Boasberg’s role in ‘Arctic Frost’ probe sparks fury from GOP senators, despite local rules
Republican senators issued a torrent of criticism against U.S. District Judge James Boasberg this week after it was revealed that he had signed off on subpoenas and gag orders issued as part of former Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation — though a cursory review of court rules suggests it is far less provocative than lawmakers have claimed. Sens. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., were among the Republicans who blasted Boasberg as an “activist” judge, and Cruz, for his part, suggested Boasberg should be impeached. “My assumption,” Cruz fumed, is “that Judge Boasberg printed these things out like the placemats at Denny’s — one after the other.” MAJOR PHONE CARRIERS REVEAL JACK SMITH’S SUBPOENAS FOR REPUBLICAN SENATORS’ RECORDS At issue were subpoenas and gag orders issued by former special counsel Jack Smith’s team as part of its probe into President Donald Trump’s actions in the wake of the 2020 election. The redacted documents were made public this week by Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa. They included subpoenas of phone records for 10 senators and one House lawmaker, and gag orders sent to Verizon and AT&T instructing them not to notify lawmakers of the subpoena. (Verizon complied, but AT&T did not.) Both the subpoenas and gag orders were signed by U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, according to the newly released documents — a detail that prompted fresh criticism and indignation from some of the Republicans in question, including Cruz, who blasted the investigation in question as “worse than Watergate” and a gross violation of prosecutorial powers. Blackburn blasted Boasberg as an “activist” judge. Some lawmakers further argued for his impeachment as a result of his involvement. In fact, his role in the process is far from surprising. WHO IS JAMES BOASBERG, THE US JUDGE AT THE CENTER OF TRUMP’S DEPORTATION EFFORTS? Local rules for the federal court system in D.C. explicitly state the chief judge “must hear and determine all proceedings before the grand jury.” The subpoenas and gag orders signed by Boasberg were signed in May 2023 — roughly two months into his tenure as the chief judge for the federal court. It’s unclear whether Sens. Cruz or Blackburn were aware of this rule, and they did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment. But it’s also not the first time Judge Boasberg previously noted his oversight of these matters as the chief judge for D.C. — including in the special counsel probe in question. Boasberg explained the rule in question in June 2023, when he granted, in part, a request from media outlets to unseal a tranche of redacted documents related to the subpoena and testimony of former Vice President Mike Pence in the same probe. (He explained in a lengthy public memo that he did so because the press movant were seeking record that Pence himself had discussed publicly.) Still, the controversy comes as Boasberg has found himself squarely in Trump’s crosshairs, after he issued a temporary restraining order in March blocking Trump’s use of a 1798 wartime law to deport hundreds of Venezuelan nationals to a maximum security prison in El Salvador. Until that point, however, Boasberg had largely avoided making headlines. JACK SMITH DEFENDS SUBPOENAING REPUBLICAN SENATORS’ PHONE RECORDS: ‘ENTIRELY PROPER’ A graduate of Yale, Oxford University and Yale Law School, Boasberg clerked for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit before joining the Department of Justice as a federal prosecutor in Washington, D.C. He was tapped in 2002 by then-President George W. Bush to serve on the D.C. Superior Court, where he served until 2011, when he was nominated by President Barack Obama to the federal bench in D.C. in 2011. His confirmation vote soared through the Senate with a 96-0 vote of approval, including with the support of Sen. Grassley and other Republicans named in the subpoena. Boasberg in 2014 was appointed by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts to a seven-year term on the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, or FISA Court, comprised of 11 federal judges hand-selected by the chief justice. Former special counsel Jack Smith, for his part, has since defended his decision to subpoena the Republican lawmakers’ phone records, which Fox News Digital reported includes phone records for a four-day period surrounding the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. They did not include the contents of phone calls or messages, which would require a warrant, but they did include “[call] detail records for inbound and outbound calls, text messages, direct connect, and voicemail messages” and phone number, subscriber, and payment information. His lawyers told Senate lawmakers in a letter earlier this month that the decision to do so was “entirely proper” and is consistent with Justice Department policy. Fox News’s Ashley Oliver contributed to this report.
Bipartisan senators call on Hegseth to release strike orders on alleged drug boats in Caribbean
A bipartisan pair of senators are calling on Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth to hand over copies of the orders issued to strike boats in the Caribbean allegedly carrying narco-terrorists. Sens. Jack Reed, D-R.I., and Roger Wicker, R-Miss., released two letters they sent to Hegseth in recent weeks in response to the repeated strikes on suspected drug boats. The first letter, which was issued on Sept. 23, explained the legal requirements for congressional oversight over the military’s executed orders, including that congressional defense committees must be provided copies of the orders within 15 days of being issued. “Unfortunately, the Department has not complied with this requirement,” the letter reads. HEGSETH SAYS MILITARY CONDUCTED ANOTHER STRIKE ON BOAT CARRYING ALLEGED NARCO-TERRORISTS The second letter, issued on Oct. 6, seeks a written opinion from the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) on the domestic or international legal basis for conducting the strikes and related operations. Reports indicate that the OLC produced a legal opinion justifying the strikes, which numerous lawmakers have been demanding in recent weeks. The senators’ letter also asked for a complete list “of all designated terrorist organizations and drug trafficking organizations with whom the President has determined the United States is in a non-international armed conflict and against whom lethal military force may be used.” “To date, these documents have not been submitted,” Reed’s office said in a news release on Friday. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have urged the Trump administration to release information related to the strikes. Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, criticized the administration on Thursday after it excluded Democrats from briefings on the strikes, a move he called “indefensible and dangerous.” SEN WARNER BLASTS TRUMP ADMIN FOR EXCLUDING DEMOCRATS FROM BRIEFINGS ON BOAT STRIKES: ‘DEEPLY TROUBLING’ On Wednesday, Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee also penned a letter demanding to review the legal justification behind the series of boat strikes they say appear to violate several laws. “Drug trafficking is a terrible crime that has had devastating impacts on American families and communities and should be prosecuted. Nonetheless, the President’s actions to hold alleged drug traffickers accountable must still conform with the law,” the letter states. The strikes have also garnered scrutiny from Republicans, including Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who raised concerns about killing people without due process and the possibility of killing innocent people. Paul has cited Coast Guard statistics that show a significant percentage of boats boarded for suspicion of drug trafficking are innocent. The senator has also argued that if the administration plans to engage in a war with Venezuela after it has targeted boats it claims are transporting drugs for the Venezuela-linked Tren de Aragua gang, it must seek a declaration of war from Congress. In the House, Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., has made similar statements. A report published on Friday suggested the U.S. military was planning to strike military installations in Venezuela, but President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that the report was inaccurate. This comes as Hegseth announced the U.S. military on Wednesday struck another boat carrying alleged narco-terrorists. The strikes were carried out in the Eastern Pacific region at the direction of Trump, killing four men on board. That was the 14th strike on suspected drug boats since September. A total of 61 people have reportedly been killed while three survived, including at least two who were later repatriated to their home countries. The Pentagon has refused to release the identities of those killed or evidence that drugs were on board.
WATCH: Dems dodge on whether Obamacare is worth shutting down government: ‘Ask a Republican’
As the shutdown enters its second month, Democrats dodged questions on whether their hardline stance on extending Obamacare subsidies is worth keeping federal workers without pay and risking benefits through the government closure. Asked by Fox News Digital whether it is worth continuing the standoff over Obamacare as federal workers go weeks without pay and benefits lag, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., answered, “We have to ask a Republican, because the Republicans have agreed to exactly zero negotiations.” “Donald Trump is out flying around the world, the Republicans here in the Senate won’t do a damn thing without Donald Trump telling them to, and the House Republicans are now on their sixth week of paid vacation,” Warren continued. “So, you know, we’d like to sit down and negotiate, but we’ve got no Republicans on the other side.” President Donald Trump embarked on a diplomatic tour to Asia this week, visiting with leaders from several different countries, both friendly and unfriendly to the U.S., including South Korea, Japan and China. GOVERNMENT LIMPS DEEPER INTO SHUTDOWN CRISIS WITH NO DEAL IN SIGHT House Republicans, meanwhile, have been in recess, with Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., indicating the body will remain thus until the Senate agrees to the House-passed budget continuing resolution bill to reopen the government. When asked the same question, Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., also placed the blame on Trump, saying, “He’s got to agree to live by the deal we come up with; thus far we’ve not been able to get him to agree.” “The issue that matters the most to me in opening government is getting the president to guarantee that if we open it, he won’t then tear up the deal,” Kaine added. “We have to do a budget deal for 30 days or 45 days, whatever is done, but he has to agree that if you do that, he won’t then the next day start firing more people, canceling projects.” Kaine credited Trump for finding funds to pay U.S. troops, “when the House refused to come back to take up a military pay bill,” saying, “I think that’s important.” Still, he also ripped on the president, saying, “Nobody should go hungry, nobody should go without pay. President Trump has billions of dollars in a contingency fund for staff that Congress put there for this moment and he is cruelly refusing to use it, and that’s all on him.” THUNE, GOP REJECT PUSHING ‘RIFLE-SHOT’ GOVERNMENT FUNDING BILLS DURING SHUTDOWN Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., meanwhile, called Trump’s stance “as fabulously immoral as any act seen by any president ever.” “The funding is there for November, $5.5 billion,” he said, “The president has the authority to distribute those funds.… But the president decided to attack the welfare of America’s children as a bargaining chip.” Faced with the question, Sen. Tina Smith, D-Minn., said, “Republicans are giving us two choices: either take health care away from millions of people or take food away from millions of people and don’t pay the troops. I don’t think that’s the choice that we’re facing.” Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, D-Nev., shot back, “You’re talking to the wrong Democratic senator, because I voted for the continuing resolution 13 times.” SENATE DEMOCRATS DEFY WHITE HOUSE WARNINGS, AGAIN BLOCK GOP BID TO REOPEN GOVERNMENT Pressed further on why more Democratic senators haven’t followed suit, Cortez-Masto said, “You’ve got to talk to my colleagues.” Sen. Angela Alsobrooks, D-Md., also framed the issue as one of affordability, saying, “The Republicans in the House haven’t been to work in six weeks. So, it shows how callous and uncaring they really are. They need to reopen this government immediately.” “We also need to ensure that we don’t inflict any further pain. We’ve inflicted so much pain on hardworking, working-class Americans who cannot afford not only the insurance and healthcare, they can no longer afford groceries,” she said, adding, “This administration is causing our economy to fail and our hurting families every day.” Alsobrooks noted, “I have voted on eight different occasions to reopen the government and, you know what, the Republicans need to come to the table and negotiate something that allows us both the reopen this government and to make sure that we are ensuring that Americans are able to afford health care coverage.”
Illinois lawmakers pass bill banning ICE immigration arrests near courthouses
Illinois lawmakers passed a bill on Friday prohibiting federal agents from making immigration arrests near courthouses. The measure also allows lawsuits when people believe their constitutional rights were violated during civil immigration arrests. The legislation, approved largely along party lines, was sent to Democrat Gov. JB Pritzker’s desk. His office said he supports the idea and will review the proposal when it reaches his desk. According to the bill, civil damages for false imprisonment could be imposed when a migrant attending a court hearing or appearing as a party or witness to a legal proceeding is arrested. BLUE CITY JUDGE CITES ‘FEAR OR OBSTRUCTION’ IN BLOCKING ICE COURTHOUSE ARRESTS DURING COURT PROCEEDINGS Supporters of the bill say courts must be accessible to everyone to seek resolutions to violations of their rights, but even one of the measure’s top sponsors acknowledges it will face an uphill battle in court. “It’s not just about the constitutionality of the law, which I think is sound, but it’s the reality that the courts are stacked against us,” Democrat Senate President Don Harmon said. “The federal government can try to remove it from state courts to federal courts. They can try to substitute the government itself for the individual defendants, but that’s not a reason not to try.” Earlier this month, a judge in Cook County, which includes Chicago, issued an order blocking immigration arrests at county courthouses, citing concerns about “fear or obstruction” while migrants attend court proceedings. The order prohibits immigration authorities from making civil arrests of any “party, witness, or potential witness” during court appearances. The federal government, however, contended that “there are no legal sanctuaries where you can hide and avoid the consequences for breaking the law.” The Trump administration’s immigration agenda aims to detain suspected illegal migrants as part of the president’s mass deportation policies. But witnesses have reported numerous incidents of Immigration and Customs Enforcement detaining people regardless of citizenship or legal status. “No one should have to choose between seeking justice and risking their freedom,” said Democrat state Sen. Celina Villanueva, who is co-sponsoring the bill. “Courthouses must be places where people can resolve disputes, testify and support loved ones, not sites of fear or intimidation.” The measure also requires hospitals, day care centers and higher education institutions to create policies detailing how they would handle immigration agents inside their facilities. Earlier this year, the federal government reversed a Biden administration policy prohibiting immigration arrests in sensitive locations such as hospitals, schools and churches. Other states have made similar efforts to protect migrants against federal raids. FEDERAL JUDGE LIMITS ICE ARRESTS WITHOUT WARRANT, PROBABLE CAUSE California has restricted immigration enforcement action in courthouses since 2017. California Attorney General Rob Bonta said the state cannot control federal immigration action, but “the state has a responsibility to provide safe and secure access to court facilities to all residents regardless of immigration status.” In Connecticut, state Supreme Court Chief Justice Raheem Mullins issued a policy in September banning warrantless arrests inside state courts, and prohibited the use of face coverings, often worn by ICE officers to shield their identities, in judicial buildings. “Judges, staff, litigants, members of the public, they all must be able to conduct their business in our courthouses without fear of disruption,” Mullins said. Other bills introduced by various local governments and Congress also seek to ban face coverings for immigration agents. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
VP JD Vance dresses up as his own viral meme for Halloween, social media post tops 15 million views
Vice President JD Vance leaned into an internet joke at his own expense this Halloween, posting a short video of himself wearing a curly brown wig to mimic a meme that’s followed him for months. In the TikTok clip, filmed at the Naval Observatory residence, Vance opens the door in a dark suit and red tie, smiling as he tells trick-or-treaters, “Happy Halloween, kids … remember, say thank you!” The line is a playful callback to the “you didn’t say thank you” meme before he spins under purple lights to the eerie “Twilight Zone” theme. The 41-year-old vice president’s video racked up more than 250,000 likes and 14 million views within hours, an extraordinary number for a political post, and drew thousands of comments across Instagram, X and Facebook. Vance first became the butt of the “fat JD with curly hair” meme after a tense White House exchange with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in February. Critics edited a photo of Vance with exaggerated features and wild hair, pairing it with captions like, “you didn’t say please” or “you didn’t say thank you.” VANCE PAUSES NORTH CAROLINA SPEECH FOR BOY WHO SAID HE ‘SKIPPED SCHOOL’ TO ASK FOR A SELFIE Rather than ignore the ridicule, Vance embraced it. Earlier this week, the White House X account joined the online fun, posting mock “costume package” images of political figures, including a “JD Vance Costume” that jokingly “does not include the fat JD curly hair.” Vance’s own Halloween post essentially completed the gag by adding that missing piece himself. Within hours, the vice president’s post was trending. Screenshots flooded social media, with one user calling him “the best VP ever” and another saying, “JD just won 2028.” Elon Musk responded simply with a laughing emoji. Even some critics gave credit. One commenter on X said, “he did the meme lol.” Users quickly remixed the Halloween look with the original meme, adding jump cuts and effects as it spread across platforms. JD VANCE RESPONDS TO HAKEEM JEFFRIES’ CLAIM SOMBRERO MEME IS ‘RACIST’ For a White House that thrives on viral content, Vance’s light-hearted stunt fits seamlessly into the Trump administration’s digital playbook. The comms shop for President Trump has long embraced meme culture and rapid-fire online humor, sometimes even powered by AI. By Friday night, Vance’s Halloween post was still climbing past 14 million views. For now, JD Vance has done what few politicians manage by turning a meme into a personal win and proving that, at least on Halloween, even the vice president can laugh along with the internet (in a wig). The office of Vice President JD Vance did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.
Federal judge blocks Trump order requiring citizenship proof on federal voter registration forms
A federal judge has ruled the Trump administration cannot enforce an executive order requiring documented proof of U.S. citizenship on federal voter registration forms, a decision the administration defends as a lawful effort to protect election integrity. U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly in Washington, D.C., on Friday found the requirement unconstitutional, writing that the president “lacks the authority to direct such changes.” “The first question presented in these consolidated cases is whether the president, acting unilaterally, may direct changes to federal election procedures,” Kollar-Kotelly wrote in her opinion. “Because our Constitution assigns responsibility for election regulation to the States and to Congress, this Court holds that the President lacks the authority to direct such changes.” CALIFORNIA REPUBLICANS LAUNCH VOTER ID BALLOT PUSH, NEED 875K SIGNATURES BY DEADLINE However, a spokesperson for the White House told Fox News Digital Trump acted within his legal powers. “President Trump has exercised his lawful authority to ensure only American citizens are casting ballots in American elections,” White House deputy press secretary Abigail Jackson told Fox News Digital in an email. “This is so commonsense that only the Democrat Party would file a lawsuit against it. “We expect to be vindicated by a higher court.” The judge sided with the plaintiffs — including the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), the Democratic National Committee and the League of Women Voters Education Fund — arguing the Constitution “assigns no direct role to the president in either domain.” NEARLY ALL REPUBLICAN AGS ADD FIREPOWER TO TRUMP’S BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP PUSH The ruling says the U.S. Election Assistance Commission is permanently blocked from adding the requirement to the federal voter form, according to The Associated Press. The lawsuit will continue as the judge examines other parts of Trump’s order, according to The Associated Press. In March, President Trump signed an executive order mandating that anyone registering to vote provide government-issued proof of U.S. citizenship. The order also directed the attorney general to enter into information-sharing agreements with state election officials to identify cases of election fraud or other election law violations and conditioned federal election-related funds on states complying with federal election integrity measures. TRUMP ADMIN BLOCKS CITIZENSHIP FOR NON-CITIZEN VOTERS “There are other steps that we will be taking in the coming weeks,” Trump said just before signing the order. “We think we’ll be able to end up getting fair elections.” Kollar-Kotelly previously issued a preliminary injunction in April, and another federal judge blocked the same March 25 executive order in June after a separate challenge brought by Democratic state attorneys general, The Associated Press reported. The White House did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment. Fox News’ Louis Casiano, Shannon Bream and Bill Mears contributed to this report.
Trump vows to ‘fund SNAP as soon as possible’ if court allows, blasts Democrats over shutdown delay
President Donald Trump said Friday his administration has asked federal courts to clarify whether it can legally release Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) payments as the government shutdown continues. In a statement posted to Truth Social, Trump said government lawyers had raised doubts about whether existing funds could be used for the November distribution and that two courts have issued conflicting opinions on the matter. “Our Government lawyers do not think we have the legal authority to pay SNAP with certain monies we have available, and now two Courts have issued conflicting opinions on what we can and cannot do,” Trump wrote. “I do NOT want Americans to go hungry just because the Radical Democrats refuse to do the right thing and REOPEN THE GOVERNMENT.” The president said he had instructed administration attorneys to ask the courts for clarification “as soon as possible.” SCHUMER, DEMS CALL ‘BULL—-‘ ON TRUMP ADMINISTRATION OVER FOOD STAMP SHUTDOWN THREAT “If we are given the appropriate legal direction by the Court, it will BE MY HONOR to provide the funding, just like I did with Military and Law Enforcement Pay,” Trump added. “The Democrats should quit this charade where they hurt people for their own political reasons, and immediately REOPEN THE GOVERNMENT.” Trump urged food stamp recipients to contact Senate Democrats, writing, “If you use SNAP benefits, call the Senate Democrats, and tell them to reopen the Government, NOW! Here is Cryin’ Chuck Schumer’s Office Number.” SNAP, formerly known as food stamps, provides aid to about 42 million Americans each month, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Funding for the program depends on congressional appropriations, which have lapsed during the current shutdown. USDA CHIEF WARNS ‘WE’RE RIGHT AT THE CLIFF’ AS 40 MILLION AMERICANS BRACE FOR FOOD STAMP CUTOFF The president made his comments one day before the scheduled Nov. 1 payment date for many recipients. The USDA has not publicly confirmed whether benefits will be issued if the courts do not provide new guidance. Trump has repeatedly accused Democrats of prolonging the shutdown to gain political leverage, while Democrats say the White House could reopen the government by signing a short-term spending bill already passed in the Senate. In his post, Trump referenced his earlier actions to protect military and law enforcement paychecks during the standoff, calling it his duty to “ensure Americans don’t go hungry.” No court filings related to SNAP funding had been publicly docketed as of Friday afternoon. The White House referred Fox News Digital to President Trump’s Truth Social post when pressed for comment.
Trump reveals first photos after Lincoln Bedroom’s renovation in the White House
President Trump announced Friday that renovations have been completed on the Lincoln Bedroom bathroom in the White House, revealing the redesigned space in a series of posts on Truth Social. The bathroom, which was last updated in the 1940s with a green tile design, has been reimagined with black-and-white marble — a look the President described as more fitting for the Lincoln era. “I renovated the Lincoln Bathroom in the White House. It was renovated in the 1940s in an art deco green tile style, which was totally inappropriate for the Lincoln Era,” Trump posted to Truth Social on Friday. PHOTOS: THE MAKING OF TRUMP’S WHITE HOUSE BALLROOM, A LOOK AT THE CONSTRUCTION PROGRESS Trump added, “I did it in black and white polished statuary marble. This was very appropriate for the time of Abraham Lincoln and, in fact, could be the marble that was originally there!” The President shared multiple photos on Truth Social of the remodel, which showcased the bathroom’s marble walls and gold fixtures. “The Refurbished Lincoln Bathroom in the White House — Highly polished, Statuary marble!” Trump said in one of the posts. WHITE HOUSE RESPONDS TO REPORTS OF TRUMP PREPARING TO HIT MILITARY TARGETS INSIDE VENEZUELA The office and cabinet room once used by America’s 16th president, Abraham Lincoln, has been known as the Lincoln Bedroom since 1945, when President Harry S. Truman directed that furnishings from Lincoln’s era be placed there, according to the White House Historical Association. The room is located in the southeast corner of the second floor of the White House. WHITE HOUSE MAKEOVERS HAVE LONG SPARKED CONTROVERSY, WELL BEFORE PRESIDENT TRUMP’S $200M BALLROOM The bathroom renovation follows Trump’s recent announcement that construction crews had begun tearing down part of the East Wing to make room for his privately funded White House ballroom, a project that’s been in the works for months. The ballroom is estimated to cost $250 million and will be financed jointly by Trump and private donors. “The White House is currently unable to host major functions honoring world leaders in other countries without having to install a large and unsightly tent approximately 100 yards away from the main building’s entrance,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said during a July 31 briefing. Fox News Digital’s Amanda Macias contributed to this report.
Supreme Court prepares to confront monumental case over Trump executive power and tariff authority
Economic imperative or executive overreach? That is the question the Supreme Court is preparing this week to confront, in one of its most monumental appeals over the scope of executive power, a time-sensitive challenge to President Donald Trump‘s expansive import tariffs over most countries. The justices will hear oral arguments Wednesday over lawsuits from a coalition of small businesses and several Democratic-led states, who say Trump has abused his authority by declaring a “national emergency” to impose levies on nearly every country in the world. At issue is whether the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) gives the president that power. TRUMP CUTS CHINA TARIFF AFTER XI SIGNALS TOUGHER FENTANYL ENFORCEMENT, RARE-EARTH PAUSE Lower federal courts have ruled against the Executive Branch, but Trump’s Justice Department warns “denial of tariff authority would expose our nation to trade retaliation without effective defenses.” The financial and political stakes are enormous, with potential immediate effects on the domestic and global economies. Businesses and industries, large and small, are nervously watching how the Court will act. “The Supreme Court will decide whether or not Congress, in fact, gave the president the fairly broad authority that he’s claimed to impose [tariffs] on, in a way that no president has used it before,” said Thomas Dupree, a leading appellate attorney and a former top Justice Department official. “Not to say that’s necessarily impermissible, but it is something that the Supreme Court has not seen in recent years and is going to weigh in on whether or not he’s overstepped the authority that he has under the law.” The consolidated, expedited appeals will be the first major test on the merits of the White House’s aggressive second-term agenda to remake large swaths of the federal government, and the outsized role this president has so far played. The administration has been winning most of the emergency appeals at the Supreme Court since January dealt only with whether challenged policies could go into effect temporarily, while the issues play out in the lower courts — including immigration, federal spending cuts, workforce reductions and transgenders in the military. In doing so, the 6-3 conservative majority has reversed about two dozen preliminary nationwide injunctions imposed by lower federal courts, leading to frustration and confusion among many judges. Now those percolating petitions are starting to reach the Supreme Court for final review — and legal analysts say the bench may be poised to grant broad unilateral powers to the president. The justices fast-tracked the administration’s appeal over sweeping tariffs on nearly every country, which were blocked by lower courts. A high court ruling on the merits could come quickly, perhaps within weeks. Both sides have urged a quick decision, since the U.S. has been engaged in active, ongoing trade negotiations with dozens of countries over the past months. This could be the start of several high-profile merits appeals over Trump’s executive actions. In December, the justices will decide whether to overturn a 90-year precedent dealing with the president’s ability to fire members of some federal regulatory agencies like the Federal Trade Commission. SENATE REPUBLICANS DEFECT, REJECT TRUMP’S TARIFFS ON CANADIAN GOODS And in January, the power of President Trump to remove Lisa Cook from the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors will be tested in another major constitutional showdown. For now, the Biden-appointed Cook will remain on the job. Other appeals that could be added to the high court argument docket include birthright citizenship and other immigration-related petitions, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion policies in educational institutions and the environment. Congress is given the power under the Constitution’s Article I to “lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises.” But when Trump in February began issuing a series of executive orders, he relied on the IEEPA, which gives the president the power — under a self-declared national economic emergency — to “investigate, block during the pendency of an investigation, regulate, direct and compel, nullify, void, prevent or prohibit, any acquisition, holding, withholding, use, transfer, withdrawal, transportation, importation or exportation of, or dealing in, or exercising any right, power, or privilege with respect to, or transactions involving, any property in which any foreign country or a national thereof has any interest.” The Trump Justice Department says the choices are stark. “President Trump and his advisors have determined that erroneously invalidating the IEEPA tariffs, ‘would have catastrophic consequences for our national security, foreign policy, and economy,’” wrote U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer, who will argue the case before the justices. Citing Trump’s own words, “The President has emphasized: ‘If the United States were forced to unwind these historic agreements … the economic consequences would be ruinous, instead of unprecedented success.” But the plaintiffs claim no president until now in the law’s five decades has ever used it to impose “sweeping worldwide” tariffs. “Context, history and common sense all support a more modest understanding of that provision — one that leaves the President ample tools to address emergencies but does not delegate Congress’ tariffing power wholesale,” wrote Benjamin Gutman, Oregon’s solicitor general, who will argue the case for the state plaintiffs. “This Court should reject the President’s bid to seize that power for himself.” Two categories of tariffs involving a variety of products are being contested: The first are “trafficking tariffs,” on goods from Canada, China and Mexico, imposed after the Trump administration said those nations have not done enough to reduce the flow of fentanyl. The second, broader category, labeled “reciprocal tariffs,” involves tariffs ranging from 10% to 50% on products from virtually all countries. The Supreme Court will hold at least 80-minutes of scheduled oral arguments in its marble-lined courtroom, but the public session is expected to last much longer. The justices will almost certainly have many questions of counsel from both sides, since they will be confronting a range of novel legal and constitutional questions over Trump’s tariff authority. TRUMP ASKS SUPREME COURT FOR URGENT RULING ON TARIFF POWERS AS ‘STAKES COULD NOT BE HIGHER’ The arguments — audio of which will
House military vets rip Jeffries for dodging question on pay during shutdown: ‘Insult to Americans’
EXCLUSIVE: Military veterans in Congress are criticizing House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., for dodging questions on whether he will forego his paycheck as government workers go without pay due to the ongoing shutdown. Reps. Gabe Evans, R-Colo., Mariannette Miller-Meeks, R-Iowa, and Tom Barrett, R-Mich., each of whom served in the U.S. Army, said they would give up their paychecks for the duration of the shutdown, citing concern for American service members. The three took aim at Jeffries for delaying saying whether he would do the same. As the government shutdown enters its fifth week, Jeffries was asked on CNN on Wednesday night if he would defer his paychecks during the shutdown in light of TSA agents and other federal workers having to work without pay. Jeffries dodged the question, saying, “I’ll be commenting on that shortly.” While Jeffries’ office did not initially give a comment by the time of original publication, a spokesperson later told Fox News Digital that Jeffries would be forgoing his November paycheck. On Friday evening, after taking criticism from Republican veterans for dodging questions on his paycheck, Jeffries answered, “I made clear to my constituents that my check will be withheld.” The spokesperson declined to comment on whether Jeffries had taken his paycheck at the beginning of October. JOHNSON REJECTS PUSH FOR MILITARY PAY FIX AS SHUTDOWN FIGHT INTENSIFIES Just the day before, Jeffries told CNN, “I understand the sacrifice that people are making, including Capitol Police officers here, and I’m going to conduct myself accordingly given that sacrifice.” To which the CNN host pressed, “So, that sounds like a yes, that you will defer your paycheck?” Jeffries answered, “Well, I’ll have more to say about that shortly, but I think consistent with the values that I just articulated.” In response, Evans, who served as a Black Hawk helicopter pilot, called Jeffries’ dodge an “insult to Americans” that “just reiterates their unserious and irresponsible legislating and proves how out of touch they are from those they are supposed to serve.” HOUSE GOP BLOCKS DEMS’ MILITARY PAY BILL AS GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN THREATENS CHECKS “As a former cop and soldier who still lives paycheck to paycheck, I understand firsthand the severity and impact that this Democrat-led shutdown has caused our country to endure, and is why I’ve chosen to defer my pay and stand in solidarity with every federal employee who misses a paycheck until the Democrats decide to work with Republicans to reopen our government,” Evans told Fox News Digital. He added that “while thousands of dedicated and hardworking Americans continue to work tirelessly without a paycheck to keep America safe and running, Democrats continue to be noncommittal when asked about deferring their own pay amid the government shutdown.” Meeks, who retired as a lieutenant colonel, told Fox News Digital that if Jeffries “cared half as much about working families as he does about his own salary, the government would already be open.” “While 42 million Americans face losing their SNAP benefits and our troops go unpaid, Hakeem Jeffries is still cashing a paycheck,” she said. FLIGHT DELAYS WORSEN AS UNPAID AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS FEEL GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN PAIN “Hakeem Jeffries is so out of touch that he thinks he should be compensated for shutting down the government and causing the American people to suffer,” added Barrett, a 22-year veteran. “This type of hypocrisy is exactly what I came to Washington to fight against,” he said. “It’s time for him to drop this ‘rules for thee and not for me’ attitude and make a decision: pay our federal employees or pass on his paycheck like the rest of us.”