1. BELGIUM CAN’T KEEP ITS OWN CAPITAL SAFE

The U.S. State Department raised its travel advisory for Belgium to Level 2 on July 23rd, urging American citizens to “exercise increased caution” due to crime, civil unrest, and even terrorism. The advisory warns that “petty crime is common, particularly in tourist areas,” including purse snatching and pickpocketing, and instructs travelers to avoid demonstrations, monitor local media, and stay on guard at banks and ATMs.

Brussels is home of the European Commission, the EU Parliament, and the entire bureaucratic apparatus that lectures the world on governance and security, and now American tourists are officially advised to watch their backs in the very city where EU officials set policy for 450 million people.

This past June, protests against education reforms devolved into riots, with e-scooters set ablaze and police deploying tear gas in the streets.

If EU technocrats can’t maintain order in their own capital, what exactly are they managing the rest of Europe for?

2. GERMANY BET THE HOUSE ON CHINA AND LOST

For decades, China was the golden goose for German automakers. Now it’s an albatross. China’s own carmakers have surpassed Volkswagen, BMW, and Mercedes-Benz in electric vehicle technology while offering lower prices in the world’s largest car market, which itself contracted by a fifth this year, forcing German brands into a brutal fight for survival they are already losing.

The fallout is staggering. BMW announced it is cutting 8,000 jobs in Germany by the end of 2027. Volkswagen is in negotiations to slash 100,000 jobs and shutter factories. Mercedes-Benz is demanding workers log a full 40-hour week for the same 35-hour pay. Meanwhile, Chinese car sales in the EU surged 63% in the first half of 2026, meaning China now sells more cars in Europe than Germany sells in China.

But the crisis didn’t happen overnight, and while Germany was wrong to get in bed with China in the first place… the EU shares blame. For years, Brussels pushed aggressive climate regulations that forced automakers to pivot to electric vehicles on a tight government-mandated timeline, regardless of whether the market was ready. Now the EU is even trying to push that overregulation agenda onto American companies with the CSDDD and CSRD.

The costly, rushed transition drained resources and left German brands flat-footed against Chinese EV makers who had a years-long head start and government subsidies of their own.

Bureaucratic caution in Brussels effectively handed Chinese automakers a longstanding German industry.

BRUSSELS’ $1 BILLION GOOGLE FINE DRAWS BACKLASH IN THE US

The European Commission’s $1 billion fine on Google last week, the largest ever levied under the Digital Markets Act, has produced an emphatic response across the American policy and media landscape, which has both condemned the European Union’s action and backed President Trump’s retaliatory stance.

Several American experts have spoken out on the matter. The Information Technology & Innovation Foundation characterized the move as “further confirmation that the DMA functions less as a competition tool than as an extractive mechanism,” while an economic policy expert pointed out that “every DMA noncompliance penalty so far,” such as the penalty handed down to Google, has fallen on an American company.

Along with criticism from former Trump officials, this reflects a consensus within the United States that crosses traditional partisan and institutional divides, and that Brussels cannot easily dismiss.

President Trump’s decision to launch a Section 301 investigation, along with other further retaliatory steps, also drew widespread support. Paul McCarthy at the Heritage Foundation, lauded President Trump’s launching of a 301 investigation as “the right call,” while also recognizing the Administration for exposing the DMA for what it is: “a direct challenge to American economic sovereignty.” Another analyst further backed the Trump administration for being “firm in standing up for U.S. trade interests” while also noting the Administration “would be justified in responding forcefully to European policies that disadvantage trusted American companies.”

This spectrum of critical voices clearly validates the Trump Administration’s strategy, and underscores the fact that, with America as united as ever in its opposition to the EU’s regulation, now is the right time to keep the EU under sustained pressure.

1. SPAIN’S SOCIALIST GOVERNMENT IN FREE FALL

A new survey delivered a devastating verdict on leftist Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez and his government this week, finding that six in ten Spaniards now hold a negative view of the current legislative term, with nearly a third describing it as “disastrous,” “nefarious,” and “ruinous.”

The numbers come straight from a Sigma Dos poll for El Mundo published Monday, one of Spain’s major national newspapers. Only 12 percent of Spaniards view the term positively. A full 31 percent say they cannot identify a single achievement by the Sánchez government.

With elections due no later than August 2027, 41 percent of Spaniards expect them to be called early. Projections show the Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party (PSOE) losing roughly 17 seats, potentially handing the right-wing People’s Party (PP) and Vox coalition a governing majority.

2. CONGRESS TAKES AIM AT EU’S $1T OVERREACH ON US BUSINESS

Last week, Rep. Craig Goldman (R-TX) introduced the Stop EU Overreach Act, legislation directing the U.S. Trade Representative to investigate a suite of European Union “green” regulations, including the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive, and others that extend far beyond Europe’s borders and land squarely on American companies.

A Hudson Institute study estimates these rules could hit U.S. businesses with more than $1 trillion in initial compliance costs and up to $43 billion in recurring annual expenses.

The regulations force American companies to map their entire supply chains, submit to third-party audits, and meet EU sustainability standards, even when their operations are fully compliant with U.S. law.

Rep. Goldman’s bill would give the USTR tools to fight back, including tariffs and suspension of trade benefits, until the EU stops applying its rules to American businesses. The legislation already has eight House co-sponsors and support from the Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council.

TRUMP RESPONDS TO BRUSSELS’ RECORD DMA FINE

This past Thursday, the DMA handed its largest penalty to date, fining Google over a billion dollars for alleged violations of how it displays its products in search queries.

Brussels’ record-setting fine follows a worrying trend for American companies who have felt the financial toll of EU enforcement rise dramatically over the past few years, with penalties growing from $589.8 million in 2023 and $2.3 billion in 2024 to $2.5 billion in 2025.

The fine drew the ire of President Trump, who ripped the move on Truth Social, characterizing it as an “illegal and highly discriminatory practice,” and declaring “The United States of America is not a “PIGGYBANK” for Europe, nor will we allow it to be!” President Trump also announced that his administration would immediately initiate a Section 301 investigation, a step that equips the US with tools critical to future negotiations such as tariffs and other retaliatory measures.

President Trump is right. In practice, the DMA functioned more as a “regulatory weapon aimed almost exclusively at American technology companies,” as the EU-US Forum’s Matt Mowers characterized it in a recent Newsweek op-ed, than a policy meant to level the playing field or benefit European consumers as it originally intended. For one, a survey of 5,000 Europeans earlier this year found the DMA’s regulations caused a widely felt decline in the quality of map services.

Worse yet, European consumers have increasingly had to absorb price hikes stemming from the DMA, a development the Commission notably left off their recent review of the DMA, perhaps because acknowledging them would call the entire regulatory framework into question, along with the vast financial and bureaucratic resources Brussels has poured into building it.

The European Commission has had ample time to change course and stop targeting American companies with crippling financial penalties. With President Trump’s 301 investigation announcement and the additional spectre of tariffs, now is the time to hold Brussels’ feet to the fire and demonstrate that they will be the last government that tries to fund its own tech ambitions on the backs of American companies.

1. NEW ERA FOR EUROPEAN PATRIOTISM?

Over the weekend, the world watched Spain beat Argentina 1-0 in extra time to win the 2026 FIFA World Cup at MetLife Stadium in New Jersey, their second world title in history. As World Cup hero Ferran Torres rode through Madrid streets in a “Make Spain Great Again” hat, the image captured something bigger: the rise of a confident, unapologetic patriotism across Europe, inspired in part by Trump’s political playbook.

Could this signal conservative movements finding their footing again in the EU? When one of the world’s most celebrated players in Europe dons a MAGA-style hat after winning the world’s biggest sporting event, it’s not just a fashion choice. It’s an indicator.

This year’s World Cup was a celebration of American leadership. Before a single ball was kicked, the tournament itself was a diplomatic and logistical triumph for Trump, with his administration processing over 5 million visa applications, holding off burdensome travel fees, and ensuring millions of fans from around the globe could flood American cities without chaos.

Then came the final, where President Trump sat with FIFA President Gianni Infantino before presenting the World Cup trophy to Spain’s captain.

And he’s not done. Following the success of their working together, reports have emerged that President Trump is interested in nominating FIFA President Gianni Infantino for UN Secretary-General, the man who helped make this the greatest sporting event in American history.

2. FRANCE’S GREEN AGENDA IS TEARING MACRON’S CABINET APART

France’s political infighting has not relented.

Over the past year, the country has burned through four prime ministers, including one who resigned after less than 24 hours in office, only to be reappointed days later. Now this plague of uncertainty is washing through others in cabinet positions.

On Wednesday, France’s Minister for Ecological Transition Monique Barbut announced her resignation over claims that “the ‘forces opposing’ her green transition agenda had become ‘too powerful.” She took to LinkedIn to announce she was quitting, before Macron refused her resignation, and she agreed to stay.

For an administration already struggling to hold its coalition together, this kind of ideologically-driven instability is becoming a pattern, and it shortens the runway for the National Rally party to consolidate power.

GOP TO EU: YOUR DIGITAL RULES ARE A TRADE WAR IN DISGUISE

Twenty-five Republican members of Congress sent a letter to President Trump this week encouraging him to build on his strong stance against the EU’s systematic targeting of American tech companies with more forceful measures.

At the center of their complaint is the Digital Markets Act, or DMA, which has saddled Amazon, Apple, and Google, among others, with “gatekeeper” obligations while Chinese platforms like Temu and AliExpress escape regulation altogether. In the letter, lawmakers accused the EU of using the DMA as “a tool of economic extraction and regulatory coercion against American firms.”

Among the items lawmakers suggested was utilizing Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to launch trade investigations, a step that would formally put tariffs and other retaliatory measures on the table.

Responding to the letter, EU spokesperson Thomas Regnier said: “The EU has the sovereign right to regulate economic activities on its territory…. we will keep enforcing our rules in a fair and non-discriminatory manner – as we have always done.”

Unfortunately for American companies designated as gatekeepers, this “fair and non-discriminatory treatment” from the EU takes the form of fining American tech companies more than they collect in taxes from their own tech sector. Using regulation as a backdoor trade barrier has a cost… and when the United States decides to collect, European companies will be the ones paying it.

1. EU SUES MEMBER STATES OVER GREEN AGENDA

The European Commission has launched infringement procedures against all 27 EU member states for failing to implement sweeping new green building mandates by the May 29, 2026 deadline. The rules, part of the EU’s Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD), would require businesses to overhaul their commercial properties to meet strict new energy efficiency standards.

The EPBD, adopted in 2024, mandates that all new buildings produce zero on-site fossil fuel emissions by 2030, that new publicly-owned buildings meet that standard by 2028, and that fossil fuel boilers be fully phased out by 2040, leaving businesses staring down potentially massive compliance costs with little relief currently available.

All this, while Europe is sweltering through record heat waves, with only 20% of households having air conditioning. Instead of easing up on their deadly energy rules, they’re doubling down.

The EU’s own data shows its current annual building renovation rate sits at just 1%.

2. FRANCE’S LEFT TURNS TO LAWFARE TO STOP LE PEN

Emmanuel Macron’s party, Renaissance, has filed a legal complaint against Marine Le Pen’s National Rally (RN), accusing the opposition of “trademark infringement and unfair competition” over Le Pen’s new campaign slogan, “Pour la France, la renaissance.” The case is scheduled to be heard July 27.

On July 7, Le Pen unveiled her slogan, and Renaissance claims the phrase unlawfully appropriates its political identity and registered trademarks, arguing it sows “confusion in the minds of voters.”

This is not a coincidence of timing. Courts have already cleared Le Pen to run for president, and her support is growing. Rather than compete on ideas, the governing party is going to court to silence the opposition’s campaign before it gains steam. RN responded bluntly: “When Mr. Attal talks about unity while throwing his support behind Edouard Philippe, we promise we won’t take him to court.”

USTR DRAWS HARD LINE AGAINST EU ASSAULT ON AMERICAN TECH

The EU’s campaign against American tech companies has a new and vocal critic in U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer.

Speaking at a recent event, Greer indicated that the Trump administration will not allow Brussels to write the rules for American tech companies who have been disproportionately targeted by the EU’s digital regulations like the DMA.

“We’re not going to let Europe control the global regulation of our companies,” he noted. “We’re just not going to let Europe be the arbiter.” Greer also took aim at the structure of Brussels’ regulatory framework, calling out rules which “only tends to capture our guys.”

While not every regulation from the EU affecting US companies has merited a fierce response, like their recent investigation into Meta’s addictive design features on Facebook & Instagram, the vast majority have. Over just the last two years, the Commission has handed down penalties of more than $7B to American companies under its digital regulatory framework. Taking into account the $1B in annual compliance fees spent between U.S. companies, the total costs since 2024 exceed $9B.

Worse yet, the EU has shown no signs of slowing their approach. On July 8, for example, the EU rejected Apple’s challenge to its gatekeeper status, condemning the company to what will likely be billions in additional fines and expenses in the years to come.

Moreover, the basis for these penalties have been rooted in a constantly evolving set of criteria. Commissioner for competition at the EC Teresa Ribera, for instance, recently signaled a willingness to designate based on qualitative criteria when the quantitative criteria is not met, bucking once-clearly defined benchmarks and leaving the door open for widespread abuse by the EU.

US companies grappling with Brussels’ regulatory assault can take solace in knowing the EU’s actions haven’t gone unnoticed by President Trump. His administration has remained steadfast in defending US businesses against these predatory regulations, using tariff leverage, diplomatic engagement, and direct demands for fair treatment. The President will not back down so long as Brussels treats US companies as a means to subsidize their own tech sector.

1. HOT AIR COMING FROM BRUSSELS

EU-US Forum senior advisor Matt Mowers joined the Guy Benson Show this week to call out what he described as a “wild, deadly dogma” gripping European elites: an almost religious opposition to air conditioning.

The numbers are brutal. Over 1,300 excess deaths have been linked to the recent heatwave in France alone, where temperatures topped 41°C. Only 20% of European households have air conditioning, compared to roughly 90% in the United States, per the IEA and U.S. Energy Information Administration. Europe’s heat toll exceeds 175,000 deaths annually across the European Region, more than four times U.S. gun homicides.

Mowers told Benson: “Across the board, you’re seeing a rise of conservative parties, because they’re responding to the will of the voters, and the voters are sitting there, sweating their rear ends off in these places right now, looking at these politicians, trying to lecture them. The only thing they’re doing is contributing to the increased climate out there, because of all the hot air that they’re spewing every single day.”

Brussels won’t change, so Europeans keep failing to beat the heat. As Mowers put it, this is the literal hill they are willing to die on.

2. LE PEN BACK IN THE GAME

On July 7, the Paris Court of Appeal upheld Marine Le Pen’s bogus conviction for misuse of EU funds, but critically reduced her sentence, cutting her office ban to 15 months, which she had already served during the appeal process.

Within hours, Le Pen appeared on TF1 and announced she is running for president in 2027, declaring she would appeal to France’s Court of Cassation, suspending enforcement of the remaining sentence, and allowing her to campaign without an ankle tag while awaiting a final ruling.

She immediately launched her campaign under the banner “Pour la France, la Renaissance” with RN President Jordan Bardella as her prospective prime minister. The move was a direct message to the French establishment: it’s not over yet.

As The European Conservative put it: “[Le Pen] intends to remain in control of her own destiny and has no intention of allowing the system to dictate her fate. Her supporters have clearly understood the message.”

EYES ON THE ROAD… AND YOU.

As of this July, every new car sold in the European Union is legally required to include a driver-facing camera that films and tracks eye movements at all times above 20 km/h, whether drivers want it or not.

The mandate, buried inside the EU’s General Safety Regulation, was never put to a public vote. Brussels calls it a safety measure. But the reality is that this is a government-mandated surveillance device installed in every new vehicle on the continent, with no requirement for independent audits to verify that footage stays local, no clear rules on how long data is stored, and no transparency on who can access it.

This isn’t hypothetical overreach; it’s already happening. In 2024, some auto makers were caught selling driver behavior data to brokers who built risk scores and sold them to insurance companies, raising rates by over 20%. And that was without an interior camera pointed at your face. Now Brussels has mandated exactly that in every new car in Europe, and written the rules loosely enough that manufacturers and third parties could exploit them freely.

This is what EU overregulation looks like when it crosses into authoritarianism: control dressed up as safety, with no accountability built in.

1.PRESIDENT TRUMP PUTS EUROPE ON NOTICE OVER DIGITAL SERVICES TAX

President Trump is taking action to stop Europe from using American companies as a piggy bank.

As Rep. Ron Estes (R-KS) laid out in a recent Bloomberg Tax op-ed, foreign governments have spent years slapping discriminatory Digital Services Taxes on U.S. firms, to the tune of $2.96 billion annually, and that number could balloon to $117 billion over the next decade. Congressman Estes is taking this issue seriously and making the case clearly: these taxes aren’t policy, they’re a shakedown.

President Trump agrees. Taking to Truth Social, he warned that “numerous European Countries” are on the verge of implementing new DSTs and made clear the consequences: “Any Country that imposes such a Tax will immediately be met with a 100% TARIFF on any and all Goods sent to the United States of America.”

This move shouldn’t come as a shock to the EU. President Trump signaled during last year’s tariff fight that he viewed these taxes as inherently unfair, yet European Parliament members kept discussing future implementation anyway. The approach is already working… Canada, India, and more than a dozen other nations have already backed down. France and the UK are next in line.

President Trump’s ultimatum is leverage against an undemocratic tax regime designed from the outset to hurt American businesses operating abroad. U.S. companies built the technologies that connect the world. They aren’t a revenue stream for foreign governments.

2. AS AMERICA TURNS 250, WE STILL DON’T TAKE ORDERS FROM EUROPE

As America approaches its 250th anniversary of declaring its independence, the last thing U.S. businesses should be doing is answering to Brussels.

A recent op-ed from Michael Toth points out that the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CS3D) is projected to cost American companies over $1 trillion in compliance costs, ensnaring roughly 4,000 U.S. firms, including 1,000 energy companies, and conscripting them to police their supply chains to meet the EU’s rules.

That’s not a partnership… it’s regulatory colonialism.

Toth writes: “Congress should make it equally clear that the rules governing American businesses will be written by elected representatives in the U.S. — not by bureaucrats in Brussels.”

As the Trump administration works to level the playing field for American workers and businesses, pushing back on overreaching foreign mandates like CS3D isn’t just smart policy, it’s an act of economic patriotism worthy of the moment.

FRANCE’S GREEN ELITE MELTS DOWN, LITERALLY

The heat wave continues…

For years, France’s Green politicians lectured the world about the evils of air conditioning, calling it an environmental sin, a right-wing indulgence, a symbol of excess. Then the thermometer hit 46.8°C (116°F) and suddenly the rules changed.

On June 23rd, France recorded its hottest day since 1947, and more than half the country was placed under the highest heat alert. Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu was forced to announce an emergency mobilization of the healthcare system.

The hypocrisy was immediate and undeniable. Marine Tondelier, national secretary of France’s Green Party, publicly acknowledged a long-standing “taboo” on air conditioning, now calling it indispensable for schools and hospitals

This year, France even decided to ban drinking alcohol in public to counter the heat. Just one year ago, during the 2025 heatwave, these same politicians attacked AC as an environmentally misguided right-wing proposal while schools closed and children sat in dangerously overheated classrooms.

This is the Green agenda in practice: ban commonsense solutions, lecture the public, and reverse course only when it’s too late.

1. MOWERS: TIME FOR BRUSSELS TO WAKE UP

EU-US Forum Board Member Matt Mowers made the case at an MCC Brussels America at 250 event on Wednesday that we need to stop the EU regulatory overreach from coming to America.

At the center of the fight: the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CS3D). Under these policies, larger U.S. companies that operate in EU revenue are legally subject to Brussels’ supply chain and environmental mandates, regardless of whether they have a single office on European soil.

Mowers put it bluntly at the event: “They want to tell American companies where they can get their supply chain from. They want to tell American companies what kind of environmental standards they have to go for. With all due respect, looking at the outcome of output from countries like Germany and their manufacturing sector, America cannot allow Brussels to overregulate its businesses the way that, unfortunately, it’s often overregulated its own, and so America is going to stand up to those issues.”

This follows closely after China’s recent move to reject the EU’s ESG demands. Beijing issued State Council Decrees 834 and 835 with immediate effect in April 2026, explicitly shielding Chinese companies from foreign extraterritorial compliance demands, a direct counter to CSRD and CSDDD overreach. Meanwhile, the Trump White House has already issued a presidential memorandum directing agencies to defend American companies from overseas regulatory extortion.

Mowers argued in a recent op-ed that President Trump can continue protecting American companies by issuing a targeted executive order.

2. BRUSSELS’ FORCES AMERICAN BUSINESSES TO REPORT ON THEIR COWS

Brussels has a new obsession: methane from dairy cows. The EU’s CSRD requires large companies to disclose greenhouse gas emissions in granular detail, including livestock methane across entire supply chains. And it’s not just a European problem. Non-EU companies with €450M+ in EU turnover face their own CSRD compliance deadline in 2029, meaning American dairy and food companies could soon be forced to file elaborate cow-emission reports to satisfy European regulators.

The result is a compliance nightmare exported from Europe to the American heartland, without a single vote in Congress. U.S. dairy producers could find themselves restructuring farm-level operations to satisfy EU bureaucrats, tracking methane that is notoriously difficult to measure in the first place, and bearing real costs for rules that don’t even promise real results. This is European regulatory theater, and it’s coming for American businesses, too.

THE DMA TAKING ITS TOLL ON EUROPEAN CONSUMERS IT PROMISED TO PROTECT

For years, critics of the EU’s Digital Markets Act warned that Brussels’ regulatory overreach would ultimately hurt the very consumers it claimed to protect. This week, in an unfortunate development for European users, those warnings came to fruition.

Just days ago, the EU ordered Meta to open WhatsApp’s API to rival AI chatbot free of charge, threatening a fine of up to 10% of global turnover if it refused – a decision the American company characterized as “regulatory overreach subsidized by the many European companies that pay.” Adding to this, Apple recently announced that its overhauled, AI-powered assistant known as Siri will be unavailable to iPhone and iPad users across the EU when it arrives later this year. This follows the Commission’s rejection of both Apple’s proposed compliance plan and its request for an 18-month phased rollout. Moreover, the company said it has no timeline for bringing the feature to European users, suggesting the burdensome nature of the DMA’s regulations for which there is often not a quick fix.

Although this may be one of the first publicly-documented consequences of the DMA for European consumers, they have long been silently paying the price, absorbing price hikes exclusive to Europe stemming from higher compliance costs on American companies.

And while Europeans users have only recently had to to grips with the negative consequences of the DMA, the ramifications have been all too painfully familiar for American firms operating there. Brussels has handed down penalties of more than $7 billion to American companies under its digital regulatory framework in just the past two years. Taking into account the $1 billion in annual compliance fees spent between U.S. companies, the total costs since 2024 exceed $9 billion.

President Trump has repeatedly made clear that the era of one-sided regulatory targeting of American companies is over. American companies shouldn’t have to choose between complying with these onerous regulations and delivering the best products to their users. Luckily, President Trump is making sure they don’t have to.

1. EUROPE IS BAKING AND BRUSSELS’ RED TAPE IS TO BLAME

European children are falling asleep at their desks from heat exhaustion. A second-grade teacher in Paris watched two students pass out mid-afternoon during a weeklong heat wave with no air-conditioning and temperatures climbing above 86°F inside a 19th century school building. An Italian education union reports only 6% of Italian schools have air-conditioning. French teachers’ unions surveyed schools and found temperatures exceeded 82°F in 90% of middle and high schools.

This is not a weather problem; it’s a regulatory failure. The EU’s ridiculous energy policies drive up energy costs so high that cooling buildings becomes economically untenable. The results are deadly: in 2024 alone, an estimated 62,775 Europeans died from heat-related causes. To put that in perspective, more Europeans die from summer heat than Americans die from gun violence each year. Brussels has made a policy choice, and European citizens are paying with their lives.

And Brussels isn’t content to let this failed Green experiment stay within its own borders. The EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) are two more regulatory weapons Europe is now trying to export onto American businesses in the name of the environment. These sweeping mandates would force U.S. companies doing business in Europe to comply with the same green bureaucracy that has left European schoolchildren sweltering in century-old buildings with no AC.

President Trump has led the charge to call this what it is: foreign regulatory overreach that puts American jobs, American competitiveness, and American energy freedom on the altar of Brussels’ failed climate agenda. We already know where that road leads…

2. THE LEFT COMES FOR CONSERVATIVE STRONGHOLD

Hungary’s new “centrist” government is moving to rewrite the constitution to remove Hungary’s president, Tamás Sulyok. Prime Minister Péter Magyar announced the move after Sulyok refused to resign, calling the push constitutionally baseless. Sulyok has formally appealed to the Venice Commission, warning that the effort could destabilize Hungary’s institutions.

Magyar’s government has also proposed retroactive term limits designed to prevent conservative Viktor Orbán from ever returning to power. A former Hungarian justice minister compared the tactics to 1948 communist-era purges, when President Zoltán Tildy was coerced from office as authoritarians consolidated control.

Hungary was one of the last firebreaks in the EU, and it is now under siege from within.

EU DRAFT MEASURES THREATEN TO TURN EU SMARTPHONES INTO A SECURITY LIABILITY

Brussels has spent years insisting its digital regulatory framework exists to protect consumers. Yet, a new set of draft measures under the EU’s Digital Markets Act is set to directly undercut that goal, stripping away core security protections for EU smartphone users in what some experts have called a “large-scale security and privacy experiment.”

The draft measures are set to dismantle foundational security safeguards that have protected smartphone users for years. These include allowing multiple third-party voice assistants to run simultaneously, meaning multiple apps could listen in on users at the same time, and mandating features that allow apps to render content directly over another.

Perhaps most notable, however, is the proposed dismantling of sandbox, which is a security system that walls apps off from one another so that a single compromised app cannot take over the entire device. Unfortunately for European users, bad actors have already exploited weaknesses in these exact areas to harvest banking credentials, personal data, and other personal information, and these changes will only make it easier for criminals to succeed.

More concerning still is the position this puts American companies in. The new DMA draft measures would directly contradict regulations the EU has already imposed, requiring US tech platforms to reduce vulnerabilities and security risks in their systems, which is precisely the type of vulnerabilities these measures would create. US companies in Europe now find themselves in an impossible position: a kind of double jeopardy where the EU will have the grounds to issue fines regardless of which set of rules American companies follow.

Just as President Trump would never open American users up to such unnecessary security risks, so too will he not allow US companies to be fined billions for being put in an unwinnable situation either. Trump has consistently pushed back against Brussels’ unfair treatment of American companies, and stands ready to do so again if the EU if Brussels presses ahead with these measures.

1. BRUSSELS IS TARGETING AMERICAN COMPANIES, TRUMP CAN STOP THEM

EU-US Forum Board Member Matt Mowers has a new op-ed in the Washington Examiner this week, making the case that President Trump can explicitly further protect American companies from EU overregulation by signing a targeted executive order.

Mowers argues that sweeping directives from Brussels, the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) and Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), are a form of regulatory imperialism forcing burdensome supply chain audits and ESG compliance on global companies, threatening American businesses and global economic growth.

President Trump and his administration have already done serious work to push back and save American businesses, but more can be done. Mowers says the next move could be an Executive Order blocking the extraterritorial reach of these rogue regulations on American soil. President Trump has always put American workers and businesses first. This is the moment to make it official and ensure that unelected bureaucrats in Brussels never get to dictate how American companies operate.

Mowers writes, “Trump has the unique authority and the necessary leverage to shatter this trap. By signing a targeted executive order, the president can explicitly protect American companies by declaring that they do not have to comply with the extraterritorial demands of foreign directives.”

2. BARDELLA LEADS: THE FRENCH RIGHT MUST SEIZE THE MOMENT

The French political earthquake that the establishment feared is now showing up in the polls. According to a new Odoxa-Mascaret survey for Public Sénat, National Rally president Jordan Bardella is projected to win both rounds of France’s 2027 presidential election. Bardella commands a dominant 32% in the first round, nearly double the support of his nearest rival, former Prime Minister Édouard Philippe at 17%. In a head-to-head second round, Bardella defeats Philippe 52 to 48.

Making matters worse for the Macronist establishment: Philippe’s support has fallen four points since March, and far-left LFI leader Jean-Luc Mélenchon is now breathing down his neck at 16%, threatening to knock the centrist out of the second round entirely. Macron’s political coalition is bleeding out, allowing an opening for the RN.

The French right must seize this moment. Macron will be term-limited out by 2027, the establishment is fracturing, and the voters are speaking clearly. A Bardella victory would mark a seismic shift not just for France, but for the trajectory of European politics writ large. The only question is whether the National Rally capitalizes now or lets the opportunity slip away through political miscalculation.

BRUSSELS’ “TECH SOVEREIGNTY PACKAGE” THREATENS TO UPEND THE TURNBERRY TRUCE

When US and EU negotiators reached the Turnberry Truce last summer, the hope in Washington was that the deal would mark a turning point in the transatlantic trade relationship, which for years has been strained by ongoing friction over the EU’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) and Digital Services Act (DSA). Yet, with the EU’s impending “tech sovereignty package” expected next week, Brussels is poised to jeopardize the truce and throw the broader trade relationship back into turmoil.

The damage already inflicted by the DMA and DSA cannot be overstated. American firms spend up to a collective $50 billion annually to comply with the DMA and DSA, assuming they allocate an estimated 2% of their global revenue – a shocking figure that doesn’t even account for the multi-billion-dollar fines Brussels has handed down under the same framework. Brussels hasn’t just stopped there, however. The EU is now preparing to issue the largest fine in the DMA’s history to Google for allegedly violating the regulation.

Brussels’ soon-to-be-announced “tech sovereignty package” effectively doubles down on the same logic guiding the EU’s digital regulatory framework. The legislation would install “Buy European” procurement mandates, shield European cloud providers and chipmakers from US competition, and embed new non-tariff barriers — effectively codifying discrimination against U.S. firms into the EU’s procurement and industrial strategy. This approach directly contradicts the Turnberry Truce’s core promise to eliminate precisely these kinds of obstacles.

As American companies contend with these regulations overseas, however, they maintain a key ally across the pond in President Trump, who has been a staunch critic of Brussels’ predatory regulations and has consistently defended US innovators from being taken advantage of. And luckily for the President, the US retains additional leverage. If the USTR’s Section 301 investigation into EU digital service taxes determines them to be discriminatory, for example, the U.S. Trade Representative will have the authority to apply proportional trade restrictions on Brussels.

The Turnberry Truce offered both sides an opportunity to stabilize the relationship, but if the EU insists on pressing forward with its “Tech Sovereignty” agenda, responsibility for the truce’s collapse will rest squarely with Brussels, not the US.

1. GERMAN DISAPPROVAL FUELS CONSERVATIVE SURGE

A new INSA poll reported by Die Welt reveals the scale of Germany’s political crisis, and the establishment has no answers.

84 percent of Germans say they feel “great or very great” concern about the state of affairs in their country. A further 64% say they cannot see any combination of parties capable of turning things around.

That anxiety is sending Germans to the one party the establishment refuses to work with. The AfD now sits at 29%, making it the most popular party in Germany. The “centre-right” CDU trails at 22%, following a horrendous first year from Chancellor Merz.

This follows polling showing 78% of Germans believe Chancellor Merz has failed to solve the migration crisis. The establishment keeps making the same moves over and over, continuing to make matters worse in Germany. Germans have lost their confidence in their leadership, and it is pushing more and more people to the AfD.

2. BRUSSELS WHITEWASHES THE DMA’S FAILURES

The European Commission recently released its review of its Digital Markets Act (DMA), claiming the regulation has had a “positive impact” and has helped establish fairer markets and greater choice for users and businesses. But as one recent analysis from AEI points out, this flattering self-assessment is far from impartial.

As part of this review, American firms subject to the DMA’s stringent regulations were provided the opportunity to provide candid input on the framework; however, despite working through the proper legal and regulatory channels to flag the tangible consequences of the DMA’s obligations, Brussels elected not to include any of it. The Commission instead built out the report with testimony exclusively taken from stakeholders and organizations already predisposed to support the regulation.

The review also ignored a growing body of independent, peer-reviewed studies documenting how the DMA has stalled innovation and degraded services, along with others that undermine the core justifications for some of its most sweeping prohibitions. As the DMA faces criticism both abroad and domestically, Brussels appears to have artificially engineered the report to make it appear successful even as evidence of its failures continues to pile up.

As US companies struggle to remain compliant with the burdensome regulation, the ramifications of Brussels’ decision to conceal the DMA’s deficiencies have begun to spread beyond just the US companies designated as gatekeepers. European consumers, for one, have increasingly had to absorb price hikes resulting from EU taxes being passed onto them. Unfortunately for them, the Commission’s doctored self-review does nothing to address that reality since an acknowledgement of these deficiencies would threaten the regulatory framework itself and the vast financial and bureaucratic resources Brussels has put into it.

The Commission may be hoping that a favorable self-review buys it time before the next round of transatlantic negotiations, but the Trump Administration has already shown its willingness to fight on behalf of American innovators abroad, especially those being taken advantage of. The Commission should not expect this support to waiver and, given that, must consider recalibrating their approach. If Brussels continues to shut gatekeeper voices out of its own review process while simultaneously demanding their compliance, it can expect a more formidable response – be it through tariffs, diplomatic leverage, or other means.

THE ART OF HONORING THE DEAL

The US and EU have finally reached a trade deal.

Following President Trump’s May 1st announcement of a 25% tariff on EU passenger cars and light trucks, the EU finally reached a trade agreement with the US. The deal includes a 15% on most European exports, while duties are being lowered on U.S. industrial products, and expands preferential access on some American agricultural and seafood products.

After months of negotiations, the EU found itself at a standstill. The European Parliament decided to attempt to rewrite the deal by adding four new amendments, including sunset clauses and suspension mechanisms that were never part of the original agreement, but at long last, a deal has been reached.

U.S. Ambassador to the EU Andrew Puzder pointed out in his latest op-ed that when President Trump took office, the U.S. faced a $235 billion trade-in-goods deficit with the EU, the result of years of other presidents allowing Europe to play by its own rules. President Trump imposed tariffs, forced negotiations, and in July 2025, struck the Turnberry Agreement, a framework on reciprocal, fair, and balanced trade. The U.S. delivered immediately, while Brussels tried “to move the goalposts while the game is underway.”

Brussels wanted to force the hand of America, but President Trump set the terms. Brussels, eventually, had no choice but to accept them.