THE DEATH OF SHERIDAN GORMAN: A DEATH SENTENCE FOR "SANCTUARY" POLICIES AND THE PRESIDENT’S WRATH
CHICAGO — The killing of Sheridan Gorman is more than just another grim entry in Chicago’s crime statistics. It is a searing indictment of a bureaucratic machine that prioritizes political ideology over the basic safety of its citizens. When the bullet struck the 18-year-old Loyola University freshman near the Rogers Park lakefront last Thursday, it did more than extinguish a promising young life; it ignited a power struggle reaching from the halls of City Hall to the Oval Office.
"Blood on Your Hands": The View from the White House
Following the arrest of 25-year-old Jose Medina-Medina—a Venezuelan migrant with a documented criminal history—President Donald Trump wasted no time in delivering a scorched-earth response. In a blistering press conference, the President characterized the tragedy as a "national disgrace" and irrefutable evidence of the failure of "sanctuary politicians."
"This individual should never have been allowed to set foot in our country," President Trump declared. "He walked through the 'open door' of the border, was shielded by the radical-left machine in Chicago, and now a brilliant young student has paid the price with his life. This isn't an oversight—it’s a systemic crime. The blood of Sheridan Gorman is on the hands of those running this city."
The President’s fury was not merely rhetorical. He explicitly accused Chicago leadership and Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker of "harboring criminals" by refusing to cooperate with federal immigration authorities (ICE), effectively creating a deadly "gray zone" in the heart of America.
A Paper Trail of Institutional Negligence
Jose Medina-Medina stands as a vivid monument to a multi-layered failure of governance. Data from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) paints a path of unforgivable lapses: apprehended by U.S. Border Patrol in May 2023, Medina-Medina was released into the interior rather than deported. A month later, following a shoplifting arrest in Chicago, the local judicial system once again opened the gates for his return to the streets instead of turning him over to immigration officials.
The question is no longer "how did this happen," but "why does the government allow it to keep happening?" The refusal to honor ICE detainers is no longer a matter of protecting the vulnerable; it has become a betrayal of tax-paying, law-abiding residents.
When "Sanctuary" Becomes Complicity
While Chicago politicians cling to the "Welcoming City Ordinance" as a shield of humanitarianism, the reality on the ground tells a far darker story. Data analyzed by The New York Times reveals a dangerous divide: while ICE offices in cities like Miami and Dallas are executing thousands of arrests to clean up the streets, enforcement in Chicago has plummeted due to local obstruction.
This disconnect creates "security loopholes" that individuals like Medina-Medina exploit with ease. Why was a suspect with a questionable immigration status and a prior criminal record permitted to roam free with a firearm in one of the city’s densest student corridors?
President Trump has already signaled direct intervention: "If these sanctuary cities will not comply with federal law, we will cut every dime of funding. We will not use American taxpayer money to subsidize jurisdictions that protect murderers."
The End of Ambiguity
At Loyola University, the "profound sadness" expressed by President Mark C. Reed and the academic platitudes regarding "care for the whole person" ring hollow in the face of such systemic failure. Students cannot be protected by condolences when potential killers are granted immunity from deportation by local decrees.
The death of Sheridan Gorman must mark the end of legal ambiguity. The war between the White House and "Sanctuary Chicago" is no longer a political debate for the op-ed pages—it is a fight for the lives of the next American citizens. If Chicago continues to choose confrontation with federal law enforcement, the price will be paid not just in financial penalties from Washington, but in more young lives lost to those who should never have been here in the first place.
Breaking, PAM BONDI discloses that she has been diagnosed with…
____BY 118_____
Steve Yates discusses Pam Bondi's contributions after her removal as attorney general
Steve Yates, former deputy national security advisor for Vice President Cheney, reflects on Attorney General Pam Bondi's significant contributions, especially in fighting illicit fentanyl and advocating for victims.
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Former Attorney General Pam Bondi was diagnosed with thyroid cancer shortly after departing the Department of Justice last month, according to a report.
Bondi, 60, who left her role at the Justice Department in early April, underwent treatment and is recovering, a source told Axios.
Katie Miller, a former White House staffer and podcast host who is married to White House deputy chief of staff for policy Stephen Miller, reposted the report on X on Tuesday.
"Pam has been quietly kicking cancer's ass the last few weeks," she wrote.
PAM BONDI CANCELS APPEARANCE AT ANTI-TRAFFICKING SUMMIT OVER MEDICAL ISSUE
Attorney General Pam Bondi takes her seat before testifying at a House Judiciary Committee hearing on oversight of the Department of Justice on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 11, 2026. (Roberto Schmidt/AFP)
She added that Bondi has "a heart of gold."
Axios disclosed the health update while reporting that Bondi has been appointed by President Donald Trump to an advisory committee focused on artificial intelligence policy.
The White House confirmed to Fox News Digital that Bondi will serve on the Presidential Council of Advisors on Science and Technology.
"Pam has been an enormously valuable asset to the president's team, and I'm thrilled for her and for all of us that she's going to remain involved in confronting some of the most important issues the administration faces," Vice President JD Vance said in a statement.
AG PAM BONDI SUGGESTS TRUMP'S CRIME CRACKDOWN IN DC WILL HELP LATINO RESIDENTS
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee in the Hart Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 7, 2025. (Win McNamee/Getty Images)
The council is co-chaired by White House AI and crypto czar David Sacks and White House science advisor Michael Kratsios.
Bondi will reportedly help facilitate coordination between the federal government and technology executives serving on the panel.
News of Bondi’s diagnosis and new advisory role comes weeks after Trump removed her as attorney general.
KARL ROVE: TRUMP DROPPED BONDI, BUT THE REAL POLITICAL FIGHT IS JUST BEGINNING
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche attends a news conference at the Justice Department in Washington, D.C., on Nov. 19, 2025. (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)
In a Truth Social post announcing her departure, Trump described Bondi as "a Great American Patriot and a loyal friend."
"Pam did a tremendous job overseeing a massive crackdown in Crime across our Country, with Murders plummeting to their lowest level since 1900," Trump wrote. "We love Pam, and she will be transitioning to a much needed and important new job in the private sector, to be announced at a date in the near future."
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche has served as acting attorney general since Bondi’s departure.
BLANCHE INVOKES TRUMP ‘LOVE’ WHEN ASKED ABOUT STAYING ON AFTER BONDI
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi speaks as President Donald Trump looks on during a news conference in the Oval Office of the White House on Oct. 15, 2025, in Washington, D.C. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)
In a post on X confirming her exit from the Justice Department, Bondi said she remains "eternally grateful for the trust that President Trump placed in me to Make America Safe Again."
"Over the next month I will be working tirelessly to transition the office of Attorney General to the amazing Todd Blanche before moving to an important private sector role I am thrilled about, and where I will continue fighting for President Trump and this Administration," Bondi wrote.
"Leading President Trump’s historic and highly successful efforts to make America safer and more secure has been the honor of a lifetime, and easily the most consequential first year of the Department of Justice in American history."
Judge Tosses Wolff Suit, Clearing Path For $1B Melania Claim
Wolff filed suit against Trump seeking to block her from suing him for $1 billion for alleged defamatory claims he made regarding her association with Jeffrey Epstein.
“It’s an inappropriate level of tactical gamesmanship,” said Manhattan Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil, an appointee of President Donald Trump.
Vyskocil said she would not be “drafted to oversee an abusively presented spat,” yet she recognized that both sides have a “real dispute.”
Last year, the first lady’s lawyer issued Wolff a letter demanding he delete the statements he made about Trump and threatening that she would have “no alternative” but to sue him if he didn’t.
That spurred him to sue her in state court in October.
Trump’s lawyer, Alejandro Brito, had the complaint moved to federal court, where Vyskocil declared that while federal court does have jurisdiction, she was declining to exercise it and “dismisses this case to be litigated like any other.”
A Melania Trump spokesperson said that the first lady “is proud to continue standing up to, and fighting against, those who spread malicious and defamatory falsehoods as they desperately try to get undeserved attention and money from their unlawful conduct.”
The 56-year-old’s lawyer previously claimed that Wolff’s statements caused her “overwhelming reputational and financial harm.”
The first lady has denied any association with Epstein, who died in jail in 2019 while awaiting trial on charges of child sex trafficking.
“The lies linking me with the disgraceful Jeffrey Epstein need to end today,” the first lady said in an April press conference.
“The individuals lying about me are devoid of ethical standards, humility, and respect. I do not object to their ignorance, but rather I reject their mean-spirited attempts to defame my reputation,” she added at the time.
Wolff claimed in his lawsuit that the president and first lady “have made a practice of threatening those who speak against them” with costly legal actions “to silence their speech, to intimidate their critics generally, and to extract unjustified payments and North Korean-style confessions and apologies.”
He added that some of his statements were taken out of context and some were protected speech, including a statement he made that claimed the Trumps have a “sham marriage, trophy marriage,” that his lawsuit says was a “fair and justified” opinion.
It also said in his lawsuit that Wolff never accused the first lady of being involved with criminal activity associated with Epstein.
The Daily Beast retracted an article last summer, titled “Melania Trump ‘Very Involved’ in Epstein Scandal: Author,” which was based on an interview with Wolff, after the outlet received a letter from Brito.
In the interview that formed the basis for the retracted piece, Wolff said he reported that the first lady was “behind the scenes” dealing with the situation at the White House, but was not involved criminally.
Republican Rep. Nancy Mace praised Melania Trump at the time for coming out against Epstein.
“Melania Trump stands with Epstein victims,” Mace said, citing the first lady’s advocacy for legislation addressing the distribution of fake intimate images. “The truth will prevail.”
Democratic lawmakers also commented following the statement.
Rep. Robert Garcia called for a public hearing, writing, “We agree with First Lady Melania Trump’s call for a public hearing,” Garcia said. “We encourage Chairman Comer to schedule a hearing immediately.”
Garcia said the remarks renewed attention on the broader investigation.
In her remarks, Melania Trump called on Congress to take action.
“Now is the time for Congress to act,” she said.
She urged lawmakers to allow victims to testify under oath.
This article may contain commentary which reflects the author’s opinion.
