Authored by Stephen Soukup via American Greatness,

Along, long time ago—27 years, to be exact—my boss (the inimitable Mark Melcher) and I predicted that the European Monetary Union would be the death of the EU. The Euro, we wrote for our clients at a now-defunct big brokerage house, would be a disaster and would destroy everything that the post-war Europeans had spent the previous several decades working to build. Specifically, we wrote:

Psst! You wanna know a secret? The Euro, and the mess it represents, is going to be a social, economic and political catastrophe. Indeed, we think it is probable that the adoption of the Euro will be to 21st century Europe, what the killing of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand was to 20th century Europe; i.e., that point in time when history will record that the unraveling began in earnest.

Exaggeration? Hyperbole? Well, maybe. But maybe not. You see, the problem isn’t, as most critics claim, simply that the “policy makers” from the various “regions,” will fight over economic and monetary policy, and that the economic ignoramuses might win. The problem is that economic ignoramuses are likely to be the only ones at the table.  . . .

Starting in about 2010 and running for the next decade or so, every January, in my annual foreign-policy forecast piece, I would lead with a reiteration of that prediction. The collapse of the Euro, I would write, was inevitable. It didn’t matter if it actually happened this year or next year or a decade down the road. It would all eventually crumble, largely because the ignoramuses simply couldn’t help themselves and couldn’t stop doing economically foolish things.

Sometime over the last few years, I quit making that prediction every year for a couple of reasons. First, I quit writing annual forecast pieces as my business model and focus changed. Second, and more to the point, it became unnecessary. The EU had already made itself economically irrelevant. Between its jealously fueled outrage at American tech companies, its obsession with carbon emissions, and its conscious decision to strangle its capital markets through the imposition of overtly political investing mandates, the EU guaranteed that it would become the first modern civilization in history to regress developmentally. It knowingly chose to deindustrialize and to build an economic future that was far bleaker than even its remote economic past. The Euro, I concluded, was pointless.

That’s not to say that I gave up believing that the EU would inevitably collapse. I just gave up wasting my readers’ time by prattling on about it.

Looking back at all of this now, it’s possible I may have been mistaken. No, I wasn’t wrong about the economic stuff. Not only are the ignoramuses in charge, but no one else is even in the discussion. Italy’s Giorgia Meloni is the only Eurozone leader who questions the Union’s climate policies, for example, rightly warning that they will lead to “industrial desertification.” Still, even she officially supports the EU’s position on climate change and carbon emissions more generally, as well as its agreement to the Paris Climate Accords. It’s ignoramuses all the way down.

Nevertheless, it’s probably the case that I was wrong that the economic ignoramuses would be the ones who would precipitate the official end of the EU. Or, more accurately, I suppose, I was wrong that their economically illiterate policies would be the proximate cause of the EU’s collapse. It’s the same ignoramuses, just different policies.

As you likely know, this past week, tens of thousands of “migrants” from Morocco invaded the Spanish city of Ceuta, which is along the coast in North Africa. The images from the enclave were grim: hordes of people, mostly young men, pushing, racing, and fighting to get out of Africa and into Europe (geographical technicalities, be damned). The conditions on the ground were grimmer still: as of yesterday, some 70-plus deaths had been confirmed, while more than a thousand people required medical attention. The whole thing was shocking—or at least it would have been if it hadn’t also been utterly predictable.

For most of the last forty years, Spain has been a hub of primarily North African and Middle Eastern immigration to Europe.

Since the 1980s, Spain has had six major extraordinary regularizations for its migrant populations. Although different in name and details, these “extraordinary regularizations” are essentially broad general amnesties, grants of legal immigration status to those who entered the country illegally. In 2005, under the former Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero (a socialist), Spain granted amnesty to more than half a million illegal immigrants. Earlier this year, under current Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez (also a socialist . . . or worse), the country began the process of yet another regularization, the total size of which is unknown at present but is estimated to be between 500,000 and over 800,000.

Additionally, earlier this summer, the Spanish Supreme Court issued a ruling limiting the ability of the government to return immigrants who arrived in Ceuta and its sister city, Melilla, by sea rather than by land (over a technical “border”).

All things considered, Spain has done everything in its power to encourage as much immigration as possible, and its government has openly conceded this fact, arguing that demographic and workforce realities make mass immigration an absolute necessity. Unsurprisingly, given all of this, the country’s foreign-born population jumped significantly in less than two years, from approximately 18.2% of the total population in 2024 to 20.3% today.

In light of Spain’s immigration policies and in the wake of the Ceuta disaster, over the weekend, several EU nations called for a suspension of Spain’s privileges under the Schengen Agreement, which allows borderless travel within the Schengen region: no passport control, a unified set of regulations, etc. Predictably, Meloni’s Italy was the first to speak up. Deputy PMs Antonio Tajani and Matteo Salvini announced a formal one-month suspension of Italy’s Schengen relations with Spain, closing Italy’s maritime and air entry points to Spain and introducing “targeted and selective” checks on non-EU travelers arriving from that country. France followed suit, reintroducing checks at its land border crossings with Spain. Finland began preparing to reimpose border controls along its own Schengen borders, and its interior minister, Mari Rantanen, offered the sharpest public statement by a government official to date: “Spain’s outer border is also our outer border, and. . . they have failed in their efforts to prevent this incursion, this invasion.” Denmark and Czechia both demanded Spain’s suspension from Schengen, but neither has taken unilateral action on its own.

In response, Pedro Sánchez complained that everyone, everywhere, was overreacting, stating that the rest of Europe was being “selfish, polarising, and unlawful.”

Taken as a whole, this entire episode—starting with Spain’s admitted desire to import as many immigrants as possible and continuing through this weekend’s demands for Spain’s suspension from Schengen—helps clarify some of the broader issues facing the EU.

First, in the age of mass immigration, Schengen shows clearly that the EU itself was a half-baked idea. Interestingly, Schengen did not start as an EU enterprise. It started as a side agreement between a handful of member states: Belgium, France, Germany, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands. It was only in 1999, via the Amsterdam Treaty’s Schengen Protocol, that the “Schengen acquis” (the whole body of Schengen rules and agreements) was formally absorbed into EU law. In 2004, the EU—as opposed to its member states, a key distinction—tried to push a European constitution on its members, including provisions formally mandating Schengen compliance, making the EU “an area without internal frontiers, in which the free movement of persons is ensured. . . .”  The following year, French and Dutch voters explicitly rejected the constitution via referenda, which should, by all rights, have been the end of it. The EU being the EU, it decided that it wouldn’t take no for an answer and scaled the constitution back marginally and re-presented it as the Lisbon Treaty, which, among many foolish things, formalized and mandated participation in the Schengen migration policies.

Second, the Euro, the immigration mess, and the EU’s unwillingness to accept the will of the people as definitive confirm Robert Michels’ Iron Law of Oligarchy and show that the EU’s pretensions to “democracy” are rather laughable. Michels was a student of Max Weber, the founder of modern sociology, who sought to deepen his appreciation of socialism by studying the German Social Democratic Party (SPD), the most avowedly democratic, mass-participatory political organization in Europe at the time. He presumed that he would find a functional, egalitarian organization that confirmed all his fantastical priors. Instead, what he discovered was the opposite. He concluded, based on his study, that even organizations explicitly founded on democratic principles—universal participation, elected leadership, accountability to the membership—invariably develop into oligarchies, ruled by a small, self-perpetuating leadership class. It is simply the nature of large organizations. This, then, is Michels’ Iron Law of Oligarchy: “It is organisation that gives birth to the domination of the elected over the electors, of the mandataries over the mandators, of the delegates over the delegators. Who says organisation, says oligarchy.”

The EU is an oligarchy in Michelsian terms. It is governed by a small self-perpetuating ruling class that sees “the people” as impediments to its technocratic program and will do whatever is necessary to advance its agenda, regardless of the will of those people.

Finally, the EU will crumble. All Utopian enterprises eventually do. They must. They can’t help but do so. And while it may not be the monetary union that brings it down, something will. Maybe it will be Schengen and immigration. Maybe it will be something else. Who knows? Whatever the case, it will, eventually, collapse. The real, painful part of Michels’ Iron Law is the inability of oligarchies to reform themselves. They are incapable. What this suggests is that the EU’s response to the Ceuta incident and to Spain’s immigration unilateralism more generally will be to add more layers of centralizing regulation to the already oligarchical system, thereby making a bad problem even worse.

The EU won’t reform because it can’t reform. And so, it will collapse instead.

Middle East regional media has reported a huge uptick in Israeli military attacks in the Gaza Strip since President Trump announced a “historic” agreement which Hamas finally signed on to. 

The agreement would result in a phased complete disarmament of Hamas and the handing over of governance to newly proposed National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG) – a body designed to replace both Hamas and the Palestinian Authority.

However, fighting has persisted, with Al Jazeera reporting that at least 19 Palestinians killed on Saturday in Israeli attacks and that the total deal toll from the weekend is now 26 people, including women and children.

Israel continues to express skepticism in the face of Washington’s recent optimism:

Despite Hamas agreeing to a phased disarmament, Israel’s government says it has “serious security concerns” about the plan, and there has been strong resistance from Israeli politicians to the deal.

The continued bombardment of Gaza, contributing to Israel’s continued breaches of October’s “ceasefire” agreement, will likely threaten Trump’s peace plan and exacerbate the already dire humanitarian situation for Palestinians in the enclave.

Reuters had on Sunday reported an entire day of fresh IDF bombardment on Gaza.

“Israeli airstrikes hit Gaza for a second straight day on Sunday, killing at least 18 Palestinians, medics said, ​despite U.S. President Donald Trump’s announcement of a breakthrough in efforts to implement last year’s ceasefire agreement,” Reuters wrote.

“From dawn, Israeli warplanes hit Gaza City in the north, the central city of Deir ‌al-Balah and the southern area of Khan Younis, causing the biggest daily death toll in weeks, according to Palestinian health officials,” it added. 

Israeli Energy Minister Eli Cohen issued the Netanyahu government’s view on Sunday: “In the deal we signed with the United States, our stance is that Hamas must be dismantled. This is the first thing ⁠that must happen.” 

Cohen expressed that Israeli is “very skeptical” that Hamas would actually disarm. And PM Netanyahu’s office said: “The most important concern for Israel is that nothing can happen ​before Hamas completely and truly disarms.”c

So while the US and regional leaders are busy celebrating and hailing the plan, the proverbial devil will be in the details and in the process – and needless to say a lot could go wrong.

⭕️ 🇵🇸 NEW: The US-led Board of Peace claims Israeli withdrawal comes only after Hamas fully disarms. Its own published roadmap says otherwise.

In a statement Monday after its envoy Nickolay Mladenov met Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the US-led Board of Peace… https://t.co/YerdKpo1Yc

— Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) August 3, 2026

On pro-Palestinian advocate and author worries that Gaza will continue to be destroyed, but that international coverage and cameras have in effect moved on: “There was a time when every explosion in Gaza flashed across my phone – horrible images of children being pulled from rubble, medical workers trying to help patients as the hospital itself gets bombed, and families howling in grief as Israeli bombs obliterated entire Palestinian lineages,” Vijay Prashad observes.

Prashad adds: “Israel’s attacks continue as families flee from one temporary shelter to another and children search through shattered concrete for fragments of lives they once knew. But the world’s attention has shifted elsewhere as the genocide has become routine. We have become comfortably numb.”

Via Remix News,

Vox leader Santiago Abascal has called for Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez to be put “in the dock,” accusing his government of lying about the number of illegal migrants returned to Morocco following the latest mass influx into Ceuta.

Abascal traveled to the Spanish enclave at the weekend after canceling a planned visit to Colombia, saying the situation demanded his presence in Spain. Upon arriving, he posted footage of significant numbers of what appear to be illegal immigrants occupying beaches in the city. He claimed that “thousands and thousands” of illegal migrants remained in Ceuta and that frightened residents were still unable to leave their homes.

“What happened in Ceuta has been an invasion and an act of war promoted by Morocco and allowed by Sánchez, who is incapable of responding because he is subservient to Morocco,” Abascal told reporters on Sunday.

He demanded the immediate return of all illegal Moroccan migrants, permanent militarization of the border, closure of the border crossing, suspension of the European Union’s agreement with Morocco, and legal proceedings against Sánchez.

🇪🇸 @Vox_es party leader @Santi_ABASCAL debunks the Spanish government’s claim that most of the 50,000+ Moroccans in Ceuta have been returned. pic.twitter.com/t6pZ2j8wNQ

— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) August 2, 2026

According to OKdiario, the Spanish government says more than 48,000 of the approximately 50,000 migrants who reached Ceuta have already returned to Morocco.

Abascal disputed those figures, arguing that footage from the city showed large numbers of migrants still present.

The center-right People’s Party also stepped up its criticism of Sánchez. Party leader Alberto Núñez Feijóo remained in Ceuta over the weekend, meeting representatives of the Civil Guard and police unions.

PP Secretary General Miguel Tellado accused Sánchez of being on vacation while attempting to make the public forget that he had failed to prevent what Tellado called the greatest attack on Spanish sovereignty.

“The worst prime minister at the worst possible time,” he said.

La Gaceta reported that undocumented migrants had carried out widespread looting of shops and supermarkets across Ceuta, placing severe pressure on local businesses struggling to maintain supplies of food and other essentials.

Government delegate Miguel Ángel Pérez Triano nevertheless insisted that the number of migrants in Ceuta had fallen substantially and said authorities would accelerate return procedures.

“There are far fewer people than when they arrived. There have been many departures,” he said, promising that removals would be processed “without fail.”

Some migrants have already attempted to travel onward to mainland Spain. El País reported that National Police intercepted two boats carrying 17 people of North African origin near Algeciras and La Línea de la Concepción.

Police are investigating where the vessels departed from and the circumstances surrounding their arrival on the Cádiz coast.

Read more here…

Authored by Christian Milord via The Epoch Times,

In a free society that embraces free markets and the rule of law, young people must be made aware of the glaring realities regarding the alleged “fuzzy and warm” nature of Marxist (collectivism, communism, progressivism, socialism) iterations. 

There are at least twelve aspects of the Marxist ideology that are clear and present dangers to democratic nations as well as undemocratic countries.

First, Marxism was founded on the stark concept of atheism.  Consequently, it attempts to dismantle the Judeo-Christian faith that has been an anchor of civilization for thousands of years and helps people to navigate life’s challenges.  Marxists also oppose the traditional family, which is the building block of any culture and bolsters societal bonds.  On every life category, intact families are far more successful than broken families.

Next, Marxist policies encourage folks to be intellectually and physically lazy as they rely on bureaucratic government for all of their needs.  This reliance generates an unearned entitlement mentality that expects others to supply the needs of those who refuse to accept personal responsibility.  Minimal effort is applied to studying and working, yet the “entitled” expect to earn high salaries regardless of the effort they put forth.

Third, Marxists are quite generous with the money confiscated from job creators, but they are stingy with their own money.  However, most of the money and possessions that are seized by Marxist leaders end up with their cronies and are not redistributed to the lower-income workers they claim to be helping.  The hypocrisy is staggering.

Fourth, Marxist influencers compete with one another to see who the best liar is as they deceive the vulnerable who might believe promises that are too good to be true.  Marxists use deception as a means to control the masses and keep them on their heels.  They talk a good game about socialism as a paradise on earth yet do everything they can to turn that alleged nirvana into a hell on earth.

Fifth, Marxism is an arbitrary system built on a foundation of contradictions.  It can hand out some goodies but just as easily withdraw them.  Marxists believe that they can alter laws whenever they feel the urge, thus using raw power plays to confuse and divide people, and consolidate power in the hands of a few.  Arbitrary laws can hinder people from advancing economically and can also create insecurity.

Sixth, for an ideology that claims it will usher in equality, Marxism certainly is fixated on economic class, color, gender, and race.  Apparently, some are more equal than others.  Instead of equal opportunity, Marxists favor the equity of prearranged outcomes.  Many Marxist spokespersons are often educated academics who pretend victimhood and fear competition in the real world yet believe they are smarter than everyone else.   They’ve learned nothing about good citizenship and wisdom, while displaying a common sense deficit.  Marxists envy folks who keep their noses to the grindstone, and lash out at those who possess discipline, deferred gratification, and a healthy work ethic.

Seventh, Marxists promise freedom and security to those who will join their cause, yet wealth is stolen from others, and security only exists for those at the top of the pyramid.  In other words, everyone is equally miserable under Marxism except for the jackbooted leaders who profit from the spoils acquired from their “legalized” theft.  For proof, just examine the misery index of folks in China PRC, Cuba, Iran, N. Korea, and Russia.

Eighth, it’s puzzling why Marxists who reside in free societies lack the courage to move to the autocratic societies they admire.  Is it because they don’t even believe the mantras they keep repeating, or do they want to have their cake and eat it, too?  They denounce the blessings of free enterprise and liberty at the same time as they partake of them.  Unfortunately, they have taken their blessings for granted.  Do they really want to transform America into a dysfunctional nation that has constant shortages of goods and services?

Ninth, Marxism promotes the darker facets of human nature rather than its nobler strivings.  Marxists turn lies into the truth and truth into lies.  They oppose the arts, constructive creativity, and innovation and constantly push monolithic groupthink instead of critical thinking.  In other words, Marxism is extremely boring and lacks a sense of humor.

Tenth, Marxists never learn from history and thus are doomed to repeat it, even after the carnage that’s been generated by their dystopian policies for over a century.  Someone once noted that doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results is the definition of insanity.  That’s the Marxist playbook in a nutshell.

Eleventh, Marxists glorify the vices and demonize traditional virtues even while they carry out plenty of virtue signaling.  They condescendingly lecture us about upholding democracy and liberty at the same time as they attempt to erode economic freedom, educational freedom, and individual freedom.

Finally, Marxism is highly immature.  Marxists rarely learn from the past and thus triple down on failure.  They blame others for their own fascist behavior, which is an example of denial and projection.  They demand to get what other folks have earned, which is childish and immoral.  Marxists side with totalitarian entities and mob rule, while opposing the sole Middle East democracy, Israel.  Most Marxists only embrace law enforcement when it is provided to protect unlawful immigrants and themselves, and when it is used to punish law-abiding folks. 

This is why it is imperative to vigorously oppose Marxism by all means necessary.

Copper wiring, light poles, catalytic converters, copper gutters, and even Tesla charging cables have long been targets for thieves.

But in crime-ridden metro areas governed by progressive or reformist socialist city halls that have adopted softer enforcement policies, where lefty prosecutors are perceived as unwilling to pursue property crimes, criminals have become increasingly emboldened.

They have moved beyond stealing industrial metals to taking entire outdoor HVAC units, prompting some homeowners and businesses to install heavy steel security cages around their condensers.

An Atlanta-based company called Ornamental Security published a viral Instagram video titled “Securing Your HVAC System,” highlighting what appears to be a growing trend among homeowners: installing metal cages over outdoor condensers to prevent theft.

Ornamental Security’s Instagram video was later reposted on X by Everything Georgia, where it went even more viral, drawing 2.6 million views in just one day.

HVAC thefts are geographically widespread, occurring in cities governed by both Democrats (Chicago, Louisville, District Heights/Prince George’s County, Maryland) and Republicans (Jacksonville, FL; Midland, TX), as well as in Canada.

Recent reports:

In Maryland, WBFF 45 reported earlier this year:

Based:

We pay taxes to stop crime….Democrats use our tax dollars to support crime.

That is the problem.

— Raging Greek (@RagingGreek2) August 2, 2026

Just wait until tech companies start installing mini data centers in residential backyards. Thieves will move up the value chain, from stealing HVAC units to targeting Nvidia chips.

Recent polling suggests that expectations of a “blue wave” in Congress for the 2026 mid-terms are crumbling fast, and as we examined recently, the Democrats are facing one of the biggest financial shortfalls in DNC history.  The organization has around $16 million of cash on hand for campaign operations after debts are counted.  The Republicans have over $129 million cash on hand with zero debt. 

In terms of super-PAC money, the Democrats have $334 million to draw from while Republicans have $1.06 billion.

The funding disparity could not be more obvious, but what is the cause?  What happened to the Democrat’s massive cash apparatus – the same system that raised over $1 billion for the Kamala Harris campaign in 2024?  It’s almost as if the money simply disappeared.

Some theories suggest that institutions like USAID were funneling cash into the DNC through various political NGOs and subsidies.  There is some validity to these claims.

Groups tied to NGO networks like the former Arabella Advisors (which managed large 501(c) funds handling over a billion dollars for advocacy, ballot measures, and political activity) saw scrutiny and restructuring after Donald Trump took office. These management groups contracted support for Democratic-aligned causes, messaging, voter mobilization, and infrastructure.  

One of the biggest supporters of Arabella Advisors was the Bill Gates Foundation, which cut ties with Arabella last year.  Arabella ceased operations in November of 2025 due to investigations into “Dark Money” funding. Interestingly, Democrat coffers have suffered significant declines after Arabella dissolved and rebranded as “Sunflower Services”.  The organization also had numerous overlapping ties to USAID.

It should also be noted that employee contributions from USAID, the Department of Education and other organizations targeted by DOGE cuts were around 95% Democrat.  Huge swaths of the federal bureaucracy have long been run by the far-left.  Presidents come and go, but the bureaucracy is forever.

Beyond the dark money angle, much of the DNC’s losses can be attributed to their own ideologically unhinged leadership.  Kamala Harris, for example, had nearly double the number of billionaire donors and corporate sponsors compared to Donald Trump, yet Trump won the election in a landslide and the Harris camp ended up with $22 million in debt.

Major donors including Bob Kerrigan and Reid Hoffman have pulled back from the DNC after the 2024 disaster, citing lack of faith in leadership and questions over the purpose of the Democratic Party.  

Finally, with the rise of fanatical Democrat Socialist candidates in blue city elections across the US, the Democrat Party is being treated as radioactive.  The more the party doubles down on woke, the less people like or trust them (Get Woke, Go Broke). 

It’s unclear how well Democrats will perform in the mid-term elections this year given their financial problems, but it is often true that any party that can’t get people to vote with their wallets is going to have a hard time getting people to show up at the polls.   

Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich on Sunday repeated his call for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to approve the establishment of three Jewish settlements in the Gaza Strip, as senior Israeli ministers continue to speak openly about their plans for permanent Israeli control of the Palestinian territory.

Smotrich made the call in a post on X, in which he referenced the withdrawal of settlements from Gaza and from an area of the northern West Bank, which he calls “northern Samaria,” a policy known as the “disengagement.” Israel is re-establishing the settlements in the northern West Bank, and he is calling for the same in Gaza.

In the post, Smotrich referenced the upcoming Israeli elections, warning that a “left-wing” government won’t expand settlements as aggressively.

“Before us stands the choice, between a right-wing government that will continue the momentum of construction and expand it, and a dangerous left-wing government that openly declares its intention to evacuate settlements and outposts and to promote a ‘political agreement,'”7 Smotrich said.

“And from northern Samaria – to Gaza! The Settlement Administration under my leadership is prepared to establish 3 settlements in the northern sector of the Gaza Strip, and I call on the Prime Minister to give the green light to the move. Together we correct the sin of the disengagement,” he added.

Smotrich also holds a ministerial position in the Israeli Defense Ministry, where he oversees the Settlement Administration. He first announced in June that the body had drawn up plans for three settlements in Gaza and was just waiting for the green light from Netanyahu.

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz, a member of Netanyahu’s Likud party, has also said that Israel will establish three “Nachala outposts” – a type of settlement that starts as a community for IDF soldiers with the goal of establishing a permanent civilian presence.

Katz recently boasted of the destruction of Gaza cities during a visit to the northern part of the Strip. When asked how the view of the destruction made him feel, the Israeli minister said, “I feel good. Thank God. This is all the result of a deliberate policy aimed at removing threats. Instead of the raid method—going in and out—the IDF is inside, the terrorists are outside, and the houses are destroyed.”

Several Louisiana media outlets report that Elon Musk’s SpaceX is in the “final stages” of securing approximately 130,000 acres on Pecan Island for a massive new spaceport to launch rockets into orbit.

The Times-Picayune reports a source with knowledge about the deal said SpaceX is poised to take control of roughly 130,000 acres at Pecan Island – more specifically, the coastal Vermilion Parish – as part of a settlement resolving long-running coastal lawsuits against ExxonMobil. Gov. Jeff Landry is expected to announce the agreement this month.

The outlet KPEL provided additional details:

Gov. Landry announced a settlement of the coastal lawsuits in June. Under that agreement, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, ExxonMobil is expected to turn over land it has owned in Vermilion Parish since the 1950s, property long leased out for hunting and fishing. The terms have not been made public.

SpaceX would then take control of the site, with provisions built in for coastal restoration and protection, according to a source with knowledge of the deal.

Landry has confirmed the coastal settlement but declined to discuss the SpaceX deal specifically, and Louisiana Economic Development Secretary Susan Bourgeois has offered no comment either. SpaceX hasn’t named Louisiana directly, though the company acknowledged in a social media post that it’s scouting new sites to expand Starship launch operations.

KPEL explained why Pecan Island best fits SpaceX’s launch requirements:

Pecan Island has a permanent population of about 100 people along Louisiana Highway 82. Aerospace experts point to a handful of reasons that sparse setting appeals to SpaceX: deep-water access along the Intracoastal Waterway for barging in rocket hardware, a location roughly midway between the company’s Texas and Florida facilities, and a local supply of natural gas. SpaceX has also told regulators it wants to launch up to a million low-Earth-orbit satellites in the coming years, a plan that will require more launch pads.

Everything Elon Musk blog Elon Chron’s S.E. Robinson, Jr. wrote on X:

SPACEX: Louisiana State Senator Bob Hensgens, who represents Vermilion Parish, confirmed yesterday, ongoing talks between “a space exploration company” and Exxon-Mobil for the potential purchase of 136,000 acres south of Hwy La. 14, west of Intracoastal City, north/south of Pecan Island, extending to Rockefeller Wildlife Refuge in Cameron Parish.

The land is owned by Exxon-Mobil with surface rights managed by Vermilion Corporation. Hensgens could not name the space company, but stated he declined to sign a non-disclosure agreement for transparency purposes.

There is also talk about the possible construction of a coastal levee. The area is prone to hurricanes, so this would be a necessity.

More SpaceX news in today’s ELON CHRON below!

SPACEX: Louisiana State Senator Bob Hensgens, who represents Vermilion Parish, confirmed yesterday, ongoing talks between “a space exploration company” and Exxon-Mobil for the potential purchase of 136,000 acres south of Hwy La. 14, west of Intracoastal City, north/south of Pecan… https://t.co/nSHbWqikKZ pic.twitter.com/HCwKGbco4G

— S.E. Robinson, Jr. (@SERobinsonJr) May 8, 2026

If SpaceX secures the Pecan Island site, it would establish the company’s second major Starship launch complex, alongside Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, where it already employs 3,400 people. SpaceX is the world’s leading launch provider, beating out entire nation states, and continues to rapidly expand its rocket and AI-driven manufacturing capabilities.

A second SpaceX launch site in Louisiana would be transformative for the state. The project is expected to create thousands of construction jobs during the build-out; although only a fraction of the 130,000-acre site would be developed, the remainder would serve as a safety and environmental buffer. Once operational, the launch, manufacturing, engineering, and support workforce could number in the thousands, establishing a major new aerospace hub along the Gulf Coast.