controversy since winning his seat two years ago and has made a name for himself by often bucking his partys marching orders and siding with Senate Republicans on thorny policy issues.For example, Fetterman has often broken with Democrats on Israel and immigration, saying his party has lost the argument on both issues.The lawmaker acknowledged his unique brand of bipartisanship during a forum alongside fellow Pennsylvania Sen. David McCormick, a Republican, moderated by Fox News Shannon Bream on Monday. "That's part of the bipartisanship where, you know, it's getting more and more kind of, punitive to just agree with some of these things in the middle of the party right now," he said.