A search of Ilhan Omar’s Washington, D.C., home reportedly uncovered DNA evidence and her personal passport as part of a federal investigation into alleged immigration fraud.

Federal authorities also seized Omar’s phone during the raid and have issued more than a dozen grand jury subpoenas, including subpoenas involving some of her relatives.

Now, it’s been revealed that federal agents went further, obtaining the DNA evidence and her passport, Fox News reported. 

Investigators have rejected reports that agents searched through Omar’s trash, although it remains unclear how they obtained the DNA evidence.

A source told The New York Post that the DNA could provide the missing link in allegations that Omar married her brother to help him obtain a green card.

Several sources have claimed that the evidence gives prosecutors grounds to pursue possible federal immigration-fraud charges against Omar.

Omar, 44, has not been charged with a crime. She strongly denies any wrongdoing and maintains that she is the target of a politically motivated witch hunt.

The Daily Mail has contacted a spokesperson for Congresswoman Omar and her attorneys for comment.

Border Czar Tom Homan has warned that Omar could lose her U.S. citizenship and face deportation if federal investigators find evidence of immigration fraud.

In an interview with Fox News, Homan said investigators had built what he described as a “strong case” against the Somali-born lawmaker.

When asked whether the probe could lead to Omar’s denaturalization and deportation, Homan said that outcome was possible.

“Of course,” he replied, explaining that federal law provides a process for revoking citizenship if someone lied during the naturalization process.

“We’ve done it before, and it is a long, tedious process, but it’s been done before,” Homan said.

“I’ve been involved with those investigations before, and certainly if the evidence points that way, yes, it could happen.”

Homan issued the warning as former President Barack Obama mounted an extraordinary defense of the Somali-born lawmaker, accusing Donald Trump’s administration of using the federal government against one of its strongest political opponents.

The intensifying dispute follows a dramatic FBI search of Omar’s Washington, D.C., residence last Monday. Agents seized her cellphone during the operation as part of an investigation into allegations concerning her family’s immigration documents.

Homan indicated that investigators were becoming increasingly confident in the evidence gathered during the probe.

‘I’ve been told we have a strong case,’ he told Fox News on Saturday. ‘We’ll let the evidence see where it leads. She’ll be held to the same standard you and I are held. If she violated law then she’d be held accountable.’

The border czar also suggested that immigration fraud investigations were intended to send a wider warning about the consequences of breaking American immigration laws.

ALSO READ: Pauline Hanson Accuses Anthony Albanese of ‘Spreading Hate’ Before Helen Haines Attack

‘Deterrence is a part of what this administration is doing,’ he said, pointing to efforts to review refugee cases and pursue denaturalization proceedings.

But when pressed on whether federal authorities were investigating Omar for other possible offenses beyond immigration fraud, Homan refused to elaborate.

‘I won’t go there,’ he replied.

The border czar’s remarks represent another escalation in a politically charged investigation that has already triggered outrage among Democrats and prompted a rare intervention from Obama.

The former president took to X on Sunday to condemn the investigation, accusing Trump of attempting to intimidate an elected official for exercising her right to criticize the White House.

‘It is a basic principle of American democracy that the government can’t selectively target individuals simply because of their political beliefs or what they say,’ Obama wrote.

‘But that’s exactly what the Trump Administration is doing to Congresswoman Ilhan Omar of Minnesota.’

Obama argued that the investigation appeared to hinge on a disputed question about Omar’s age when her father became a naturalized American citizen.

According to the former president, Omar arrived in the United States aged 12 and automatically acquired citizenship five years later when her father was naturalized.

He claimed investigators were pursuing a theory that she had actually been 18 at the time, potentially undermining her citizenship status.

‘Think about that. The full weight of the federal government is being brought down on a law-abiding elected official because she has dared to criticize the president,’ Obama wrote.

‘The fact that any president, or any administration, is willing to engage in such transparent efforts to intimidate someone should outrage all Americans, regardless of how they feel about Congresswoman Omar’s political views.’

The investigation has revived longstanding allegations circulated by conservative critics that Omar married her brother to facilitate his immigration to the United States.

The congresswoman has repeatedly rejected those claims as ‘absurd and offensive.’

Her legal team has now demanded the immediate return of property seized during the search, accusing the Justice Department of conducting an unlawful and politically motivated investigation.

Omar’s attorneys insisted there was ‘no legitimate basis for any suggestion that she has violated any law concerning her citizenship status.’

They also accused federal authorities of disregarding longstanding Justice Department practices intended to prevent investigative actions from influencing elections.

‘This vindictive, retributive, and politically motivated criminal investigation into one of the President’s chief congressional critics violates Representative Omar’s constitutional rights and threatens the separation of powers,’ they wrote.

Justice Department spokesperson Emily Covington rejected the accusations, describing the lawyers’ letter as ‘riddled with false allegations and inaccuracies.’

‘Our attorneys and law enforcement partners complied with all court orders and legal obligations, as they always do,’ she said.

Trump previously denied having any involvement in the investigation, telling reporters following the search: ‘I think she’s a terrible person, but that’s really up to the DOJ.’

A Florida substitute teacher allegedly kicked a student with disabilities in the leg and later told a witness he had done it to “even the score,” authorities said.

Bryan Schewitz, 60, was arrested Friday following the reported incident at Matanzas High School in Flagler County, according to the Flagler County Sheriff’s Office.

When a witness asked about a large mark on the student’s leg, Schewitz allegedly replied, “He kicked me and I kicked him. So now we’re square,” investigators said.

Schewitz, a Flagler Beach resident, was charged with child abuse without great bodily harm.

Investigators said the incident began Friday as the student, whose disability has not been identified, experienced behavioral difficulties in class.

A witness told authorities that Schewitz used excessive force while trying to place the student in a chair. The substitute then allegedly directed the child to put his hands on a table and warned, “The gloves are off.”

The witness said Schewitz’s handling of the student made her feel uncomfortable.

Another witness reported seeing Schewitz kick the child and later noticed a large mark on the student’s leg.

The student’s mother later told deputies that skin had been torn from her child’s leg. She also provided photographs of the injury, according to WKMG, which cited the arrest report.

School officials questioned the student, who confirmed that Schewitz had kicked him, authorities said.

Schewitz offered deputies a different version of events, maintaining that any contact had been accidental.

He said the student had arrived late, refused to take a seat and began kicking in his direction before striking Schewitz’s leg.

Schewitz told investigators that he extended his own foot and unintentionally kicked the student.

He also claimed the student had been walking around the classroom and trying to poke other students with a pencil. Schewitz said he guided the child by the shoulder toward an empty chair.

The substitute acknowledged placing the student’s hands on a table and issuing a stern warning that “the gloves were coming off,” investigators said.

Asked about the alleged comment that he and the student were now square, Schewitz first denied making it. He later said he was unsure whether he had used those words.

Despite that uncertainty, Schewitz continued to insist that the kick had been accidental, authorities said.

Flagler County Sheriff Rick Staly criticized the alleged conduct, saying adults responsible for children — especially students with disabilities — are expected to remain calm and exercise sound judgment.

Flagler Schools Superintendent LaShakia Moore also said protecting students remains the district’s top priority.

“This kind of behavior will not be tolerated on our campuses,” Moore said.

Schewitz was booked into the Sheriff Perry Hall Inmate Detention Facility and released Saturday on $2,500 bond, according to the sheriff’s office.

It was not immediately clear whether Schewitz had been suspended, fired or removed from the school district’s substitute teaching roster.

The Trump administration has reached a settlement with the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill that will end 18 active federal investigations, along with a separate Justice Department compliance review into alleged antisemitism and race discrimination on campus.

The voluntary agreement does not require UNC to pay a fine, and the university neither admits wrongdoing nor accepts liability. The deal remains in effect through the end of 2028 and allows UNC to continue receiving federal funding.

As part of the settlement, UNC will create an internal “Merit & Civil Rights Administrator” role and add a “Title VI Coordinator” to its compliance office. The positions will handle complaints involving antisemitism and discrimination based on race.

UNC said Elizabeth Hall, the university’s associate vice chancellor for university compliance, will hold both positions while continuing her current responsibilities. Hall will serve as the university’s liaison with the Justice Department and oversee its required reports.

“This announcement reinforces our commitment to the fair and equal treatment of everyone at Carolina,” UNC Chancellor Lee H. Roberts said in a statement. “For at least a decade, through different presidential administrations, U.S. universities have faced heightened public scrutiny across a range of issues. We’re proud to resolve those issues at Carolina in a way that protects our mission and affirms the civil rights of everyone in our community.”

The settlement also directs UNC to provide required antisemitism training for students, faculty members and staff.

The university must additionally ban face coverings used to hide a person’s identity, with certain exceptions. Under the agreement, student organizations “shall be subject to discipline for antisemitic discriminatory conduct.”

President Donald Trump and administration officials have characterized pro-Palestinian demonstrations as antisemitic. Protesters, including some Jewish organizations, dispute that claim, arguing that criticism of Israel’s military campaign in Gaza is not inherently antisemitic and that support for Palestinian rights does not amount to backing extremism.

The agreement also requires UNC to adopt what the Justice Department described as a “color-blind admissions system.” The university may not use race or adjust its admissions procedures to influence the racial makeup of its student body. It may, however, consider how an applicant personally overcame hardship and evaluate elements of family background, including poverty, as long as those factors are applied consistently.

UNC must also enforce race-neutral rules for student benefits, scholarships, financial aid and university programs, according to the settlement.

The administration has maintained that policies giving preference to particular racial groups violate federal anti-discrimination requirements.

Under the deal, UNC will submit any complaints involving antisemitism or race discrimination to the Justice Department and the Education Department every quarter.

The Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights will close its 18 open investigations into UNC. Separately, the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division will end an 18-month compliance review that began in April 2025.

“Title VI requires that all students — regardless of their ancestry or race — receive equal treatment under the law at federally funded colleges and universities,” Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon said in a statement.

“Higher ed policies and practices that tolerate antisemitism or favor certain racial groups over others, frustrate our color-blind justice system. The Civil Rights Division commends UNC for its cooperation in meeting its obligations under federal law without the need for litigation; we hope other institutions will take note and do the same,” she added.

In 2023, the Supreme Court struck down race-based admissions programs at UNC and Harvard, effectively ending affirmative action in college admissions.

The administration has launched investigations into universities nationwide and threatened to withdraw federal funding over issues including pro-Palestinian campus protests, diversity programs and transgender policies.

The federal government has also settled with some other schools, including Columbia University, which last year agreed to pay more than $200 million to resolve federal probes, and Brown University, which agreed to provide $50 million over 10 years to Rhode Island workforce-development organizations as part of its settlement.

Harvard, which has been a primary target of the administration’s threats, has not yet made a deal.

A prominent MAGA influencer broke down in tears after saying she was removed from a campaign rally for Ken Paxton, the Republican candidate seeking the Texas Senate nomination, despite years of publicly supporting Donald Trump and the GOP.

The TikTok creator, who uses the name Thelma Louise online, appeared shocked as she was escorted from Sunday’s event in San Antonio. In video of the incident, she repeatedly questioned why she had been asked to leave, emphasizing her loyalty to the Republican Party.

“I cannot believe this,” Louise said while recording the confrontation. She later told followers she had driven for two hours to attend the rally, only to be turned away.

The circumstances surrounding her removal remain unclear. Louise said she had not done anything wrong and claimed that Paxton’s campaign had given her no explanation for the decision.

Louise has more than 204,000 TikTok followers and has developed a substantial online following by promoting Trump, the MAGA movement and other Republican figures.

Her posts frequently praise conservative politics. In one video, she celebrated the “baddest queens” working to “flip it red,” while another expressed her support for fellow conservative influencer Nick Shirley.

She also shared footage from September’s Republican midterm convention in Dallas, portraying herself as an enthusiastic member of the party she says she joined wholeheartedly after leaving the Democrats two years ago.

That enthusiasm was on display before Sunday’s rally. In an earlier video filmed during her journey to the event, Louise announced her arrival in Texas and told her followers, “Of course I had to drive down.”

The positive tone quickly changed. In a later post, Louise uploaded footage of herself being escorted out, alongside text stating: “I was asked to leave… I’m a REPUBLICAN that has done nothing but support my party.”

She expressed similar disbelief in the caption, writing: “I can’t believe I was treated like this… They were even told not to allow me back inside.”

As she left the venue, Louise asked someone off-camera whether there was a campaign representative or another official she could speak with about the decision.

“And there’s no one I can talk to about this?” she asked.

“I’m sorry. No, ma’am,” the person responded.

Outside the venue, Louise described her version of events. She said someone had approached her and told her that Paxton’s campaign manager wanted her to leave.

“Someone just came up to me and said that Ken Paxton’s campaign manager wanted me to leave,” she said in the video.

FIND OUT MORE: Truth About ‘America’s Worst Neighbor’ and His Trash-Filled $1.3M Home

“I did nothing wrong, I drove two hours to get here,” Louise added. “And this is how I get treated?”

In a follow-up video, Louise appeared dumbfounded as she reflected on what she described as the ‘disrespect that I was just given’.

She explained that she had left the Democratic Party two years earlier and had volunteered for Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign, presenting her political journey as evidence of her commitment to the Republican cause.

For someone who says she had devoted years to supporting the movement, the experience appeared to leave a particularly bitter aftertaste.

‘This I will never forget,’ she declared.

Louise subsequently addressed the controversy again, pointing out that she had previously received press credentials to attend the Texas Youth Summit, where Paxton appeared, as well as the Republican midterm convention.

She appeared frustrated that, despite those previous experiences, she had still not been told why she was removed from Sunday’s rally.

The absence of an explanation has left the circumstances surrounding the incident unclear.

However the incident prompted social media users to speculate about whether her race played a role in her removal. 

Democratic strategist Ameshia Cross commented, ‘Being MAGA while Black chapter 293.’ However, no explanation from Paxton’s campaign has been provided.

The controversy comes as Paxton, the Texas attorney general and a prominent conservative figure, has been seeking the Republican nomination for the US Senate, putting his campaign at the center of a closely watched contest within the state’s GOP.

A University of Houston Hobby School of Public Affairs poll showed Talarico leading Paxton by 48% to 46%. Libertarian candidate Ted Brown had 3% support, while another 3% of voters were undecided.

Talarico, a state representative from Austin, could become the first Democrat elected to statewide office in Texas in more than 30 years if he wins. His narrow lead appears to reflect support from independents and a fair share of Republicans considering voting against Paxton.

The Daily Mail has reached out to Ken Paxton for comment.  

Prosecutors say Jonathan McKinsey, a New York Times executive, was fatally shot by his elderly in-laws in a California parking lot while he was arriving for a supervised visit with his children.

McKinsey, 40, was allegedly killed on September 26 at Dublin Sports Ground in Dublin, California. Witnesses told authorities that Shouyong Zhang and Shili Chen, both 77, took turns firing at him.

At the couple’s plea hearing on Monday, prosecutors said McKinsey had been at the sports facility to see his children under court-ordered supervision.

According to KTVU, Zhang and Chen each entered a not-guilty plea to charges of first-degree murder.

The hearing also brought new claims about the troubled family relationship. Chen’s attorney, Curtis Briggs, alleged outside court that McKinsey had previously threatened to hire a hitman to “get rid of” his mother-in-law.

Briggs said the couple bought guns in March 2026 because they feared their son-in-law, arguing that the firearms were obtained for protection rather than as part of a planned attack.

MORE STORY: Donald Trump Reacts in His Unique Way to Mike Pence's Decision Not to Endorse Him – NewsFinale

The defense lawyer maintained that Chen and Zhang had not plotted McKinsey’s death, but became increasingly frightened as the family conflict intensified.

Court documents also contain allegations that McKinsey had threatened to kill his wife and her parents. The documents say he gave his children a book about a young girl whose mother had died.

“During our marriage, the children and I learned to avoid provoking Jonathan lest he became angry. In my experience, appearing agreeable or happy around him was sometimes a means of avoiding his anger,” McKinsey’s wife, Candice Jang, wrote in an August custody filing obtained by The California Post.

McKinsey and Jang married in 2010, but she filed for divorce in 2025. That year, Jang also sought a restraining order against him, while McKinsey filed for one against her in response.