Trump Action Archive

Supporting reports

• Trump administration claims executive privilege over Kennedy Center renovation conversations — The White House claimed that all conversations between Trump and advisors regarding plans to renovate the Kennedy Center are protected by executive privilege and therefore must be kept secret. This represents a dramatic expansion of executive privilege doctrine, which traditionally shields only communications with key advisors from public scrutiny, extending it to cover virtually all presidential conversations. Attorney General Todd Blanche issued a memo upon taking office asserting that presidents can shield "presidential communications with private advisers so long as the communications relate to official presidential decisionmaking."

Supporting reports

• US Department of Justice sues California to block tabulation of ballots allegedly cast by noncitizens — The US Department of Justice filed a federal lawsuit in the Central District of California seeking a court order to prevent the state from tabulating certain ballots in the midterm elections. The suit followed a demand sent to Los Angeles County officials on Tuesday containing a thumb drive with purported names of over 20,000 noncitizens registered to vote, with a 48-hour deadline to verify citizenship. Los Angeles County Clerk Dean Logan and California Secretary of State Shirley Weber both refused to act on the unverified list, citing lack of methodology and security concerns. The DOJ seeks an injunction requiring California to set aside and independently verify citizenship status of flagged voters before tabulation.
• Justice Department Sues State of California over Voter List — The Department of Justice announced this on 2026-10-15 through Office of the Attorney General. The recorded stage is a complaint filed. The allegations are unadjudicated; this documents the announcement, not the truth of any allegation. The department's own account of it reads: "The Justice Department, working with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), today filed a complaint against the State of California over its voter list after determining that more than 20,000 people who are likely aliens are registered to vote in California. Under California law, every registered voter is mailed a ballot. It is unlawful for aliens to vote in federal elections."

Supporting reports

• Federal judge voids DOJ policy collecting state voter rolls — US District Judge Sparkle Sooknanan ruled that the Trump administration's Department of Justice policy of collecting unredacted state voter rolls to cross-check against a federal immigration database violated federal privacy laws and exceeded DOJ authority. The policy, adopted under Trump's election integrity executive order, had already removed US citizens from voter rolls and risked further disenfranchisement. Sooknanan found Congress, not the federal government, controls voter roll maintenance. The lawsuit was brought by Common Cause after roughly 18 states complied with DOJ requests in May, providing voters' names, birth dates, addresses, and partial identification numbers.

Supporting reports

• Trump administration redirects $20 million in DHS funds to pay for pro-Trump midterm campaign advertisements — The Trump administration diverted $20 million from funds Congress appropriated for the Department of Homeland Security to finance advertisements boosting Trump before the midterm elections. This represents a second instance of the administration redirecting congressionally appropriated funds away from their intended purpose to serve administration political objectives.

Supporting reports

• Government Accountability Office found Trump's funding cancellation unconstitutional — The Government Accountability Office sent a letter to congressional leaders on September 29 stating that Trump's cancellation of $810 million in federal funding, primarily for Health and Human Services programs serving refugees and asylum seekers, violated the Constitution. Trump used the "pocket rescission" process to bypass Congress, ensuring the funds would go unspent before the end of the fiscal year.

Supporting reports

• Speaker Johnson defended Trump's Iran war as "operation" not war — Speaker Mike Johnson, when asked at what point Congress should step in to address the Iran war, responded that the administration does not consider it an ongoing war but rather an "operation—Operation Epic Fury, which was an epic success." Johnson stated "I don't think we need liberal Marxist Democrats in Congress trying to tell the commander in chief what to do with the military right now," dismissing congressional oversight of military operations.

Supporting reports

• Federal judge blocks Trump's second executive order restricting birthright citizenship — On September 3, 2026, U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman issued a temporary injunction blocking Trump's August 6 executive order that attempted to deny automatic citizenship to children born in the U.S. to foreign diplomats, international organization employees, "alien enemies," and parents engaged in "birth tourism." The order came after the Supreme Court ruled in June that Trump's first birthright citizenship restriction was unconstitutional. Judge Boardman ruled that no presidential order can override the Supreme Court's decision and that the new order risked rescinding citizenship from children already protected by that ruling.

Supporting reports

• Judge Talwani holds hearing on extending block of USPS mail ballot restrictions — U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani of Massachusetts held a hearing on September 3 to determine whether to extend her temporary block of the USPS mail ballot restrictions beyond September 10. Talwani expressed concern that the new system could cause "major disenfranchisement" and questioned why states would want the USPS to stop batches of ballots from their own voters. She noted the rush to implement the system 70 days before the election and questioned why states could not implement such measures themselves if they desired them.

Supporting reports

• Solicitor General Sauer petitions Supreme Court to enforce USPS ballot restrictions — Solicitor General John Sauer filed an emergency petition with the U.S. Supreme Court on September 3, asking the justices to immediately allow the Trump administration to enforce the new USPS restrictions on mail-in ballots. The DOJ argued the restrictions imposed only "modest requirements" on the postal system and did not regulate state election administration, contradicting Judge Talwani's finding that the requirements were significant and likely unconstitutional.

Supporting reports

• US Supreme Court permits Trump White House ballroom construction to continue — The US Supreme Court issued a 5-4 ruling permitting the Trump administration to block a lower court order that had halted above-ground construction of a controversial $400 million White House ballroom. The conservative majority found that the National Trust for Historic Preservation lacked standing to challenge the project, sidestepping the question of whether Congress had authorized the demolition of the historic East Wing. Chief Justice Roberts and three liberal justices dissented, arguing the project likely violated separation of powers and congressional authority over federal property.
• Supreme Court allows Trump White House ballroom construction to proceed — By a 5–4 vote, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the National Trust for Historic Preservation lacked legal standing to challenge Trump's construction of a ballroom at the White House. The majority cited national security considerations as favoring construction. Chief Justice Roberts dissented, writing that the project is "likely unlawful" and that the White House's iconic status requires adherence to legal procedures for alterations. The ruling permits construction to advance before the legality question is resolved.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States v. National Park Service (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-04316 — The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 per curiam ruling, granted the government's application for a stay of the district court's preliminary injunction pending disposition of the government's forthcoming petition for certiorari, holding that the government was likely to show the National Trust lacked Article III standing to challenge the East Wing construction project and the government would likely suffer irreparable harm without a stay, with the balance of equities tipping in its favor. The Court noted it did “not pass upon the legality of the government's East Wing project.” Chief Justice Roberts, joined by Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson, dissented , arguing the National Trust has adequate standing and the construction likely violates 40 U. S. C. §8106's requirement of express congressional authorization for building new structures on federal park land in D.C., which Congress has not necessarily provided.
• Supreme Court releases opinion in National Park Service v. National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States (26A203) — The Supreme Court released an official slip opinion in National Park Service v. National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States. Docket number(s): 26A203.

Supporting reports

• Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel concludes Foreign Service Grievance Board violates Article II — The Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion concluding that the Foreign Service Grievance Board's statutory authority to reverse disciplinary decisions by the Secretary of State violates Article II of the Constitution. The opinion, signed by Assistant Attorney General T. Elliot Gaiser, holds that final decision-making power over Foreign Service personnel must rest with the presidentially accountable Secretary of State, not an independent board. The DOJ advised that the FSGB may continue to hear grievances but the Secretary will retain final authority going forward.

Supporting reports

• Judge Wilson rules California oil pipeline can continue operating under Trump's Defense Production Act order — Federal Judge Stephen Wilson ruled that the Sable offshore oil pipeline off Santa Barbara can continue operating, overriding California state opposition. The Trump administration invoked the Defense Production Act (DPA) in March 2026 to order the pipeline's reopening, citing national security and energy supply needs during the Iran war. Wilson found the DPA order pre-empts conflicting state law, including California's trespass claims. The judge fined Sable $1.5 million for violating a consent decree but allowed operations to proceed under federal oversight rather than state authority.
• Federal court upholds Defense Production Act order requiring Santa Ynez Pipeline operation against California state obstruction — The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California ruled that a Defense Production Act order issued by the Secretary of Energy preempts California state law and environmental challenges to the Santa Ynez Pipeline's operation. The court rejected California's motion for a preliminary injunction, held that federal law bars state trespass claims against pipeline operations, modified an existing consent decree to place pipeline safety oversight under federal rather than state authority, and clarified that state courts cannot enforce injunctions conflicting with federal directives. The Department of Justice announced the ruling as a victory for national energy security.

Supporting reports

• Trump appealed to Supreme Court to override lower courts' rulings on ballroom construction authority — Trump appealed to the Supreme Court seeking to override lower courts' rulings that he lacks the authority to build a ballroom structure without congressional permission. The ballroom project has become a point of controversy, with Trump spending significant time and resources on Washington, D.C. renovation and beautification projects while the administration faces other pressing issues.
• Supreme Court deadline set for Trump ballroom construction intervention — Tomorrow (August 21, 2026) is the deadline for the Supreme Court to intervene on Trump's ballroom construction project. If the Court chooses not to take the case, construction must be halted based on a prior court order.
• Supreme Court temporarily halts lower court order blocking White House ballroom construction — Chief Justice John Roberts signed a temporary order on Friday permitting construction of Trump's controversial White House ballroom to continue while the Supreme Court considers an emergency appeal from the administration. An appeals court had ordered work to stop pending legal review, concluding the project likely requires congressional approval. The administration argued the 90,000-square-foot ballroom and underground military facility are critical to presidential security. Democrats criticized the decision as "rubber stamping Trump's vanity-driven, gilded corruption." The project, already 65% complete after 10 months, is expected to cost over $400 million.

Supporting reports

• US appeals court halts White House ballroom construction, upholds preliminary injunction — The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a 2-1 ruling upholding a preliminary injunction that halts construction of Trump's $400 million White House ballroom project. The court found that the President lacks unilateral authority to demolish and rebuild the White House without Congressional authorization, stating each President is a "temporary tenant, not the owner." The ruling was placed on hold for two weeks to allow the administration to appeal to the Supreme Court.
• Federal Appeals Court Blocks Trump's White House Ballroom Project — A federal appeals court panel ruled against former President Trump's attempt to demolish parts of the White House to construct a massive ballroom, stating that such a project requires congressional approval. The decision halts the unprecedented project, emphasizing the need for legislative oversight in significant alterations to historic government properties.
• National Trust for Historic Preservation lawsuit against White House ballroom construction upheld by lower courts — The National Trust for Historic Preservation sued to halt construction of the White House ballroom, and lower courts ruled in favor of the organization, determining that the ballroom requires congressional approval. An appeals court on August 7, 2026, stated it was aware of no precedent in American history in which a president unilaterally demolished substantial portions of the White House that Congress authorized and taxpayers funded. Despite the court rulings, construction has continued with a 250-person crew working 20 hours daily, seven days a week.
• Federal appeals court blocks Trump's White House ballroom project — A federal appeals court has issued a ruling blocking former President Donald Trump's project to construct a ballroom at the White House. This decision represents a significant setback for Trump, who had been pursuing the project as part of his post-presidency initiatives. The court's ruling halts any further development on the ballroom, pending further legal proceedings or appeals.

Supporting reports

• US Senate rejects war powers resolution limiting Trump's Iran war authority — The US Senate voted 49-50 on Thursday to reject a war powers resolution that would have required President Trump to withdraw US forces from Iran absent explicit congressional authorization. The vote occurred amid escalating military operations, including a fresh wave of US airstrikes on Wednesday in retaliation for an Iranian missile attack on a US base in Jordan. Only three Republicans (Collins, Murkowski, Paul) voted for the measure; one Democrat (Fetterman) voted against it. This marks the second failed attempt in two weeks to legislatively constrain Trump's war powers.

Supporting reports

• Secretary Hegseth provides inconsistent testimony on Iran war objectives — During Senate Appropriations Committee testimony, Senator Jon Ossoff (D-GA) questioned Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth about statements made early in the Iran conflict claiming core objectives were to "destroy the missile threat" and "obliterate Iran's missiles and drones." Hegseth had declared four months earlier that all objectives had been achieved. When pressed, Hegseth declined to confirm whether the missile threat had been defeated, instead redefining "combat ineffective" to mean Iran could not deploy missiles at scale against the United States. Ossoff noted that Hegseth had assured the American people of Iranian surrender on day nine of the war and asked whether his statement that Iran's military had been "destroyed and made combat ineffective" was truthful.
• Senator Murray challenged Hegseth's claim that Iran's missile program is "functionally destroyed." — Senator Patty Murray cited Hegseth's April 8 statement that Iran's missile program was "functionally destroyed" with "launchers, production facilities and existing stockpiles depleted and decimated." She noted that Iran has been firing missiles at U.S. military bases and ships for the past week, contradicting Hegseth's assessment. Hegseth responded only that "Iran is at the weakest point militarily it has ever been in in the past decade."
• Hegseth and Joint Chiefs Chair Caine testified on $1.5 trillion DOD budget request. — Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Joint Chiefs Chair Dan Caine testified before the Senate to defend a $1.5 trillion DOD budget request—nearly double the 2024 budget of $841 billion. Hegseth stated "not funding this department at $1.5 trillion is the greatest threat our nation faces," while Caine acknowledged air power has limits in achieving military objectives.
• Senator Durbin questioned unobligated DOD funding and "woke priorities" pivot. — Senator Dick Durbin asked Hegseth about $75 billion in unobligated DOD funding from the prior year's reconciliation package. Hegseth acknowledged the figure and stated "There's plans and designs on that - move away from all the woke priorities of what the Biden admin was pursuing," indicating funds would be redirected away from diversity and inclusion initiatives.
• Senator Merkley pressed Caine on civilian infrastructure targeting in retaliation. — Senator Jeff Merkley questioned Joint Chiefs Chair Dan Caine on whether the U.S. would target civilian infrastructure in retaliatory strikes, noting that international law prohibits such targeting. Caine responded only that "we have a robust process," declining to provide explicit assurance that civilian infrastructure would be protected.
• Senator Murray questioned necessity of National Guard funding and Caribbean strikes for Iran war. — Senator Patty Murray asked Hegseth why "billions of dollars more for the National Guard and this administration's illegal strikes in the Caribbean" are urgently needed for the Iran war. Hegseth responded by blaming "gross negligence and neglect of the Biden admin" without addressing the substance of her question about the connection between Caribbean operations and Iran conflict.
• Senator Reed challenged Hegseth on war authorization and Strait of Hormuz contingencies. — Senator Jack Reed accused Hegseth of "gross negligence" for failing to fully inform Trump that the Strait of Hormuz could be effectively closed by Iranian action. Reed questioned whether Trump should be "praised for starting war without authority" and creating conditions where "the world economy is suffering tremendously," challenging the administration's failure to obtain congressional authorization.
• Senator Reed questioned whether airstrikes alone will defeat Iran; Caine declined to address ground troop escalation. — Senator Jack Reed asked Joint Chiefs Chair Dan Caine whether airstrikes alone would defeat Iran. Caine acknowledged that "air power has got limits" but declined to address whether ground combat escalation would follow, stating "I think it'd be unhelpful for me to opine on hypotheticals."

Supporting reports

• US District Judge Kathleen Williams voided DOJ's $1.776 billion settlement with Trump — US District Judge Kathleen Williams voided the Department of Justice's $1.776 billion settlement with Trump, finding the litigation constitutionally defective under Article III because Trump, as head of the Executive Branch, controlled both the plaintiff and defendant agencies (Treasury and IRS), making them never genuinely adverse. The judge found no actual case or controversy occurred, no meaningful litigation preceded the settlement, and government lawyers never filed a response or defended the agencies. Williams imposed Rule 11 sanctions and referred one of Trump's attorneys for possible professional discipline.
• Federal Judge Voids Trump's $1.8 Billion IRS Settlement — A federal judge voided Trump's $1.8 billion settlement with the IRS that included an "anti-weaponization fund" and immunity from tax audits, ruling that the president's $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS was filed "to manipulate the judicial process." The judge sanctioned two of Trump's personal attorneys, banning one from practicing in the Southern District of Florida for at least one year, and suggested that acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and associate Attorney General Stan Woodward could face state bar investigations.
• Federal judge nullifies Trump tax-return settlement and sanctions president's lawyers — US District Judge Kathleen Williams in the Southern District of Florida voided a settlement agreement between the Trump administration and the president over a $10 billion lawsuit regarding leaked tax returns. The judge found the lawsuit was filed in bad faith and the settlement was collusive, designed to confer immunity on Trump and his family and create an $1.8 billion slush fund. Williams sanctioned Trump's lawyers, referred two to bar disciplinary proceedings, and blocked one from practicing in the district for one year.
• Federal judge ruled Trump's IRS lawsuit settlement was improper and manufactured — U.S. District Court Judge Kathleen Williams for the Southern District of Florida ruled that Trump, his lawyers, and Department of Justice lawyers had manufactured a fraudulent settlement of Trump's $10 billion lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service. Williams found the lawsuit was brought "for an improper purpose—to gain the imprimatur of judicial legitimacy for a 'settlement' that had no viable basis in law or fact." The settlement was designed to establish a $1.776 billion slush fund for Trump loyalists and to grant Trump, his family, businesses, and associates immunity from prosecution for any tax crimes revealed by audits of tax returns filed before May 19, 2026.
• Federal judge rules against Trump's IRS lawsuit — On July 13, 2026, U.S. District Court Judge Kathleen Williams ruled that Trump and his legal team improperly manufactured a settlement in his $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS, which aimed to create a slush fund for Trump loyalists and grant immunity from prosecution for tax crimes. The judge found the lawsuit lacked a legitimate basis and recommended sanctions against some lawyers involved.
• Judge Williams recommended sanctions against lawyers involved in fraudulent settlement — Judge Kathleen Williams recommended legal sanctions against some of the lawyers involved in the fraudulent IRS settlement and expressed that she was "extremely troubled" by the testimony of Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, which she characterized as "at best, misleading and, at worst, disingenuous."
• E. Jean Carroll Receives Payment from Trump — E. Jean Carroll has received a $5.6 million payment from Donald Trump, confirmed by a court filing. This payment is part of a legal settlement related to a defamation case brought by Carroll against Trump.

Supporting reports

• US Supreme Court rules president can fire independent agency heads at will — On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of President Trump in a case brought by former Federal Trade Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter, who was fired in March. The court overturned a 90-year-old precedent by holding that the president has the right to remove the head of any federal government agency at will. The decision, justified through the unitary executive theory, grants the president sole total control over the executive branch and opens the door to what critics call an "imperial presidency."

Supporting reports

• DOJ argues courts lack authority to block White House ballroom construction — The Trump administration asked the DC Circuit Court of Appeals to reverse a lower court decision blocking construction of a $400 million ballroom and underground bunker at the White House's demolished East Wing. A DOJ lawyer argued that only Congress, not courts, has authority to halt the project, citing national security imperatives. The National Trust for Historic Preservation had sued after Trump ordered demolition without completing required environmental and historic preservation reviews. The Senate had removed $1 billion in Secret Service funding for the project from a spending bill.
• Trump's DOJ argues government can demolish Statue of Liberty without legal recourse — In an appeals court argument over White House ballroom construction, Trump's Department of Justice argued that the federal government has the right to bulldoze the Statue of Liberty and that once demolition is complete, no court would have standing to stop it or provide remedy. When Judge Millett asked if people could obtain an injunction before destruction, the DOJ answered affirmatively that nothing could be done. The DOJ also argued courts cannot stop the ballroom construction even if the administration violated the law, claiming only Congress can intervene.

Supporting reports

• Federal judge issues temporary order blocking "anti-weaponization" fund — A federal judge issued a temporary order preventing the Trump administration from establishing the nearly $1.8 billion "anti-weaponization" fund while a lawsuit seeking to stop it is considered. The fund, which originated from a settlement after Trump sued the IRS over disclosure of his tax returns, had been proposed to compensate individuals involved in the January 6 Capitol attack.
• Federal judge temporarily blocks Trump's $1.8bn Anti-Weaponization Fund — US District Judge Leonie Brinkema issued a temporary restraining order on Friday barring the Trump administration from transferring money into or taking further action on a $1.8 billion "Anti-Weaponization Fund." The fund was created to settle a $10 billion lawsuit filed by Trump and his sons over leaked tax returns, without the government mounting a legal defense. The order preserves the status quo pending legal arguments in a challenge brought by Democracy Forward and other plaintiffs, preventing irreversible disbursement of taxpayer funds.
• Judge Leonie Brinkema temporarily blocked Anti-Weaponization Fund — U.S. District Judge Leonie M. Brinkema for the Eastern District of Virginia issued a temporary order halting the Department of Justice from creating, operating, or distributing funds from the so-called Anti-Weaponization Fund, a $1.776 billion slush fund established by the Trump administration to compensate those convicted of crimes related to efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election. The order prohibits the administration from transferring money to the fund, considering claims for payment, or paying out any funds. Brinkema scheduled a hearing on the case for June 12. The plaintiffs challenging the fund are people and entities prosecuted or threatened by the Trump administration who argue they are not being treated equally with Trump loyalists in compensation claims.
• Motion granted — Floyd v. Department of Justice (E.D. Va.) 1:26-cv-01399 — Judge Brinkema enjoined Defendants from taking any action related to the creation or operation of the Anti-Weaponization Fund, including transferring money to the Fund, considering submitted claims, or disbursing any funds. Judge Brinkema also denied the Plaintiffs' motion for expedited briefing and granted the Defendants' request for additional time.
• Federal Judge Brinkema temporarily blocked Trump's $1.776 billion fund for fraudsters and insurrectionists — Federal Judge Brinkema issued a temporary block on any further action involving Trump's $1.776 billion fund, preserving the status quo while litigation moves forward. A hearing on the matter is scheduled for June 12, 2026. The fund was characterized as being for "fraudsters and insurrectionists."
• Federal judge temporarily blocked Trump's $1.8 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund — U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema in Virginia issued a temporary restraining order preventing the Department of Justice from taking further action on the creation or operation of the Anti-Weaponization Fund, a $1.8 billion taxpayer-funded initiative. The order blocks the transfer of money to the fund, consideration of claims, and disbursement of funds while plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction is pending. Judge Brinkema scheduled a hearing for June 12 to hear further arguments on the case.
• Federal Judge Temporarily Blocks Trump's $1.776 Billion "Anti-Weaponization Fund" — A federal judge issued a temporary restraining order blocking the Trump administration from creating or operating a planned $1.776 billion "Anti-Weaponization Fund" designed to compensate individuals who claim they were wrongfully targeted by the government, potentially including those Trump pardoned for Jan. 6 involvement. The order prohibits consideration of submitted claims and disbursement of funds pending a June 12 hearing.

Supporting reports

• Judge Christopher Cooper ordered removal of Trump's name from Kennedy Center — U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper of the District of Columbia ordered the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts to remove Trump's name from the building, all official materials, and signage within fourteen days. Cooper also blocked the Kennedy Center's plan to close for two years. The judge affirmed that Congress, not the Trump administration, has authority over the Kennedy Center's name and operations. Cooper found that the Kennedy Center's board had agreed to the closure without legal counsel and that the executive director had proposed the shutdown within minutes of assuming the role.
• Judge Cooper issued ruling requiring Trump's name removed from Kennedy Center — On May 29, 2026, Judge Christopher R. Cooper of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that Trump's name must be removed from the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, finding that Congress alone has authority to change the center's name and that the board's renaming violated statutory restrictions on memorials. Cooper set a midnight June 12 deadline for removal of all signage, merchandise, and related materials bearing Trump's name.
• Federal judge ordered Trump's name removed from Kennedy Center — U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper in Washington, D.C., declared that the Kennedy Center's Board of Trustees lacked authority to rename the facility for President Trump. The judge ruled that only Congress can change the Center's official name under federal statute (20 U.S.C. 76h-76s), and voided the Board's December 18, 2025 resolution to rename it the "Donald J. Trump and John F. Kennedy Memorial Center." The court found the defendants violated the Kennedy Center's organic statute by installing signage, altering the website, and issuing materials bearing Trump's name.

Supporting reports

• Department of Justice argued for unlimited presidential firing power — Karen Lesperance, a lawyer for the Department of Justice, told Judge Jesse Furman of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York that the government's position is that the President has the power to fire anyone, even if doing so for political reasons. The statement was made in the case of Maurene Comey, daughter of former FBI Director James Comey, who was fired from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York. When Judge Furman asked whether there were any limits to presidential firing power—such as whether the President could fire people to create an "all-white executive branch" or "all-Black" executive branch—Lesperance avoided answering the question. Comey's lawyer characterized the Justice Department's position as a "novel and breathtaking theory about the scope of" presidential power.

Supporting reports

• Court of International Trade ruled Trump's global tariffs illegal — The Court of International Trade in New York found Trump's 10% global tariffs, imposed after the Supreme Court declared his "Liberation Day" tariffs of April 2025 unconstitutional, to be illegal. Trump is expected to appeal the ruling. On the same day, Trump threatened to impose "much higher" tariffs on the European Union if it does not approve a trade agreement with the U.S. by July 4, 2026.

Supporting reports

• Trump signs bipartisan DHS funding bill, ending 75-day shutdown — President Trump signed bipartisan legislation on Thursday ending a 75-day shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security, the longest agency shutdown in U.S. history. The Republican-controlled House approved the measure in a swift voice vote, funding much of DHS including the Secret Service and TSA, but explicitly excluding immigration enforcement agencies (ICE and CBP). The White House had warned that emergency funds were nearly exhausted and that staffing shortages threatened airport operations. A separate $70 billion immigration enforcement budget was advanced through a Republican-only reconciliation process.
• Became Law: Homeland Security and Further Additional Continuing Appropriations Act, 2026 — Congress passed and the President signed H.R. 7147, a continuing appropriations measure funding the Department of Homeland Security and related agencies through fiscal 2026. The bill became Public Law 119-86 on April 30, 2026. Continuing resolutions maintain federal operations when regular appropriations bills are not enacted, preserving agency funding and preventing government shutdowns.
• US Congress passes 45-day extension of FISA Section 702 warrantless surveillance authority — The US House of Representatives voted to extend Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act for 45 days, avoiding a statutory lapse at midnight on April 30. The extension follows a 10-day stopgap passed earlier in April. Republican Speaker Mike Johnson refused to include substantive reforms demanded by progressive Democrats and hardline Republicans, particularly a warrant requirement for surveilling Americans' communications. Privacy advocates and reform-minded lawmakers criticized the decision as circumventing democratic process and constitutional protections.
• House Republicans ended 76-day Department of Homeland Security shutdown — After a 76-day shutdown, House Republicans passed a Senate measure to fund the Department of Homeland Security while withholding funds from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection. The Senate had passed the bill unanimously on March 27, but Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) refused to take it up until April 30 because it aligned with Democratic priorities.
• House Passes Partial DHS Funding Bill — The U.S. House of Representatives passed a partial funding bill for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), likely ending the longest partial government shutdown in U.S. history. This legislative action aims to restore funding and operations for DHS, impacting national security and federal employees.

Supporting reports

• Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche filed motion to dissolve preliminary injunction on ballroom construction — Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche filed a motion late on April 28, 2026, seeking to dissolve the court's preliminary injunction blocking construction of the White House ballroom. The motion contained seven pages of argument that the lack of a ballroom endangers Trump, and opened with dismissive language attacking the National Trust for Historic Preservation's name and legitimacy. The motion did not address the court's separate decision not to stop construction of an underground bunker beneath the proposed addition.