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
Trump, lawmakers react after ‘big, beautiful bill’ clears Senate hurdle
Lawmakers from across the aisle are reacting to President Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” passing a key Senate vote on Saturday night. Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., who flipped his vote from a ‘no’ to ‘yes’ in dramatic fashion, said in a statement that the mammoth bill is a “necessary first step” to fiscal sustainability and cleaning up the mess left by the Biden administration. “Biden and the Democrats left behind enormous messes that we are trying to clean up – an open border, wars, and massive deficits,” Johnson said. “After working for weeks with President Trump and his highly capable economic team, I am convinced that he views this as a necessary first step and will support my efforts to help put America on a path to fiscal sustainability.” The 51-49 vote went along party lines, with only Sens. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., and Rand Paul, R-Ky., voting against unlocking a marathon 20-hour debate on the bill. SENATE REPUBLICANS RAM TRUMP’S ‘BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL’ THROUGH KEY TEST VOTE Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., was among the Democrats against what he called a “radical” bill. “Senate Republicans are scrambling to pass a radical bill, released to the public in the dead of night, praying the American people don’t realize what’s in it,” Schumer said in a statement. “If Senate Republicans won’t tell the American people what’s in this bill, then Democrats are going to force this chamber to read it from start to finish.” The bill will not immediately be debated thanks to Senate Democrats’ plan to force the reading of the entire, 940-page legislative behemoth on the Senate floor. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., posted a video on her X account in which she said that Democrats were holding the floor “all night” and “we need to use every single second we can to fight back against Trump’s bill.” Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., however, said he was “proud” to work with Trump on the bill and “put our nation on a path to balance the budget after years of Democrats’ reckless spending.” “We will deliver on President Trump’s agenda and continue Making America Great Again!” Scott wrote. Trump has said that he wants the bill, which must pass the Senate before being sent to the House for a vote, on his desk by July 4. TRUMP’S ‘BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL’ FACES REPUBLICAN FAMILY FEUD AS SENATE REVEALS ITS FINAL TEXT Trump called the Senate vote a “great victory” and directly praised Sens. Johnson, Scott, Mike Lee, R-Utah, and Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., in a post on his Truth Social platform. “They, along with all of the other Republican Patriots who voted for the Bill, are people who truly love our Country!” Trump wrote. “As President of the USA, I am proud of them all, and look forward to working with them to GROW OUR ECONOMY, REDUCE WASTEFUL SPENDING, SECURE OUR BORDER, FIGHT FOR OUR MILITARY/VETS, ENSURE THAT OUR MEDICAID SYSTEM HELPS THOSE WHO TRULY NEED IT, PROTECT OUR SECOND AMENDMENT, AND SO MUCH MORE. GOD BLESS AMERICA &, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!” In a second post, Trump wrote, “VERY PROUD OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY TONIGHT. GOD BLESS YOU ALL! MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!” Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, released a statement calling the legislation “significant,” and “soon we will vote to send it over to the House and on to President Trump’s desk to become law.” “Senate Republicans are one step closer to delivering on President Trump’s agenda by advancing the One Big Beautiful Bill, which will avoid a massive tax increase on Texas families, secure our southern border, remove burdensome taxes on Americans exercising their Second Amendment rights, and chart our country on a path toward fiscal sanity after years of frivolous spending in Washington under Joe Biden,” Cornyn said. Fox News Digital’s Alex Miller contributed to this report.
New Jersey lawmaker proposes legislation renaming Delaware Bay to ‘The Bay of New Jersey’
A New Jersey Republican has proposed legislation to change the Delaware Bay to “The Bay of New Jersey,” appearing to be inspired by President Donald Trump’s executive order changing the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America. The measure, introduced Thursday by GOP state Sen. Michael Testa, would order state agencies to use “The Bay of New Jersey” in publications, signage, websites and materials to reflect the new designation and notify relevant federal entities, NJ.com reported. “I look at the robust fishing industry – commercial fishing industry and recreational industry of the State of New Jersey,” he told the outlet. “I think that the fact that we have to call the bay that we fish in the Delaware Bay – they’ve had a claim to that long enough.” Testa represents Cape May County, which the bay borders. MEXICO SUES GOOGLE FOR CHANGING ‘GULF OF MEXICO’ TO ‘GULF OF AMERICA’ AFTER TRUMP’S ORDER “It’s time to Make New Jersey Great Again!” Testa wrote on X. The bay is a vital body of water for New Jersey tourism, commerce and travel that has had the name of its southern neighbor since 1610, according to the Delaware government’s website, and was named after the third baron de la Warr, Thomas West, who governed the Virginia colony. The proposed legislation comes after Trump signed an order in January renaming the northern part of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America. The body of water has shared borders between the U.S. and Mexico, and Trump’s order only carries authority within the U.S. Last month, U.S. House Republicans passed the Gulf of America Act, marking the first step in codifying Trump’s order in the U.S. The legislation is now awaiting consideration in the Senate. GOOGLE MAPS, FAA OFFICIALLY ACKNOWLEDGE GULF OF AMERICA AFTER TRUMP DECLARATION: ‘ISN’T IT BEAUTIFUL?’ Trump’s order also prompted Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont, a Democrat, to jokingly suggest amending the Long Island Sound to the “Connecticut Sound.” “While the maps are changing, here’s an idea,” Lamont posted on X in February, tagging New York Democrat Gov. Kathy Hochul with an altered map with the sound renamed. Another bill Testa introduced this week seeks to reclaim a slice of land along Salem County’s shore claimed by Delaware in a decades-old border agreement with New Jersey, according to NJ.com.
Trump threatens to support a primary challenger against GOP senator for opposing ‘big, beautiful bill’
President Donald Trump on Saturday said he is looking for a GOP candidate to mount a primary challenge against Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., after the lawmaker announced he would not support the president’s “big, beautiful bill.” “Numerous people have come forward wanting to run in the Primary against ‘Senator Thom’ Tillis,” Trump wrote 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,” he continued. “Thank you for your attention to this matter!” Tillis, who is up for re-election in 2026, came out against Trump’s spending bill earlier on Saturday over concerns about deep cuts to Medicaid. KEY GOP SENATOR DEFECTS ON CRUCIAL VOTE, IMPERILING TRUMP’S ‘BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL’ IN NARROW MAJORITY The senator vowed not to support the measure through a procedural hurdle needed to kick off a marathon of debate and amendment voting that would eventually lead to a vote on the measure’s final passage. As he was leaving the Senate GOP’s closed-door lunch on Saturday, the North Carolina lawmaker said he has a “great relationship” with his colleagues, but that he could not support the colossal bill. “We just have a disagreement,” he said. “And, you know, my colleagues have done the analysis, and they’re comfortable with the impact on their states. I respect their choice. It’s not a good impact in my state, so I’m not going to vote on the motion to proceed.” The Senate cleared the hurdle late Saturday to start debate on the bill by a 51-49 vote. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., was another Republican who joined Tillis in voting no. “Did Rand Paul Vote ‘NO’ again tonight? What’s wrong with this guy???” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Senate Republicans hold a slim 53-47 majority and can only afford to lose three votes. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said earlier that she would help advance the bill through the first step, but was leaning against voting to pass the bill’s final passage unless the legislation was “further changed.” Collins and other initial GOP holdouts, Sens. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., and Ron Johnson, R-Wis., voted to at least advance the legislation through the first key procedural hurdle. SENATE REPUBLICANS RAM THROUGH TRUMP’S ‘BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL’ THROUGH KEY TEST VOTE The latest version of the bill pushed back the provider rate crackdown by one year and also added another $25 billion for a rural hospital stabilization fund over the next five years. During a closed-door lunch earlier this week, Tillis reportedly warned that North Carolina could lose as much as $40 billion in Medicaid funding if the changes were codified. He is also planning to unveil further analysis on the impact of Medicaid cuts on his state that he said no one in the “administration or in this building” has been able to refute. “The president and I have talked, and I just told him that, ‘Look, if this works for the country, that’s great. And if my other colleagues have done extensive research and concluded it’s different in their states, I respect that,’” he said. “We just have a disagreement based on the implementation in our respective states.” Fox News’ Alex Miller contributed to this report.
Senate Republicans ram Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’ through key test vote
Senate Republicans rammed President Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” through a procedural hurdle after hours of tense negotiations that put the megabill’s fate into question. Speculation swirled whether Republicans would be satisfied by the latest edition of the mammoth bill, which was released just before the stroke of midnight Saturday morning. TRUMP’S ‘BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL’ FACES REPUBLICAN FAMILY FEUD AS SENATE REVEALS ITS FINAL TEXT Nearly every Republican, except Sens. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., and Rand Paul, R-Ky., all voted to unlock a marathon 20-hour debate on the bill. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., could only afford to lose three votes. Though successful, the 51-49 party line vote was not without drama. Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., flipped his vote from a ‘no’ to ‘yes’ in dramatic fashion, as he and Sens. Rick Scott, R-Fla., Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., and Mike Lee, R-Utah, made their way to the Senate floor accompanied by Vice President JD Vance. Vance was called in case he was needed for a tie-breaking vote, but only his negotiating services ended up being used. No lawmaker wanted to be the fourth and final decisive vote to kill the bill. Republican leadership kept the floor open for nearly four hours while negotiations, first on the Senate floor and then eventually in Thune’s office, continued. The bill won’t immediately be debated thanks to Senate Democrats’ plan to force the reading of the entire, 940-page legislative behemoth on the Senate floor – a move that could drain several hours and go deep into the night. The megabill’s fate, and whether it could pass its first test, was murky at best after senators met behind closed doors Friday, and even during another luncheon on Saturday. 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. ANXIOUS REPUBLICANS TURN TO TRUMP AMID DIVISIONS OVER ‘BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL’ However, changes were made at the last-minute to either sate holdouts or comply with the Senate rules. Indeed, the Senate parliamentarian stripped numerous items from the bill that had to be reworked. The Medicaid provider tax rate was kept largely the same, except its implementation date was moved back a year. Also included as a sweetener for lawmakers like Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, Josh Hawley, R-Mo., and others was a $25 billion rural hospital stabilization fund over the next five years. Collins said that she would support the bill through the procedural hurdle, and noted that the rural hospital stabilization fund was a start, but whether she supports the bill on final passage remains to be seen. “If the bill is not further changed, I will be leaning against the bill, but I do believe this procedural vote to get on the bill so that people can offer amendments and debate it is appropriate,” Collins said. Tillis, who is also concerned about the changes to Medicaid and would like to see a return to the House GOP’s version, said that he would not vote in favor of the bill during final passage. GOP SENATOR CALLS FOR PARLIAMENTARIAN’S FIRING AFTER SERVING MEDICAID BLOW TO TRUMP’S ‘BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL’ The SALT deduction included in the House GOP’s version of the bill also survived, albeit the $40,000 cap will remain intact for five years. After that, the cap will revert to its current $10,000. Other sweeteners, like expanding nutrition benefit waivers to Alaska and a tax cut for whaling boat captains, were thrown in, too, to get moderates like Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, on board with the bill. Lee announced that he withdrew his open lands sale provision, which proved a sticking point for lawmakers in Montana and Idaho. Still, Republicans who are not satisfied with the current state of the bill will use the forthcoming “vote-a-rama,” when lawmakers can offer an unlimited number of amendments, to try and change as much as they can before final passage. Democrats, however, will use the process to inflict as much pain as possible on Republicans. Once the amendment marathon concludes, which could be in the wee hours of Monday morning, lawmakers will move to a final vote to send the bill, which is an amendment to the House GOP’s version of the “big, beautiful bill,” back to the lower chamber. From there, it’s a dead sprint to get the package on the president’s desk by July 4. In a statement of administration policy obtained by Fox News Digital, Trump signaled that he would sign the bill. “President Trump is committed to keeping his promises,” the memo read. “And failure to pass this bill would be the ultimate betrayal.”
Chief Justice Roberts sounds alarm on dangerous rhetoric aimed at judges from politicians
U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts warned Saturday of the dangers of politicians using heated rhetoric against judges. “It becomes wrapped up in the political dispute that a judge who’s doing his or her job is part of the problem,” Roberts said in Charlotte, North Carolina, at the Judicial Conference of the Fourth Circuit, a gathering of judges and lawyers. “And the danger, of course, is somebody might pick up on that. And we have had, of course, serious threats of violence and murder of judges just simply for doing their work. So, I think the political people on both sides of the aisle need to keep that in mind.” Roberts didn’t name anyone but appeared to be referencing President Donald Trump and Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer when he said he’d felt compelled to speak out against rhetoric by Democrats and Republicans in the past. CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS DOUBLES DOWN ON DEFENSE OF COURTS AS SCOTUS GEARS UP TO HEAR KEY TRUMP CASES Trump has criticized judges many times over the years, including calling for the impeachment of a judge who ruled against a deportation policy earlier this year, referring to him as “radical left” and a “lunatic.” Roberts responded at the time, saying, “For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.” In 2020, Roberts condemned Schumer for saying that Trump-appointed Supreme Court justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch would “pay the price” regarding an abortion rights case during Trump’s first term. EX-SUPREME COURT JUSTICE ANTHONY KENNEDY PLEADS FOR CIVIL POLITICAL DISCOURSE, WARNS, ‘DEMOCRACY IS AT RISK’ “You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price,” Schumer said at a rally outside the Supreme Court at the time. “You will not know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.” Schumer later said he was referring to the political price he believed Senate Republicans would pay, but he said, “I shouldn’t have used the words I did, but in no way was I making a threat. I never, never would do such a thing, and Leader McConnell knows that.” Roberts, at the time, said of Schumer, “Justices know that criticism comes with the territory, but threatening statements of this sort from the highest levels of government are not only inappropriate, they are dangerous. All members of the court will continue to do their job, without fear or favor, from whatever quarter.” CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP In April, an armed man who was arrested outside of Kavanaugh’s home pleaded guilty to attempting to assassinate the justice. Roberts’ remarks came after the Supreme Court issued the final decisions of its term, handing the Trump administration a win Friday by limiting judges’ ability to block his agenda through court orders. The Associated Press contributed to this report.