News

News

January 15, 2026

Utah Valley University president to step down in May following Kirk assassination, husband’s death

Utah Valley University Astrid S. Tuminez announced on Wednesday that she will be stepping down from her role at the school on May 1 “to devote more time to her family and personal pursuits.” The college was the site of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk’s assassination in September, where suspected assassin Tyler Robinson fatally shot Kirk in the neck.

Tuminez said in a statement, “I will be forever grateful to the students, staff, and faculty at Utah Valley University and the friends who support UVU’s noble mission to transform the lives of our students. UVU has been a labor of love for me. The university’s call to ‘come as you are’ recognizes and cultivates human potential in bold ways that traditional institutions may overlook. Education transformed my life from the slums of the Philippines to a global adventure, and I brought that conviction to UVU. My heart will always be green. Given the academic calendar and hiring process, this is the ideal transition point for USHE to identify and onboard a new president who will lead the next chapter of UVU’s inspiring story.”

Tuminez became the university’s seventh president in the fall of 2018, and the end of her time as the school’s head comes in the wake of both Kirk’s assassination on campus, as well as the February death of her husband. 

The school held a “Vigil for Unity” in the wake of Kirk’s assassination, with Tuminez telling the crowd, “Shock, grief, abandonment, fear and hurt have filled our hearts since Sept. 10.” She added, “I have seen goodness and mercy. Our community, the wounded, showed up to serve one another. Hundreds, if not thousands, offered prayers for peace, clarity and resilience. We listened and gave each other patience and grace.”

“I urge each of us to remember that love can be stronger than fear. May peace, love and grace heal us in all the parts that we are broken,” she added.

3 Perverse Ways Your Tax Dollars Fund the Left’s Dark Money Network

Did you know that millions of your tax dollars go to fund leftist activist groups, who then lobby the government for policies you may disagree with?

The funding comes in at least three ways: directly through contracts and grants, indirectly through unions taking federal employees’ dues and sending a portion to activist groups, and then obliquely, through taxpayer-funded union time.

Examples of direct funding are legion.

The U.S. Agency for International Development awarded more than $800,000 to New Venture Fund, a dark money pass-through nonprofit that cloaks which donors give to which projects, and $27 million to the Tides Center, another dark money nonprofit that supports anti-Israel rioters, among other causes.

An arm of the Open Society Foundations, the funding organ set up by Hungarian American billionaire George Soros and now run by his son Alex, received so much money from USAID that it found it worthwhile to sue the agency to bypass guardrails on funding. The resulting legal battle reached the Supreme Court not once but twice.

In February, the Open Society Foundations released a statement distancing itself from USAID funding.

“The claims that the Open Society Foundations, founded by George Soros, receive funding from USAID or direct the funding of a multibillion-dollar U.S. government agency are manifestly false,” the foundation said.

The Justice Department funded at least one major Soros-backed nongovernmental organization. One of Soros’ most notorious projects involves his support for “rogue prosecutors” who lower the penalties for crime. Not surprisingly, many of the cities with the highest murder rates have prosecutors backed by Soros.

The Vera Institute of Justice, which claims that the American criminal justice system is “rooted in a history of white supremacy,” has received more than $11 million from the Foundation to Promote Open Society since 2016.

Under President Joe Biden, the Justice Department paid Vera at least $73.6 million in contracts, mostly for providing legal services to immigrant children. In just over one year, the Department of Health and Human Services paid Vera nearly $200 million for “refugee and entrant assistance.”

Vera aims to “establish a right to representation for all immigrants facing deportation,” a rather curious stance to take under the Biden administration, when at least 9 million illegal aliens entered the country.

Meanwhile, other NGOs also received hefty government funding to house and transport immigrants across the country, including illegal aliens. The U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants, one of many such groups, received 98% of its revenue—a whopping $284 million—from government grants in the 2023 fiscal year. The Foundation to Promote Open Society also contributed to the committee, sending $75,000 between 2017 and 2021.

The government also supports the Left’s dark money network indirectly. Federal employees in a union give part of their taxpayer-funded paychecks to the union, ostensibly for representation in bargaining for perks like working from home. Yet instead of using all the money to help employees, unions take a portion of those dues and send it to activist NGOs.

About a quarter of federal employees are union members, and the major government unions don’t just negotiate for perks like working from home. They also bankroll the same leftist groups that sent staff and policy recommendations into the Biden administration, using the bureaucracy to force leftist ideology on the American people.

The SEIU, for example, gave $1.6 million to New Venture Fund. The SEIU gave $1.8 million to the Tides Foundation.

The AFL-CIO, America’s largest union and home to the largest federal employee union, the American Federation of Government Employees, gave $250,000 to New Venture Fund and $100,000 to the Tides Foundation, among other left-wing groups.

Both the SEIU and the AFL-CIO bankrolled the Center for American Progress, which sent at least 60 staff into the Biden administration, and Demos, which wrote and helped implement a policy to turn government offices into voter registration machines likely to help Democrats. Many of these unions have sued to block Trump’s reforms to the administrative state.

Not only did the SEIU and the AFL-CIO send part of members’ dues to support leftist causes, but they also benefit from a process known as “official time.” Federal employees can bill the taxpayer for time they spend not doing their jobs, but doing work for the union. This creates yet another stream of taxpayer funds supporting unions that then back leftist causes.

• Federal prosecutors opened a criminal investigation following the January 7, 2026 incident in Minneapolis, Minnesota in which ICE officer Jonathan Ross was struck by a vehicle driven by Renee Good during a federal immigration enforcement operation. Investigators are reviewing video evidence, witness statements, and on-scene conduct to assess obstruction, incitement, conspiracy, and other potential federal criminal exposure connected to the assault on Ross.
• Authorities discussed potential violations including obstruction of federal officers, intimidation, aiding and abetting, and urging flight from lawful detention. Statements and recorded footage referenced encouragement and coordinated actions during the encounter. Prosecutors indicated liability may extend beyond the individual operating the vehicle.
• Ross, a 19-year Department of Homeland Security veteran and Iraq War veteran, later suffered confirmed internal bleeding and internal injuries. Officials stated this was the second time Ross had been injured by a vehicle while on duty. The injuries were described as serious and directly caused by the impact.
• Federal officials reported a sharp increase in vehicle-ramming incidents targeting ICE and Border Patrol officers following the Minneapolis event. The case was framed as part of a broader pattern of escalating violence against federal law enforcement. Authorities emphasized that state or local political opposition does not negate federal criminal statutes.

• The United States Supreme Court heard arguments on whether biological males may compete in women’s sports under Title IX. The discussion centered on whether sex-based protections are rooted in biological sex or gender identity. Justices questioned whether sex can be legally defined without reference to biology.
• Arguments addressed state policies allowing athletes to compete based on gender identity rather than biological sex. Concerns raised included competitive fairness, physical safety, and privacy in locker rooms and athletic facilities. The Court examined whether such policies undermine the original intent of Title IX.
• Advocates emphasized documented performance differences between male and female athletes. Arguments stated that women’s sports could be fundamentally altered or displaced without sex-based categories. Opposing views focused on inclusion and nondiscrimination frameworks.
• The pending decision is expected to have nationwide implications for school athletics and education policy. Observers noted the ruling could clarify how sex is defined in federal civil rights law. The case was described as a defining moment for women’s athletic protections.

• The United Kingdom government has revoked the Electronic Travel Authorization of German journalist Eva Vlaardingerbroek, barring her from traveling to the country without a visa. The notice stated her presence was “not considered to be conducive to the public good” and specified that the decision could not be appealed.
• The revocation occurred days after Vlaardingerbroek publicly criticized Prime Minister Keir Starmer and the Labour government’s approach to online speech regulation. She stated no explanation or due process was provided beyond the notice itself. The timing was cited as evidence of political retaliation.
• The action coincided with increased scrutiny of the platform X under the UK Online Safety Act. Downing Street confirmed it is considering enforcement measures, including a potential nationwide block, following reports involving artificial intelligence-generated explicit content.
• UK officials confirmed discussions with Canada and Australia regarding possible coordinated responses to online platform regulation. Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese publicly condemned reported misuse of artificial intelligence tools. Canadian officials acknowledged the talks but stated they are not currently considering a ban on the platform.

.