Author: Admin

Alexander Butterfield, the former White House official whose testimony about President Richard Nixon’s secret recording devices became pivotal evidence in the Watergate scandal, has passed away at 99 years old.

Butterfield’s wife Kim confirmed his death to major news outlets. He died at his La Jolla, California residence, just one month before reaching his 100th birthday. No specific cause of death was provided.

The former aide’s disclosure about Nixon’s covert audio recording system triggered a fierce legal fight over presidential executive privilege and ultimately provided crucial evidence that led to Nixon’s downfall.

Butterfield previously expressed frustration about his historical legacy, telling journalist Alicia Shepard that he disliked being remembered solely as the person who revealed the tapes’ existence, as it suggested he had “eagerly and breathlessly” shared the information with congressional investigators.

Born in Pensacola, Florida, and raised in California, Butterfield studied at UCLA before enlisting in the U.S. Air Force in 1948. He served as a combat pilot in Vietnam, leading a tactical reconnaissance squadron, and later worked as a military assistant to senior Pentagon officials, which gave him initial White House experience.

After leaving military service, Butterfield joined Nixon’s White House team as deputy to Chief of Staff H.R. Haldeman, his former UCLA classmate. His responsibilities included maintaining presidential historical records, which involved supervising the installation of the voice-activated recording equipment.

By the time the investigation into the June 17, 1972, Democratic headquarters break-in at the Watergate complex intensified, Butterfield had already moved on to lead the Federal Aviation Administration.

As one of the few White House insiders aware of the recording system, Butterfield decided when facing Senate questioning that he would avoid lying while also not volunteering unnecessary information.

During a private preliminary interview, a Republican committee attorney directly asked whether the White House maintained a recording system. Butterfield reluctantly confirmed its existence.

PIVOTAL MOMENT

Three days following his initial private testimony, on July 16, 1973, Butterfield testified publicly before the televised Senate Watergate Committee hearing. Fred Thompson, then serving as Republican counsel and later an actor and senator, posed the same crucial question.

After a lengthy pause, Butterfield responded, “I was aware of listening devices, yes, sir.”

This revelation shocked the nation because it meant concrete evidence existed of Nixon’s conversations, including exactly what he said, when he said it, and to whom.

Butterfield explained that the recording equipment had been secretly capturing conversations and meetings in the Oval Office, Nixon’s Executive Office Building office, and the Cabinet room, plus four White House phone lines. He stated the recordings were intended for historical purposes.

In a 1975 People magazine interview, Butterfield revealed that Nixon frequently forgot about the recording devices and ignored recommendations to destroy the tapes, never anticipating the Watergate investigation would escalate to the point of requiring their surrender.

“I’m sure that he hates me as much as anyone can,” Butterfield said regarding his former boss, who died in 1994.

He believed Nixon should have stepped down sooner, stating, “I don’t feel awful about the president’s resignation. Not at all.”

THE SMOKING GUN

A recording from six days after the Watergate break-in became Nixon’s ultimate downfall – the “smoking gun” that demonstrated his knowledge of the cover-up. The tape captured him approving a plan to halt the break-in investigation citing national security concerns.

The Supreme Court eventually rejected the White House’s executive privilege claims and mandated Nixon surrender the subpoenaed recordings as his public and political support crumbled. Facing impeachment and Senate trial, he resigned on August 9, 1974.

Since Butterfield had no involvement in the break-in or subsequent cover-up, he faced no criminal charges, though his friend Haldeman joined several other Nixon associates in prison.

Butterfield became the subject of Bob Woodward’s 2015 book “The Last of the President’s Men.” The Washington Post reporter, who helped expose the Watergate story, received thousands of documents that Butterfield had secretly taken from Nixon administration offices.

These materials and Butterfield’s interviews revealed what the former aide called a “cesspool” within the administration and depicted Nixon as peculiar, isolated, and bitter.

Butterfield said he regularly faced hostility from Nixon supporters and told Time magazine that longtime Nixon secretary Rose Mary Woods, who claimed to have accidentally erased 18½ minutes of White House tapes, had called him a “son of a bitch” who had “destroyed the greatest leader this country ever had.”

Butterfield served as an advisor for Oliver Stone’s 1995 movie “Nixon” and appeared in a small role as a White House staff member.

His first marriage to Charlotte Maguire ended in divorce in 1985. He previously dated Audrey Geisel, widow of children’s author-illustrator Theodor Seuss Geisel, known as Dr. Seuss.

Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell is contemplating remaining as a board member when his leadership role concludes in May, according to court documents made public Friday in Washington.

The information emerged from legal filings connected to the Fed’s successful effort to prevent Justice Department subpoenas in a criminal probe examining Powell’s management of the central bank’s Washington headquarters renovation project. A federal district court judge sided with the Fed and blocked the subpoenas Friday.

During a January 29th meeting with U.S. District Attorney Jeannine Pirro, Powell’s legal team indicated their client’s thinking, according to Justice Department lawyers opposing the Fed’s legal motion. The attorneys stated: “The Chair (Powell) feels like he would not leave the Board when his term as Chair expires, if he was still under investigation; and while he could not say the converse is true, it would be a different look to the Chair if he was not facing criminal investigation and the Chair would be free to make a decision that would focus on his family.”

Powell’s lawyers also noted that President Donald Trump, who has pushed for lower interest rates, “does not have enough votes in the Senate to confirm a new Board Chair,” the documents showed.

Trump has nominated former Fed Governor Kevin Warsh to replace Powell, though Warsh encounters confirmation hurdles.

The 73-year-old Powell has not publicly announced his intentions regarding the conclusion of his chairmanship, but his potential continuation as a governor could prove significant. His position might serve as a crucial swing vote on the Fed’s seven-member governing panel.

Historically, Fed chairs step down from their board positions when successors assume leadership, but concerns about Federal Reserve independence and Trump’s potential influence through additional appointments have fueled speculation that Powell might break this tradition.

No precedent exists for how a former chair might operate while still participating in monetary policy discussions and votes, or how such an arrangement would affect relations with Warsh.

Powell’s governor appointment runs through January 2028, extending beyond November’s midterm elections and into Trump’s final presidential year.

The Federal Reserve declined to comment on the unsealed document contents.

Justice Department attorneys characterized Powell’s lawyers’ remarks as “strongarming” the U.S. attorney by suggesting he would depart the board if the investigation ended.

“By making this peculiar suggestion, the Board morphed the Subpoenas into the exact thing about which they complain,” by attempting to introduce politics into the matter, the legal filing argued.

The Federal Reserve Board has enlisted Robert Hur, the former special counsel who probed President Biden’s classified documents case, to help fight a Justice Department investigation targeting Fed Chair Jerome Powell, according to court documents made public Friday.

The records became available after a Washington federal judge struck down Justice Department subpoenas in a criminal probe examining Powell’s oversight of historic building renovations at the central bank. The court determined the government “offered no evidence whatsoever that Powell committed any crime other than displeasing the President.”

President Trump has repeatedly demanded the Federal Reserve lower interest rates and has publicly criticized Powell for moving too slowly on rate cuts. Powell has characterized the Justice Department’s probe as politically motivated.

Hur, who holds conservative views, served as special counsel under Biden’s administration to examine his possession of classified materials discovered at his residence and office. While Hur chose not to file charges, he faced Democratic backlash for describing Biden as an “elderly man with a poor memory.”

During Trump’s initial presidency, Hur held the position of Maryland’s chief federal prosecutor. He currently works as a partner with the King & Spalding law firm. Jeffrey Bucholtz, another firm partner who has previously represented the Federal Reserve in court cases, is also working on this subpoena matter.

Neither Hur nor Bucholtz provided immediate responses to comment requests. A Federal Reserve Board of Governors representative refused to comment.

King & Spalding and Hur are also defending Harvard University in legal battles with the Trump administration concerning the university’s federal funding and international student enrollment.

Powell, whose legal team comes from Williams & Connolly, revealed in January that the Justice Department was examining a renovation project for historic structures at the Fed’s Washington headquarters. The subpoenas demanded details about the renovations and Powell’s July 2025 Senate Banking Committee appearance.

The Fed’s governing board sought to dismiss the subpoenas, claiming in a February 24 court document that they were designed to “aid the president’s quest to seize for himself a power specifically denied to him by federal law.”

Chief U.S. District Judge James Boasberg ruled in favor of the Fed’s Board of Governors Friday, stating there exists a “mountain of evidence” indicating the DOJ’s investigation aimed to force Powell to reduce rates or step down.

Washington, D.C. U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, whose office leads the investigation, announced plans to appeal the decision.

TRENTON, N.J. — A federal judge delivered a sharp rebuke to the Trump administration Monday, blocking three Justice Department officials from jointly overseeing New Jersey’s federal prosecutor office in what the court called an unconstitutional attempt to circumvent Senate approval.

U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann issued a blistering 130-page decision that marks another chapter in the ongoing legal battle between federal courts and President Donald Trump regarding the appointment process for U.S. attorneys, who typically must receive Senate confirmation to remain in their roles.

Last year, Judge Brann had already blocked Trump’s initial pick for U.S. attorney, former personal lawyer Alina Habba, ruling she had served beyond the legal time limit without Senate confirmation.

Monday’s decision rejected Attorney General Pam Bondi’s unprecedented move to install three Justice Department officials — Philip Lamparello, Jordan Fox and Ari Fontecchio — to collectively run the office that Habba had previously overseen on a temporary basis.

The judge determined that appointing this trio violated the Constitution’s Appointments Clause, which mandates Senate confirmation for such positions.

Brann characterized the administration’s actions as representing an “enormous assertion of Presidential power.”

“It is plain that President Trump and his top aides have chafed at the limits on their power set forth by law and the Constitution. To avoid these roadblocks, this administration frequently purports to have discovered enormous grants of executive power hidden in the vagaries and silences of the code,” Brann stated in his opinion.

Habba, who continues working at the Justice Department as a senior adviser, dismissed the court’s decision as “ridiculous.”

“Judges may continue to try and stop President Trump from carrying out what the American people voted for, but we will not be deterred,” she posted on social media. “The unconstitutionality of this complete overreach into the Executive Branch, time and time again, will not succeed.”

Federal law typically mandates Senate confirmation for U.S. attorneys and permits individuals to serve without such approval only for restricted timeframes.

However, under Trump’s administration, the Justice Department has attempted to keep unconfirmed prosecutors in place much longer through creative staffing arrangements that courts have subsequently deemed improper.

In his ruling, Brann noted there are “at least three undisputedly legal methods” available to the Trump administration for filling the New Jersey position and ending the dispute.

“With all these options remaining, why does the fate of thousands of criminal prosecutions in this District potentially rest on the legitimacy of an unprecedented and byzantine leadership structure?” he questioned. “The Government tells us: the President doesn’t like that he cannot simply appoint whomever he wants.”

Using an occasionally sharp and critical tone, the judge accused the Trump administration of caring “far more about who is running” New Jersey’s federal prosecutor office than “whether it is running at all.”

“I am not fooled by the Government’s superficial arguments,” he wrote elsewhere in the decision.

Similar court rulings have found that individuals placed as chief federal prosecutors in Nevada, Los Angeles and northern New York were all serving illegally.

Lindsey Halligan, who had pursued charges against two Trump opponents, stepped down from her role as acting U.S. attorney in Virginia following a November judicial determination that her appointment was unlawful. The court also ordered the dismissal of indictments she had filed against New York Attorney General Letitia James and former FBI Director James Comey.

In certain situations, judges have used their legal authority to name U.S. attorneys to run prosecutor offices until the president’s nominees receive Senate confirmation. The Justice Department has responded by immediately dismissing these court-appointed officials.

A federal judge in Boston has put a temporary halt to the Trump administration’s mandate requiring colleges and universities to submit detailed race-related admissions information by next week.

U.S. District Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV granted a temporary restraining order Friday following a lawsuit filed by 17 Democratic state attorneys general who challenged the new Education Department requirement.

The contested mandate would have forced schools receiving federal student aid funding to provide detailed admissions data broken down by race and gender of their student populations. Federal officials intended to use this information to monitor whether institutions are following the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision that eliminated affirmative action in college admissions.

Judge Saylor, nominated during the George W. Bush presidency, recognized that educational institutions across the country were facing a Wednesday deadline to submit the required information. He pushed back that deadline to March 25 to allow time for a full hearing on the states’ legal challenge and ensure an “orderly resolution of the issues.”

The Education Department has not yet provided a response to requests for comment on the court’s decision.

The disputed information would have been collected through the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System surveys, a data collection program that the Education Department’s National Center for Education Statistics has operated since 1986 to gather university information on topics including financial data, admissions processes, and student outcomes.

Trump ordered changes to the survey system in an August directive, citing insufficient data to determine whether race continues to influence admissions decisions following the Supreme Court ruling, particularly given what he called the “rampant use of ‘diversity statements’ and other overt and hidden racial proxies.”

Education Secretary Linda McMahon subsequently announced that higher education institutions would be required to submit undergraduate applicant and enrollment data separated by race and gender categories.

The Office of Management and Budget formalized these new data collection requirements in December, requesting information covering the 2025-2026 academic year plus the previous six years.

A federal judge in Rhode Island has ordered the restoration of collective bargaining rights for 320,000 Department of Veterans Affairs workers, dealing a significant blow to the Trump administration’s efforts to limit union activities across federal agencies.

U.S. District Judge Melissa DuBose made the ruling Friday in Providence, determining that the VA improperly terminated its union agreement in August as payback against the American Federation of Government Employees for opposing Trump administration labor policies.

The decision stands as one of the most important legal victories so far in multiple court challenges to Trump’s 2025 executive directive that eliminated collective bargaining rights for much of the federal workforce.

Judge DuBose sided with AFGE, which represents over 800,000 federal employees nationwide, finding that the Veterans Affairs department acted out of retaliation rather than legitimate policy concerns.

The VA had defended its actions by arguing that Trump correctly excluded the agency from union negotiations due to its national security responsibilities, specifically describing itself as “the primary backup” for military healthcare during wartime or national emergencies.

However, DuBose concluded that the VA failed to demonstrate that national security considerations actually drove the decision to terminate the union agreement, and she restored the contract while the union’s broader lawsuit continues.

“There is zero indication from the Defendants that the termination decision would have been made or implemented without the retaliatory motive,” DuBose wrote in her decision. The judge was appointed by former Democratic President Joe Biden.

VA officials have not yet responded to requests for comment. The department manages an extensive system of hospitals and medical centers serving veterans and employs more than 400,000 people, ranking among the federal government’s largest agencies.

AFGE President Everett Kelley stated that the VA targeted his union for retaliation because of its resistance to budget reductions and policy changes that the organization believes would negatively impact veteran services.

“Today’s ruling holds this administration accountable and makes clear: no one can retaliate against workers for standing up for their rights,” Kelley said in a statement.

Trump’s executive directive removed collective bargaining obligations from the VA and more than a dozen additional federal departments, including Justice, State, Defense, Treasury, and Health and Human Services.

The presidential order targets agencies that Trump says “have as a primary function intelligence, counterintelligence, investigative, or national security work.” This represents a major expansion of existing limitations that previously applied only to workers with specific national security duties, such as federal law enforcement officers.

At least three separate lawsuits have been filed challenging Trump’s directive, while unions have initiated numerous additional legal actions against individual agencies that have canceled their bargaining agreements. Last month, a federal appeals court in San Francisco denied a request by AFGE and other unions to halt Trump’s order while their case moves through the courts.

WASHINGTON — Richard Grenell, a veteran Republican foreign policy advisor who implemented sweeping reforms at the Kennedy Center that drove numerous performers away from the prestigious arts facility, is resigning from his position as president.

Former President Donald Trump revealed the leadership transition on Friday following initial coverage by Axios. Trump named Matt Floca, who currently oversees the Kennedy Center’s facility management, as Grenell’s replacement. Sources familiar with the situation, speaking on condition of anonymity about plans not yet made public, indicate the transitions will be completed during a board meeting set for Monday at the White House.

Grenell played a key role in Trump’s effort to completely transform the Kennedy Center after the Republican leader returned to the presidency. While Trump largely overlooked the venue during his initial presidency, he made it a centerpiece of his campaign against what he termed “woke” culture upon his return. Trump removed the Kennedy Center’s existing leadership and installed his own chosen board of trustees, who voted to rebrand the institution as the Trump Kennedy Center — a modification that experts and legislators argue requires congressional approval.

In a recent development, Trump’s name was physically installed on the building’s famous exterior.

The arts world responded with immediate and severe backlash, as major theatrical productions like “Hamilton” pulled their scheduled shows. Notable figures including actress Issa Rae and writer Louise Penny canceled their planned appearances, while advisors including musician Ben Folds and opera singer Renée Fleming stepped down from their roles.

ATLANTA — Georgia state senators on Friday questioned Nathan Wade, the former special prosecutor who handled the election interference case against President Donald Trump, focusing on his team’s communications with federal investigators. However, Wade’s frequent claims of not remembering specific details left lawmakers with few answers.

Wade testified before a subcommittee of the Special Committee on Investigations, established by the Republican-controlled state Senate in January 2024 to investigate alleged misconduct by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, a Democrat, regarding her Trump prosecution.

Despite multiple hearings featuring various witnesses, including a contentious December appearance by Willis herself, the committee has revealed little new information. Republicans have also expanded their investigation to include Democrat Stacey Abrams, though no public action has been taken on that front.

Willis secured an indictment against Trump and 18 co-defendants in August 2023, using Georgia’s anti-racketeering statute to allege their participation in a broad conspiracy to unlawfully reverse Trump’s narrow Georgia defeat. Four defendants subsequently entered guilty pleas through plea agreements.

The committee’s founding resolution centered on Wade’s appointment as special prosecutor, describing his romantic involvement with Willis as a “clear conflict of interest and a fraud upon the taxpayers” of both the county and state. A December 2024 appeals court ruling removed Willis from the case due to an “appearance of impropriety” stemming from their relationship, and a new prosecutor dropped the charges last November.

While senators questioned Wade about his appointment — including the timeline and selection process — his romantic relationship with Willis was not discussed. Wade’s opening statement suggested a prior agreement that personal relationships would remain off-limits.

Senator Greg Dolezal primarily focused on Wade’s billing records, particularly entries suggesting contact with the U.S. House committee investigating the January 6, 2021 Capitol attack and meetings with Justice Department officials. Wade consistently claimed inability to recall timing of trips or calls, meeting participants, or discussion topics.

Wade defended his team’s work, emphasizing that Willis led the investigation independently. “She led us, I led the team and we did the work,” Wade testified. “We didn’t get assistance, coordination, however you want to characterize it. No one held her hand and guided her through the process. This is her work.”

Following the hearing, Dolezal acknowledged not obtaining all desired information. “Look, I wish Mr. Wade had a better memory,” he told reporters, while appreciating Wade’s appearance and responses “to the best of his recollection.”

Dolezal expressed satisfaction with establishing that Wade’s team met with January 6 investigation personnel and contacted Justice Department officials, suggesting potential coordination in efforts to “get Trump.”

Wade’s attorney Andrew Evans dismissed conspiracy theories as “absolute fiction,” accusing Republican senators of using the committee to distract from unfavorable issues as midterm elections approach.

Four of the committee’s five Republicans, including Dolezal who is seeking lieutenant governor, are pursuing statewide offices in 2026. Bill Cowsert is running for attorney general, while Senators Blake Tillery and Steve Gooch are also seeking the Republican lieutenant governor nomination. Former committee member John Kennedy resigned to launch his own lieutenant governor campaign. Only Dolezal and Cowsert attended Friday’s subcommittee session.

The subcommittee also heard from Fulton County Deputy District Attorney Jeff DiSantis, who handles media relations for Willis’ office. He answered questions about Wade’s hiring, which he said he learned about after the decision was made, and the district attorney’s office’s media monitoring services.

The ongoing conflict between the U.S., Israel and Iran has disrupted global energy markets and supply chains, prompting the Trump administration to explore suspending requirements under a maritime law that’s been in place for more than 100 years.

Known as the Jones Act, this legislation mandates that cargo transported between American ports must travel aboard vessels flying U.S. flags. Originally enacted in 1920, the law was designed to safeguard America’s shipping industry, though critics have long argued it delays goods delivery and drives up costs, particularly for gasoline.

White House officials confirmed this week they’re examining the possibility of temporarily waiving Jones Act provisions as part of broader efforts to address surging oil prices and shipping disruptions caused by the war.

Officially called the Merchant Marine Act of 1920, this legislation was championed by Senator Wesley Jones from Washington state. Congress approved the measure to help restore America’s shipping capabilities after German submarines destroyed much of the nation’s merchant fleet during World War I.

The Jones Act establishes that vessels transporting goods and passengers between domestic ports must be constructed in America and owned by U.S. citizens, essentially barring foreign-flagged ships from participating in domestic commerce. These ships must also employ American crews.

According to the U.S. Maritime Administration, the law can be suspended for “interest of national defense” purposes through either the Homeland Security or Defense departments.

The legislation was also designed to guarantee America maintained its own merchant fleet during wartime. Some U.S. shipping companies, national security experts and labor unions have championed the law, but eliminating foreign competition has increased domestic cargo transportation expenses.

American-flagged vessels typically cost more to operate and construct compared to foreign alternatives. These elevated costs particularly impact states and territories dependent on maritime supply routes, including Hawaii and Puerto Rico.

Since the Iran war began, oil prices have experienced dramatic spikes and volatility as tanker traffic through the crucial Strait of Hormuz has essentially stopped and major Middle Eastern oil producers have reduced output. Commercial vessels carrying everything from medications to computer components have also faced delays at sea or direct attacks.

These disruptions are increasing costs for businesses and consumers globally. Crude oil now trades near $100 per barrel, climbing from approximately $70 before hostilities commenced. American drivers have already experienced pump price increases, with regular gasoline averaging around $3.63 per gallon on Friday according to AAA, representing a 69-cent jump from the previous month.

These developments have nations seeking additional supply sources and alternative shipping pathways. When asked Friday about potentially suspending the 1920s-era Jones Act, President Donald Trump responded, “we’ll take a look at everything.”

During a Fox News Radio interview, Trump described the Jones Act as a “restrictive act” while acknowledging it enjoys “tremendous support” in Congress. The president’s remarks followed White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt’s Thursday confirmation that the administration was exploring a temporary waiver to “ensure vital energy products and agricultural necessities are flowing freely to U.S. ports.”

Neither official provided a specific timeframe for any decision.

Numerous factors influence gasoline prices. Allowing foreign-flagged vessels access to domestic shipping routes might provide some relief by expanding transportation alternatives, but it wouldn’t represent a comprehensive solution.

The Center for American Progress projects that waiving the Jones Act would reduce East Coast gasoline prices by approximately three cents while potentially increasing Gulf Coast costs. The research organization stated Friday that such action “would also sideline American shipbuilders and workers and allow the oil industry to continue to profit from high prices while reducing transport costs.”

The United States has emerged as a leading crude oil producer, now exporting more petroleum than it imports. However, oil remains a globally traded commodity, and countries worldwide are pursuing additional measures to combat escalating prices.

Thursday evening, the Treasury Department announced another step to release Russian oil from U.S. sanctions related to its Ukraine conflict, issuing a one-month waiver license. This follows last week’s decision granting India temporary authorization to purchase Russian oil.

Earlier this week, the International Energy Agency committed to releasing 400 million barrels from member nations’ reserves, representing the largest emergency oil release in the organization’s history. While Trump previously questioned the need to access reserve oil, he confirmed Wednesday that the U.S. would withdraw 172 million barrels from its Strategic Petroleum Reserve over 120 days as part of the IEA initiative.

Analysts maintain this release will serve as a short-term solution. New supply takes time to reach consumers, and refineries purchase crude oil in advance, meaning higher price impacts could intensify if the conflict continues. Even with additional reserve withdrawals, they may be working with more expensive supply for an extended period.

Election authorities in California announced Friday they are examining allegations that ballot petition workers in San Francisco broke the law by paying individuals to sign petitions with fabricated identities.

A video that went viral on social media earlier this week captured a sign advertising “Sign petition for $5” with a queue of people lined up on the sidewalk. The footage shows a woman seated at a portable table who appears to be telling people what names and addresses to write on the petition forms. When asked by the person filming about the petition’s purpose, the woman simply responded, “Just sign it.”

The California secretary of state’s office confirmed in a written statement that officials were “aware of, and investigating, the matter.”

California’s ballot initiative process allows citizens to place measures before voters by collecting hundreds of thousands of valid signatures. While campaigns are permitted to compensate signature gatherers for each name they collect, this creates pressure to maximize the number of signatures obtained.

The video revealed that at least one petition was connected to a technology industry-supported ballot measure designed to counter a proposed tax on billionaires. The initiative receives funding from Building a Better California, an organization established by prominent business figures including Google co-founder Sergey Brin, who contributed $20 million.

Molly Weedn, speaking for the campaign, clarified that the signature collectors were not direct employees of their organization. She stated the campaign was working with authorities to disqualify any petitions containing fraudulent information.

“Under no circumstance do we tolerate this type of activity,” Weedn declared. “Our campaign took immediate action and campaign attorneys reported to authorities.”

Weedn added that election officials were contacted immediately after the video became public.

The video also showed another ballot petition backed by Building a Better California, this one aimed at blocking new taxes on retirement savings. Nathan Click, representing that campaign, emphasized they “does not tolerate fraudulent activity in any signature-gathering process.”

“As soon as we became aware of the activities in question, we demanded that our signature-gathering firm identify the petition circulator, reject any and all petitions submitted by this circulator,” Click stated.

Multiple petitions were visible on the table, though it remains uncertain whether additional campaigns were involved.

State election law prohibits offering monetary payments or other incentives in exchange for ballot measure signatures, according to the secretary of state’s office. All petition signatures undergo verification against voter registration databases, and those that fail to match are rejected.

“It is also a crime to circulate, sign and/or file those signed petitions with an election official any initiative petition that is known to include forged names,” the office explained.

WASHINGTON – A federal court has mandated that the Trump administration must maintain financial support for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau without time limits, after determining that senior officials improperly used questionable legal justification to halt funding.

U.S. District Judge Edward Davila from California’s Northern District delivered the decision Friday, representing yet another judicial setback for President Trump’s approach to CFPB operations, which he has advocated for eliminating entirely. A Washington-based judge reached comparable findings in December.

CFPB representatives have not yet provided statements regarding the court decision. The consumer protection organization focuses on tackling financial industry issues including exploitative lending practices, unreasonable charges, and the inclusion of medical debt in credit evaluations.

During the administration’s initial period, agency operations were nearly completely halted while officials attempted widespread staff reductions.

The Trump administration refused to provide agency funding in 2025. Officials claimed in November that legal guidelines prevented them from using Federal Reserve funds to support the CFPB as Congress originally intended, citing the Fed’s financial losses.

Judge Davila determined that acting CFPB Director Russell Vought requested Justice Department legal guidance as part of a “transparent attempt” to eliminate the CFPB through misinterpretation of Federal Reserve finances and applicable laws – circumventing Congressional intentions to protect the CFPB “from this exact transparent display of partisanship.”

The judge clarified that while the CFPB faces a preliminary injunction in separate litigation, Friday’s decision ensures ongoing agency funding indefinitely.

Following court requirements, Vought, who simultaneously serves as Trump’s budget director, requested $145 million from the Federal Reserve in January to cover CFPB operational costs for one fiscal quarter, though he indicated his objection to the action.

Administration officials have criticized the CFPB for politically motivated enforcement actions and hampering business freedom, allegations that agency defenders and employees dispute. They argue that dismantling the CFPB benefits politically connected donors and business interests.

Consumer advocacy groups in San Jose, California initiated the legal action.

On Friday, President Donald Trump put his signature on two executive orders designed to make housing more affordable for Americans, according to White House officials.

The first order focuses on removing regulatory obstacles that slow down the construction of new homes and drive up building costs. The second directive addresses mortgage regulations, aiming to reduce loan costs and streamline the home financing process, based on information sheets provided by the White House.

The Associated Press was the first news organization to break the story about these housing-focused executive orders.

WASHINGTON — Federal officials have dramatically cut the cost for Americans seeking to formally abandon their U.S. citizenship, reducing the fee by roughly 80% to $450.

Following extended court fights with multiple organizations advocating for Americans seeking to surrender their citizenship, the State Department released its final regulation Friday in the Federal Register, lowering the price from $2,350 to $450.

The updated fee, which became effective Friday, had been pledged in 2023 but never put into practice. The price now matches what the State Department initially charged when it began requiring payment for formal citizenship renunciation in 2010.

Giving up U.S. citizenship involves a complex and time-consuming procedure. Those seeking renunciation must confirm through numerous written and oral declarations to State Department consular officials that they fully comprehend the consequences of their decision before taking a formal renunciation oath. The department must then conduct its review.

Officials increased the fee from $450 to $2,350 in 2015 to address administrative costs as citizenship renunciations increased significantly, partly due to new tax reporting rules for Americans living overseas that frustrated many expatriates.

The steep price hike faced strong resistance from organizations like the France-based Association of Accidental Americans, which advocates for individuals primarily residing abroad whose American citizenship stems solely from being born on U.S. soil.

The organization pursued multiple legal challenges questioning the fee’s constitutionality, including an ongoing case arguing that citizenship renunciation should be completely free.

“The Association of Accidental Americans welcomes this decision, which acknowledges the necessity of making this fundamental right accessible to all,” its president, Fabien Lahagre, said in a statement. “This victory is the direct result of six years of relentless legal action and advocacy.”

During court proceedings, the association reported that since the 2023 announcement about the fee reduction, at least 8,755 Americans had paid the complete $2,350 to renounce their citizenship. State Department officials have not released total figures for Americans who have renounced their citizenship.

A Wisconsin state representative has admitted guilt to misdemeanor disorderly conduct charges following a contentious dispute with Democratic colleagues over Hispanic heritage resolutions.

State Rep. Sylvia Ortiz-Velez, a Milwaukee Democrat, entered her guilty plea on Friday in Milwaukee County court, according to online records. Judge Paul Malloy sentenced her to pay $300 in fines and provide a DNA sample. The charge could have resulted in up to 90 days behind bars.

Following her sentencing, Ortiz-Velez released a statement saying she would pay the penalty and continue concentrating on constituent services rather than party disputes.

“My voting choices caused a rift that has been ugly and bitter,” she said. “My constituents did not send me to Madison to litigate internal caucus disputes or be distracted by the personal feuds — they sent me there to deliver results.”

Assembly Democratic Minority Leader Greta Neubauer’s office did not respond to requests for comment.

The criminal complaint reveals the conflict originated in August when Assembly Democrats were developing resolutions to celebrate Hispanic heritage and honor Hispanic veterans for September’s Hispanic Heritage Month observance.

Ortiz-Velez became upset, believing an unidentified colleague deliberately kept her out of the heritage resolution drafting process.

Court documents indicate she had received an invitation to participate in June but declined, though she later wanted involvement in writing the language. She reached out to news organizations claiming intentional exclusion from the resolution work. She also expressed frustration to the resolution’s author about being left out of a separate measure honoring Hispanic veterans, noting her deceased husband’s status as a Hispanic veteran.

Two additional unnamed legislators informed investigators that Ortiz-Velez threatened during separate phone calls to release “negative personal information” about the resolution author to media outlets and stated “they are going to do what I want them to do, or I’m going to x, y and z,” the complaint states.

When pressed for clarification, she made remarks about the resolution author’s private life and other legislators. The complaint described these comments as “indecent and tended to disrupt the good public order” without providing additional details.

Democratic leadership released a September statement claiming Ortiz-Velez had made comments about shooting three caucus members. This came one day after announcing her departure from the Democratic caucus.

In conversations with Wisconsin Right Now and the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Ortiz-Velez rejected claims she threatened colleagues. However, the Legislature’s human resources department temporarily prohibited her Capitol access for one day. A representative for Assembly Republican Speaker Robin Vos stated she should not have faced the ban.

Ortiz-Velez’s legal counsel, Michael Cernin, explained in a Friday phone interview that Assembly Democrats were already frustrated with his client before September due to her support for the 2025-27 state budget and new legislative maps created by Democratic Gov. Tony Evers in 2024. Democrats opposed the spending plan partly because they believed it inadequately funded public education and argued the state Supreme Court should have created the new legislative boundaries.

According to Cernin, Rep. Priscilla Prado, another Milwaukee Democrat, prevented Ortiz-Velez from participating in the Hispanic resolutions. Two unnamed lawmakers in the complaint alleged to investigators that Ortiz-Velez threatened to reveal unfavorable aspects of Prado’s personal life to media outlets.

“It’s incredibly petty, and Sylvia didn’t want any part of this,” Cernin said. “Sylvia truly wanted to spare Prado any sort of embarrassment on this.”

Prado’s Capitol office did not respond to Friday afternoon requests for comment.

A federal judge delivered a crushing defeat to the Justice Department on Friday, throwing out subpoenas targeting Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell and condemning the investigation as baseless harassment.

The probe centers on Powell’s congressional testimony last June regarding a $2.5 billion Federal Reserve building renovation project. The controversy has created political ripple effects in Washington, stalling Senate confirmation proceedings for Kevin Warsh, whom President Trump has nominated to succeed Powell when his tenure expires on May 15.

Judge James Boasberg issued a scathing rebuke of the government’s case, stating they have “produced essentially zero evidence to suspect Chair Powell of a crime.” The judge characterized the justifications for the subpoenas as so “thin and unsubstantiated” that they appeared designed solely to pressure Powell into cutting interest rates, which Trump has repeatedly advocated.

“There is abundant evidence that the subpoenas’ dominant (if not sole) purpose is to harass and pressure Powell either to yield to the President or to resign and make way for a Fed Chair who will,” Boasberg wrote in his decision.

The court’s decision prevents U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, who authorized the subpoenas, from accessing Federal Reserve documents related to the building renovation. Pirro responded angrily to the ruling during a press conference, announcing plans to appeal.

Pirro criticized what she termed an “activist judge” for quashing the subpoenas, claiming the decision has “neutered the grand jury’s ability to investigate crime” and leaves Powell “bathed in immunity.”

“This is wrong and it is without legal authority,” she declared.

The investigation became public knowledge when Powell took the unusual step of announcing it in a video statement on January 11. This revelation prompted Senator Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican who serves on the Banking Committee, to halt consideration of Warsh’s nomination until the probe is abandoned.

Following Friday’s ruling, Tillis said the court decision validated his concerns about the investigation’s merit, calling it “weak and frivolous.” The senator has maintained his position of blocking all Federal Reserve nominations, including Warsh’s appointment as the next Fed chair, until authorities drop their criminal investigation of Powell.

“We all know how this is going to end and the D.C. U.S. Attorney’s Office should save itself further embarrassment and move on,” Tillis stated Friday. “Appealing the ruling will only delay the confirmation of Kevin Warsh as the next Fed Chair.”

President Donald Trump issued an executive order Friday targeting companies that deceive consumers with false ‘Made in America’ product labeling, according to White House officials.

The directive instructs the Federal Trade Commission chairman to make enforcement against deceptive origin labeling a top priority, focusing on manufacturers and retailers who illegally misrepresent where their products are actually made.

Under the new order, all federal agencies responsible for monitoring country-of-origin labeling must work alongside the FTC to develop updated regulations and provide uniform guidance on enforcement.

The action reflects the current administration’s focus on promoting domestic manufacturing and ensuring companies provide truthful information about how much of their products contain foreign versus American-made components.

Additionally, the executive order mandates that agencies handling federal procurement contracts must regularly check claims about American origins for products purchased by the government, White House officials announced.

Companies found violating these requirements will be reported to the Department of Justice for potential prosecution, the order specifies.

A federal judge has halted the Justice Department’s criminal investigation into Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, ruling Friday that subpoenas targeting the Fed leader should be blocked.

Chief U.S. District Judge James Boasberg determined that prosecutors failed to provide adequate evidence of criminal wrongdoing in their investigation of Powell’s oversight of historic building renovations at Federal Reserve facilities.

The criminal probe, led by U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro, centers on renovation projects at Fed headquarters buildings in Washington. Powell first revealed the existence of the Justice Department investigation on January 11.

In his ruling, Judge Boasberg stated that a “mountain of evidence” indicated the investigation’s true purpose was to force the Fed chair to reduce interest rates or step down from his position.

“The Government has produced essentially zero evidence to suspect Chair Powell of a crime; indeed, its justifications are so thin and unsubstantiated that the Court can only conclude that they are pretextual,” Boasberg wrote in his decision.

Powell has consistently characterized the investigation as an attack on Federal Reserve independence and part of former President Trump’s efforts to influence monetary policy decisions.

The Fed’s Board of Governors had filed a motion to block the subpoenas, which demanded details about the renovation projects and Powell’s scheduled July 2025 testimony to the Senate Banking Committee.

Prosecutor Pirro, who was appointed during the Trump administration, announced plans to challenge the judge’s decision. She told reporters that the ruling “has neutered the grand jury’s ability to investigate crime; as a result Jerome Powell today is now bathed in immunity.” Pirro maintained that her suspicions of legal violations justify continuing the case.

The investigation has created political complications on Capitol Hill. Republican Senator Thom Tillis has threatened to block any Federal Reserve nominations through his Banking Committee position as long as the probe continues, potentially stalling confirmation of Trump’s choice to replace Powell when his leadership term concludes in mid-May.

The Trump administration has sparked controversy by creating promotional videos that blend actual combat footage from the Iran war with clips from blockbuster films, popular video games, and professional sports highlights.

These rapid-fire montages feature snippets from beloved entertainment franchises including “Braveheart,” “Superman,” “Top Gun,” “Breaking Bad,” and “Iron Man,” interwoven with declassified military imagery. One particularly striking video includes SpongeBob SquarePants asking “You wanna see me do it again?” between scenes of American airstrikes destroying buildings and vehicles. The administration captioned one explosive compilation “Courtesy of the Red, White and Blue,” referencing Toby Keith’s patriotic anthem.

The White House social media team has incorporated cultural references that appeal to younger male audiences, drawing from gaming titles like Call of Duty, Grand Theft Auto, Mortal Kombat and Halo. Additional videos showcase NFL and college football hits alongside MLB home runs, with the sound of cracking bats mixed between explosion audio.

These productions feature intense soundtracks including Childish Gambino’s “Bonfire,” Miami XO’s “Bazooka” and AC/DC’s “Thunderstruck.” One White House post labeled the content “JUSTICE THE AMERICAN WAY,” adding flag and fire emojis.

The strategy appears designed to make warfare more cinematic and potentially boost public support for military action.

While politicians have long used popular music and cultural references in campaigns dating back to Bill Clinton’s use of Fleetwood Mac in 1992, no previous administration has created content explicitly connecting entertainment violence with actual battlefield footage to promote military engagement.

This “gamification” of warfare has drawn sharp criticism from multiple sources.

Actor Ben Stiller, whose 2008 film “Tropic Thunder” appeared in the videos, posted on X that he had “no interest in being part of your propaganda machine. War is not a movie.” Voice actor Steve Downes, who portrays the Halo video game character Master Chief, called the videos “disgusting and juvenile war porn.” Both demanded their content be removed, saying it was used without authorization. The NFL and MLB declined to comment on their footage being included.

Cardinal Blase J. Cupich, Chicago’s archbishop, issued strong condemnation of the administration’s approach, saying it sickened him to see real warfare with genuine casualties treated like gaming entertainment.

“Our government is treating the suffering of the Iranian people as a backdrop for our own entertainment, as if it’s just another piece of content to be swiped through while we’re waiting in line at the grocery store,” Cupich stated over the weekend. “But, in the end, we lose our humanity when we are thrilled by the destructive power of our military.”

When asked about accommodating artists who objected to unauthorized use of their work, the White House declined to respond directly.

“America’s heroic warfighters are meeting or surpassing all of their goals under Operation Epic Fury,” White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly responded. “The legacy media wants us to apologize for highlighting the United States Military’s incredible success, but the White House will continue showcasing the many examples of Iran’s ballistic missiles, production facilities, and dreams of owning a nuclear weapon being destroyed in real time.”

This isn’t the administration’s first venture into gaming culture. Previous posts have depicted Trump as the Master Chief character and as a Minecraft figure with the caption “America’s most pro-gamer president.”

Zia Haque, who directs the Baker Institute for Peace and Conflict Studies at Juniata College in Pennsylvania, views this as psychological warfare adapted for the digital era. “We live in a digital age, and I see this as a use of the space to propagate the message across the board,” he explained.

Some analysts suggest these videos might serve as military recruitment tools targeting gamers. The Pentagon has pursued gamer recruitment since 2002 with the release of “America’s Army” and continues sending recruiters to gaming conventions and esports events.

Trump’s core supporters include many young white men who consume gaming content, sports, and popular culture heavily, making them a natural audience for such material.

Retired Navy Commander Ray Deptula, who served 24 years before recently leaving the service, understands the appeal. He admits action movies motivated his own military service, so he recognizes why these videos might attract recruits.

However, Deptula warns of a significant disconnect.

“That’s not what your life is going to be like,” said Deptula, who authored the novel “A Dog Before a Soldier” about Revolutionary War military service. “Your life is going to be about hard work and humility.”

Jeff Fromm, who co-wrote “Marketing to Gen Z,” questions whether these videos will prove effective long-term.

Generation Z values organizational transparency and ethics highly, and Fromm doubts the current administration scores well in those areas among younger audiences.

Sometimes the entertainment-military crossover appears unintentional. Trump recently posted on Truth Social about defense contractors agreeing to “quadruple Production of the ‘Exquisite Class’ Weaponry.” While policy experts were confused, Final Fantasy XIV players recognized terminology from their game’s most powerful weapons. However, the president likely wasn’t advocating for production of the game’s Exquisite Wrathgrinder.

WASHINGTON — California Representative Kevin Kiley announced Monday he is abandoning his Republican Party membership and will continue serving in Congress as an independent, effective immediately.

The congressman, now in his second term, is confronting a difficult reelection campaign after California’s congressional map was redrawn. Last Friday, he declared his intention to seek reelection in a district that favors Democrats, choosing not to include any party designation alongside his name on the ballot.

On Monday, Kiley informed reporters he had requested the House clerk update the chamber’s official records to show his new independent status, while noting he plans to continue working with the Republican caucus to keep his committee positions.

“So I will be the sole independent member of the House of Representatives,” Kiley told Politico.

Following Kiley’s departure from the GOP, Republicans now hold a 217-214 advantage in the House, with one independent member. The most recent independent House member was Michigan’s Justin Amash, who left the Republican Party in 2019.

Kiley had been weighing several choices after his district’s borders underwent major changes last year. In recent weeks, he considered whether to challenge Republican colleague Tom McClintock in a safely Republican area or try his luck in a Democratic-favored district centered around Sacramento. He chose the second option and will compete in California’s 6th Congressional District.

Kiley’s situation illustrates how the redistricting battles that started in Texas, encouraged by President Donald Trump, and prompted Democratic retaliation in California, have forced some sitting lawmakers to fight to keep their political futures alive.

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump put his signature on two executive orders Friday, demonstrating his administration’s focus on tackling housing affordability challenges that resonate with voters as November’s midterm elections approach.

The first directive instructs federal agencies to cut housing-related regulatory obstacles and establish incentive programs encouraging best practices among state and local authorities, with the objective of simplifying the home construction process for builders. The second order targets mortgage-related regulatory requirements and aims to help smaller community banks expand their home lending capabilities.

A draft version of the order stated, “Layers of unnecessary regulatory barriers, slow permitting processes, and onerous mandates at all levels of government have delayed construction, restricted development, and driven up the costs of new housing. These constraints have made housing less affordable for many Americans.”

These executive directives — exclusively obtained by The Associated Press — demonstrate the Trump administration’s renewed policy focus on promoting homeownership opportunities. Housing costs have become a critical political issue affecting both Republican and Democratic lawmakers, who are working to develop legislation showing their responsiveness to concerns that first-time home purchases have become increasingly difficult for middle-income families.

The Senate approved comprehensive bipartisan housing legislation Thursday, which aims to modify policies for increased construction while limiting institutional ownership in residential development. The bill’s future in the House remains uncertain, though the White House expressed support for the measure in a March 2 statement.

Questions remain about how rapidly federal initiatives can stimulate new construction or substantially lower mortgage expenses, given that primary regulatory challenges in housing development stem from state and local policy decisions, while mortgage rates respond to financial market fluctuations.

Years of construction shortages have maintained elevated prices, while mortgage rates that surged following the pandemic have prevented many renters from purchasing homes and discouraged current owners from selling their properties.

Trump’s first executive order directs federal agencies to develop incentive programs accelerating permitting timelines for state and local authorities, including reducing “green” building requirements, minimizing design and construction mandates, and facilitating innovative building techniques.

The directive focuses significantly on federal environmental regulations, instructing the EPA and Army secretary to examine and revise stormwater, wetlands, and other water-related permitting standards to lower costs and improve home insurability.

The Commerce, Housing and Urban Development, and Transportation departments, alongside the Federal Housing Finance Agency, must eliminate regulations and modify programs that hinder residential development. Various federal agencies will also work to remove environmental and energy efficiency rules that might increase expenses and limit home construction.

White House officials indicated that Biden-era energy efficiency requirements in HUD and Agriculture department guidelines could increase housing construction costs by up to $9,000. These officials spoke anonymously to detail the orders before signing, noting that additional federal regulations would impose even greater costs on participants.

The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation will simplify its historic review guidance, while the federal government will work to align its New Markets Tax Credit program with Opportunity Zone tax incentives established during Trump’s initial presidency.

The order avoids changing state and local zoning regulations, as the administration prioritizes preserving suburban housing rather than increasing housing density.

White House officials explained that federal agencies can include housing regulation best practices as criteria for awarding discretionary grants to state and local governments. One best practice example would require local governments to approve building permits within 60 days. The administration views this order as providing long-term benefits for homebuilders and purchasers.

The second directive seeks to simplify mortgage procedures, instructing the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to modify mortgage guidelines enabling smaller banks to increase lending activities. The CFPB will update Home Mortgage Disclosure Act requirements to reduce regulatory burdens for mortgage acquisition, among other instructions.

The administration believes these mortgage regulation changes will increase the number of financial institutions competing to offer home loans, thereby reducing borrowing costs for buyers. The White House asserts that these modifications will maintain mortgage market financial safety and stability.

White House officials anticipate that prospective homebuyers could experience the effects of mortgage regulation changes within months.

Elevated home prices have become a significant concern for voters under 40 heading into this fall’s midterm elections.

According to the National Association of Realtors, the median price for existing homes sold in February reached $398,000. This figure represents nearly five times the median household income, compared to the historical benchmark of homes costing approximately three times household income.

The National Association of Realtors reported that the average 30-year mortgage rate in February was 6.05%, declining from 6.84% the previous year.

While reduced borrowing costs have improved monthly payment affordability, rates remain significantly higher than the sub-3% averages experienced in 2020 and 2021 when the economy struggled with coronavirus pandemic impacts.

Trump has primarily addressed home affordability challenges by directing government-controlled mortgage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to purchase $200 billion in mortgage bonds.

He has also advocated for restricting financial institutions’ ability to purchase homes and implementing credit card interest rate caps, arguing both measures would facilitate home purchases.

However, the president has previously opposed dramatically increasing construction, suggesting such action could reduce home prices and existing owners’ net worth. This position requires him to balance maintaining price growth while expanding ownership opportunities for current renters.

“People that own their homes, we’re going to keep them wealthy,” Trump stated during his January Cabinet meeting. “We’re going to keep those prices up. We’re not going to destroy the value of their homes so that somebody that didn’t work very hard can buy a home.”

Extended security checkpoint delays stretching several hours at multiple American airports this week underscore potential complications when government funding lapses during peak spring vacation travel periods.

Houston’s Hobby Airport experienced the most severe disruptions, with security screening waits consistently exceeding three hours throughout Sunday and Monday. Travelers at other major hubs, including New Orleans and Atlanta facilities, also endured delays surpassing one hour.

The influx of millions of spring break travelers would challenge even fully operational airport systems. Combined with personnel shortages typically associated with government funding interruptions, certain airports are experiencing increased strain. However, the majority of aviation facilities have not encountered substantially extended security queues.

As Transportation Security Administration personnel continue working without compensation during this partial funding lapse, absenteeism becomes increasingly likely as employees seek additional employment to cover essential expenses such as fuel, childcare, and other financial obligations. Many workers may still be recovering financially from the 43-day funding interruption last fall, which marked the longest such period in U.S. history.

Johnny Jones, secretary-treasurer of the TSA union’s bargaining unit, indicated workers will miss their initial complete paychecks this weekend following the shutdown’s February 14 start date. He described workforce morale as having “taken a severe hit.”

“Over the last 15 months, TSA officers have went through three government shutdowns,” he told The Associated Press.

Jones, who serves as both union official and TSA agent, explained that recovering financially from the 43-day shutdown required months.

“I refilled my water buckets and now I’m starting to empty them again. Some people were not so fortunate to be able to refill their water buckets,” he said.

This ongoing shutdown exclusively impacts the Department of Homeland Security. Congressional Democrats have withheld department funding due to objections regarding immigration enforcement methods. Democratic representatives state DHS funding will remain blocked until new limitations are implemented on federal immigration activities following the fatal shootings of Alex Pretti and Renee Good in Minneapolis earlier this year.

Both TSA leadership and the Airlines for America trade organization immediately attributed extended security delays to Democratic lawmakers.

“This chaos is a direct result of Democrats and their refusal to fund DHS. These political stunts force patriotic TSA officers, who protect our skies from serious threats, to work without pay,” said Lauren Bis, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs, Department of Homeland Security. “These frontline heroes received only partial paychecks earlier this month and now face their first full missed paycheck, leading to financial hardship, absences, and crippling staffing shortages.”

Chris Sununu, president and CEO of the airlines trade group, renewed his appeal for Congress to resolve the shutdown.

“More than 2.7 million people cleared through TSA yesterday, but too many had to wait in extraordinarily long—and painfully slow—lines at checkpoints,” Sununu said in a written statement Monday. “It’s unacceptable to have wait times of 2 or 3 hours. And it’s unacceptable that TSA officers will have $0 in their paychecks this week.”

However, House Homeland Security Committee Democrats dismissed responsibility for TSA personnel working without compensation.

“FACTS: Democrats introduced a clean bill to fully fund TSA with no conditions. Republicans blocked it,” the Homeland Democrats group said on X. “Republicans would rather disrupt our travel than rein in ICE. It’s shameful.”

The nation’s most extensive security delays have occurred at Houston’s William P. Hobby Airport, where waiting periods have exceeded three hours. Sunday footage from New Orleans displayed security queues extending beyond the terminal into a parking structure, with peak wait times reaching 77 minutes.

Conditions at both locations had improved by Monday afternoon, though Hobby airport continued reporting two-hour security waits while officials advised travelers to arrive three to four hours before departure times. New Orleans wait times dropped to 10 minutes by late afternoon.

Additional complications may emerge when security shifts operate with insufficient screening personnel during busy periods.

Neither Houston airport authorities nor TSA responded to Monday inquiries regarding why Hobby airport experiences such pronounced delays during the shutdown. While Hobby remains smaller than George Bush Intercontinental Airport, which processes approximately three-quarters of Houston’s air passengers, Hobby still accommodated nearly 15 million travelers in 2024.