A possible terrorist attack at Old Dominion University was ended by heroic students who “subdued” and killed the suspect, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

One person was killed and two others were wounded when the suspect identified as Mohamed Bailor Jalloh allegedly opened fire at the campus in Norfolk, Virginia.

‘The students who subdued him and rendered him no longer alive. I don’t know how else to say it.’

FBI Director Kash Patel praised the students that took down the alleged terrorist.

“The shooter is now deceased thanks to a group of brave students who stepped in and subdued him – actions that undoubtedly saved lives along with the quick response of law enforcement,” he wrote on social media.

He went on to say the attack is being investigated as an act of terrorism.

“Our Joint Terrorism Task Force is fully engaged, embedded with local authorities, and providing all resources necessary in the investigation,” he added.

FBI Special Agent in Charge Dominique Evans confirmed the account at a media briefing.

“There were students that were in that room that subdued him, and rendered him no longer alive,” she said. “I don’t know how else to say it. But they basically were able to terminate the threat.”

RELATED: ISIS-inspired? Here’s what we know about the weekend NYC terror attack suspects.

Jalloh was arrested and plead guilty to attempting to provide material support for ISIS, according to Evans. He was sentenced to prison in Oct. 2017 and released in 2024.

The suspected shooter was also a former member of the Army National Guard.

“By putting the idea of this murder plot into religious terms, and by suggesting that murdering members of the US military would be a path to heaven, the defendant showed how strongly committed he was to the deadly ideology” of the Islamic State, said prosecutors at the time.

This is a developing story.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Terror attack, Old dominion university attack, Students subdue terrorist, Mohamed bailor jalloh, Politics 

Five food stamp recipients have filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture over new restrictions on purchasing junk food, soda, and energy drinks with taxpayer money.

The Trump administration ordered the restrictions on “non-nutritious” items in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.

‘When I shop for food, I have to read the ingredient list on everything I buy to try to figure out if I can use SNAP to buy it.’

The National Center for Law and Economic Justice as well as Shinder Cantor Lerner filed the lawsuit at the behest of the recipients from Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Tennessee, and West Virginia.

“The food restriction waivers contain no exceptions for individual medical, nutritional, or household circumstances,” the lawsuit reads. “Instead, the food restriction waivers place on recipients and retailers the responsibility for determining whether a particular product is a permissible SNAP purchase under each state’s altered definition of ‘food.'”

Supporters of the new restrictions say that taxpayer funds should not be spent on snacks and other unhealthy foods, while critics say the restrictions are unfair to recipients and confusing.

One plaintiff said her daughter suffers from “avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder,” and the restrictions don’t allow her to buy the food that she can ingest.

“Her physicians have advised Plaintiff Johnson to provide her daughter with whatever foods she is able to eat in order to avoid nutritional deterioration and invasive medical intervention,” the lawsuit reads.

Another plaintiff named Marc Craig from Iowa said the new restrictions confuse him.

“I am finding Iowa’s food restriction waiver extremely complicated to navigate,” he said. “When I shop for food, I have to read the ingredient list on everything I buy to try to figure out if I can use SNAP to buy it. I still get to the register only to be told I cannot use SNAP to buy everything I have selected.”

Another plaintiff said sugary drinks were important to him as a sufferer of diabetes.

“I would have told USDA that many people have medical or personal reasons for the foods and drinks they choose, Nieves Aragon said.

“For me, certain drinks can be lifesaving. When my blood sugar drops, I need something like juice or a sugary drink immediately to raise it and prevent a dangerous situation,” he added.

RELATED: Able-bodied 38-year-old man goes viral for response to Trump food stamp restrictions: ‘That’s some bulls**t!’

“The practical effect,” the plaintiffs said, “is to destabilize food access for every SNAP participant in the affected states.”

“Once again, the Trump administration is making it up as they go along and disregarding the damage. We are asking the Court to immediately block implementation of these unlawful food restriction waivers,” said Katharine Deabler-Meadows, a senior lawyer for the National Center for Law and Economic Justice.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Snap recipient lawsuit, Snap restrictions on snacks, Trump bans snap candy, Lawsuit on snap restrictions, Politics 

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton claimed the Republican-backed SAVE America Act could prevent millions of married women from voting.

“Are you one of nearly 70 million American women who changed their names when they got married? Republicans in Congress want to make it harder for you to vote. Tell your senator to oppose the SAVE Act,” Clinton wrote in a post on X.

“This is so crazy,” BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey’s father, Ron Simmons, comments on “Relatable.”

“First of all, there are provisions,” he says, explaining that they have “other ways to reconcile” a mismatched ID and birth certificate when you vote.

“You can sign an affidavit. You can bring other proof of information, your marriage license, that type of thing. No issue with that,” he explains, pointing out that women who want to travel via airplane after getting married face similar issues.

“If you go to the airport and your ID doesn’t match the name on your ticket because you’ve gotten married, then what are they going to do? You can’t fly. So, what do people do? They get that taken care of,” he adds.

And according to stats released by the White House, a majority of the American people support voter IDs — regardless of political party.

“Eighty-five percent agree only U.S. citizens should vote in our election. But if you listen to some of the far-left woke, they don’t believe that. The mayor of New York doesn’t believe that. A lot of people don’t believe that,” Simmons says.

“Remember that most things that seem crazy, it’s a loud minority that’s doing it. Sometimes that’s on the far left, sometimes that’s on the far right,” he adds.

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Relatable with allie beth stuckey, Relatable, Allie beth stuckey, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Ron simmons, Save america act, Save act, Hillary clinton, The far left, Democrats 

A top judge in New York was met with outrage after he said voters needed to support judges who would give more lenient sentences to criminals.

New York state Republicans have filed a complaint against Chief Judge Rowan Wilson over comments he made at a panel discussion at the CUNY School of Law in Queens in February.

‘Your political opinion means nothing when you’re in that robe on the bench. Your politics should have nothing to do with the way you render a decision.’

The panelists were discussing a Democratic proposal to allow convicted criminals to request another sentencing hearing after serving 10 years. It’s called the Second Look Act.

Wilson mocked voters against the proposal as “stupid” and said judges should be more lenient on criminals.

“They hurt somebody maybe very seriously in the past, but they have come to be a very different person. And now we are spending a lot of money to keep them in prison. That’s stupid,” he said.

“It’s a very hard thing, I think, given the current sentencing framework, to get judges at the moment of sentencing, to think, ‘Oh, I should think about this fact that there isn’t a re-sentencing available,'” he added.

Wilson also cited a case where a judge referred to a defendant as an “animal” who should be “locked up” for the rest of his life. He called the comments “very distressing.”

Republicans accuse Wilson of breaking ethics rules.

“Your political opinion means nothing when you’re in that robe on the bench. Your politics should have nothing to do with the way you render a decision,” said New York state Sen. Anthony Palumbo (R), who is also a ranking member of the judiciary panel. “We think it definitely warrants review. This is not us being dramatic or hysterical.”

A spokesperson for the Office of Court Administration disagreed and said Wilson’s comments did not violate ethics rules.

“It is appropriate for the Chief Judge to express his views on pending legislation that affects the court system,” Al Baker said.

RELATED: ‘Activist judge’ rules Trump appointee doesn’t have authority to order mass layoffs at Voice of America

“It is also appropriate for him to speak publicly about proper judicial temperament and values,” he added, “and to encourage New Yorkers to stay informed about the conduct of the judges serving their communities and to participate in the processes by which those judges are elected or appointed.”

Wilson has been the chief judge of the New York Court of Appeals since 2022 and was praised as the first African-American chief judge in New York. He could face removal from the bench by the State Commission on Judicial Conduct, or he could simply get a private admonishment.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Chief judge rowan wilson, Ethics charge against rowan, Second look act in new york, Lenient liberal sentences, Politics 

President Donald Trump has backed a social media gun activist for the election of the 23rd congressional district in Texas after the Republican incumbent backed out of the race.

Republican Rep. Tony Gonzales was forced to drop out after evidence surfaced that he had cheated on his wife with a staffer named Regina Santos-Aviles. Santos-Aviles later committed suicide by lighting herself on fire at her home in Uvalde.

‘I had a lapse in judgment, and there was a lack of faith. And I take full responsibility for those actions.’

Brandon Herrera is a gun manufacturer and YouTuber known as “the AK Guy” who challenged Gonzales in 2024 and lost by fewer than 400 votes.

“Brandon is strongly supported by many Highly Respected MAGA Warriors in Texas, and Republicans in the U.S. House. As your next Congressman, he will work tirelessly to advance our MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN Agenda,” the president wrote on Truth Social Wednesday.

Herrera will face attorney and former elementary school teacher Katy Padilla Stout, the Democratic candidate for the seat. Democrats didn’t previously believe the seat could be flipped, but with the incumbent falling, they see an opportunity to seize the advantage.

“Brandon will fight hard to Grow the Economy,” the president continued, “Cut Taxes and Regulations, Advance MADE IN THE U.S.A., Unleash American Energy DOMINANCE, Safeguard our Elections, Champion School Choice, Keep our Border SECURE, Stop Migrant Crime, Support our Brave Military, Veterans, and Law Enforcement, and Protect our always under siege Second Amendment.”

Trump added, “HE WILL NEVER LET YOU DOWN!”

RELATED: ‘The appropriate decision’: Scandal-ridden Tony Gonzales ends re-election bid after admitting to affair

Gonzales, a father of six children, admitted to the affair after sexually explicit texts he allegedly sent to Santos-Aviles were leaked to the media.

“I made a mistake. I had a lapse in judgment, and there was a lack of faith. And I take full responsibility for those actions. … I’ve asked God to forgive me, which he has, and my faith is as strong as ever,” he said in a podcast interview.

The congressman’s conduct is being investigated by the House Ethics Committee.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Trump backs brandon herrera, Rep. tony gonzales scandal, Regina santos-aviles self immolation, Staffer lights herself on fire, Politics 

Rising tensions with Iran sent oil markets into panic. What happens if the conflict escalates?

“So we get these times in the markets, in periods of great uncertainty, where you have real information that is uncertain, right? You don’t know, with 20% to 30% of the world’s oil going through the strait of Hormuz, if that is going to be cut off entirely,” financial expert Carol Roth tells Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck.

“Then that is exacerbated by financial markets, and there are two pieces to that. One is just when there are these periods of uncertainty, sometimes you get, from hedge funds that have large positions and sometimes levered positions in the market, something called de-grossing, where they just get rid of everything and they go to cash, and they go, ‘We’re just going to sit and wait out and see what happens,’” she explains.

“And then you get the algorithms, and the algorithms are jumping on headlines, which are rapidly changing and uncertain, and other algorithms are following those first algorithms. So you get this exacerbation of volatility, something where … uncertainty and fear drives an outcome in the market, and then it becomes exacerbated by the dynamics of the financial market,” she adds.

Roth notes that the “good news” is that these tend to be “short-lived.”

“Because once there becomes a price mismatch between what certain people think is reality and the prices that are reflected,” she tells Glenn, “then greed drives in, they buy things up, and the prices kind of stabilize.”

But Glenn wants to unpack the “worst-case scenario.”

“Worst-case scenario: This drags on, this gets ugly. They find a way to mine the strait of Hormuz or whatever, and they shut it down. What will that do to the price of oil?” Glenn asks Roth.

“I mean, that’s a blowout. Minimum $120 to $150 a barrel. And if it really, you know, gets bad, I’ve seen a few analysts call that up to $250,” Roth answers.

“But let me give you some good news. The likelihood of that is sort of priced right now at like a 20% chance. So 80% chance that doesn’t happen,” she adds.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​The glenn beck program, Glenn beck, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Oil prices, Strait of hormuz, Oil, Iran, War with iran, Carol roth, President trump, The trump administration, Donald trump