Category: Politics

Minnesota Governor Tim Walz criticized the Trump administration Thursday for freezing federal Medicaid payments to his state, calling it political payback while announcing new legislation designed to combat fraud in government programs.

The Democratic governor’s remarks came one day after Vice President JD Vance announced the administration would temporarily suspend Medicaid funding due to concerns about fraudulent activity. Walz had been developing his anti-fraud proposals before the federal announcement, continuing efforts he started previously to address problems that contributed to his decision not to seek reelection.

“This is a targeted retribution against a state that the president doesn’t like,” Walz stated during a press briefing. He accused the administration of using misleading fraud claims as justification, similar to how they defended Operation Metro Surge, which deployed more than 3,000 federal agents to Minnesota.

Walz’s comprehensive proposal includes enhanced detection systems, stronger investigative powers, tougher criminal penalties, and establishing a centralized Office of the Inspector General for fraud prevention. The state Senate approved a bipartisan inspector general measure last year, but it remains stuck in the House due to disputes over whether the office should have law enforcement powers or focus solely on investigations while leaving enforcement to the existing state Bureau of Criminal Apprehension.

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz announced Wednesday alongside Vance that the federal government would withhold $259.5 million in Minnesota Medicaid payments. Oz stated the funds would only be released after Minnesota develops “a comprehensive corrective action plan to solve the problem” and gave Walz a 60-day deadline to respond.

“How does taking and punishing children and elderly have anything to do with fighting fraud?” Walz responded. He noted that the Trump administration has provided no guidance on addressing their concerns or opportunities to demonstrate Minnesota’s existing anti-fraud efforts. His administration projects that 1.2 million state residents could be affected.

The federal action represents part of a broader nationwide fraud investigation, stemming from allegations involving daycare facilities operated by Somali residents in the Minneapolis region that triggered the massive federal enforcement operation in the city, leading to widespread demonstrations.

A Minnesota federal prosecutor estimated last summer that total fraud across multiple programs might surpass $9 billion. However, John Connolly, the state’s Medicaid director, told media Thursday that the state lacks evidence supporting such an enormous figure.

Minnesota Department of Human Services officials, who oversee Medicaid, pointed out that withholding the $259.5 million — retroactive to the fourth quarter of 2025 — follows previous federal decisions to freeze over $2 billion in annual Medicaid funding. The department said it previously submitted a corrective action plan and continues appealing that determination.

The state agency reported implementing multiple new procedures and reforms to prevent and identify Medicaid fraud since 2024. These changes included pinpointing high-risk fraud areas, establishing tighter controls like criminal background screenings for providers, and conducting more surprise facility inspections.

Both Walz and Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison are set to testify before the U.S. House Oversight Committee next Wednesday during a hearing examining federal fund misuse in Minnesota’s social service programs.

WASHINGTON – The nation’s chief banking regulator indicated Thursday he might grant a congressional request to let senior lawmakers examine the banking charter application submitted by World Liberty Financial, a cryptocurrency business operated by President Donald Trump’s family.

During testimony before the Senate Banking Committee, Comptroller of the Currency Jonathan Gould, who was appointed by Trump last year, told Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren he would “entertain” her request for confidential access to the crypto firm’s national trust bank charter application, which was submitted in January. Approval of such a charter would enable the company to broaden its business activities.

Senator Warren, alongside fellow Democrats who have expressed worries about possible conflicts of interest, requested that Gould provide both her and Republican Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Scott with a complete, unredacted version of the application to verify it contains all required details.

Warren and additional Democratic committee members also urged Gould to either deny or postpone consideration of the application. The Trump sons and other business partners manage World Liberty Financial.

Democratic lawmakers also referenced Wall Street Journal coverage indicating that the United Arab Emirates’ national security adviser holds a significant investment stake.

A representative for World Liberty Financial stated the firm has met all regulatory requirements throughout the application procedure, including mandatory disclosures.

Company spokesperson David Wachsman said, “Democrats are playing politics and, with baseless lies, smearing a private American company undergoing a rigorous regulatory process.”

The White House has previously stated that the Trump family’s cryptocurrency business connections do not create a conflict of interest.

Gould described the licensing procedure as being managed by “superb” agency personnel and noted that the process is outlined in publicly accessible staff guidelines.

During the congressional hearing, he stated, “We process applications in a fair and evenhanded manner.”

A trust bank charter permits companies to manage and store customer assets while processing payments more quickly, though these institutions cannot accept deposits or issue loans. Multiple other cryptocurrency companies have obtained preliminary approval for similar charters.

A newly disclosed State Department document reveals the United States plans to handle 4,500 refugee applications monthly from white South Africans, a figure that significantly exceeds President Donald Trump’s announced refugee program limits.

The January 27 document, which had not been previously reported, shows officials are setting up temporary trailer facilities at the U.S. embassy compound in Pretoria to handle the increased workload.

This monthly processing goal far surpasses Trump’s declared ceiling of 7,500 total refugees from all countries for fiscal year 2026. Internal discussions last year had considered much higher limits between 40,000 and 60,000 people.

Since the program began in May 2025, approximately 2,000 white South Africans have arrived in the United States as refugees through January 31, though the numbers have increased in recent months.

However, recent administrative holdups in Washington have temporarily suspended all refugee arrivals to the U.S., including those from South Africa, according to a government official with knowledge of the situation.

Neither the State Department nor Department of Homeland Security provided responses to inquiries about the program. White House officials directed questions to the State Department.

The South African Chamber of Commerce in the U.S. reported last year that over 67,000 individuals had shown interest in relocating to America.

After initially stopping all refugee admissions upon taking office in 2025, Trump later created a special program for white South Africans of Afrikaner heritage, claiming they face violent persecution in the predominantly Black nation. South African officials have disputed this characterization, and some refugee advocacy groups have condemned the policy.

The contracting document, published Wednesday in a government database, justifies bypassing competitive bidding for the trailer contract due to urgent security needs.

According to the document, South African immigration officials had previously raided a U.S. refugee processing center located in a commercial building in Johannesburg, which “compromised operations” and forced officials to seek a more secure location.

“The inability to safely process about 4,500 applicants per month, an objective communicated to (the U.S. State Department’s refugee division) from the White House, would result in failure to meet a Presidential priority,” the document stated.

South African Foreign Ministry spokesperson Chrispin Phiri indicated his government would not obstruct the U.S. program as long as it operates within legal parameters, while maintaining Pretoria’s disagreement with Trump’s persecution claims.

“The assertion that Afrikaners face systemic persecution is fundamentally unsubstantiated,” Phiri said.

It remains uncertain whether the ambitious 4,500 monthly target can be achieved. The State Department recently suspended all refugee travel, including South Africans, from February 23 through March 9 due to operational issues, according to an email sent to applicants.

Due to Trump’s comprehensive refugee prohibition issued in January 2025, South Africans must receive individual approval from Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem on a case-by-case basis.

The government official, speaking anonymously about internal operations, said DHS has delayed these approvals, creating an administrative bottleneck.

Before the temporary suspension, South African admissions had been increasing, with approximately 1,500 people entering in December and January, compared to roughly 500 during the previous six and a half months, based on State Department data.

U.S.-South Africa relations became strained in mid-December when South African authorities conducted the raid on the Johannesburg commercial facility where American staff and contractors were processing refugee cases.

Seven Kenyan contractors working for a U.S.-based refugee organization were arrested for alleged visa violations, while two American refugee officers were temporarily detained.

American and South African officials reached a private understanding during a closed meeting in late December to permit processing to resume, as Reuters previously reported.

The contracting document revealed that a South African company received a non-competitive $772,000 contract to provide and install 14 prefabricated modular units as part of a “temporary modular village” at an embassy property in Pretoria.

In a WhatsApp chat group where South Africans exchange program information, one applicant reported having an interview this week in a trailer-style building at an embassy property, noting that additional trailers were being prepared, indicating the facility is now functioning.

In an era of deep political division, lawmakers from both sides of the aisle are discovering shared concerns about regulating emerging technologies like artificial intelligence and massive data facilities.

The bipartisan collaboration on tech oversight represents a rare moment of unity between Republican and Democratic officials at the state level. However, the cross-party cooperation isn’t limited to technology policy alone, as legislators are also working together on other significant issues affecting their constituents.

This unexpected alliance demonstrates that despite partisan gridlock on many fronts, certain challenges are compelling enough to bridge the political divide and encourage lawmakers to work toward common solutions.

Two key White House representatives expressed frustration following diplomatic discussions with Iranian officials on Thursday morning in Geneva, according to a report from Axios.

The envoys, Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff, came away from the negotiations feeling unsatisfied with what Iranian representatives presented during the talks, the news outlet reported.

The diplomatic meeting represents part of ongoing efforts to engage with Iran on various international issues.

WASHINGTON – A federal judge has denied a request to stop President Donald Trump’s massive $400 million White House ballroom construction project, allowing work to continue on the controversial renovation.

U.S. District Judge Richard Leon rejected the National Trust for Historic Preservation’s attempt to secure a preliminary injunction that would have halted the project while their lawsuit moves forward. The preservationist organization argued the construction violates federal laws and lacks proper congressional approval.

Leon determined that the National Trust’s legal arguments didn’t satisfy the stringent requirements needed for a court order to stop the work temporarily. However, the judge indicated the organization could revise their legal complaint.

“Unfortunately, because both sides initially focused on the President’s constitutional authority to destruct and construct the East Wing of the White House, Plaintiff didn’t bring the necessary cause of action to test the statutory authority the President claims is the basis to do this construction project without the blessing of Congress and with private funds,” Leon stated in his decision.

The National Trust filed their lawsuit in December against Trump and multiple federal agencies, claiming the project proceeded illegally without necessary approvals, environmental studies, or congressional authorization.

Trump’s demolition crew tore down the historic East Wing in October. The structure, originally constructed in 1902 during Theodore Roosevelt’s administration and significantly expanded in 1942 under Franklin Roosevelt, previously contained the first lady’s offices, a theater, and an entrance for visiting foreign dignitaries.

The planned ballroom represents just one of multiple significant modifications Trump has implemented at the White House since taking office in January 2025. The president has also installed gold decorative elements throughout the Oval Office and transformed the Rose Garden lawn into a paved patio similar to his Mar-a-Lago property in Florida.

The preservation group contends that federal statutes prohibit construction on federal parkland in Washington without explicit congressional permission. They also claim the National Park Service broke federal law by conducting an environmental assessment rather than a comprehensive impact study, and by releasing it after demolition had already started.

“No president is legally allowed to tear down portions of the White House without any review whatsoever – not President Trump, not President Biden, and not anyone else,” the lawsuit stated.

Leon previously refused to grant a temporary restraining order requested by the National Trust in December.

The Trump administration has maintained the project’s legality, stating it continues a tradition of presidential renovations. Administration lawyers argued in court documents that the ballroom is essential for state functions, design plans are still developing, and above-ground construction won’t begin until April, making an injunction unnecessary.

The rapid demolition of the East Wing sparked criticism from preservationists and other opponents, who viewed the project as reflecting the Republican president’s assertions of broad presidential authority. Trump has stood by the project, writing on his Truth Social platform that using private donations means “ZERO taxpayer funding.” Trump described the proposed ballroom as a “desperately needed space.”

While no definitive completion timeline has been announced, the White House has stated the project will finish “long before the end” of Trump’s presidential term.

Neither the White House nor the National Trust for Historic Preservation immediately provided comments when contacted about the ruling.

Federal immigration officers arrested a Columbia University student early Thursday morning after allegedly deceiving their way into campus housing, according to university officials.

Acting President Claire Shipman revealed that Department of Homeland Security agents took the student into custody around 6:30 a.m. from a residential building on the New York campus. The university has not disclosed the detained student’s identity.

“Our understanding at this time is that the federal agents made misrepresentations to gain entry to the building to search for a ‘missing person,’” Shipman stated, emphasizing that law enforcement requires judicial warrants or subpoenas to access private university spaces like dormitories and classrooms.

New York Governor Kathy Hochul criticized the agents’ tactics on social media, directly accusing immigration enforcement of deception.

“Let’s be clear about what happened: ICE agents didn’t have the proper warrant, so they lied to gain access to a student’s private residence,” Hochul wrote on X.

Shipman advised that when law enforcement seeks access to restricted campus areas, they should wait for campus security to facilitate the university’s proper response protocols.

Student arrests on university campuses remain uncommon, even amid President Donald Trump’s intensified immigration enforcement efforts.

The most recent arrests at Columbia occurred approximately one year ago following pro-Palestinian demonstrations. Among those detained was activist Mahmoud Khalil, who spent three months in immigration detention before his release. Khalil continues fighting legal efforts to strip his permanent resident status and remove him from the country.

The Department of Homeland Security has not yet responded to requests for comment regarding Thursday’s incident.

WASHINGTON — A federal court has denied efforts by historic preservationists to stop President Trump’s massive White House ballroom construction project on Thursday.

U.S. District Judge Richard Leon determined that The National Trust for Historic Preservation had little likelihood of winning their case seeking to temporarily stop the $400 million project.

However, Leon indicated the organization might find more success by revising their legal challenge.

“Unfortunately, because both sides initially focused on the President’s constitutional authority to destruct and construct the East Wing of the White House, Plaintiff didn’t bring the necessary cause of action to test the statutory authority the President claims is the basis to do this construction project without the blessing of Congress and with private funds,” the judge stated in his ruling.

The preservation organization had filed suit seeking to pause construction until the project receives multiple independent evaluations and congressional authorization.

The administration revealed plans for the ballroom during the summer months. By the end of October, Trump had already torn down the East Wing to clear space for the massive venue, which he claims will accommodate 999 guests. According to White House officials, private contributions — including funds from Trump personally — will finance the entire 90,000-square-foot ballroom complex.

The president moved forward with demolition and construction without first consulting two key federal oversight bodies: the National Capital Planning Commission and the Commission of Fine Arts. Trump has appointed supporters to leadership positions on both regulatory panels.

More than 1,000 transgender residents in Kansas have had their official identification documents invalidated under new state legislation that became effective Thursday.

The Kansas state government has voided driver’s licenses and birth certificates for transgender individuals who had previously updated their gender markers on these official documents. Under the new requirements, residents must have their gender identification reflect the sex designated at birth, and future modifications to gender markers on official documents are now prohibited.

Those impacted by the change are required to cover the costs of obtaining replacement driver’s licenses.

The legislation also mandates that transgender individuals must use restroom facilities and changing areas in government-owned or government-leased buildings that correspond to their birth-assigned sex.

This development comes as transgender Americans face mounting legal restrictions across multiple states and at the federal level. Since returning to the presidency, Republican Donald Trump has implemented several executive orders that limit transgender rights.

Trump’s directives include establishing that the federal government will only acknowledge male and female as the two recognized sexes, while another order aims to prevent transgender athletes from participating in women’s sports competitions.

Harper Seldin, a senior staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union’s LGBTQ and HIV Project, warned that the Kansas legislation creates serious safety concerns for transgender individuals.

“The mismatch between how they present themselves in the world and their driver’s license puts them at risk of discrimination or violence, and so that’s why many trans people choose to change the sex markers on our licenses so that we can live as ourselves in society and keep ourselves safe,” Seldin explained.

Seldin added that the law “puts transgender people in danger any time they interact with law enforcement or apply for a job or for housing or public benefits.”

Kansas had previously allowed residents to modify gender markers on licenses and birth certificates until 2023, when such changes were suspended during legal proceedings initiated by Republican Attorney General Kris Kobach. Courts restored the ability to make these modifications last year, prompting state legislators to draft the current bill. The measure became law after the Kansas legislature successfully overturned a veto by Democratic Governor Laura Kelly.

The ACLU plans to challenge the legislation in court, with Seldin indicating the organization expects to file a lawsuit by Friday’s end.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth delivered a Friday deadline to artificial intelligence company Anthropic this week: allow unlimited military access to your technology or lose your federal contract.

Trump administration defense leaders have also threatened to classify Anthropic, creator of the Claude AI chatbot, as a supply chain threat — or potentially use a Korean War-era statute known as the Defense Production Act to grant military forces broader authority over the company’s products, regardless of corporate approval.

Legal scholars indicate that applying the legislation in this manner would be uncharted territory and might trigger court battles. The government’s push to essentially coerce Anthropic highlights broader tensions surrounding artificial intelligence’s function in national security matters.

The Defense Production Act grants federal authorities extensive power to compel private enterprises to fulfill national defense requirements.

President Harry S. Truman enacted the legislation in 1950 during supply and equipment concerns throughout the Korean conflict. Throughout its multi-decade existence, officials have activated the law’s authorities not just during wartime but also for domestic emergency readiness and recovery following terrorist incidents and natural catastrophes.

One section of the statute enables the president to mandate that companies prioritize government contracts and orders considered essential for national defense, aiming to ensure private sector production meets wartime or emergency needs. Additional sections provide presidential authority to offer loans and other incentives to boost critical goods production, plus authorize government establishment of voluntary partnerships with private industry.

“One of the government’s most powerful and adaptable industrial policy tools,” described Joel Dodge, an attorney and director of industrial policy and economic security at the Vanderbilt Policy Accelerator.

Among its artificial intelligence competitors, Anthropic remains the sole company refusing to provide its technology to a new U.S. military internal system. Chief Executive Dario Amodei has consistently expressed ethical objections regarding unrestricted government AI usage, including risks from completely autonomous weaponized drones and AI-enhanced mass monitoring that could track opposition movements.

According to sources familiar with the situation and a senior Pentagon official, the Defense Department is exploring DPA activation to expand military authority over Anthropic’s products without company consent. This could involve compelling Anthropic to modify its system for Pentagon requirements without built-in safety measures, or eliminating specific ethical limitations from contractual language.

Legal experts including Dodge characterize both approaches as “without precedent under the history of the DPA.”

“It’s a powerful law,” Dodge explained. “(But) it has never been used to compel a company to produce a product that it’s deemed unsafe, or to dictate its terms of service.”

During his initial presidency, Trump and former President Joe Biden both activated the DPA to increase supplies for fighting the COVID-19 pandemic. Throughout 2022’s national infant formula crisis, Biden employed the law to accelerate formula production and authorize international supply flights.

Biden also utilized the DPA in a 2023 executive directive on AI, particularly requiring companies to share safety testing results and additional data with the government. Trump revoked this order upon beginning his second term.

Years earlier, both President Bill Clinton and George W. Bush administrations invoked the DPA to ensure electricity and natural gas suppliers maintained service to California utilities during an energy emergency. Officials also applied the law following Hurricane Maria’s 2017 Puerto Rico impact to prioritize contracts for food, bottled water, temporary housing and electrical system repairs.

The DPA needs periodic reauthorization to continue operating, which can broaden or refine the law’s scope. Congressional records show its next expiration scheduled for September 30 this year. Depending on how the Defense Department’s reported demands develop, Anthropic could become a primary concern for legislators.

Should the Defense Department employ the DPA provision targeting government contract prioritization and production ordering — which the Anthropic situation suggests it will — companies can resist if the requested product isn’t something they currently manufacture, according to Dodge and other experts, or if they consider the terms unreasonable. However, the government may attempt to override such objections, notes Charlie Bullock, senior research fellow at the Institute for Law & AI.

“If neither side backs down, it seems realistic that there would be litigation between Anthropic and the government,” Bullock stated.

Some observers have highlighted contradictions between the Pentagon’s warning about potentially designating Anthropic as a supply chain threat while simultaneously suggesting its products are so crucial to national defense that DPA invocation is necessary — two claims that appear contradictory.

“There are a lot of forces that I think the administration’s counting on that would lead Anthropic to just give in on Friday and agree with its terms,” Dodge said.

Regarding potential future litigation over a possible DPA order, Dodge doesn’t anticipate government victory because “it seems very out of bounds under the text of the law.”

However, if the administration succeeds, or Anthropic simply accepts new terms, that could unleash “a Pandora’s box of what the government could do to assert power and control over private companies,” he added.

DALLAS — Texas Congressman Wesley Hunt is drawing heavier fire from his more established Republican opponents as Tuesday’s GOP Senate primary approaches, which he interprets as evidence that his candidacy poses a real challenge to their ambitions.

“As an Apache helicopter pilot, it means I must be right over the target zone,” the Iraq War veteran told about 50 people during a recent event at Dallas GOP headquarters.

Hunt jumped into the Senate race late, disrupting what had been primarily a two-way battle between incumbent four-term Senator John Cornyn and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. Throughout much of the campaign, political observers viewed him as the third-place contender whose presence would likely prevent either frontrunner from securing an outright victory, thereby triggering a May runoff.

During recent weeks, both Cornyn and Paxton have ramped up their advertising spending to target Hunt with critical messaging, indicating that these two prominent statewide officials view him as an obstacle to their nomination strategies.

The escalating attacks highlight Cornyn’s precarious position as he works to avoid becoming the first Texas Republican senator in state history to lose a primary challenge for renomination.

Should no candidate capture at least 50 percent of Tuesday’s vote, the nomination will be determined through a May 26 runoff between the two highest vote-getters.

Cornyn, who anticipates facing Paxton in a runoff, needs to prevent Hunt from overtaking him during the campaign’s final stretch. At the same time, Paxton could potentially secure an outright victory by reaching 50 percent if he successfully reduces Hunt’s support among voters seeking an alternative to Cornyn.

“I think it suggests Paxton thinks he might be able to get to 50 percent, and that Hunt is polling too close,” said Wayne Hamilton, a Republican strategist unaffiliated with any of the Senate candidates and an adviser to Gov. Greg Abbott. “And Cornyn may be seeing Hunt ticking up too close.”

Hunt, who serves Houston’s northwest suburban districts, rejects the notion that he’s merely disrupting the race and insists he can win the nomination outright.

“I was told this was going to be a vanity project and that I didn’t have a chance,” Hunt told reporters after his Dallas event. “If that were the case, then why are they spending all this money attacking me?”

Cornyn’s campaign organization and supporting super PACs have launched advertisements targeting Hunt, including one highlighting his 2008 Democratic presidential primary vote for Hillary Clinton. Hunt has explained that vote as part of a conservative strategy to assist GOP nominee John McCain by prolonging the contentious 2008 Democratic nominating process ultimately won by Barack Obama.

However, Hunt hasn’t been the primary target of Cornyn and his supporters, who include Senate Republican leadership. According to ad-tracking service AdImpact, the majority of the more than $63 million spent by Cornyn and his allies on television advertising has focused on attacking Paxton.

A super PAC backing Paxton also launched advertisements criticizing Hunt this month, particularly highlighting his House absences while campaigning across Texas as the least recognizable of the three candidates.

Hunt has positioned himself as the most loyal supporter of the former president, despite none of the three receiving Trump’s endorsement. He endorsed Trump’s 2024 campaign early and frequently served as a surrogate during his comeback effort two years ago.

Hunt entered the October race recognizing an opportunity against Cornyn, a former state Supreme Court justice who has lost favor with segments of the Republican primary base partly due to his early dismissal of Trump’s 2024 candidacy. Trump subsequently won Texas by nearly 14 percentage points.

Cornyn also became a conservative target for supporting gun-control legislation following the 2022 Uvalde school shooting tragedy.

“I would never vote for Cornyn,” said Bob Burns, a 74-year-old retired manufacturing executive from Dallas who attended Hunt’s GOP office appearance. He characterized the incumbent as disconnected from today’s Republican Party.

Burns indicated he will support Hunt because he’s “new” and “can carry on Trump’s good work.” He also appreciates Hunt’s advocacy for two-term limits for U.S. senators.

Hunt particularly identified an opportunity as an alternative to Paxton, whom Senate Republican campaign officials in Washington fear would require significantly more resources to defend in a general election. Paxton has endured a failed 2023 impeachment trial and faced allegations of extramarital relationships.

At 44, Hunt represents a generational shift for Texas Republicans choosing between him, the 74-year-old Cornyn who has served in the Senate since 2003, and the 63-year-old Paxton who has held the attorney general position since 2015.

Ultimately, some Texas Republicans suggest Hunt may have simply extended an already lengthy and contentious primary campaign by forcing a runoff, potentially without his participation.

“The biggest thing that’s happened in the race is Hunt’s getting in,” said Tyler Norris, a Texas Republican strategist unaffiliated with any of the Senate candidates. “But, so far, his major contribution is to guarantee a runoff where Paxton and Cornyn will spend tens of millions more to attack each other.”

The Trump administration announced Thursday its plan to eliminate a worker classification regulation from 2024 that business organizations have strongly criticized for creating obstacles when companies want to designate workers as independent contractors instead of full employees.

The Department of Labor issued a proposal to eliminate the regulation, stating it contained legal defects and prevented workers from enjoying the flexibility that independent contractor status provides.

Since Trump returned to office last year, the department has ceased enforcement of the regulation, which mandates companies classify workers as employees under federal wage laws when those workers are “economically dependent” on the company for their livelihood. The new proposal would substitute this with a business-preferred approach that examines the level of control companies exercise over their workers.

Eliminating this regulation will significantly benefit companies across multiple sectors, including trucking operations, healthcare providers, retail sales organizations, and app-based transportation and delivery platforms like Uber and Instacart. These companies depend extensively on contractor relationships and have faced numerous legal challenges alleging worker misclassification to reduce costs.

Research indicates that employees can increase business expenses by as much as 30%, as they receive minimum wage guarantees, overtime compensation, unemployment benefits, expense reimbursements, and additional protections that contractors do not receive.

Worker classification disputes have emerged as among the most heated employment controversies during the past ten years, with industry associations conducting intensive lobbying efforts to overturn the 2024 regulation after Congressional Republican attempts to prevent its implementation failed to advance.

The regulation had superseded a rule from Trump’s initial presidency that permitted workers who operate their own businesses or can work for rival companies, such as drivers working for both Uber and Lyft, to receive contractor classification. Thursday’s proposal would essentially restore that previous framework.

Friday will mark the formal publication of the proposal, initiating a 60-day window for public feedback.

The Biden administration’s regulation was anticipated to generate numerous new legal cases claiming worker misclassification as independent contractors. However, this wave of litigation failed to emerge, probably because the rule remained active for only a brief period before the Labor Department indicated its intention to repeal it last year.

At least five legal challenges targeted the regulation from freelance workers, employers, and business organizations, with these cases either dismissed or suspended while the department continues its rulemaking process.

Last year, a Trump-appointed federal judge in New Mexico validated the regulation, dismissing a trucking company’s arguments that the Labor Department had overstepped its authority and improperly attempted to rewrite federal legislation. The company’s appeal has been suspended and will likely face dismissal following the rule’s repeal.

Federal authorities announced Wednesday they are examining whether certain documents connected to Jeffrey Epstein were improperly kept from public view, following media reports that some files containing unverified allegations against President Donald Trump were missing from the released materials.

The development coincides with Bill and Hillary Clinton’s scheduled appearances Thursday and Friday before a House committee investigating Epstein connections. The former first couple agreed to testify after facing potential contempt of Congress charges, with support from both Republican and Democratic lawmakers.

Representative Robert Garcia of California, the leading Democrat on the Oversight committee, stated that both Republican and Democratic administrations “have failed survivors in not getting more information out to the public.” Garcia also expressed interest in questioning potential connections between Epstein and foreign governments.

Democratic members joined their Republican colleagues last month in advancing contempt charges against the Clintons. Several lawmakers indicated they felt no personal allegiance to the former president and first lady.

This week, Democrats brought women who survived Epstein’s abuse as guests to Trump’s State of the Union address, highlighting concerns about the previous administration’s handling of Epstein-related materials. Even prominent Democrats like former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi supported interviewing anyone with Epstein connections, including former presidents.

The Justice Department’s review follows news reports indicating that a large collection of released records did not contain several FBI interview summaries with an unnamed woman who came forward after Epstein’s 2019 arrest. This woman allegedly claimed she was sexually assaulted by both Trump and Epstein as a minor during the 1980s, though these accusations remain unverified.

“Several individuals and news outlets have recently flagged files related to documents produced to Ghislaine Maxwell in discovery of her criminal case that they claim appear to be missing,” the Justice Department stated on social media platform X.

Officials promised that if any document was found to have been wrongfully withheld and falls under the federal law requiring the files’ release, “the Department will of course publish it, consistent with the law.”

Meanwhile, World Economic Forum President Børge Brende announced his resignation Thursday following scrutiny over his connections to Epstein. The former Norwegian foreign minister, who served from 2013-2017, stepped down from leading the organization known for its annual Davos summit.

“I am grateful for the incredible collaboration with my colleagues, partners, and constituents, and I believe now is the right moment for the Forum to continue its important work without distractions,” Brende said in his resignation statement.

The World Economic Forum had initiated an internal investigation into Brende’s relationship with Epstein after released files showed the two had dined together multiple times and exchanged messages.

For the Clintons, the upcoming testimony represents another chapter in their decades-long experience with Washington controversies. Political observers note that the couple, whose careers began during the Vietnam War and Watergate era, have frequently found themselves at the center of cultural and political battles involving questions of judgment, misconduct, money, and influence.

WASHINGTON — Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton appeared before House lawmakers Thursday for questioning related to a congressional probe into deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, beginning two days of depositions that will also feature former President Bill Clinton.

The private testimony sessions taking place in Chappaqua, New York — the Clintons’ home community in the quiet suburbs north of Manhattan — follow months of heated exchanges between the former Democratic power couple and House Oversight Committee Republicans. This marks an unprecedented moment as no former president has previously been compelled to provide congressional testimony.

The push for accountability regarding Epstein’s exploitation of minors has gained unstoppable momentum both in Congress and across the nation.

President Donald Trump, despite expressing sympathy for the Clintons’ situation, yielded to pressure last year by authorizing the release of Epstein case documents. Epstein died by suicide in a Manhattan detention facility in 2019 while facing trial. The Clintons ultimately consented to testify after the Oversight Committee, led by Chairman Rep. James Comer of Kentucky, rejected their written statement proposals and warned of potential contempt charges.

In a recent BBC interview, Hillary Clinton stated: “We have a very clear record that we’ve been willing to talk about.” She acknowledged her husband’s travel with Epstein for philanthropic purposes and mentioned having no memory of meeting Epstein personally, though she recalled encounters with Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s former associate, at Clinton Foundation events.

“We are more than happy to say what we know, which is very limited and totally unrelated to their behavior or their crimes, and we want to do it in public,” Hillary Clinton explained.

Republicans have particularly focused on Bill Clinton amid political battles over Epstein connections. Justice Department documents released in January contained multiple photographs featuring the former president alongside women with obscured identities. No misconduct allegations have been made against Clinton regarding his Epstein association.

Comer has cited Hillary Clinton’s anti-trafficking efforts as Secretary of State as additional justification for her deposition. The committee aims to understand why federal prosecutors under previous administrations failed to pursue additional charges against Epstein after his 2008 plea deal in Florida, where he admitted to soliciting an underage prostitute while avoiding federal prosecution.

Conspiracy theories, particularly among conservatives, have long surrounded the Clintons’ Epstein ties and their connection to Maxwell, who maintains her innocence. Republicans have persistently sought Clinton testimony on these matters.

“I mean if you’re the wife of Bill Clinton, aren’t you going to have some questions about your husband’s activities?” questioned Rep. Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, an Oversight Committee member. “We only go where the facts take us. We didn’t put the president and the secretary in this position. They put themselves in it.”

Democrats, now under younger leadership, have emphasized Epstein transparency over protecting former party leaders. Multiple Democratic lawmakers supported Republican contempt proceedings against the Clintons last month, with several indicating no personal ties or obligations to the couple.

Rep. Robert Garcia of California, the Oversight Committee’s ranking Democrat, stated that both parties’ administrations “have failed survivors in not getting more information out to the public.” He expressed interest in exploring potential foreign government connections to Epstein.

Democrats recently highlighted Trump’s Epstein file handling by bringing abuse survivors as guests to the State of the Union address. Even prominent Democrats like former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California endorsed interviewing anyone with Epstein connections, including former presidents.

“We want to hear from everyone,” Pelosi remarked, questioning Hillary Clinton’s inclusion while emphasizing the importance to “believe survivors.”

A new nationwide survey shows Americans hold conflicting views about President Donald Trump’s immigration enforcement approach, supporting the goal of removing unauthorized immigrants while criticizing the methods being used.

The Reuters/Ipsos poll, which wrapped up this Monday after six days of questioning, found that 61% of Americans back deporting people living in the country without legal status. This includes an overwhelming 92% of Republican respondents and 35% of Democrats who expressed support for removals.

However, the same survey revealed widespread concern about how these deportations are being carried out. Approximately 60% of those polled believe immigration enforcement has become too aggressive, including one-fifth of Republicans and nearly all Democrats surveyed.

The polling data highlights potential political challenges for Trump’s party as they work to maintain control of both chambers of Congress in the upcoming November elections. Independent voters, who often decide close races, showed particular disapproval with 65% saying authorities have overstepped boundaries.

During his State of the Union speech Tuesday, Trump addressed growing criticism of enforcement tactics that have included confrontations between masked agents and American citizens, family separations, and fatal shootings of two U.S. citizens. The president emphasized targeting criminals specifically, stating: “We’re getting them the hell out of here fast.”

The survey shows Trump’s immigration stance, which helped secure his 2024 election victory as he criticized Democrats for supporting “open borders,” remains popular in principle but faces implementation concerns.

Minority communities have shown the strongest opposition to current enforcement methods. Nearly three-quarters of Black respondents (74%) and Hispanic respondents (72%) disapproved of how the administration handles deportations, compared to roughly half (51%) of white Americans.

These concerns appear to be affecting Trump’s standing with minority voters. Since February 2025, his approval rating dropped 7 points among Hispanic Americans to 29%, fell 2 points among Black Americans to 14%, and declined 4 points among white Americans to 49%.

The immigration issue has created divisions within both major parties. Nearly a quarter (23%) of Republicans who support deportations expressed discomfort with current enforcement tactics. Democrats face their own splits, disagreeing both on deportation policy generally and on whether to eliminate Immigration and Customs Enforcement entirely.

Support for abolishing ICE has grown significantly among Democrats, with 63% now favoring dissolution compared to 44% in a 2018 survey. However, only 30% of Democratic voters oppose this idea, while independents remain largely unchanged with just one-third supporting ICE elimination.

Despite this Democratic sentiment, few congressional candidates have publicly called for ending the agency. Centrist organizations like Third Way have cautioned that embracing such positions could hurt Democratic candidates in November elections.

The online survey collected responses from 4,638 American adults nationwide and carries a margin of error of two percentage points.

WASHINGTON – The former Secretary of State and 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton will appear before a House committee Thursday for private questioning about her connections to deceased financier Jeffrey Epstein, according to congressional sources.

Clinton has maintained she possesses minimal knowledge relevant to the investigation and has criticized the GOP-controlled committee for allegedly attempting to divert attention from former President Trump’s own relationship with Epstein. The convicted sex offender took his own life in federal custody during 2019 while facing sex trafficking allegations.

Both Hillary and former President Bill Clinton initially declined the committee’s request to appear, prompting House Oversight Committee members to threaten contempt proceedings against the couple.

The private questioning session is scheduled for 11 a.m. Thursday at the Clinton residence area in Chappaqua, New York. Bill Clinton will face similar questioning Friday at the same location.

Representatives for the Clinton family have not provided statements regarding the upcoming testimony.

Kentucky Republican James Comer, who chairs the oversight panel, has indicated the interview transcripts will be released to the public following the sessions.

The nature of Hillary Clinton’s relationship with Epstein remains largely unknown.

Records show Bill Clinton used Epstein’s private aircraft multiple times during the early 2000s following his presidency. The former president has denied any misconduct while acknowledging regret about the association.

Chairman Comer has stated that White House visitor logs show Epstein made 17 visits during Clinton’s presidential tenure.

Former President Trump maintained social connections with Epstein throughout the 1990s and 2000s, ending before Epstein’s 2008 conviction for soliciting underage prostitution. Comer claims the committee’s findings do not suggest Trump involvement in wrongdoing.

The Justice Department has made public over 3 million pages of Epstein-related materials in recent months, following congressional mandate.

While Justice officials have highlighted photographs involving Bill Clinton, the released documents have exposed Epstein’s connections to numerous business executives and political figures, including Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and Tesla’s Elon Musk.

Internationally, the document releases have sparked criminal inquiries involving Britain’s Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, previously known as the Duke of York, along with other high-profile individuals.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement faces significant challenges screening new employees during an unprecedented hiring campaign, according to an internal agency communication obtained by Reuters Monday.

The message, distributed to supervisors within ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations unit, outlined concerns about the “high volume of new hires” and delayed security screenings creating complications for regional offices when misconduct allegations surface regarding actions prior to ICE employment.

“If a Field Office receives derogatory information about a newly hired employee’s conduct prior to ERO employment (e.g., termination or resignation in lieu of termination from another law enforcement agency for misconduct), please refer the matter to IIU,” the communication stated, referring to the agency’s Integrity Investigations Unit.

The Trump administration rapidly expanded ICE’s workforce last year, adding thousands of officers to support the president’s mass deportation initiative. The Department of Homeland Security reported hiring 12,000 new ICE officers to supplement an existing workforce of 10,000, though federal employment records show smaller numbers, resulting in a net increase of 6,200 positions after accounting for departures.

DHS representative Lauren Bis disputed suggestions that ICE was having difficulty processing security clearances, characterizing the email as informational guidance for supervisors.

“This was not highlighting any vetting problems, but rather a reminder of the services and resources ICE provides supervisors,” Bis explained. “All new hires go through extensive background checks and continuous vetting when they are hired including criminal and financial checks.”

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller reportedly pressed aggressively during conference calls for ICE to meet ambitious hiring targets before the end of last year, according to an administration source.

“The president’s entire team has worked to make sure his agenda is implemented,” a White House representative responded when asked about Miller’s involvement.

Congressional Democrats and former ICE leadership have expressed concerns that accelerated recruitment could allow unsuitable or problematic candidates to join the agency’s ranks.

Senator Dick Durbin wrote to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem last year, drawing parallels to Border Patrol’s hiring surge in the 2000s that preceded increased misconduct allegations. The Illinois Democrat, who serves as Senate Majority Whip, predicted ICE’s expansion would “likely result in increased officer misconduct.”

Claire Trickler-McNulty, who served as an ICE official during the Biden administration, emphasized that thorough background investigations help verify candidates’ law-abiding history and identify potential vulnerabilities to coercion.

“To speed, shortcut, or limit background checks or training puts the public and other law enforcement officers at risk,” she warned.

Multiple recruits have encountered problems after being hired, according to current and former federal officials who spoke anonymously about internal operations.

Two trainees were identified as possible MS-13 gang members based on their tattoos while attending the training facility in Georgia last year, one former official disclosed. Additionally, at least five other trainees were terminated after ICE discovered active arrest warrants against them.

“They weren’t completing the background checks before they would get to the academy,” the former official revealed.

A current official reported that one new hire was removed from an ICE facility in February after background check issues were discovered.

ICE does not release statistics on dismissed recruits. However, NBC News reported in October that the agency had terminated more than 200 recruits since the hiring surge commenced, citing internal records.

At one location, approximately one-third of new employees are awaiting completion of stalled background investigations, including some who have already finished training, according to the current official.

Vice President JD Vance is scheduled to make a Thursday trip to Wisconsin’s third congressional district as the Trump administration works to safeguard Republican control of the House of Representatives before this November’s midterm contests.

The vice president will make his stop in Plover, located within the congressional district currently held by Republican Representative Derrick Van Orden. This seat represents one of two GOP-controlled districts in Wisconsin that Democratic challengers are actively pursuing this election cycle.

Vance plans to conduct a tour of a local manufacturing business as a way to reinforce President Trump’s economic priorities following Tuesday’s State of the Union speech.

In that address, Trump addressed a wide range of pocketbook concerns affecting American families, including housing costs, healthcare expenses, and utility payments. However, the president did not fully recognize that numerous citizens continue to face challenges with elevated living expenses, particularly regarding food and housing costs.

Political strategists within the Republican Party have cautioned that failing to deliver a stronger anti-inflation message could put GOP congressional control at risk come November.

The vice president’s Wisconsin visit represents part of a broader White House strategy to deploy the president and senior administration members across crucial swing regions to promote Trump’s economic platform. Trump himself is slated to travel to Texas later this week for an event centered on energy policy and economic matters.

Democratic Party officials announced this week they are increasing their financial investment in Van Orden’s Wisconsin district, where the incumbent secured reelection in 2024 with a margin of less than three percentage points.

Trump secured victory in this district by seven points during the 2024 election, contributing to his successful sweep of key battleground states. The president gave his endorsement to Van Orden for the 2026 race ten months prior.

This marks Vance’s second appearance in the congressional district. He previously visited La Crosse, Wisconsin last August to advocate for President Trump’s tax and spending legislation.

Law enforcement professionals are voicing concerns about the preparation standards for Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers as the agency increases its presence in communities nationwide.

The questions surrounding ICE training protocols come at a time when the federal immigration enforcement agency is expanding its workforce and deploying additional personnel to urban areas across the country.

Industry experts in law enforcement are scrutinizing whether current educational and preparation methods adequately equip new immigration officers for the complexities of field work in diverse communities.

WASHINGTON — A fresh national survey reveals significant public concern about Iran’s nuclear capabilities, even as Americans express doubts about President Donald Trump’s decision-making on overseas military operations during ongoing diplomatic talks in Geneva.

The latest research from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research shows roughly half of American adults express high levels of worry that Iran’s atomic program directly threatens the United States. An additional 30% report moderate concern, while only 20% indicate minimal or no worry about the issue.

Researchers gathered data between February 19-23 amid escalating tensions in the Middle East between Washington and Tehran. American officials are working toward an agreement that would restrict Iran’s nuclear development and prevent weapons production, while Iranian leaders maintain they aren’t seeking weapons capability and continue resisting calls to stop uranium processing or surrender their enriched uranium supplies.

The current president, who abandoned a previous Iranian nuclear accord during his earlier administration, has made multiple threats to employ military action against Iran’s atomic facilities. Trump claimed to have “obliterated” the program after a 12-day conflict in June that saw American forces strike Iranian nuclear locations. Tehran has promised retaliation for any attacks. Trump has also issued warnings regarding Iran’s treatment of demonstrators. Officials from both nations have indicated readiness for armed conflict should diplomatic efforts collapse, with America deploying its most substantial Middle Eastern military presence in recent decades.

Survey results show 61% of Americans classify Iran as an adversary of the United States, representing a slight increase from a September 2023 Pearson Institute/AP-NORC study. However, public faith in the president’s foreign policy judgment remains limited, with only approximately 30% of respondents expressing substantial confidence in Trump’s handling of international relationships and military decisions abroad.

Some Republican voters, particularly younger party members, harbor concerns about Trump’s capability to navigate these critical situations appropriately.

This year’s administration has conducted two sets of nuclear discussions with Iran through Omani intermediaries, with additional talks beginning Thursday. Previous negotiations between the countries collapsed following Israel’s involvement in the June military action.

“We are in negotiations with them,” Trump stated during Tuesday evening’s State of the Union speech, delivered after poll completion. “They want to make a deal, but we haven’t heard those secret words: We will never have a nuclear weapon.”

The AP-NORC survey demonstrates substantial American skepticism regarding Trump’s foreign policy judgment. Only about 30% of adults express high confidence in the president’s military decision-making, adversarial relationship management, or nuclear weapons policies. More than half report minimal or no trust in these areas.

Republican respondents show greater confidence than Democrats and Independents in presidential decision-making. Approximately 60% of Republicans express high trust levels in Trump, while roughly 90% of Democrats report low confidence.

Republican support varies by age group. Younger Republicans under 45 show less confidence than older party members in Trump’s military judgment, with about half expressing high trust compared to two-thirds of older Republicans.

Current findings showing 48% of adults expressing high concern about Iran’s nuclear threat align with July 2025 AP-NORC polling, suggesting American opinions remain stable despite recent escalations.

Prior to the June conflict, Iran had been processing uranium to 60% purity levels, approaching weapons-grade concentrations. The International Atomic Energy Agency identified Iran as the only non-nuclear nation enriching uranium to such levels.

Iran continues blocking IAEA inspection requests for sites damaged during June’s military action, raising proliferation concerns among experts.

Concern about Iran’s nuclear development spans party lines, though Republicans currently show higher worry levels. About 56% of Republicans express high concern compared to 44% of Democrats.

Americans maintain predominantly negative views of Iran, with stronger opposition among older citizens.

Approximately 60% of adults classify Iran as an American enemy, up from 53% in the 2023 Pearson/AP-NORC survey. About 30% describe relations as unfriendly but not hostile, while only 10% consider Iran friendly or allied.

Age differences emerge in these perceptions, with only half of Americans under 45 viewing Iran as an enemy compared to 70% of those 45 and older. Generational gaps also appear in nuclear concerns, with about one-third of younger Americans expressing high worry versus 60% of older respondents.

Decades-long tensions over Iran’s nuclear program may explain older Americans’ heightened concern. Nuclear negotiations stalled after Trump’s 2018 decision to withdraw America from Iran’s 2015 international nuclear agreement.

The AP-NORC survey included 1,133 adults interviewed February 19-23 using NORC’s AmeriSpeak Panel, designed to represent the U.S. population. The margin of error is plus or minus 4.0 percentage points.

The Himalayan nation of Nepal is gearing up for a pivotal national election scheduled for March 5, marking the country’s first vote since massive anti-corruption demonstrations led by young people forced the resignation of former Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli’s administration in September.

Approximately 19 million citizens out of Nepal’s total population of 30 million are registered to participate in the upcoming election for the 275-seat national assembly. Following last year’s widespread protests that resulted in 77 deaths and over 2,000 injuries, election officials added roughly one million new voters to the rolls, with young people making up the majority of these fresh registrations.

The electoral system will fill 165 positions through direct competition where candidates receiving the highest vote totals will claim victory, while the remaining seats will be distributed using proportional representation based on each party’s overall vote percentage. Election officials report that 65 different political organizations have registered to participate in the contest.

Beyond addressing government corruption, economic concerns dominate the campaign agenda, particularly job creation in a nation where approximately 20 percent of residents live below the poverty line and youth unemployment remains persistently high, according to political observers.

The landlocked country’s relationships with neighboring giants India and China will significantly influence the election outcome as Nepal seeks to maintain diplomatic balance between these regional powers. India currently handles two-thirds of Nepal’s international commerce, while China manages 14 percent and has provided loans exceeding $130 million to the impoverished nation, World Bank data shows.

Leading the race for prime minister is 35-year-old Balendra Shah, a former rapper turned politician who previously served as Kathmandu’s mayor and represents the moderate Rastriya Swatantra Party. His main challenger in the Jhapa 5 district is 74-year-old Oli from the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist–Leninist), who has held the prime minister position four times and seeks to return despite struggling to reconnect with younger voters who removed him from power just six months earlier.

Additional candidates include 49-year-old Gagan Thapa from the centrist Nepali Congress party and 71-year-old Pushpa Kamal Dahal, who has served as prime minister three times and currently heads the Nepali Communist Party. Oli has maintained liberal communist positions since the 1990s, while Dahal previously commanded a violent Maoist rebellion for ten years before transitioning to conventional politics in 2006.

NEWARK, N.J. — Federal immigration officers were involved in a pursuit that ended in a multi-car collision Wednesday in New Jersey’s most populous city, according to local officials.

Newark Mayor Ras Baraka announced through social media that Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents tried to stop a van when the operator chose to escape. The mayor explained that federal agents pursued the vehicle, which led to a collision involving multiple cars, one of which had three children as passengers.

According to Baraka, the van’s operator sustained injuries and was transported to a medical facility.

The severity of the driver’s injuries remains unknown, as does the reason ICE was attempting to apprehend the individual. Baraka clarified that Newark’s police department had no involvement in the federal investigation and only responded to handle the accident scene.

Representatives from the mayor’s office, Newark police, the Department of Homeland Security, and ICE have not yet provided responses to requests for additional information.

However, the Democratic mayor used his statement on X to condemn ICE’s conduct as irresponsible and hazardous. He pointed out that New Jersey’s state regulations prohibit law enforcement from pursuing vehicles unless a suspect represents an immediate danger.

“Federal authorities should adhere to local laws regarding vehicle pursuits and exercise common sense,” Baraka said. “Based on the damage they are inflicting on our communities, ICE has no business engaging in chases at anytime, anywhere — but especially in densely populated areas, and on roads still being cleared from a significant snowstorm.”

Last May, Baraka faced arrest and trespassing charges during a demonstration outside Delany Hall, a recently opened federal immigration detention facility located in his city. Those charges were subsequently dropped.

A high-ranking Navy officer has been dismissed from a top Pentagon leadership role after serving just two months in the position, according to sources with knowledge of the decision.

Vice Admiral Fred Kacher was ousted from his role directing Joint Staff operations, having assumed the position in December. Two sources briefed on the matter confirmed the removal to Reuters on Wednesday, with one indicating that Kacher simply wasn’t well-suited for the demanding role.

When contacted about the dismissal, Pentagon officials acknowledged that Kacher would be transitioning back to regular Navy duties. The military confirmed his departure from the Joint Staff position.

General Dan Caine, who serves as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, issued a diplomatic statement regarding the leadership change. “We are deeply grateful for Vice Adm. Kacher’s dedicated service to the Joint Force and his contributions to the Joint Staff,” Caine said in his official remarks.

The brief tenure highlights the challenging nature of senior Pentagon positions, where military leaders must navigate complex inter-service coordination and high-level strategic planning.

A federal court in Boston has declared unconstitutional a Trump-era immigration policy that enabled the government to quickly deport migrants to nations other than their home countries without adequate legal protections.

U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy delivered his final decision on Wednesday, invalidating the Department of Homeland Security’s controversial deportation practice in a legal battle expected to reach the Supreme Court.

Murphy, nominated by President Joe Biden, delayed implementation of his order for two weeks to give federal officials time to file an appeal, citing the case’s “importance and its unusual history.”

The Supreme Court has already weighed in on this matter twice, initially overturning Murphy’s earlier temporary block on the policy in April, then later permitting eight individuals to be transported to South Sudan.

During the period when Murphy’s initial order was active, it significantly hampered the government’s ability to send migrants to alternative destinations including South Sudan, Libya, and El Salvador.

The current legal challenge originated from a group lawsuit targeting a Homeland Security directive first outlined in March documentation and later expanded through July guidance. This policy enabled quick deportations to third nations for migrants who had received final removal orders from immigration courts.

Legal representatives filed the case on behalf of migrants facing removal to countries that were not originally specified in their deportation orders or mentioned during their immigration hearings.

Under this policy, migrants could be sent to alternative nations if immigration officials either obtained reliable diplomatic guarantees that deportees would face no persecution or torture, or provided migrants with as little as six hours advance notice of their transfer to such locations.

Justice Department attorneys defended the practice, claiming it met immigration law standards and provided adequate due process protections for migrants, who they said could voice concerns about specific third countries during their court proceedings.

Government lawyers contended that finding alternative destinations was crucial for removing the “worst of the worst” – migrants whose origin countries rejected them due to criminal backgrounds.

DENVER (AP) — State election officials received assurance Wednesday from a federal homeland security administrator that immigration enforcement personnel will stay away from voting sites during the upcoming November midterm elections, addressing concerns raised by Democratic leaders about potential federal interference.

During a conference call with state secretaries of state, Heather Honey, who holds the position of deputy assistant secretary for election integrity, stated that “any suggestion that ICE will be present at any polling location is simply not true,” as reported by Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, a Democrat.

The commitment was also confirmed by a representative for Oregon Secretary of State Tobias Read, while Kentucky’s Republican Secretary of State Michael Adams shared the assurance on social media platform X, crediting “DHS” as the source.

The Department of Homeland Security has not provided a response to requests for additional comment.

Honey, who has previously supported unfounded theories claiming President Donald Trump was wrongfully denied victory in the 2020 election, participated in the discussion alongside officials from the FBI, U.S. Election Assistance Commission, Postal Service and additional federal departments to coordinate midterm election preparations.

While such coordination meetings typically occur without controversy, this year’s session takes place against a backdrop of actions by the Trump administration that have raised alarm among Democratic state election leaders.

The Justice Department has initiated legal proceedings seeking comprehensive voter information from states without providing clear justification for these data requests. Meanwhile, Trump continues to promote debunked allegations about widespread electoral fraud in 2020 while directing his administration to pursue investigations.

Federal investigators conducted a raid earlier this month at the Fulton County, Georgia election office, a Democratic-leaning area encompassing Atlanta, to confiscate voting materials and ballots from the 2020 election, based on thoroughly discredited conspiracy theories.

For months, Democratic officials and civil rights attorneys nationwide have been developing response strategies to address potential Trump administration interference in midterm voting procedures and vote tallying processes.

The participation of Honey in the call highlighted the changed landscape facing election administrators. Under the U.S. Constitution, individual states rather than federal authorities maintain responsibility for conducting elections, with most states delegating this authority to elected secretaries of state.

Call participants reported that Democratic secretaries of state questioned Honey extensively about the Trump administration’s reduction of election security funding, its initiative to identify non-citizen voters — an already prohibited practice that occurs infrequently — and concerns about federal law enforcement presence at polling locations this fall.

The White House has previously dismissed these concerns, pointing to the absence of disruptions during last year’s elections when Democrats achieved strong results. During recent congressional testimony, leadership from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection both responded “No, sir” when questioned about involvement in voting precinct security efforts.

Democratic leaders emphasize that Trump previously attempted to reverse his 2020 electoral defeat, issued pardons to individuals who stormed the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, in his support, and has appointed administration officials who assisted his efforts to challenge the 2020 results.

WASHINGTON — Federal Bureau of Investigation officials have dismissed more agents involved in investigating President Donald Trump, specifically targeting personnel who participated in the classified documents case, according to sources with knowledge of the situation who spoke Wednesday.

These dismissals represent part of an extensive staff overhaul led by Director Kash Patel, a Trump selection who has removed dozens of bureau personnel over the past year. Those terminated either took part in Trump-related investigations or were viewed as opposing the current administration’s priorities. The Department of Justice has conducted similar widespread dismissals of attorneys since Trump returned to office last year.

The FBI Agents Association has denounced these terminations as illegal and dangerous to America’s security.

“These actions weaken the Bureau by stripping away critical expertise and destabilizing the workforce, undermining trust in leadership and jeopardizing the Bureau’s ability to meet its recruitment goals — ultimately putting the nation at greater risk,” the association said in a statement.

The most recent wave of dismissals affected personnel who assisted in examining Trump’s possession of classified materials at his Mar-a-Lago estate, an investigation that featured a widely publicized FBI raid of the Florida location and culminated in federal charges against the current president for retaining confidential government documents from his initial presidency and blocking official recovery attempts.

Multiple sources confirmed these dismissals to The Associated Press under condition of anonymity due to restrictions on discussing personnel decisions publicly. Several sources indicated approximately 10 employees lost their jobs, with one source stating at least 10 were dismissed.

The bureau has previously terminated agents involved in a different investigation examining Trump’s attempts to reverse the 2020 election outcome. This probe also generated criminal charges, but similar to the Mar-a-Lago matter, special counsel Jack Smith dropped the case following Trump’s November 2024 electoral victory due to established Justice Department policies preventing the prosecution of serving presidents.

These dismissals became public on the same day Patel told Reuters that the FBI during the Biden presidency had requested his phone records along with those of current White House chief of staff Susie Wiles. Patel indicated this occurred during 2022 and 2023 when both were private citizens.

Federal prosecutors subpoenaed Patel in 2022 for grand jury testimony in Washington regarding the Mar-a-Lago investigation, and he testified after receiving immunity protection, as previously reported by the AP.

Two Delaware congressional leaders are demanding answers from the British government about a controversial directive that would have forced Apple to compromise its encryption security measures.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan and Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Brian Mast sent a formal request Wednesday to British Interior Minister Shabana Mahmood, seeking a comprehensive briefing about the technical capability notice that was issued to Apple.

The directive, which Britain ultimately withdrew according to U.S. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard’s August statement, would have required Apple to develop backdoor access to its encrypted user information.

Both congressional leaders had previously expressed concerns that such requirements could create vulnerabilities that cybercriminals and authoritarian regimes might exploit. They have also been vocal critics of Big Tech regulations imposed by European authorities.

In their Wednesday correspondence, which Reuters obtained, the lawmakers emphasized the need for transparency in the matter.

“For there to be a ‘mature and informed public debate,’ it is imperative that the Committees fully understand the actions taken by the UK government with respect to the TCN issued to Apple,” Jordan and Mast stated in their joint letter.

The representatives are requesting expedited scheduling for the briefing, writing: “We respectfully ask that the Home Office and UK Embassy to the United States arrange for the briefing to occur as soon as possible but no later than 10:00 a.m. ET on March 11, 2026.”

Apple had contested the British government’s technical capability notice through the UK’s Investigatory Powers Tribunal. The technology giant has consistently maintained its position against creating such access points, stating it would never incorporate backdoor capabilities into its encrypted products or services.

WASHINGTON – Federal immigration officials will not be positioned at voting sites during this year’s elections, the Department of Homeland Security confirmed Wednesday during a briefing with state election administrators.

The clarification came after state officials across the country sought assurance about potential Immigration and Customs Enforcement activities near polling places. Heather Honey, who serves as deputy assistant secretary for election integrity at DHS, addressed these concerns directly.

“Any suggestion that ICE will be present at any polling location is simply not true,” Honey stated during the virtual conference call, according to Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes who participated in the discussion.

The topic arose when California Secretary of State Shirley Weber inquired whether states would receive advance notice of any immigration enforcement activities planned near voting locations, her office confirmed.

Maine’s top election official, Secretary of State Shenna Bellows, emphasized during the briefing that deploying ICE agents to polling sites would violate constitutional protections.

However, a DHS spokesperson acknowledged to reporters that immigration agents might need to respond to a polling location “if an active public safety threat endangered” the site, but only for targeted enforcement actions addressing immediate safety concerns.

The November midterm elections will determine control of Congress and numerous state offices, with primary contests beginning next month to select party nominees.

These assurances come as the current administration pursues heightened immigration enforcement policies that have drawn criticism from advocacy groups and Democratic lawmakers, including operations conducted by federal agents in protective gear.

The Trump administration is preventing Venezuela from covering legal defense expenses for their former leader Nicolás Maduro, who faces drug trafficking charges in New York, according to his attorney who argues this could violate his constitutional right to legal representation.

Defense lawyer Barry Pollack informed a federal judge in Manhattan through an email last week that the U.S. Treasury Department had prevented authorization for legal fees that Venezuela’s government is obligated to cover for Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores according to their nation’s laws and traditions. This correspondence became part of the public court file on Wednesday.

Both Maduro and his spouse have been detained in New York without the possibility of bail since their capture from their Venezuelan residence on January 3 during a covert nighttime operation conducted by U.S. military personnel. Both individuals have entered not guilty pleas.

This dramatic arrest, which came after months of military preparation in the Caribbean region, has enabled the Trump administration to wield significant control over Maduro’s successor, Vice President and current acting President Delcy Rodriguez. Facing U.S. pressure, Rodriguez has quickly moved to welcome American investment in Venezuela’s petroleum sector, release political detainees, and restore direct diplomatic contact with Washington — a relationship that had been severed when the first Trump administration closed the U.S. embassy in Caracas during 2019.

According to Pollack’s email, the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control, which oversees Venezuela-related sanctions, had initially approved payment of legal expenses by the Venezuelan government on January 9.

However, the Trump administration withdrew this approval in under three hours “without explanation,” while maintaining authorization for the first lady’s legal representation costs, Pollack stated.

This legal fee controversy is directly connected to American foreign policy objectives. The initial Trump administration severed diplomatic relations with Maduro in 2019, instead recognizing the opposition leader of the National Assembly as Venezuela’s rightful president. The Biden administration followed a similar approach.

Nonetheless, permitting Rodriguez’s administration to fund Maduro’s defense could undermine prosecutors’ courtroom efforts to challenge the former leader’s claims that his arrest was unlawful and that he enjoys immunity from U.S. prosecution as a foreign head of state under domestic and international law.

A 25-page criminal indictment charges Maduro and co-conspirators with collaborating alongside drug cartels and military officials to enable the transportation of thousands of tons of cocaine into the United States. Both defendants could receive life sentences upon conviction.

The alleged conspiracy included Maduro and his wife ordering kidnappings, physical assaults, and murders of individuals who owed drug money, according to the indictment. This reportedly included executing a local drug leader in Caracas.

The Treasury Department, White House, and Justice Department did not respond to requests for comment.

Pollack indicated he requested the Office of Foreign Assets Control on February 11 to restore the original authorization and allow Venezuela to fulfill its responsibility for Maduro’s defense expenses.

The attorney noted that Maduro “cannot otherwise afford counsel” and will seek judicial assistance to fund his defense.

Pollack argued the United States was “interfering with Mr. Maduro’s ability to retain counsel and, therefore, his right under the Sixth Amendment to counsel of his choice.”

WASHINGTON — Federal officials confirmed Wednesday they are examining whether certain documents from the Jeffrey Epstein investigation were improperly excluded from public release, following media reports that key records were missing from the files.

The review comes after multiple news outlets discovered that FBI interview summaries were absent from the extensive collection of Epstein-related documents the government made public. These missing records reportedly involve unverified allegations made by an unnamed woman against President Donald Trump.

According to news reports, the woman contacted authorities following Epstein’s 2019 arrest, claiming she had been sexually assaulted by both Trump and Epstein during the 1980s when she was underage. Trump has consistently rejected any wrongdoing connected to Epstein.

“Several individuals and news outlets have recently flagged files related to documents produced to Ghislaine Maxwell in discovery of her criminal case that they claim appear to be missing,” the Justice Department stated on social media. “As with all documents that have been flagged by the public, the Department is currently reviewing files within that category of the production.”

Maxwell, who served as Epstein’s long-time associate, is currently serving two decades in prison following her conviction on sex trafficking charges.

Federal officials indicated that any document determined to have been wrongfully withheld and required under the law mandating the files’ public release would be published accordingly.

The controversy centers on a series of 2019 FBI interviews with the accuser. While authorities reportedly spoke with the woman four times, only one interview summary appeared in the publicly available documents, according to recent news coverage.

Journalist Roger Sollenberger first reported the missing records on Substack, with NPR also covering the issue. Subsequently, major outlets including The New York Times, MS Now, and CNN have documented the omissions.

Democratic Representative Robert Garcia, who holds the ranking position on the House Oversight Committee, announced his panel would examine the withheld documents. Garcia stated he had examined unredacted evidence logs and could “confirm that the DOJ appears to have illegally withheld FBI interviews” with the woman making the accusations.

Last month, the Justice Department announced it was making public over 3 million pages of Epstein-related materials. Epstein died by suicide in a New York detention facility in 2019 while facing sex trafficking charges. Officials explained they aimed for transparency while reserving the right to withhold certain materials, including those that could expose victims, duplicate records, legally privileged information, or documents tied to active investigations.

“Some of the documents contain untrue and sensationalist claims against President Trump that were submitted to the FBI right before the 2020 election. To be clear, the claims are unfounded and false, and if they have a shred of credibility, they certainly would have been weaponized against President Trump already,” the department stated when initially releasing the records.

The document redaction process quickly showed problems, with officials pulling back materials flagged by victims and their attorneys, plus a “substantial number” of additional documents the government identified on its own.

Legal representatives for Epstein accusers informed a New York federal judge last month that nearly 100 victims had their lives “turned upside down” due to inadequate redactions in the government’s latest document release. The exposed materials included nude photographs showing victims’ faces, along with names, email addresses, and other personal details that were either left unredacted or inadequately concealed.

The publicly released files contained other unsubstantiated allegations against Trump and additional public figures. In Wednesday’s social media statement, the department did not explain why documents related to this particular accuser might have been excluded.

WASHINGTON – A leading House Democrat is charging that the Justice Department has deliberately concealed FBI interview records involving sexual abuse allegations against President Donald Trump by an underage victim.

Rep. Robert Garcia, who serves as the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, stated Wednesday that he has verified news reports indicating DOJ held back more than 50 pages of documents concerning the woman’s claims. These materials were excluded from the over 3 million Jeffrey Epstein-related documents the department has made public.

According to Garcia, the concealed records demonstrate that federal investigators treated the allegations with seriousness, conducting four separate interviews with the accuser. However, authorities only made public the initial interview, which did not contain specific details about her accusations involving Trump.

“The fact that DOJ is suppressing documents alleging President Trump’s commission of sexual abuse of an underage victim only heightens my genuine concerns about a White House cover-up,” Garcia stated in his correspondence to the department.

Justice Department officials responded that they are conducting a review to determine whether any Epstein-connected documents were inappropriately withheld, promising to make them available to the public if deemed suitable.

DOJ officials have cautioned that some previously released materials contain unsubstantiated allegations and sensational claims targeting Trump.

The department maintains it has kept certain materials confidential to protect the identities of Epstein’s victims and avoid compromising active investigations.

Among the materials DOJ has made public are photographs showing Trump alongside several women with obscured faces, plus a provocative message to Epstein featuring the silhouette of an unclothed woman that appears to carry Trump’s signature.

Court records and witness testimony from Ghislaine Maxwell’s 2021 prosecution reveal Trump used Epstein’s aircraft on multiple occasions. In one electronic message, Epstein stated that Trump “knew about the girls,” though the meaning remains unclear.

White House representative Abigail Jackson maintained that Trump has been “totally exonerated on anything relating to Epstein.”

Trump maintained close social connections with Epstein throughout the 1990s and 2000s but has consistently denied awareness of the financier’s criminal activities. He claims their relationship ended prior to Epstein’s 2008 conviction for soliciting prostitution from a minor. Trump disputes ever using Epstein’s aircraft and maintains the suggestive note is fraudulent.

WASHINGTON — Conservative critics believe they may have found the controversy that could finally bring down the Clinton political dynasty. After initially resisting calls to appear before Congress, the former first couple now faces another major political battle as they prepare to use their decades of experience to challenge their opponents.

Bill and Hillary Clinton are returning to a familiar 1990s-style political warfare.

The former president and secretary of state are scheduled to appear before a House committee Thursday and Friday as part of an ongoing Jeffrey Epstein investigation. This arrangement came after Republicans made it clear they would pursue contempt charges if the Clintons continued to refuse cooperation. For this politically seasoned duo, it represents yet another Capitol Hill confrontation featuring the same elements that have defined their careers: questionable decisions, sexual misconduct allegations, financial dealings, and power struggles.

When Bill Clinton ran for president in 1992, he described his candidacy as offering voters “two for the price of one,” signaling a presidential partnership unlike any previous administration, featuring a first lady with professional achievements matching her husband’s. This partnership has enabled the Clintons to survive numerous controversies, including deeply personal scandals that might have destroyed other marriages. As his political career wound down, hers gained momentum with her election to represent New York in the U.S. Senate, followed by her role as secretary of state and her 2016 Democratic presidential nomination.

Long-time Clinton observers note that this latest controversy demonstrates how the couple — shaped by the political upheaval of Vietnam and Watergate — has consistently found itself at the center of cultural battles. With the Epstein investigation continuing to develop globally, the Clintons once again find themselves caught up in a major scandal.

“It’s kind of a sad but fitting coda to extraordinary political lives,” said David Maraniss, who has written two biographies of Bill Clinton.

Neither Clinton has been accused of any criminal activity related to Epstein, the convicted sex offender who died by suicide in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges.

However, Epstein maintained connections with Bill Clinton over many years, including multiple White House visits during the 1990s according to official records. Following Clinton’s presidency, Epstein became involved in his charitable work, and the former president took several trips aboard Epstein’s private aircraft.

“Traveling on Epstein’s plane was not worth the years of questioning afterward,” Bill Clinton wrote in his 2024 memoir. “I wish I had never met him.”

The Republican-controlled House Oversight Committee issued subpoenas for both Clintons last summer. The 79-year-old former president and 78-year-old former secretary of state mostly avoided public discussion of the matter for months, but maintaining silence became more difficult in December when Bill Clinton appeared prominently in the initial release of Epstein documents.

The thousands of released documents included photographs showing him aboard a private aircraft, including one image with an unidentified woman whose face was obscured sitting next to him with her arm around him. Another photograph depicted Bill Clinton in a swimming pool alongside Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s longtime associate and British socialite, with another person whose face was redacted. A third image showed Bill Clinton in a hot tub with an unidentified woman whose face was also obscured.

Committee Chairman Rep. James Comer of Kentucky warned he would pursue contempt charges against the Clintons if they failed to comply with the subpoenas, which would mark an unprecedented action since no former president has ever been forced to testify before Congress. Donald Trump cited this precedent between his presidential terms to resist a subpoena from the committee investigating the January 6, 2021 Capitol attack.

Although the photographs of Bill Clinton lacked context, they highlighted how his political potential has consistently been overshadowed by personal misconduct.

The same 1992 campaign that symbolized the Baby Boom generation’s political emergence was also plagued by allegations of an extramarital affair with Gennifer Flowers. A presidency largely characterized by economic growth nearly collapsed when Clinton faced impeachment in 1998 for perjury and obstruction of justice after denying a sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky.

In each instance, many Republicans believed they had finally gained an advantage over the Clintons. Yet each time, the Clintons managed to escape the pressure.

Former Republican congressman Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas, who served as a House manager during Clinton’s impeachment proceedings, characterized the couple as “a smart lawyer and brilliant communicator.”

A consistent strategy emerged with each crisis: the Clintons would vehemently deny accusations and frequently discredited women making claims against them. They would portray the Republican Party as villainous while redirecting public focus toward more positive topics like the era’s strong economy.

Bill Clinton, famous for telling voters “I feel your pain,” consistently maintained public connection. He actually achieved some of his highest presidential approval ratings during his impeachment investigation and trial, with approximately 70% of Americans approving of his job performance.

Hillary Clinton similarly outmaneuvered Republicans who saw opportunity in her response to a 2012 attack on a Libyan compound that resulted in four American deaths. She emerged from an 11-hour televised congressional hearing in 2015 appearing composed. Even the Republican committee chairman investigating the attack acknowledged uncertainty about whether she had revealed new information about what many in his party viewed as scandalous.

That experience is shaping the Clintons’ approach to this week’s testimony. Hillary Clinton has been particularly outspoken about demanding public hearings rather than the private sessions Comer currently plans.

“We have nothing to hide,” she told the BBC earlier this month.

Bill Clinton’s communications team has adopted an aggressive approach reminiscent of the political “war room” strategy popularized during the 1992 campaign to counter negative coverage.

One statement accused Comer of “lying in every appearance he’s made this week.” Another mockingly presented GOP Representatives Scott Perry of Pennsylvania and Andy Biggs of Arizona with a “hypocrisy award of the day,” pointing out how these Oversight committee members ignored subpoenas from the January 6 panel.

The Clintons also published a four-page letter to Comer on social media defiantly criticizing a process they described as “literally designed to result in our imprisonment.”

Echoing their 1990s strategy of redirecting attention, the letter criticized the White House for dismantling institutions, implementing severe immigration enforcement, and pardoning Capitol riot participants.

The Clintons’ political ascent coincided with talk radio’s emergence as a political force, with Rush Limbaugh using his daily program to constantly attack the White House. Today, conservative podcast hosts like Benny Johnson have assumed Limbaugh’s role and celebrated when the House panel moved to hold the couple in contempt last month.

“Do you understand Donald Trump made good on his oldest promise arguably which is he told all of us 10 years ago that Hillary Clinton would be going to jail?” Johnson said last month.

However, some circumstances have shifted.

The unwavering Democratic support the Clintons previously enjoyed in Congress has weakened as newer lawmakers have taken office — nine Democrats joined Republicans on the House committee to advance the contempt resolution. Trump, who faces his own scrutiny regarding Epstein connections and may be concerned about establishing a precedent for compelling former presidents to testify, has shown unusual sympathy for the Clintons.

He told NBC News that it “bothers me that somebody is going after Bill Clinton.” He has called Hillary Clinton “a very capable woman.”

Even Hutchinson, who helped build the case for Bill Clinton’s impeachment, expressed compassion for the couple.

“It’s frustrating and disappointing that President Clinton and Secretary Clinton are having to go through this fact-finding ordeal,” he said. “That’s difficult for them.”

During Tuesday evening’s State of the Union speech, President Donald Trump orchestrated what many are calling a calculated political ambush targeting Democratic lawmakers. Midway through his address to Congress, Trump issued a direct challenge: rise to your feet if you believe safeguarding American citizens, rather than ‘illegal aliens,’ should be the government’s primary obligation.

The orchestrated confrontation may become the defining moment of what was already an exceptionally lengthy presidential address. Trump’s Republican supporters are certainly hoping it will be.

Democratic members of Congress who chose to attend the speech found themselves trapped in an impossible scenario. They could either show support for a president their party opposes, or risk appearing unpatriotic in what was clearly designed as campaign material.

‘One of the great things about the State of Union is how it gives Americans a chance to see clearly what their representatives really believe,’ Trump declared. He then issued his ultimatum: ‘If you agree with this statement, then stand up and show your support: The first duty of the American government is to protect American citizens. Not illegal aliens.’

The president’s words immediately created visible battle lines throughout the congressional chamber, reflecting the broader divisions across America.

Trump’s entire speech demonstrated the unique theatrical power available to any sitting president, particularly one with his background in entertainment. He honored military veterans while connecting their service to America’s upcoming 250th birthday celebration. He highlighted the U.S. men’s hockey team’s Olympic victory and delivered emotional moments, including introducing the widow of murdered activist Charlie Kirk.

However, no other segment of the address generated the impact of Trump’s sit-or-stand ultimatum.

Vice President JD Vance and House Speaker Mike Johnson immediately jumped up behind the president. Republican legislators throughout the chamber followed suit with enthusiastic applause. Nearly every Democratic lawmaker remained in their seats, some appearing uncomfortable while others stared ahead stoically.

‘Isn’t that a shame?’ Trump responded. ‘You should be ashamed of yourself, not standing up.’

The confrontation exemplified Trump’s signature style as a former reality TV personality who has incorporated dramatic moments into his political leadership. His next test will be using this divisive approach to help Republicans in upcoming midterm elections, as the party works to maintain congressional control.

The moment seemed tailor-made for Trump supporters to share across social media platforms and preserve for future campaign advertisements. White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller posted on X: ‘The entire Democrat Party disqualified itself from government service in this one exchange. Nothing like it in U.S. history.’

Fox News host Lawrence Jones commented Wednesday morning: ‘This is your Democratic Party right here. The entire speech was riddled with test questions for Democrats.’ He argued Democrats don’t view people ‘with different stripes’ as legitimate Americans.

CNN analyst Van Jones dismissed the moment as pure theatrics. ‘If he would have said ‘Stand up if you like puppies,’ they would have said, ‘We like kittens.’ I mean, there was no way they were going to stand up. He was just trying to make Democrats look bad.’

While gathering reactions from Saginaw, Michigan residents, Jones questioned a panel member about what he would have done as a Democrat in that situation. The man avoided directly answering initially. When pressed again, he replied: ‘I would have respected our country and I would have stood to my standards. I would have stayed to who I am.’

During a Fox News interview Wednesday, host Bill Hemmer asked Pennsylvania Democratic Senator John Fetterman whether he stood during that particular moment.

Fetterman explained he stood when Trump recognized a crime victim’s mother, a freed Venezuelan political prisoner, and Erika Kirk. He also stood for military veterans. However, he avoided directly answering Hemmer’s specific question about the controversial challenge.

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer deflected when CNN asked about the moment. ‘We agree we need to protect Americans,’ Schumer said. ‘He’s not. By his reckless ICE agency in Minnesota, two Americans were killed. Americans are being pulled out of their car and beaten.’

The confrontation showcased Trump’s television communication abilities, developed during his years starring in ‘The Apprentice’ before entering politics, according to Robert Thompson, director of Syracuse University’s Bleier Center for Television and Popular Culture. ‘However we feel about the politics and craziness,’ Thompson explained, ‘he has a real sense of rhetorical timing. He can play a room.’

Thompson noted that Democrats were caught unprepared, forced into a role they never agreed to play. With more time to consider their response, he suggested, they might have simply rolled their eyes and stood up anyway.

That approach might have worked if Trump had only mentioned the government’s duty to protect American citizens, said Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania.

But Trump went further than that. By framing the choice as citizens versus ‘illegal aliens’ — terminology many find offensive — he changed the entire dynamic, Jamieson explained. While the challenge may have energized Trump’s base supporters, she predicted independents and Democrats would recognize it as a trap.

‘I don’t think the Democrats had any choice,’ Jamieson concluded. ‘But here’s a potential implication: You may see a higher number of Democrats not attending future State of the Union addresses.’

Democratic strategist Xochitl Hinojosa argued her party couldn’t participate in characterizing any immigrant as subhuman. While Trump achieved a visual moment ‘that might end up being on Fox News all day,’ she said it doesn’t alter negative public opinion about his immigration policies and the ICE operation in Minneapolis where two Americans died.

David Axelrod, former President Barack Obama’s communications director, said Trump’s objective was provoking a reaction. He dismissed concerns that Democrats made a lasting error, even if Trump achieved his immediate goal.

‘He’s on the defense now’ regarding the economy and immigration issues, Axelrod observed. ‘It will be interesting to see how it plays out.’

Democratic strategist Antjuan Seawright from South Carolina, who occasionally advises House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, characterized the sit-or-stand challenge as a ‘distraction moment’ for Trump.

‘I think,’ Seawright concluded, ‘the members who ignored the president did our party a favor.’

President Donald Trump launched a social media attack Wednesday against two Muslim Democratic congresswomen following their disruptive outbursts during his State of the Union speech the night before.

Representatives Ilhan Omar from Minnesota and Rashida Tlaib from Michigan interrupted Trump’s address Tuesday evening as he highlighted his administration’s strict immigration policies and enforcement measures. The lawmakers yelled “you’re killing Americans” at the president, with Omar also shouting “liar” during the speech.

Trump responded with harsh criticism on his Truth Social platform Wednesday, describing the two representatives as having “the bulging, bloodshot eyes of crazy people, LUNATICS, mentally deranged and sick who, frankly, look like they should be institutionalized.”

“We should send them back from where they came — as fast as possible,” Trump wrote, despite both Omar and Tlaib being United States citizens.

The confrontation stemmed from the lawmakers’ opposition to Trump’s immigration crackdown, which has faced scrutiny after two deadly incidents in January where federal agents fatally shot U.S. citizens in Minnesota. Immigration detention facilities have recorded at least eight deaths since early 2026, adding to 31 fatalities documented last year.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries condemned Trump’s remarks as “xenophobic” and “disgraceful.” Tlaib responded on social media platform X, saying Trump’s comments demonstrated “he is crashing out.”

The Council on American-Islamic Relations labeled the president’s statements as racist. “It’s racist and bigoted to say two Muslim U.S. lawmakers should be sent to the country they were born in or where their ancestors came from based on their criticism of the gunning down of Americans by ICE,” stated CAIR National Deputy Director Edward Ahmed Mitchell.

During Tuesday’s address, Trump repeated accusations against Somali communities regarding fraud and claimed “Somali pirates” had damaged Minnesota. His administration has deployed armed federal immigration officers to Minnesota citing these fraud allegations.

The White House has not provided comment on the latest controversy. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt previously stated that media outlets have unfairly “smeared” the president with racism accusations.

Civil rights organizations argue Trump’s enforcement actions have fostered an atmosphere of fear and that he exploits individual fraud cases to justify broader immigrant targeting. Critics also question his commitment to fighting fraud, pointing to his past pardons of individuals with fraud convictions.

This incident follows recent criticism of Trump after his social media account shared a video containing racist portrayals of former President Barack Obama and former First Lady Michelle Obama.

FBI Director Kash Patel is coming under fire from Democratic lawmakers and other critics who are questioning his use of government-funded aircraft for official travel.

The controversy surrounds concerns about whether taxpayer dollars are being properly utilized for the director’s transportation expenses on federal jets.

Critics are calling for greater transparency and accountability regarding how public funds are being allocated for high-ranking officials’ travel arrangements.

WASHINGTON — On Wednesday, Vice President JD Vance declared that the Trump administration will “temporarily halt” certain Medicaid payments to Minnesota due to suspected fraudulent activity, marking part of what he characterized as an intensive campaign against the abuse of taxpayer dollars.

The Medicaid program serves as America’s healthcare lifeline for individuals with low incomes. By the end of 2025, approximately 70 million Americans were participating in the program across the nation.

Speaking alongside Dr. Mehmet Oz, who heads the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Vance explained the administration was implementing this measure “in order to ensure that the state of Minnesota takes its obligations seriously to be good stewards of the American people’s tax money.”

This Wednesday action represents one component of the Trump administration’s broader initiative to expose fraudulent activities nationwide. The push follows accusations of fraudulent behavior involving daycare facilities operated by Somali residents in Minneapolis, which led to an extensive immigration enforcement operation in the Minnesota city and sparked widespread demonstrations.

Last month, Oz released a social media video claiming billions in fraudulent hospice and home healthcare activities in Los Angeles. California Democratic leaders criticized Oz for the video, where he appeared outside an Armenian bakery while alleging, without supporting documentation, that much of the fraudulent activity was “run by the Russian Armenian mafia.”

During a Wednesday interview on Fox News Channel, Vance revealed that both the Justice Department and Treasury Department would participate in the anti-fraud efforts, including examining tax documentation to identify fraudulent schemes.

“There’s a whole host of tools that we have never used,” Vance stated.

WASHINGTON – Federal officials are withholding portions of Medicaid payments to Minnesota following allegations that federal money earmarked for social welfare programs has been stolen, Vice President JD Vance announced Wednesday.

The suspension of funding comes as the Trump administration investigates suspected fraudulent activity involving federal dollars meant to support the state’s Medicaid program.

Vance made the announcement from Washington on Wednesday, though additional details about the scope of the investigation or the specific amount of funding being withheld were not immediately provided.

Federal investigators secretly collected phone records belonging to two individuals who now hold top positions in the Trump administration, according to revelations made Wednesday by current FBI Director Kash Patel.

Patel disclosed to Reuters that the FBI issued subpoenas for his phone records and those of current White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles during 2022 and 2023, when both were private citizens. The collection occurred during Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into former President Donald Trump’s handling of classified documents and alleged election interference.

The FBI director characterized the record seizure as government overreach under the previous administration, claiming the files were deliberately hidden from oversight.

“It is outrageous and deeply alarming that the previous FBI leadership secretly subpoenaed my own phone records – along with those of now White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles – using flimsy pretexts and burying the entire process in prohibited case files designed to evade all oversight,” Patel stated.

Smith received his appointment as special counsel in November 2022 to oversee the investigation examining whether Trump interfered with the 2020 election results and improperly retained classified materials at his Mar-a-Lago resort.

The phone record collection focused on what investigators call “toll records,” which show call timing and recipients but not conversation content. Federal authorities can obtain such records through subpoenas without requiring judicial approval.

According to Patel, investigators gathered the records during the period when Smith was examining allegations that Trump illegally removed classified documents to his Florida property after leaving office in 2021 and subsequently obstructed federal recovery efforts.

Both Patel and Wiles maintained close relationships with Trump during this timeframe. Patel had publicly stated in 2022 that Trump had declassified the Mar-a-Lago documents, though prosecutors challenged this assertion and Trump’s legal team never presented this argument in court proceedings.

Patel received a grand jury summons in connection with the case after being granted limited immunity from criminal prosecution. Both he and Wiles underwent questioning by investigators as part of Smith’s document retention probe.

The FBI director revealed that the phone records were stored in files marked “Prohibited,” making them difficult to locate within the bureau’s computer systems. He announced that he has recently eliminated the FBI’s ability to use this classification system.

Smith brought felony charges against Trump related to the classified documents investigation in 2023, though a federal judge later dismissed the case. Smith abandoned his appeal following Trump’s election victory. Trump has consistently denied any wrongdoing in connection with Smith’s investigations.

Congressional Democrats have previously supported Smith’s investigative methods, arguing that subpoenaing phone records and collecting other evidence was appropriate for thoroughly examining allegations of misconduct by Trump and his associates.

Phone record collection represents a standard investigative practice, even involving prominent individuals, as authorities work to establish case facts and identify potential participants in alleged incidents.

The record collection continued into Wiles’ tenure as Trump’s co-campaign manager, though Patel did not specify exact start and end dates for the surveillance period.

Republican leadership has previously criticized Smith’s investigative approaches, particularly his collection of phone records from U.S. senators and other GOP officials during his examination of alleged attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election.

During previous testimony, Smith defended his record collection practices, stating they helped investigators confirm the timeline surrounding the January 6 Capitol riot and that prosecutors “followed all legal requirements in getting those records.” He assured lawmakers that the collected records did not include conversation content.

A federal judge issued a permanent order Monday preventing the Justice Department from releasing Smith’s report on the documents investigation. Smith has informed Congress that court orders prohibit him from discussing investigation aspects not previously revealed in court documents.

Smith previously told congressional members that his investigators had significant concerns about obstruction of justice during their probes. He informed lawmakers that his office “followed Justice Department policies, observed legal requirements and took actions based on the facts and the law.”

Representatives for Smith declined to provide comments regarding Patel’s allegations. Former Attorney General Merrick Garland, who appointed Smith as special counsel, former FBI Director Chris Wray, and President Biden have not responded to requests for comment. The White House and Wiles also have not issued statements.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture announced Wednesday it plans to put its historic South Building headquarters on the National Mall up for sale while moving remaining staff to facilities nationwide before 2025 ends.

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins described the decision as a necessary cost-saving measure, pointing to expensive upkeep requirements and sparse occupancy levels in the decades-old facility.

The announcement comes after thousands of USDA workers accepted voluntary departure packages and left their positions during the past year as part of President Donald Trump’s initiative to streamline federal government operations and reduce its overall size.

Speaking at a Wednesday news conference held outside the building, Rollins reflected on the facility’s decline. “At one time, the South Building was the beating heart of USDA, alive with research and teeming with activity decades ago. But today, it is a shell of what it once was,” she stated.

The property will be transferred to the General Services Administration for the sales process, Rollins explained, while Iowa Senator Joni Ernst displayed a “For Sale By Owner” sign during the announcement.

According to GSA Administrator Edward Forst, the landmark USDA building constructed during the 1930s faces $1.6 billion in overdue maintenance expenses, with approximately 80% of its office space currently unoccupied.

Department officials have indicated plans to relocate most Washington-based personnel to regional centers in North Carolina, Missouri, Indiana, Colorado and Utah.

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins announced Wednesday that the Trump administration has begun taking steps to put the USDA South building up for sale by handing control of the property over to the General Services Administration.

The move represents the opening phase of what officials describe as an effort to dispose of the government-owned facility and relocate the Food and Nutrition Service office currently housed there.

By transferring oversight of the building to GSA, the administration is setting in motion the formal process that could eventually lead to the sale of the federal property.

WASHINGTON — The nominee selected to oversee a newly established Justice Department fraud unit promised Wednesday to conduct investigations “without fear or favor” amid growing concerns about potential political interference in the division’s operations.

Colin McDonald’s appointment to head the proposed National Fraud Enforcement Division has drawn scrutiny because fraud cases are already handled by the department’s existing Criminal Division, and because the White House has indicated it will play an unprecedented role in supervising the new unit’s activities.

The nomination comes as the Trump administration has intensified focus on alleged fraud schemes in Minnesota. During Tuesday’s State of the Union address, President Trump announced that Vice President JD Vance would spearhead the administration’s “war on fraud,” making accusations that Minnesota’s Somali community members have “pillaged” billions in taxpayer funds.

When questioned during Wednesday’s confirmation hearing about whether he would comply with presidential directives to launch specific investigations, McDonald avoided giving a direct response. The experienced prosecutor, who currently serves in Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s office, stated only that he bases decisions on evidence and legal standards.

“The vision that we have is a division that is large enough where no fraud is too big, and no fraud is too small, so that we can reach all actors within the chain of criminal culpability and no one more than that,” McDonald testified. “Those are the ones that we are going to be looking after, investigating and following the facts — without fear or favor.”

Vance’s January announcement that the new fraud division chief would answer directly to the White House surprised many Justice Department officials, even within an administration that has dismantled traditional barriers between the department and executive branch.

The administration has since modified its position, stating that McDonald would report to the deputy attorney general like other division leaders, though questions remain about Vance’s specific involvement in overseeing cases and prosecutions.

Federal investigators have been examining extensive fraud allegations in Minnesota for several years, with dozens of defendants — primarily of Somali heritage — facing charges under both the Biden and Trump administrations. The alleged fraud gained heightened attention during the current administration’s immigration enforcement operations in Minneapolis. A federal prosecutor has estimated that potentially half of approximately $18 billion in federal program funding distributed in Minnesota since 2018 may have been fraudulently obtained.

If confirmed, McDonald may immediately encounter staffing challenges as the Minnesota U.S. attorney’s office has experienced mass resignations following controversial fatal shootings of civilians by federal agents during recent immigration raids. Joseph Thompson, the prosecutor overseeing the extensive Minnesota fraud investigation, is among those who have resigned amid tensions over the Justice Department’s handling of the shootings.

Skeptics have questioned the necessity of creating the new division when the department’s Criminal Division already handles fraud prosecutions effectively. The existing fraud section filed charges against 265 individuals last year, representing a more than 10% increase from the previous year. These cases involved over $16 billion in attempted fraud losses, setting a record for the section and more than doubling 2024’s total.

Despite these achievements, McDonald told committee members that significant additional work remains “to ensure that our taxpayer funded programs are free of fraud.”

“The problem is massive,” McDonald stated. “And so President Trump and the attorney general were right to identify this as a place where we needed to put significantly more focus.”

A winter snowball battle in New York City has sparked tension between Mayor Zohran Mamdani and the police department after officers were targeted and injured during the chaotic event.

The mayor has characterized the incident at Washington Square Park as young people enjoying themselves after a major snowstorm. However, Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch and the NYPD view the situation much more seriously.

Authorities are now hunting for four individuals and have released their photographs after officers sustained injuries from thrown snow and ice during Monday’s gathering, which social media influencers had promoted online.

Mamdani has indicated he doesn’t think criminal prosecution is necessary in this case.

“I’ve said time and time again that, having seen these videos, to me it was a snowball fight that got out of hand and it should be treated accordingly,” he told reporters Wednesday when asked if anyone should be prosecuted.

Commissioner Tisch condemned the events as “disgraceful” and “criminal.” The police officers’ union immediately pointed to the incident as proof that officer respect has eroded under the new mayor’s leadership.

“This was not just a ‘snowball fight.’ This was an assault,” the Police Benevolent Association said in a statement.

The controversy could potentially develop into a significant political challenge for Mamdani, who entered office facing criticism from multiple directions due to his previous statements about law enforcement.

The Monday snowball event attracted large crowds to Washington Square Park following a major winter storm that hit the Northeast, resulting in pandemonium as participants hurled snowballs throughout the famous city park.

As any parent understands, snowball battles naturally tend to escalate into conflicts or injuries. Participants can become overly aggressive, and not everyone appreciates being struck with snow.

Social media footage revealed two officers who walked into the park being bombarded with snowballs from multiple directions, leaving them covered in snow as they moved along a pathway. The officers knocked at least two individuals to the ground while snowballs continued flying and bystanders recorded with their devices. One officer’s face appeared injured and he was seen touching his eye.

More video footage captured people launching snowballs at additional officers positioned on the street outside the park boundaries.

The police department subsequently issued a statement confirming that several officers were hit in the face with snowballs. A union representative reported that two police officers received medical treatment at a local hospital for injuries to their face, head and neck areas.

The responses to this week’s snowball incident mirrored reactions following a 2019 summer episode when energetic young people engaged in water fights were captured on video splashing police officers.

Those water incidents also generated anger from police leadership, who condemned it as unacceptable disrespect and even suggested officers who would tolerate such behavior should find different careers.

On Tuesday night, the police department published photos of four suspects they’re seeking regarding the incident while requesting public assistance in identifying them. These images were distributed just hours after Mamdani minimized the confrontation during an unrelated press event earlier that day.

Mamdani stated Wednesday that he has communicated with Tisch and values her efforts but avoided addressing questions about their conflicting views on the snowball incident.

During his election campaign, Mamdani, a progressive Democrat, issued an apology for previous language he’d used to describe the police department, having once called it in a social media post “racist, anti-queer & a major threat to public safety.”

He also disappointed some left-wing supporters when he kept Tisch, a moderate establishment figure, as police commissioner, indicating his intention to take a balanced approach to law enforcement matters.

A federal judge has declared that the Trump administration’s practice of sending immigrants to nations where they lack any connections violates the law and must be halted, according to a Wednesday ruling in a case that previously went before the Supreme Court.

Federal District Judge Brian E. Murphy in Massachusetts has given the government a 15-day window to appeal his latest decision by temporarily suspending the ruling. Murphy referenced how the Supreme Court sided with the administration last year, putting his earlier decision on hold and allowing a deportation flight carrying multiple migrants to proceed to conflict-ridden South Sudan, despite the deportees having no connections there.

According to Murphy, immigrants who are challenging the Department of Homeland Security’s approach deserve “meaningful notice” and a chance to contest their removal to a third nation before it happens. The current policy “extinguishes valid challenges to third-country removal by effecting removal before those challenges can be raised,” the judge determined.

“These are our laws, and it is with profound gratitude for the unbelievable luck of being born in the United States of America that this Court affirms these and our nation’s bedrock principle: that no ‘person’ in this country may be ‘deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law,’” Murphy stated in his ruling.

The Supreme Court’s conservative majority decided in June that immigration authorities could rapidly remove individuals to third nations. Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, both liberal justices, opposed the decision, arguing it provided preferential treatment to the government.

Murphy pointed out that the Trump administration has consistently broken or attempted to break his court orders. He highlighted how the Defense Department sent at least six individuals covered by the case to El Salvador and Mexico last March without following the procedures mandated by a temporary restraining order he had issued.

“The simple reality is that nobody knows the merits of any individual class member’s claim because (administration officials) are withholding the predicate fact: the country of removal,” Murphy, who received his judicial appointment from Democratic President Joe Biden, explained in his decision.

The judge noted that DHS’s third-country deportation approach has focused on immigrants who had received protection against being returned to their native countries, where they faced potential torture or other forms of persecution.

According to Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials, eight men deported to South Sudan in May had criminal convictions in the United States and faced final removal orders.

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins announced Wednesday that the U.S. Department of Agriculture is moving forward with plans to sell its South Building as part of a broader agency restructuring initiative.

Speaking at a Wednesday press conference, Rollins explained that putting the South Building on the market represents the next step in the USDA’s reorganization strategy, which aims to reduce unnecessary expenses and improve how the department’s staff is distributed.

The Agriculture Secretary indicated that the current state of the South Building demonstrates the need for this change, beginning to describe what visitors would encounter if they entered the facility today.

Political spending has reached unprecedented levels in Texas’s competitive U.S. Senate primary, driven largely by Democratic candidate James Talarico’s impressive fundraising efforts and Republican groups working to protect Senator John Cornyn’s lengthy political career.

As voters prepare for Tuesday’s primary contest, advertising expenditures and reserved airtime have exceeded $110 million, establishing a new benchmark for Senate primary races nationwide, according to AdImpact, which monitors political advertising. This massive financial commitment in Texas offers a glimpse of the substantial monetary investments anticipated throughout this year’s midterm campaigns nationwide, as both parties battle for congressional control.

In the Democratic contest, Talarico is competing against U.S. Representative Jasmine Crockett for the party’s nomination. His most recent television commercial, released Wednesday before the primary, criticizes the previous Trump administration’s harsh immigration policies, referring to Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents as “secret police.”

Financial reports show Talarico has collected over $21 million through the previous week, while Crockett has accumulated nearly $8.6 million, with most of those funds transferred from her congressional campaign after joining the Senate race in December, three months behind Talarico’s entry.

Crockett has branded herself as the more aggressive advocate, creating a stark contrast with Talarico’s final advertisement, which differs from his previous appeals to disenchanted Republican voters through discussions of his Christian beliefs.

During a campaign event Tuesday in Tyler, located in northeastern Texas where President Donald Trump won decisively in 2024, Talarico declared, “We can transform this broken political system.”

Texas Democrats haven’t secured a Senate victory since 1988, yet Cornyn confronts his most challenging primary battle against Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and U.S. Representative Wesley Hunt.

Independent expenditure groups, operating separately from candidate campaigns, have contributed more than $75 million of the total Texas spending, AdImpact data reveals.

Republican-aligned organizations dominate this outside spending, with groups supporting Cornyn’s quest for a fifth term investing nearly $57 million. Texans for a Conservative Majority, a pro-Cornyn organization, has allocated over $22 million specifically for advertisements opposing Hunt.

Cornyn’s official campaign has generated more than $11 million, while two additional organizations using his name have contributed another $10 million toward his candidacy.

Political observers anticipate Paxton will advance to a May 26 runoff election, despite conducting a relatively quiet campaign until recently and facing ongoing legal challenges.

Cornyn and Senate Republican leadership express concern that the party may need to invest tens of millions more to retain the Texas seat should Paxton become the nominee.

South Carolina GOP Senator Tim Scott expressed this worry Wednesday on “Fox & Friends,” stating, “It is a strong possibility we cannot hold Texas if John Cornyn is not our nominee.”

However, other Republicans dispute this assessment. Paxton traveled to Washington Tuesday, attending President Trump’s State of the Union address as the invited guest of Texas Republican Representative Troy Nehls.

Campaign finance records indicate Paxton has raised approximately $6 million, while Hunt has collected about $2 million, though he possessed roughly $3 million in his House campaign account when entering the Senate race in October, based on Federal Election Commission filings.

The combined $19 million raised by all Republican candidates falls short of Talarico’s individual campaign total, highlighting the critical importance of outside group support for GOP efforts to maintain the seat.

Talarico received a significant financial surge this month when his campaign reported collecting $2.5 million within 24 hours after late-night television host Stephen Colbert canceled a scheduled interview for his February 16 program, citing concerns from CBS legal representatives. Donations under $1,000 during this period won’t appear in public reports until after the primary.

During a recent campaign appearance, Crockett reminded supporters of her 2020 Texas House race, two years before winning her Dallas-area congressional seat, when opponents outspent her campaign by a 5-to-1 margin.

“People said, ‘There’s no way she’s going to win,’” Crockett recalled emotionally. “I show up, authentically me. That makes some people cringe, but the people are tired of politics as usual.”

WASHINGTON — During his inaugural State of the Union address, President Donald Trump painted a picture of economic prosperity with declining inflation and robust job creation, but polling data reveals Americans hold a far more pessimistic outlook on the nation’s financial health.

Just hours before Trump’s Tuesday evening speech, The Conference Board published consumer confidence data showing economic optimism remains at historically weak levels, hovering near the depths seen during the COVID-19 recession.

The February confidence index registered 91.2, significantly lower than the four-year high of 112.8 recorded in November 2024. Survey respondents expressed concern about elevated costs and limited employment opportunities.

Additional research supports these findings: Trump’s economic stewardship receives approval from only 39% of Americans, based on the most recent Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll. The University of Michigan’s consumer sentiment measurements also remain stuck at levels typically associated with economic downturns.

Trump attempted to counter this pessimism by highlighting positive economic indicators, a strategy previously employed unsuccessfully by President Joe Biden. However, Tuesday’s address contained discrepancies between presidential assertions and the financial realities confronting many citizens.

“Inflation is plummeting, incomes are rising fast, the roaring economy is roaring like never before,” Trump declared.

However, current economic expansion falls short of truly “roaring” growth patterns.

The economy grew 2.2% in the previous year, declining from Biden’s final year rate of 2.8% and 2023’s 2.9% expansion. While Americans expressed widespread frustration with Biden-era price increases that drove inflation to 9.1% in 2022 — a four-decade record — current growth remains modest.

Historical “roaring” economies typically resemble the late 1990s, when expansion exceeded 4% for four consecutive years, or the 1980s, which saw growth of 3.5% or higher for six straight years.

While inflation has decelerated recently, Americans continue identifying high prices as their primary economic concern in surveys.

Trump accurately stated that core inflation, excluding volatile food and energy sectors, reached a five-year low in January. Nevertheless, alternative price measurements indicate inflation remains persistently high: The Federal Reserve’s preferred core price gauge showed 3% year-over-year growth in December, exceeding the Fed’s 2% objective. This measure assigns less significance to housing costs, which have moderated, compared to Trump’s cited metric.

Nearly half of University of Michigan survey participants in February “spontaneously mentioned high prices eroding their personal finances,” according to survey director Joanne Hsu.

While Trump noted egg prices have dropped substantially from peak levels — which is accurate — most essential items Americans depend on, including groceries, housing, and utilities, cost significantly more than five years ago. Electricity prices alone increased 6.3% over the past year.

Trump’s trade tariffs have elevated costs for numerous imported goods, encompassing furniture, automotive components, tools, and clothing. Grocery items like ground beef, coffee, and bananas have experienced sharp price increases recently, with ground beef costs rising 17%.

Consumer pessimism likely stems partly from last year’s dramatic hiring slowdown. Employers created merely 181,000 positions in 2025 — approximately 15,000 monthly — marking the weakest job growth outside recession periods since 2002.

Despite Trump’s commitment to revitalizing American manufacturing, factories eliminated 108,000 positions in 2025, adding to the 202,000 jobs lost during Biden’s final two years. Automotive and parts manufacturing has shed nearly 74,000 positions over two years.

Trump’s tariffs bear partial responsibility, forcing manufacturers to pay premium prices for imported materials and components. High interest rates have also damaged manufacturing over recent years. Many companies hired extensively — perhaps excessively — during 2021 and 2022 as the economy recovered from pandemic restrictions. Automation additionally reduces factory workforce requirements.

January hiring showed unexpected strength with 130,000 new positions, and manufacturing added jobs for the first time in over a year.

Trump suggested his tariffs directly fuel American economic growth, though most citizens likely experience minimal benefits.

“Moving forward, factories, jobs, investment and trillions and trillions of dollars will continue pouring into the United States of America,” Trump stated.

Trump again portrayed tariffs as costless, claiming foreign nations pay them. Actually, U.S. importers pay these fees and frequently transfer costs to customers through higher prices. Foreign companies might suffer if they reduce prices to maintain American market share, but import prices haven’t decreased significantly, indicating overseas exporters aren’t experiencing substantial impact.

Harvard University economist Alberto Cavallo and colleagues found American consumers absorb 43% of increased tariff costs, with U.S. businesses covering most remaining expenses.

Trump’s comprehensive import taxes haven’t achieved meaningful progress toward reducing America’s substantial trade deficit — the difference between exports and imports.

The U.S. goods trade deficit in products like automobiles and appliances — the target of Trump’s protectionist measures — reached a record $1.24 trillion last year, increasing 2% from 2024.

A record-breaking $110 million has been spent on television advertisements and reserved airtime for Texas’ U.S. Senate primary contest, making it the most expensive Senate primary in American history according to advertising tracking company AdImpact.

The massive financial investment reflects the high-stakes battle between Democratic candidates James Talarico and U.S. Representative Jasmine Crockett, while Republican Senator John Cornyn fights to survive a primary challenge that could end his decades-long political career.

This unprecedented spending in the Lone Star State offers a glimpse of the enormous sums expected to flow into congressional races nationwide this year as both parties battle for control of the Senate.

On the Democratic side, Talarico has emerged as a fundraising powerhouse, collecting more than $21 million through last week’s reporting deadline. His opponent Crockett has brought in nearly $8.6 million, though most of that money came from transferring funds from her House campaign war chest after jumping into the Senate race in December, three months behind Talarico’s entry.

Talarico released his closing television advertisement Wednesday before Tuesday’s primary, taking aim at former President Trump’s immigration policies and characterizing Immigration and Customs Enforcement as “secret police.”

The ad’s aggressive tone marks a shift from Talarico’s earlier strategy of appealing to Republican voters by emphasizing his Christian beliefs and values.

“We can transform this broken political system,” Talarico declared at a campaign event Tuesday in Tyler, located in northeastern Texas where Trump won decisively in 2024.

Crockett has branded herself as the more combative candidate willing to take on tough fights.

Texas Democrats haven’t captured a Senate seat since 1988, but Cornyn faces his most challenging primary battle yet against Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and U.S. Representative Wesley Hunt.

Independent political organizations account for more than $75 million of the total spending, with the overwhelming majority supporting Republican candidates, AdImpact data shows.

Groups backing Cornyn’s quest for a fifth Senate term have invested nearly $57 million. The organization Texans for a Conservative Majority alone has poured over $22 million into negative advertisements targeting Hunt.

Cornyn’s official campaign has collected more than $11 million, while two additional organizations using his name have contributed another $10 million to his cause.

Political observers expect Paxton to advance to a May 26 runoff election despite running a relatively quiet campaign until recently and facing ongoing legal troubles.

Cornyn and Republican Senate leadership fear the party may need to invest tens of millions more to defend the Texas seat if Paxton becomes the nominee.

“It is a strong possibility we cannot hold Texas if John Cornyn is not our nominee,” Republican Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina warned Wednesday during an appearance on “Fox & Friends.”

Not all Republicans share that concern. Paxton attended President Trump’s State of the Union address Tuesday as the invited guest of Texas Republican Representative Troy Nehls.

Campaign finance reports show Paxton has raised approximately $6 million, while Hunt has collected about $2 million, plus roughly $3 million remaining in his House campaign account when he entered the Senate race in October.

The combined $19 million raised by all Republican candidates falls short of Talarico’s individual fundraising total, highlighting the critical role outside groups will play in helping the GOP maintain control of the seat.

Talarico received a significant financial windfall this month, with his campaign reporting $2.5 million in donations within 24 hours after late-night television host Stephen Colbert canceled a scheduled interview on February 16, citing concerns from CBS legal advisors.

During a recent campaign appearance, Crockett reminded supporters of her 2020 Texas House race where opponents outspent her campaign by a 5-to-1 margin before she won her current Dallas-area congressional seat two years later.

“People said, ‘There’s no way she’s going to win,’” Crockett said, becoming emotional. “I show up, authentically me. That makes some people cringe, but the people are tired of politics as usual.”

WASHINGTON – A prominent Democratic senator is pushing the House of Representatives to schedule another vote on aviation safety legislation that came up just one vote short of passage despite Pentagon resistance.

The House cast ballots with 264 members supporting and 133 opposing the ROTOR Act on Wednesday. The legislation had previously received unanimous approval from the Senate in December. The bill was drafted in response to a tragic mid-air collision between an American Airlines regional aircraft and an Army Black Hawk helicopter in Washington D.C. airspace that resulted in 67 fatalities. Senator Maria Cantwell is advocating for the House to hold another vote on the measure.

Because the legislation was considered under expedited procedures, it required approval from two-thirds of House members to advance – missing that threshold by a single vote.

WASHINGTON — During Tuesday evening’s State of the Union address, President Donald Trump spotlighted his administration’s border security achievements, declaring that migrant arrivals at the southern border have dramatically decreased following his January 2025 inauguration.

However, the president largely avoided discussing the controversial aftermath of federal enforcement actions in cities including Minneapolis and Chicago, where local communities have protested against federal agents’ methods. The Minneapolis operation in January resulted in the fatal shootings of two American citizens, sparking significant public backlash and broader criticism of how immigration authorities are executing the Republican president’s directives.

“Today our border is secure,” Trump declared to Congress during his Tuesday evening remarks. “We now have the strongest and most secure border in American history by far. In the past nine months, zero illegal aliens have been admitted to the United States.”

Immigration policy has remained Trump’s cornerstone political issue and played a crucial role in securing his 2024 electoral victory. His initial year back in the Oval Office brought dramatic enforcement overhauls and billions in additional funding for agencies implementing his policies. These changes are fundamentally altering enforcement practices for Trump’s remaining presidency, affecting everything from detention numbers to asylum approval rates.

An examination of six critical immigration metrics reveals how his administration has performed.

Throughout Joe Biden’s presidency, Republican lawmakers consistently characterized migrant flows at the U.S.-Mexico border as a crisis they attributed to Democratic policies.

Illegal border crossing arrests peaked at nearly 250,000 in December 2023 before beginning to decline during Biden’s final months in office.

December 2024, Biden’s last complete month as president, saw approximately 46,000 arrests. By February 2025, that figure dropped below 8,000 and has remained at similar or lower levels since. January’s total reached 6,070.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement announced a transformed enforcement approach, eliminating previous restrictions on who could be detained and deported. This policy shift led to a dramatic increase in ICE apprehensions.

December 2024 saw ICE record 8,507 arrests. Throughout 2025, numbers climbed to 17,000 by February, approached 30,000 by June, and hit 32,771 by September, based on University of California, Berkeley’s Deportation Data Project research analyzed by The Associated Press. The most recent data release covered mid-October, preceding the Minneapolis operation.

Rising arrest numbers have correspondingly increased the immigrant population housed in ICE’s nationwide detention network.

The Department of Homeland Security received $45 billion to construct, purchase, or lease additional facilities for detained immigrants awaiting deportation.

ICE publishes detention population data biweekly. These figures change daily as individuals enter the system or are released through bond arrangements — now increasingly uncommon — or deportation.

December 2024 average daily detention populations stayed just below 40,000 individuals. Under Trump’s leadership, these numbers have risen sharply. February figures reached 70,000 people. With current ICE funding, the agency could potentially detain approximately 100,000 immigrants or more.

ICE has embarked on extensive spending following its $45 billion congressional allocation for enhanced immigration enforcement and border security. The agency is actively seeking additional detention space through rental or purchase agreements and collaborating with conservative states to establish facilities with distinctive names like “Alligator Alcatraz” and “Speedway Slammer.”

Approximately $30 billion will fund hiring 10,000 additional deportation officers. Another $46 billion supports completing Trump’s first-term border wall project. Additional funds support hiring more Customs and Border Protection personnel and strengthening immigration court systems.

Asylum seekers arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border have increased substantially in recent years, creating enormous immigration court backlogs.

These individuals are experiencing higher case rejection rates under the current Trump administration.

Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse data shows asylum application denial rates ranged from 40% to 60% before Trump’s initial presidency. Rejection rates increased annually during his first term before declining under Biden’s administration.

However, the data indicates asylum denial rates surged 22.5% during Trump’s second term’s first year.

The Trump administration consistently describes its mass deportation operations as targeting immigrants with criminal records or those posing public safety risks, labeling them “the worst of the worst.”

Yet Deportation Data Project information reveals the percentage of ICE arrests involving individuals with criminal histories has steadily decreased.

Prior to Trump’s inauguration, approximately 86% of ICE arrests involved people with criminal backgrounds — meaning they had been convicted or charged with U.S. crimes beyond illegal entry, which constitutes a civil violation.

This percentage has declined, with mid-October data showing about 55% had criminal backgrounds while 45% did not. Critics note that criminal arrests don’t necessarily indicate serious felonies like murder, often involving minor offenses such as shoplifting.

This trend partly reflects increased collateral arrests by immigration enforcement. When ICE targets specific individuals with criminal records, officers can arrest others encountered who are in the country illegally.

Traditionally, most ICE arrests involved transfers from state or local correctional facilities. While ICE continues this practice, the Trump administration has implemented additional arrest strategies. These include workplace raids and targeting individuals attending immigration court hearings or routine agency check-ins.

Federal lawmakers are pushing to stop the Department of Homeland Security from purchasing and using a controversial full-body restraint system following revelations about its deployment during deportation operations.

Congresswoman Delia Ramirez, a Democrat from Illinois, introduced the “Full-Body Restraint Prohibition Act” in the House Wednesday, which would block future acquisitions of the device known as the WRAP and establish new oversight measures.

Ramirez referenced an Associated Press investigation that uncovered multiple instances where U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement used the restraint system on individuals during deportation flights, sometimes for extended periods, in cases dating back to 2020.

“The WRAP fuels destruction in our communities and human suffering. This legislation is an additional step to end the pain and violence caused by DHS,” Ramirez said in a statement.

The restraint system, manufactured by California company Safe Restraints Inc., has become the focus of multiple federal court cases, with plaintiffs arguing its improper use constitutes punishment or torture. Civil rights advocates worry that ICE isn’t properly documenting WRAP usage as mandated by federal regulations governing use of force, creating challenges in determining how many people have been subjected to the restraints.

Beyond ICE’s deployment of the device, the Associated Press discovered twelve fatalities over the past ten years involving local police and jail officials using the WRAP, with medical examiners concluding that “restraint” contributed to the deaths.

The Department of Homeland Security has not provided detailed responses to Associated Press inquiries about WRAP usage and did not comment on the proposed legislation.

The investigation revealed that ICE continued using the device even after a 2023 internal report from DHS’s civil rights division raised concerns, partly based on fatality reports involving the WRAP’s use by local law enforcement. Ramirez also referenced Bloomberg Law reporting on the restraint system.

Federal procurement documents indicate DHS has paid Safe Restraints Inc. $268,523 from when purchases began in late 2015 during the Obama presidency through June 2025. Government records show the Trump administrations accounted for approximately 91% of that expenditure.

Company CEO Charles Hammond defended the device, stating the WRAP was created to offer a “safer, more humane, pain-free alternative to other restraint methods.”

“Eliminating The WRAP from these situations would not lead to safer outcomes; it would force the return to alternative restraints and tactics proven to cause pain, injury and even fatalities,” Hammond said.

Hammond explained that his company developed a specialized version for ICE, with modifications designed to accommodate use during flights and extended bus transportation.

However, the Associated Press found that ICE personnel deploy the WRAP under circumstances that fall well below the manufacturer’s recommended guidelines. Detained individuals who spoke with the Associated Press described officers applying the restraints after they were already shackled, claiming this occurred to intimidate or punish them for requesting legal counsel or expressing concerns about deportation to countries they had fled due to violence and persecution.

Hammond acknowledged to the Associated Press that if individuals were not acting violently and were only voicing protests, placing them in the WRAP might constitute inappropriate usage.

Following the October Associated Press investigation, eleven Democratic senators sent correspondence to senior immigration officials, referencing the reporting and stating that ICE’s deployment of full-body restraints during deportation flights raises “serious human rights concerns.”

WASHINGTON — The nation’s highest court delivered a setback Wednesday to a major private prison corporation battling claims that immigration detainees were compelled to perform labor for just $1 per day at a Colorado facility.

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court rejected GEO Group’s request for an expedited appeal, though this represents a procedural loss rather than a final judgment on the merits. The company has been contesting a decade-old lawsuit from 2014 that accuses the firm of requiring detainees at its Aurora facility to carry out custodial duties and other tasks without compensation, or for minimal wages to help offset insufficient food provisions.

The GEO Group has maintained its employment practices are lawful and contended the litigation should be dismissed because the company enjoys immunity from civil suits due to its status as a federal contractor.

When a lower court rejected this argument, GEO petitioned the Supreme Court for permission to bypass normal appeals procedures. However, the justices declined to grant this request.

Based in Florida, GEO Group ranks among the nation’s largest private detention operators, controlling approximately 77,000 beds across 98 facilities nationwide. The company’s portfolio includes a recently opened federal immigration detention facility in Newark, New Jersey, where Mayor Ras Baraka was taken into custody during a May 2025 demonstration, though charges against the Democratic mayor were subsequently dismissed.

Comparable legal challenges have emerged at other locations where GEO operates, including litigation in Washington state that resulted in a court ordering the company to pay over $23 million in damages.

During his State of the Union speech on Tuesday, President Donald Trump informed members of Congress that he will not require their approval to implement his tariff strategy moving forward. The president expressed confidence that existing trade agreements will remain in place, suggesting that other nations understand the consequences of backing out could be significantly more severe.

Trump’s remarks indicate he plans to move ahead with trade policy initiatives without seeking legislative backing from lawmakers, relying instead on executive authority to pursue his economic agenda.

WASHINGTON — A wellness entrepreneur and physician who champions Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s Make America Healthy Again initiative will testify Wednesday before senators considering her nomination as the nation’s top doctor.

Dr. Casey Means, 38, will finally get her chance to address the Senate health committee after her original October hearing was postponed when she went into labor on the scheduled day. The Stanford-educated nominee plans to outline her approach to combating chronic illness by tackling underlying causes through nutrition and lifestyle modifications — a philosophy that aligns with the health department’s current emphasis on dietary improvements as midterm elections draw near.

However, Means is expected to encounter challenging questions regarding her credentials and possible financial entanglements. The physician’s frustration with conventional medicine led her to pursue ventures promoting various products, sometimes without revealing her potential financial gains.

The surgeon general serves as America’s chief health advocate, issuing public health warnings and guidance to both citizens and medical professionals. Should senators confirm her appointment, Means would champion Kennedy’s comprehensive MAHA platform, which seeks to eliminate thousands of food additives, eliminate conflicts within federal agencies, and improve nutrition in school meals and related programs.

While previous surgeons general have occasionally weighed in on vaccination matters — despite having no official vaccine policy authority — Means has largely avoided Kennedy’s discredited vaccine positions, though she has supported additional safety research.

Means brings no government service to the role, and her medical license remains inactive. Following her medical degree completion at Stanford University, she abandoned her surgical residency at Oregon Health and Science University in 2018, citing her view that the healthcare system was fundamentally flawed and exploitative.

She subsequently pursued alternative methods to address what she characterizes as widespread metabolic problems caused primarily by inadequate nutrition and excessive consumption of highly processed foods.

Having completed sufficient postgraduate training for medical licensure, she obtained one and established a functional medicine practice in Oregon, which eventually shuttered. She later helped launch Levels, a health-tracking application that monitors nutrition, sleep, and exercise while providing users with blood test results and continuous glucose data.

Financial disclosure documents reveal she earned hundreds of thousands of dollars endorsing wellness products, including specialized basil seed supplements, teas, elixirs, probiotics, and meal delivery services. An Associated Press review discovered that she sometimes failed to reveal potential financial benefits from these product recommendations.

According to ethics documentation, Means has committed to leaving her Levels position and surrendering stock options and shares if confirmed by the full Senate. She also promised to end her relationship with Rupa, a specialized laboratory company for which she created an online educational program. While she may continue receiving book royalties from “Good Energy,” she will cease promotional activities, the filing indicated.

The documentation further states she will “avoid acquiring direct financial stakes in companies appearing on the Food and Drug Administration’s prohibited holdings roster.”

Two former surgeons general have publicly questioned Means’ suitability for the position.

Former Bush administration surgeon general Dr. Rich Carmona wrote in a Hill op-ed last May that Means’ professional background “creates substantial concerns.” Shortly afterward, Dr. Jerome Adams, who served as surgeon general during Trump’s initial term, posted on social media platform X that leading the U.S. Public Health Service Commissioned Corps traditionally requires an active medical license.

Means would join an administration already employing her brother, Calley Means, who serves as a senior Health and Human Services Department adviser promoting the Republican administration’s warnings about highly processed foods.

Trump’s initial surgeon general selection, former Fox News medical contributor Janette Nesheiwat, withdrew her nomination following criticism from presidential allies. Means received her nomination last May.

Small convenience stores across the region are voicing concerns over a new federal proposal that would change what items retailers must stock to accept food stamp benefits.

Under the Trump administration’s plan, stores participating in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program would need to carry increased amounts of fresh and whole food products. The proposal has sparked opposition from convenience store owners who fear the new mandates could force them to drop out of the federal nutrition program altogether.

The potential changes would affect how local corner stores and small retailers serve customers who rely on SNAP benefits for their grocery needs.

WASHINGTON — After delivering his State of the Union address Tuesday evening, President Donald Trump faces the challenge of ensuring his message resonates with voters across the nation.

Trump’s 108-minute speech served as a celebration of accomplishments during his second term’s early months, highlighting what he described as economic revival domestically and establishing new international leadership. He will first test this midterm election year messaging when he visits Texas later this week, targeting Latino voters who played a crucial role in his 2024 reelection victory and demonstrated his transformation of the Republican Party base.

The administration seeks to communicate this message to a wider voter base that remains largely skeptical of Trump’s performance, even as potential Middle East tensions could divert attention from his domestic agenda. Trump has shown a tendency to deviate from prepared remarks during campaign events, including a recent Georgia appearance where he claimed to have “solved” affordability issues despite ongoing voter concerns about high costs.

However, the economic growth and national security themes Trump highlighted during Tuesday’s lengthy address will form the foundation of the campaign message he and Republican colleagues plan to present to voters in November.

“This is going to be setting the tone for the following year,” Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., who maintains close relationships with Trump, told The Associated Press.

Following State of the Union speeches, presidents typically embark on immediate travel to promote their priorities. President Joe Biden, for example, visited battleground states like Wisconsin and Pennsylvania the day following his addresses during his final two years in office.

Trump will remain in the Washington region until later this week before departing for Texas, where he plans to address economic matters and energy initiatives just before the state’s March 3 congressional primaries. Instead of immediate travel, the president will spend Wednesday in White House meetings, including policy discussions and a session with Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy.

Trump, who incorporated several social media-friendly surprises into his speech, demonstrates skill at capturing attention in today’s fragmented media landscape and will likely discover additional methods to maintain visibility beyond typical post-State of the Union activities.

“Donald Trump is a master at the big moments, so he obviously cares a lot about how the speech goes, but what he cares a lot about are the clips that get replayed over and over again from the State of the Union,” said Austin Cantrell, who served as an assistant White House press secretary in Trump’s first term.

Cantrell, now working with Chattanooga, Tennessee-based Bridge Public Affairs, added: “I don’t expect this to be some Aaron Sorkin-esque, perfectly choreographed post-State of the Union media fan-out.”

Six years earlier, Trump surprised audiences by presenting conservative radio personality Rush Limbaugh with the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation’s highest civilian recognition. Tuesday’s record-breaking lengthy address featured comparable headline-grabbing moments. He announced plans to bestow the same honor on Connor Hellebuyck, the U.S. men’s hockey team goaltender who recently won gold at the Milano-Cortina Winter Olympics. Trump invited Hellebuyck and teammates into the House chamber, where they received thunderous applause.

Trump also unveiled new proposals addressing affordability issues during his speech, while criticizing Democrats for opposing policies he credited with creating a more prosperous and secure America. Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger, delivering the Democratic response, countered that costs remain elevated for many Americans and families continue struggling under Trump’s policies.

Trump urged both parties to “protect American citizens, not illegal aliens,” advocating for restrictions on mail-in voting and stricter voter identification requirements while emphasizing dangers of uncontrolled illegal immigration.

“I do think a lot of the success outlined in the State of the Union will be a part of the Republican message in the fall,” Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., another Trump ally, told the AP, referencing GOP accomplishments in tax policy and border security. “As far as the president is concerned, I think he’ll be anxious to get on the road and talk about the success.”

Senior White House staff members have committed to regular Trump travel until the midterm elections. His economy tour has included crucial swing states like Michigan, Pennsylvania and North Carolina, plus traditionally conservative Iowa and former Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s congressional district. He has supported candidates — in Rocky Mount, North Carolina, he engaged with Republican Michael Whatley and endorsed his Senate campaign — while occasionally straying from the economic focus these trips are designed to emphasize.

Simply leaving Washington can signal to voters that a president values connecting with them. Edward Frantz, a University of Indianapolis historian, noted that Herbert Hoover — an engineer, self-made millionaire and technocrat — believed he could address national problems by working with his team in isolation and rarely departing Washington. This created voter perception that Hoover was indifferent because they didn’t witness him engaging with Americans.

“If you think about a call and response … the call is the State of the Union, and if you really do care about being in touch with others, then what’s the response?” Frantz explained. “The best way to be able to see that is by hitting the road.”

American opinions about Trump have remained relatively consistent throughout his second term, making it improbable that a single speech will significantly alter public perception. His approval ratings have shown minimal change during his second term, with Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research polling indicating only a slight decline from 42% in March 2025 to 36% in early February.

Despite this, the annual address provides Trump an opportunity to reshape his message, as it has for previous presidents.

Presidential historian Timothy Naftali noted that Bill Clinton used his 1996 State of the Union to establish themes for his Democratic reelection campaign. Following George W. Bush’s November 2006 midterm losses, the Republican adopted a notably more conciliatory approach toward newly empowered Democratic leadership on Capitol Hill.

“The State of the Union, they’re less important than they once were because with a president like Trump, he’s always available,” said Naftali, a senior research scholar at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs. “But the State of the Union is an opportunity to reset the president’s agenda or to reaffirm it, and resetting an agenda in the social media era is different from resetting it in previous times.”

President Donald Trump’s pick to serve as America’s top doctor will finally face senators Wednesday in a confirmation hearing that was delayed for months due to childbirth.

Casey Means, the 38-year-old nominee for U.S. Surgeon General, was initially scheduled to testify before the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee back in October. However, the session was postponed when she delivered her baby at full term.

If senators approve her nomination, Means would take on the role of providing Americans with science-based health guidance aimed at preventing disease and injuries. She works closely with Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and strongly backs his “Make America Healthy Again” campaign, alongside her brother Calley Means, who advises the Trump administration on nutrition policy.

This marks Trump’s second attempt to fill the surgeon general position after he pulled his earlier choice, Janette Nesheiwat, in May. Both selections have drawn criticism from conservative activists like Laura Loomer and traditional political figures who question her positions.

The nominee has promoted drinking unpasteurized milk, repeatedly supported Kennedy’s debunked theories connecting vaccines to autism, and spoken against hormonal contraceptives.

In testimony prepared for her original October appearance, Means described herself as both a wellness advocate and licensed physician who has cared for thousands of patients across 15 years in hospitals, surgical suites, and private practice. The committee has not posted any revised testimony for Wednesday’s hearing.

The Stanford University School of Medicine graduate left her surgical training program before completion. Her Oregon medical credentials are currently listed as “inactive,” which Means explains is by choice since she’s not actively seeing patients.

Means helped start Levels, a health technology application, and owns stock in Truemed, her brother’s business that helps customers get tax breaks for specialized medical treatments.

She has promised in ethics documents to step down from Levels and sell her ownership stakes in both businesses if confirmed to the federal post.

During a Food and Drug Administration gathering Tuesday, Kennedy praised Means for having “an extraordinary capacity to communicate to the American public” and said he expects her confirmation to succeed.

“We’ve been waiting for a long time for Dr. Means to come on board,” he said.

The Trump administration has directed American diplomats to actively oppose foreign regulations targeting how U.S. technology companies manage overseas citizens’ personal information, according to an internal State Department communication obtained by Reuters.

The diplomatic directive, issued February 18 and bearing Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s signature, warns that international data sovereignty measures could harm artificial intelligence services and disrupt global information networks.

Policy analysts suggest this represents a shift toward more aggressive tactics as nations worldwide increasingly seek to control how Silicon Valley giants process and store their residents’ digital information through what experts call “data sovereignty” or “data localization” policies.

According to the State Department memo, such regulations would “disrupt global data flows, increase costs and cybersecurity risks, limit Artificial Intelligence (AI) and cloud services, and expand government control in ways that can undermine civil liberties and enable censorship.”

The communication outlined the administration’s push for “a more assertive international data policy” while instructing diplomatic personnel to “counter unnecessarily burdensome regulations, such as data localization mandates.”

The State Department has not responded to requests for comment regarding the directive.

These data protection efforts have accelerated across Europe amid growing tensions between Washington and the European Union over trade protectionism and political interference concerns.

European officials have expressed mounting anxiety about American AI companies’ dominance, particularly given these firms’ reliance on vast personal data collections to fuel their technological models. Continental regulators have simultaneously intensified scrutiny of American social media platforms.

Bert Hubert, a Netherlands-based cloud computing specialist and former Dutch intelligence oversight board member, believes Europe’s growing skepticism of American tech firms may be prompting Washington’s more confrontational stance.

“Where the previous administration attempted to woo European customers, the current one is demanding that Europeans disregard their own data privacy regulations that could hinder American business,” he said.

International data sovereignty legislation takes various forms. Some regulations mandate that information collected within specific countries remain stored domestically. Others restrict how data gets shared, limiting distribution to foreign corporations. The European Union’s 2018 General Data Protection Regulation exemplifies such measures, imposing transfer restrictions on Europeans’ data and resulting in substantial penalties for American technology companies.

Rubio’s communication specifically criticized GDPR as imposing “unnecessarily burdensome data processing restrictions and cross-border data flow requirements.”

The memo also accused China of “bundling enticing technology infrastructure projects with restrictive data policies that expand its global influence and access to international data for surveillance and strategic leverage.” Beijing has strengthened oversight of how Chinese companies handle and transfer user information in recent years.

China’s Washington embassy stated unfamiliarity with the diplomatic cable but emphasized that Beijing “has always attached great importance to cybersecurity and data security.” The European Commission’s Washington office did not provide comment.

The directive, labeled an “action request,” assigned American diplomatic staff to monitor proposals restricting international data transfers while providing promotional materials for the Global Cross-Border Privacy Rules Forum. This organization, established in 2022 by the United States alongside Mexico, Canada, Australia, Japan, and other nations, aims “to support the free flow of data and effective data protection and privacy globally.” The Forum has not responded to inquiries.

This communication represents the latest effort to challenge European digital regulation initiatives.

Last year, Rubio instructed diplomats to build opposition against the EU’s Digital Services Act, legislation designed to enhance internet safety by requiring major social platforms to eliminate illegal content including extremist materials and child exploitation imagery. Reuters recently reported that the United States plans to launch an online platform helping Europeans and others circumvent censorship of content including alleged hate speech and terrorist propaganda.

Federal immigration enforcement agencies are conducting dangerous vehicle pursuits that have resulted in multiple accidents and at least one fatality, raising concerns about chase policies during heightened deportation operations.

As the Trump administration intensifies mass deportation efforts, more individuals are attempting to evade Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers. Federal agents have responded by engaging in high-speed vehicular chases and aggressive driving tactics that would violate pursuit policies used by local law enforcement agencies.

The dangerous pursuit practices have led to several vehicle crashes, with at least one resulting in death. The incidents highlight a gap between federal immigration enforcement tactics and the safety protocols that govern local police departments across the country.

Former President Donald Trump used his State of the Union address to showcase what he views as economic successes while launching verbal attacks against his political opponents. The speech represented Trump’s effort to convince American voters of his economic vision and record.

During the address, Trump attempted to persuade the public to embrace his perspective on the nation’s financial situation and economic policies.

In separate congressional news, the United States House of Representatives voted to reject proposed legislation focused on aviation safety measures, blocking the bill from advancing.

Fresh questions are being raised about FBI Director Kash Patel’s leadership approach following his participation in celebratory activities with the U.S. men’s hockey team after they captured Olympic gold.

The director’s decision to join the team’s post-victory festivities has generated renewed scrutiny of his tenure at the helm of the federal law enforcement agency, with critics pointing to the incident as another example of questionable judgment in his leadership role.

Annie Farmer, who courageously testified against Jeffrey Epstein during legal proceedings, recently spoke with journalist Leila Fadel regarding her attendance at President Trump’s State of the Union address.

Farmer, recognized as one of the survivors who came forward with testimony in the Epstein case, shared her reflections on being present for the presidential address to Congress.

The interview focused on Farmer’s experience and thoughts following her participation in the significant political event.

For more than ten years, federal immigration officers quietly used a California city’s shooting range for training exercises without drawing much attention from local residents. That changed following President Trump’s intensified immigration enforcement efforts and deadly incidents involving federal agents shooting U.S. citizens.

The training agreement in Escondido, a community of roughly 150,000 located north of San Diego amid agricultural land and horse properties, has now become the center of ongoing protests. Community members are calling on city leaders to terminate the contract allowing Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents access to the police department’s shooting facility, part of a broader nationwide pushback against the administration’s immigration policies.

“We don’t want ICE anywhere near Escondido or fraternizing with the police,” said Richard Garner, 71, while rallying against the deal outside the city’s police station.

Recent polling shows most Americans believe Trump has overstepped by deploying federal immigration officers in U.S. cities. Beyond large-scale protests in Minneapolis, residents from New York to California are challenging existing agreements between ICE and municipal governments covering everything from training facility access to parking arrangements. Communities have also expressed anger over ICE’s plans to establish massive detention warehouses, some designed to hold up to 10,000 immigration detainees.

Congressional Democrats have blocked Department of Homeland Security funding during this controversy, stating they won’t approve additional resources without new restrictions on federal immigration activities following last month’s fatal shootings of U.S. citizens Alex Pretti and Renee Good in Minneapolis.

Escondido’s City Council plans to address the ICE contract during Wednesday’s meeting.

Escondido previously maintained unusually strong ties with ICE compared to other California municipalities, permitting immigration officers to operate from police headquarters and collaborate on traffic enforcement. This cooperation ceased after California enacted 2017 legislation restricting such partnerships with federal immigration authorities.

Local activists say they discovered the shooting range contract online and were previously unaware of the arrangement at the facility located in the city’s hills. They worry the agreement will discourage immigrants from reporting crimes to local law enforcement, potentially compromising public safety in a community where Latino residents comprise approximately half the population.

Residents express concern about providing ICE agents any justification to visit their area or supporting an agency they believe may not adhere to federal law. These fears affect both immigrants and citizens worried about masked federal immigration officers’ use of lethal force.

Police Captain Erik Witholt explained that Escondido provides the facility through a contract ICE signed in 2024 and renewed this year, although the agency has conducted training at the outdoor range along a curved road outside downtown for over a decade.

The three-year agreement with ICE’s San Diego Homeland Security Investigations unit, which handles cases involving human trafficking and drug smuggling, will pay the city $22,500 annually.

“We don’t train with them. We don’t train them,” Witholt said, noting that 22 different agencies utilize the facility, each bringing their own range supervisors, targets, and ammunition.

The Department of Homeland Security, ICE’s parent agency, declined to address the criticism and wouldn’t verify training locations due to security considerations.

However, several training sites have been revealed as communities seek to terminate such contracts.

In Cottage Grove, Minnesota, located 20 miles southeast of Minneapolis, Ruth Jones and fellow residents have petitioned their community to cancel its agreement allowing ICE access to the regional training center. Mayor Myron Bailey responded that the facility was constructed using state bond money and serves approximately 60 law enforcement agencies and other organizations, including ICE.

“Contractually we cannot discriminate against any public agency,” Bailey said in a statement.

Islip, New York residents urged local officials last year to cancel a long-term contract for rifle range training access, but municipal leaders maintained the agreement.

Hartford, Connecticut has taken steps to terminate a contract allowing ICE personnel to use a city-owned parking facility.

Not all Escondido residents oppose the city’s ICE agreement. Luke Beckwith, 26, believes police should determine facility access.

“I personally don’t care,” Beckwith said. “It’s bringing revenue to the city.”

Edgar, a Mexican immigrant who requested his surname be withheld due to deportation concerns, said preventing ICE from using the city’s shooting range won’t eliminate the danger for immigrants like himself.

“If they want to come, they will come,” he said.

WASHINGTON – Virginia’s newly elected Governor Abigail Spanberger launched sharp criticisms against President Donald Trump’s economic policies and immigration enforcement during the Democratic response to Tuesday’s State of the Union address.

Spanberger, who made history last month as Virginia’s first female governor, centered her remarks on rising consumer costs despite Trump’s 2024 campaign promises to make living expenses more affordable for American families.

Her response signals the key talking points Democrats intend to emphasize as they work to gain control of both chambers of Congress in this November’s midterm elections.

While Trump used his speech to highlight what he called an economic recovery driven by his tariff policies on imported goods, Spanberger presented a contrasting narrative.

The moderate Democrat, who previously flipped Republican districts in both the U.S. House and Virginia’s governorship, described serious challenges facing agricultural communities.

According to Spanberger, farming operations are struggling due to trade barriers that prompted other nations to retaliate against key American agricultural exports like soybeans. She noted that these same tariffs have increased costs for essential farming supplies including fertilizers.

“Farmers have suffered, some losing entire markets,” she said.

Delivering her remarks from Williamsburg, Virginia’s historic House of Burgesses – a location predating the Declaration of Independence whose upcoming 250th anniversary Trump referenced multiple times – Spanberger accused the president of prioritizing personal financial gain over voter interests ahead of this year’s elections.

Addressing immigration enforcement, an issue where polling indicates most Americans disapprove of the current administration’s approach, Spanberger criticized the deployment of inadequately prepared federal officers to American cities like Minneapolis, where they have detained U.S. citizens without proper warrants.

“They have ripped nursing mothers away from their babies,” she said. “They have sent children, a little boy in a blue bunny hat, to far-off detention centers and they have killed American citizens in our streets.”

WASHINGTON — During Tuesday night’s State of the Union address, President Donald Trump awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor to an Army helicopter pilot who sustained severe injuries while leading the military operation that resulted in the capture of former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.

Army Chief Warrant Officer 5 Eric Slover, who walked with assistance from a mobility device, served as the primary pilot for the lead CH-47 Chinook helicopter that approached what Trump described as a “heavily protected military fortress” where Maduro was located. The successful mission resulted in gunshot and shrapnel injuries to seven American military personnel.

“While preparing to land, enemy machine guns fired from every angle, and Eric was hit very badly in the leg and hip, one bullet after another,” Trump stated during his remarks, explaining that Slover “absorbed four agonizing shots, shredding his leg into numerous pieces.”

The daring military action followed extensive covert preparation and resulted in the South American nation’s capital losing power as forces entered Maduro’s residence and transported him to America to face narcotics trafficking allegations.

Trump’s account of Slover’s performance during the operation provided previously undisclosed details about the military mission, which has remained largely classified since its execution in the early morning hours of January 3.

During the landing approach, Slover encountered “two machine gunners who escaped the wrath of the previous planes,” Trump explained.

“Eric maneuvered his helicopter with all of those lives and souls to face the enemy and let his gunners eliminate the threat,” Trump declared, “saving the lives of his fellow warriors from what could have been a catastrophic crash deep in enemy territory.”

The president emphasized that “the success of the entire mission and the lives of his fellow warriors hinged on Eric’s ability to take searing pain.”

Lt. Gen. Jonathan Braga, who leads Joint Special Operations Command, formally presented the Medal of Honor to Slover in the gallery above the House chamber.

Appearing in his military dress uniform and relying on a walker for support, Slover continues his recovery from the injuries sustained during the operation, Trump noted.

The president also announced that ten additional service members who participated in the Venezuela mission will receive recognition during an upcoming private White House ceremony.

Trump also honored retired Navy Captain E. Royce Williams with the Medal of Honor, upgrading his previous Navy Cross award for shooting down several Soviet aircraft during the Korean War.

The president praised the 100-year-old former aviator as “one of the last living legends.”

DALLAS — A federal trial commenced Tuesday with prosecutors alleging that nine individuals connected to antifa were responsible for shooting a police officer during a demonstration at a Texas immigration detention facility last summer.

The defendants have entered not guilty pleas regarding their alleged participation in the incident at Prairieland Detention Center near Dallas this past July, where a law enforcement officer sustained a gunshot wound to the neck.

Eight defendants are facing charges of providing material support to terrorists, stemming from President Donald Trump’s designation of the loosely organized antifa movement as a domestic terrorist organization. Additional charges against most defendants include attempted murder of a police officer.

Defense lawyers maintain their clients were not antifa members but were instead participating in what they called a “noise demonstration” featuring fireworks on July 4, 2025, intended to express solidarity with detained immigrants.

“Make no mistake, there’s nothing peaceful about what happened on July Fourth,” prosecutor Shawn Smith told jurors.

The proceedings are anticipated to continue for more than three weeks, with several defendants potentially facing life sentences if found guilty.

The indictment describes a group dressed in black clothing and masks, with some carrying weapons and protective gear, who launched fireworks at the facility and damaged vehicles plus a security structure. When local police arrived, someone reportedly shouted “get to the rifles” before gunfire erupted, striking an officer.

Smith explained that while defendant Benjamin Song allegedly fired the shots, multiple other defendants face attempted murder and firearm discharge charges because such violence was a predictable outcome of their planning. Song’s legal representative chose not to present opening remarks Tuesday.

Alvarado police Lt. Thomas Gross, the wounded officer, served as the initial witness Tuesday. He described responding around 11 p.m. to a detention center emergency call, discovering graffiti on security structures and a stop sign, plus observing a guard pursuing a masked individual in dark clothing.

Gross testified about exiting his patrol car and encountering another masked person in black carrying a rifle.

“At this point the scene is becoming extremely chaotic,” he said.

He informed jurors that a bullet entered his shoulder and exited through his neck.

Defense attorneys emphasized that their clients should be evaluated based solely on their individual conduct. “It’s a trial within a trial,” stated attorney Chris Tolbert, representing Savanna Batten.

Tolbert argued his client brought no weapons, spray paint, or fireworks to the location. While prosecutors claim her book club — named after anarchist Emma Goldman — serves as an antifa recruitment tool, he insisted it’s simply a reading group.

“She’s not a member of antifa, she’s not providing material support to terrorists,” Tolbert said.

Antifa, short for “anti-fascists,” represents not one organization but rather a broad term for far-left militant groups that oppose neo-Nazis and white supremacists at rallies. FBI Director Kash Patel indicated the Texas charges mark the first instance of material support terrorism charges being applied to alleged antifa participants.

Attorney James Luster, defending Autumn Hill, described his client as deeply committed to helping marginalized people, including immigrants. Luster said Hill departed after observing fireworks being launched skyward, leaving before police arrival.

“It was never supposed to come to this,” Luster said.

Multiple individuals have already entered guilty pleas to providing material support to terrorists in connection with antifa activities related to the July 4 shooting. They could receive up to 15 years in prison when sentenced.

During Tuesday evening’s State of the Union address, President Donald Trump revealed his administration has directed major technology corporations to generate their own electricity for data center operations, an initiative designed to shield consumers from escalating utility costs.

The directive emerges as communities nationwide increasingly resist power-intensive data center developments that have contributed to surging electricity expenses.

“Tonight, I’m pleased to announce that I have negotiated the new rate payer protection pledge. You know what that is? We’re telling the major tech companies that they have the obligation to provide for their own power needs,” Trump stated during his address.

“We have an old grid. It could never handle the kind of numbers, the amount of electricity that’s needed. So I’m telling them, they can build their own plant. They’re going to produce their own electricity. It will ensure the company’s ability to get electricity, while at the same time, lowering prices of electricity for you,” the president explained.

Trump did not identify specific corporations or elaborate on implementation and enforcement mechanisms. Sources familiar with the initiative indicate the White House plans to convene with companies in early March to formalize these efforts.

While the Trump administration champions artificial intelligence advancement to compete with China, the rapid expansion of AI data centers and their effect on electricity costs has emerged as a potential political liability for Republicans before November’s midterm elections.

Last month, PJM Interconnection, the nation’s largest power grid operator, introduced a strategy requiring new major electricity consumers to either contribute fresh generation capacity to the grid or reduce consumption during peak demand periods.

Several corporations, including Anthropic and Microsoft, have independently launched programs to minimize data center impacts on consumer energy costs.

Former President Donald Trump addressed a joint session of Congress Tuesday evening in what could prove to be a crucial moment for the White House as it works to solidify Republican voter support before this November’s midterm elections.

The speech occurred amid escalating tensions with Iran and widespread public concern over America’s high cost of living.

ECONOMIC FOCUS CARRIES POLITICAL RISK

Trump made economic issues the centerpiece of his address, though he maintained a potentially dangerous stance on financial matters that political analysts warn might cost the Republican Party control of Congress this fall. All House seats and roughly one-third of Senate positions will be contested in November, with Democrats aiming to wrest control from the current Republican majorities in both chambers.

According to Trump’s presentation, inflation rates, home loan costs, and fuel prices are declining, while stock markets, domestic oil production, and international investment are thriving alongside growth in construction and manufacturing employment. However, he avoided recognizing the financial hardships Americans continue to experience due to elevated prices, consistent with his approach in recent economic speeches.

Government statistics indicate inflation remained stagnant and actually increased last year, while manufacturing employment declined during the same period.

Polling data reveals voters express concern about economic conditions and dissatisfaction with Trump’s management of financial issues. According to Reuters/Ipsos surveys, 56 percent of respondents disapprove of his economic performance, compared to 36 percent who approve.

Political strategists emphasize this represents a challenge Trump must address if he intends to serve as the Republican Party’s primary economic spokesperson while they work to maintain congressional control in November’s elections.

WASHINGTON — During Tuesday evening’s State of the Union address, President Donald Trump declared to the nation that America is experiencing unprecedented success, proclaiming ‘we’re winning so much’ as he detailed what he described as significant economic and foreign policy achievements.

The president’s primary goal appeared to be persuading skeptical Americans that economic conditions are stronger than many perceive, urging voters to support Republicans in the upcoming November midterm elections to continue current policies.

Trump incorporated several bipartisan patriotic moments into his speech, most notably making a dramatic invitation for the Olympic gold medal-winning U.S. men’s hockey team to enter the House chamber, which resulted in thunderous applause. The team had visited the White House earlier that afternoon before appearing at the Capitol.

‘Our country is winning again. In fact, we’re winning so much that we really don’t know what to do about it. People are asking me, please, please, please, Mister President, we’re winning too much. We can’t take it anymore,’ Trump declared before presenting the team. ‘We’re not used to winning in our country until you came along.’

The hockey players, displaying their medals and wearing jerseys emblazoned with ‘USA’ in bold letters, received a bipartisan standing ovation. Trump gestured toward the Democratic section of the chamber and remarked, ‘That’s the first time I ever I’ve ever seen them get up.’

In another television-ready moment, Trump revealed he would present the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation’s highest civilian recognition, to the hockey team’s goaltender, Connor Hellebuyck. This mirrors a similar surprise announcement Trump made in 2020 when he awarded the honor to conservative radio personality Rush Limbaugh during his address.

Trump described the nation’s current state by saying, ‘It is indeed a turnaround for the ages.’

The president promoted his strict immigration enforcement policies and federal government reductions, along with his efforts to maintain extensive tariffs that the Supreme Court recently overturned and his capacity to execute rapid military operations globally, including actions in Iran and Venezuela.

Trump also revealed that technology companies working with artificial intelligence have agreed to pay increased electricity costs in regions where their data centers operate, according to a White House official who requested anonymity when discussing the speech.

These data centers typically consume substantial amounts of electricity, which can raise power costs for other local consumers.

Trump criticized the Supreme Court’s rejection of his key tariff initiatives, describing it as ‘an unfortunate ruling.’ He discussed his efforts to work around that decision without relying on Congress or disturbing financial markets.

‘It’s saving our country,’ Trump stated regarding tariffs, describing them as ‘peace-protecting.’

The Supreme Court justices present were identical to those who attended Trump’s joint congressional address last March: Chief Justice John Roberts, along with Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett and Elena Kagan.

Trump welcomed the justices and even exchanged handshakes with Coney Barrett before his speech commenced, despite previously criticizing her for joining the majority decision against Trump’s tariffs — even though he nominated her to the Supreme Court during his first presidency.

Prior to Trump’s address, Senate Democrats prevented passage of legislation to reinstate Department of Homeland Security funding, demanding new restrictions on immigration enforcement that Republicans have rejected.

‘Tonight, I am demanding the full and immediate restoration of all funding for the Border Security and Homeland Security of the United States,’ Trump planned to state, according to speech excerpts.

Cost of Living Concerns Remain Prominent

Trump regularly claims to have controlled inflation and maintains the economy is thriving, pointing to the Dow Jones Industrial Average recently surpassing 50,000 points for the first time in history.

Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger delivered the Democratic response to Trump’s address. Multiple congressional Democrats chose to boycott Trump’s speech as a form of protest.

International Affairs Take Center Stage

Trump’s speech occurred while two U.S. aircraft carriers have been sent to the Middle East due to rising tensions with Iran.

The president has frequently described how U.S. air attacks last summer targeted Tehran’s nuclear facilities, praised the operation that removed Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, and highlighted his administration’s role in negotiating a ceasefire in the conflict between Israel and Hamas in Gaza.

However, he has also created tension within U.S. military partnerships with NATO due to his efforts to acquire Greenland from Denmark and his reluctance to take stronger action against Russian President Vladimir Putin regarding ending the war in Ukraine. Tuesday marked the fourth anniversary of the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

MCALLEN, Texas (AP) — Civil rights attorneys filed a court motion Tuesday demanding an end to a U.S. Customs and Border Protection practice that encourages immigrant children traveling alone to agree to voluntary deportation before they receive required legal protections.

Under federal law established by the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008, border officers who apprehend unaccompanied immigrant minors entering illegally must transfer them to federally-operated shelters managed by the Office of Refugee Resettlement. These facilities provide children with legal representation, access to immigration hearings, and phone contact with family members before they decide whether to pursue deportation or explore alternative options.

However, a new approach now presents the voluntary departure choice while children remain in border custody, before they reach the shelter system. This practice commenced in September 2025, based on CBP official testimony included in the legal filing.

According to the attorneys’ Tuesday motion, children who refuse voluntary return face threats of extended detention, potential arrest and prosecution of their U.S.-based adult sponsors, and permanent visa application bans.

The legal team represents Guatemalan minors affected by the government’s failed attempt to remove dozens of them during a chaotic overnight flight last August. They argue this policy breaches an existing court order that prevents deportation of any unaccompanied Guatemalan children without proper immigration court proceedings.

The lawyers also request the judge extend the protective order to include minors from additional nations, except Mexico and Canada.

CBP has not yet provided a response to requests for comment.

Multiple children reported to attorneys that agents used threatening behavior, shouting, and coercion to force them to sign documents they couldn’t comprehend, often due to language difficulties.

One young girl described how an agent aggressively pressured her to sign paperwork after she injured her leg in a vehicle accident and was refused medical care.

“I thought I had to sign, but I didn’t know why or what for,” she stated in a written court declaration.

Mishan Wroe, representing the National Center for Youth Law, emphasized that these minors are being denied federally mandated protections.

“It’s plainly coercive to threaten children with prolonged detention while they are scared and not given the opportunity to speak to counsel or their family before they make a decision that has grave implications for their future,” Wroe stated Tuesday.

Michael Julien, a CBP representative, wrote in his Tuesday court filing that agents only offer the voluntary departure option to certain unaccompanied minors crossing illegally, and that this choice is communicated verbally rather than through written documentation.

Legal advocates discovered 13 cases in South Texas where children experienced this new approach, though they suspect many more instances exist.

“We believe that this is happening to many, many more children and that the 13 that are mentioned in our motion are just those that kind of slipped through the cracks,” stated Kate Talmor, senior counsel at the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection.

Talmor explained that attorneys only learned about and could assist these 13 children because despite signing departure agreements while in CBP custody, transportation wasn’t arranged in time and they were eventually transferred to shelter facilities.

Federal officials have two weeks to submit their response, after which the judge will decide whether to halt the policy’s enforcement on Guatemalan children and potentially extend protections to minors from other nations.

During Tuesday evening’s State of the Union speech, President Donald Trump focused his message on economic accomplishments while urging Americans to support Republican candidates in the approaching November midterm elections.

The president used the annual address to highlight what he characterized as a robust economy and encouraged voters to continue backing similar policies by supporting GOP candidates this fall.

The speech was documented through a collection of photographs selected by Associated Press photo editors, capturing key moments from the evening’s proceedings.

WASHINGTON – Security officials removed Texas Democratic Representative Al Green from the House chamber on Tuesday evening as President Trump prepared to deliver his State of the Union address, following Green’s decision to display a protest sign.

When the President made his entrance into the chamber, Green raised a white placard bearing the message “Black people aren’t apes.” The demonstration referenced a controversial social media post that appeared on Trump’s account earlier this month, which contained footage showing former President Barack Obama and former First Lady Michelle Obama depicted as apes. The administration later removed the post, with Trump attributing its publication to a staff member.

This marks the second consecutive year that Green has disrupted Trump’s congressional address, having previously called out during last year’s speech.

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon is taking its legal battle with Arizona Senator Mark Kelly to a higher court after being blocked from disciplining the former Navy pilot over his participation in a controversial military video.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth filed an appeal Tuesday asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to overturn a February 12th federal court decision that protected Kelly from punishment.

The Arizona Democrat responded on social media, claiming Hegseth’s only motivation is to “keep trampling on the free speech rights of retired veterans and silence dissent.”

“These guys don’t know when to quit,” Kelly posted on his X account.

Hegseth had previously promised to challenge the court ruling, posting “Sedition is sedition, ‘Captain,’” using Kelly’s military retirement rank.

The controversy stems from a November video where Kelly joined five other Democratic Congress members in encouraging military personnel to follow the Constitution and reject any illegal orders from the Trump administration. President Trump later accused the group of sedition that was “punishable by DEATH” in his own social media response.

A Washington grand jury recently chose not to bring charges against the lawmakers involved in the video.

Kelly filed his own federal lawsuit to prevent a January 5th censure from Hegseth. U.S. District Judge Richard Leon issued a temporary order stopping the Pentagon from carrying out Kelly’s punishment while the case continues.

Judge Leon determined that Pentagon leadership violated Kelly’s constitutional free speech protections and also “threatened the constitutional liberties of millions of military retirees.” The judge used the colorful phrase “Horsefeathers!” to dismiss government arguments that Kelly was seeking special treatment under military justice rules.

“To say the least, our retired veterans deserve more respect from their Government, and our Constitution demands they receive it!” Leon wrote in his decision. Leon was appointed by former Republican President George W. Bush.

The 90-second video originally appeared on Representative Slotkin’s social media account. Other participants included Representatives Jason Crow from Colorado, Chris Deluzio from Pennsylvania, Maggie Goodlander from New Hampshire, and Chrissy Houlahan from Pennsylvania. Each person in the video served in either the military or intelligence services.

A federal magistrate judge in Virginia has prevented government prosecutors from examining electronic equipment confiscated from Washington Post journalist Hannah Natanson during a national security leak probe, ruling Tuesday that the court will oversee the review process instead.

Federal agents conducted a search of Natanson’s residence in January as part of their investigation into leaked classified information. The journalist, who has reported extensively on former President Donald Trump’s efforts to dismiss large numbers of federal employees, has not been charged with any criminal activity.

U.S. Magistrate Judge William Porter determined that court oversight of the device examination would properly protect journalists’ constitutional rights while allowing investigators to pursue evidence in matters involving national security.

“Accordingly, the court rejects the government’s request to conduct an unsupervised, wholesale search of all … seized data,” Porter stated in his decision.

Government attorneys had contended that accessing the materials was essential for their investigation into unauthorized release of classified government information. Department of Justice officials proposed using a separate team of FBI personnel, uninvolved in the main investigation, to examine the confiscated items and filter out irrelevant materials.

Press freedom organizations have criticized the search as a threat to journalistic independence and the ability of reporters to protect their sources.

When President Donald Trump takes the podium for his State of the Union speech Tuesday evening, he may find himself sharing the same room with several Supreme Court justices who recently ruled against his controversial tariff policies.

The traditional annual address has historically produced awkward situations for the nation’s highest court members, and this year’s event could underscore the strain between Trump and three conservative justices who sided with the court’s liberal wing in last Friday’s 6-3 decision: Chief Justice John Roberts, Neil Gorsuch, and Amy Coney Barrett.

Notably, Trump personally selected Gorsuch for the court in 2017 and Barrett in 2020 during his previous presidency. Roberts has led the court for over twenty years after his appointment by former Republican President George W. Bush in 2005.

Following Friday’s court decision, Trump harshly criticized the institution and the six justices who voted against his position. The ruling determined that Trump had overstepped his authority by circumventing Congress and implementing tariffs through legislation designed for national emergency situations.

In his response to the ruling, Trump expressed being “ashamed” of the three conservative justices who opposed him, labeling them “fools and lapdogs for the RINOs and the radical-left Democrats.” The acronym RINO stands for “Republican in name only,” a phrase conservative Republicans sometimes use to criticize party members they consider disloyal.

Trump specifically called Gorsuch and Barrett “an embarrassment to their families” for their tariff ruling stance. He also made unsubstantiated claims that the court has been “swayed by foreign interests.”

However, Trump praised the three justices who supported his position, offering particular commendation for Brett Kavanaugh, whom he appointed in 2018.

Several of the nine current justices typically attend State of the Union addresses, and some are anticipated to be present in the House of Representatives chamber for Trump’s joint congressional session speech. The court has not yet announced which justices plan to attend Tuesday’s event.

According to tradition, attending justices don their judicial robes and maintain neutral facial expressions throughout the proceedings.

Brown University political science professor Corey Brettschneider explained that justice attendance “sends a message of stability” and “conveys that these aren’t enemy institutions.”

During last year’s congressional address, Trump physically greeted Roberts with a handshake and shoulder pat, saying “Thank you again. I won’t forget.”

This interaction occurred following a 2024 Supreme Court ruling written by Roberts that provided Trump with extensive immunity from prosecution for presidential official acts, though Trump later claimed he was thanking Roberts for administering his inaugural oath.

Four justices were present for Trump’s final formal State of the Union in 2020.

Despite attending every State of the Union since joining the Supreme Court, Roberts has publicly expressed reservations about the practice.

“The image of having the members of one branch of government standing up, literally surrounding the Supreme Court, cheering and hollering, while the court, according to the requirements of protocol, has to sit there expressionless, I think is very troubling,” Roberts stated during a 2010 University of Alabama speech, according to media coverage.

Roberts further commented, “To the extent the State of the Union has degenerated into a political pep rally, I’m not sure why we’re there.”

These comments came after Democratic President Barack Obama used his State of the Union platform to criticize a Supreme Court decision that removed certain campaign finance restrictions, warning it would “open the floodgates” to unlimited corporate and potentially foreign election funding.

Conservative Justice Samuel Alito, who was present for Obama’s speech, visibly reacted by shaking his head and apparently mouthing “not true,” breaking from the justices’ typical stoic behavior.

Since that incident, Alito has avoided State of the Union addresses, describing the tradition as “very awkward.”

In a 2015 American Spectator interview, Alito described the challenging position justices face during these addresses.

“Every once in a while the president will say something that is nonpartisan,” Alito explained. “We look foolish sitting there, so we stand up and start to applaud. And then we’ll get faked out. The president will get say, ‘This is a great country’ – and everyone will stand up and start to applaud – ‘because we’re gonna do this, we’re gonna enact this legislation.’ It’s a very odd experience.”

The late conservative Justice Antonin Scalia also regularly avoided the speech, once describing it as a “childish spectacle.”

During his 2024 State of the Union address, Democratic President Joe Biden directly addressed the present justices, criticizing them for the court’s 2022 decision that overturned abortion protections.

“With all due respect, justices, women are not without … electoral or political power,” Biden declared.

The most recent occasion when all nine court members skipped a State of the Union was in 2000, near the conclusion of Democratic President Bill Clinton’s second term. The court issued a public statement attributing the absences to “travel changes and minor illnesses.”

A federal magistrate judge has prohibited government investigators from performing unlimited searches of electronic equipment confiscated from Washington Post journalist Hannah Natanson’s Alexandria, Virginia residence during a probe into suspected classified document leaks.

U.S. Magistrate Judge William Porter announced Tuesday he will personally examine the contents of Natanson’s confiscated devices rather than permit a Justice Department screening team to conduct the review. Porter explained his decision sought to balance protecting the reporter’s constitutional speech rights against the government’s responsibility to secure sensitive national security materials.

“The Court finds that seizing the totality of a reporter’s electronic work product, including tools essential to ongoing newsgathering, constitutes a restraint on the exercise of First Amendment rights,” Porter stated in his ruling.

The situation has attracted nationwide focus and criticism from media freedom organizations, who view it as evidence of heightened Justice Department enforcement in leak cases involving news professionals.

During their January 14th search of Natanson’s Alexandria home, federal investigators confiscated multiple items including a smartphone, two laptop computers, recording equipment, a portable storage device, and a Garmin fitness watch. Porter had previously issued a temporary restriction preventing authorities from examining materials on Natanson’s devices, which Tuesday’s ruling now makes permanent.

“The Court’s genuine hope is that this search was conducted — as the government contends — to gather evidence of a crime in a single case, not to collect information about confidential sources from a reporter who has published articles critical of the administration,” the judge noted.

While The Post requested immediate return of all equipment to their reporter, Porter rejected that appeal. However, he determined the government may retain only minimal information directly related to their search authorization, requiring everything else be returned to Natanson.

Permitting authorities to examine a journalist’s work materials, including unrelated confidential source information, “is the equivalent of leaving the government’s fox in charge of the Washington Post’s henhouse,” Porter observed.

Defense contractor Aurelio Luis Perez-Lugones faces charges following his January 8th arrest for illegally removing and keeping classified materials. Prosecutors allege Perez-Lugones brought home printed classified documents from his job and subsequently provided them to Natanson.

Legal representatives for the newspaper claim officials violated journalist protection protocols and infringed upon Natanson’s constitutional rights.

Government prosecutors maintain they deserve to keep the confiscated materials because they contain evidence relevant to an active national security investigation.

The FBI launched their inquiry after The Post published an October 31st story containing classified details from an intelligence document, according to federal authorities. Officials say the Post reporter authored or contributed to at least five articles featuring classified material supplied by Perez-Lugones.

Natanson has focused her reporting on President Donald Trump’s federal government restructuring efforts. The Post featured an article where she detailed cultivating hundreds of federal employee sources, earning recognition from a colleague as “the federal government whisperer.”

The Post reports the confiscated materials encompass years of Natanson’s journalism spanning hundreds of stories, including correspondence with anonymous sources.

The Justice Department maintains internal protocols for addressing media leak situations. Last April, Attorney General Pam Bondi implemented revised guidelines restoring prosecutor authority to utilize subpoenas, court orders, and search warrants when pursuing government officials who make unauthorized information disclosures to journalists.

These updated guidelines eliminated protections from President Joe Biden’s administration that shielded reporters from secret phone record seizures during leak investigations.

Perez-Lugones, age 61 from Laurel, Maryland, remains in custody since his arrest. He possessed top-secret security clearance while employed as a systems engineer and IT specialist for a government contracting firm.

Investigators discovered text communications between Perez-Lugones and the reporter discussing his provided information, authorities stated. “I’m going quiet for a bit … just to see if anyone starts asking questions,” Perez-Lugones messaged after transmitting one document, according to government evidence.

President Donald Trump has scheduled a Wednesday meeting to discuss his proposal for a complete renovation of Washington Dulles International Airport, the White House announced, following his sharp criticism of the facility’s current state last December.

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy will join the discussions about the future of the federally-owned airport that serves the Washington D.C. metropolitan area.

Located approximately 25 miles from the nation’s capital, the airport first opened its doors in 1962 and is preparing to unveil a new 435,000-square-foot concourse with 14 gates dedicated to United Airlines passengers this fall.

The facility experienced its busiest year on record in 2025, according to Tuesday’s report from the airport authority, processing 29 million passengers—a 6.4% increase. Meanwhile, nearby Reagan National Airport experienced a 5.4% decline in passenger traffic.

During December remarks, Trump expressed his intention to reconstruct Dulles, stating “because it’s not a good airport. It should be a great airport… They have a great building and a bad airport.”

The president indicated he has developed a new architectural vision for the airport’s redesign.

The current terminal building was created by Finnish architect Eero Saarinen and features a distinctive sloping roof that curves skyward on both ends. Architecture experts recognize it as an outstanding representation of Mid-Century Modern design.

In December, the Transportation Department issued requests for comprehensive renovation proposals, which could include demolishing the landmark main terminal building.

Department officials complained about “jet fuel smell in the concourses” and the “paltry” gate count in the primary terminal, declaring that Dulles “is no longer an airport suitable and grand enough for the capital of the United States.”

The Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority operates the facility through a 50-year congressional lease agreement.

Recent media reports indicated Trump proposed releasing his hold on $16 billion in funding for a crucial New York Hudson River tunnel project in return for Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer’s support for renaming both Dulles Airport and New York Penn Station in Trump’s honor.

Florida state legislators approved measures last week to rename Palm Beach International Airport after the president.

The airport currently bears the name of John Foster Dulles, who held the position of secretary of state during President Dwight Eisenhower’s administration in the 1950s.

LOS ANGELES — California Governor Gavin Newsom’s national book tour is generating significant controversy as the Democrat faces criticism from multiple fronts while promoting his memoir across the country.

The two-term governor, who many anticipate will run for president in 2028, has drawn fire from Republican politicians who claim recent statements were racially insensitive, as well as from LGBTQ+ advocates who object to his suggestion that Democrats should become more “culturally normal.”

Newsom launched his promotional tour for “Young Man in a Hurry: A Memoir of Discovery” as part of his effort to establish himself as Trump’s primary Democratic opponent and demonstrate his capabilities on the national stage.

The memoir, which hit shelves Tuesday, emphasizes personal biography rather than policy positions and aims to familiarize national audiences with the former San Francisco mayor and lieutenant governor. While some argue any media attention benefits politicians, the six-city promotional tour is challenging Newsom as he works to overcome perceptions of being an out-of-touch liberal elite.

Central to Newsom’s personal story are his academic challenges and ongoing battle with dyslexia, which he uses to connect with voters. However, Republicans criticized remarks he made Sunday while speaking with Atlanta Mayor Andre Dickens, who is Black.

“I’m just trying to impress upon you: I’m like you, I’m no better than you, I’m a 960 SAT guy,” Newsom stated, referencing his below-average college entrance exam score.

GOP leaders accused Newsom of insulting Black Americans by implying they lack intelligence, charges that Newsom and his staff vehemently rejected.

“Black Americans aren’t your low bar,” wrote South Carolina Republican Senator Tim Scott, who is Black, on social media. “We’ve built empires, created movements, outworked, outhustled and outsmarted people like you. Stop using your mediocre academics as a way to patronize communities. Its ridiculous!”

Newsom’s team responded aggressively to criticism from Fox News host Sean Hannity, accusing him of manufactured outrage while ignoring Trump’s racist statements. “You’re going to call me racist for talking about my lifelong struggle with dyslexia?” Newsom posted on X.

His staff noted the audience’s diverse racial composition and their positive reaction. Dickens defended Newsom, arguing critics misunderstood the context.

“That wasn’t an attack on anyone. It was a moment of vulnerability about his own journey,” the mayor posted on Instagram. “We’ve gotten so used to loud, chest-pounding politics that when someone speaks about shortcomings, people try to twist it into something else.”

Several prominent Black Democrats also supported Newsom against the criticism.

The ongoing debate has kept Newsom’s book tour in national headlines for multiple days, valuable exposure in today’s fractured political media landscape.

“At this early stage of the pre-presidential race, just about any publicity is good publicity,” explained Republican strategist Mike Murphy. To “have the spotlight is invaluable and Newsom has a real knack for attracting all the right enemies if you are running for the Democratic presidential nomination.”

Newsom’s communications team later boasted on social media about dominating news coverage on the same day as Trump’s State of the Union address. “FOX NEWS IS WALL-TO-WALL COVERAGE OF ME,” the post declared.

While most criticism of his Atlanta remarks came from conservatives, some exceptions included Nina Turner, who co-chaired Senator Bernie Sanders’ 2020 presidential campaign, and Cornel West, who attempted a third-party presidential run in 2024. Both are Black.

Simultaneously, Newsom is facing criticism from California Democrats regarding separate comments made this week.

During a CNN interview that aired Monday, he argued the Democratic Party should become “more culturally normal” and “less prone to spending a disproportionate amount of time on pronouns, identity” while focusing more on energy costs, childcare, and other practical concerns.

“It’s deeply concerning for anyone, especially our elected leaders, to be defining who or what is ‘culturally normal.’ By definition, it implies someone else is ‘not normal,’” responded the California Legislative LGBTQ Caucus in an official statement.

“We cannot adopt the language of MAGA extremists who in the last year are actively seeking to roll back the rights of women, LGBTQ+ individuals and marginalized communities,” the caucus added.

Lindsey Cobia, a senior campaign adviser for Newsom, highlighted his extensive record supporting LGBTQ+ rights, including his decision as mayor to issue same-sex marriage licenses before it was legally permitted.

“Nobody’s been a bigger supporter of LGBTQ+ rights than Governor Newsom,” she stated.

This isn’t Newsom’s first conflict with LGBTQ+ allies. During his political podcast’s debut episode last year, he called transgender athletes competing in women’s sports “deeply unfair.” Many interpreted those remarks as Newsom’s attempt to appeal to moderate voters.

The book tour concludes with stops in San Francisco and Los Angeles. With one year remaining in his gubernatorial term, some critics question whether he should concentrate on California issues instead.

“To go on a book tour when our state is in desperate need of revamping and revisions … its almost comical,” said Hollywood crisis manager Holly Baird, who opposes the governor.

WASHINGTON – A leading Senate Democrat is raising concerns that FBI Director Kash Patel’s personal travel habits have interfered with major federal investigations, according to allegations from a government whistleblower.

Senator Dick Durbin, who serves as the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, sent a letter Tuesday to federal oversight agencies accusing Patel of “seemingly engaged in what amounts to irresponsible joyriding on DOJ and FBI-operated aircraft at the expense of the American taxpayer and to the detriment of ongoing Bureau operations.”

According to Durbin’s letter, a whistleblower informed his staff that the FBI’s specialized shooting reconstruction unit faced delays reaching a Utah university following the September assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. The delay allegedly occurred because pilots needed mandatory rest time after being used for Patel’s personal travel.

The shooting reconstruction specialists, who analyze and rebuild crime scenes involving firearms, were reportedly held up due to the pilot availability issues, Durbin’s correspondence states. Reuters has not been able to confirm these whistleblower allegations independently.

The FBI has not yet provided an official response to these accusations. However, FBI spokesperson Ben Williamson rejected Durbin’s criticism on social media platform X, stating the senator was “full of it.”

These new allegations come amid ongoing questions about Patel’s use of taxpayer-funded government aircraft. His recent trip to the Milan Olympics in Italy generated significant attention after footage emerged showing him celebrating with beer alongside the U.S. men’s hockey team in their locker room after Sunday’s gold medal victory.

Williamson previously defended that trip, explaining Patel was conducting official government business in Italy, including meetings with foreign officials and American security personnel overseeing Olympic operations. Patel has maintained that FBI directors are legally obligated to use government aircraft for travel.

Durbin has requested that the Government Accountability Office, which serves as Congress’s research division, launch an investigation into these new allegations. He also wants the Justice Department’s inspector general to review Patel’s travel patterns.

The whistleblower additionally claimed that Patel’s decision-making caused delays for investigators responding to a mass shooting incident at Brown University in December.

Tonight presents a pivotal opportunity for President Donald Trump to bolster Republican prospects as the midterm elections approach. The president will deliver his State of the Union address before a joint congressional session, with expectations that the speech will be extended in length.

The timing of Trump’s address comes in the wake of his recent frustration with a Supreme Court ruling on tariffs, a topic that political observers expect will play a prominent role in tonight’s remarks to lawmakers.

WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court in Washington D.C. has ruled against immigrant advocacy organizations seeking to halt the Internal Revenue Service’s practice of sharing taxpayer information with immigration authorities.

The three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit turned down the emergency request from Centro de Trabajadores Unidos and several other nonprofit organizations on Tuesday. These groups had filed a lawsuit challenging a data-sharing arrangement established last April between Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.

Under this arrangement, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials can provide names and addresses of individuals believed to be in the country without legal status to the IRS, which then checks these details against their tax database records.

Judge Harry T. Edwards explained the court’s decision to deny the emergency halt, writing that the advocacy groups “are unlikely to succeed on the merits of their claim” because the data being exchanged falls outside the protections of IRS privacy laws.

Centro de Trabajadores Unidos has not yet responded to requests for comment regarding the ruling.

Attorney General Pam Bondi celebrated the court’s decision on social media, calling it a “crucial victory” for the current administration. “Deporting illegal aliens makes the American people safer,” Bondi wrote in her social media statement.

The current administration maintains that this data-sharing initiative supports President Donald Trump’s border security priorities and represents a key component of his comprehensive immigration enforcement strategy, which has included deportation operations and workplace enforcement actions.

The data-sharing arrangement sparked significant internal controversy, leading to the resignation of the IRS acting commissioner last year in protest of the agreement.

Recent court documents have disclosed that the IRS mistakenly shared taxpayer data for thousands of individuals with the Department of Homeland Security through this program.

According to a sworn statement from IRS Chief Risk and Control Officer Dottie Romo, the tax agency was able to confirm information for approximately 47,000 individuals out of 1.28 million names submitted by ICE. The IRS provided additional address details for fewer than 5% of those confirmed cases, which may have violated taxpayer privacy protections.

Governor Kathy Hochul of New York is demanding the Trump administration return $13.5 billion in tariff collections following a U.S. Supreme Court decision that overturned President Donald Trump’s extensive tariff program.

After Trump returned to office last year, he implemented widespread tariffs affecting most countries globally. Trump referred to this action as “Liberation Day,” though it sparked numerous legal challenges from business groups and several states.

According to Hochul, these tariffs imposed an estimated $1,751 in additional expenses on typical New York families during the past year while damaging small businesses throughout the state.

“These senseless and illegal tariffs were just a tax on New York consumers, small businesses and farmers, and that’s why I’m demanding a full refund,” the governor said.

Hochul’s demand follows similar requests made last week by Illinois Governor JB Pritzker and California Governor Gavin Newsom, who also urged the Republican president to provide refunds after the Supreme Court decision.

The three Democratic governors are all viewed as potential candidates for the 2028 presidential race.

The White House rejected the governors’ requests, claiming they had spent years discussing problems that Trump was able to solve.

“President Trump used tariffs to actually deliver where Democrats could only talk, so naturally Democrats are resorting to gathering more meaningless popcorn headlines – pathetic but unsurprising,” White House spokesman Kush Desai said in a statement.

Last week, Reuters reported that economists from the Penn Wharton Budget Model calculated that over $175 billion in tariff collections across the United States could be eligible for refunds.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has indicated that lower courts will handle the matter of tariff refunds.

More than a dozen states filed a federal lawsuit Tuesday challenging the Trump administration’s decision to scale back childhood vaccination guidelines, arguing the policy changes illegally endanger public health.

The legal challenge targets the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s announcement last month ending universal vaccination recommendations for children against influenza, rotavirus, hepatitis A and B, certain meningitis strains, and RSV. The revised guidelines now suggest these immunizations only for high-risk groups or through individual doctor-patient consultations in what officials term “shared decision-making.” Medical professionals have widely criticized this approach.

States participating in the lawsuit, which include Arizona and California, contend the modified vaccine guidance disregards established medical science and will force state governments to spend additional resources preventing disease outbreaks.

“The health and safety of children across the country is not a political issue,” said Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes, a Democrat, at a news conference. “It is not a culture war talking point.”

Neither the CDC nor the Department of Health and Human Services provided immediate responses to requests for comment regarding the legal action.

This lawsuit represents an intensification of ongoing conflicts between Democratic state leadership and Republican President Donald Trump’s administration concerning federal public health policy modifications under Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. The current administration has terminated thousands of federal public health agency employees, reduced scientific research funding, and modified government guidance regarding fluoride and other health matters.

Kennedy previously removed all members of a vaccine advisory committee last year, replacing them with his own appointees, which Tuesday’s legal complaint claims violated federal law.

The legal action follows the formation of an alliance by Democratic governors from California, Washington, and Oregon several months ago to develop independent vaccine recommendations. These governors accused the Trump administration of endangering public health by introducing politics into CDC operations.

While individual states maintain authority over school vaccination requirements rather than the federal government, CDC recommendations typically shape state-level regulations.

WASHINGTON — Federal judges delivered pointed criticism Tuesday during a heated three-hour hearing over the Trump administration’s cancellation of a massive $20 billion clean energy financing program, with the court challenging both government officials and nonprofit organizations involved in the dispute.

The full U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit examined the controversial termination of the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, a Biden-era initiative designed to boost clean energy investments that Trump officials have moved to eliminate since taking office.

During the proceedings, judges pressed EPA representatives about what appeared to be constantly changing explanations for shutting down contracts with nonprofit groups selected to operate the so-called “green bank.” The court noted that federal officials initially froze funding in February 2025 without detailed justification while claiming waste and fraud, then later cited concerns about insufficient EPA supervision of the program.

EPA attorney Yaakov Roth defended the government’s actions, stating: “The way these were structured was fundamentally inappropriate and unacceptable and required doing them over.”

Roth maintained that federal agencies possess extensive authority over contracting decisions and argued that any legal challenges should be handled through a different court system that could only award monetary damages, not reinstate program access.

The legal battle centers on whether the Trump administration acted lawfully when it targeted the program after President Trump returned to office in January 2025. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin moved aggressively to recover the funds, making allegations of fraud and conflicts of interest that judges noted were not supported with evidence in court documents.

The program had awarded $20 billion to organizations including Climate United Fund and other nonprofits, with former EPA Administrator Michael Regan selecting these groups to finance thousands of climate change and environmental justice projects. The money was officially distributed in August 2024 and placed in a Citibank account for program use.

However, judges also questioned the nonprofit organizations about whether they truly controlled the frozen funds and whether they could legally access money after Congress repealed portions of the 2022 law that originally created the green bank program in July.

Climate United Fund attorney Adam Unikowsky argued that the EPA had already violated the law before Congress made those changes. “Repealing a statute doesn’t retroactively render an illegal action legal,” he told the court.

The case reached the full appeals court after a three-judge panel ruled in September that federal officials have broad power to cancel congressionally appropriated funds without facing lawsuits in federal district court. That 2-1 decision, written by Trump appointee Judge Neomi Rao, directed the dispute to federal claims court for contract issues.

Judge Cornelia Pillard, an Obama appointee who dissented from that ruling, argued the outcome weakened not only the green bank groups but also Congress’s constitutional authority to set policy and control government spending.

The September decision had overruled U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who previously found that the EPA could not justify Administrator Zeldin’s misconduct allegations and ordered that the nonprofit contracts should not be terminated. That ruling remains suspended while the EPA’s appeal continues.

The full court’s decision to rehear this case signals its significant legal importance, as the complete appeals court rarely agrees to reconsider three-judge panel decisions.

Federal prosecutors have filed a lawsuit against the University of California, Los Angeles, claiming the institution failed to shield Jewish staff members from antisemitic harassment during campus demonstrations that disrupted the university in 2023 and 2024.

The federal case, submitted Tuesday in a California court, represents another step in the Trump administration’s efforts to hold major universities accountable for what officials describe as inadequate responses to antisemitism. The legal action claims UCLA did not take disciplinary action against protest participants, including numerous individuals who were taken into custody in 2024 after refusing to vacate a campus demonstration site.

University representatives have not yet provided a statement regarding the lawsuit.

Federal authorities had previously concluded that UCLA inadequately protected Jewish students, leading to a $6 million agreement last year between the university and three Jewish students plus one Jewish faculty member who had filed their own legal action. The current federal lawsuit contends that the damage to Jewish and Israeli staff members extends far beyond what the previous settlement covered.

The legal filing states: “The United States will now do what UC has thus far failed to do: protect Jewish and Israeli employees” from antisemitic harassment.

A significant portion of the legal complaint centers on the 2024 demonstration encampment, which federal authorities claim prevented Jewish staff and students from accessing certain campus areas and featured antisemitic messaging and verbal expressions. The lawsuit contends UCLA broke its own regulations by permitting the encampment to continue and charges the institution with failing to impose consequences on any students, faculty, or staff for antisemitic conduct.

Federal prosecutors are requesting that a judge compel UCLA to implement its existing anti-discrimination rules and provide financial compensation to Jewish employees who experienced a hostile workplace.

The current administration has largely concentrated on prestigious private institutions in its effort to ensure compliance from universities it characterizes as having liberal and antisemitic tendencies. UCLA represents one of the rare public institutions being pursued in this initiative.

During the summer, the Trump administration indicated it was pursuing $1 billion from UCLA as part of an agreement to conclude federal oversight. Administration officials had withdrawn hundreds of millions in federal support from the institution, although a federal judge mandated the funds be reinstated in September.

LOS ANGELES (AP) — A former fire chief in Los Angeles has taken legal action against the city, claiming her termination was part of a calculated campaign to damage her reputation so Mayor Karen Bass could dodge responsibility for the city’s most catastrophic wildfire.

Kristin Crowley was terminated by Bass one month following the January 2025 Palisades Fire, with her removal sparking a blame game between the former chief and city officials regarding the fire’s destruction and department funding issues. Crowley’s attempt to regain her position through a City Council appeal failed in March of that year.

The legal action filed by Crowley last week claims Bass deliberately spread false information to shield the mayor’s political standing after the disaster. Neither the mayor’s office nor the LA City Attorney’s office provided immediate responses to requests for comment regarding the lawsuit.

According to Crowley, the first-term Democratic mayor attempted to deflect criticism over her absence in Africa on a presidential delegation when the fire erupted, despite weather forecasts predicting hazardous wildfire conditions before her departure.

The lawsuit claims Bass made misleading public statements, “including falsely claiming that she was not aware of the nationally anticipated weather event, falsely claiming that the LAFD’s budget was not cut, and falsely claiming that LAFD’s resources would have supported an additional 1,000 firefighters to fight the blaze.”

“These false statements were not mistakes but part of a deliberate strategy to divert scrutiny from Bass’ decisions and to avoid accountability,” the legal document states.

The former chief is requesting unspecified financial and compensatory damages in her filing.

Bass dismissed Crowley on February 21, 2025, six weeks following the start of the Los Angeles fire. While initially commending Crowley during early firefighting operations, Bass later stated she discovered that 1,000 additional firefighters could have been mobilized when the fire began. The mayor also claimed Crowley refused to compile a fire report essential for investigating the incident.

Crowley’s legal document challenges both of these assertions.

The Palisades Fire ignited on January 7 amid powerful winds, destroying or damaging close to 8,000 residential, commercial and other structures while claiming at least 12 lives in the upscale Pacific Palisades neighborhood. A separate fire that began the same day in Altadena, located east of Los Angeles, resulted in at least 17 fatalities and destroyed or damaged over 10,000 homes and buildings.

WASHINGTON – A senior Commerce Department official confirmed during congressional testimony Tuesday that Chinese companies have yet to receive any of Nvidia’s highly sophisticated H200 artificial intelligence processors.

When questioned about these sought-after semiconductors during the hearing, Commerce Assistant Secretary for Export Enforcement David Peters responded, “My understanding is that none so far.”

Neither Nvidia nor the Chinese Embassy in Washington provided immediate responses to inquiries about the chip deliveries.

Last month, the Trump administration officially authorized conditional exports of Nvidia’s H200 processors to China, a decision that sparked criticism from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle as well as former government officials.

The current administration’s approach, championed by White House AI czar David Sacks, argues that allowing these advanced chip sales to China will prevent Chinese rivals like the heavily sanctioned Huawei from intensifying their efforts to develop competing technology that could match Nvidia and AMD’s cutting-edge designs.

However, national security advocates worry these sophisticated processors could be redirected from civilian applications to boost China’s military capabilities and potentially undermine America’s artificial intelligence leadership.

Currently, actual deliveries of these processors remain on hold due to protective measures incorporated into the approval process.

President Trump is scheduled to deliver his State of the Union address to Congress and the American people on Tuesday evening, where he will present his administration’s objectives and policy priorities for the upcoming year.

The presidential speech will be followed by the traditional response from the Democratic party, as is customary following State of the Union addresses.

NPR will broadcast comprehensive live coverage of both the president’s remarks and the opposition party’s rebuttal throughout the evening.