Trump reacts to Tillis not seeking re-election, sends warning to ‘cost cutting Republicans’
President Donald Trump celebrated the retirement announcement of one of the two Republicans who voted against advancing his “big, beautiful bill.” “Great News! ‘Senator’ Thom Tillis will not be seeking reelection,” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social. “For all cost-cutting Republicans, of which I am one, REMEMBER, you still have to get reelected. Don’t go too crazy! We will make it all up, times 10, with GROWTH, more than ever before,” he continued in a separate post. The North Carolina Republican announced on Sunday that he would not seek re-election in the 2026 cycle. Tillis would have been among the most vulnerable Republicans running next year. He faced threats from Trump to face a challenger after his vote against the president’s agenda Saturday night. SCOOP: HOUSE REPUBLICAN EYES BID FOR THOM TILLIS SENATE SEAT AFTER TRUMP ATTACK The lawmaker voted against advancing the bill and is likely to vote against final passage, because deep Medicaid cuts inside the colossal bill brought on changes to the Medicaid provider tax rate. THOM TILLIS ANNOUNCES RETIREMENT FROM SENATE AFTER CLASH WITH TRUMP Tillis railed against the slow death of bipartisanship in Washington in a statement. “In Washington over the last few years, it’s become increasingly evident that leaders who are willing to embrace bipartisanship, compromise, and demonstrate independent thinking are becoming an endangered species,” he said. TRUMP THREATENS TO SUPPORT A PRIMARY CHALLENGER AGAINST GOP SENATOR FOR OPPOSING ‘BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL’ His announcement also comes after Trump spent much of Saturday evening blasting Tillis as a “grandstander” and vowing to interview potential primary challengers, while Vice President JD Vance, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and his leadership team worked over holdout fiscal hawks. “Numerous people have come forward wanting to run in the Primary against ‘Senator Thom’ Tillis,” Trump said on Truth Social. “I will be meeting with them over the coming weeks, looking for someone who will properly represent the Great People of North Carolina and, so importantly, the United States of America. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”
Tillis’ retirement announcement draws reactions from Trump critic Jeff Flake, Bernie Sanders: ‘A cult’
Former Senator Jeff Flake, one of President Donald Trump’s most vocal critics during his first administration, reacted to Sen. Thom Tillis’ retirement plans on Sunday. Tillis, who was one of the most vulnerable Republicans in the 2026 cycle, had faced threats from Trump to endorse a challenger after Tillis voted against the president’s “big, beautiful bill,” on Saturday night. In an X post, Flake speculated that Tillis could have won re-election, but only if he took certain positions. “He could win again, but only by taking positions he doesn’t believe in,” Flake, who served as U.S. ambassador to Turkey during the Biden administration, said. TRUMP’S ‘BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL’ FACES REPUBLICAN FAMILY FEUD AS SENATE REVEALS ITS FINAL TEXT “It’s an honor to serve in the Senate — but not at any cost,” he added. Tillis said on Sunday that he plans to retire at the end of his term in 2026. In a statement, the North Carolina Republican referenced “the greatest form of hypocrisy in American politics.” “When people see independent thinking on the other side, they cheer,” Tillis said. “But when those very same people see independent thinking coming from their side, they scorn, ostracize, and even censure.” “In Washington over the last few years, it’s become increasingly evident that leaders who are willing to embrace bipartisanship, compromise, and demonstrate independent thinking are becoming an endangered species,” he added. Tillis added that the choice broke down to either spending time with his family or navigating “the political theater and partisan gridlock,” in Washington, D.C. “It’s not a hard choice, and I will not be seeking re-election,” he said. SENATE REPUBLICANS RAM TRUMP’S ‘BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL’ THROUGH KEY TEST VOTE Senator Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., also reacted to Tillis’ announcement with a criticism of Trump. “I do not agree with N.C. Senator Thom Tillis on much. But he’s right on this,” Sanders’ post began. He added, “Trump’s Republican Party does not allow for independent thought. The Republican Party today is a cult. Either you do as Trump wants, or you’re out. Pathetic.” On Saturday evening, Trump blasted Tillis as a “grandstander” and expressed interest in interviewing potential primary challengers. “Numerous people have come forward wanting to run in the Primary against ‘Senator Thom’ Tillis,” Trump said on Truth Social. “I will be meeting with them over the coming weeks, looking for someone who will properly represent the Great People of North Carolina and, so importantly, the United States of America. Thank you for your attention to this matter!” he added. Fox News Digital’s Alex Miller contributed to this report.
Curtis Sliwa vows to stay in NYC mayoral race as donors plot to stop Mamdani
EXCLUSIVE: New York City Republican mayoral nominee Curtis Sliwa slammed the door on any talk of him dropping out of the race, and blamed incumbent Eric Adams for the rise of socialist Zohran Mamdani. Prominent donors are exploring ways to get Sliwa to drop out of the race to open up the GOP nomination – with Adams being touted to replace him, according to a New York Post report. Former Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who lost the Democratic primary to Mamdani last week, could also be on the ticket in November. But Sliwa, a lifelong New Yorker and founder of the Guardian Angels crime-prevention group, insisted to Fox News Digital that he is the man for the job. He also spoke about his fractured relationship with President Donald Trump and said he would welcome the president’s endorsement, should it come. ZOHRAN MAMDANI REPEATEDLY PRESSED ON WHETHER HE CONDEMNS ‘GLOBALIZE THE INTIFADA’ TERM IN NBC INTERVIEW He said the city needs a fighter and he has already risked his life to make the city safer – and has the battle scars to prove it. The Brooklyn-born 71-year-old famously survived a mob hit in 1992 in which he was shot multiple times inside a moving taxi before jumping out through a window. “The only way you get me out of this race before Nov. 4 is in a coffin, in a pine box,” he said. “And people know the Gottis and Gambinos tried that in 1992, and it didn’t work and this won’t work either. Be prepared to see Curtis Sliwa on the Republican line on Nov. 4.” Sliwa has led the Guardian Angels since 1979 and said what separates him from the field is simple: He rides the subways, talks to the people and knows the neighborhoods by heart. “I’m the only real tried and true New Yorker. Andrew Cuomo hasn’t lived in the city since 1990. Mamdani goes back and forth to Uganda. Eric Adams? He lives in Fort Lee,” Sliwa said in a dig at Adams owning a property in New Jersey. “As goes the subway, so goes New York City. That’s our veins and arteries. None of these other guys are in the system. I live there.” Political experts consider Sliwa’s election bid as a long shot. He ran against Adams in the 2021 election and lost by 66.1% to 27.4%. But the chips could finally fall Sliwa’s way in November if the left and center vote splits – with voters balking at Mamdani’s far-left agenda and both Adams and former Cuomo siphoning off Democratic votes with Independent runs. WASHINGTON POST BASHES SOCIALIST ZOHRAN MAMDANI AS POTENTIAL DISASTER FOR NEW YORK CITY “Oh, I don’t care how many candidates are in the race. Look, we wouldn’t be in this situation, people wouldn’t even know who Zohan Mamdani is if Eric Adams had fairly been a successful Democratic elected mayor… Republicans don’t trust him, Democrats don’t want him… He is corrupt.” Adams’ tenure was marred by federal corruption charges brought under the Biden administration, including accusations of wire fraud and solicitation of campaign contributions from foreign nationals. Adams denied the charges, which were later dropped by the Trump administration. Adams’ spokesperson, Kayla Mamelak Altus, blasted Sliwa’s characterization of the mayor, telling Fox News Digital Sliwa is becoming “more detached from reality every day and nothing he ever says should be taken seriously.” In the interview, Sliwa also took aim at Mamdani’s socialist policies, which include a citywide rent freeze, free public bus service and higher property taxes on wealthy neighborhoods – all ideas that critics say have already strained budgets and backfired in Chicago under Mayor Brandon Johnson. “Just go to Chicago and see the results of what a socialist mayor will not be able to do for you,” Sliwa said. “There’s a lot of promise, but there’s no delivery.” Mamdani’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment. Sliwa said his campaign is focused on public safety and housing affordability, embracing the slogan “improve, don’t move,” which taps into disgruntled voters who may seek to join the exodus of people fleeing the city in recent years. He also thinks his no-kill policy for the city’s animal shelters will bring in moderate Democrats, women voters, younger generations and animal advocates who might not typically support a Republican candidate. Sliwa is known for his deep love of cats, often highlighting his devotion to rescuing and caring for strays. Sliwa scoffed at the notion that Mamdani’s social media influence could be a deciding factor, arguing the race will be won by connecting with people on the ground. The assemblyman has nearly 2 million followers on Instagram, compared to Sliwa’s 66,000, while the socialist candidate has more than 910,000 followers on TikTok compared to Sliwa’s 183,000. ‘DELUSIONAL’ NYC POLITICIANS CALLED OUT BY GUARDIAN ANGELS FOUNDER OVER SUBWAY VIOLENCE: ‘SLAP IN THE FACE’ “I already know how to appeal to young people,” Sliwa said, noting he’s been recruiting young people for decades to lead the Guardian Angels. “My Baby Boomer generation talks about Gen Z like they’re lazy or stupid… They couldn’t be more wrong. That just pushes them into Mamdani’s camp.” A Trump endorsement could also shift momentum in Sliwa’s favor. Though he called his relationship with the president a “love-hate” one, Trump’s rallies in the Bronx and at Madison Square Garden last year suggest a shifting political tide in the city – and a joint appearance with Sliwa could prove a game-changer. “I don’t talk to President Trump on the phone. I haven’t been to Mar-a-Lago or gone to Washington,” Sliwa said. “He seems to talk to Eric Adams. Look, he saved him from going to prison, I understand that. In the last election, I voted for him and I encouraged people to vote for him.” But Sliwa said he is open to receiving Trump’s backing, even if the race is not on the president’s radar. “Well, if it comes, that’s fine. If it doesn’t come, remember I ran the last
SCOOP: House Republican eyes bid for Thom Tillis Senate seat after Trump attack
FIRST ON FOX: A first-term House Republican and military veteran is eyeing a bid for Sen. Thom Tillis’ North Carolina Senate seat after the GOP lawmaker announced he would not run for re-election, a source close to the congressman told Fox News Digital. Rep. Pat Harrigan, R-N.C., a former Army Special Forces Officer who was deployed to Afghanistan, was elected to represent North Carolina’s 10th congressional district in November 2024. It comes after President Donald Trump pledged to find a primary challenger for Tillis over the senator’s decision to vote “no” on a key procedural hurdle to advance the commander-in-chief’s “big, beautiful bill.” SENATE REPUBLICANS RAM TRUMP’S ‘BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL’ THROUGH KEY TEST VOTE Harrigan was elected to replace former House Financial Services Committee Chairman Patrick McHenry, R-N.C. He’s among the first to express interest in Tillis’ seat in what could shape up into a crowded Republican primary race ahead of the 2026 midterms. Rep. Tim Moore, R-N.C., another first-term House Republican, is also considering a bid for Tillis’ Senate seat, a source familiar with his plans told Fox News Digital. Moore is the former speaker of the North Carolina state House of Representatives. Tillis revealed he would not run for re-election in a bombshell statement on Sunday afternoon, criticizing the current political environment. “Too many elected officials are motivated by pure raw politics who really don’t give a damn about the people they promised to represent on the campaign trail. After they get elected, they don’t bother to do the hard work to research the policies they seek to implement and understand the consequences those policies could have on that young adult living in a trailer park, struggling to make ends meet,” Tillis said. “As many of my colleagues have noticed over the last year, and at times even joked about, I haven’t exactly been excited about running for another term. That is true since the choice is between spending another six years navigating the political theatre and partisan gridlock in Washington or spending that time with the love of my life Susan, our two children, three beautiful grandchildren, and the rest of our extended family back home.” The statement came on the second continuous day that senators are wrestling with the “one big, beautiful bill,” a vast piece of legislation advancing Trump’s agenda on tax, immigration, energy, defense, and the national debt. TRUMP’S ‘BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL’ FACES REPUBLICAN FAMILY FEUD AS SENATE REVEALS ITS FINAL TEXT Tillis said he had objections to the bill’s spending cuts targeting Medicaid, arguing they would be damaging to rural communities and hospitals in North Carolina. The senate voted 51-49 to begin debate on the legislation late on Saturday. Tillis and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., were the only two Republicans to vote “no.” Trump posted on Saturday, “Numerous people have come forward wanting to run in the primary against ‘Senator Thom’ Tillis. I will be meeting with them over the coming weeks, looking for someone who will properly represent the Great People of North Carolina and, so importantly, the United States of America. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”
Mike Lee preemptively drops ‘big beautiful bill’ provision to sell federal lands that riled GOP colleagues
Utah Republican Sen. Mike Lee preemptively withdrew a provision in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act on Saturday evening that would have allowed for the sale of federal lands for development after widespread outrage among his conservative colleagues. “Over the past several weeks, I’ve spent a lot of time listening to members of the community, local leaders, and stakeholders across the country. While there has been a tremendous amount of misinformation – and in some cases, outright lies – about my bill, many people brought forward sincere concerns,” Lee said in a message posted to his X account on Saturday evening. Lee, who chairs the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, said he pulled the provision after he failed to secure “safeguards to guarantee that these lands would be sold only to American families,” and not to China or corporations. The Senate parliamentarian ruled on Monday that the provision’s original language did not comply with strict rules related to what could be included in reconciliation legislation, with Lee’s office resubmitting the provision with new language before pulling it altogether on Saturday evening. Lee said he maintains his long-held position that the U.S. government owns too much land that is often mismanaged and leaves Americans, most notably in Western states, with higher tax burdens. HOUSE GOP LEADERSHIP TAKES VICTORY LAP AFTER PASSING TRUMP’S ‘ONE BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL’ “I continue to believe the federal government owns far too much land – land it is mismanaging and in many cases ruining for the next generation,” Lee wrote in his post. “Under Democratic presidents, massive swaths of the West are being locked away from the people who live there, with no meaningful recourse.” Lee had included a mandate for sales of millions of acres of federal lands in a draft provision of the tax cut package earlier this month. He preemptively pulled the provision on Saturday ahead of a procedural vote, as a handful of Republican lawmakers in both chambers publicly denounced the provision and said they would vote against the bill if it was included. “We’ve got the votes to strike it,” Montana Sen. Steve Daines said Thursday of Lee’s provision. “We’re ready.” SENATE GOP AIMS TO APPROVE MAJOR LEGISLATION NEXT WEEK AS TRUMP TOUTS PARTY UNITY “I agree with my colleagues that the federal government has mismanaged federal lands for decades. But I don’t agree with their solution. The solution is not to sell public lands. The solution is better management. Let’s send legislation to POTUS desk to improve management and access. I remain a no on the senate reconciliation bill,” Montana Rep. Ryan Zinke posted to X last week ahead of Lee pulling the provision. Zinke served as President Donald Trump‘s secretary of the Department of the Interior during his first administration. “The entire Montana delegation has been united on this since Day One: public lands belong in public hands. Proud to work with @SteveDaines to block the sale of public lands. Now let’s pass the Big, Beautiful Bill so we can implement the America First agenda Montanans overwhelmingly support,” Montana Republican Sen. Tim Sheehy posted to X on Sunday in response to Daines saying he and Sheehy “worked together to block this provision from being included in the Senate reconciliation bill.” “The people of Idaho have been clear – we do NOT support the sale of our public lands to the highest bidder. I am proud to help lead the effort to remove this provision from the One Big Beautiful Bill,” Idaho Republican Sen. Jim Risch posted to X after Lee said he would pull the provision. MIKE JOHNSON, DONALD TRUMP GET ‘BIG, ‘BEAUTIFUL’ WIN AS BUDGET PASSES HOUSE Lawmakers are on a tight 4th of July deadline to get the legislation, which will advance Trump’s agenda on taxes, immigration, energy, defense and the national debt, to the president’s desk. Senate Republicans successfully carried the legislation over a procedural hurdle late on Saturday after hours of negotiations. Fox News Digital’s Alex Miller and Elizabeth Elkind contributed to this report.
Dem delay tactic ends, debate begins on Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’
Senate Democrats’ delay tactic has finally come to a close, but Senate Republicans are still a ways out from voting on President Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful bill.” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., forced clerks on the Senate floor to read aloud the entirety of the Senate GOP’s version of Trump’s megabill on Saturday. In all, reading the 940-page legislative behemoth bled well into Sunday and took nearly 16 hours. SENATE REPUBLICANS RAM TRUMP’S ‘BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL’ THROUGH KEY TEST VOTE Schumer announced that he would be forcing the clerks to read the bill ahead of the ultimately successful, albeit drama-filled, procedural vote. And after forcing the reading of the bill, he said on X, “Republicans are squirming.” “I know damn well they haven’t read the bill, so we’re going to make them,” he said. It’s an oft-unused strategy Schumer and Senate Democrats deployed as part of the pain campaign against Republicans, who have iced them out from having input on the president’s agenda. SCHUMER FORCES READING OF TRUMP’S ENTIRE ‘BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL’ AS SENATE BRACES FOR ALL-NIGHTER The last time Senate clerks were forced to read the entirety of a bill on the floor was in 2021, when Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., similarly objected and demanded that former President Joe Biden’s American Rescue Act be read aloud. Now with the reading dispensed, lawmakers will trudge onward with 20 hours of debate evenly divided between both Democrats and Republicans. Senate Democrats are expected to squeeze every second from their allotted time, while Senate Republicans will likely only use a couple of hours at most. That time on the GOP side will be used by those already critical of the bill, like Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky. While his support for final passage is unlikely, he is not the only headache that Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., may have to worry about. KEY GOP SENATOR DEFECTS ON CRUCIAL VOTE, IMPERILING TRUMP’S ‘BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL’ IN NARROW MAJORITY Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., is unlikely to change his mind and vote for final passage – despite Trump bashing him on social media and threatening a primary challenger – unless substantial changes are made to the Medicaid adjustments in the bill. Tillis further steeled his resolve against the bill when he announced his retirement from Washington at the end of his term, opting against a likely grueling primary battle. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, who supported the legislation through the first test, also wants to see real changes to the Medicaid provider tax rate. Then there are the fiscal hawks who held the vote hostage on Saturday night as they negotiated with Thune, with the help of Vice President JD Vance, to get an amendment to make changes to the federal medical assistance percentage (FMAP), which is the amount that the federal government pays for Medicaid to each state. Changes to FMAP are not popular among most Senate Republicans, save for fiscal hawks looking for steeper cuts in the colossal bill.
GOP, Dem senators remain divided over Medicaid after Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’ vote
Senate Republicans and Democrats remain divided on the Medicaid issue hours after President Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” passed a key Senate vote Saturday night. Sen. Jim Banks, R-Ind., and Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., both appeared on “Fox News Sunday” to discuss Trump’s legislation in the wake of the 51-49 vote. Banks argued that the Medicaid reforms would only affect certain people. “The Medicaid reforms would affect able-bodied Americans, those who are sitting at home who can work, who don’t work, who don’t have a sick kid or a sick mom, they shouldn’t receive Medicaid without working,” he said. “And on top of that, the bill would take Medicaid away from illegal immigrants.” SENATE REPUBLICANS RAM TRUMP’S ‘BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL’ THROUGH KEY TEST VOTE Coons conceded there are states that are using their state funding to provide healthcare “for people who are undocumented,” though argued that Trump’s $900 billion cuts to the program “are not about throwing people off of Medicaid who are not here legally.” “They are about imposing more and more requirements on the beneficiaries of Medicaid,” the Democrat said. Banks argued that taxes for everyday Americans will go up if the bill doesn’t get passed. “If we don’t pass this bill, everyone’s taxes on average will go up $2,000 a household, and that’s not fair to the regular Americans who work hard every day,” he said. Lingering concerns in both chambers about Medicaid — specifically the Medicaid provider tax rate and the effect of direct payments to states — energy tax credits, the state and local tax (SALT) deduction and others proved to be pain points that threatened the bill’s survival. TRUMP, LAWMAKERS REACT AFTER ‘BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL’ CLEARS SENATE HURDLE Coons, however, said that Americans who don’t believe the Democrats’ standpoint should listen to Sen. Tom Tillis, R-N.C., who, along with Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., voted against the bill. “Don’t believe me. Listen to Senator Tom Tillis,” Coons said. “He’s been saying loudly this bill is a bad deal for the middle class. It’ll raise healthcare costs and throw millions off of needed health care.” On Sunday morning, Trump slammed both Tillis and Paul on social media. Hours later, Tillis announced he would not seek reelection. Following the vote, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., demanded that the text of the behemoth bill be read aloud before debates begin. After 14 hours, Senate clerks were still about 120 pages short of finishing reading aloud the 940-page text. Once the reading is finished, the two parties will each get about 10 hours to debate on the bill. The timeline puts a likely Senate vote-a-rama on the bill in the early morning hours of Monday. A final passage vote could happen between late morning and late Monday night. Fox News Digital’s Alex Miller and Fox News’ Tyler Olson contributed to this report.
The five liberal courts that tied Trump’s hands before SCOTUS clipped their power
Nearly all the universal injunctions blocking President Donald Trump‘s agenda were issued by just five of the nation’s 94 federal district courts, a statistic that the administration said lays bare the Left’s strategy of lawfare. Trump and Attorney General Pam Bondi spoke at a news conference Friday just after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 6-3 decision that district judges, the lowest-level jurists in the federal system, cannot impose nationwide injunctions. Bondi noted that out of 40 nationwide injunctions issued since Trump retook the White House, 35 came out of five districts perceived as liberal. “Active liberal… judges have used these injunctions to block virtually all of President Trump’s policies,” Bondi said. “No longer. No longer.” Nationwide injunctions are court orders that prevent the federal government from implementing a policy or law. They have a cascading effect impacting the entire country, not just the parties involved in the court case, and have been used against the Trump administration at a vastly higher rate than previous administrations. SUPREME COURT POISED TO MAKE MAJOR DECISION THAT COULD SET LIMITS ON THE POWER OF DISTRICT JUDGES Trump’s first administration faced 64 injunctions out of the total 127 nationwide injunctions issued since 1963, Fox News Digital previously reported. There were 32 injunctions issued against the Bush, Obama and Biden administrations collectively since 2001, meaning the first Trump administration was on the receiving end of double the amount of nationwide injunctions than his two predecessors and successor combined, according to an April 2024 edition of the Harvard Law Review. Bondi pointed to the five district courts – Maryland, Washington, D.C., Massachusetts, California and Washington state – calling it “crazy” that such an overwhelming number of nationwide injunctions originated in those jurisdictions. Conservatives have accused the Left of bringing their cases in liberal judicial districts stocked with Democratic-appointed judges. Fox News Digital looked at the five district courts and how judges in them have issued sweeping injunctions that have hampered Trump’s federal policies. SUPREME COURT TO DEBATE TRUMP RESTRICTIONS ON BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP AND ENFORCEMENT OF NATIONWIDE INJUNCTIONS The Supreme Court agreed this year to take up three consolidated cases involving nationwide injunctions handed down by federal district judges in Maryland, Massachusetts and Washington state related to Trump’s birthright citizenship executive order. The U.S. District Court for Maryland was one of the courts nationwide that issued an injunction against Trump’s January executive order to end the practice of granting birthright citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants. Maryland U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman issued the injunction in February following a lawsuit brought by five pregnant illegal immigrant women in the state, which was followed by other district judges in Washington state and Massachusetts ordering injunctions of their own. The Maryland district court also issued a separate preliminary injunction against the Trump administration’s executive orders ending federal support for diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs in February. The court recently came under fire from the Trump administration when the Department of Justice filed lawsuits against each of the 15 federal judges on the Maryland federal bench earlier this month for automatically issuing injunctions for certain immigration cases. The injunctions have prevented the Department of Homeland Security from deporting or changing the legal status of the immigrant in question for two business days. JONATHAN TURLEY: SUPREME COURT COULD SOON GIVE TRUMP ‘ENORMOUS’ VICTORY IN BATTLE WITH LEFT-WING JUDGES “President Trump’s executive authority has been undermined since the first hours of his presidency by an endless barrage of injunctions designed to halt his agenda,” Bondi said in a press release of the state’s automatic injunction practices. “The American people elected President Trump to carry out his policy agenda: this pattern of judicial overreach undermines the democratic process and cannot be allowed to stand.” Judges on the bench for the Northern District of California have issued at least six significant injunctions hampering policies put forth by the Trump administration this year. The Northern California district court includes counties such as San Francisco, Sonoma and Santa Clara. Back in March, Judge William Alsup, for example, granted a preliminary injunction ordering federal agencies to reinstate probationary employees fired under the Trump administration’s efforts to slim down the size of the federal government. Judge Susan Illston granted a temporary pause in May to the Trump administration’s federal reductions in force initiatives, and Judge William Orrick granted a separate injunction in April that prevented the Trump administration from withholding federal funds from areas deemed sanctuaries for illegal immigrants. SCOTUS RULES ON TRUMP’S BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP ORDER, TESTING LOWER COURT POWERS Federal judges on the Northern California bench also issued injunctions to block the enforcement of Trump administration polices related to organizations that promote DEI and LGBTQ programs and to prevent the administration from terminating the legal visa status of international students. The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia has issued at least six signigicant injunctions against the Trump administration this year, including Judge James Boasberg’s March injunction preventing the Trump administration from deporting violent illegal immigrant gang members under the Alien Enemies Act – which received widespread backlash among conservatives. “People are shocked by what is going on with the Court System. I was elected for many reasons, but a principal one was LAW AND ORDER, a big part of which is QUICKLY removing a vast Criminal Network of individuals, who came into our Country through the Crooked Joe Biden Open Borders Policy! These are dangerous and violent people, who kill, maim and, in many other ways, harm the people of our Country,” Trump posted to Truth Social in March following Boasberg extending his restraining order against the use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport illegal immigrants with alleged ties to gangs, such as Venezuelan criminal organization Tren de Aragua (TdA). TRUMP CELEBRATES SUPREME COURT LIMITS ON ‘COLOSSAL ABUSE OF POWER’ BY FEDERAL JUDGES Federal Judge Loren AliKhan issued a preliminary injunction in January barring the Trump administration’s freeze on federal grant disbursements through various federal agencies; Judge Paul Friedman
Mamdani doubles down on plan for ‘richer and whiter’ NYC neighborhoods, says billionaires shouldn’t exist
New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani doubled down on his plan to tax “richer and whiter neighborhoods,” while also adding that he believes billionaires should not exist. The democratic socialist claimed Sunday that his push to burden white taxpayers was not racist, despite his agenda explicitly targeting white-majority areas. “That is just a description of what we see right now,” Mamdani told NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday. “It’s not driven by race. It’s more of an assessment of what neighborhoods are being under taxed and overtaxed.” Mamdani’s policy proposal, “Stop the Sqeeze on NYC Homeowners,” outlines his plans to “shift the tax burden from overtaxed homeowners in the outer boroughs to more expensive homes in richer and whiter neighborhoods.” NEW YORK MAYORAL HOPEFUL ZOHRAN MAMDANI SLAMS CAPITALISM ON CNN, CITES MLK TO DEFEND SOCIALISM The policy notes that homeowners in wealthy neighborhoods “pay less than their fair share,” and proposes adjusting tax rates and assessment percentages to address the supposed imbalance. NEW YORK DEMOCRAT SAYS MAYORAL CANDIDATE ZOHRAN MAMDANI ‘TOO EXTREME TO LEAD’ When asked whether he would change the language of the proposal, Mamdani deflected, saying that the proposal is meant to ensure a fair property tax system and that the wording simply reflects an observation. “The use of that language is just an assessment of the neighborhood.” Mamdani said. “I’m just naming things as they are,” he added. “The thing that motivates me in this is to create a system of fairness. It is not to work backwards from a racial assessment of neighborhoods or our city.” BERNIE SANDERS, AOC-BACKED MAYORAL CANDIDATE PLANNING MASSIVE SPENDING INCREASES IN NYC Mamdani also reiterated his belief that “we shouldn’t have billionaires,” despite campaigning in the city believed to have the most billionaires in the world at 123 people. “I don’t think that we should have billionaires, frankly,” he said. “It is so much money in a moment of such inequality. And ultimately, what we need more of is equality across our city and across our state and across our country.”
Trump administration takes on new battle shutting down initial Iran strike assessments
A leaked Defense Intelligence Agency report is casting doubt on President Donald Trump’s claim that recent U.S. airstrikes “completely and totally obliterated” three Iranian nuclear facilities, instead concluding the mission only set back Iran’s program by several months. The report, published by CNN and The New York Times, comes just days after Trump approved the strikes amid escalating tensions between Israel and Iran. In a national address immediately following the operation, Trump declared the sites “completely and totally obliterated.” While members of the Trump administration have waged a new war to discredit the initial report from the Pentagon’s Defense Intelligence Agency, multiple experts told Fox News Digital that there is too little information available right now to accurately determine how much damage the strikes did. Piecing together a thorough intelligence assessment is complex and time-consuming, they said. FBI INVESTIGATING IRAN STRIKE LEAKER, LEAVITT SAYS: ‘THEY SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE’ Dan Shapiro, who previously served as the deputy assistant secretary of Defense for the Middle East and the U.S. ambassador to Israel, said he didn’t put a lot of stock in both overly pessimistic or overly optimistic assessments that emerged quickly, and said that the initial assessment from DIA was likely only based on satellite imagery. “That’s one piece of the puzzle of how you would really make this assessment,” Shapiro, now a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, told Fox News Digital. “You’d really want to have to test all the other streams of intelligence, from signals intelligence, human intelligence, other forms of monitoring the site, potentially visits by International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors, potentially visits by other people. So that’s going to take days to weeks to get a real assessment.” “But I think it’s likely that if the munitions performed as expected, that significant damage was done, and would set back the program significantly,” Shapiro said. Gen. Dan Caine, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Sunday that initial battle damage assessments suggested “all three sites sustained extremely severe damage and destruction,” but he acknowledged that a final assessment would “take some time.” Still, media reports based on the DIA report painted a different picture, and CNN’s reporting on the initial report said that Iran’s stash of enriched uranium was not destroyed in the strikes, citing seven people who had been briefed on the report. The findings were based on a battle damage assessment from U.S. Central Command, according to CNN. Other members of the Trump administration, including Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, have subsequently pushed back on the DIA report’s conclusions, claiming that the report was labeled “low confidence.” TRUMP SLAMS RUSSIA’S CASUAL THREAT TO ARM IRAN WITH NUCLEAR WEAPONS: ‘THAT’S WHY PUTIN’S THE BOSS’ The term is commonly used when labeling initial assessments, and means that conclusions are based on limited data, according to experts. Retired Navy Rear Adm. Mark Montgomery, who previously served as the director for transnational threats at the National Security Council for former President Bill Clinton, said the low confidence description is commonly used in early assessments. “Low confidence means the analyst is not sure of the accuracy of their assessment,” said Montgomery, now a senior fellow at the Washington think tank the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. “This is frequent when with a Quick Look 24-hour assessment like this one.” Montgomery’s colleague, Craig Singleton, also a senior fellow with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said that the low confidence label is used in cases with thin evidence and serves as a warning to policy-makers to seek additional information. “Most importantly, low confidence assessments are usually issued when key facts have yet to be verified, which certainly applies in this case,” Singleton said. Rob Greenway, former deputy assistant to the president on Trump’s National Security Council, told Fox News Digital that it will take one or two months to get a more thorough assessment with higher confidence. IRANIAN FOREIGN MINISTER REITERATES ‘SERIOUS DAMAGE’ TO NUCLEAR FACILITIES, DESPITE AYATOLLAH’S COMMENTS Greenway also said that the strikes were designed to create damage underground, which will complicate the assessment of damage, because it is not immediately available and will require multiple sources of intelligence, such as signals or human intelligence, to draw conclusions. Israel had also previously conducted strikes targeting the sites, adding to the web of analysis that must be evaluated, Greenway said. “Each of these are one piece of a much larger puzzle, and you’re trying to gauge the ultimate effect of the entirety of the puzzle, not just one particular strike,” said Greenway, now the director of the Allison Center for National Security at The Heritage Foundation. “All of that means it’s going to take time in order to do it.” Even so, Greenway said that the amount of ordnance dropped on the sites – including more than 14 30,000-lb. bombs – means that the targeted facilities have been so heavily compromised they are no longer serviceable. “We were putting twice the amount of ordnance required to achieve the desired effect, just to make sure that we didn’t have to go back,” Greenway said. EX-CLINTON OFFICIAL APPLAUDS TRUMP’S ‘COURAGEOUS’ IRAN CALL, DOUBTS HARRIS WOULD’VE HAD THE NERVE “There’s virtually no mathematical probability in which either facility can be used again by Iran for the intended purpose, if at all, which again means that everything now is within Israel’s capability to strike if that’s required,” Greenway said. And Michael Allen, a former National Security Council senior director in the George W. Bush administration, said that even though a final judgment from the intelligence community won’t be ready soon, the intelligence portrait will become “richer” in the coming days. “Stuff is pouring in, and we’re out there collecting it, and they’re trying to hustle it to the White House as soon as possible,” Allen, now the managing director of advisory firm Beacon Global Strategies, told Fox News Digital. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters that very few people had access to this report, and those who leaked it