Rosie O’Donnell says her daughter is holding President Donald Trump personally responsible for their relocation to Ireland and for what she sees as his broader damage to the country.

‘My daughter is now saying, ‘Damn him. Damn Trump,’’ O’Donnell said during an appearance on ‘The Jim Acosta Show.’

She recalled her daughter pounding on a table in anger and stating, ‘He made us move for our own safety … and now he’s destroying the country.’ 

O’Donnell acknowledged the challenge of shielding her child from political upheaval while still confronting the realities of their situation.

‘She lives here. She hears what I’m saying to you,’ O’Donnell said, explaining that her daughter ‘recognizes what’s going on.’ 

The comedian also emphasized, ‘Of me thinking that I have to somehow stand in defiance of him. No, no … I don’t. Somebody can tap me out, you know. Yeah. I did 22 years. I don’t really need to do any more. And I don’t want my kid to be so affected by it.’

Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House for comment.

O’Donnell’s relocated to Ireland after Trump threatened to strip her of U.S. citizenship.

In October, she announced she was applying for Irish citizenship, citing her grandparents’ roots and a self-described ‘self-imposed (political exile)’ in Ireland.

In an interview with the U.K.’s Daily Telegraph, the 63-year-old said, ‘I am applying and about to be approved for my Irish citizenship as my grandparents were from there, and that’s all you need. It will be good to have my Irish citizenship, especially since Trump keeps threatening to take away mine.’

White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson reacted at the time, telling Fox News Digital, ‘What great news for America!’

O’Donnell revealed her international move in March, sharing that she’d relocated to Ireland just five days before President Trump’s 2025 inauguration. 

Sharing the news with her TikTok followers, she called the transition ‘pretty wonderful.’

The feud between O’Donnell and Trump flared again in July, when he took to Truth Social, warning he was considering stripping the comedian of her U.S. citizenship.

‘Because of the fact that Rosie O’Donnell is not in the best interests of our Great Country, I am giving serious consideration to taking away her Citizenship,’ he wrote. ‘She is a Threat to Humanity, and should remain in the wonderful Country of Ireland, if they want her. GOD BLESS AMERICA!’

O’Donnell fired back on social media, asserting that Trump ‘has always hated the fact that i see him for who he is.’

Under the United States Constitution, a president does not have the power to strip the citizenship of someone born in the country, meaning since O’Donnell was born in New York, her citizenship is protected by the 14th Amendment.

The tensions between the two go back nearly two decades, beginning in 2006 when O’Donnell criticized Trump while co-hosting ‘The View.’

Russian President Vladimir Putin ratcheted up tensions with Europe on Tuesday, warning that if the bloc sparked a war with Russia, Moscow was prepared to meet it.

Putin also blasted European leaders, accusing them of sabotaging U.S.-led efforts to end the nearly four-year-old war in Ukraine.

‘But if Europe suddenly wants to wage a war with us and starts it, we are ready right away. There can be no doubt about that,’ Putin said, according to The Associated Press.

Putin was responding to a question about Russian media reports that Hungary’s foreign minister warned Europe was preparing for war with Russia. Putin insisted, as he has for years, that Moscow does not seek a war with European nations.

The Russian president made the remarks after speaking at an investment forum and before meeting in the Kremlin with a U.S. delegation led by envoy Steve Witkoff and President Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner.

It’s not the first time Putin has warned Europe about meddling in the war.

In October, Putin warned that Europe would face a ‘significant response’ if it continued supplying military aid to Ukraine, and he made similar threats in May.

In February 2024, Putin warned that Western military intervention against Russia’s invasion of Ukraine could result in nuclear escalation — a statement widely interpreted as a warning to Europe and Western allies.

Putin claimed on Tuesday that European leaders introduced ‘demands that are absolutely unacceptable to Russia’ that effectively ‘blocked the entire peace process.’ He accused them of doing so cynically in order to blame Moscow for rejecting peace.

European leaders have maintained that Putin’s invasion of Ukraine is a stepping stone to a wider war with the 27-nation European Union, which has poured billions of dollars into supporting Kyiv.

Putin said European powers had locked themselves out of peace talks on Ukraine because they cut off contacts with Moscow.

‘They are on the side of war,’ Putin said.

He also suggested the conflict in Ukraine was not a full-blown war, describing Russia’s actions as ‘surgical’ — a restraint, he said, that would not apply in a direct confrontation with European powers, according to Reuters. 

Putin’s comments come as Witkoff and Kushner press for peace between Ukraine and Russia.

On Sunday, Witkoff — a central figure in negotiating the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas — joined Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Kushner in Florida to meet with Ukrainian negotiators. Rubio described the meeting as ‘very productive.’ In a statement, Rubio said the goal is ‘not just the end of the war.’

Last week, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov warned that Moscow could reject the White House’s peace framework if it does not uphold the ‘spirit and letter’ of what Trump and Putin agreed to at the Alaska summit in August. He said that if the ‘key understandings’ were watered down, the situation would become ‘fundamentally different.’

Despite Lavrov’s comments, Putin showed interest in Trump’s effort to end the war, calling the drafted plan a starting point. 

‘We need to sit down and discuss this seriously,’ Putin told reporters, according to the AP.

He characterized Trump’s plan as ‘a set of issues put forward for discussion,’ rather than a draft agreement.

Fox News’ Andrea Margolis, Sarah Tobianski, Kyle Schmidbauer and Ashley Carnahan as well as The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report.

House appropriators and foreign affairs leaders convened a rare joint briefing Tuesday as part of a broader congressional investigation into what lawmakers and experts describe as escalating and targeted violence against Christians in Nigeria.

The session — led by House Appropriations Vice Chair and National Security Subcommittee Chairman Mario Díaz-Balart, R-Fla. — is feeding into a comprehensive report ordered by President Trump on recent massacres of Nigerian Christians and potential policy steps the U.S. could take to pressure Abuja to respond.

Trump directed Congress, led by Reps. Riley Moore, R-W.Va., and Appropriations Chairman Tom Cole, R-Okla., to probe Christian persecution in Nigeria and produce a report for the White House to review. He has floated the idea of taking direct military action against Islamists who kill. 

Vicky Hartzler, chair of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, told lawmakers that ‘religious freedom [is] under siege,’ citing the abduction of more than 300 children and attacks in which ‘radical Muslims kill entire Christian villages [and] burn churches.’ She said violations are ‘rampant,’ ‘violent,’ and disproportionately affect Christians, who she argued are targeted ‘at a 2.2 to 1 rate’ compared with Muslims.

Hartzler said Nigeria has taken some initial corrective steps — including reassigning about 100,000 police officers from VIP protection details — but warned the country is entering a ‘coordinated and deeply troubling period of escalated violence.’ She recommended targeted sanctions on Nigerian officials ‘who have demonstrated complicity,’ visa restrictions, blocking U.S.-based assets, and conditioning foreign and humanitarian aid on measurable accountability.

She also urged Congress to direct the Government Accountability Office to conduct a review of past U.S. assistance and said Abuja should retake villages seized from Christian farming communities so widows and children can return home.

Dr. Ebenezer Obadare of the Council on Foreign Relations offered the sharpest challenge to the Nigerian government’s claim that the violence is not religiously motivated. He said the idea Boko Haram and other militant groups target Christians and Muslims equally is a ‘myth,’ arguing the groups ‘act for one reason and one reason only: religion.’ Any higher Muslim casualty count, he said, reflects geography, not equal targeting.

Obadare described Boko Haram as fundamentally opposed to democracy and said the Nigerian military is ‘too corrupt and incompetent’ to dismantle jihadist networks without strong external pressure. He urged the U.S. to press the Nigerian government to disband armed groups enforcing Islamic law, confront corruption inside the security forces, and demonstrate genuine intent to curb religious violence. He added that Washington should insist Nigerian officials respond immediately to early warnings of impending attacks.

Sean Nelson of Alliance Defending Freedom International added that Nigeria is ‘the deadliest country in the world for Christians,’ claiming more Christians are killed there than in all other countries combined and at a rate ‘five times’ higher than Muslims when adjusted for population. He said extremists also target Muslims who refuse to embrace their extreme ideology, which he argued further undercuts Abuja’s narrative that the crisis is driven mainly by criminality or local disputes.

With a population of more than 230 million, Nigeria’s vibrant and often turbulent cities and villages are home to people of strikingly diverse backgrounds. The nation’s roughly 120 million-strong Muslim population dominates the north, while some 90 million Christians are centered in the southern half of the country.

Nelson urged tighter U.S. oversight of assistance to Nigeria, including routing some aid through faith-based organizations to avoid corruption. He called for greater transparency in how Abuja handles mass kidnappings and ransom payments and said sustained U.S. and international pressure is essential because ‘without transparency and outside pressure, nothing changes.’

Díaz-Balart criticized the Biden administration for reversing the Trump administration’s designation of Nigeria as a ‘country of particular concern’ in 2021, arguing the change has had ‘clearly deadly consequences.’ Lawmakers on the Appropriations, Foreign Affairs and Financial Services committees signaled additional oversight actions in the months ahead as they prepare the Trump-directed report to Congress.

Hartzler noted that Nigeria has recently begun taking several steps that could signal a shift toward confronting the crisis more directly. She pointed to President Bola Tinubu’s decision to pull about 100,000 police officers from VIP bodyguard assignments and redistribute them across the country, calling it ‘a promising start after years of neglect.’ She said the move reflects growing recognition inside Nigeria’s political leadership that the violence has reached an intolerable level.

She also highlighted comments last week from Nigeria’s speaker of the House, who acknowledged the country is facing a ‘coordinated and deeply troubling period of escalated violence.’ Hartzler said that acknowledgment — coupled with a push from the Nigerian House majority leader for more intensive legislative oversight — suggests the government may finally be admitting the scale and severity of the attacks.

Even with these developments, Hartzler warned the measures are far from sufficient. She emphasized that the Nigerian government must show clear intent to ‘quell injustice,’ act quickly when early warning signs of attacks appear, and commit to transparency and accountability if the recent steps are going to amount to meaningful progress.

The Nigerian Embassy did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., doesn’t want to get ahead of impending investigations into a deadly Sept. 2 strike on alleged drug boats in the Caribbean, but argued that there is a precedent for such strikes dating back to the Obama administration.

Both congressional Republicans and Democrats have raised concerns about the nature of the two strikes on the suspected drug vessel, with chairs of the House and Senate Armed Services committees announcing that they planned to delve into rigorous oversight of the situation.

It all comes after a report from The Washington Post said Secretary of War Pete Hegseth green-lighted a second strike on the vessel to take out any remaining survivors. The White House later confirmed on Monday that Hegseth did authorize the second strike, but that Adm. Frank Bradley, the head of U.S. Special Operations Command, ordered and directed it.

In the aftermath, there have been calls to release unedited footage of the strikes, and for lawmakers to get a fulsome briefing on what exactly happened three months ago.

When asked if unedited video should be released of the strikes to Congress and the public, and, if the footage showed that the survivors were defenseless, if that would amount to a war crime, Johnson said that he wouldn’t ‘prejudge any of that,’ and he noted that both the Senate and House Armed Services panels would hold hearings to review the incident.

The top House Republican noted that he was playing catch-up on the developments, given that he spent much of Monday campaigning in Tennessee for Tuesday’s special election to replace former Rep. Mark Green, R-Tenn.

‘My assessment of this, my understanding, is that most of the people that have looked at this, at least, in a preliminary review, say that the admiral who ordered the second strike was — thought it was necessary to complete the mission,’ Johnson said. ‘He’s a highly decorated, highly respected admiral in the Navy. And, he made that call.’

‘And so, you know, we’re going to have to look at that,’ he continued. ‘I’m sure Congress has a right to look at it. I don’t know how much of the tape should be released, because I’m not sure how much is sensitive with regard to national security and all that. I haven’t had a chance to review it, so I’m not going to prejudge it.’

Johnson then turned his focus to former President Barack Obama and argued that under his administration, few questions were asked about the slew of drone strikes authorized by the then-president.

‘One of the things I was reminded of this morning is that under Barack Obama, President Obama … I think there were 550 drone strikes on people who were targeted as enemies of the country, and nobody ever questioned it,’ Johnson said. ‘And second, secondary strikes are not unusual. It has to happen if a mission is going to be completed.’

‘So I haven’t reviewed the scope of the mission,’ he continued. ‘I haven’t reviewed that particular strike. I don’t know what went into the admiral’s decision matrix, but it’s something that Congress will look at, and we’ll do that in the regular process in order.’

In the wake of a federal judge’s moves last month to dismiss separate indictments against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, the Department of Justice is considering possibly pursuing new indictments against the two figures, according to Politico.

The outlet reported that two individuals familiar with the cases indicated that the DOJ is seriously thinking about refraining from appealing the dismissals and is instead seeking new indictments against Comey and James.

Fox News Digital reached out to the DOJ, which did not provide comment.

Last week, senior U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie dismissed indictments against Comey and James, asserting that the appointment of Lindsey Halligan as interim U.S. attorney violated the law and Constitution.

In Comey’s and James’ separate cases, the judge wrote that ‘because Ms. Halligan had no lawful authority to present the indictment, I will… dismiss the indictment without prejudice.’

Responding to the judge’s moves last week, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt claimed the judge was attempting to ‘shield’ Comey and James from ‘accountability’ and said that the DOJ would appeal. 

‘And it is our position that Lindsey Halligan is extremely qualified for this position, but more importantly, was legally appointed to it,’ she told reporters outside the White House.

‘We’ll be taking all available legal action, including an immediate appeal, to hold Letitia James and James Comey accountable for their unlawful conduct,’ U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi said at a press conference last week.

President Donald Trump is continuing to advocate for the Senate GOP to nix the filibuster.

In a Monday Truth Social post, the president shared a video featuring clips of former Attorney General Eric Holder, who opined that if Democrats win a ‘trifecta’ in the 2028 elections, the prospect of expanding the Supreme Court should be under consideration. 

Holder made the comment while speaking with Ben Meiselas, co-founder of MeidasTouch, which posted the video last month.

In the Monday Truth Social post, Trump referred to Holder, who served under Democratic President Barack Obama, as an ‘Obama sycophant’ and said that ‘Eric Holder (known as ‘FAST AND FURIOUS’) just gave a Speech where he emphatically stated, above all else, that Democrats will PACK the Supreme Court of the United States if they get the chance. The word is, he wants 21 Radical Left Activist Judges, not being satisfied with the heretofore 15 that they were seeking.’

Trump suggested that eliminating the filibuster would enable Republicans to win in the 2026 midterm elections and the 2028 White House contest.

‘It will be 21, they will destroy our Constitution, and there’s not a thing that the Republicans can do about it unless we TERMINATE THE FILIBUSTER, which will lead to an easy WIN of the Midterms, and an even easier WIN in the Presidential Election of 2028,’ he asserted.

‘Why would the Republicans even think about giving them this opportunity? The American People don’t want gridlock, they want their Leaders to GET THINGS DONE — TERMINATE THE FILIBUSTER, AND HAVE THE MOST SUCCESSFUL FOUR YEARS IN THE HISTORY OF OUR COUNTRY, BY FAR, WITH NOT EVEN THE HINT OF A SHUTDOWN OF OUR GREAT NATION ON JANUARY 30TH!’ Trump declared in the post.

White House envoy Steve Witkoff is in Moscow is set to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin Tuesday after a whirlwind weekend of negotiations with Ukraine aimed at securing a peace deal.

All eyes are on Putin as Witkoff and Jared Kushner, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and occasional foreign policy envoy, feel out whether Putin might agree to the 19-point proposal they finalized with Ukrainian counterparts following initial U.S.-Russian talks.

The latest round of diplomacy represents the most active push toward a potential settlement since the full-scale invasion in 2022, but negotiators acknowledge that significant obstacles remain. Core disputes over territory, Ukraine’s long-term security arrangements, and the conditions for any ceasefire are unresolved, and officials say progress will depend on whether Putin shows flexibility during this week’s meetings.

After an initial 28-point plan brokered by Witkoff and Russian envoy Kirill Dmitriev was viewed by Kyiv as too favorable to Moscow, U.S. and Ukrainian officials went back to the drawing board. They met in Geneva at the end of November to work through a trimmed-down version of the plan and again over the weekend in Florida to hammer out additional details.

Both sides said the talks were productive but offered no specifics on which issues still divide them.

‘So much work remains,’ Secretary of State Marco Rubio said after the meeting. ‘But today was again a very productive and useful session where I think additional progress was made.’

‘There’s a good chance we can make a deal,’ Trump said.

Despite the momentum, the two sides remain far apart. Several of the most sensitive issues were left for a meeting between principal leaders.

Russia insists Ukraine cannot join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization — even though Ukraine amended its constitution to make NATO membership a national objective. In the original 28-point plan, Russia also demanded Ukraine reduce its peacetime armed forces to 600,000.

European and Ukrainian officials instead floated an 800,000 cap, according to the Financial Times. Ukraine currently fields around 880,000 troops, up from about 209,000 before the 2022 invasion.

The largest impasse remains territorial concessions. A draft of the earlier proposal suggested recognizing Crimea and large parts of the Luhansk, Donetsk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions as de facto Russian.

Complicating the process is the sudden removal of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s chief of staff and chief negotiator, Andriy Yermak, who resigned after a corruption probe led to a raid of his home. Yermak had publicly insisted days earlier that Ukraine would not give up land for peace. 

‘Not a single sane person today would sign a document to give up territory,’ he told The Atlantic magazine. 

Putin said at the end of November he was ready for ‘serious’ talks but also asserted that Russia has the upper hand and would halt fighting only if Ukrainian forces withdraw from territory it has recaptured on the front lines.

‘If they don’t withdraw, we will achieve this by force,’ he said.

Analysts say Washington still has levers it could use if negotiations stall, including tightening sanctions and expanding military assistance to Ukraine. But many of the most powerful economic measures — such as penalties on major Russian energy and financial entities — are already in place, and the U.S. has provided Ukraine with tens of billions of dollars in military aid since 2022. 

That leaves a narrower set of options if the talks reach an impasse.

Trump has voiced frustration with the slow pace of diplomacy in recent days, saying publicly that he believed a resolution ‘should have happened a long time ago,’ though officials have not indicated that Washington is preparing to walk away from the talks.

President Donald Trump threw himself in the middle of Honduras’ razor-thin presidential race on Monday, warning that there would be ‘hell to pay’ if election officials altered the results.  

Writing on Truth Social, Trump, without offering evidence, accused Honduras of ‘trying to change the results.’

‘If they do, there will be hell to pay! The people of Honduras voted in overwhelming numbers on November 30th,’ Trump said.

The president’s remarks came hours after Ana Paola Hall, president of the National Electoral Council, wrote on X that the preliminary rapid reporting system that began providing results Sunday night had reached its conclusion with votes 57% tallied.

Their count showed a close race between two conservative candidates, Nasry Asfura of the National Party and Salvador Nasralla of the Liberal Party, with Asfura holding a narrow lead of only a few hundred votes. Rixi Moncada, the democratic socialist LIBRE candidate, trailed roughly 20 percentage points behind.  

‘It is imperative that the Commission finish counting the Votes,’ Trump wrote. ‘Hundreds of thousands of Hondurans must have their Votes counted. Democracy must prevail!’

Officials have said the count would continue but did not specify when updated totals would be released, and parts of the council’s online system appeared to have been taken down.

Just before the freeze, Trump had endorsed Asfura, calling him the ‘only Honduran candidate his administration would work with and saying he would fight ‘narco-communists’ alongside the U.S.

Both leading candidates have pointed to the close tally as evidence that they are ahead – though both men have stopped short of declaring victory.

Trump’s announcement that he would pardon former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández, who is now serving a 45-year U.S. sentence – also loomed large over the race, underscoring how U.S. politics can intrude in the country’s politics.

Trump’s latest warning injects new pressure into an already hostile post-election environment. The outcome will determine whether the Latin American country shifts away from the ruling LIBRE party and have deep impacts on its future relationship with Washington.

The White House confirmed and defended conducting a second strike against alleged drug smugglers in the Caribbean in September, amid the Trump administration’s crusade targeting the influx of drugs into the U.S. 

The White House’s statement comes after the Washington Post reported Friday that Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth verbally ordered that a Sept. 2 attack kill everyone on board the alleged drug boat, drawing scrutiny from lawmakers who are requesting additional oversight into the strikes. The Post reported that a second strike was conducted to take out the remaining survivors on the boat. 

Although the Pentagon pushed back against the report, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt did not deny that a second strike occurred and told reporters Monday that the strike Sept. 2 was conducted ‘in self-defense’ in international waters ‘in accordance with the law of armed conflict.’ 

The White House said Monday that Hegseth authorized the second strike, but the head of U.S. Special Operations Command, Adm. Frank ‘Mitch’ Bradley, ordered and directed it. At the time of the strike, Bradley was serving as the commander of Joint Special Operations Command, which falls under U.S. Special Operations Command. 

‘On September 2nd, Secretary Hegseth authorized Admiral Bradley to conduct these kinetic strikes,’ Leavitt said. ‘Admiral Bradley worked well within his authority and the law, directing the engagement to ensure the boat was destroyed and the threat to the United States of America was eliminated.’

When asked to confirm that Bradley was the one who ordered the second strike, Leavitt said that he was ‘well within his authority to do so,’ but declined to disclose whether the second strike was ordered because there were survivors remaining from the first strike. 

Leavitt also disputed that Hegseth ever gave an initial order to ensure that everyone on board was killed, when asked specifically about Hegseth’s instructions. 

‘I would reject that the secretary of War ever said that,’ Leavitt said. ‘However, the president has made it quite clear that if narco-terrorists, again, are trafficking illegal drugs toward the United States, he has the authority to kill them.’

The White House’s statements on the matter don’t completely align with the Pentagon’s. On Friday, the Pentagon denied the Post’s reporting in its entirety. 

‘We told the Washington Post that this entire narrative was false yesterday,’ Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell said in a post on social media Friday. ‘These people just fabricate anonymously sourced stories out of whole cloth. Fake News is the enemy of the people.’ 

The Pentagon did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital.

Meanwhile, the report has prompted lawmakers on both sides of the aisle to ask additional questions about the operations, and press for additional oversight. 

‘This committee is committed to providing rigorous oversight of the Department of Defense’s military operations in the Caribbean,’ Reps. Mike Rogers, R-Ala., and Adam Smith, D-Wash., who lead the House Armed Services Committee, said in a statement on Saturday. ‘We take seriously the reports of follow-on strikes on boats alleged to be ferrying narcotics in the SOUTHCOM region and are taking bipartisan action to gather a full accounting of the operation in question.’

Spokespeople for the committee did not respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital regarding the nature of these additional oversight efforts. 

Additionally, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., said Monday that she is calling for an investigation into the matter as well, and said that Hegseth ‘owes answers to the American people immediately.’

The Trump administration has carried out more than 20 strikes against alleged drug boats in Latin American waters, and has bolstered its military presence in the Caribbean to align with Trump’s goal to crack down on the influx of drugs into the U.S.

The White House also confirmed Monday that Trump is slated to hold a meeting on Monday evening to discuss future actions concerning Venezuela. 

The House unanimously passed a bill on Monday barring anyone linked to Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023 attack on Israel from moving to the United States.

It’s a rare moment of bipartisanship on the topic of Israel, an issue that’s otherwise exacerbated deep fractures within both parties in the House of Representatives — particularly for Democrats.

The Republican-led legislation is called the ‘No Immigration Benefits for Hamas Terrorists Act of 2025’ and was introduced by Rep. Tom McClintock, R-Calif.

It passed the House by voice vote on Monday afternoon, meaning it advanced with unanimous approval without lawmakers taking individual votes on the bill.

‘There are still some things we can come together on in this body, and one of them is opposition to Hamas and the terrorism they unleashed on civilians in Israel more than two years ago,’ McClintock told Fox News Digital.

‘What this does is place them in the same category as Nazi collaborators in the Holocaust, which are also referenced in the Immigration Nationality Act.’

The bill now heads to the U.S. Senate, where a parallel effort was introduced earlier this year by Sens. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., and Jacky Rosen, D-Nev.

McClintock told Fox News Digital he was hopeful the Senate would take up the bill — while noting it passed the House last term as well without the upper chamber taking action.

‘The repeated actions of the House in passing this bill, I think, will hopefully inspire the Senate to take it up this year and send it to the president,’ he said. ‘It’s important for two reasons. Number one, to prevent a future Joe Biden from admitting such people, and to empower a future Donald Trump presidency to keep them out.’

The legislation would amend existing U.S. immigration law to deem ‘any alien who carried out, participated in, planned, financed, afforded material support to, or otherwise facilitated any of the attacks against Israel initiated by Hamas beginning on October 7, 2023’ inadmissible to the country.

It would also add Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad to the list of terror groups whose members and supporters are barred from the U.S. under the Immigration and Nationality Act.

It comes after a Gazan native, Mahmoud Amin Ya’qub Al-Muhtadi, who was residing in Louisiana, was arrested earlier this year over his alleged involvement in the Oct. 7 attack.