A nationwide business-aid fraud crackdown — highlighted by a bizarre Missouri scheme involving alleged stolen corporate identity — is among the enforcement actions being highlighted during the federal push dubbed "Fraud Week."

The announcement is part of the Department of Justice's National Fraud Enforcement Division's nationwide summer surge. It netted more than 160 criminal defendants and approximately $245 million in intended losses to taxpayers, according to DOJ, as the agency announced busts from Los Angeles to Philadelphia.

"This is the problem of our day," said U.S. Attorney Matt Price of the Western District of Missouri, whose office was one of 44 involved in the greater "Heartland Fraud Surge" that encompassed June through Sept. 1. "And this is a response to what happened over the previous four years,"

WHITE HOUSE PUSHES 'WATERSHED' FRAUD-FIGHTING REFORM IN CONGRESS AS VANCE CONVENES TASK FORCE

"After 9/11, there was a huge lean-in, [an] all-of-government approach to national security issues," Price said, comparing the Bush-era interagency pivot to terror threats with the coordinated response to the current push against fraud in taxpayer-funded programs.

Price headlined the extensive Small Business Administration (SBA) and COVID-19-related fraud probes under division chief Colin McDonald.

In the "Fur Lives Matter" case, a Missouri man allegedly claimed to operate 19 separate businesses, including some focused on pet care like "Fur Lives Matter," "Fur Lives Matter LLC," "Chows & Pals" and "God’s Chow Chow."

MINNESOTA FRAUD MASTERMIND GETS NEARLY 42 YEARS IN PRISON IN MASSIVE $250M 'FEEDING OUR FUTURE' SCHEME

There was one glaring problem: "Fur Lives Matter" was a real company in another state — and prosecutors say it had no connection to Gray.

Using "Fur Lives Matter" and the other purported companies, Jamie Gray allegedly sought to fraudulently obtain nearly $56 million in Paycheck Protection (PPP) and Economic Injury Disaster (EIDL) funds from the Small Business Administration through 29 applications.

BRAZEN SOCIAL MEDIA FRAUD SCHEMES WREAK HAVOC AS TRUMP OFFICIAL ISSUES STARK WARNING FOR 'FRAUDFLUENCERS'

Most cases involved entirely fictitious businesses, and only "Fur Lives Matter" was operational at the Feb. 15, 2020, eligibility cutoff.

"Gray effectively stole this company’s identity," the DOJ said in a statement, alleging the legitimate business had no knowledge of him and that his claims about ownership, employees, revenue and operations were fabricated. Gray nevertheless received about $820,000 in SBA funds, prosecutors said.

The case stood out even among a summer surge of alleged fraud schemes for its unusual details.

JUDGE SENTENCES FEEDING OUR FUTURE FRAUDSTERS WHO FAKED RUNNING CHILD NUTRITION SITE

"If you screwed the American taxpayer, the federal government is now going to say you're cut off, no more," Vice President JD Vance said this week on the matter of the larger administration crackdown. "You shouldn't be applying anymore, and if you do apply, you're no longer able to get those benefits."

VANCE-LED TASK FORCE CUTS OFF $1.4B FROM HOME HEALTH, HOSPICE PROVIDERS SUSPECTED OF FRAUD

Price said the effort is expanding beyond Operation No Doze, the SBA-focused enforcement action conducted as part of the broader Heartland Fraud Surge.

His office and Missouri Gov. Mike Kehoe, along with other state officials, have also launched Operation Show-Me the Money, a new state-federal effort targeting fraud in state benefit programs.

REPUBLICANS DECLARE WAR ON 'ORGANIZED THEFT' WITH GOVERNMENT FRAUD CRACKDOWN

"No fraud is too small to prosecute, but leveraging all state resources in the state of Missouri from the top down [is believed to be] a first-of-its-kind collaboration between the state and the feds, working to identify and prosecute this type of fraud," he said Saturday.

Price also credited SBA Administrator Kelly Loeffler with "leading from the front" as the agency is suspending suspected fraudulent borrowers and sending demand letters seeking repayment.

SIGN UP TO GET THE POLITICS NEWSLETTER

He said the Heartland Surge depicts a new approach to countering fraud, characterizing the Biden administration’s attempts to recoup lost dollars as a "pay and chase" model.

Attorney General Todd Blanche has instructed prosecutors to charge fraud cases of all sizes, in that the smaller cases sends the message to bigger scofflaws that, no matter the amount of money involved, "if you ripped off the American taxpayer… we will find you, we will identify you, we will hunt you down, we'll prosecute you," said Price.

The lone juror whose holdout forced a mistrial in the Lindsay Clancy case has retained a lawyer who once represented President Donald Trump, the attorney said. One legal scholar following the case said the move signals the juror is ready to "stand up for himself."

Clancy, 36, faced three counts of first-degree murder in connection with the slayings of her children — 5-year-old Cora, 3-year-old Dawson and 8-month-old Callan — who were discovered strangled at the family's home in January 2023. Judge William Sullivan declared a mistrial on Sept. 4 after jurors could not agree on a unanimous verdict, with the panel split 11-1.

Attorney Edward Paltzik told Fox News Digital Friday that he is representing the holdout juror, Michael P. Desronvil.

LINDSAY CLANCY HOLDOUT PRAISED AS 'AMERICAN HERO' BY LAWYER WHO SAYS HE REPRESENTS HIM

Desronvil, the lone dissenter from the jury, has come forward and said he didn't sway away from his belief that prosecutors proved Clancy was criminally responsible in killing her three children in January 2023 in a statement first reported by NewsNation that was confirmed by Paltzik to Fox News Digital.

"I didn't have any doubts. As I tried to explain different possible theories during deliberation, I kept getting cut off as if I had doubts based on the evidence present," Desronvil said. "Based on all the physical evidence, key witnesses and what the prosecution presents, I thought it was enough proof that she knew exactly what she was doing and planned."

Most notably, Paltzik represented Trump in his lawsuit against the New York Times, which he said falsely cast his business success as fraudulent ahead of the 2024 presidential election. The lawsuit was dismissed in 2025, but has since been refiled.

Paltzik was also involved in Trump's lawsuit against CBS after "60 Minutes" was accused of selectively editing an interview with then-Vice President Kamala Harris. In July 2025, Paramount Global agreed to pay $16 million, which the company said would go toward Trump's future presidential library.

Paltzik said at the time that the CBS interview generated confusion and "mental anguish" among viewers, misled voters and diminished attention to Trump and his online platform, Truth Social.

He also represented Trump during his lawsuit against ABC News, which settled for $15 million, with the funds going towards his future presidential library.

LINDSAY CLANCY HOLDOUT JUROR ‘LOOKED AT THE CASE AND HE MADE THE CALL,’ HIS BROTHER SAYS

In another high-profile case, Paltzik is representing three friends of Nolan Wells. Wells, 18, went missing July 4 after a boat trip with friends to Horn Island, a barrier island off Mississippi's Gulf Coast. Crews searched the area for two days before a National Parks Service ranger found his remains on the island's northwestern tip on July 6.

Paltzik began representing the friends of Wells in August after several social media influencers made false allegations about them.

FOLLOW THE FOX TRUE CRIME TEAM ON X

"We are proud to stand with and fight for three completely innocent young men: Warren Hudson, Jax Pitalo, and Morgan Seymour. Starting today, those who wish to continue trafficking in lies about these Good Ocean Springs People will be held accountable to the maximum extent of the law. We, on the other hand, will be focused solely on the truth, which is that these innocent young men had nothing whatsoever to do with the tragic death of Nolan Wells," Paltzik said alongside Tyler Cox, a Mississippi-based attorney, in a statement to Fox News Digital.

Paltzik said Desronvil won't be doing any other media interviews at this time, calling him an "American hero" and "Champion of justice."

LINDSAY CLANCY ATTORNEY KEVIN REDDINGTON SIGNALS HE'S OPEN TO A DEAL, HOPES DA WILL 'REVISIT' CASE

"Again, we are focused entirely on his health, safety, and well-being. There will be a time for accountability and a time for the real story of the Lindsay Clancy Trial to be told. But not right now," Paltzik said on X. "This American Hero and Champion of Justice thanks all of you who have stood by him for your kindness, prayers, and support," he added.

SIGN UP TO GET THE LATEST TRUE CRIME NEWS

The statement was made as Plymouth County prosecutors weigh whether to retry Clancy, while her attorneys have also raised the prospect of resolving the case without a second jury trial.

LIKE WHAT YOU'RE READING? CLICK HERE FOR MORE

Mark Astor, a former prosecutor and behavioral health law expert, told Fox News Digital it's clear that Desronvil has retained counsel to "stand up for himself."

SEND US A TIP

"I think there's certainly some indication that his name and reputation is now being dragged through the mud," Astor said. "The other issue obviously is he's basically been attacked not just by potentially the other jurors, but by Mr. Reddington on the foot of the courthouse, since we had that mistrial declared by the judge. So I mean, I think he feels like he needs to, you know, at least stand up for himself."

Astor said the exposure from the Clancy jury threatens a system that depends on people being willing to serve.

LISTEN TO THE NEW 'CRIME & JUSTICE WITH DONNA ROTUNNO' PODCAST

"I think it's a terrible thing that we're having to see this," Astor said. "The whole idea of the jury is sort of this sacred arena where jurors get to decide a verdict in a case. And now we're taking what is really a sacred arena and we're exposing it to the public."

GET BREAKING NEWS BY EMAIL

Clancy is due back in court on Sept. 29 for a status hearing, at which more information about the future of her case may be revealed.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

A Utah government immunity law could upend the Kirk family’s efforts to bring a wrongful death lawsuit against Utah Valley University over alleged security failures surrounding Charlie Kirk’s assassination.

Attorneys for Kirk’s family filed a notice of intent to sue on Sept. 9, one day before the anniversary of his death. The filing alleges a series of security failures by the university, including declining additional police officers, failing to adequately address concerns from Kirk's security team and not having an adequate security plan in place for his visit.

But legal experts say the Kirks face an uphill legal battle because Utah law grants government entities — including their officers and employees — broad immunity from lawsuits arising from a lengthy list of circumstances, including the performance or failure to perform discretionary functions and claims involving assault, battery, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution and civil rights violations.

"Unfortunately, Charlie Kirk's family is going to have a very difficult time prevailing in a wrongful death case in Utah," Tenielle Brown, a University of Utah law professor, told Fox News Digital. "And that's because Utah's government immunity statute is phrased in such a way that says even if the state and UVU were reckless, they retain immunity in cases that arise out of a battery, and that would include gunshot wounds."

JUDGE IN ACCUSED ASSASSIN TYLER ROBINSON'S CASE EXPLAINS WHY DEATH PENALTY REMAINS ON TABLE IN WRITTEN ORDER

Kirk, 31, co-founded Turning Point USA in 2012 and grew the conservative youth organization into a major force on high school and college campuses nationwide. He was shot and killed while speaking at Utah Valley University in Orem on Sept. 10, 2025.

Neama Rahmani, president of West Coast Trial Lawyers, told Fox News Digital that wrongful death claims against the government are already difficult for plaintiffs to win because government entities generally enjoy broad immunity from lawsuits stemming from assaults or batteries committed by third parties.

"I've handled lack of security cases, including lack of security cases against the government," Rahmani told Fox News Digital. "They are tough because you are trying to hold the police or city, county or state responsible for someone else's criminal actions."

But Rahmani suggested the Kirk family's strongest evidence could be a message from UVU Police Chief Jeffrey Long acknowledging concerns about rooftop access to the Sorenson Center, a building located "pretty close" to where Kirk was scheduled to speak. The Sorenson Center sits directly west of the Losee Center, where prosecutors say Tyler Robinson fired the shot that killed Kirk. In response to the security concerns, Long messaged Kirk's team, "I got you covered."

TYLER ROBINSON HEARING ENDS WITHOUT RULING AS EVIDENCE DISMANTLES CHARLIE KIRK CONSPIRACY CLAIMS

"That means they're gonna argue that they assume the responsibility to make sure Charlie Kirk was safe, and they failed to do so," Rahmani said of the Kirk family. "In cases where you have the government taking on a duty, that tends to be better than simply arguing that the government has a duty to protect everyone because we know that murders happen all the time, and you can't sue the government just because someone is killed."

But Brown said Utah law can shield government officials from lawsuits even when they fail to perform their job functions.

"There have been a number of cases where the plaintiffs and the family of the victims have sued for either wrongful death or battery," Brown told Fox News Digital. "And in some cases, the government did behave recklessly, and they could show carelessness and recklessness and the plaintiffs were not able to prevail because it arose out of a battery. And that's unusual. Most states don't have that broad of a statute."

Brown pointed to the case of Mika Scott, a 19-year-old Utah Valley University student who sued Utah County and the Utah County Sheriff's Office after Shawn Leonard, a prisoner with a violent criminal record who had escaped from a work-release program, raped her in 2010.

"They were supposed to screen inmates to make sure that they weren't violent," Brown told Fox News Digital. "And then when they went out in the community on the job sites, they were supposed to make sure that they were policing the boundaries so that these inmates couldn't escape and in a really terrible situation."

"And she could have shown carelessness and maybe even recklessness, but because of the government immunity statute and because this claim arose out of a battery, she was not able to prevail against the state," Brown continued.

CHARLIE KIRK SUPPORTERS RETURN TO SITE OF ASSASSINATION 1 YEAR LATER: ‘WE ARE STILL STANDING’

The Utah Supreme Court addressed the statute's language in its 2005 decision in Wagner v. Utah, which held that civil battery does not require an intent to cause physical or psychological injury.

"The court said, it may not be prudent for the state to continue to retain immunity here," Brown told Fox News Digital. " And they're kind of signaling to the legislature that the legislature should probably change the statute to allow for suits in cases like Charlie Kirk's."

"But the state has not revised the statute and so it still says very clearly that you can't sue the state if the claim arises out of a battery," Brown continued.

Brown said state workers who are not elected cannot be held accountable at the ballot box for failing to do their jobs.

"The president of UVU, the campus police, those people are not elected, and so if you were to say sovereign immunity is all about letting people decide whether they're state actors or careless at the ballot box, then you vote them out of office," Brown said.

"That doesn't work," Brown continued. "That argument doesn't for the UVU president because nobody can vote them of office, nobody is having any political check on the campus police."

Astrid Tuminez, who served as the school's president at the time of Kirk's assassination, stepped down from her position in May 2026 after eight years. She and Long are named in the filing by Kirk's family.

"We are aware of the notice of claim," a Utah Valley University spokesperson said in a statement to Fox News Digital. "UVU addresses legal matters consistent with our established processes. Our focus remains on supporting our campus community."

SIGN UP TO GET THE POLITICS NEWSLETTER

Kirk leaves behind his wife Erika Kirk and their two small children.

Fox News Digital reached out to the Kirk family's lawyers for comment.

Judge William Sullivan, who drew national attention earlier this month after declaring a mistrial in the Lindsay Clancy murder case, also presided over another closely watched child-killing trial that a retired Massachusetts judge says would look dramatically different if retried.

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court last month vacated the murder convictions of Brockton mother Latarsha Sanders, ruling jurors were improperly prevented from seeing psychiatric records central to her insanity defense and ordering a new trial.

"They ordered a new trial which will fundamentally change the way the case is going to be tried," retired Massachusetts Superior Court Judge Jack Lu told Fox News Digital.

LINDSAY CLANCY MISTRIAL DECLARED AFTER JURY DEADLOCKS IN KILLINGS OF HER THREE CHILDREN

Sullivan, who presided over Sanders' 2022 trial and later sentenced her to two concurrent life terms without parole, has returned to the national spotlight following the closely watched Clancy trial, which ended in a mistrial after jurors deadlocked over whether Clancy was criminally responsible for killing her three children. Like Sanders, Clancy admitted killing her children but argued she lacked criminal responsibility because of mental illness.

"There is no doubt the defendant committed these incomprehensible crimes," Justice David Gaziano wrote for the unanimous court in Sanders' case. "The sole issue before a Superior Court jury was whether she lacked criminal responsibility."

LINDSAY CLANCY JUDGE CALLS MISTRIAL, THEN GRANTS DEFENSE ONE HOUR STAY FOR APPEAL

The justices concluded Sanders was entitled to a new trial because jurors never saw medical records documenting diagnoses and treatment of mental illness that were relevant to the only issue disputed at trial: whether she lacked criminal responsibility.

Lu said the ruling does far more than simply order another trial.

"Thousands of pages of mental health records will be admitted ... and the jury's gonna get it all," he said.

Lu cautioned against judging Sullivan's decision with the benefit of hindsight.

"The trial judge did an excellent job ... but now I'm a great Monday morning quarterback just like everybody else," Lu said, explaining that the evidentiary issue was unusually difficult before the SJC clarified the law.

Sanders admitted killing her sons, 8-year-old Edson "Marlon" Brito and 5-year-old La'Son Brito, but argued she was legally insane at the time of the attacks.

Her attorneys contended she was suffering from severe mental illness and psychosis, while prosecutors argued she appreciated the wrongfulness of her actions despite bizarre statements she made before and after the killings.

According to evidence summarized by the Supreme Judicial Court, Sanders had become consumed by conspiracy theories involving the Illuminati and expressed fears about voodoo before the killings.

After the deaths, investigators said she gave police multiple conflicting accounts before eventually telling detectives the stabbings were part of a "ritual" tied to voodoo and the Illuminati.

At trial, Sanders' defense called a clinical neuropsychologist who testified she was "grossly psychotic" at the time of the killings and suffered from a schizophrenia-spectrum disorder.

The expert based that opinion in part on thousands of pages of psychiatric treatment records from prison and a state psychiatric hospital.

Those are the records Lu said a future jury would likely hear if prosecutors pursue another trial.

FOLLOW THE FOX TRUE CRIME TEAM ON X

The Supreme Judicial Court said that was an error, concluding the excluded records documented repeated observations of paranoia, hallucinations, delusional thinking and schizophrenia-spectrum diagnoses that formed the medical foundation of Sanders' defense.

Read the court's ruling:

"We hold that the exclusion of the MCI-Framingham and WRCH medical records documenting the defendant's post-arrest diagnoses or treatment of mental illness ... impermissibly stripped the sole defense 'of the medical foundation that supported it,'" the court wrote. "The defendant is entitled to a new trial."

SIGN UP TO GET THE LATEST TRUE CRIME NEWS

Lu said the opinion should not be interpreted as a determination that Sanders was legally insane or wrongly convicted. Instead, he described it as the resolution of a difficult evidentiary question that changes what evidence jurors would be permitted to consider if the case is retried.

During oral arguments before the Supreme Judicial Court, Sanders' attorney, Robert Shaw, argued the trial judge's exclusion of medical evidence deprived his client of "a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense," FOX 25 in Boston reported.

LIKE WHAT YOU'RE READING? CLICK HERE FOR MORE

Assistant Plymouth County District Attorney Melissa Johnson countered that Sanders showed no documented psychotic behavior for months after the killings and that the records were properly excluded, the station reported.

SEND US A TIP

The justices also addressed two issues that would likely shape any future trial.

GOT A TIP?

First, they said prosecutors could refer to Sanders describing herself as "evil" because the statements were relevant to whether she appreciated the moral wrongfulness of her actions, so long as the argument remained tied to that legal issue rather than serving as a personal attack.

LISTEN TO THE NEW 'CRIME & JUSTICE WITH DONNA ROTUNNO' PODCAST

However, the court found prosecutors improperly suggested Sanders may have borrowed elements of her story from episodes of "Law & Order: SVU," ruling there was no evidence supporting that theory.

GET BREAKING NEWS BY EMAIL

The ruling vacates Sanders' convictions and sends the case back to Plymouth Superior Court for a new trial.

An overturned conviction does not clear Sanders of the charges, Lu said.

"It just means you have to do it all over again," he said.

Fox News Digital has reached out to Sullivan, Sanders' attorney and the Plymouth County District Attorney's Office for comment.

FIRST ON FOX: A report released this week examining America’s election-law pipeline found law schools that are overwhelmingly left-leaning, leaving conservatives outnumbered in both law-school classrooms and election litigation, which has resulted in a real world effect on courtroom outcomes, the report says.

After reviewing election-law courses and faculty at all 198 ABA-accredited law schools, The Public Interest Legal Foundation, a conservative legal group, found that liberal professors outnumber conservative professors nearly 7-to-1.

"Among those few law schools that make election law classes available, leftist and liberal election professors outnumber right of center and conservative ones 76 to 12," the report states, adding that most of the election law centers are based in universities in blue states like New York and California.

"There are so many left-wing lawyers in election law that it creates policy outcomes, election law changes, adapts, and election integrity statutes get struck down because there's so many lawyers on the other side," PILF President J. Christian Adams told Fox News Digital.

INSIDE THE FAR-LEFT 'BREEDING GROUND' UNIVERSITIES ALLEGED WHCD SHOOTER CALLED HOME FOR YEARS

"So nobody ever studied what's going on in law schools. We just always assumed, oh, there's just so many of them, but we never asked why. So, for the first time ever, Public Interest Legal Foundation went in and quantified the election law professors in the country and figured out if they're liberal or conservative and it's overwhelming. An absolute dangerous imbalance."

PILF also examined curriculum at the top schools and characterized 70% of election-law classes as taught by professors with a left-leaning ideological bias.

The report argues that students are being trained to challenge voter ID laws, citizenship-verification requirements, redistricting maps, voter-roll maintenance and other election-integrity measures. As a result, the law school graduates then move into liberal nonprofits and major law firms that litigate those issues.

EXCLUSIVE: BAD BUNNY, MARXISM AND 'NASTY WOMEN' AMONG COURSES OFFERED AT IVY LEAGUE, ELITE COLLEGES

The report cites examples from course descriptions that include references to "voter suppression," racial and partisan gerrymandering, felony disenfranchisement, the Electoral College and "election subversion."

The report also highlights what it describes as ideological course offerings at several law schools, including Harvard’s "Bonobo Sisterhood" class, which examines what bonobos can teach humans about creating a society free of male sexual coercion. PILF points to election-law courses at Harvard, Michigan, UC Berkeley and other schools that address social justice, racial inequity, voter suppression, election subversion and proposals to restructure the Electoral College.

The report makes the case that the political imbalance in law schools makes its way into courtrooms across the nation. Adams, who litigated a redistricting case in Galveston County, told Fox News Digital that the left brings "a swarm of lawyers" to court, outnumbering conservatives "five, six, seven times" in some hearings.

"In that trial, it was so many lawyers on the other side, not only at the regular lawyer table, they filled the jury box," Adams said. "It was like 25 to five." Adams added that "anytime voter ID hangs in the balance, the left sends an army," while "conservatives defending election integrity just don’t have the horses."

Adams told Fox News Digital that the current political culture on campuses exacerbates the divide and that part of the solution is law schools in red states establishing election law centers.

"There’s definitely a culture on campuses that makes it hard," Adams said. "I’ve spoken at 75 law schools, and at many of them, conservatives show up as an anomaly rather than as active participants. But that’s not true everywhere."

"A lot of schools that aren’t ideologically driven still don’t have election law programs. There’s no reason almost none of the law schools in Texas should teach election law. That’s something the legislature could fix by funding an election law chair at one of the state’s public universities."

The report does not argue that every professor it identified as left-leaning advocates for a particular legal outcome or that ideology alone determines the result of election cases. Rather, PILF makes the case that the imbalance shapes the pipeline of students and lawyers entering election litigation, leaving conservative attorneys with fewer specialized colleagues, fewer academic resources and less experience to draw on when defending election-integrity laws.

The result, according to PILF, is a self-enforcing imbalance where left-leaning professors shape how students are introduced to election law, those students move into voting-rights nonprofits and major law firms, and they eventually become the attorneys challenging election-integrity laws in court.

According to report, that translates into more than just an ideological disparity on campus but a nationwide advantage in the lawyers, research and resources available to each side of election litigation.

"We can solve this problem of this dangerous imbalance in election litigation, but we have to start to solve it," Adams told Fox News Digital.

Fox News Digital reached out to Harvard, UC Berkeley, and University of Michigan law schools for comment.

Critics are slamming Norway over new legislation that they say singles out Jews. The proposed law could send individuals to prison for up to three years for knowingly conducting certain forms of business with Israeli communities in the West Bank.

The proposal, introduced by Norway’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, would prohibit the importation of goods originating in Israeli communities in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem and the exportation of goods to those communities. It would also restrict certain real estate transactions, construction and engineering services and investments in businesses headquartered and operating there.

Intentional violations could result in fines, imprisonment for up to three years or both, while negligent violations could carry fines, imprisonment for up to six months or both, according to Section7 of the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ official consultation document.

ISRAEL’S E1 PLAN EXPLAINED: THE JERUSALEM-AREA CORRIDOR SPARKING INTERNATIONAL BACKLASH

The measure remains under public consultation, with responses due Sept. 19, and has not yet been enacted.

Israel’s Ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon, condemned the proposal in a statement to Fox News Digital.

"Norway’s proposal to criminalize trade with Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria is the latest expression of their obsessive and openly hostile policy toward Israel. Instead of contributing to peace or regional stability, Norway has chosen political grandstanding, selective outrage and punitive measures against Israel. This approach damages bilateral relations, encourages rejectionism, and exposes just how detached Norwegian policy has become from the realities of the Middle East."

The Israeli Foreign Ministry’s Northern Europe Department also referred Fox News Digital to a statement it posted on X condemning the proposal.

US AMBASSADOR HUCKABEE SLAMS EXTREME GROUP OF ISRAELI SETTLERS FOR SEIZING PALESTINIAN HOMES ON WEST BANK

"Norway’s legislative proposal to criminalize trade with Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria is the latest example of the Norwegian foreign minister’s obsessive anti-Israel activism on the global stage. Norway has repeatedly chosen to sacrifice its bilateral relationship with Israel in favor of one-sided rhetoric and hostile actions that serve domestic interests, undermine efforts to reach peaceful solutions, and are completely detached from the reality in the Middle East."

In response to a request for comment from Fox News Digital, Norway’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs referred the outlet to its June 19 press release announcing the proposed legislation. The release states that Israeli settlements violate international law and undermine prospects for a two-state solution in which Israelis and Palestinians can live in peace and freedom.

"By proposing legally binding prohibitions, the government makes it clear that Norwegian citizens and Norwegian companies must not profit from or support activities that help sustain Israel’s unlawful settlement activity in Palestine," Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide said in the release.

Eide also said the settlements contribute to "displacement, extreme violence and a situation that makes a peaceful solution impossible."

UN AGENCY ACCUSED OF HAMAS TIES SEES ANOTHER EUROPEAN NATION CUT FUNDING

The ministry cited United Nations Security Council findings and International Court of Justice advisory opinions supporting its position on the settlements’ illegality. It said the proposed restrictions would cover imports and exports, property purchases, certain property-related services and acquisitions of businesses with headquarters and production in the settlements, while safeguarding legitimate Palestinian activities and humanitarian assistance.

The proposed legislation would exempt humanitarian activities, as well as transactions the government determines have "sufficient Palestinian ties" and do not contribute to the construction, expansion or maintenance of Israeli communities.

Dag Juliussen, national director of the Norwegian branch of the International Christian Embassy Jerusalem, said that the exemption could permit business with Palestinian residents while criminalizing comparable transactions involving Jewish residents in the same territory.

"The bill is based on a fundamentally misguided understanding of the Middle East conflict, which in turn rests on a rewriting of history," Juliussen said in a statement to Fox News Digital. "In addition, such a law would effectively serve as a reward for terrorism and, at its core, is deeply racist toward Jews."

CHRISTIAN ZIONISTS TAKE ON ANTI-ISRAEL ‘PROPAGANDA’ FROM BIBLICAL HEARTLAND

The consultation document does not characterize the proposal as targeting Jews. Instead, it says the measure is intended to prevent commercial activity that helps maintain Israeli communities beyond the pre-1967 lines, while shielding qualifying Palestinian commerce and humanitarian assistance.

Under the proposal, exemptions would be evaluated according to the people involved who benefit from the transaction and whether the activity contributes to the construction, expansion or maintenance of an Israeli community.

Juliussen said purchasing agricultural products from Muslim, Christian, Arab or Bedouin residents could be permitted, while purchasing similar products from Jewish residents could become a criminal offense. He argued that the determining factor would effectively be the identity of the seller.

Norway formally recognized a Palestinian state in 2024 and has become one of Israel’s strongest European critics since the Hamas-led terrorist attacks of Oct. 7, 2023.

Juliussen warned that the proposed legislation would not bring Israelis and Palestinians closer to peace but could instead deepen divisions and encourage extremist forces in the region.

Voters aren't convinced that President Donald Trump will make good on his new promise to send eligible Americans $5,000 dividend checks if Republicans maintain their majorities in the House and Senate this midterm cycle.

The proposal, which Trump unveiled during the Republican National Committee's midterm convention in Dallas last week, has ignited a national debate over whether the payments are financially feasible — and whether they'll ever become reality.

Asked what they thought of the proposal, and whether they believed it would ever become reality, most voters were skeptical with several dismissing the idea as unrealistic while pointing to Congress, the nation's debt and previous promises they said never materialized.

A few were hopeful.

"Personally, I think it's just a publicity stunt and I don't think that it's ever gonna happen," a voter named William said when speaking with Fox News Digital.

"It'll need to go through Congress, and I don't think with the midterm elections... the possibility of that happening is just so far down the road."

TRUMP'S $5,000 DIVIDEND CHECKS WOULD COME WITH A MAJOR CATCH UNDER GOP SENATOR'S PLAN

As Fox News Digital previously reported, the dividend proposal would require congressional approval and it's unclear where the money would come from the fund the program.

Another voter was clued into the dilemma and questioned whether the federal government under it's 40.1 trillion in national debt could afford the proposal.

"I don't think we have the money for that," said Daniel from Maryland. "And I think if we did, it should be going a couple different other places than that for sure."

Liz from Alexandria, Virginia, was even more blunt, calling the idea "absolute nonsense."

"I don't believe a word that man ever says," she added in reference to Trump.

Another cited previous promises they believed had fallen short. "Last time I remember he promised a stimulus and a couple other things. None of that happened," the voter said.

The president argued the checks would be funded through tariff revenue — but with an estimated price tag of roughly $1.2 trillion, the total needed far exceeds the record customs duties the federal government has collected under Trump's tariff agenda.

TRUMP DANGLES $5,000 CHECKS AS DEBT SURGES — BUT ONLY IF GOP CAN CLEAR MAJOR MIDTERM HURDLE

Some voters said they welcomed the proposal, arguing that taxpayer dollars should go to hardworking Americans.

"I think he's limiting it to American citizens and adults who work," one supporter told Fox News Digital.

"We've given a hell of a lot of money to people who don't deserve it," they added. "It's about time hardworking citizens of America get the money they deserve."