Trump Action Archive

Supporting reports

• Trump discusses constitutional third-term workaround but rules out VP gambit — Donald Trump stated aboard Air Force One that while he would be "allowed" to run as vice-president to circumvent the 22nd Amendment's two-term limit, he would rule out such an approach, calling it "too cute" and saying "the people wouldn't like that." He also said he "would love" to serve a third term and has previously distributed "Trump 2028" hats, leaving ambiguity about whether he is definitively foreclosing a third-term bid.
• Trump expressed interest in running for a third term — When asked about the possibility of running for a third term, Trump stated "I would love to do it" and claimed "I've solved eight wars and the ninth is coming." The statement expressed willingness to pursue a constitutionally prohibited third presidential term.
• Trump stated he would not pursue a third term by running as vice president with a puppet candidate. — On Air Force One en route to South Korea, Trump was asked whether he would follow Steve Bannon's suggestion to run for a third term as vice president with a puppet presidential candidate. Trump responded that while he would be legally allowed to do so, he would not pursue such a strategy, calling it "too cute." The statement came amid ongoing speculation about constitutional limits on presidential terms.
• Trump discusses third-term presidency and Twenty-Second Amendment — President Trump has repeatedly discussed the possibility of serving a third term as president, most recently speaking about it to reporters on Air Force One earlier in the week. The Twenty-Second Amendment to the Constitution prohibits a third term. Trump ally Stephen Bannon told the Economist that "Trump is going to be president in '28 and people just ought to get accommodated with that," claiming there are "many different alternatives" to circumvent the Twenty-Second Amendment. Trump campaign merchandise displaying "Trump 2028" is displayed on bookshelves outside the Oval Office.

Supporting reports

• Border patrol agents deploy tear gas at Chicago Halloween parade — Border patrol agents converged on a children's Halloween parade in Irving Park, Chicago, on October 26, deploying tear gas and tackling and arresting several people, including U.S. citizens, outside homes decorated for Halloween. Video footage reviewed by ABC News documented the incident. The action prompted judicial criticism and the governor's intervention.
• ICE agents deployed tear gas against Halloween parade protesters in Chicago — Federal ICE agents deployed chemical agents against protesters in Chicago's Old Irving Park neighborhood as parents and children were heading to a Halloween parade. Agents tackled an undocumented immigrant who had been working on a nearby home. As angry neighbors protested, agents began lobbing tear gas minutes before the scheduled start of the parade. Resident Brian Kolp, an attorney with law enforcement experience, stated he saw no weapons or physical contact that justified the use of force, including against his 70-year-old neighbor who was taken to the ground.

Supporting reports

• Trump stated intention to kill drug traffickers without congressional declaration of war — When asked by a reporter why he had not sought a congressional declaration of war against South American drug cartels, Trump responded: "Well, I don't think we're gonna necessarily ask for a declaration of war, I think we're just gonna kill people that are bringing drugs into our country. OK? We're going to kill them. You know? They're going to be, like dead. OK?" The statement articulates an intention to exercise lethal force against foreign nationals without seeking constitutional authorization from Congress.

Supporting reports

• Trump authorizes Defense Department to redirect research and development funds to pay military personnel — President Trump authorized the Department of Defense to pay US military personnel using funds originally allocated for research and development, circumventing the appropriations process during the government shutdown. Budget experts consulted by the Guardian characterized the move as likely illegal, as it reallocates congressionally approved funds without legislative authorization. This action occurred as hundreds of thousands of federal employees and military personnel faced unpaid status during the shutdown.

Supporting reports

• Judge Young issues 161-page ruling blocking deportations of pro-Palestinian activists — Judge William Young in Boston issued a scathing 161-page ruling last month finding that Trump administration efforts to deport non-citizen pro-Palestinian activists and academics violated their First Amendment rights and were conducted under an "unconstitutionally broad definition of antisemitism." Young, a Reagan appointee, concluded the deportations lacked due process and constituted a "full-throated assault on the first amendment."

Supporting reports

• Trump threatens use of Insurrection Act against American cities — On the morning of October 19, 2025, President Trump told Fox News Channel host Maria Bartiromo that he could invoke the Insurrection Act, stating "Don't forget I can use the Insurrection Act. Fifty percent of the presidents almost have used that. And that's unquestioned power. I choose not to, I'd rather do this, but I'm met constantly by fake politicians." He framed the threat in terms of ensuring "safety" in cities, implying military or federal force could be deployed against American civilians and local governments.
• Trump falsely claimed presidents have invoked the Insurrection Act 28 times and threatened to use it to deploy troops to cities — Trump stated he can "always use the Insurrection Act" to send more troops to U.S. cities and falsely claimed that one president invoked it 28 times. In reality, the Insurrection Act has been invoked only 30 times in over 230 years, with President Ulysses S. Grant invoking it six times. Trump specifically threatened to deploy National Guard troops to San Francisco and other Democratic-run cities, claiming they are "unsafe" and "disasters."

Supporting reports

• ProPublica reported more than 170 U.S. citizens detained by immigration agents — ProPublica reported that more than 170 U.S. citizens have been detained by immigration agents at raids and protests, some of whom have been dragged, tackled, beaten, tased, shot, had their necks kneeled on, and were held outside in the rain in their underwear. More than 20 of them have said they were held for over a day without being able to contact a lawyer or loved one. At least three were pregnant when they were detained.
• Immigration agents detain over 170 U.S. citizens without due process — According to reporting by Nicole Foy of ProPublica on Thursday, October 16, 2025, more than 170 U.S. citizens have been detained by immigration agents. The detainees have been subjected to violence including dragging, tackling, beating, tasering, and shooting. At least three pregnant women were detained, including one whose home had its door blown off by Department of Homeland Security agents while Secretary Kristi Noem was present. Detainees have been held outside in rain while in underwear and subjected to neck kneeling.

Supporting reports

• 50501 Movement announces coordinated protests across all 50 state capitals on October 18th — The 50501 Movement, a decentralized protest organization that began on Reddit in late January 2025, announced coordinated demonstrations planned for October 18th at all 50 state capitals, U.S. territories, and over 25 international locations. The movement organized under the "No Kings" banner represents the ninth major action since February 5th. The announcement includes specific times, locations, and logistical details for participation, alongside context describing policy shifts including ICE detention without warrant, USAID closure, removal of 2,000+ federal datasets, university funding freezes, and tariff-driven market losses exceeding $6.6 trillion.
• National coordinated protest planned across United States — The 50501 Movement announced a coordinated national protest scheduled for Saturday, October 18th, 2025, with over 2,500 protests planned across the nation and support from 25 countries globally. The article provided organizing guidance on protest signs, chants, safety protocols, and de-escalation tactics. Participants were encouraged to wear colors symbolizing optimism (yellow) or endurance (purple), participate in "Operation Inflation" with inflatable costumes, and carry paperclips as symbols of solidarity. The movement emphasized peaceful assembly, community care, and protection of vulnerable participants, particularly people of color.
• Nationwide "No Kings" Protests Planned — On October 18, 2025, the 50501 Movement is organizing "No Kings" protests across all 50 states in the United States. This event is expected to be larger than the previous protest in June, with over 2,200 events planned. Participants are encouraged to wear paperclips as a symbol of unity and resistance, inspired by the Norwegian resistance during World War II. The movement aims to defend democracy and reject authoritarianism, drawing on historical symbols to galvanize support and participation.
• Nationwide protest planned for October 18th with 2,110+ events announced — The 50501 Movement announced a planned nationwide protest for October 18th, 2025, with over 2,110 events organized across small towns and major cities. Organizers describe it as intended to be "the largest peaceful protest in modern American history," surpassing the June 14th protest that drew over 5 million participants across 2,100+ cities and 20 countries. Major coalition partners include Indivisible, ACLU, AFT, MoveOn, and Public Citizen. The article lists specific protest times and locations in Hawaii and directs participants to nokings.org to find local events.
• Nationwide protests organized across 2,700 communities — On October 18, 2025, protests are set to occur in 2,700 communities across the United States as part of the No Kings movement, marking a significant increase from the previous wave of protests in June. These events aim to mobilize citizens to actively participate in defending democracy and express their collective dissent against authoritarianism. The protests are characterized by community engagement, with participants preparing signs, food, and resources to support one another.
• No Kings Day nationwide protest mobilizes over 7 million participants across 2,700 events in all 50 states — On October 18, 2025, organizers of "No Kings Day" reported over 7 million participants across more than 2,700 protest events in all 50 states and internationally. Independent crowd scientists estimated between 5.2 and 8.2 million participants. Major rallies occurred in Boston (with Senator Elizabeth Warren), New York City (NYPD confirmed over 100,000 peaceful participants with no major arrests), Washington D.C. (over 100,000 anticipated near the Capitol with Senator Bernie Sanders speaking), San Francisco, Portland Maine, and Columbus Ohio. Demonstrations were largely peaceful, featuring families, veterans, marching bands, and constitutional imagery. The movement reached deeper into Trump-voting areas than previous protests during Trump's first administration.
• No Kings Day nationwide protests planned — The 50501 Movement organized No Kings Day protests scheduled for October 18, 2025, across over 2,500 cities and towns in all 50 states. The article describes the movement as a response to the Trump administration's attacks on various marginalized groups and constitutional rights. Organizers called for peaceful assembly and invited participants to wear paperclips as a symbol of solidarity.
• October 18 "No Kings" mobilization reached 2,700+ locations nationwide — On October 18, 2025, a coordinated "No Kings" protest mobilization reached 2,700 or more locations across the United States. Attendance estimates varied by methodology but were consistently reported in the multi-million range, making it one of the largest coordinated protest waves in modern U.S. history.
• Operation Inflation: National protest planned using inflatable costumes and creative attire — The 50501 Movement announced "Operation Inflation," a coordinated national protest strategy for October 18, 2025, in which participants wear inflatable animals, mythical creatures, and surreal costumes to reclaim protest space and counter government narratives. The movement frames creative protest dress as a historical tactic used by civil rights, suffrage, and other resistance movements. Organizers emphasized that large-scale protests require extensive coordination including permit acquisition, safety networks, marshal training, legal observation, and medical support across multiple states.
• Planned mass protest at state capitals and Washington D.C. on October 18 — The 50501 Movement announced a planned mass protest scheduled for October 18, 2025, at every state capital and in Washington, D.C. The article frames the protest as addressing multiple issues: opposition to fascism, oligarchy, ICE enforcement, police violence (in memory of George Floyd), and Medicare cuts. The movement is conducting a five-day organizing challenge (October 14–18) using social media and offline flyers to mobilize participation.
• Major US labor unions organize "No Kings" protests against Trump administration policies — The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and American Federation of Teachers (AFT) organized over 2,700 demonstrations across all 50 states on October 18, 2025, protesting Trump administration policies including Medicaid cuts, aggressive ICE raids, rising healthcare and grocery prices, and what organizers characterized as abuses of executive power. Union leaders framed the protests as defending worker voice, democracy, and the promise of America against what they described as billionaire-friendly policies and authoritarian governance.
• Millions participate in No Kings protests across all 50 US states against Trump administration — On October 18–19, 2025, millions of Americans across all 50 states participated in the No Kings protests, a second iteration of a coalition that marched in June. Participants, many in costumes, gathered in anchor cities including Chicago (100,000+), Washington DC (200,000+), Atlanta (10,000+), and Los Angeles, among dozens of others. The protests centered on opposition to what organizers characterized as Trump's authoritarianism, federal militarization of cities, immigration enforcement, erosion of free speech, and defiance of courts. Organizers emphasized nonviolent resistance; some federal officers used force against protesters at an ICE facility in Portland, Oregon.
• No Kings Day protests held across United States and globally — Millions of Americans and international allies participated in No Kings Day demonstrations across the United States and around the globe on October 18, 2025, to express commitment to American democracy and opposition to the current administration. Protesters carried American flags, homemade signs, and wore costumes. City police departments in New York City, San Diego, and Washington, D.C., reported no protest-related arrests. The demonstrations ranged from hundreds of thousands in large cities to smaller crowds in Republican-dominated towns.
• Seven million people participate in "No Kings" day protests on October 18 — On Saturday, October 18, more than seven million people took to the streets in another "No Kings" day to demonstrate their opposition to the Trump administration. The massive turnout represented the largest organized public opposition to the administration's policies.
• Nearly 7 million people participated in 'No Kings' protests across all 50 states against Trump's authoritarian agenda — Organizers reported that approximately 7 million people participated in thousands of "No Kings" protests across all 50 states on October 18, 2025, to oppose Trump's authoritarian policies. An estimated 200,000 people attended the main event in Washington, DC. The protests specifically targeted Trump's attacks on immigration, free speech, and democratic institutions. This represented one of the largest coordinated protest movements against the Trump administration during his second term.
• No Kings protests held across all 50 US states against Trump administration — On Saturday, October 20, 2025, millions of protesters participated in "No Kings" demonstrations across all 50 US states, organized as civil resistance against the Trump administration amid a government shutdown. Protesters cited concerns about constitutional norms, healthcare access, LGBTQ+ protections, immigration enforcement, and labor rights. The article features interviews with 14 protesters from Los Angeles, Washington DC, Chicago, and Atlanta discussing their motivations, hopes for resistance leadership, and strategies including continued protests, economic boycotts, and strikes.

Supporting reports

• Case update — Illinois v. Trump (N.D. Ill.) 1:25-cv-12174 — The administration filed an emergency appeal of the district court's order to the Supreme Court of the United States, asking for the order enjoining the deployment to be stayed and requesting an immediate administrative stay (Case No. 25A443 ). Describing the protests in Chicago as “prolonged, coordinated, violent resistance”, the administration argued that the lower court decision “improperly impinges on the president's authority and needlessly endangers federal personnel and property.” The filing contends that only the President can determine whether the conditions for federalizing troops has been met and that the Seventh Circuit had placed itself “in the untenable position of controlling the military chain of command and judicially micromanaging the exercise of the President's Commander-in-Chief powers.” The Supreme Court instructed the State of Illinois and City of Chicago to file their responses by 5pm on Monday, Oct. 20.
• Trump administration appeals to Supreme Court for immediate deployment of National Guard in Chicago — On Friday, October 17, 2025, the Trump administration filed an emergency appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court requesting an immediate order to deploy National Guard troops in Chicago. The administration claimed a "pressing risk of violence" in the city and argued that preventing deployment "improperly impinges on the President's authority." Four judges—two appointed by Democrats and two by Republicans—had previously rejected the administration's arguments for military deployment. The DOJ sought a decision on the shadow docket, which would bypass hearings and explanation.

Supporting reports

• Former Inspector General Mark Greenblatt reported firing of Export-Import Bank Inspector General — Former Inspector General Mark Greenblatt confirmed that Trump has fired another Inspector General, this time at the Export-Import Bank. Greenblatt characterized the dismissal as "deeply alarming," stating it weakens independent oversight and erodes a vital safeguard for taxpayers.
• Trump fired Export-Import Bank Inspector General without notifying Congress — Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) stated that President Trump fired the Export-Import Bank Inspector General without informing Congress, violating federal law. Grassley noted that the law requires the President to specifically inform Congress about Inspector General firings and stated that "unless the courts say otherwise, that's still the law."

Supporting reports

• Louisiana v Callais case scheduled for oral arguments on Voting Rights Act — The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear Louisiana v Callais on October 15, a case challenging Louisiana's creation of a majority-Black congressional district required under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The case will determine whether such majority-minority districts violate the 14th or 15th Amendments. Legal experts predict the court may strike down the Voting Rights Act's majority-minority district provision on "color-blind" grounds, potentially enabling Republican-run states to gerrymander districts and affecting the 2026 midterm elections.
• Oral arguments in Louisiana v Callais on Voting Rights Act Section 2 — The US Supreme Court heard oral arguments on 15 October in Louisiana v Callais, which challenges whether Section 2 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act is constitutional. Louisiana is accused of creating a second majority-Black congressional district to comply with the act's minority representation provisions, which the state argues violates the 14th and 15th Amendments. The case will determine whether the Voting Rights Act's core protections for racial minorities remain enforceable or whether the Court will further restrict voting rights protections.
• US Supreme Court hears Louisiana v Callais, case that could gut Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act — The US Supreme Court is set to hear oral arguments on October 15, 2025, in Louisiana v Callais, a case challenging the constitutionality of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The dispute centers on Louisiana's redrawing of a congressional district to create a second majority-Black district after Black voters sued under Section 2. White voters are now challenging that district as an unconstitutional race-based gerrymander. The Court has invited briefing on whether the district violates the 14th and 15th Amendments. A ruling striking down or severely limiting Section 2 would eliminate the primary remaining tool for challenging racially discriminatory voting practices nationwide.
• Supreme Court hears arguments in Louisiana v. Callais and Robinson v. Callais challenging Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act — The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in two consolidated cases challenging a federal court decision that struck down Louisiana's racial gerrymander and required the state to create a second majority-Black congressional district. The right-wing majority indicated opposition to the use of race in redistricting to comply with the Voting Rights Act, suggesting such remedies are unconstitutional. A ruling against Section 2 could eliminate more than a dozen Democratic-held districts in the South and fundamentally alter the balance of power in the House of Representatives.
• Supreme Court re-heard case on Voting Rights Act Section 2 — The Supreme Court re-heard a case that could further undercut the 1965 Voting Rights Act by dismantling Section 2, the law's main safeguard against racially discriminatory redistricting. If the justices strike down Section 2, Republicans could gain 19 new safe U.S. house seats, enough to lock in one-party control of the House of Representatives for a generation.
• US Supreme Court hears arguments on Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act in Louisiana electoral districts case — The US Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Wednesday in a case challenging Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits racial discrimination in voting. The case involves Louisiana electoral districts. Voting rights activists, predominantly Black, gathered outside the Court to protest, invoking the legacy of civil rights leaders and warning that weakening the Voting Rights Act would reverse decades of progress. Legal advocates including Janai Nelson of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund argued on behalf of Black voters, expressing confidence that the law and the justices' own precedent support their position.
• US Supreme Court hears oral arguments in Callais v Louisiana, case challenging Voting Rights Act Section 2 — The US Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Wednesday in Callais v Louisiana, a case in which Louisiana, non-African American voters, and the Trump administration challenge Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits electoral maps that dilute minority voting power. The conservative majority appeared sympathetic to weakening or eliminating this provision. The case centers on Louisiana's 2024 congressional map that created a second majority-Black district following a prior Voting Rights Act lawsuit. A ruling against Section 2 could set a precedent making redistricting lawsuits based on race considerably harder to bring.
• US Supreme Court oral arguments signal intent to narrow Section 2 of Voting Rights Act in Louisiana v Callais — The US Supreme Court's conservative majority appeared poised during oral arguments on October 16, 2025, to weaken Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act as applied to redistricting. The case, Louisiana v Callais, involves Louisiana's sixth congressional district, which was redrawn to create a second majority-Black district following a successful Section 2 challenge by Black voters. White voters and the Trump administration challenged the map, arguing that race-conscious redistricting violates the 14th and 15th Amendments. A ruling narrowing Section 2 could strip minority voters of a key tool to challenge discriminatory district lines and potentially cost Democrats around a dozen House seats.
• Supreme Court hears arguments in Louisiana v. Callais — The Supreme Court heard arguments in the case of Louisiana v. Callais, which challenges a federal court decision that found Louisiana's congressional district map violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act by racially gerrymandering Black voters. The case could determine the future of majority-minority districts and the enforcement of voting rights protections. The right-wing majority of the Court indicated a potential shift away from previous understandings of race in redistricting.

Supporting reports

• Trump administration withheld over $27 billion in funds from Democratic districts during government shutdown — During the government shutdown, Trump told reporters his administration was using the shutdown to withhold funds Congress appropriated from Democratic districts. The New York Times estimated the administration cancelled more than $27.24 billion in funds for Democratic districts and states while cutting only $738.7 million from Republican districts and states. Speaker Johnson said such withholding was lawful and constitutional but did not explain his reasoning. Republican representatives, including Senator Susan Collins (chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee), reported they were not consulted about the cuts.
• Trump claims administration is selectively closing Democratic programs — President Trump told reporters that the administration is deliberately closing government programs it disagrees with, framing the cuts as targeting Democratic priorities. Trump stated: "We're not closing up Republican programs because we think they work. So the Democrats are getting killed, but they're not telling the people about that…. So we are closing up Democrat programs that we think that we disagree with, and they're never going to open again."

Supporting reports

• Border Patrol agents conduct military-style immigration raid in Chicago — Earlier this month, Border Patrol agents, alongside other federal agents, conducted a military-style immigration raid on an apartment complex in Chicago. Video evidence showed agents bursting through front doors without warrants, leading to allegations of egregious rights violations. Legal experts and advocates have raised concerns about the combative enforcement culture of the Border Patrol, which has historically had more leeway with the Fourth Amendment's protections against arbitrary stops and searches. The raid is part of a broader deployment of Border Patrol agents into urban areas as part of the Trump administration's immigration crackdown.

Supporting reports

• Speaker Johnson has convened House for only 12 of 80 days — Speaker Mike Johnson has called the House into session for only 12 of the last 80 days, with House Republicans receiving full pay and benefits during the extended shutdown. The extended absence has been characterized as "The Epstein Shutdown," with 68 days off with full pay over the 80-day period.
• House Speaker Johnson delays swearing in of Representative Grijalva — Speaker Mike Johnson has not sworn in Representative Raúl Grijalva despite her written request, according to a Fox reporter's question at a House Republican press conference. Johnson denied the delay was related to obstruction of the Epstein files release. Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes sent a letter to Johnson demanding he swear in Grijalva and stated her office is considering litigation to hold him accountable for the delay.
• Arizona attorney general accused Speaker Johnson of violating Constitution — Arizona's attorney general sent a letter to House Speaker Mike Johnson accusing him of violating the Constitution by delaying the swearing-in ceremony of newly elected Democratic Rep.-elect Adelita Grijalva, who is expected to be the key 218th vote on a petition that would force a vote to require the Trump administration to release the Epstein files.
• Rep-elect Adelita Grijalva demanded Speaker Johnson release Epstein files — Rep-elect Adelita Grijalva responded to Speaker Mike Johnson's dismissive "bless her heart" comment about her demand to be sworn in by accusing Johnson of stalling and obstruction. Grijalva stated she is the 218th signer of a discharge petition for the Epstein files and that Johnson's delay in swearing her in is politically motivated, driven by fear of Trump.
• House adjourned for 74 of last 86 days; zero committee hearings in October — Speaker Johnson has had the House adjourned for 74 of the last 86 days. The House Committee Calendar for October shows zero hearings or business being conducted. Rep. Hakeem Jeffries criticized House Republicans for being on vacation for three consecutive weeks during a government shutdown, stating they were in "legislative witness protection program" and not holding town halls or engaging with constituents.
• Speaker Johnson dismissed Arizona AG's lawsuit as a "publicity stunt" — When asked about the lawsuit filed by Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes to compel him to swear in Rep. Adelita Grijalva, Speaker Johnson dismissed it as a "publicity stunt" by a "Democrat attorney general in Arizona" seeking a "national moment," claiming she had "nothing whatsoever to do with what's happening in Congress."

Supporting reports

• Trump threatens to invoke Insurrection Act to sidestep court orders blocking Guard deployments — In response to recent court orders blocking military deployments, Trump and senior White House officials raised the possibility of invoking the Insurrection Act, one of the president's most powerful emergency authorities. The rarely used law allows the president to deploy military forces within the U.S. to suppress rebellion, domestic violence, or lawless behavior. The act is the primary exception to the Posse Comitatus Act. Trump stated in the Oval Office on Monday that he may invoke the act to sidestep court rulings blocking the dispatch of Guard troops, saying "It's been invoked before. We have an Insurrection Act for a reason."

Supporting reports

• Steve Bannon suggests plans for Trump to run for unconstitutional third term — On NewsNation, former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon suggested there are plans for Trump to run for an unconstitutional third term in 2028, saying "I think there are many different alternatives that, at the appropriate term, after the midterms in '26, we will roll out…to make sure that President Trump is on the ballot…and if he's on the ballot, he'll win."

Supporting reports

• Vice President Vance said Trump considering Insurrection Act invocation for National Guard deployment — On NBC's "Meet the Press," Vice President JD Vance said Trump is "looking at all of his options" to deploy National Guard troops in Democratic-led cities, including invoking the Insurrection Act. He noted that while Trump "has not felt like he needed to" invoke the Insurrection Act "right now," he also hasn't ruled out doing so.
• Trump threatens to invoke Insurrection Act to sidestep court orders blocking Guard deployments — In response to recent court orders blocking military deployments, Trump and senior White House officials raised the possibility of invoking the Insurrection Act, one of the president's most powerful emergency authorities. The rarely used law allows the president to deploy military forces within the U.S. to suppress rebellion, domestic violence, or lawless behavior. The act is the primary exception to the Posse Comitatus Act. Trump stated in the Oval Office on Monday that he may invoke the act to sidestep court rulings blocking the dispatch of Guard troops, saying "It's been invoked before. We have an Insurrection Act for a reason."

Supporting reports

• The Pentagon diverted $8 billion in research and development funds to cover military payroll during the shutdown. — The Trump administration ordered the Pentagon to repurpose approximately $8 billion in unobligated research and development funds from the prior fiscal year to cover military payroll, preventing service members from missing their first paychecks during the government shutdown. However, civilian federal employees were not afforded the same treatment. The Trump administration's budget office also argued in a draft opinion that furloughed workers are not entitled to back pay when the shutdown ends, creating a disparity in how different federal workers are treated.
• Trump administration redirects Pentagon funds to pay military personnel during shutdown — The Trump administration, via Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, reallocated unspent Pentagon research and development funds to ensure military personnel receive scheduled paychecks on October 15 during the government shutdown. House Speaker Mike Johnson defended the move as lawful, while Democratic lawmakers questioned its legality under appropriations law. The action bypassed the need for a separate military pay bill and was framed by Trump as preventing Democrats from holding the military "hostage."
• Trump announces plan to pay furloughed troops using unappropriated funds — Trump announced he has the power to pay furloughed troops by redirecting unused fiscal year 2026 appropriations to cover military payroll after funding expired on September 30. Trump claims authority as commander in chief. Budget experts note this violates the Antideficiency Act and constitutional requirements that only Congress can appropriate and direct spending. The move is unnecessary, as Congress would easily pass a measure to pay troops if House Speaker Mike Johnson called the chamber into session.
• Trump directs use of FY2026 Department of War funds to pay active-duty military during appropriations lapse — President Trump issued National Security Presidential Memorandum/NSPM-8 directing the Secretary of War, in coordination with the Office of Management and Budget, to use funds appropriated for Fiscal Year 2026 to disburse military pay and allowances to active-duty and Reserve component personnel during a 15-day appropriations lapse. The memorandum asserts that the lapse presents a threat to military readiness and invokes Article II authority as Commander in Chief to authorize the reallocation of funds with a "reasonable, logical relationship" to military compensation.
• Trump signed presidential memo to pay military during shutdown — Trump signed a presidential memo to use unspent federal funds to pay military members during the government shutdown. It's unclear whether he has the legal authority to issue the directive.
• Trump administration announced use of military research funds to pay furloughed troops — The Trump administration announced it would pay furloughed troops by redirecting funds Congress appropriated for research, development, testing, and evaluation (RDTE) for fiscal year 2026. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt defended the action as a "creative solution," dismissing Democratic legal objections. The Antideficiency Act, dating to 1870, prohibits spending money Congress has not appropriated for a specific purpose. This action violates that law and undermines congressional control of federal finances.

Supporting reports

• Motion granted — Illinois v. Trump (N.D. Ill.) 1:25-cv-12174 — The Seventh Circuit denied the request for an administrative stay as to the deployment of the federalized National Guard to Chicago. However, the appeals court granted an administrative stay for the part of the lower court order blocking the federalization of the Guard. “Members of the National Guard do not need to return to their home states unless further ordered by a court to do so,” the appellate court said in its brief order.
• Federal appeals court temporarily paused part of lower court order on National Guard federalization in Chicago — A federal appeals court temporarily paused part of a lower judge's order prohibiting the Trump administration from federalizing National Guard troops in Chicago, but left in place a block on their active deployment in the city. The court wrote that troops "do not need to return to their home states unless further ordered by a court to do so," allowing a partial continuation of the federalization process while maintaining restrictions on active deployment.
• A federal appeals court blocked deployment of National Guard troops in Chicago. — The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals on Saturday blocked the deployment of National Guard troops in the Chicago area in response to protests at Immigration and Customs Enforcement facilities. The court upheld a ruling from U.S. District Judge April Perry earlier in the week denying the White House's request to deploy National Guard troops on the streets of Chicago. The Trump administration had vowed to crack down on the protests, but the court found the deployment request lacked legal justification.
• Federal appeals court halts national guard deployment in Illinois while allowing troops to remain — An appeals court ruled Saturday that national guard troops sent by Trump to Illinois may remain in the state under federal control but cannot be deployed, pausing the case pending further arguments. This followed federal judge April Perry's Thursday ruling temporarily blocking the deployment for two weeks, finding no evidence of "danger of rebellion" in Illinois. The decision upholds constitutional protections against military involvement in domestic policing and state sovereignty under the 10th and 14th Amendments.
• Federal court blocks National Guard deployment to Illinois — A federal court ruling this week prevented the Trump administration from deploying federalized National Guard troops to Chicago, despite the administration's push to use military forces for immigration enforcement. The deployment was opposed by Mayor Brandon Johnson and Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker, who argued it violated state sovereignty and was unnecessary.
• Case update — Illinois v. Trump (N.D. Ill.) 1:25-cv-12174 — The Seventh Circuit issued a per curiam opinion denying the administration's request to stay a district court order that blocked deployment of the Illinois National Guard under 10 U.S.C. § 12406. The court agreed with the lower court that the President's Oct. 4 federalization order , issued to suppress protests against “Operation Midway Blitz,” lacked statutory justification finding that the demonstrations at an ICE facility in Broadview, Illinois, did not constitute a “rebellion or danger of rebellion” nor did they show the President was “unable with the regular forces to execute the laws.” The panel rejected the claim of unreviewable presidential discretion and found the administration unlikely to prevail under § 12406 or the Tenth Amendment. While allowing Guard troops to remain temporarily under federal control, the court kept in force the injunction barring their deployment in Illinois pending appeal.

Supporting reports

• House Majority Whip Tom Emmer labels Democratic opposition as "terrorist wing" — House Majority Whip Tom Emmer joined Speaker Johnson in attacking political opponents, labeling those opposing Trump's destruction of constitutional checks and balances as "the terrorist wing" of the Democratic Party. Emmer characterized the October 18 rally defending constitutional separation of powers as a "hate America rally."
• House Republican leadership claimed No Kings protests are terrorism — House Republican leadership, including Speaker Mike Johnson and GOP Whip Tom Emmer, claimed that the "No Kings" protests scheduled for October 18 on the National Mall are acts of terrorism and alleged that Democratic leadership wants to keep the government shutdown ongoing to avoid facing the protesters. Johnson stated the protests are "Pro-Hamas, Antifa people" and accused House Democrats of selling merchandise for the event. Emmer called the protests "the terrorist wing of their party."
• House Speaker Johnson labels "No Kings" protest as "Hate America rally" — House Speaker Mike Johnson labeled the planned "No Kings" protest scheduled for October 18—a demonstration against Trump's authoritarian overreach—as a "Hate America rally." Republicans also characterized the peaceful protest as "pro-Hamas" or "anti-America."

Supporting reports

• Rutgers professor blocked from boarding flight to Spain after Trump threats against antifa — Mark Bray, a Rutgers University historian who teaches courses on anti-fascism and authored "Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook," was prevented from boarding a flight to Spain at Newark airport on October 9. His family's flight reservation was cancelled at the gate without explanation, one day after Trump promised "very threatening" steps against antifa activists. Bray had announced plans to relocate to Europe after receiving death threats, including one vowing to kill him in front of his students. He successfully reboarded a flight to Spain the following evening.

Supporting reports

• Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt becomes first Republican governor to question National Guard deployment — In an interview with the New York Times, Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt, the current chair of the National Governors Association, criticized the federal deployment of troops in Illinois, becoming the first Republican governor to publicly question the deployment. Stitt noted that establishing such a precedent could allow future presidents to use it against Republican states. He stated: "Oklahomans would lose their mind if Pritzker in Illinois sent troops down to Oklahoma during the Biden administration." Stitt also noted that the National Governors Association, as an educational organization under IRS code, could not formally weigh in on the deployment.
• Vermont Governor Phil Scott opposes federalized National Guard deployment to Chicago and Portland — Vermont Governor Phil Scott, a Republican, publicly opposed the Trump administration's deployment of federalized National Guard troops to Chicago and Portland, Oregon. Scott stated that using the National Guard against civilians is unconstitutional and compared the deployment to the January 6 insurrection, saying such action would only be justified in the event of an actual insurrection.
• Governor Kevin Stitt criticized Texas National Guard deployment to Illinois — Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt, chairman of the National Governors Association, criticized Texas Governor Greg Abbott's deployment of Texas National Guard troops to Illinois as a violation of federalism and states' rights principles. Stitt stated that Oklahoma would object if Illinois Governor Pritzker had sent troops to Oklahoma during the Biden administration, and noted that he and Abbott had previously sued the Biden administration over federal overreach on vaccination and mask mandates.

Supporting reports

• Vermont Governor Phil Scott opposes federalized National Guard deployment to Chicago and Portland — Vermont Governor Phil Scott, a Republican, publicly opposed the Trump administration's deployment of federalized National Guard troops to Chicago and Portland, Oregon. Scott stated that using the National Guard against civilians is unconstitutional and compared the deployment to the January 6 insurrection, saying such action would only be justified in the event of an actual insurrection.

Supporting reports

• Trump ordered a military strike on a Colombian boat — President Donald Trump ordered a military strike on a boat identified as Colombian, which has sparked an international incident. Colombia's president stated that Colombian citizens were on board the vessel. The White House dismissed the accusation as "baseless," but U.S. officials privately believe the boat was likely Colombian.
• Trump announces 100% tariffs on Chinese products effective November 1 — After the stock market closed, President Trump posted on social media announcing 100% tariffs on products from China beginning November 1, 2025. This levy is in addition to existing tariffs. The announcement sent stocks falling further in after-market trading. The tariff authority constitutionally belongs to Congress, not the President.
• Trump announced 100% tariff on Chinese goods — Trump announced a new 100% tariff on all goods from China in addition to previously imposed tariffs, following his earlier Truth Social posts claiming China was becoming "very hostile" and attempting to impose export controls on rare earths and other materials. Trump stated he had not spoken to President Xi and canceled plans to meet him at APEC in South Korea in two weeks. The announcement caused significant stock market decline, with the Dow falling nearly 900 points and the NASDAQ dropping 3.56%.
• Trump threatens massive new tariffs on China — Trump announced threats of massive new tariffs on China, causing the stock market to decline rapidly in response.
• Trump posts social media threats against China regarding rare earth minerals — President Trump posted on social media claiming "[s]ome very strange things are happening in China!" in response to Chinese restrictions on rare earth mineral exports. Rare earth minerals are essential for manufacturing robotics, electric vehicles, and electronics. Trump threatened retaliation against China and suggested canceling an upcoming meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping. The post sent stock prices tumbling.

Supporting reports

• Federal judge allows Texas National Guard deployment to Chicago to proceed while Illinois lawsuit pending — U.S. District Judge April Perry declined to immediately block the deployment of Texas National Guard troops to Chicago in response to a lawsuit filed by Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul against the Trump administration. The judge allowed the federal government to continue the deployment while it responds to Illinois's suit, setting a midnight Wednesday deadline for the government's reply. Texas Guard members departed Fort Bliss on Monday evening; Illinois Governor JB Pritzker stated the administration had not consulted him and called it "Trump's invasion."
• Federal judge declines to block National Guard deployment to Chicago — U.S. District Judge April Perry declined to immediately block Texas National Guard troops from entering Chicago on October 7, 2025, despite a pending lawsuit filed by Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul and the city of Chicago seeking to stop the deployment. The judge's refusal to grant an injunction allowed the Trump administration to proceed with mobilizing troops to the city.
• Federal judge holds hearing on legality of Chicago national guard deployment — U.S. District Judge April Perry held a hearing in downtown Chicago on the constitutionality of the national guard deployment after Illinois and Chicago officials filed to declare it illegal. State and city attorneys argued the deployment violates the Constitution and represents a "constitutional crisis," while a Department of Justice lawyer defended it as necessary due to "tragic lawlessness." The hearing drew heavy public turnout requiring an overflow room.
• Judge Ellis restricts federal agents' use of force in northern Illinois — US District Judge Sara Ellis issued a preliminary injunction restricting federal agents' use of force against protesters and journalists in northern Illinois who do not pose a serious threat. The order prohibits pepper balls, rubber bullets, and physical force such as pulling, shoving, or tackling. Ellis also required federal agents to wear visible identification such as badges, addressing concerns about masked plainclothes officers conducting immigration enforcement operations.
• Judge Perry temporarily blocks Trump's national guard deployment in Chicago — US District Judge April Perry issued a temporary restraining order blocking the Trump administration from federalizing or deploying the national guard in Illinois. The order, effective Thursday and lasting two weeks, came after the state of Illinois sued over Trump's directive to send hundreds of troops to Chicago for immigration enforcement and crime reduction. Perry found no credible evidence of rebellion in Illinois and criticized the Department of Homeland Security's characterization of events as "simply unreliable." The White House stated it would appeal.
• U.S. District Judge April M. Perry blocks federal National Guard deployment in Chicago for two weeks — U.S. District Judge April M. Perry issued a temporary restraining order halting the federal deployment of 200 National Guard troops from Texas and 300 from Illinois in and around Chicago for two weeks. Perry stated: "I have found no credible evidence that there is a danger of rebellion in the state of Illinois." She cited grand jury refusals to indict protesters accused of assaulting law enforcement and questioned the Department of Homeland Security's credibility and assessment of conditions in Chicago.
• Grand juries refuse to indict Chicago protesters accused of assaulting law enforcement — Grand juries in Chicago, including one on Tuesday night, refused to indict protesters accused of assaulting law enforcement. Judge Perry cited these refusals in her decision to block the federal National Guard deployment, stating they cast doubt on the Department of Homeland Security's credibility and assessment of conditions in Chicago. The grand jury refusals suggest local juries do not view the alleged assaults as warranting criminal charges.