Trump Action Archive

Supporting reports

• Trump requests congressional resolution to symbolically expunge his two impeachments — President Trump is pressing Congress to pass a resolution that would symbolically nullify his two impeachments from his first term—one in 2019 over abuse of power regarding Ukraine, the second in 2021 following the January 6 Capitol attack. Constitutional scholars note the Constitution contains no mechanism to reverse an impeachment, making any resolution largely a political statement. Democrats argue the effort will only resurrect the original allegations during the midterm election cycle.
• Trump seeks to expunge impeachments — The Wall Street Journal reported on June 11 that Trump and his allies have discussed urging Republican lawmakers to pass a resolution "expunging" Trump's two first-term impeachments. House Speaker Mike Johnson called the move a "priority," though it would be purely symbolic with no legal weight. A measure is unlikely to be considered until after the midterm elections.

Supporting reports

• Department of Homeland Security issues waiver allowing border wall construction in Big Bend National Park — The Trump administration's Department of Homeland Security published a waiver in the Federal Register on June 11, 2026, that suspends enforcement of major environmental and historical preservation laws—including the National Environmental Policy Act, Endangered Species Act, Clean Water Act, and Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act—to permit Customs and Border Protection to construct border security infrastructure in Big Bend National Park, Texas. The waiver authorizes construction of vehicle barriers, roads, surveillance systems, and potentially 30-foot steel bollard fencing across 17 miles of the park's river frontage and interior, despite the area accounting for less than 0.5% of unauthorized border crossings nationally.

Supporting reports

• Lawsuit filed to halt UFC event at White House, citing corruption and regulatory violations — Plaintiffs filed a lawsuit seeking to prevent the UFC event from proceeding on the White House South Lawn, arguing it violates regulations and represents corruption. The suit contends that the event is a for-profit endeavor from which the President and allies stand to profit, distinguishing it from precedent White House events. Plaintiffs also challenged the Trump administration's June 9 representation that the UFC would not film inside the Lincoln Memorial, noting that the National Park Service appeared to be taking instruction from the UFC and planned to close public access to the Memorial and allow filming inside it.
• Judge Amit Mehta ruled UFC event at White House could proceed despite legal challenge — Federal Judge Amit Mehta ruled that a UFC event scheduled to take place at the White House could proceed, finding that harm to plaintiffs challenging the event would be only "temporary" and that the legal challenge came too late. The judge cited the considerable time, labor, and funding already invested in organizing the event and its lead-up activities.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — Douglas v. National Park Service (D.D.C.) 1:26-cv-02016 — Judge Mehta denied Plaintiffs' emergency application for a temporary restraining order or expedited preliminary injunction to block United Fighting Championship (UFC) Freedom 250 events at the White House South Lawn and Lincoln Memorial, concluding that Plaintiffs failed to establish a substantial likelihood of standing, irreparable harm, or a favorable balance of equities. On standing, the court held that neither Plaintiff demonstrated a concrete, direct aesthetic injury - Romano's presence near the affected areas was speculative, and Douglas' planned visits were primarily for protest activity rather than enjoyment of the sites' aesthetic or historical character. The court also found that Plaintiffs' unreasonable delay in filing (the event had been publicized since July 2025), the ancillary nature of their claimed harms, and the temporary character of the event structures independently precluded a showing of irreparable harm. Judge Mehta also highlighted the significant potential losses that would be borne by event organizers and damage to the reliance interests of prospective attendees in the event of an emergency injunction.

Supporting reports

• Trump compares Fourth of July crowd to MLK's "I Have a Dream" speech — Trump compared the size of his Fourth of July crowd on the National Mall to the crowd at Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech, claiming his was bigger.