Fetterman Helps Republicans Block Effort to End Trump’s Iran War

Senate Republicans Thursday blocked a resolution directing President Trump to end the war in Iran. Again.Only three Republicans—Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, and Rand Paul of Kentucky—crossed the aisle to vote with Democrats to advance the measure. Again. Mitch McConnell didn’t show. Again. And Democratic Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania voted with Republicans against the measure.Again.The final vote was 49–50 to vanquish a resolution out of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that would have instructed the president to withdraw U.S. troops from Iran, blocking him from military action in Iran without congressional approval. The resolution only needed a simple majority to pass, but Fetterman tanked it.Although Fetterman initially ran his 2022 campaign for a Senate seat with a progressive mask, his M.O. since entering office has been the exact opposite. He is one of the most outspoken supporters of Israel in Congress, he supports the deadly and expensive campaigns against Iran and Lebanon, he voted with Republicans to confirm Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin, and he has become increasingly aligned with President Trump on a host of other issues.The House of Representatives has now passed two separate war powers resolutions, and for a moment there it looked like the upper chamber might join them, but the Senate (and one senator, in particular) continues to hold out. This was its thirteenth vote on a resolution to end the Iran war this year.These resolutions are only growing in importance as the war spreads, with the U.S. resuming airstrikes and Iran launching missiles at targets across the Middle East. Just Wednesday night, U.S. Central Command struck dozens of Iranian targets for the first time in days, following Iran’s attacks on American military sites earlier this week.Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s mass immigration detention policy was struck down twice in a single day on Thursday, in a brutal loss for President Donald Trump. Two separate federal appeals courts rejected the Trump administration’s bid to detain immigrants—many of whom have lived in the U.S. for years without a criminal record—without a hearing. The rulings mark the administration’s fifth and sixth consecutive losses on the case.In a 2–1 ruling by the Wisconsin-based Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, the majority found that the government could not refuse bond hearings to undocumented immigrants who were already living in the U.S. In executing its mass detention policy, the government had been improperly applying a rule meant to apply to immigrants “seeking admission” at the U.S. border. Earlier Thursday, there was a 2–1 ruling by the California-based Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which similarly found that the government had misconstrued decades-old immigration laws to justify its actions. The majority opinion was written by Trump appointee Judge Daniel Bress.These rulings follow the same logic as decisions from the Atlanta-based Eleventh Circuit, the New York–based Second Circuit, the Colorado-based Tenth Circuit, and the Ohio-based Sixth Circuit. Only two federal appeals courts have sided with the Trump administration’s mass detention policy as it inevitably makes its way to the Supreme Court. Mass detention isn’t merely a step along the way to achieving Trump’s goal of mass deportation: It’s also the goal. ABC accused the Federal Communications Commission Thursday of “attempted censorship” and a clear “retaliation” effort meant to send a message to every other media company in the country.“The Administration has openly and repeatedly called for the revocation of ABC’s licenses, because it dislikes the content and viewpoints expressed on ABC network programs,” ABC wrote in a fiery 119-page regulatory filing to the agency.The filing is the latest in a legal battle between the television network and the FCC, which abruptly moved to review the licenses of eight ABC-owned television stations in April. The agency initially claimed that the review was related to ABC’s diversity and inclusion hiring policies, though it came shortly after Jimmy Kimmel made a joke about President Trump that Trump didn’t like. The federal government had never before demanded such a vast review of a major television network’s licenses.ABC’s latest filing called out FCC Chair Brendan Carr by name and made clear that this fight isn’t just about the Disney-owned network: “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.”“Across the government, regulatory and contracting carrots and sticks have been trained on other disfavored speakers,” the filing continued. “The tools vary; the objective does not: a media industry too fearful of official reprisal to report the news freely.”Carr has rejected accusations of censorship, despite the sledgehammer he’s taken to the free press since the start of Trump’s second term.“Look at the results so far,” Carr bragged at the Conservative Political Action Conference in March. “PBS, defunded. NPR, defunded. Joy Reid, gone from MSNBC. Sleepy-eyes Chuck Todd, gone. Jim Acosta, gone. John Dickerson, gone. Stephen Colbert is leaving. CBS is under new ownership, and soon enough, CNN is going to have new ownership, as well.”Still, despite it all, Carr claims he doesn’t view the FCC as “the speech police.”Luckily, as ABC outlined in its filing, the network has received a massive outpouring of support from viewers, current and former FCC officials, advocacy groups, and political leaders on both sides of the aisle—including warnings from conservative Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch and Senator Ted Cruz. The FCC’s website has been buried in public comments supporting ABC and offering passionate defenses of the First Amendment and local television.This latest filing may not change Carr’s approach, but it could rally the rest of the industry—and the public—before the FCC makes its next move. The White House formally announced a program to have veterans skip certain certifications to get commercial drivers’ licenses and become truck drivers. The program is called “Freedom Haulers” and promises to cover training costs and offer signing bonuses to veterans who sign up. In a post on X Thursday, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy claimed that trucking jobs paid up to six figures, leading with “🚨ILLEGALS OUT, VETERANS IN🚨” and a flashy patriotic video. 🚨ILLEGALS OUT, VETERANS IN🚨Our new campaign, FREEDOM HAULERS, is reclaiming America's highways and putting Vets in the driver's seat✅ Make up to six-figures ✅ Flexible schedule✅ Medical benefits ✅ Training costs covered✅ Sign-on bonuses Get on the road in a few… pic.twitter.com/j5vBCE49PO— Secretary Sean Duffy (@SecDuffy) July 30, 2026 Veterans who recently drove large military vehicles as part of their duties can skip the normally required skills test for a commercial driver’s license. Others who are still on active duty can attend a commercial driving school for their final six months of service. The GI Bill will also fully cover commercial driver’s license training, and will even pay for a housing allowance during this training in some cases. Trump spoke about the plan two weeks ago at a Pennsylvania rally, railing against “illegal alien truck drivers who are just killing a lot of people—they can’t read signs, a lot of them are on drugs or alcohol, and they shouldn’t be driving these things.”About 20 percent of all truck drivers in the U.S. are immigrants, according to the AP, but only 5 percent, or 200,000, have what are called non-domiciled licenses, which are issued by states to people who are legally authorized to work in the U.S. but do not have a permanent legal residence or domicile in that state.Roughly 200,000 immigrants had their commercial licenses revoked in March, preventing them from driving semi-trucks, buses, and tractor-trailers despite passing tests and meeting the legal requirements to drive. Immigrant groups believe that many truck drivers are being targeted because of their ethnic backgrounds, such as Sikhs, who often wear turbans as part of their faith and make up a large portion of the trucking industry. Meanwhile, operating a military vehicle is different from operating a commercial vehicle, and some veterans may breeze to a CDL job without having the necessary skills, posing a danger on the road. MAGA Senate candidate Mike Collins fled his own press conference Thursday when faced with a question about his son-in-law’s social media posts promoting white nationalism. During the outdoor event, Collins was asked to respond to reports that David Alan Scheer II, his son-in-law, has shared Nazi and antisemitic material online, including posts from the white nationalist hate group Patriot Front.“You know, we’ve fully addressed that,” Collins said. “But Jon Ossoff refuses to disavow these Democrat socialist movements in our country—as a matter of fact he embraces them.”Collins launched into a rant about all the things he felt Ossoff needed to answer for, without holding himself to the same standard. The Republican representative indicated he would take another question, but then abruptly excused himself.“Listen, thank you. I appreciate y’all’s time. I appreciate you coming out this morning. Thank you very much,” Collins said, before he quickly departed. Mike Collins abruptly wrapped up a press conference instead of answering questions about his close ties with a prominent neo-Nazi propagandist pic.twitter.com/tYEGzxBnq3— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) July 30, 2026 Although Collins claims to have “fully addressed” his son-in-law’s actions, his prior response was far from a condemnation. “Nobody speaks for me, and I don’t speak for anybody else,” Collins told reporters last week. He also removed a photograph featuring Scheer from his campaign’s website. Speaking of Collins’s website, the candidate found himself in hot water earlier this year after he published fake endorsements from several local officials.