Late last month, President Donald Trump signed an executive order restricting “transgender” procedures on youth, including puberty blockers and surgeries such as mastectomies and penile reconstruction. In response, many medical providers including some of the top in the nation for performing them have announced they will comply with the EO.

The EO states that “it is the policy of the United States that it will not fund, sponsor, promote, assist, or support the so-called 'transition' of a child from one sex to another, and it will rigorously enforce all laws that prohibit or limit these destructive and life-altering procedures.”

Last year, nonprofit Do No Harm unveiled a database reporting that between 2019-2023, there were 13,000 gender reassignment procedures performed throughout the nation on minors; those procedures included both surgeries and prescriptions. Among the top states in the nation for those procedures was Ohio, which has since enacted legislation banning such procedures.

The Center Square reached out to more than two dozen medical providers throughout the country based on data provided by Do No Harm regarding their total billing, prescriptions, and surgeries performed, asking them how they planned to respond to Trump’s EO.

Among those to announce they were suspending all procedures was Seattle-based UW Medicine, which stated in an email that it was “committed to supporting the clinical care needs and well-being of all our patients, as well as complying with state and federal law. We are currently in compliance and are also continuing to provide our full spectrum of services.”

Seattle Children’s Hospital ranked among the top in the nation for puberty blocker prescriptions; though it did not respond to request for comment, there have been reports that it has suspended those services, and its webpage for gender affirmation surgery has since been removed.

MultiCare Mary Bridge Children's Hospital located in Tacoma wrote in an email that while it does not perform gender-affirming surgeries, “we are aware of the executive order that calls for an end to gender-affirming medical treatments for children and adolescents under 19 and are continuing to monitor the situation. Executive orders are directives to federal agencies on how they will operate. Much of what’s been issued has not yet become rules for us to evaluate.”

D.C.-based Children’s National Hospital released a statement that it will no longer prescribe puberty blockers or hormone therapy, noting that prior to the EO it did not perform gender affirming surgeries.

Coolie Dickinson Hospital based out of Massachusetts wrote in an email that it “is reviewing to see what, if any, actual impact the executive orders might have and would follow up, if there is any impact. In the meantime, the care we provide to our community continues as normal at this time.”

University of Michigan Health stated that its “teams are assessing the potential impact of this executive order on our healthcare services and the communities we serve. Our priority remains delivering high-quality, accessible care to our patients while ensuring compliance with the law."

Another medical provider to cease gender transition services for anyone under 19 is VCU Health and Children’s Hospital of Richmond, Virginia, which wrote in a statement that it was “in response to an Executive Order issued by the White House on January 28, 2025, and related state guidance received by VCU on January 30, 2025. Our doors remain open to all patients and their families for screening, counseling, mental health care and all other health care needs.”

UCSF’s Gender Affirming Care in San Francisco has also ended services for patients under 19, a policy also adopted by Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles.

Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York simply wrote in an email that “we will keep you posted once we have an update on this matter.”

Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago and the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia both said they were reviewing their services.

Several hospitals and hospital systems who performed these procedures on minors did not respond to The Center Square's requests for comment on the executive order. The Center Square will continue to seek clarification on whether they plan to comply with the order.

(The Center Square) – A new Wisconsin bill would limit government-sponsored divisions from flying certain flags.

The bill prevents flags other than the U.S. flag, Wisconsin flag, local flags and U.S. armed forces and POW/MIA flags from being flown or hung outside any state or local institution.

The bill was introduced by a group of Republicans including Rep. Jerry L. O’Connor, R-Fond du Lac, Dave Murphy, R- Greenville, Rob Brooks, R-Saukville, Joy Goeben, R-Hobart and State Sens. Dan Feyen, R-Fond du Lac, and Cory Tomczyk, R-Mosinee.

The bill points to particular flags that have led to divisiveness including those of political movements or social causes, such as MAGA, pride, heterosexual, CSA, Second Amendment rights, BLM, ALL Lives Matter, Antifa, Pro-Life, Pro-Choice and others.

The bill doesn’t prohibit any private citizens or Native American tribes from flying any flags.

“Government should not be in the business of choosing sides, or even giving the appearance of choosing sides,” said Feyen. “This bill simply ensures that the first impression of all government buildings and institutions is neutral, offering equal treatment to all Wisconsinites.”

The lawmakers said that they were asked to act on the divisiveness by Wisconsin residents.

“Flags on government buildings are not supposed to be divisive and should not support one ideology over another,” said Sen. Tomczyk, “When the governor uses flags flown over the State Capitol and other taxpayer-funded buildings to divide the people of Wisconsin, it is shameful and frankly, embarrassing. It is time to end this nonsense.”

Immigrants residing illegally within the U.S. could no longer receive child tax credits or tax breaks for low income earners if the Safeguarding American Workers’ Benefits Act becomes law.

Reintroduced by Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith, R-Miss., the legislation would require both parents and children to have Social Security numbers that are valid for employment in order to claim the Child Tax Credit or the Earned Income Tax Credit.

Rep. Clay Higgins, R-La., has introduced a companion bill in the House.

The U.S. Joint Committee on Taxation estimates Hyde-Smith's legislation could save nearly $28 billion over ten years.

“I welcome President [Donald] Trump’s intent to target wasteful spending and enforce immigration laws,” Hyde-Smith said Tuesday. “The environment is certainly friendlier now to adopt legislation that saves billions of dollars and ensures that only U.S citizens and persons authorized to work can benefit from the Child Tax Credit and Earned Income Tax Credit.”

While the CTC and EITC should only go to those with SSNs valid for employment, certain loopholes allow some people who do not meet the requirements to receive the federal benefits. The bill would close those loopholes.

Only weeks into Trump’s second presidency, Republicans and the Commander in Chief have already implemented or introduced other anti-illegal immigration measures, including reinstating the Remain in Mexico policy and authorizing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to round up and deport migrants residing in the U.S.

The Safeguarding American Workers’ Benefits Act is also part of Republicans’ federal cost-cutting efforts to finance the extension of Trump’s 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which the Congressional Budget Office estimates will cost $4.6 trillion over the next ten years.

“I will work to ensure that [the] Safeguarding American Workers’ Benefits Act is considered as part of the debate to extend and improve on the Trump tax cuts that expire this year,” Hyde-Smith said.

Surveying nearly an equal number of Republicans and Democrats, a poll taken by the New York Times and polling company Ipsos showed that the majority of Americans do not want transgender-identifying men in women’s sports.

Of those surveyed, 79% answered that men “should not” compete in women’s sports when posed with the following question: “thinking about transgender female athletes – meaning athletes who were male at birth but who currently identify as female – do you think they should or should not be allowed to compete in women's sports?”

This number has increased from a 2023 The Center Square Voters' Voice Poll that reported 67% of American voters were collectively against men playing in women’s sports.

When the 2025 New York Times-Ipsos poll is broken up along political divides, 94% of Republicans, 67% of Democrats, and 64% of Independents or “something else” answered that men should not be in women’s sports.

The highest bracket that believes men should be allowed to play in women’s sports are Democrats, equaling 31%.

The results of this poll came just before President Trump declared there are only two sexes in America, male and female. The survey was taken from Jan. 2 to 11.

When reached for comment, Ipsos vice president for public affairs Mallory Newall repeated the question posed to respondents and said “we cannot speculate on what people meant or interpreted beyond the wording of the question.”

Ipsos is a global market research and polling company, according to its description in the poll document.

Men in women’s sports has become an issue in recent years, with high school girls such as Payton McNabb getting injured by a male competitor on a volleyball team and former University of Kentucky swimmer Riley Gaines becoming an activist defending women's-only sports after placing second to a transgender female swimming competitor.

The Independent Women’s Forum senior legal advisor Beth Parlato told The Center Square that “without female-only athletics, the safety of girls and women is endangered, and men will dominate the playing field, which unfairly takes away awards, opportunities, scholarships and roster spots.”

The Independent Women’s Forum (IWF) is a nonprofit women’s organization “dedicated to developing and advancing policies” that “enhance people’s freedom, opportunities, and well-being,” according to its website. IWF has taken a staunch stance against men competing in women’s sports.

“Males and females possess unique and immutable biological differences,” Parlato said. “With respect to sports, males have biological athletic advantages over females, as the average male is stronger, bigger and faster.

“Furthermore, allowing males in female-only spaces is an invasion of a women’s right to privacy and threatens women’s safety and well-being,” Parlato said.

“Defining sex-based terms in law and policy is essential to protect women’s sports and spaces,” Parlato said.

Trump’s executive order on two sexes provides “needed clarity to preserve the legal existence of women as distinct from men,” Parlato said. “Protect women’s sports bills at both the federal and state levels must be codified into law to ensure equal athletic opportunities for women and girls."

The NYT-Ipsos survey was “of the American general population” aged 18 and up, interviewing a total of 2,128 people; 1,022 of those polled were Republican/Lean Republican, 1,025 were Democrat/Lean Democrat, and 81 were Independent or “something else.”

In a vein similar to transgender-identifying men playing in women’s sports, the poll showed that the majority of Americans are not for sex changes in minors, either.

Respondents were asked “thinking about medications used for transgender care, do you think doctors should be able to prescribe puberty-blocking drugs or hormone therapy to minors between the ages of 10 and 18?”

A total of 71% of Americans do not think anyone under 18 should have access to such drugs or therapy.

Shortly after this poll, Trump signed an executive order “restricting transgender drugs and surgeries for minors,” The Center Square previously reported.

Changing the name to Donald J. Trump International Airport from Dulles International Airport has been proposed by a freshman congressman from North Carolina.

Rep. Addison McDowell, the 31-year-old Republican from the state’s 6th Congressional District, introduced the bill Thursday along with Reps. Brian Jack, R-Ga., Riley Moore, R-W.V., Brandon Gill, R-Texas, and Guy Reschenthaler, R-Penn.

“It is only right that the two airports servicing our nation’s capital are duly honored and respected by two of the best presidents to have the honor of serving our great nation,” McDowell said.

Dulles International and Reagan National are major airports serving the District of Columbia, Maryland and Northern Virginia. The former is named for Josh Foster Dulles, secretary of state under Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower from 1953-59. More than 26 million passengers used Dulles in the 12 months ending in November, according to the latest statistics available.

The then-$108.3 million airport, on 10,000 acres of Loudoun and Fairfax counties in Virginia, was dedicated Nov. 17, 1962. Another 830 acres were acquired 20 years ago.

Jack said the effort “to ‘cancel’ President Trump during his post-presidency” is rightly countered by the bill to “enshrine President Trump’s legacy.”

“This legislation will cement his status in our nation’s capital as our fearless commander-in-chief, extraordinary leader, and relentless champion for the American people,” Reschenthaler said in a release from McDowell’s office.

Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, smaller in gates 113 to 58 than Dulles, is on 860 acres in Virginia. Opening in 1941 as National Airport, Democratic two-term President Bill Clinton on Feb. 6, 1998, signed the legislation authored by Sen. Paul Coverdell, R-Ga., renaming it for the nation’s 40th president.

Reagan National also checked more than 26 million passengers in the 12 months ending in November. The Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority reported 53.1 million total between the two.

Pete Hegseth, the newly-confirmed Secretary of Defense, has indicated that changes to the military are already in motion.

Hegseth told reporters outside the Pentagon Monday that Trump will soon authorize the reinstatement of military members who were discharged for refusing to take the COVID-19 vaccine, with backpay.

He also hinted that military bases renamed under the Biden administration will revert to their original names. This includes Fort Moore and Fort Liberty, originally known as Fort Benning and Fort Bragg, the names of confederate officers.

"Our job is lethality and readiness and warfighting, and we are going to hold people accountable," Hegseth told reporters on the Pentagon's steps.

The Senate voted 51-50 late Friday to confirm Hegseth, with Vice President J.D. Vance casting the tie-breaking vote.

Former Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., along with Sens. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, and Susan Collins, R-Maine, voted no.

“Effective management of nearly 3 million military and civilian personnel, an annual budget of nearly $1 trillion, and alliances and partnerships around the world is a daily test with staggering consequences for the security of the American people and our global interests,” McConnell said Friday night. “Mr. Hegseth has failed, as yet, to demonstrate that he will pass this test.”

The veteran and former Fox News host has faced allegations of abusing alcohol, mismanaging nonprofit funds, and sexual assault, which he denies.

All Democratic senators voted against Hegseth. The Senate Armed Services Committee barely recommended his nomination Monday with a 14-13 vote.

Ranking member on Senate Foreign Relations committee Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., said Thursday that Hegseth’s “11th hour conversion” on the roles of women in the military and the importance of NATO “raises questions about what he really believes.”

“Any inconsistency in our commitment to support our allies and partners, to support democracy around the world, to support the international world order — that is going to be seen and exploited by our adversaries,” she said.

As Defense secretary, Hegseth has promised he will root out social justice initiatives and partisan politics in the military, focusing instead on merit-based recruiting, effective deterrence, and overall lethality.

“Thank you for your confidence Mr. President. Thank you for the tie-breaker Mr. Vice President. Thank you Senators for 50 votes,” Hegseth posted on X following the vote. “This is for the troops. For the warriors. For our country. America First. Every day. We will never back down.”

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott surged additional Texas military resources to the Rio Grande Valley (RGV) to assist President Donald Trump with his border security efforts.

Abbott did so as removal operations are already underway in Trump’s first week in office after he issued a series of executive orders to secure the border, including sending 1,500 troops to Texas and California, The Center Square reported.

Abbott directed the Texas Military Department to deploy the Texas Tactical Border Force to the RGV to coordinate efforts with U.S. Border Patrol agents.

More than 400 troops are departing from military bases in Fort Worth and Houston Monday morning, as well as C-130s and Chinook helicopters, to join thousands of Texas National Guard soldiers already stationed at the Texas-Mexico border.

“Texas has a partner in the White House we can work with to secure the Texas-Mexico border," Abbott said. “For the past four years, Texas held the line against the Biden Administration’s border crisis and their refusal to protect Americans. Finally, we have a federal government working to end this crisis. I thank President Donald Trump for his decisive leadership on the southern border and look forward to working with him and his Administration to secure the border and make America safe again.”

Abbott first deployed the border force in May 2023 to the RGV and El Paso to support his border security mission, Operation Lone Star, The Center Square reported.

Under OLS, thousands of Texas National Guard soldiers and Texas Department of Public Safety troopers have been deployed to the Texas-Mexico border since March 2021. Abbott also received the support of 25 Republican governors, who also sent troops to Texas to participate in OLS.

“We have shifted troops to hotspots, added additional drone teams, and increased miles of barrier along the border. The dedication of these troops to the State of Texas is inspirational,” Texas Military Department Major General Thomas Suelzer said when the border force was first deployed in 2023. They included quick reaction forces comprised of military police units in El Paso and another to cover the region stretching from San Antonio to the Rio Grande Valley.

Last year, Texas Military Department efforts expanded after Texas built its first modern-day military base at the U.S. border in Eagle Pass, Texas, the only National Guard base along Texas’ border with Mexico, The Center Square reported.

Texas’ Forward Operating Base camp houses 1,800 troops with the ability to expand up to 2,300 if needed. Since then, military forces have been consolidated, enabling troops to expand barrier construction and other operations.

Since March 2021, when OLS was launched, more than 10,000 Texas National Guard troops and Texas Department of Public Safety troopers have been deployed to the Texas-Mexico border.

Through OLS, they’ve built more than 240 miles of border barriers, constructed 100 miles of border wall, installed and fortified 200 miles of concertina wire barriers, and installed marine buoy barriers, including additional barriers last week. Attempts by the Biden administration to prevent Texas’s construction of concertina wire and buoy barriers failed in court.

OLS officers alone have apprehended more than 530,000 illegal border crossers, repelled over 140,000 attempted illegal entries, made more than 50,000 criminal arrests, with more than 43,000 felony charges reported, and seized enough lethal doses of fentanyl to kill everyone in the U.S., Mexico and Canada combined, according to data from the governor’s office.

After Texas’ first Border Czar Mike Banks expanded OLS efforts, a 51% drop in federal border apprehensions was reported in one year in Texas, The Center Square exclusively reported.

Within that first year, as Texas resistance grew, illegal entries increased in Arizona, California and New Mexico, The Center Square exclusively reported.

(The Center Square) – Nearly $55 million in spending was reportedly approved to winterize American Family Field in Milwaukee, with claims the taxpayer district funds will allow for winter events and concerts at the stadium.

The spending includes $25 million to winterize the stadium, meaning the improvements would allow for the seating bowl temperature to be 68 degrees even when the temperature outside is 10 below zero, according to WISN.

The Wisconsin Professional Baseball Park District Board also approved $10 million for social gathering spaces, $500,000 for roof repairs, $661,000 to build a sensory room and $500,000 to upgrade the umpire locker room for women umpires, WISN reported.

The issue with the spending and winterization is that stadium concert tours do not occur in the winter because artists do not put together tours during a time of year when only some stadiums and cities can be visited.

"The difference between an outdoor stadium and an indoor stadium is essentially zero in terms of events," economist Victor Matheson told The Center Square while discussing similar claims involving a roofed NFL stadium in Nashville. "The reason for that is that all the big tours all go out in the summer specifically so they can use all the outdoor stadiums in the country rather than the limited number of domed stadiums."

American Family Field has a capacity of nearly 42,000, which is larger than most concert venues that artists perform at to begin with.

Visit Milwaukee told the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel late last year that winterizing the stadium could lead to the stadium hosting The NHL Winter Classic and the NCAA men's and women's basketball Final Four.

After President Donald Trump threatened tariffs and other punitive measures, Columbia backed down and agreed to accept its citizens who illegally immigrated to the U.S.

Trump on Sunday said the U.S. would impose tariffs on Colombia after the South American nation refused to allow a plane carrying illegal immigrants from the U.S. to land.

But soon after the threat, Colombian President Gustavo Petro conceded and agreed to allow deportation planes from the U.S. to land in the South American country.

"Based on this agreement, the fully drafted IEEPA tariffs and sanctions will be held in reserve, and not signed, unless Colombia fails to honor this agreement," a statement from the White House said. "The visa sanctions issued by the State Department, and enhanced inspections from Customs and Border Protection, will remain in effect until the first planeload of Colombian deportees is successfully returned."

Trump had said the U.S. would immediately impose 25% tariffs on all Colombian goods, but would increase that to 50% in a week, presumably if the country didn't change its position.

Trump and his new border czar, Tom Homan, vowed to round up foreign nationals in the U.S. illegally and deport them back to their home countries, with violent criminals the priority.

Trump also has threatened to use tariffs as a negotiating tactic against foreign nations that don't cooperate with the U.S.