Donald Trump Poll News

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is returning next month to New Hampshire, the state that for a century has held the first primary in the race for the White House.

But that doesn’t mean the Democratic Party’s 2016 presidential nominee is looking to make a comeback in 2028.

While a growing number of potential contenders for the next Democratic presidential nomination have made stops in New Hampshire, as well as in South Carolina and Nevada, two other key early primary states, Clinton said in an interview last month she would not run for president again and that the party had a “good bench.”

Instead, Clinton will headline the New Hampshire Democratic Party’s (NHDP) annual spring fundraising dinner. The state party announced the news Thursday and said the gala, the McIntyre-Shaheen 100 Club Dinner, would be held April 25 in Nashua, New Hampshire.

HEAD HERE FOR THE LATEST FOX NEWS REPORTING, ANALYSIS, AND OPINION ON HILLARY CLINTON

“Through decades of public service — as first lady, a U.S. senator, and secretary of state — Secretary Clinton has fought tirelessly for women’s rights and been a champion for economic security around the world,” longtime NHDP chair Ray Buckley said. “Her work to expand voting rights, strengthen child and family leave policies and combat global health crises has made a lasting impact both here and abroad.”

Buckley told Fox News Digital Clinton will salute retiring Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen for her 40 years of public service. Shaheen was the first woman in the nation’s history elected both governor and senator.

A spokesperson for Clinton told Fox News Digital the former secretary is excited about returning to New Hampshire.

But not everyone’s happy with Clinton’s return to the key New England swing state.

HILLARY CLINTON COMES OUT SWINGING FOLLOWING EPSTEIN DEPOSITION

Responding to the news, a longtime progressive leader in New Hampshire, who asked to remain anonymous to speak more freely, told Fox News Digital, “Although this may be a good invite to raise money for the party, it is another example of how completely tone-deaf the party is to the need for real change.

“As exemplary as Hillary Clinton’s conduct was with respect to the Epstein congressional subpoena, she’s yesterday’s news, hasn’t offered a new idea in decades and doesn’t serve the needs of building a new Democratic majority in New Hampshire.”

Clinton won the 2008 New Hampshire Democratic presidential primary in her marathon battle against former President Barack Obama for the party’s nomination.

Eight years later, in her second White House bid, she lost the New Hampshire primary in a landslide to progressive champion Bernie Sanders, the senator from neighboring Vermont.

Since her loss to President Donald Trump in the 2016 general election, Clinton has returned twice to New Hampshire. She made a stop in Concord in December 2017 as part of her book tour. And she spoke at Dartmouth College in 2019.

While some on the left take issue with the optics of Clinton’s return to New Hampshire, both the former secretary of state and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, have long been supporters of New Hampshire’s cherished position at the top of the primary calendar.

Lucas Meyer, a New Hampshire-based non-profit leader and former longtime president of the New Hampshire Young Democrats, noted that “a lot of New Hampshire Democrats have a lot of affection and love for Secretary Clinton and for her service to our country.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

And Meyer, a former campaign strategist, emphasized the state party’s fundraising dinner that Clinton is headlining “is about funding the apparatus to run campaigns over the next year. Secretary Clinton has a pretty broad appeal, and since she’s not running, there’s a little more flexibility for her to raise money for the party and to attract donors to cut checks for the state.”

Congress is one step closer to ending the Homeland Security shutdown after the Senate advanced a new, last-minute deal, but it came at the price of Republicans ceding ground, temporarily, to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.

The Senate unanimously advanced a deal to reopen most of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in the wee hours of Friday morning, 42 days into the shutdown that was spurred by the Trump administration’s immigration operations in Minnesota.

It was an agreement that largely gave Schumer and Senate Democrats what they wanted — no funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and parts of Customs and Border Protection (CBP). But it lacked the stringent reforms they desired, like requiring judicial warrants or requiring agents to unmask.

SCHUMER, DEMS BLOCK DHS FUNDING AGAIN, TRUMP INTERVENES TO PAY TSA AGENTS

While the deal mirrors previous attempts by Democrats to pass similar legislation that carved out immigration funding, Thune argued that Democrats are still walking away empty-handed in the policy fight over immigration enforcement. 

“We’ve been trying for weeks to fund the whole thing,” Thune said. “And, I mean, in the end, this is what they were willing to agree to. But again, it’s different that it has zero reforms in it. I mean, they got no reforms on DHS, which they could have had if they had been willing to work with us a little bit on that.”

Schumer said that if Republicans hadn’t blocked their initial attempts, “this could have been done three weeks ago.”

“This is exactly what we wanted,” Schumer said. “This is what we asked for, and I’m very proud of my caucus. My caucus held the line.”

The DHS funding deal now heads to the House, where Republicans aren’t enthusiastic about not funding key components of President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown agenda.

The latest plan came after Senate Democrats blocked a seventh attempt to reopen DHS, after back-and-forth talks throughout the day on Thursday appeared to yield little progress toward a resolution. Trump also announced his intent to sign an order that would pay Transportation Security Administration (TSA) agents as major airports are rocked with staggering lines and eye-popping wait times amid the shutdown. 

DEMS BLOCK DHS FUNDING AFTER GOP REJECTS THEIR COUNTER, THUNE SAYS SCHUMER ‘GOING IN CIRCLES’

While a further concession to Democrats, in part, the underlying argument Republicans have made all along is that if Schumer and his caucus wanted reforms, they would have to agree to fund immigration enforcement.

And ICE and CBP are still flush with roughly $75 billion in cash from Trump’s “big, beautiful bill,” giving the agencies a buffer for a time.

“The good news is we anticipated this a year ago. I mean, one of the reasons we front loaded, pre-loaded up the ‘one big, beautiful bill’ with advanced funding for Homeland Security was because we anticipated this was likely going to happen, and it did,” Thune said. “I still think it’s unfortunate. The Dems wanted reforms. We tried to work with them on reforms. They ended up getting no reforms.”

The same process used to pass that colossal legislative package will likely be turned to again fund immigration enforcement.

DHS DEAL IN LIMBO AS DEMOCRATS DEMAND TOUGHER ICE CRACKDOWN DESPITE GOP COMPROMISE

Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., envisions funding ICE and CBP for several years.

“Democrats are trying to shut down ICE funding for the remainder of the fiscal year — ultimately they won’t be successful,” Schmitt said on X. “In response, I’ll be pushing to lock in funding for deportation operations and salaries for a decade.”

Doing so could be difficult, still, given that Republicans want to dump several other priorities into the mix, including portions of the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) America Act and funding for the Iran war.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

And some Republicans are already couching expectations on what can and can’t be accomplished in the party-line process, given that anything in the bill has to pass muster with strict rules in the Senate.

“I think we have to set our sights a little bit lower on this reconciliation bill,” Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan., told Fox News Digital. “It’s got to be targeted to fund ICE for 10 years, I think that’s the number one thing to us.”

Nearly a month since the U.S. and Israel launched military attacks on Iran, a slew of new national polls indicate that most Americans give the military strikes a thumbs down.

But the surveys point to a continued broad partisan divide between Democrats and Republicans over the ongoing fighting in the volatile Middle East.

Forty-two percent of voters support the current U.S. military action against Iran, and 58% oppose it, including nearly 4 in 10 who are strongly opposed, according to a Fox News national poll conducted last Friday through Monday (March 20–23) and released on Wednesday.

That’s a switch from the previous Fox News poll, which was in the field Feb. 28 to March 2, when those questioned were evenly divided on support for the strikes.

WHAT AMERICANS SAY ABOUT THE WAR WITH IRAN – IN OUR LATEST FOX NEWS POLL

The Fox News poll is far from alone in pointing to underwater support for the fighting.

Fifty-four percent of voters questioned in a Quinnipiac University survey conducted March 19-23 said they opposed the military action, while 39% supported it.

HEAD HERE FOR FOX NEWS LIVE UPDATES ON THE STRIKES AGAINST IRAN

Only 35% said they supported the strikes in a Reuters/Ipsos poll in the field March 20–22, with 61% saying they disapproved of the military action.

According to an AP/NORC poll that surveyed respondents from March 19–23, six in 10 said the military action against Iran had gone too far, with just over a quarter saying it’s been about right, and 13% saying it has not gone far enough.

And a Pew Research Center poll conducted March 16–22 indicated that 61% disapproved of President Donald Trump’s handling of the conflict with Iran, with 37% approving.

The military attacks by the U.S. and Israel have resulted in the deaths of Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and other top officials, and the decimation of the country’s military.

But Iran has retaliated with attacks against Israel and many of its other neighbors in the region.

ONLY ON FOX NEWS: PENCE SAYS TRUMP ‘TURNED A DEAF EAR’ TO ISOLATIONISTS IN GOP

And Iran has targeted energy facilities with missile and drone attacks in a number of Persian Gulf nations. It has also made the Strait of Hormuz nearly impassable to commercial shipping, bringing to a halt roughly 20% of the world’s oil supply and in turn sending fuel prices skyrocketing in the U.S. and across the globe.

Trump said on Thursday that Iran is “begging to make a deal” to end the fighting.

While many Democratic political leaders have criticized Trump’s handling of the conflict, most Republicans are standing with the president.

And that’s reflected in opinions among Democratic and Republican voters.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

The partisan divide was stark in the Fox News poll.

More than three-quarters (77%) of Republicans supported the effort compared to 12% of Democrats and 28% of independents. Within the GOP, support ranged from 90% among MAGA supporters to 52% of non-MAGA Republicans.

The gap was just as wide in the other polls, including the Quinnipiac survey, where 86% of Republicans supported the military action, compared to 28% of independents and just 5% of Democrats.

Voters are not only dissatisfied with the direction of the country but also pessimistic about the economic outlook, financially strained in their own lives and unconvinced Washington leaders are in touch or will offer solutions. 

That’s according to a new Fox News national survey released Thursday. 

Nearly two-thirds, 64%, are dissatisfied with how things are going in the U.S. 

While that’s the highest dissatisfaction rating of President Trump’s second term, it’s also a small improvement from the 68% who were unhappy at the end of the Biden administration in December 2024.

FOX NEWS POLL: VOTERS OPPOSE ACTION IN IRAN BUT GIVE US MILITARY POSITIVE MARKS 

At the same time, majorities say national leaders are out of touch with people like them. Six in 10 voters say the White House is out of touch (60%), and similar shares say the same about congressional Republicans (61%) and congressional Democrats (58%). 

A quarter of both Democrats and Republicans think their respective party’s lawmakers are out of touch. Half of non-MAGA Republicans say the White House is out of touch.

FOX NEWS POLL: VOTERS EXPECT AI TO TRANSFORM OUR LIVES — BUT TODAY IS NOT THAT DAY

Trump receives negative marks across issues. His worst numbers are on inflation, with a new low of 28% approving. That’s down 7 points since January and 12 points since March 2025.

His 34% approval for the economy is another new low, down 6 points since January and 9 points from a year ago. Other ratings are also well underwater: healthcare (36 approve, 64 disapprove), Iran (36-64), taxes (36-64), foreign policy (38-62), and immigration (44-56). His best issue is border security (50-50), where equal numbers approve and disapprove.

The president’s overall job rating stands at 41% approve and 59% disapprove. Former President Obama had similar ratings at a comparable point in his second term, 40%-53% in March 2014.

Trump’s 59% disapproval is the highest of either term. Last month, 43% approved and 57% disapproved. A year ago, views were nearly evenly divided, 49-51%.

Current approval of Trump among Republicans is 84%, a second-term low (down from 92% last March), while disapproval has reached a high of 16%. Approval among non-MAGA Republicans dropped 11 points over the past year (70% to 59%). MAGA Republicans remain nearly unanimous with 97% approval, little changed from 98% a year ago. Fully 95% of Democrats disapprove, tying a record high this term. Independents are also negative, 75% disapprove.

The economy remains central to dissatisfaction. Large numbers of Democrats (91%) and independents (90%) rate it negatively, as do more than half of Republicans (52%).

Overall, 75% of voters say the economy is in bad shape, up 4 points since last month (71%). The number giving the economy negative marks has ranged from 67% to 79% since Trump took office in January 2025.

Personal financial assessments are similarly downbeat, with nearly half, 46%, saying they are falling behind. That’s up from 44% in December and just one point below the record high of 47% in June 2022.

That strain is reflected by 61% saying they could not miss more than two paychecks and still pay their bills. That’s up from 54% in both 2023 and 2019.

Two years ago, 17% lived paycheck-to-paycheck. Now, 27% say they couldn’t miss even one payday. That number climbs to 37% for those with annual household income below $50,000.

Neither major party has convinced voters it has a clear plan to address costs. Some 68% say the Democratic Party lacks a clear plan for bringing prices down, while 70% say the same about the GOP. More than 4 in 10 say neither party has a plan. Equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans, 59%, say their respective party has a clear plan.

“The issue environment in 2026 has almost completely flipped from 2022 and 2024,” says Daron Shaw, a Republican who conducts the survey with Democrat Chris Anderson. “Voters don’t think either side has a plan, of course, but since the GOP is in charge, they shoulder the blame.”

To top things off, voters don’t see the economy getting better anytime soon. A 53% majority anticipates economic conditions will worsen in the next year, up from 45% in January and more than double the share who see improvement (25%).

Republicans are alone in their optimism, expecting the economy to improve by a 19-point margin. Both independents (by 44 points) and Democrats (by 68 points) see the economy declining next year by wide margins. 

Concerns about the economy — day-to-day costs in particular — top the list of what worries voters most. A large majority of 86% is concerned about inflation and high prices, including 57% who are extremely concerned. Around 8 in 10 express concerns about healthcare (81%), gas prices (80%), and political divisions in the country (80%).

Seven in ten or more are worried about unemployment (73%), potential attacks in the United States (73% by Islamic terrorists and 70% non-Islamic terrorists) and their ability to pay their bills (70%). Concern also extends to gun violence (69%), Iran obtaining nukes (66%), AI technology (66%), antisemitism (63%) and detentions and deportations by ICE (62%).

Inflation is the top concern for Democrats, Republicans and independents. Healthcare is second for Democrats and independents, while Islamic terrorist attacks are second for Republicans. There is a consensus that political divisions within the country are a problem, with most Democrats (85%), Republicans (80%), and independents (70%) expressing concern.  

Worry about gas prices is widespread, with about 8 in 10 across all income levels — including $100,000 and above — saying they are concerned.

CLICK HERE FOR CROSSTABS AND TOPLINE

Poll-pourri

Sixty-nine percent of voters support birthright citizenship for children born in the United States to illegal immigrants. That’s up from 67% in 2025 and from 45% when Fox News first asked the question in 2006. Current support stands at 91% among Democrats, 75% among independents and 44% among Republicans. The U.S. Supreme Court will hear a birthright citizenship case April 1.

Conducted March 20-23, 2026, under the direction of Beacon Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R), this Fox News survey includes interviews with a sample of 1,001 registered voters randomly selected from a national voter file. Respondents spoke with live interviewers on landlines (104) and cellphones (641) or completed the survey online after receiving a text (256). Results based on the full sample have a margin of sampling error of ±3 percentage points. Sampling error for results among subgroups is higher. In addition to sampling error, question wording and order can influence results. Weights are generally applied to age, race, education and area variables to ensure the demographics are representative of the registered voter population. Sources for developing weight targets include the most recent American Community Survey, Fox News Voter Analysis, and voter file data.

Fox News’ Victoria Balara contributed to this report.

Republican attorneys general are hailing a First Amendment victory in a censorship lawsuit against the Biden administration after two red states secured a settlement restricting federal government agencies from influencing social media companies’ moderation practices.

Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill told Fox News Digital the settlement, a 10-year consent decree blocking several agencies from pressuring social media companies over their content, was “simply historic in nature.”

“Being able to set a precedent like this will help everybody in the future be able to show that this conduct is wrong,” Murrill said in a phone interview. “It was Orwellian in nature from the beginning. It still is, and I’m grateful that the government is acknowledging that it shouldn’t have been doing it.”

Missouri, Louisiana and several individual plaintiffs brought the high-profile jawboning lawsuit in 2022, alleging the Biden administration and officials in the first Trump administration inappropriately pressured social media companies to censor conservative viewpoints about COVID-19, election security and Hunter Biden’s laptop.

FEDERAL JUDGE RULES PENTAGON POLICY RESTRICTING PRESS ACCESS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, HANDS VICTORY TO NEW YORK TIMES

Under the settlement, the Office of the Surgeon General, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency are barred for the next decade from threatening or coercing social media companies to remove or suppress protected speech. The agreement also blocks officials from giving directions on or vetoing platforms’ content moderation decisions.

“This is the first real, operational restraint on the federal censorship machine,” said Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., who brought the lawsuit when he served as his state’s attorney general. “The deep state just got checked.”

Murrill and U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer helped with the case when they were solicitors general of Louisiana and Missouri, respectively. Murrill reflected on conversations she had at the time about “the line between coercion and government speech.”

“It was so clear to me that what the government was doing went way beyond appropriate boundaries in terms of deliberately throttling people’s speech, taking down protected, truthful speech and forcing these corporations to bend to the White House’s will,” Murrill said. “That was a very scary precedent, and I think that’s why this agreement is so important.”

GOOGLE TO REINSTATE BANNED YOUTUBE ACCOUNTS CENSORED FOR POLITICAL SPEECH

The lawsuit alleged that federal government agencies and officials pressured YouTube; Twitter, now X; Facebook, now Meta; and other platforms to censor content, arguing the actions amounted to coercing the companies to remove constitutionally-protected speech.

Republicans’ outrage about social media censorship gained momentum in 2020 after Twitter fully restricted and Facebook suppressed the New York Post’s bombshell report about the Biden family and Ukraine that was based on contents from Hunter Biden’s laptop. 

Discovery in the lawsuit and subsequent congressional investigations revealed that FBI officials during the first Trump administration met with social media companies and warned them just before the story was published of a possible Russian “hack and leak” operation designed to interfere with the 2020 election, which the companies later said influenced their decision to block the story.

President Donald Trump told Fox Business in October 2020 the censorship efforts were “out of control” and intended to derail his election prospects.

“It’s like a third arm, maybe a first arm, of the DNC — Twitter, and Facebook, they’re all — like really, it’s a massive campaign contribution,” Trump said at the time.

An infamous open letter signed by 51 former top intelligence officials in the weeks before the election fueled the fire by alleging the New York Post’s story had “all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.” Trump, when he took office in 2025, revoked their security clearances in an executive order and accused them of using their powerful former job titles to help discredit the story to swing the election for Joe Biden.

Judge Terry Doughty, a Louisiana-based federal judge appointed by Trump, initially issued an injunction against the Biden administration in 2023, saying evidence in the case “depicts an almost dystopian scenario” in which the federal government “seems to have assumed a role similar to an Orwellian ‘Ministry of Truth.’” Biden administration officials were found, for instance, to have aggressively demanded in emails to social media companies that they remove anti-vaccine content, which they said was disinformation.

One Biden White House official told Facebook that “internally, we have been considering our options on what to do about it,” while another warned Twitter to take down content “ASAP” and “immediately.”

The injunction limited the government from having certain interactions with social media companies, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit narrowed that injunction, and the Supreme Court fully vacated it on appeal, finding the plaintiffs did not show they had standing. The high court punted on addressing the underlying merits of the case, leading to this week’s consent decree.

GOOGLE’S DECISION TO WALK BACK BIDEN-ERA YOUTUBE ACCOUNT BANS HAILED AS ‘HUGE DEVELOPMENT’ FOR FREE SPEECH

The settlement allows government officials to continue communicating with social media companies, including by flagging content or expressing disagreement, so long as the communication does not involve threats, such as implying that the companies will suffer regulatory or legal consequences.

In the settlement, the federal government did not admit any wrongdoing, and the agreement noted that the government still had authority to address criminal activity or national security threats on the platforms.

Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway applauded the consent decree in a statement, saying her state “will NOT allow politicians to police speech.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Attorney John Vecchione of the New Civil Liberties Alliance, which represented individuals who were named as plaintiffs in the case alongside the two states, emphasized their winding path to the consent decree.

“This case began with a suspicion, that blossomed into fact, that led to congressional hearings and an executive order that government censorship of Americans’ social media posts should end,” Vecchione said. 

“Freedom of speech has been powerfully preserved by our clients, past and present, who initiated this suit.”

An appeals court paused a pair of lower court rulings in Oregon that restricted federal agents’ use of tear gas and other crowd-control munitions during protests outside the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement building in Portland.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit granted the Trump administration’s request for temporary administrative stays in two cases in a 2-1 ruling.

Anti-ICE demonstrators have held protests at the building since June, as part of protests across the country challenging President Donald Trump’s mass deportation agenda.

Two lawsuits were filed over federal agents’ crowd control tactics — one brought by the American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon on behalf of protesters and freelance journalists and another brought by the residents of an affordable housing complex across the street from the ICE building.

OREGON JUDGE LIMITS FEDERAL AGENTS’ TEAR GAS USE AT PORTLAND PROTESTS

The complaints argue that federal agents’ use of chemical and projectile munitions has violated the rights of plaintiffs — including a demonstrator known for wearing a chicken costume, a married couple in their 80s and two freelance journalists who said federal agents used chemical spray and projectile munitions against them.

The Department of Homeland Security has previously said that the agents have “followed their training and used the minimum amount of force necessary to protect themselves, the public, and federal property.”

Earlier this month, the federal judges in Portland overseeing the separate cases both issued preliminary injunctions limiting federal agents’ use of tear gas, pepper spray and other chemical munitions unless someone poses an imminent threat of physical harm.

The agents were also ordered not to fire munitions at the head, neck or torso “unless the officer is legally justified in using deadly force against that person” and were told not to use pepper spray against a group in an indiscriminate way that would affect bystanders. Additionally, they were told to only target people who were engaging in violent unlawful conduct or actively resisting arrest, noting that trespassing, refusing to move and refusing to obey an order to disperse are acts of passive resistance, not active resistance.

“Plaintiffs provided numerous videos, which were received in evidence and unambiguously show DHS officers spraying OC Spray directly into the faces of peaceful and nonviolent protesters engaged in, at most, passive resistance and discharging tear gas and firing pepper-ball munitions into crowds of peaceful and nonviolent protestors,” U.S. District Judge Michael Simon wrote in his ruling on March 9 in the case brought by the ACLU.

“Defendants’ conduct — physically harming protestors and journalists without prior dispersal warnings — is objectively chilling,” he added.

JUDGE RULES FEDERAL AGENTS MUST LIMIT TEAR GAS AT PROTESTS NEAR PORTLAND ICE BUILDING

The Ninth Circuit panel said on Wednesday that oral arguments in the two cases will be consolidated and scheduled for April 7.

Earlier this year, Portland Mayor Keith Wilson called on ICE to leave the city after federal agents deployed tear gas at a crowd of demonstrators outside the agency’s building. The mayor described the protests as peaceful and criticized federal officers’ use of pepper balls, flash-bang grenades and rubber bullets.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“Federal forces deployed heavy waves of chemical munitions, impacting a peaceful daytime protest where the vast majority of those present violated no laws, made no threat, and posed no danger to federal forces,” he said in a statement at the time.

“To those who continue to work for ICE: Resign. To those who control this facility: Leave,” he added, accusing federal officials of “trampling the Constitution.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

U.S. dollar bills will bear President Donald Trump’s signature to mark the 250th anniversary of American independence, the Treasury Department said, a first for a sitting president.

Trump’s signature will be placed on all U.S. paper currency and will replace the Treasurer of the United States’ signature on U.S. money for the first time in 165 years. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the move will recognize the Trump administration’s “historic achievements.”

“Under President Trump’s leadership, we are on a path toward unprecedented economic growth, lasting dollar dominance and fiscal strength and stability,” Bessent said in a statement. 

“There is no more powerful way to recognize the historic achievements of our great country and President Donald J. Trump than U.S. dollar bills bearing his name, and it is only appropriate that this historic currency be issued at the Semiquincentennial.”

TRUMP LAUNCHES MASSIVE ‘FREEDOM 250’ PUSH TO IGNITE AMERICA’S 250TH BIRTHDAY CELEBRATION

The first $100 bills with the signatures of Trump and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent will be produced in June, followed by other denominations in the coming months, Reuters reported. 

Fox News Digital has reached out to the Treasury Department for comment.

MAGA COUNTRY VOTERS SOUND ALARM OVER ‘RIDICULOUS’ NATIONAL DEBT AMID DEBATE OVER TRUMP-BACKED BILL

The Treasury’s Bureau of Engraving and Printing is still producing notes bearing the signatures of former President Joe Biden’s Treasury Secretary, Janet Yellen, and Treasurer Lynn Malerba, Reuters reported.

In a statement, Treasurer Brandon Beach said placing Trump’s signature on U.S. currency is “not only appropriate, but also well-deserved,” given his “mark on history as the architect of America’s Golden Age economic revival.”

Thursday’s announcement came as Trump makes efforts to put himself on a coin. The design of a commemorative gold coin with his image was approved by a federal arts panel. 

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Trump’s name has also been placed on buildings, government programs and institutions.

President Donald Trump said he will sign an executive order to address airport disruptions, announcing the move in a Truth Social post Thursday that framed the situation as a national emergency.

“Because the Democrats have recklessly created a true National Crisis, I am using my authorities under the Law to protect our Great Country,” Trump wrote. 

“Therefore, I am going to sign an Order … to immediately pay our TSA Agents in order to address this Emergency Situation.”

WHY SOME US AIRPORTS ARE DODGING TSA SHUTDOWN CHAOS WHILE OTHERS GRIND TO A HALT

The move comes as a 41-day partial government shutdown has disrupted the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), causing long lines at airports nationwide amid a standoff over DHS funding and immigration enforcement.

Trump accused Democrats of “refusing to fund Immigration Enforcement” and creating “Chaos at the Airports,” while thanking TSA agents for their work.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

The White House did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.

This is a developing story, check back later for updates.

The Senate was again unable to end the Homeland Security shutdown on Thursday despite signs of a possible breakthrough to end the long-running closure, which prompted President Donald Trump to make a move. 

Senate Democrats blocked Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding for a seventh time as the partial shutdown entered its 41st day on Thursday, after Senate Republicans made a new offer earlier in the day after late night negotiations. 

Trump then ordered DHS to pay airport workers on, and accused “their ‘Leader,’ Cryin’ Chuck Schumer,” of making it clear where Democrats stand, “and that is, ON THE SIDE OF CRIMINAL ILLEGAL ALIENS, AND NOT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.”

“I am going to sign an Order instructing the Secretary of Homeland Security, Markwayne Mullin, to immediately pay our TSA Agents in order to address this Emergency Situation, and to quickly stop the Democrat Chaos at the Airports,” Trump said on Truth Social. “It is not an easy thing to do, but I am going to do it!”

Still, several other components of the agency, including the Federal Emergency Management Agency, are still without funding. 

DEMS BLOCK DHS FUNDING AFTER GOP REJECTS THEIR COUNTER, THUNE SAYS SCHUMER ‘GOING IN CIRCLES’

The vote stayed open for several hours to allow for talks between both sides to continue, but by the fifth hour, Trump pulled the trigger on funding the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). 

“We’ve held the vote open for five hours to give the Democrats an opportunity to come to the table,” Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso, R-Wyo., told reporters. “They have not. And now, time is up.”

Earlier in the day, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said he believed talks between the two sides are making progress.

And despite Thune saying just a day earlier that there was “no point” in sending Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Democrats another compromise proposal, Republicans did just that.

“Dems are in possession of what I think is our last and final [offer],” Thune said. “So let’s hope this gets it done.”

Thune remained mum on the details of the offer. When asked if the White House backed it, he said, “They’ve been involved in the back-and-forth that has occurred overnight and all morning, so we’ll see.”

DHS DEAL IN LIMBO AS DEMOCRATS DEMAND TOUGHER ICE CRACKDOWN DESPITE GOP COMPROMISE

Several Senate Democrats leaving their closed-door lunch meeting said they had yet to see or be briefed on the latest proposal, and that the GOP’s new offer wasn’t discussed during the meeting.

A source familiar with negotiations told Fox News Digital that, “Schumer needs to grow a pair of balls and make a decision.” 

The quick shift in mood in the upper chamber, despite the latest failure, came after the prospect of a deal to end the second-longest shutdown in history appeared even further out of reach. 

Republicans had offered Democrats a framework that would carve out Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) funding but lacked the reforms Schumer and his caucus want.

“I think our caucus remains united around the same premise: we’re not going to fund an immigration enforcement operation that doesn’t obey the law,” Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., told Fox News Digital. “And I don’t think we’ve seen a proposal from them yet that meets that very simple priority.”

SENATE REPUBLICANS MOVE TO REOPEN DHS WITH NEW PLAN, WAIT FOR DEMOCRATIC BUY-IN

The ICE carve-out is also a proposal Democrats have made before — one Republicans previously blocked. Given that, many Senate Republicans were frustrated that Democrats appeared to back away from an idea they once supported.

“They go on the floor, they shoot their mouths off and say we’ll fund everything but ICE,” Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan., told Fox News Digital. “We took them at their word. So, you know, they need to agree to ‘yes.’”

It has also forced Republicans to grapple with the idea of not funding immigration enforcement, which has been a sore subject throughout the week.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Still, they are eyeing budget reconciliation — the same party-line tactic used to pass Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” last year — to fund immigration operations and several other priorities.

“I will not support legislation that doesn’t pay ICE agents. However, there’s a mechanism, by way of reconciliation, where we can front-load multiple years of that,” Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., told Fox News Digital. “The Democrats, I think, just handed us more certainty moving forward.”

Elon Musk demanded on Wednesday that a Delaware judge recuse herself from Tesla lawsuits, arguing she recently demonstrated her bias against him when she liked an anti-Musk LinkedIn post. 

Musk’s lawyers filed a motion for recusal in Delaware’s Court of Chancery, which included a screenshot of Judge Kathaleen McCormick liking the social media post celebrating Musk’s $2 billion court loss in a separate case. The attorneys noted that the incident did “not exist in a vacuum.”

The lawyers were referring to McCormick previously presiding over high-stakes cases involving Musk and the tech billionaire accusing the judge of bias stretching back years. The ongoing friction with the judge follows hostility Musk has faced from the left in recent years, most notably when he became a close ally of President Donald Trump in 2024 and through the early months of the administration. 

Musk’s lawyers said McCormick appeared to cheer on a lawyer on LinkedIn who made a post mocking Musk’s legal defeat in a California fraud case. McCormick is currently presiding over separate derivative litigation brought by Tesla shareholders who have alleged Musk harmed the company by overpaying himself and board members. The lawyers said one of McCormick’s staff members also liked another anti-Musk post related to Musk’s pending litigation.

TRUMP NOT INTERESTED IN TALKING TO MUSK: ‘ELON’S TOTALLY LOST IT’

“This post to which the Court reacted and another to which a Court staff member reacted are not simply negative criticism of Mr. Musk and his attorneys, they are inflammatory,” Musk’s lawyers wrote.

The lawyers said that “the very facts underlying the litigation celebrated in the posts are squarely at issue in the consolidated and coordinated actions.”

McCormick later deactivated her LinkedIn account, and in a letter to attorneys in the case she denied supporting the anti-Musk post.

“I either did not click the ‘support’ icon at all, or I did so accidentally,” McCormick wrote. “I do not believe that I did it accidentally.”

McCormick in 2022 presided over a separate, high-profile lawsuit brought by Twitter, now called X, against Musk to force him to complete his $44 billion acquisition of the company after Musk attempted to back out over allegations the company misled him about the number of bots on the platform. Musk ended up moving forward with the acquisition and later testified that he felt forced to because he believed McCormick was biased against him.

“We were unlikely to win the [Twitter] case in Delaware because the judge was extremely biased against me,” Musk said this month, according to the recusal motion. “This was, in fact, the same judge that struck my Tesla option grant that was subsequently overturned by the Delaware Supreme Court. So it’s accurate to say she was, that judge was not favorably inclined to me. Not objective.”

In another lawsuit, McCormick in 2024 twice voided a multibillion-dollar pay package for Musk and the Tesla board, saying they had breached their fiduciary duties and that Musk effectively controlled the board. The Delaware Supreme Court reinstated the pay package but upheld McCormick’s underlying findings.

Musk responded that year to an X post from a conservative influencer about McCormick, writing “absolute corruption” after the influencer noted that she had previously worked at a Delaware law firm that donated to former President Joe Biden.

Musk’s grievances with McCormick began amid a national push against the tech billionaire as he began weighing in on politics, speaking out against the Democrat Party ahead of the 2022 midterms and endorsing Trump in the 2024 election. 

He became the head of Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency in 2025, serving in the role as a special government employee as he sought to identify government overspending and fraud, which raised his status as a political target by the left. Democrat lawmakers condemned Musk’s DOGE efforts in protests, while Tesla locations were targeted by rioters last year as critics characterized Musk as an unelected billionaire working in the administration. 

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Trump and Musk had a public falling out last spring, when Musk openly opposed the president’s signature budget bill, known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The pair have since been spotted chatting at various public events. 

House Democrats largely voted in lockstep to continue the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) shutdown Thursday despite growing fallout over air travel nationwide. 

Democrats’ opposition to ending the funding lapse — the second-longest in history — comes as lawmakers could leave for recess before striking a deal.

The DHS funding measure still passed the House largely along party lines in a vote of 218-206. It was the third time House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has held a vote on the legislation since the funding lapse began Feb. 14.

The measure, sponsored by Rep. Juan Ciscomani, R-Ariz., would fund the department through the end of September. Reps. Henry Cuellar, D-Texas, Jared Golden, D-Maine, Marie Gluesenkamp-Perez, D-Wash., and Don Davis, D-N.C., were the only Democrats to vote “yes” after previously supporting the DHS funding measure earlier in March.

SEE IT: TRAVELERS SOUND OFF AS ICE AGENTS DEPLOYED TO AIRPORTS AS SHUTDOWN DRAGS PAST 40 DAYS

Still, the measure is likely dead on arrival in the Senate, where both parties continue to negotiate an end to the stalemate.

Democrats have remained dug in against providing funding to DHS sub-agencies executing President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP). Top Democratic leaders continue to demand sweeping reforms — including requiring the use of judicial warrants — that Republicans have charged could impede law enforcement efforts.

The funding standoff has caused major travel disruptions nationwide as a shortage of Transportation Security Administration (TSA) agents has resulted in hours-long wait times at security checkpoints. More than 50,000 TSA personnel are set to miss their second full paycheck on Friday, leading to nearly 500 agents quitting and a surge in callouts.

“They’re using TSA agents, Coast Guardsmen and other DHS employees as pawns in their political game,” Republican Study Committee Chairman August Pfluger, R-Texas, told Fox News Digital. “They’re just demonstrating a real willingness to hold hostage the American public.”

Members of the conservative RSC held a news conference Tuesday at Washington’s Reagan National Airport to spotlight the financial difficulties TSA officers are facing. Acting Deputy Administrator Adam Stahl said some personnel, many of whom live paycheck to paycheck, are sleeping in their cars and selling blood plasma to make ends meet.

“The Democrats know their plan is not working,” Rep. Mark Alford, R-Mo., told reporters. “They know Americans are hurting, and they are still doing it anyway.”

FLASHBACK: JEFFRIES CALLED FAILING TO FULLY FUND DHS AN ‘ABDICATION OF RESPONSIBILITY’

House Democrats, however, have sought to blame Republicans for the funding stalemate and have signaled reluctance to walk away from their ICE reform demands. 

“We want ICE to be compelled to conduct itself like every other law enforcement agency in the country,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., told reporters on Wednesday. “Immigration enforcement should be fair, just and humane—that’s not what’s happening right now. ICE is out of control, and taxpayer dollars are being used in unacceptable ways.”

Republicans have fired back that it is essential to fund ICE, invoking the murder of 18-year-old Sheridan Gorman, who was killed by a Venezuelan illegal immigrant in Chicago last week. The foreign national, Jose Medina-Medina, was taken into custody by federal law enforcement in May 2023 but released into the United States under the Biden administration.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“Democrats in the House are demanding a DHS bill that would eliminate funding for the exact agencies that are tasked with preventing a tragedy like this,” Speaker Johnson said Wednesday during a House GOP leadership press conference. “They tell you what they prioritize. And it is the welfare of criminal illegal aliens over American citizens. We ought to believe what they say, the words in action.”

When asked about Gorman’s murder by an illegal immigrant Wednesday, Jeffries told Fox News he would look into the case without commenting further. 

President Donald Trump said Thursday he is pausing planned strikes on Iranian energy infrastructure for 10 days as negotiations continue, setting a new deadline of April 6.

“As per Iranian Government request, please let this statement serve to represent that I am pausing the period of Energy Plant destruction by 10 Days to Monday, April 6, 2026, at 8 P.M., Eastern Time,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

The president added that “talks are ongoing” and claimed they are progressing positively “despite erroneous statements to the contrary by the Fake News Media, and others.”

TRUMP LASHES OUT AT ‘SICK’ IRANIAN LEADERS, CONFIRMS ESTIMATED TIMELINE FOR ENDING WAR

Trump wrote the talks are “going very well” as the new deadline approaches. 

The U.S. previously set a deadline of five days amid ongoing peace talks.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

The White House did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for additional comment.

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., continued her relentless cross examinations of college administrators Thursday – this time pressing Michigan’s interim president Domenico Grasso on Chinese student spies at the university.

Stefanik wanted to know why Chinese nationals in Michigan were accused of spying on America and his university is not auditing potential national security vulnerabilities in research there.

“Last year, facing congressional pressure, Michigan ended its partnership with Shanghai Jiao Tong University after five Chinese students were caught spying at night and taking illegal photos of U.S. military drills and equipment on the remote Michigan installation Camp Grayling,” Stefanik said. “These students lied and misled U.S. law enforcement about their motives and later conspired on the CCP-controlled messaging app WeChat to clear their phones and cameras of photos and evidence.”

“Has the university conducted a full audit to determine what intellectual property or federally funded research was compromised?” the congresswoman asked.

CHINESE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN STUDENTS CHARGED AFTER ALLEGEDLY SPYING ON MILITARY BASE

Without an audit, Grasso responded, “we are unaware of any research that was compromised by these individual students,” noting the alleged spying occurred “miles and miles away from campus.”

But Stefanik was nonplussed by the answer.

“I understand Camp Grayling is off campus, but was there an audit conducted?”

TRUMP DOUBLES DOWN ON PLAN FOR 600,000 CHINESE STUDENT VISAS DESPITE MAGA BACKLASH

Grasso admitted Michigan did not.

“Well, they were not researchers,” he said, doubting “they did something nefarious.” “They were undergraduate students. So, we did not do an audit.”

And, adding, “they did not have any access to any of our research.”

FOREIGN-BACKED INFLUENCE IN SCHOOLS TO BE EXPOSED UNDER GOP ‘TRACE ACT’ GIVING PARENTS ACCESS TO CURRICULUM

But Stefanik noted they were found to be spying.

“Well, they did do something nefarious off campus,” she said. “I think it would be important for the university to ensure that there is a full audit conducted to make sure that no research, that they didn’t take any nefarious acts there.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Grasso admitted he does “not know what all of our researchers are involved in,” but doubted the Department of War would clear them for access to U.S. secrets on campus.

“Congresswoman, we have improved, and we’re continuing to improve our background checks for all of our researchers and students that come into the country, but we also have to partner more closely with our federal intelligence community to make sure that these students are vetted before they’re allowed to get visas to enter our country as well,” he concluded.

President Donald Trump confirmed he voted by mail in Florida’s special election Tuesday, but he pivoted from the media attack point to note his mail-in ballot reform agenda provides for “exceptions” — and not only because he has the privilege of being president.

“Yeah, I did,” Trump shot back at a reporter Thursday at his second Cabinet meeting of 2026. “You know what? Because I’m president of the United States.”

“And because of the fact that I’m president of the United States, I did a mail-in ballot for elections that took place in Florida because I felt I should be here instead of being in the beautiful sunshine.”

The reporter noted Trump was at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida, before the Palm Beach County election held Tuesday for a state senator and a state representative.

REPUBLICANS, TRUMP RUN INTO SENATE ROADBLOCK ON VOTER ID BILL

“That’s right, and I decided that I was going to vote by mail-in ballot because I couldn’t be there,” Trump said, adding, “I had a lot of different things” going on.

Trump was at Mar-a-Lago for the weekend, in Memphis, Tennessee, on Monday for a forum on crime, and then back in Washington, D.C., for the rest of the week, including delivering a speech to the National Republican Congressional Committee on Wednesday night.

Still, Trump proudly reminded the reporter, he is not being hypocritical in rebuking mail-in ballot fraud while voting by mail.

TRUMP DOUBLES DOWN ON CALLS FOR GOP TO ‘NATIONALIZE’ VOTING AS CONGRESSIONAL LEADERS BALK

“You know, we have exceptions for mail-in ballots,” Trump said. “You do know that, right? So if you’re away, you have an exception. If you’re in the military, we have an exception. If you’re on a business trip, we have an exception. If you’re disabled, we have an exception. And if you’re ill, if you’re not feeling good.

“So I was away mostly in Washington, D.C., so I used a mail-in ballot.”

Trump rebuked voting by mail as “mail-in cheating” at his Memphis stop.

FEDERAL JUDGE BLOCKS TRUMP ADMINISTRATION FROM ENFORCING MAIL-IN VOTING RULES IN EXECUTIVE ORDER

“I call it mail-in cheating, and we got to do something about it all,” Trump said. “And it’s part of Homeland Security.”

Trump said Sunday his fellow Republicans should not reach an agreement on funding the Department of ​Homeland Security until Democrats in Congress approve a bill — the SAVE America Act — that requires people registering to vote to provide proof of U.S. citizenship.

FEDERAL JUDGE STRIKES DOWN PARTS OF TRUMP EXECUTIVE ORDER ON CITIZENSHIP VERIFICATION FOR VOTER REGISTRATION

Trump also pushed for Democrat approval of other items he wants added to the bill, including banning transgender women from women’s sports, outlawing “transgender mutilation of our children” and restricting mail-in ballots except in cases of illness, disability, military service or travel.

“As President Trump has said, the SAVE America Act has commonsense exceptions for Americans to use mail-in ballots for illness, disability, military, or travel – but universal mail-in voting should not be allowed because it’s highly susceptible to fraud,” White House spokesperson Olivia Wales wrote in an email earlier this week.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

It was not the first time Trump has voted by mail. He voted by absentee ballot in the 2018 midterm elections, a White House spokesperson said at the time. Trump had requested an absentee ballot but decided to vote in person in 2020.

Reuters contributed to this report.

Senate Democrats blocked an amendment to Trump-backed voter ID legislation that would have done something they publicly support: require photo identification to vote in federal elections.

Democrats, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., have shown interest in photo voter ID, which has grown in popularity among voters across the country.

“Democrats support voter ID,” Schumer said on a press call earlier this month. “In fact, we included it, and it is included, in our Freedom to Vote legislation several years ago.”

HOUSE CONSERVATIVES ERUPT OVER SENATE GOP, WHITE HOUSE DEAL AMID SAVE ACT FIGHT

Several others have also come out in support of a voter ID bill in recent weeks.

When asked by CNN’s Kaitlan Collins whether he would support a clean voter ID bill, Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., said, “Yes.”

“And New Jersey has voter ID laws,” Booker said. “I’ve got to show my driver’s license.”

Still, Democrats blocked an amendment to the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) America Act from Sen. Jon Husted, R-Ohio, meant to put them on record for that position.

DEMS BLOCK GOP AMENDMENT TYING VOTER ID BILL TO TRANSGENDER SPORTS BAN

Schumer said ahead of the vote that “Republicans are once again wasting time on voter suppression.” 

“Let’s let’s be very clear what this amendment is,” Schumer said. “It’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing, and it’s a giant cover-up to what their bill really does, which is dramatic voter suppression, kicking 20 million or more people off the rolls without their knowledge or consent.”

Senate Republicans argued that if Democrats truly support voter ID, they should back the amendment.

“That is one on which the Democrats have said — Senator Schumer himself — that ‘we are not opposed to photo ID,’” Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said. “Well, let’s test that proposition. Let’s actually have a vote on it and see where the Democrats are.”

Republicans have been engaged in a floor push on the SAVE America Act for the past 10 days, debating the legislation in a bid to shift the narrative from the GOP being unable to advance the bill out of the Senate to Democrats being the ones blocking it.

Senate Democrats have argued that while they support identification to vote, the SAVE America Act goes far beyond that requirement. Schumer and others have likened the broader bill to Jim Crow-era segregationist laws in the Deep South, saying it would disenfranchise voters — particularly minority communities and low-income Americans.

GOP TRIGGERS MARATHON SENATE FIGHT TO EXPOSE DEMS’ OPPOSITION TO TRUMP-BACKED VOTER ID BILL

However, requiring identification is already the practice in 36 states. Of those, 23 require photo ID, while 13 accept another form of identification, such as a bank statement. Nine of those states have Democratic senators.

According to a widely cited Pew Research poll from last year, 71% of Democratic voters support showing government-issued photo ID to vote.

“I know there are a lot of issues in the SAVE America Act, but this particular one focused on photo ID as something that can be easily implemented, which is already being implemented around the country,” Husted said of his amendment.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Senate Democrats blocked the measure once before, when Husted tried to force a vote on a standalone photo voter ID bill last week. His amendment listed several acceptable forms of identification, including an unexpired driver’s license with a photo, an unexpired state-issued ID card with a photo, a valid passport, a valid military or veteran ID with a photo, or an unexpired tribal ID with a photo.

Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., who typically breaks with his party, stood alongside Schumer and his colleagues on Thursday. Like other Democrats, he has opposed the SAVE America Act because of its additional provisions, such as giving the Department of Homeland Security access to states’ voter rolls.

But he recently said, “If the GOP wants real reform over a show vote — put out a clean, standalone bill, and I’m AYE.”

A conservative watchdog group is adding fodder to the debate over whether the American Bar Association has become a politicized institution favoring the left.

A new report released by Trump-aligned lawfare group America First Legal, co-founded by one of the president’s top advisors, Stephen Miller, claims that the ABA’s Standing Committee on Amicus Curiae Briefs over the last decade has produced 80% of left-leaning liberal arguments, 20% neutral and non conservatively-aligned. 

Meanwhile, in all 6 cases the ABA has filed amicus briefs involving Trump, the ABA went against the president or his allies.

President Donald Trump’s second term has included attacks against the ABA, arguing it has politicized its accrediting power, and has favored Democratic Party-backed candidates when vetting judicial nominees. The ABA’s size and legacy make it the premier trade association for the legal sector, but some conservatives fear the group’s power is becoming a “monopoly.”

REPUBLICANS CALL FOR TRUMP TO CUT OFF AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION

“The ABA requires that amicus briefs be authorized by its Board of Governors and must be consistent with existing ABA policy or involve matters of ‘special significance to lawyers or the legal profession,'” a press release from AFL argued. “Briefs on birthright citizenship, transgender healthcare for minors, and the Texas heartbeat law fall well outside that mandate.”

Fox News Digital reached out to the ABA for comment on the allegations about its amicus filings, but did not receive a response in time for publication. 

According to AFL’s audit, which scanned briefs filed between April 2016 and February 2026, there were a total of 87 filed. Seventy of them “favored a liberal or progressive outcome,” AFL argues, while none they came across were “conservative-aligned” the group added. The remaining covered what AFL described as neutral issues, such as a patent law case.

TRUMP LAWYER IN JACK SMITH CASE DRAWS CONSERVATIVE BACKING AFTER DOJ PRAISE RATTLES ‘ELITE’ LEGAL CONFERENCE

The audit also found that cases where Trump, or a Trump official, was named, and the ABA filed an amicus brief, every time they argued in the direction contrary to the Trump official or Trump himself.

“The ABA presents its amicus program as advancing the interests of the legal profession and the rule of law,” said Gene Hamilton, President of America First Legal.

“The data tells a different story,” Hamilton continued. “More than four in five briefs push a progressive agenda, immigration advocacy has become the program’s dominant focus, and the organization has not once — in ten years and across two Trump administrations — filed a brief that could be characterized as supportive of a conservative legal position. The ABA is not a neutral arbiter and should be treated no differently than any other liberal advocacy group.”

In President Trump’s second term, the Trump administration has taken several steps to push back against what it says is bias at the ABA. In February 2025, Federal Trade Commission Chairman Andrew Ferguson announced a new policy prohibiting FTC political appointees from holding leadership roles in the American Bar Association (ABA), participating in ABA events, or renewing their ABA memberships. 

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

That early action was also followed by several others, such as a May letter to the ABA’s president from Attorney General Pam Bondi indicating the Department of Justice would no longer be engaging in its traditional partnership related to vetting judicial nominees, citing “refusal to fix the bias in its ratings process, despite criticism.”

Meanwhile, in April, Trump signed an Executive Order that singled out the ABA and other powerful accrediting groups, warning that anyone engaging in unlawful discrimination would be refused federal recognition.

President Donald Trump acknowledged peacemaking with Iran is made difficult because their “sinister, sick” replacement leaders are hiding.

“One of the problems they do have when they deal with us is we deal with people and the people aren’t able to communicate with anybody else, because all of their leadership has been gone,” Trump said at the start of his second Cabinet meeting of 2026 on Thursday.

“The first level is gone. And they met to pick a new level, and they’re gone. They’re all gone because they didn’t make a deal.

“And because they’re sick people, they’re really sick. They’re they’re really sinister, sick people.”

NEW IRANIAN SUPREME LEADER ‘LIKELY DISFIGURED,’ HEGSETH SAYS

Regardless of the struggle to find a diplomatic off-ramp, Trump is pleased with the progress on the “military operation” against Iran, saying the conflict may end after four to six weeks of fighting.

“We estimated it would take approximately four to six weeks to achieve our mission, and we’re way ahead of schedule,” Trump said. “If you look at what we’ve done in terms of the destruction of that country, I mean, we’re way ahead.”

While the chokepoint of the Strait of Hormuz remains an issue — despite the removal of the Iranian military commander that had ordered it closed to the U.S. and its allies — Trump lamented the NATO allies are only now vowing to stand with the U.S.

WHITE HOUSE WARNS IRAN AGAINST BALKING AT DEAL: TRUMP READY TO ‘UNLEASH HELL’

“I said 25 years ago that NATO’s a paper tiger, but more importantly, that we’ll come to their rescue, but they will never come to ours,” Trump said. “And I want you to remember that we said this.: They didn’t come to our rescue.

“Now they all want to help when the other side is annihilated. They said, ‘We’d love to send ships.’ They actually made a statement, a couple of them, that ‘we want to get involved when the war is over.’

“You know, it’s supposed to get involved with the war’s beginning or even before it begins.”

TRUMP ORDERS WAR DEPT TO POSTPONE STRIKES ON IRANIAN ENERGY SITES, CITING ‘PRODUCTIVE’ TALKS TO END WAR

Ultimately, Trump warned, NATO failed a “test,” something that might loom down the road when peace negotiations in Ukraine and potential aspirations for Greenland resurface after Iran is off the top of Trump’s foreign policy agenda.

“Nobody’s a match for the United States,” Trump said, noting Iran’s heavy losses showing “they’re not a match for the United States. It’s small potatoes.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“That’s why I’m so disappointed in NATO, because this was a test for NATO. This was a test. You can help us. You don’t have to, but if you don’t do that, we’re going to remember.”

“Just remember, remember this in a number of months from now,” he continued. “Remember my statements. They have an expression, a great expression: Never forget. It can never forget.”

Parents won’t admit that they have a favorite child.

But they do.

The same is true with lawmakers.

They won’t admit they have a favorite bill.

But they do.

That’s why the SAVE America Act is the favorite bill of Senate Republicans.

Until it isn’t.

TRUMP DEMANDS SAVE AMERICA ACT BE TIED TO DHS FUNDING AMID AIRPORT CHAOS

At some point, lawmakers will forge a deal to fund the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). It could be today. Tomorrow. A week. A month. But it will happen. And until then, the Senate likely squats on the SAVE America Act, which requires proof of citizenship to vote.

The Senate is stalled here, partly because it lacks anything else to do. But mostly because the SAVE America Act is the “favorite child” of Republican senators — for now. It’s good optics for the Senate to look like it’s working on the hallmark of President Trump’s legislative agenda — even if it has no viable path to passage.

And when the Senate eventually secures that DHS agreement, it will likely ditch its favorite child. The DHS bill will quickly matriculate in status to Republican senators.

It’s not that GOP senators loved the SAVE America Act less. But that they loved funding DHS more.

So why wouldn’t the Senate quickly revert to the SAVE America Act as soon as it passes DHS funding? Well, that’s because senators will acquire another favorite child: congressional recess. That’s right. If there’s a DHS deal, lawmakers will abandon Washington for about two weeks to observe Easter and Passover.

Senators will wrestle with the SAVE America Act again down the road. But the measure is likely relegated to the island of misfit toys for legislation. Something called “budget reconciliation.”

More on that in a moment.

Yes. Republicans relish talking about the importance of voter ID and securing elections so persons illegally in the country can’t cast ballots. But if enough Republicans really liked the SAVE America Act, they’d have the votes to pass the measure.

The Senate has incinerated more than a week of debate on the SAVE America Act. Republicans have little to show for their efforts. That is, unless you include the Senate blocking a proposed amendment to bar men from competing in women’s sports. That test vote secured a paltry 49 yeas Saturday afternoon.

Everyone has known where the vote count stands on this for weeks now.

“I’m telling you, the SAVE (America) Act is not going to pass,” said Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin, D-Ill. “They have to change the rules of the Senate for that to happen.”

THUNE ACCUSES CRITICS OF ‘CREATING FALSE EXPECTATIONS’ AMID BACKLASH OVER STALLED SAVE AMERICA ACT

And, for the record, the Senate lacks the votes to alter the rules, too. 

It’s not that Republicans didn’t embrace the SAVE America Act. It’s just that lines at the airports and the risk of terrorism worry them.

The SAVE America Act has emerged as a messaging exercise for Senate Republicans. They can get Democrats on the record about opposing bans on men in women’s sports and voter ID. The National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) — the panel charged with electing GOPers to the Senate — is more than happy to document Democrats via a roll call vote how they feel about those subjects. However, the GOP simply lacks the votes to pass the bill.

Moreover, there is finally an opportunity to end the protracted government shutdown. There are only so many exits on the legislative interstate. You have to be able to read a map. Republicans don’t want to miss this exit. The limited interstate exits also apply to opportunities for congressional recesses.

Republicans are about to punt more than Ray Guy.

“We have had this battle now for two weeks,” said Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont., on Fox. “This is going to continue after we get back. After the Easter break.”

Some advocates of the bill promise they won’t retreat.

“We’re busting our butt to do what the public wants us to do. We’ve got to secure our elections,” said Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla.

“Then why haven’t we seen a 25-hour speech, [Sen.] Cory Booker [D-N.J.] style, by somebody to keep the Senate in session around the clock?” asked yours truly.

HOUSE CONSERVATIVES ERUPT OVER SENATE GOP, WHITE HOUSE DEAL AMID SAVE ACT FIGHT

“I think we ought to do everything we can,” replied Scott.

Some Republicans say their side raised expectations too high.

“I think anytime you promise something you can’t possibly deliver, you’ve got to be held accountable,” said Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C. “It’s disingenuous to go out to the people and say ‘I’m fighting for you’ when you haven’t even entered the ring.”

So Republicans will try to shoehorn every possible component of the SAVE America Act into a “budget reconciliation” bill later this year. “Try” is the key word. Budget reconciliation is a special process, inoculated from a filibuster and only needs a simple majority to pass. Sounds great, right? But budget reconciliation is an elite Senate process for only money and tax matters. Not policy, like voter ID. And voter ID could be a target of the Senate’s umpire — Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough — if GOPers try to stuff it in that bill.

“Budget reconciliation, as I’ve said before, you have to have a reason to do it,” said Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D. “Obviously the parliamentarian has a role to play in that process. And in the past we have respected it. And I would expect we would do that.”

If they’re being honest, few Republicans think budget reconciliation is feasible to salvage parts of the SAVE America Act.

“I don’t think under reconciliation we’re going to be able to pass voter ID,” said Senate Budget Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.

“The SAVE America act is not reconcilable,” said House Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Harris, R-Md. “It will never fly past the parliamentarian because it really is predominantly a policy issue.”

“This is fake,” said Rep. Warren Davidson, R-Ohio, about any wing-and-a-prayer effort to wedge the SAVE America Act into budget reconciliation. “It isn’t going to work.”

“A talking filibuster is the most obvious and the most sure way of getting this thing passed,” said Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas. “This reconciliation is not an out for the Senate. They need to do their job and get this bill passed.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

But Senate Republicans haven’t shown a willingness to hold the Senate in session until they wear down their opponents and pass the bill via a lengthy talking filibuster. Staying on the bill for now is a parliamentary convenience. Especially after the weekend vote on men playing women’s sports.

The Senate will eventually move on. And senators will eventually embrace yet another favorite legislative child.

EXCLUSIVE: A conservative House Republican is seeking to enact sweeping new election transparency measures before November’s midterm elections.

Rep. Ralph Norman, R-S.C., will introduce legislation Thursday requiring a small federal agency, known as the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, to establish a public database that would disclose basic information about private vendors running federal elections. 

Norman’s Election Infrastructure Transparency Act would require the new database to report the names of all private election vendors, details of the vendor contracts and their ownership structures, including the mandatory disclosure of any foreign ties, within 30 days of an election. 

Norman, who is running to be South Carolina’s next governor, argues his transparency-focused legislation is necessary to combat foreign adversaries attempting to interfere with U.S. elections. Russia, China and Iran all sought to influence the outcome of the 2024 presidential election, according to multiple reports.

SEN KENNEDY URGES ‘SMART LAWYERS’ TO REWORK SAVE AMERICA ACT FOR SIMPLE MAJORITY PATH

If a transparency database is not created, proponents of the legislation say lawmakers and election officials could be left in the dark about whether foreign money or potential foreign ties are present among the vendors that make up the country’s election infrastructure.

“The American people deserve to know exactly who is involved in administering their elections,” Norman said in a statement. “Foreign adversaries are not sitting on the sidelines. They are actively looking for ways to exploit weaknesses in our system.”

The legislation would apply to the 2026 elections and every election cycle in the future. The measure would also cut off federal funding to any state that does not comply. 

The Election Assistance Commission is a bipartisan agency tasked with certifying voting hardware and distributing election infrastructure grants to states.

HOUSE CONSERVATIVES ERUPT OVER SENATE GOP, WHITE HOUSE DEAL AMID SAVE ACT FIGHT

Norman’s legislation could face obstacles to being signed into law due to anticipated opposition from Democratic lawmakers, who have repeatedly criticized GOP-authored election integrity measures.

House Republicans, however, have floated multiple election-related proposals that could be included in an anticipated budget reconciliation package. Ideas circulated by the House Administration Committee include granting funding to states for verifying voter registration data and conducting post-election audits. 

The flurry of election integrity and transparency measures comes as congressional Republicans are pushing for the passage of the Trump-backed SAVE America Act. The legislation would require proof of citizenship to vote in federal elections and enact a nationwide voter ID, among other provisions. 

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The House-passed measure has stalled in the Senate due to Democratic opposition and is not expected to get the votes to overcome the upper chamber’s 60-vote threshold.

Some Republicans have advocated for passing parts of the SAVE America Act in a GOP-only budget reconciliation bill, but the legislative maneuver’s stringent requirements could derail that plan.

FIRST ON FOX: Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, has received a slate of 18 new endorsements from Texas Republicans in the latest development in the bitter primary runoff between him and challenger state Attorney General Ken Paxton.

Texas Republican congressmen Randy Weber, Nathaniel Moran and Roger Williams, influential GOP state Rep. Matt Shaheen, and former Texas House Speaker Dade Phelan are among the latest lawmakers to back Cornyn over Paxton.

This primary has become increasingly bruising, with the rivals lobbing more personal attacks at each other after neither candidate achieved the 50% threshold needed to secure the GOP nomination in the March primary. Meanwhile, the stakes are high for the Republican Party, as Democrats believe candidate James Talarico, a state representative and rising star, has an opening to flip the seat for the first time in decades. Such an upset would be devastating for the GOP’s chances of retaining a majority in the upper chamber and could impact President Donald Trump’s agenda for the remainder of his term.

Cornyn, a top Senate Republican who has held the seat since 2002, responded to the new endorsements by telling Fox News Digital, “I’m honored to have the endorsement of many longtime friends in Texas politics, whom I have gotten to know during our time in office and with whom I’ve been proud to work.”

DEM PRIMARY TURNS UGLY: MILLS UNLEASHES BRUTAL ATTACK ON SANDERS-BACKED PLATNER IN CRUCIAL SENATE SHOWDOWN

The senator said that he has “always worked hard to earn the trust of our elected officials, so we can roll up our sleeves and work together for the betterment of all Texans.”

He added that he looks forward to “continuing our important work together upon my re-election to the United States Senate.”

In total, 30 prominent Republican legislative leaders from Texas have publicly backed Cornyn, evidencing strong support for the incumbent among party leadership. He has received the support of more than 500 current and former Texas elected officials. Outside Texas, Cornyn has also received the backing of Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., the National Republican Senatorial Committee and the National Border Patrol Council.

In a statement shared with Fox News Digital, Weber said Cornyn “has been a tireless fighter for Texas energy, standing up for our oil and gas industry and working to unleash American energy dominance.”

Weber said he is “proud” to support Cornyn “because he will continue fighting to protect our energy producers and keep Texas leading the way.”

Shaheen emphasized the importance of the GOP not losing the Senate seat in November, writing, “As someone with a Democrat challenger this November, I understand how vital it is that John Cornyn be our U.S. Senate nominee, otherwise election losses for Republicans could be disastrous.”

He emphasized that Cornyn “has never lost an election,” and said that “with him at the top of the ballot, he will defeat James Talarico and lift up Republicans in down-ballot races.” 

TRUMP WARNS HE WON’T ENDORSE LAWMAKERS WHO OPPOSE SAVE AMERICA ACT

Meanwhile, Paxton, who has served as Texas attorney general since 2015, also has strong grassroots support. Last week, Paxton received a slate of 13 new state-level endorsements, including several prominent legislators. This brought his total number of endorsements from Texas Republican leaders to 250, a list that includes congressmen Lance Gooden and Troy Nehls. He has been endorsed by Turning Point USA and the NRA Political Victory Fund.

Fox News Digital reached out to Paxton’s campaign for comment.

After receiving the new endorsements last week, Paxton told Fox News Digital that “the momentum behind our campaign continues to grow stronger every single day.”

He said that “Texans are ready for a change and are ready to be represented by an America First warrior who is going to work tirelessly to help Texas and support President Trump,” adding, “That’s exactly what I’ve done as Attorney General, and it’s what I’ll continue to do as our next United States Senator.”

Noticeably absent from the list of supporters for either candidate is Trump, who, despite saying he likes both, has not officially endorsed. He has hinted that he would endorse “soon.”

He recently suggested that the SAVE America Act, a voting integrity bill being debated in the Senate, will play a role in his endorsement decision.

“A lot has to do with the SAVE America Act,” Trump said, according to NBC News. “A lot is going to determine — Republicans have to get that passed, because that will secure voting in this country.” 

PRITZKER FLEXES POLITICAL MUSCLE IN ILLINOIS SENATE PRIMARY AS 2028 BUZZ BUILDS

Cornyn, who co-sponsored an earlier version of the SAVE America Act, recently authored an opinion piece in The New York Post titled “Why the SAVE Act matters more than the filibuster.” In the piece, he advocated for passing the measure through “whatever changes to Senate rules may prove necessary.” This marks a break from his previous support for the filibuster, which many lawmakers consider a necessary guardrail against majoritarian rule.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Cornyn argued that “the Senate rules will change eventually, whether Republicans like it or not,” and that “this leaves conservatives with two options. We can either unilaterally disarm, or we can stand and fight.”

“We can let the Democrats keep obstructing today and then smash the rules the first chance they get, or we can act now and use the mandate the American people gave this president and this Congress to secure our elections, protect our homeland and bring back common sense,” wrote Cornyn, adding, “The answer is clear: We need to stand, fight and win.”

“Democrats started this fight. Now Republicans should finish it,” said Cornyn.