Trump Action Archive

Supporting reports

• Federal judge orders Trump administration to explain tarp obscuring Kennedy Center facade — US District Judge Christopher Cooper ordered the Trump administration to report by 31 July on the purpose and status of a tarp and scaffolding installed at the Kennedy Center after workers removed Donald Trump's name from the building's facade in a predawn operation. The tarp was placed following Cooper's court order requiring removal of Trump's name, which had been unlawfully added in December. The administration faces scrutiny for what critics characterize as obstruction of the restoration of the Kennedy Center's original name.

Supporting reports

• DOJ opinion claims Presidential Records Act unconstitutional — Assistant Attorney General T. Elliot Gaiser published an opinion stating that the Presidential Records Act is unconstitutional, arguing it infringes on presidential autonomy. This opinion could significantly impact the handling of presidential records and accountability.
• Office of Legal Counsel published opinion declaring Presidential Records Act unconstitutional — Assistant Attorney General T. Elliot Gaiser of the Office of Legal Counsel published a legal opinion for the White House arguing that the Presidential Records Act (PRA), which requires presidents to keep records of official business and transfer them at the end of their term, is unconstitutional. The memo claims the PRA "unconstitutionally intrudes on the independence and autonomy of the President guaranteed by Article II" and states "the President need not further comply with its dictates."

Supporting reports

• Judge Aileen Cannon blocked release of Special Counsel Jack Smith's classified documents report — U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon issued an order permanently blocking the release of Volume Two of Special Counsel Jack Smith's report on classified documents. Cannon ruled that releasing the report would be "unfair" to Trump and his co-defendants, citing her prior conclusion that the Special Counsel lacked lawful authority. The Department of Justice did not oppose the motion, allowing Cannon to write that "all parties agree" disclosure would violate the court's dismissal order. The decision shields the report from public scrutiny.
• Judge Cannon permanently blocks release of Jack Smith's classified documents report — US District Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee, issued a permanent injunction barring the Department of Justice from releasing Special Counsel Jack Smith's report on the classified documents case (Volume II). Cannon condemned Smith's compilation of the report after she had dismissed the underlying case in 2024 on grounds of unlawful appointment, calling it a "brazen stratagem" and a breach of her dismissal order. She ruled that release would expose grand jury material and cause irreparable harm to Trump, distinguishing the case from prior special counsel reports (Mueller) that were publicly released.
• Judge Aileen Cannon blocked release of Jack Smith's classified documents report — Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee, blocked the release of Special Counsel Jack Smith's report on his investigation of Trump's retention of classified documents after leaving office in 2021. It is standard procedure for a special counsel's report to be made public. Legal analyst Joyce White Vance noted that Cannon has consistently worked to suppress Smith's report and that Trump's fierce fight to keep it under wraps has led to speculation about surprising contents.
• Judge blocks release of Jack Smith’s report on Trump — Judge Aileen Cannon blocked the release of special counsel Jack Smith's report regarding Trump's retention of classified documents. This decision is notable as it deviates from the usual procedure of making such reports public, raising concerns about transparency and accountability.

Supporting reports

• Representatives Khanna and Massie sought to bypass DOJ to release Epstein files — Representatives Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie announced they would bypass the Department of Justice to demand release of all Epstein files by asking the Southern District of New York to appoint a "special master" to ensure document release. The pair is also seeking to hold Attorney General Pam Bondi in contempt of Congress for DOJ's failure to release the files. The DOJ stated it would not finish reviewing remaining files until at least January 20.
• Congress considers inherent contempt proceedings against Attorney General Bondi — Representatives Ro Khanna (D-CA) and Thomas Massie (R-KY), who introduced the Epstein Files Transparency Act, announced they are pursuing inherent contempt charges against Attorney General Pam Bondi for non-compliance with the law. Khanna stated the measure would likely give Bondi a 30-day grace period before daily fines commence. Inherent contempt, a rarely used congressional enforcement mechanism not employed since the 1930s, requires only a House majority vote and does not require Senate approval. The measure aims to compel release of all Epstein-related records.
• House representatives filed motion to compel DOJ to release Epstein files — On January 8, 2026, Representatives Ro Khanna (D-CA) and Thomas Massie (R-KY), the leading sponsors of the Epstein Files Transparency Act, filed a motion with U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer asking him to appoint "a Special Master and an Independent Monitor to compel" the DOJ to produce the Epstein files as required by law.
• Representatives asked judge to compel DOJ to release Epstein Files — Representatives Ro Khanna (D-CA) and Thomas Massie (R-KY), the leading sponsors of the Epstein Files Transparency Act, asked U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer to appoint a Special Master and an Independent Monitor to compel the DOJ to produce the Epstein files as the law requires. They wrote that "the DOJ cannot be trusted with making mandatory disclosures under the Act" and that they do not believe the DOJ will produce the records required by law.
• Congressmen Khanna and Massie request special master to enforce Epstein Files disclosure — Democratic congressman Ro Khanna and Republican congressman Thomas Massie filed a letter with Manhattan federal court judge Paul Engelmayer requesting appointment of a special master and independent monitor to compel DOJ compliance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act. They alleged DOJ violated the statute by missing the deadline, asserting impermissible privileges, applying excessive redactions, and failing to provide a required report on withheld records and redaction bases.
• House members request special master to compel DOJ release of Epstein files — Representatives Ro Khanna (D-CA) and Thomas Massie (R-KY) filed a letter with US District Judge Paul Engelmayer requesting appointment of a special master to force the Department of Justice to release all files related to Jeffrey Epstein under the Epstein Files Transparency Act. The congressmen alleged the DOJ violated mandatory disclosure obligations by missing a December 19, 2025 deadline and releasing less than 1% of documents while claiming 2 million more remain under review. They also noted the DOJ failed to submit required reports to Congress detailing redactions and withheld records.

Supporting reports

• House of Representatives voted 427–1 to pass the Epstein Files Transparency Act. — After four months of delays and Speaker Johnson's early adjournment to prevent signatures, the House voted on legislation requiring the Department of Justice to release unclassified Epstein-related records. The vote passed 427–1, with only Rep. Clay Higgins (R-LA) voting no and five members not voting. The overwhelming bipartisan support reversed Trump's earlier opposition to the bill; Trump had called it a "hoax" and withdrawn endorsements from Republicans supporting it before reversing position on November 17.
• House passes Epstein Files Transparency Act 427–1 — The House of Representatives voted 427–1 to pass the Epstein Files Transparency Act, directing the Department of Justice to release all unclassified Epstein-related records within 30 days with victims' names redacted. Representative Clay Higgins of Louisiana cast the sole opposing vote, arguing the bill abandoned criminal justice procedure protections. Five members did not vote. The Senate has already agreed via unanimous consent to pass the bill immediately upon receipt from the House.
• House votes on Epstein Files Transparency Act discharge petition — The House voted on the Epstein Files Transparency Act, a discharge petition requiring Attorney General Pam Bondi to release sealed Justice Department investigative files within 30 days, including flight logs, travel records, witness transcripts, immunity deals, and records related to Epstein's death in federal custody. The vote followed four months of procedural delays by Speaker Johnson, including early adjournment and withholding the swearing-in of Rep. Adelita Grijalva (D-AZ), whose signature provided the 218th required for the discharge petition. Trump initially opposed the bill, withdrew his endorsement from Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene over her support, then reversed position on Sunday and said he would sign it if it reached his desk.
• House passes bill to release Epstein files; Massie and Khanna call for accountability — The U.S. House of Representatives passed legislation to force the complete release of Department of Justice files related to Jeffrey Epstein. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) held a press conference with Epstein survivors outside the Capitol, calling for the same accountability faced by UK figures tied to Epstein, including Prince Andrew's loss of titles and Peter Mandelson's removal as ambassador. Khanna renewed calls for Prince Andrew to testify before the House oversight committee.
• House passes Epstein Files Transparency Act with overwhelming bipartisan support — The House of Representatives voted 427–1 on November 18, 2025, to pass the Epstein Files Transparency Act, requiring the Justice Department to release all unclassified materials related to Jeffrey Epstein. The Senate unanimously agreed to expedite passage. President Trump, who initially resisted the measure, reversed course on November 17 and called for release, declaring "we have nothing to hide." The bill now awaits Trump's signature at the White House.
• House prepares vote on legislation to compel release of Epstein-related government files — The House of Representatives is scheduled to vote on legislation requiring the release of US government files related to the Jeffrey Epstein case. Democrats and four dissident Republicans gathered sufficient signatures to force the vote over objections from Speaker Mike Johnson. Initially, Trump opposed the legislation, but reversed course on Sunday evening and called for its approval. The bill's passage in the Senate remains uncertain, with Subramanyam predicting Trump will pressure the Republican majority to block it.
• House passed bipartisan Epstein files disclosure resolution — The House passed a bipartisan resolution sponsored by Representatives Ro Khanna (D) and Thomas Massie (R) compelling the Department of Justice to release the entire contents of Epstein investigative files, with the exception of victim information. The vote was 427–1, with only Rep. Clay Higgins (R-LA) voting against. The resolution now advances to the Senate. The measure followed a discharge petition after Speaker Mike Johnson initially declined to bring it to a floor vote.
• Senate passed legislation to force DOJ to release Epstein files — The Senate passed legislation to force the Justice Department to release the Epstein Files within 30 days by unanimous consent after only one House lawmaker voted against it earlier in the day, moving the bill to Trump's desk. One administration official told Zeteo, "We lost this one badly."
• House passes bipartisan bill to force release of DOJ Epstein files — The House of Representatives passed a bipartisan bill on Tuesday to compel the release of justice department records related to Jeffrey Epstein. The measure secured overwhelming support after Donald Trump reversed his five-month opposition and called on Republicans to back it. Epstein survivors, joined by Representatives Ro Khanna, Thomas Massie, and Marjorie Taylor Greene, held a news conference outside the Capitol demanding accountability and transparency. The bill now moves to the Senate.
• House passes Epstein Files Transparency Act with near-unanimous vote — The U.S. House of Representatives voted 427-1 on November 18 to pass the Epstein Files Transparency Act, legislation requiring the release of investigative documents related to Jeffrey Epstein. The Senate approved the bill by unanimous consent the following day. President Trump, who had initially opposed the measure, reversed course and indicated he would sign it. The sole dissenting vote came from Louisiana Republican Clay Higgins, who cited concerns about protecting witness identities.
• House passes Epstein Files Transparency Act — The House of Representatives voted 427–1 to pass the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which mandates the release of all unclassified Epstein-related records within 30 days, with victims' names redacted. The bill now moves to the Senate, where it is expected to pass immediately under a unanimous-consent agreement. The bill will then be sent to President Trump, who has stated he will sign it. However, a recent directive from Trump to the Department of Justice to open a new investigation into Epstein's connections may allow the DOJ to withhold records under the bill's "ongoing investigations" exception.
• Senate agrees to pass Epstein Files bill via unanimous consent — Senate Majority Leader John Thune announced that the Senate has agreed via unanimous consent to pass the Epstein Files Transparency Act the moment it arrives from the House, expected Wednesday morning. No senator objected to the unanimous-consent motion. The bill will proceed directly to the President's desk without amendments or delay.
• Senate passed the Epstein Files Transparency Act by unanimous consent. — The Senate passed the Epstein Files Transparency Act by unanimous consent without debate, moving the legislation to the president within hours of House passage. The rapid Senate action followed the House's 427–1 vote.
• Senate passes Epstein Files Transparency Act by unanimous consent — The Senate passed the Epstein Files Transparency Act by unanimous consent after Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer requested and obtained agreement for automatic passage upon the bill's arrival. Senate Majority Leader John Thune declined to delay or amend the measure, bypassing House Speaker Mike Johnson's expectation that the Senate would stall the bill with amendments.
• Became Law: Epstein Files Transparency Act — Congress enacted the Epstein Files Transparency Act (Public Law 119-38), requiring the disclosure of sealed documents related to Jeffrey Epstein's criminal case. The law mandates the release of previously withheld records to the public, expanding access to judicial proceedings and evidence. This legislative action increases transparency in a high-profile criminal matter of significant public interest.

Supporting reports

• DOJ announces it will not release additional Epstein files despite campaign promises — Over the summer, the Trump administration's justice department announced it would not release any additional files related to Jeffrey Epstein, despite Trump's campaign promises to do so. The decision sparked bipartisan outrage and accusations of a "cover-up" from both sides of the political aisle. The announcement contradicted Trump's pre-election commitments on transparency regarding the Epstein case.

Supporting reports

• American Oversight filed lawsuit against Defense Secretary Hegseth and other officials for Federal Records Act violations — American Oversight, a nonprofit organization focusing on government transparency, filed a lawsuit against Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and the National Archives. The lawsuit alleges violations of the Federal Records Act for using the Signal messaging app to discuss military operations without preserving the communications as required by law. The suit also suggests the administration has made other attempts to circumvent federal records preservation requirements.
• American Oversight files lawsuit to compel preservation of Signal chat messages — The watchdog group American Oversight filed a federal lawsuit on Tuesday against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, and others, alleging violations of federal records retention laws. The 18-page suit seeks to compel the Trump administration to preserve Signal chat messages that use auto-deletion functions. The case was assigned to Chief US District Judge James Boasberg in Washington DC, who is also presiding over a separate national security case involving the administration's deportation of Venezuelans under the Alien Enemies Act.
• Government watchdog sued Hegseth over Signal records violation — A government watchdog group sued Hegseth and other Trump administration officials, arguing that using Signal to discuss military plans violated federal records laws. The lawsuit seeks to enforce compliance with the Federal Records Act.
• Federal judge orders preservation of Signal chat messages from Yemen military operation — Chief US District Judge James Boasberg issued a temporary restraining order requiring Trump administration officials—including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard—to preserve all Signal messages exchanged between 11–15 March. The order followed disclosure that National Security Adviser Mike Waltz had inadvertently added Atlantic editor Jeffrey Goldberg to a chat discussing a military strike on Houthi targets in Yemen, including operational details and intelligence sourced from Israeli assets. The lawsuit, brought by transparency group American Oversight, alleges violation of the Federal Records Act, which requires preservation of government communications.
• Case update — American Oversight v. Hegseth (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00883 — After a hearing, Chief Judge James Boasberg issued an order , “as agreed by the parties,” for “Defendants shall promptly make best efforts to preserve all Signal communications from March 11-15, 2025.” The court also ordered defendants to file a status report by March 31 “setting forth the steps that they have taken to implement such preservation.”
• American Oversight filed a lawsuit against Trump administration officials — American Oversight, a nonprofit organization focused on government transparency, filed a lawsuit against Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, and others for violating the Federal Records Act. The lawsuit claims that these officials failed to preserve federal records related to military planning discussions conducted on the unsecure messaging app Signal. This legal action aims to hold the administration accountable for its handling of sensitive information.