Trump

A federal judge in the United States has told the administration of President Donald Trump that an alleged effort to deport migrants to South Sudan was “unquestionably violative” of his court injunction.

The announcement from US District Judge Brian Murphy on Wednesday tees up yet another judicial battle for the Trump administration, which has faced repeated criticism that it is ignoring court orders.

Judge Murphy, who is based in Boston, Massachusetts, has yet to announce what he plans to do about the apparent violation. He left that question to another day.

But he indicated that the people on board Tuesday’s flight had not been given enough time to challenge their deportations, in violation of their right to due process — and also in violation of Murphy’s April 18 injunction.

Murphy had ruled that migrants facing removal to a third-party country besides their own had the right to a reasonable amount of time to challenge their deportations.

But the Trump administration has repeatedly dismissed claims that it refuses to abide by decisions unfavourable to its policies, instead blasting judges like Murphy as “activist”.

During Wednesday’s court hearing, a lawyer for Trump’s Justice Department, Elainis Perez, refused to confirm where the deportation flight had landed, saying that divulging the information raised “very serious operational and safety concerns”.

Separately, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) held a news conference addressing the issue and defending the deportation flight.

Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons said the people on board had been accused of murder, armed robbery, rape and sexual assault.

In the case of one migrant, Lyons said, “his country would not take him back.” He called such countries “recalcitrant”.

Tricia McLaughlin, a spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), also framed the removals as a “diplomatic and military security operation”.

Standing in front of photos representing eight migrants, she said they were deported alone for safety reasons and confirmed they remain in DHS custody, although they had indeed left the US.

“We cannot tell you what the final destination for these individuals will be,” she added, again citing security issues.

But she did address the possibility that they might currently be in South Sudan, as their lawyers indicated in court filings.

“I would caution you to make the assumption that their final destination is South Sudan,” she said, later clarifying that the flight may make multiple stops: “We’re confirming the fact that that’s not their final destination.”

In Tuesday’s court filings, lawyers for the migrants said their clients hail from Myanmar, Vietnam and other countries. They also explained that their clients speak little English but were provided no translator to understand their removal notices.

They allegedly were deported with less than 24 hours’ notice. On Tuesday morning, as one lawyer tried to locate her client, she said she was informed he had been removed to South Sudan, a country with a turbulent history and a record of human rights abuses.

Judge Murphy had previously ordered the migrants to be given at least 15 days to challenge their removals on the grounds that they could face dangers in the countries they were deported to.

In the wake of Tuesday’s flight, he has also ruled that the US government must keep the migrants in its custody and ensure their safety while hearings proceed.

McLaughlin, however, accused the “activist judge” of “trying to protect” the migrants, which she described as “some of the most barbaric, violent individuals”.

“While we are fully compliant with the law and court orders, it is absolutely absurd for a district judge to try to dictate the foreign policy and national security of the United States of America,” she said.

McLaughlin and the other officials also argued that the Trump administration was exercising its right to find “safe third countries” to remove these individuals to.

“No country on earth wanted to accept them because their crimes are so uniquely monstrous and barbaric,” she said.

“Thanks to the courageous work of the State Department and ICE and the president’s national security team, we found a nation that was willing to accept custody of these vicious illegal aliens.”

The Trump administration has been accused of amping up fears of criminality among immigration populations, as part of its justification for its “mass deportation” campaign.

Police in South Sudan have told The Associated Press news agency that no migrants from the US have arrived in the country so far. The New York Times has reported that the plane is believed to have landed in the East African country of Djibouti.

WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has accepted a gifted Boeing 747 aircraft from Qatar for President Trump to use as Air Force One, the Pentagon said Wednesday.

The Defense Department will “work to ensure proper security measures” on the aircraft to make it safe for use by the president, Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said. He added that the plane was accepted “in accordance with all federal rules and regulations.”

Trump has defended the gift, which came up during his recent Middle East trip, as a way to save tax dollars.

“Why should our military, and therefore our taxpayers, be forced to pay hundreds of millions of Dollars when they can get it for FREE,” Trump posted on his social media site during the trip.

Others, however, have raised concerns about the aircraft being a violation of the Constitution’s prohibition on foreign gifts. They also have noted the need to retrofit the plane to meet security requirements, which would be costly and take time.

Trump was asked about the move Wednesday while he was meeting in the Oval Office with South Africa’s president, Cyril Ramaphosa. “They are giving the United States Air Force a jet,” Trump said.

The Republican president has presented no national security imperative for a swift upgrade rather than waiting for Boeing to finish new Air Force One jets that have been in the works for years.

Baldor writes for the Associated Press.

May 21 (UPI) — The Trump administration asked the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday to block proceedings on a case looking to get information on the Department of Government Efficiency.

In an application to stay the orders of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia seeking documents about DOGE under the Freedom of Information Act, Solicitor General John Sauer wrote that DOGE is exempt from such requests.

“The U.S. DOGE Service is a presidential advisory body within the Executive Office of the President. The President, in various executive orders, has tasked USDS with providing recommendations to him and to federal agencies on policy matters that the President has deemed important to his agenda,” Sauer wrote. “Given those advisory functions, USDS is exempt from the Freedom of Information Act.”

The government watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW, filed a lawsuit against DOGE in February, which described DOGE as “a cadre of largely unidentified actors, whose status as government employees is unclear, controlling major government functions with no oversight.”

The CREW suit asked for DOGE to comply with its FOIA requests “and promptly disclose the requested records.” The U.S. Court of Appeals for D.C. ordered in May that DOGE must provide the requested information.

CREW responded to the request from Sauer to the Supreme Court with a statement Wednesday that said “While DOGE continues to attempt to fight transparency at every level of justice, we look forward to making our case that the Supreme Court should join the District Court and Court of Appeals in allowing discovery to go forward.”

WASHINGTON — House Republicans are pushing to vote on their multitrillion-dollar tax breaks package as soon as Wednesday, grinding out last-minute deal-making to shore up wavering GOP support and deliver on President Trump’s top legislative priority.

Trump himself had instructed the Republican majority to quit arguing and get it done, his own political influence on the line. But GOP leaders worked late into the night to convince skeptical Republicans who have problems on several fronts, including worries that it will pile onto the nation’s $36-trillion debt.

A fresh analysis from the Congressional Budget Office said the tax provisions would increase the federal deficit by $3.8 trillion over the decade, while the changes to Medicaid, food stamps and other services would tally $1 trillion in reduced spending. The lowest-income households in the U.S. would see their resources drop, while the highest ones would see a boost, the CBO said.

Republicans hunkered down at the Capitol through the night for one last committee hearing processing changes to the package. Democrats immediately motioned to adjourn, but the vote failed on party lines.

“President Trump’s ‘one, big, beautiful bill’ is going to require one, big, beautiful vote,” said Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.). “We are going to get this done.”

It’s a make-or-break moment for the president and his party in Congress, who have invested much of their political capital during the crucial first few months of Trump’s return to the White House on this package. If the House Republicans fall in line with the president, overcoming unified Democratic objections, the package would next go to the Senate.

The package comes at a daunting time as the U.S. economy faces uncertainty. Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries said Republicans are trying to “quickly jam this unpopular legislation through the House because they know that the longer they wait, the more will come to light about this cruel and unconscionable bill.”

At its core, the sprawling 1,000-plus-page bill is centered on extending the tax breaks approved during Trump’s first term in 2017, while adding new ones he campaigned on during the 2024 presidential campaign.

To make up for some of the lost revenue, the Republicans are focused on spending cuts to federal safety net programs and a massive rollback of green energy tax breaks from the Biden-era Inflation Reduction Act.

Additionally, the package tacks on $350 billion in new spending — with about $150 billion going to the Pentagon, including for the president’s new “ Golden Dome” defense shield, and the rest for Trump’s mass deportation and border security agenda.

The package title carries Trump’s own words, the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act.”

As Trump promised voters on the tax front, the package proposes there would be no taxes on tips for certain workers, including those in some service industries; automobile loan interest; or some overtime pay.

There would also be an increase to the standard income tax deduction, to $32,000 for joint filers, and a boost to the child tax credit to $2,500. There would be an enhanced deduction, of $4,000, for seniors of certain income levels, to help defray taxes on Social Security income.

To cut spending, the package would impose new work requirements for many people who receive health care through Medicaid, with able-bodied adults without dependents needing to fulfill 80 hours a month on a job or in other community activities.

Similarly, those who receive food stamps through the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program, known as SNAP, would also face new work requirements.

Older Americans up to age 64, rather than 54, who are able-bodied and without dependents would need to work or engage in the community programs for 80 hours a month. Additionally, some parents of children older than 7 years old would need to fulfill the work requirements; under current law, the requirement comes after children are 18.

Republicans said they want to root out waste, fraud and abuse in the federal programs.

The Congressional Budget Office has estimated 8.6 million fewer people would have health insurance with the various changes to Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act. It also said 3 million fewer people each month would have SNAP benefits.

Republicans have been racing to finish up the package by Memorial Day, a deadline imposed by Johnson as he tries to overcome objections within his own ranks.

Conservatives are insisting on quicker, steeper cuts to federal programs to offset the costs of the trillions of dollars in lost tax revenue. GOP leaders have sped up the start date of the Medicaid work requirements from 2029 to 2027.

At the same time, more moderate and centrist lawmakers are wary of the changes to Medicaid that could result in lost health care for their constituents. Others are worried the phaseout of the renewable energy tax breaks will impede businesses using them to invest in green energy projects in many states.

Plus, a core group of lawmakers from New York, California and other high-tax states want a bigger state and local tax deduction, called SALT, for their voters back home.

As it stands, the bill would triple what’s currently a $10,000 cap on the state and local tax deduction, increasing it to $30,000 for joint filers with incomes up to $400,000 a year. They have proposed a deduction of $62,000 for single filers and $124,000 for joint filers.

Trump has been pushing hard for Republicans to unite behind the bill, which has been uniquely shaped in his image, and he said after meeting with House lawmakers privately Tuesday at the Capitol that anyone who doesn’t support the bill would be a “fool.”

But it’s not at all clear that Trump, who was brought in to seal the deal, changed minds.

One of the conservative Republicans, Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, said afterward he’s still a no vote.

“We’re still a long ways away,” said Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.), chair of the House Freedom Caucus.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a nonpartisan fiscal watchdog group, estimates that the House bill is shaping up to add roughly $3.3 trillion to the debt over the next decade.

Mascaro, Freking, Askarinam and Cappelletti write for the Associated Press.

United States President Donald Trump announced on Tuesday that he has selected a $175bn design for the multilayered Golden Dome missile defence programme aimed at countering aerial threats “even if they are launched from space”.

As part of the project, the US would deploy missile interceptors in space to shield against ballistic and hypersonic threats.

Here is more about the Golden Dome project.

What did Trump announce?

Trump on Tuesday announced $25bn initial funding for the project that will cost $175bn and be completed by the end of his current term in 2029.

“Once fully constructed, the Golden Dome will be capable of intercepting missiles even if they are launched from other sides of the world, and even if they are launched from space,” Trump said.

“This is very important for the success and even survival of our country.”

Trump also announced that US Space Force General Michael Guetlein would be the lead programme manager, responsible for overseeing the project’s progress.

“I promised the American people that I would build a cutting-edge missile defence shield to protect our homeland from the threat of foreign missile attack,” said Trump.

Trump additionally announced: “Canada has called us, and they want to be a part of it. So we’ll be talking to them.”

What is the Golden Dome project?

Trump said the Golden Dome was made to take down “hypersonic missiles, ballistic missiles and advanced cruise missiles”, adding that the programme would have space-based interceptors and sensors.

Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth, speaking alongside Trump, said the system is aimed at protecting “the homeland from cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, hypersonic missiles, drones, whether they’re conventional or nuclear”.

The announcement comes just months after January 27, when Trump signed an executive order to “immediately begin the construction of a state-of-the-art Iron Dome missile defence shield, which will be able to protect Americans”.

The Iron Dome is Israel’s missile defence system which detects an incoming rocket, determines its path, and intercepts it. The development of the system was funded by a grant from the US.

Trump said existing defence capabilities will be used in the construction of the project, and predicted the total cost would be about $175bn.

The White House has not yet released further details about the project. While Trump said the system would be developed in the US, he has not named which companies will be involved.

A space-based defence system was first envisaged by Ronald Reagan, the Republican US president from 1981 to 1989. Amidst the Cold War, Reagan proposed a barrier to nuclear weapons that included space-based technology, as part of his Strategic Defense Initiative, or Star Wars project.

“We will truly be completing the job that President Reagan started 40 years ago, forever ending the missile threat to the American homeland,” Trump said on Tuesday.

Is the Golden Dome plan feasible?

Industry experts have questioned the timeline and budget of the plan.

Funding for the Golden Dome has not yet been secured. At Tuesday’s news conference, Trump confirmed that he was seeking $25bn for the system in a tax cut bill currently moving through Congress, although that sum could be cut amid ongoing negotiations.

Additionally, some variation is expected in the total cost of the project. The Associated Press quoted an unnamed government official as saying Trump had been given three versions of the plan, described as “medium,” “high”, and “extra high”. These versions correspond to the number of satellites, sensors and interceptors that will be placed in space. AP reported that Trump picked the “high” version, which has an initial cost ranging between $30bn and $100bn.

“The new data point is the $175 billion, but the question remains, over what period of time. It’s probably 10 years,” Tom Karako, a senior fellow with the Defense and Security Department at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), told the Reuters news agency.

On May 1, 42 Democratic members of the US Congress signed a letter questioning the possible involvement of Elon Musk’s SpaceX, which is among the top technology companies seeking to build key components of the Golden Dome.

“If Mr Musk were to exercise improper influence over the Golden Dome contract, it would be another example of a disturbing pattern of Mr Musk flouting conflict of interest rules,” the letter says.

How did China and Russia – the US’s biggest rivals – react?

The US sees a growing threat from China and Russia, its main adversaries.

Over the past decades, China has greatly advanced its ballistic and hypersonic missile technology, while Moscow boasts one of the most advanced intercontinental-range missile systems in the world. Russia and the US have amassed the largest arsenals of nuclear warheads worldwide.

The threat of drones has also grown amid advancements in technology.

China denounced the Golden Dome as a threat to international security and accused the US of prompting an arms race.

“The United States puts its own interests first and is obsessed with seeking its own absolute security, which violates the principle that no country’s security should come at the expense of others,” Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning said at a regular briefing.

“(The plan) heightens the risk of space becoming a battlefield, fuels an arms race, and undermines international security,” he said.

The Kremlin said the Golden Dome missile shield plan was a “sovereign matter” for the US.

“This is a sovereign matter for the United States. If the United States believes that there is a missile threat, then of course it will develop a missile defence system,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters, including AFP, on Wednesday.

“That is what all countries do,” he added.

“Of course, in the foreseeable future, the course of events will require the resumption of contacts to restore strategic stability,” he said.

May 21 (UPI) — South African President Cyril Ramaphosa will meet with President Donald Trump Wednesday to talk about relations, both trade and diplomatic.

“The trade relations between South Africa and the United States will be the focus of my working visit,” wrote South African President Cyril Ramaphosa to his X account Tuesday, “We aim to strengthen and consolidate relations between our two countries.”

South African Minister of Agriculture John Steenhuisen said via social media Tuesday that he had a “constructive meeting” with U.S. Trade Representative Ambassador Greer in Washington.

“Trade is essential between our two countries and we are determined to ensure that access for agricultural products remains open in a mutually beneficial way. Trade means jobs and a growing economy,” Steenhuisen said.

However, it is also likely that the two will discuss the relationship between the two nations in general, as the Trump administration has cut off aid to South Africa and publicly leveled accusations that the South African government has backed violence against the Afrikaners, the White South Africans, whom the United States has begun to accept as refugees, despite the fact that Trump suspended the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program on the first day of his second term.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said earlier in May that Afrikaners fleeing persecution are welcome in the United States.

“The South African government has treated these people terribly — threatening to steal their private land and subjected them to vile racial discrimination. The Trump Administration is proud to offer them refuge in our great country.”

“We all know as South Africans both Black and White is that there is no genocide here,” Ramaphosa said Friday. “We are not genociders. We are not committing any act of hatred, act of retribution or violence against anyone,” Ramaphosa said.

White South Africans maintain control of a majority of the land and much of the county’s wealth after apartheid ended in 1994.

“The false narratives about a genocide are not a reflection of who we are as a nation,” Ramaphosa further stated Friday, “and during our working visit to the U.S. we will be advancing a proudly South African message.”

Washington, DC – United States Congresswoman LaMonica McIver has been charged with assaulting a law enforcement officer after a standoff at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention facility in early May.

On Tuesday, Democrats denounced the charge as an attempt by the administration of Republican President Donald Trump to silence his political rivals for speaking out against his deportation campaign.

In a post on the social media platform X, Democratic Representative Gil Cisneros blasted the administration for having “gone after judges, prosecutors, and now, Members of Congress” in its attempts to stifle dissent.

“The charges against Rep McIver are a blatant political attack and an attempt to prohibit Members of Congress from conducting oversight,” Cisneros wrote.

The charge was announced on Monday evening, with federal prosecutor Alina Habba —Trump’s former personal lawyer — accusing McIver of having “assaulted, impeded, and interfered” with law enforcement.

“The conduct cannot be overlooked,” Habba wrote in a statement. “It is my constitutional obligation to ensure that our federal law enforcement is protected when executing their duties.”

The criminal charge stemmed from an incident on May 9, when McIver joined two other members of Congress for an oversight tour of Delaney Hall, a privately run immigration detention facility in Newark, New Jersey.

The visit devolved into a fracas involving elected officials, protesters and federal law enforcement agents. The mayor of Newark, Ras Baraka, was arrested at the scene for alleged trespassing.

In Monday’s statement, Habba announced the charge against Baraka has since been dropped “for the sake of moving forward”. But his arrests likewise spurred outcry over possible political motives.

‘Intimidate and interfere’

Late on Monday, McIver responded to the charges against her with a statement of her own, saying she and other members of Congress were “fulfilling our lawful oversight responsibilities” when they visited the detention centre.

McIver accused ICE agents at the scene of creating an “unnecessary and unsafe confrontation”. She added that the charges against her “mischaracterise and distort my actions”.

“The charges against me are purely political,” McIver wrote.

Top Democrats also remained defiant in the face of the Trump administration’s accusations, saying they would continue their oversight duties at immigration facilities like Delaney Hall.

“The criminal charge against Congresswoman LaMonica McIver is extreme, morally bankrupt and lacks any basis in law or fact,” Democratic leaders in the House of Representatives said in a joint statement.

They underscored that they have a right as Congress members to show up at federal facilities unannounced for inspections.

The charges against McIver, they argued, are a “blatant attempt by the Trump administration to intimidate Congress and interfere with our ability to serve as a check and balance on an out-of-control executive branch”.

In a separate statement, Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee said the criminal charge was a “dangerous precedent” that “reveals the increasingly authoritarian nature of this administration”.

“Representative McIver has our full support, and we will do everything in our power to help fight this outrageous threat to our constitutional system,” they said.

Democrats have denounced the Trump administration’s push for “mass deportation” as violating constitutional and human rights. As part of that push, the Trump White House has sought to expand the use of private detention centres to house the growing number of people arrested for deportation.

Mayor Baraka, in particular, has repeatedly protested the 1,000-bed Delaney Hall for opening without the proper permits and approvals. Its operator, The GEO Group, has denied any violations.

The facility became operational in early May, under a 15-year agreement made with ICE.

May 20 (UPI) — The Trump administration has lifted a stop-work order on New York’s offshore wind energy project and will allow construction to resume.

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul announced Monday evening that Interior Secretary Doug Burgum and President Donald Trump had agreed to lift the order after making progress on a natural gas compromise with the state.

“Americans who live in New York and New England would see significant economic benefits and lower utility costs from increased access to reliable, affordable, clean American natural gas,” Burgum wrote in a post on X.

The offshore and wind energy project Empire Wind 1, off Long Island, is the first offshore wind project that would deliver electricity directly to New York City. It was approved by the Biden administration and stopped last month by Trump.

Throughout his campaign, Trump made his opposition to wind power clear as he pushed offshore fossil fuel production instead. In January, Trump signed an executive order that bans new leases for offshore wind in U.S. waters.

Equinor, the parent company of Empire Offshore Wind LLC, suspended offshore construction last month in compliance with the Interior Department order.

According to Burgum, the Empire Wind 1 project was tabled “until further review of information that suggests the Biden administration rushed through its approval without sufficient analysis.”

Hochul pushed back last month, saying, “Empire Wind 1 is already employing hundreds of New Yorkers, including 1,000 good-paying union jobs as part of a growing sector that has already spurred significant economic development and private investment throughout the state and beyond.”

On Tuesday, Equinor expressed gratitude for the administration’s agreement with New York.

“We appreciate the fact that construction can now resume on Empire Wind, a project which underscores our commitment to deliver energy while supporting local economies and creating jobs,” said Anders Opedal, president and chief executive officer of Equinor.

Equinor’s work began last year with the goal of gearing up commercial operations in 2027. The Empire Wind 1 project is 30% complete. It will include 54 turbines, up to 910-feet tall, that will generate 810 megawatts of electricity for half a million homes.

“I would like to thank President Trump for finding a solution that saves thousands of American jobs and provides for continued investments in energy infrastructure in the United States,” Opedal added. “I am grateful to Gov. Hochul for her constructive collaboration with the Trump administration, without which we would not have been able to advance this project and secure energy for 500,000 homes in New York.”

WASHINGTON — President Trump implored House Republicans at the Capitol to drop their fights over his big tax-cut bill and get it done, using encouraging words but also the hardened language of politics over the multitrillion-dollar package that is at risk of collapsing before planned votes this week.

During the more than hourlong session Tuesday, Trump warned Republicans to not touch Medicaid with cuts, and he told New York lawmakers to end their fight for a bigger local tax deduction, reversing his own campaign promise. The president, heading into the meeting, called himself a “cheerleader” for the Republican Party and praised Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.). But he also criticized at least one of the GOP holdouts as a “grandstander” and warned that anyone who doesn’t support the bill would be a “fool.”

“We have unbelievable unity,” Trump said as he exited. “I think we’re going to get everything we want.”

The president arrived at a pivotal moment. Negotiations are slogging along and it’s not at all clear the package, with its sweeping tax breaks and cuts to Medicaid, food stamps and green energy programs, has the support needed from the House’s slim Republican majority. Lawmakers are also being asked to add some $350 billion to Trump’s border security, deportation and defense agenda.

Inside, he spoke privately in what one lawmaker called the president’s “weaving” style, and took questions.

The president also made it clear he’s losing patience with the various holdout factions of the House Republicans, according to a senior White House official who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the private meeting.

But Trump disputed that notion as well as reports that he used an expletive in warning against cutting Medicaid. Instead, he said afterward, “That was a meeting of love.” He received several standing ovations, Republicans said.

Yet it was not at all clear that Trump, who was brought in to seal the deal, changed minds.

“We’re still a long ways away,” said Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.), the chair of the House Freedom Caucus.

Conservatives are insisting on quicker, steeper cuts to federal programs to offset the costs of the trillions of dollars in lost tax revenue. At the same time, a core group of lawmakers from New York and other high-tax states wants bigger tax breaks for their voters back home. Worries about piling onto the nation’s $36-trillion debt are stark.

With House Democrats lined up against the package, calling it a giveaway to the wealthy at the expense of safety net programs, GOP leaders have almost no votes to spare. A key committee hearing is set for the middle of the night Tuesday in hopes of a House floor vote by Wednesday afternoon.

“They literally are trying to take healthcare away from millions of Americans at this very moment in the dead of night,” said House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York.

Trump has been pushing hard for Republicans to unite behind the bill, the president’s signature domestic policy initiative in Congress.

Asked about one of the conservative Republicans, Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, Trump lashed out.

“I think he is a grandstander, frankly,” the president continued. “I think he should be voted out of office.”

But Massie, a renegade who wears a clock lapel pin that tallies the nation’s debt load, said afterward he’s still a no vote.

Also unmoved was Rep. Mike Lawler, one of the New York Republicans leading the fight for a bigger state and local tax deduction, known as SALT: “As it stands right now, I do not support the bill. Period.”

The sprawling 1,116-page package carries Trump’s title, the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” as well as his campaign promises to extend the tax breaks approved during his first term while adding new ones, including no taxes on tips, automobile loan interest and Social Security.

Yet, the price tag is rising and lawmakers are wary of the votes ahead, particularly as the economy teeters with uncertainty.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a nonpartisan fiscal watchdog group, estimates that the House bill is shaping up to add roughly $3.3 trillion to the debt over the next decade.

Republicans criticizing the measure argued that the bill’s new spending and tax cuts are front-loaded, while the measures to offset the cost are back-loaded.

In particular, the conservative Republicans are looking to speed up the new work requirements that Republicans want to enact for able-bodied participants in Medicaid. They had been proposed to start Jan. 1, 2029, but Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) said on CNBC that work requirements for some Medicaid beneficiaries would begin in early 2027.

At least 7.6 million fewer people are expected to have health insurance under the initial Medicaid changes, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said last week.

Republican holdouts are also looking to more quickly halt green energy tax breaks, which had been approved as part of the Biden-era Inflation Reduction Act, and are now being used for renewable energy projects across the nation.

But for every change Johnson considers to appease the hard-right conservatives, he risks losing support from more traditional and centrist Republicans. Many have signed letters protesting deep cuts to Medicaid and food assistance programs and the rolling back of clean energy tax credits.

At its core, the sprawling legislative package permanently extends the existing income tax cuts and bolsters the standard deduction, increasing it to $32,000 for joint filers, and the child tax credit to $2,500.

The New Yorkers are fighting for a larger state and local tax deduction beyond the bill’s proposal. As it stands, the bill would triple what’s currently a $10,000 cap on the state and local tax deduction, increasing it to $30,000 for joint filers with incomes up to $400,000 a year. They have proposed a deduction of $62,000 for single filers and $124,000 for joint filers.

Trump, who had campaigned on fully reinstating the unlimited SALT deduction, now appears to be satisfied with the proposed compromise, arguing it only benefits “all the Democratic” states.

If the bill passes the House this week, it would move to the Senate, where Republicans are also eyeing changes.

Mascaro, Freking, Askarinam and Cappelletti write for the Associated Press. AP writers Darlene Superville and Seung Min Kim contributed to this report.

A United States citizen has been transferred to the US after being held for nearly six months in Venezuela.

The family of US Air Force veteran Joseph St Clair confirmed his release on Tuesday, following his detention in November of last year.

“This news came suddenly, and we are still processing it, but we are overwhelmed with joy and gratitude,” St Clair’s parents, Scott and Patti, said in a statement.

US President Donald Trump’s envoy for special missions, Richard Grenell, later explained on social media that he had met with Venezuelan officials on the Caribbean island of Antigua to negotiate the release.

Grenell credited St Clair’s freedom to Trump’s “America First” political platform.

“Joe St. Clair is back in America,” he wrote. “I met Venezuelan officials in a neutral country today to negotiate an America First strategy. This is only possible because [Trump] puts Americans first. ”

Citing anonymous sources familiar with the negotiations, the Reuters news agency reported that Grenell discussed St Clair’s case on Tuesday with Jorge Rodriguez, the president of Venezuela’s National Assembly and an ally of President Nicolas Maduro.

Reuters and another news agency, Bloomberg, both reported that a deal was struck to extend a licence for the US oil company Chevron to operate in Venezuela by 60 days.

The Trump administration had previously announced it was revoking the licence in February, on the basis that Venezuela had not upheld its commitment to fair elections. The licence was due to end on May 27.

Any extension will likely need the approval of the US Department of State and the US Treasury.

The South American country relies on oil as the pillar of its economy. But since the mid-2010s, Venezuela has experienced an economic crisis that has pushed even basic supplies like food and medicine beyond what some families can afford.

That, combined with alleged political repression, has prompted an exodus of nearly 7.9 million people out of Venezuela, according to the United Nations.

In 2023, Venezuela committed to electoral reforms under the Barbados Agreement, a deal that the US applauded. Then-US President Joe Biden loosened restrictions on Venezuela’s oil industry in the aftermath of the agreement.

But Venezuela’s presidential election on July 28, 2024 was widely criticised for its lack of transparency. While Maduro and his allies claimed he had won a third term, the electoral authorities did not provide any proof of his victory.

Instead, the opposition coalition published voting tallies it said proved that its candidate had won by a landslide. That prompted widespread protests and a deadly crackdown from law enforcement.

During his first term in office, from 2017 to 2021, Trump had pursued a campaign of “maximum pressure” on Maduro’s government, even offering a $15m bounty for information that led to the Venezuelan leader’s arrest.

But critics have pointed out that Trump may need Venezuela’s cooperation to carry out his goal of “mass deportation” during his second term.

Since returning to office in January, Trump has signalled a willingness to negotiate with Maduro. In late January, he even sent Grenell to meet with Maduro in person in the capital of Caracas. Part of Grenell’s directive was to ensure all detained Americans in the country were returned home.

As Grenell left the country, he revealed he was returning with six Americans who had previously been imprisoned in Venezuela.

In March, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio estimated that nine Americans remained in Venezuela’s custody.

Venezuela, for its part, has started to accept deportation flights from the US, although in the past it has refused to accept migrants removed from the US.

St Clair’s family has said that the military veteran was a language specialist who was seeking treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder in South America.

A United States judge has rebuked the administration of President Donald Trump, saying that reports of deportations to South Sudan appear to violate his previous court order.

On Tuesday in Boston, Massachusetts, US District Court Judge Brian Murphy held a virtual hearing to weigh an emergency motion on behalf of deported migrants reportedly on board a flight to South Sudan.

He asked lawyers for the Trump administration to identify where the migrants were. He also indicated that he could ask for the flight to be turned around.

“Based on what I have been told, this seems like it may be contempt,” Judge Murphy told Elianis Perez, a lawyer for the Trump Justice Department.

In a recent annual report, the US Department of State accused South Sudan of “significant human rights issues”, including torture and extrajudicial killings.

But the Trump administration has been looking abroad for destinations to send undocumented immigrants currently detained in the US, particularly those whose home countries will not accept them.

In Tuesday’s hearing, Judge Murphy said the flight to South Sudan appeared to violate a preliminary injunction he issued on April 18, which prohibited migrants from being deported to third-party countries that were not their own.

That injunction required the Trump administration to give the migrants an adequate opportunity to appeal their removal.

The migrants, Judge Murphy ruled, were simply seeking “an opportunity to explain why such a deportation will likely result in their persecution, torture, and/or death”.

He cited the Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution, which guarantees the right to due process: in other words, a fair hearing in the US court system.

Earlier this month, on May 7, lawyers for the migrants had indicated that their clients were slated to be sent to Libya, another country with significant human rights concerns.

Judge Murphy, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, ruled that such a deportation would be in violation of his injunction.

In Tuesday’s emergency court filing, the lawyers for those migrants emphasised how close a call that incident was. The migrants in question were already on a bus, sitting on the tarmac of an airport, when they were ordered to be returned.

The emergency motion identifies the migrants only by their initials and countries of origin, Myanmar and Vietnam among them.

But it explains what allegedly happened to them over the last 24 hours and seeks immediate action from the court.

The lawyers allege that one migrant from Myanmar, called NM in the court filings, received a notice of removal on Monday. It identified the destination as South Africa. Within 10 minutes, the court filing said the email was recalled by its sender.

A couple of hours later, a new notice of removal was sent, this time naming South Sudan as the destination.

In both instances, NM refused to sign the document. Lawyers in the emergency petition indicate that NM has “limited English proficiency” and was not provided a translator to understand the English-language document.

While one of NM’s lawyers stated her intention to meet with him on Tuesday morning, by the time their appointment time came, she was informed he had already been removed from his detention facility, en route to South Sudan.

The emergency filing includes a copy of an email sent to the lawyers from the family members of those deported.

“I believe my husband [name redacted] and 10 other individuals that were sent to Port Isabel Detention Center in Los Fresnos, TX were deported to South Africa or Sudan,” the email begins.

“This is not right! I fear my husband and his group, which consist of people from Laos, Thailand, Pakistan, Korea, and Mexico are being sent to South Africa or Sudan against their will. Please help! They cannot be allowed to do this.”

WASHINGTON — For generations, official American documents have been meticulously preserved and protected — from the era of quills and parchment to boxes of paper to the cloud, safeguarding snapshots of the government and the nation for posterity.

Now, the Trump administration has sought to expand the executive branch’s power to shield from public view key administration initiatives. Officials have used apps like Signal that can auto-delete messages containing sensitive information rather than retaining them for record-keeping. And they have shaken up the National Archives leadership.

To historians and archivists, it points to the possibility that President Trump will leave less for the nation’s historical record than nearly any president before him.

Such an eventuality creates a conundrum: How will experts — and even ordinary Americans — piece together what occurred when those charged with setting aside the artifacts properly documenting history refuse to do so?

How to preserve history?

The Trump administration says it’s the “most transparent in history,” citing the president’s fondness for taking questions from reporters nearly every day. But flooding the airwaves, media outlets and the internet with all things Trump isn’t the same as keeping records that document the inner workings of an administration, historians caution.

“He thinks he controls history,” says Timothy Naftali, a presidential historian who served as founding director of the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum in Yorba Linda. “He wants to control what Americans ultimately find out about the truth of his administration, and that’s dangerous.”

Trump long refused to release his tax returns despite every other major White House candidate and president having done so since Jimmy Carter. And, today, White House stenographers still record every word Trump utters, but many of their transcriptions are languishing in the White House press office without authorization for release — meaning there’s no official record of what the president says for weeks, if at all.

“You want to have a record because that’s how you ensure accountability,” said Lindsay Chervinsky, executive director of the George Washington Presidential Library in Mount Vernon, Va.

The law mandates maintaining records

The Presidential Records Act of 1978 mandates the preservation, forever, of White House and vice presidential documents and communications. It deems them the property of the U.S. government and directs the National Archives and Records Administration to administer them after a president’s term.

After his first term, rather than turn classified documents over the National Archives, Trump hauled boxes of potentially sensitive documents to his Florida estate, Mar-a-Lago, where they ended up piled in his bedroom, a ballroom and even a bathroom and shower. The FBI raided the property to recover them. The case was later scrapped.

Trudy Huskamp Peterson, who served as acting archivist of the United States from 1993 to 1995, said keeping such records for the public is important because “decision-making always involves conflicting views, and it’s really important to get that internal documentation to see what the arguments were.”

Presidential clashes with archivists predate Trump

President George H.W. Bush’s administration destroyed some informal notes, visitor logs and emails. After President Clinton left office, his former national security advisor, Sandy Berger, pleaded guilty to taking copies of a document about terrorist threats from the National Archives.

President George W. Bush’s administration disabled automatic archiving for some official emails, encouraged some staffers to use private email accounts outside their work addresses and lost 22 million emails that were supposed to have been archived, though they were eventually uncovered in 2009.

Congress updated the Presidential Records Act in 2014 to encompass electronic messaging — including commercial email services known to be used by government employees to conduct official business.

But back then, use of auto-delete apps like Signal was far less common.

“It’s far easier to copy — or forward — a commercial email to a dot-gov address to be preserved, than it is to screenshot a series of messages on an app like Signal,” said Jason R. Baron, a professor at the University of Maryland and former director of litigation at the National Archives.

Relying on ’an honor system’

There were efforts during the first Trump administration to safeguard transparency, including a memo issued through the office of White House counsel Don McGahn in February 2017 that reminded White House personnel of the necessity to preserve and maintain presidential records.

The White House now points to having recently ordered the declassification of bevies of historical files, including records related to the assassinations of Kennedy, his brother Robert and Martin Luther King Jr.

The Trump administration says it also ended a Biden policy that allowed staffers to use Microsoft Teams, where chats weren’t captured by White House systems. The Biden administration had over 800 users on Teams, meaning an unknown number of presidential records might have been lost, the Trump administration now says.

But the White House did not answer questions about the possibly of drafting a new memo on record retention like McGahn’s from 2017.

Chervinsky, author of “The Cabinet: George Washington and the Creation of an American Institution,” said Congress, the courts and even the public often don’t have the bandwidth to ensure records retention laws are enforced, meaning, “a lot of it is still, I think, an honor system.”

“There aren’t that many people who are practicing oversight,” she said. “So, a lot of it does require people acting in good faith and using the operating systems that they’re supposed to use, and using the filing systems they’re supposed to use.”

Angered by the role the National Archives played in his documents case, meanwhile, Trump fired the ostensibly independent agency’s head, Archivist of the United States Colleen Shogan, and named Secretary of State Marco Rubio as her acting replacement.

Peterson, the former acting national archivist, said she still believes key information about the Trump administration will eventually emerge, but “I don’t know how soon.”

“Ultimately things come out,” she said. “That’s just the way the world works.”

Weissert writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Democratic senators sparred Tuesday over the Trump administration’s foreign policies, including on Ukraine and Russia, the Middle East and Latin America, as well as the slashing of the U.S. foreign assistance budget and refugee admissions.

At a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, his first since being confirmed on the first day of President Trump’s inauguration, former Florida Sen. Rubio defended the administration’s decisions to his onetime colleagues.

He said “America is back” and claimed four months of foreign policy achievements, even as many of them remain frustratingly inconclusive. Among them are the resumption of nuclear talks with Iran, efforts to bring Russia and Ukraine into peace talks, and efforts to end the war in Gaza between Israel and Hamas.

He praised agreements with El Salvador and other Latin American countries to accept migrant deportees, saying “secure borders, safe communities and zero tolerance for criminal cartels are once again the guiding principles of our foreign policy.” He also rejected assertions that massive cuts to his department’s budget would hurt America’s standing abroad. Instead, he said the cuts would actually improve American status and the United States’ reputation internationally.

Sen. Jim Risch (R-Idaho), the committee’s chair, opened the hearing with praise for Trump’s changes and spending cuts and welcomed what he called the administration’s promising nuclear talks with Iran. Risch also noted what he jokingly called “modest disagreement” with Democratic lawmakers, who used Tuesday’s hearing to confront Rubio about Trump administration moves that they say are weakening the United States’ influence globally.

Yet Democrats on the Senate committee, including ranking member Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, Chris Murphy of Connecticut, Tim Kaine of Virginia, and Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, took sharp issue with Rubio’s presentation.

Shaheen argued that the Trump administration has “eviscerated six decades of foreign policy investments” and given China openings around the world.

“I urge you to stand up to the extremists of the administration,” Shaheen said. Other Democrats excoriated the administration for its suspension of the refugee admissions program, particularly while allowing white Afrikaners from South Africa to enter the country.

In two particularly contentious exchanges, Kaine and Van Hollen demanded answers on the decision to suspend overall refugee admissions but to exempt Afrikaners based on what they called “specious” claims that they have been subjected to massive discrimination by the South African government. Rubio gave no ground.

“The United States has a right to pick and choose who we allow into the United States,” he said. “If there is a subset of people that are easier to vet, who we have a better understanding of who they are and what they’re going to do when they come here, they’re going to receive preference.”

He added: “There are a lot of sad stories around the world, millions and millions of people around the world. It’s heartbreaking, but we cannot assume millions and millions of people around the world. No country can.”

On the Middle East, Rubio said the administration has continued to push ahead with attempts to broker a ceasefire in Gaza and to promote stability in Syria.

He stressed the importance of U.S. engagement with Syria, saying that otherwise, he fears the interim government there could be weeks or months away from a “potential collapse and a full-scale civil war of epic proportions.”

Rubio’s comments addressed Trump’s pledge to lift sanctions on Syria’s new transitional government, which is led by a former militant chief who led the overthrow of the country’s longtime oppressive leader, Bashar Assad, late last year.

Lee and Knickmeyer write for the Associated Press.

Washington, DC – United States President Donald Trump and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have laid out their clearest plan yet for the “Golden Dome” missile defence programme, which would include putting weapons in space for the first time.

Speaking from the White House on Tuesday, Trump said he had “officially selected an architecture” for the system, designed to take down “hypersonic missiles, ballistic missiles and advanced cruise missiles”.

“I promised the American people that I would build a cutting-edge missile defence shield to protect our homeland from the threat of foreign missile attack,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office.

The Golden Dome system, he added, would include “space-based sensors and interceptors”.

“ Once fully constructed, the Golden Dome will be capable of intercepting missiles even if they are launched from other sides of the world and even if they’re launched from space,” Trump continued. “We will have the best system ever built.”

The announcement comes just less than four months after Trump signed an executive order kicking off the programme’s development. General Michael Guetlein – who currently serves as the vice chief of space operations at Space Force, a branch of the US military – is slated to manage the programme.

Speaking at the event, Hegseth hailed the plan as a “game changer” and a “generational investment in security of America and Americans”.

The White House did not immediately release further details about the missile defence system, and the Pentagon is reportedly still working out its capabilities and requirements.

The Congressional Budget Office estimated earlier this month that the space-based components of the Golden Dome alone could cost as much as $542bn over the next 20 years.

It noted that a high number of sensors and interceptors would be needed for a space-based system to be effective, particularly as foreign militaries like North Korea’s grow more sophisticated.

But on Tuesday, Trump outlined a much lower price tag and timeline.

“It should be fully operational before the end of my term. So, we’ll have it done in about three years,” Trump said.

He estimated the total cost to add up to about $175bn, adding that he planned to use existing defence capabilities to build the system.

But the funding for the programme has so far not been secured. At Tuesday’s news conference, Trump confirmed that he was seeking $25bn for the system in a tax cut bill currently moving through Congress, although that sum could be cut amid ongoing negotiations.

There is likely to be some variation in the total cost of the project. The Associated Press news agency, for example, cited an unnamed government official as saying that Trump had been given three versions of the plan, described as “medium”, “high” and “extra high”.

Those tiers corresponded to how many satellites, sensors and interceptors would be put in space as part of the programme. The news agency reported that Trump chose the “high” version, which has an initial cost ranging between $30bn and $100bn.

Questions over viability

As he explained his plans for the Golden Dome on Tuesday, Trump cited several inspirations, including Israel’s “Iron Dome” missile defence system, which is funded in part by the US.

He also pointed to the work of a fellow Republican, the late President Ronald Reagan, who served in the White House during the Cold War in the 1980s.

As part of his Strategic Defense Initiative in 1983, Reagan had proposed a barrier to nuclear weapons that included space-based technology.

“ We will truly be completing the job that President Reagan started 40 years ago, forever ending the missile threat to the American homeland,” Trump said.

But questions have persisted over the viability of a space-based defence system, its price, and whether it could ignite a new arms race.

Democrats have also questioned the possible involvement of Elon Musk’s SpaceX, which is a frontrunner among the technology companies seeking to build key components of the system.

A group of 42 Democratic lawmakers have called for a probe into Musk’s role in the bidding process, pointing to his position as a special adviser to Trump and his substantial campaign donations to the president.

“If Mr. Musk were to exercise improper influence over the Golden Dome contract, it would be another example
of a disturbing pattern of Mr. Musk flouting conflict of interest rules,” the Democrats wrote in a letter, calling for the probe.

On Tuesday, Trump did not directly respond to a question about which companies would be involved in the Golden Dome. Instead, he highlighted that the system would boost industries in states like Alaska, Indiana, Florida and Georgia.

He added, “Canada has called us, and they want to be a part of it. So we’ll be talking to them.”

The administration of US President Donald Trump has granted refugee status to 49 white Afrikaners, echoing a debunked conspiracy theory about “white genocide” in South Africa. The move comes after Trump cut aid to the nation and threatened to boycott meetings with its government. What’s behind Trump’s fixation on South Africa?

Outlet is one of several media services whose funding was cut by the Trump administration amid an aggressive downsizing effort.

The European Union plans to step in to help save longtime media outlet Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) after United States President Donald Trump’s administration abruptly stopped funding it.

The bloc’s foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, told reporters after a meeting of EU foreign ministers in Brussels on Tuesday that 5.5 million euros ($6.2m) will be provided to “support the vital work of Radio Free Europe”.

“It’s short-term emergency funding designed as a safety net for the independent journalism,” she added.

Trump suspended all funding for RFE/RL in March along with other US broadcasters, including Voice of America, to slash government spending.

Critics of the administration said the cuts are also politically motivated and part of a push to control and curb news media that do not hew to its outlook.

Trump earlier this month signed an executive order slashing federal subsidies to two US public broadcasters, PBS and NPR , accusing them of biased reporting and spreading “left-wing” propaganda.

Lawyers for RFE/RL, which has been operating for 75 years, secured an order last month from a US federal judge for the Trump administration to restore $12m that was appropriated by Congress.

The money has not been sent so far as lawyers said the service will have to shut down in June without the funding.

Kallas said on Tuesday that the EU funding would not cover the work of the outlet across the globe but would focus on interests closer to the agenda of the bloc.

“So our focus should be really to help Radio Free Europe to work and function in those countries that are in our neighbourhood and that are very much dependent on news coming from outside,” she said.

The EU’s top diplomat said she hoped the 27 EU member countries would also provide more funds to help Radio Free Europe longer term. Kallas said the bloc has been looking for “strategic areas” where it can help as Washington cuts life-saving foreign aid.

The outlet’s corporate headquarters are in Washington, DC, and its journalistic headquarters are based in the Czech Republic. The service has aired programmes in 27 languages in 23 countries across Eastern Europe, Central Asia and the Middle East and has more than 1,700 staff.

The outlet has been heavily criticised and banned by Russia for its coverage of the war in Ukraine.

Radio Free Europe began broadcasting in 1950 in the early years of the Cold War to several Eastern European nations that had become Soviet Union satellites. Radio Liberty began broadcasting to Russia a few years later. Both were initially funded by the US Congress through the Central Intelligence Agency.

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration has agreed to pay just under $5 million to settle a wrongful death lawsuit that Ashli Babbitt’s family filed over her shooting by an officer during the U.S. Capitol riot, according to a person with knowledge of the settlement. The person insisted on anonymity to discuss with the Associated Press terms of a settlement that have not been made public.

The settlement would resolve the $30-million federal lawsuit that Babbitt’s estate filed last year in Washington, D.C. On Jan. 6, 2021, a Capitol police officer shot Babbitt as she tried to climb through the broken window of a barricaded door leading to the Speaker’s Lobby.

The officer who shot her was cleared of wrongdoing by the U.S. Attorney’s office for the District of Columbia, which concluded that he acted in self-defense and in the defense of members of Congress. The Capitol Police also cleared the officer.

Settlement terms haven’t been disclosed in public court filings. On May 2, lawyers for Babbitt’s estate and the Justice Department told a federal judge that they had reached a settlement in principle but were still working out the details before a final agreement could be signed.

Justice Department spokespeople and two attorneys for the Babbitt family didn’t immediately respond to messages seeking comment.

Babbitt, a 35-year-old Air Force veteran from San Diego, was unarmed when she was shot by the officer. The lawsuit alleges that the plainclothes officer failed to de-escalate the situation and did not give her any warnings or commands before opening fire.

The suit also accused the Capitol Police of negligence, claiming the department should have known that the officer was “prone to behave in a dangerous or otherwise incompetent manner.”

“Ashli posed no threat to the safety of anyone,” the lawsuit said.

The officer said in a televised interview that he fired as a “last resort.” He said he didn’t know if the person jumping through the window was armed when he pulled the trigger.

Thousands of people stormed the Capitol after President Trump spoke to a crowd of supporters at his Jan. 6 “Stop the Steal” rally near the White House. More than 100 police officers were injured in the attack.

In January, on his first day back in the White House, Trump pardoned, commuted the prison sentences or ordered the dismissal of charges for all of the more than 1,500 people charged with crimes in the riot.

Tucker and Kunzelman write for the Associated Press. AP writer Alanna Durkin Richer contributed to this report.

May 20 (UPI) — President Donald Trump visited Capitol Hill Tuesday to move those House Republicans who have so far chosen not to approve his legislative agenda bill to cease their opposition and move the legislation forward.

Trump was blunt in his dealings with conservative GOP representatives who want the bill to cut deeper into Medicaid.

He further pushed that message as he spoke to reporters outside the meeting and said of Medicaid that the bill would only cut “waste, fraud and abuse.”

The other GOP House faction he came to beseech are those who hail from mostly blue states and seek a higher cap on the state and local tax, or SALT, deduction. Trump alleged that it’s the governors of blue states like New York, Illinois and California, who would benefit if they were to change the bill to up the SALT cap, “and those governors are the ones who blew it because they weren’t able to get it.”

In the closed-door session, Trump reportedly told those who held out for SALT should “leave it alone” and run with the bill as is.

However, so far Trump’s efforts have not encouraged the SALT faction to flip. Rep. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., told the press Tuesday he still plans to vote no on the bill, but that Trump does understand that it’s “imperative to get a deal done and a bill passed.”

New York GOP Reps. Nick LaLota and Andrew Garbarino have also said they remain a no.

There are also Republicans who are hardline against a SALT cap raise.

“Republicans going to bat for tax deductions that will primarily benefit limousine liberals in blue states,” said Thomas Massie, R-Ky., in an X post Tuesday, “This carve out for affluent people in states like NY and California will increase the deficit substantially and is a reversal of Trump’s first term tax policy.”

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., remains steadfast that he wants the bill passed by the House by May 26, which is Memorial Day, but as of Tuesday those GOP House members with gripes have put the bill’s movement in neutral.

The press office for Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, posted to social media Tuesday that Roy has said “We all are here to advance the agenda that the President ran on and that we all ran on,” but added “I don’t think the bill is exactly where it needs to be, yet.”

Libraries across the United States are cutting back on ebooks, audiobooks and loan programs after the Trump administration suspended millions of dollars in federal grants as it tries to dissolve the Institute of Museum and Library Services.

Federal judges have issued temporary orders to block the Trump administration from taking any further steps toward gutting the agency. But the unexpected slashing of grants has delivered a significant blow to many libraries, which are reshuffling budgets and looking at different ways to raise money.

Maine has laid off a fifth of its staff and temporarily closed its state library after not receiving the remainder of its annual funding. Libraries in Mississippi have indefinitely stopped offering a popular ebook service, and the South Dakota state library has suspended its interlibrary loan program.

Ebook and audiobook programs are especially vulnerable to budget cuts, even though those offerings have exploded in popularity since the COVID-19 pandemic.

“I think everyone should know the cost of providing digital sources is too expensive for most libraries,” said Cindy Hohl, president of the American Library Assn. “It’s a continuous and growing need.”

Library officials caught off guard by Trump’s cuts

President Trump issued an executive order March 14 to dismantle the IMLS before firing nearly all of its employees.

One month later, the Maine State Library announced it was issuing layoff notices for workers funded through an IMLS grant program.

“It came as quite a surprise to all of us,” said Spencer Davis, a library generalist at the Maine State Library who is one of eight employees who were laid off May 8 because of the suspended funding.

In April, California, Washington and Connecticut were the only three states to receive letters stating the remainder of their funding for the year was canceled, Hohl said. For others, the money hasn’t been distributed yet. The three states all filed formal objections with the IMLS.

Rebecca Wendt, California state library director, said she was never told why California’s funding was terminated while the other remaining states did not receive the same notice.

“We are mystified,” Wendt said.

The agency did not respond to an email seeking comment.

Popular digital offerings on the chopping block

Most libraries are funded by city and county governments, but receive a smaller portion of their budget from their state libraries, which receive federal dollars every year to help pay for summer reading programs, interlibrary loan services and digital books. Libraries in rural areas rely on federal grants more than those in cities.

Many states use the funding to pay for ebooks and audiobooks, which are increasingly popular, and costly, offerings. In 2023, more than 660 million people globally borrowed ebooks, audiobooks and digital magazines, up from 19% in 2022, according to OverDrive, the main distributor of digital content for libraries and schools.

In Mississippi, the state library helped fund its statewide ebook program.

For a few days, Erin Busbea was the bearer of bad news for readers at her Mississippi library: Hoopla, a popular app to check out ebooks and audiobooks, had been suspended indefinitely in Lowndes and DeSoto counties due to the funding freeze.

“People have been calling and asking, ‘Why can’t I access my books on Hoopla?’” said Busbea, library director of the Columbus-Lowndes Public Library System in Columbus, a majority-Black city northeast of Jackson.

The library system also had to pause parts of its interlibrary loan system allowing readers to borrow books from other states when they aren’t available locally.

“For most libraries that were using federal dollars, they had to curtail those activities,” said Hulen Bivins, the Mississippi Library Commission executive director.

States are fighting the funding freeze

The funding freeze came after the agency’s roughly 70 staff members were placed on administrative leave in March.

Attorneys general in 21 states and the American Library Assn. have filed lawsuits against the Trump administration for seeking to dismantle the agency.

The institute’s annual budget is below $300 million and distributes less than half of that to state libraries across the country. In California, the state library was notified that about 20%, or $3 million, of its $15-million grant had been terminated.

“The small library systems are not able to pay for the ebooks themselves,” said Wendt, the California state librarian.

In South Dakota, the state’s interlibrary loan program is on hold, according to Nancy Van Der Weide, a spokesperson for the South Dakota Department of Education.

The institute, founded in 1996 by a Republican-controlled Congress, also supports a national library training program named after former first lady Laura Bush that seeks to recruit and train librarians from diverse or underrepresented backgrounds. A spokesperson for Bush did not return a request seeking comment.

“Library funding is never robust. It’s always a point of discussion. It’s always something you need to advocate for,” said Liz Doucett, library director at Curtis Memorial Library in Brunswick, Maine. “It’s adding to just general anxiety.”

Lathan writes for the Associated Press.

Donald Trump made a rare trip to Capitol Hill to try and convince Republican members of Congress to approve his “big, beautiful bill” that would cut programmes for the poor and lower taxes while raising the US’ national debt.