Trump Action Archive

Supporting reports

• Federal Election Commission Cancels Open Meeting — The Federal Election Commission (FEC) announced the cancellation of its open meeting scheduled for June 26, 2025. The meeting was to be held in a hybrid format at 1050 First Street NE, Washington, DC, and virtually. The cancellation was made public through a notice in the Federal Register, as required by the Government in the Sunshine Act. No further details on the reason for the cancellation were provided.

Supporting reports

• Trump administration delays farm trade report — The Trump administration delayed and redacted a farm trade report that predicted an increase in the trade deficit, a finding that was reportedly "disliked" by officials.
• Concerns over data suppression in U.S. economic reporting — Reports indicate that the Trump administration delayed and altered a USDA report that was set to reveal increased deficits. Additionally, personnel cuts at government statistical agencies have made it more difficult to collect accurate economic data. This situation raises concerns about the transparency and reliability of economic information, which is crucial for informed policymaking.

Supporting reports

• Pentagon investigates Defense Secretary's aides over Signal messages — The Pentagon is investigating whether aides to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth were instructed to delete Signal messages, potentially linked to Elon Musk's recent fallout with the Trump administration. This investigation follows Hegseth's arrangement for Musk to receive a top-secret military briefing, which Trump halted. The inquiry raises questions about accountability and transparency within the government.

Supporting reports

• Remand ordered — CREW v. DOGE (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00511 — The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 to stay the lower courts' action, and also to treat the petition as a writ for certiorari. The Court ruled that the district court could not order the Government, in discovery, “to disclose the content of intra-Executive Branch USDS recommendations and whether those recommendations were followed.” On remand, the Court of Appeals is instructed to narrow the discovery order with deference to internal Executive Branch communications.
• Supreme Court grants stay in U.S. Doge Service v. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington — The Supreme Court granted a stay in the case of U.S. Doge Service, et al., Applicants v. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. This decision allows the Department of Government Efficiency to proceed with its actions that were previously challenged by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. The stay was granted despite dissent from Justices Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson, indicating a division within the Court on this matter. The stay effectively pauses the lower court's ruling against the Department of Government Efficiency, pending further litigation.
• U.S. Doge Service v. CREW: Certiorari Granted and Stay Issued — The Supreme Court granted a stay and treated the application as a petition for a writ of certiorari in the case of U.S. Doge Service, et al. v. CREW. The Court vacated the D.C. Circuit's order denying a writ of mandamus and remanded the case for further consideration. The Court found that the District Court's discovery order requiring disclosure of intra-Executive Branch recommendations was not appropriately tailored, citing separation of powers concerns. The stay on the District Court's orders will remain pending further proceedings.

Supporting reports

• House Oversight Committee Democrats Demand Epstein Files — The House Oversight Committee Democrats formally demanded that FBI Director Kash Patel and Attorney General Pam Bondi release all files and evidence related to the Jeffrey Epstein case. This demand follows posts by Elon Musk suggesting former President Trump was implicated in the FBI's Epstein files. The committee noted that Bondi had promised to release these documents three months ago and questioned why no additional documents have been released since February 27, 2025.

Supporting reports

• Trump administration requests Congress to rescind $9.4bn in funding — The Trump administration formally requested Congress to rescind $9.4 billion in already approved funding, targeting foreign aid and public broadcasters such as NPR and PBS. This move follows an executive order signed by Trump in May, which cut federal funding to these media organizations. The rescission process aims to retrieve funds from programs that have already received them. The House and Senate will now consider the request, with Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson expressing support for the cuts. The White House budget director indicated that more rescission packages could follow if this effort succeeds.
• Trump requests Congress to cancel appropriated spending — The White House requested Congress to cancel $9.4 billion in already-appropriated spending identified as wasteful by the Department of Government Efficiency, targeting programs like public media and international aid.

Supporting reports

• US Veterans Affairs restricts publication without clearance — Senior officials at the US Department of Veterans Affairs have mandated that VA physicians and scientists must seek clearance from political appointees before publishing in medical journals or speaking publicly. This directive was communicated via emails from Curt Cashour, the VA’s assistant secretary for public and intergovernmental affairs, and John Bartrum, a senior adviser to the VA secretary. The move follows the publication of a perspective piece by VA pulmonologists in the New England Journal of Medicine, which criticized the impact of staff reductions on veterans' health care.

Supporting reports

• Pentagon Press Access Restricted — Gabrielle Cuccia, a correspondent for OAN, reported being fired after criticizing Pete Hegseth's restrictions on press access at the Pentagon. Cuccia claimed that the Pentagon briefing room doors were locked, a protocol not previously in place. Hegseth has not conducted any press briefings as Secretary.

Supporting reports

• Trump Hosts Crypto Dinner at Country Club — Former President Donald Trump hosted a crypto-themed dinner at his country club near Washington, D.C., where attendees reportedly spent a combined $394 million on a cryptocurrency associated with Trump. The event, which included the use of a government helicopter and the presidential seal, has raised concerns about conflicts of interest and potential corruption. The White House has refused to disclose the guest list, but social media posts have identified some attendees, including crypto billionaire Justin Sun, who spent $75 million and is under investigation by the SEC.
• Trump Hosts “Pay-to-Play” Dinner with Cryptocurrency Investors — Trump hosted a dinner at his Virginia golf club for top investors in his personal cryptocurrency, raising concerns about potential influence on US financial regulations. This event highlights issues of transparency and ethics in political fundraising.

Supporting reports

• EPA Notice of Availability of Environmental Impact Statements — The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued a notice of availability for several Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) filed between May 5 and May 12, 2025. This includes final and draft EISs for projects in Hawaii, Nevada, California, South Carolina, and Louisiana. The notice provides details on the review and comment periods for each EIS, as well as contact information for further inquiries. The EPA's notice ensures public access to these documents, facilitating transparency and public participation in environmental decision-making processes.

Supporting reports

• Election Assistance Commission Seeks Comments on Voting System Information Collection — The U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) announced a request for public comments on proposed information collection forms related to voting system manufacturer registration, testing applications, anomaly reporting, and root cause analysis. This initiative, part of the EAC's Testing and Certification Program, aims to enhance the quality of voting systems used in federal elections. The program is voluntary and mandated by the Help America Vote Act of 2002. Comments are due by July 15, 2025.
• Election Assistance Commission Seeks Comment on Financial Report Collection — The U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) announced a request for public comment on the reinstatement of the EAC Federal Financial Report (EAC-FFR) information collection. This effort aims to reduce paperwork burdens and standardize financial reporting for grants under the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). Comments are due by July 18, 2025. The EAC-FFR is used to monitor and report on the use of federal funds by grantees, ensuring compliance with federal requirements.
• Election Assistance Commission Seeks OMB Approval for Budget Expenditures Worksheet — The U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) has requested approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to extend the information collection for the EAC Budget Expenditures Worksheet (EAC-BEW). This worksheet is used to collect budget and expense data for the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) grants. The EAC aims to ensure grantees meet project goals and reduce administrative burdens through standardized reporting. Public comments are invited until July 18, 2025.

Supporting reports

• Case update — Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Kennedy (D. Mass.) 1:25-cv-10814 — The court found that it has subject matter jurisdiction over the action.
• Case update — Democracy Forward Foundation v. U.S. Department of the Treasury (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00684 — All Defendants answered the complaint and the Department of Education and Small Business Administration filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings .
• Case update — National Education Association v. U.S. Department of Education (D.N.H.) 1:25-cv-00091 — Plaintiffs amended their complaint .
• Case update — PFLAG, Inc. v. Trump (D. Md.) 8:25-cv-00337 — The Fourth Circuit placed the case in abeyance pending the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Skrmetti , No. 23-477.
• Case update — Rhode Island Latino Arts v. National Endowment for the Arts (D.R.I.) 1:25-cv-00079 — Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint , which included updates on the changes to NEA policy that took place following the commencement of the lawsuit.
• Dismissal entered — Lentini v. Department of Government Efficiency (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00164 — Plaintiffs American Health Association, American Federation of Teachers, Minority Veterans of America, Votevets Action Fund, Center for Auto Safety Inc., and Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington voluntarily dismissed their claims without prejudice. Judge Cobb clarified that the remaining consolidated case, Lentini v. DOGE, would proceed.
• Motion granted — D.B.U. v. Trump (D. Colo.) 1:25-cv-01163 — The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals granted the appellants' motion for voluntary dismissal of their April 23 appeal.
• Motion granted — Mahdawi v. Trump (D. Vt.) 2:25-cv-00389 — Petitioner filed a motion as to the conditions of his release, which was granted on May 14. This order allows Petitioner to travel to New York State for educational purposes, to meet with his lawyers, or as otherwise ordered by the court.
• Motion granted — National Treasury Employees Union v. Russell Vought (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00381 — The D.C. Circuit granted Defendants' voluntary dismissal, terminating the consolidation with 25-5091 .
• Motion to dismiss decided — Make the Road New York et al v. Kristi Noem (Acting Secretary of Homeland Security) et al (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00190 — Plaintiffs filed a response to the motion to dismiss , refuting the Defendants' arguments and further arguing that the allegations supporting the Plaintiffs' complaint are plausible.
• Motion to dismiss decided — State of California v. U.S. Department of Education (D. Mass.) 1:25-cv-10548 — Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction or, in the alternative, to transfer the case to the Court of Federal Claims.
• Motion to dismiss decided — The Intercept v. DOGE (S.D.N.Y.) 1:25-cv-02404 — Plaintiff responded in opposition to Defendants' motion to dismiss.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — American Educational Research Association v. Department of Education (D. Md.) 8:25-cv-01230 — Defendants filed a memorandum opposing Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction and proposed an alternative order on the motion.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — American Public Health Association v. National Institutes of Health (D. Mass.) 1:25-cv-10787 — Defendants filed an opposition to Plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction, claiming that the Court lacks jurisdiction over Plaintiffs' claims, the Plaintiffs are unlikely to succeed on the merits, they are not certain, imminent, and irreparable, and an injunction would be contrary to the public interest.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — Planned Parenthood of Greater New York v. Department of Health and Human Services (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-01334 — Plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary injunction to prevent the implementation of HHS's new requirements on certain TPP recipients.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — State of New York v. Trump (D. Mass.) 1:25-cv-11221 — Plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary injunction, requesting that the Court enjoin the defendant federal agencies from implementing or giving effect to the directive.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — Taylor v. Trump (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-01161 1:25-cv-03742 — Plaintiffs filed a reply memorandum in further support for their motion for a preliminary injunction, claiming that the Defendants stopped the lawful process to impose an extra-judicial punishment. Plaintiffs claim that they are likely to prevail on the merits, they will suffer irreparable harm if the court does not intervene, and the balance of equities and public interest weighs heavily in their favor.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — United States Conference of Catholic Bishops v. Department of State et al. (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00465 — Plaintiffs filed their opposition to Defendants' motion to dismiss, stressing that the court's denial of the preliminary injunction does not preclude Plaintiffs from seeking other forms of equitable relief.
• Summary judgment ruling — Amica Center for Immigrant Rights et al. v. U.S. Department of Justice (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00298 — Plaintiffs filed a memorandum in opposition to Defendants' motion for summary judgment and a motion for preliminary injunction.
• Summary judgment ruling — Oregon v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (Ct. Intl. Trade) 1:25-cv-00077 — Defendants filed a brief in response to Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment. Defendants requested that the court deny the motion for summary judgement arguing that the Plaintiff States nor the V.O.S. Plaintiffs can show Trump acted outside of his authority in imposing tariffs under the IEEPA. On May 13, Plaintiffs filed a supplemental response to their motion for summary judgment.
• Summary judgment ruling — Slaughter and Bedoya v. Trump (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00909 — Defendants filed a reply in support of their cross-motion for summary judgment, alleging that the restrictions on the removal of FTC Commissioners are unconstitutional and that the Plaintiffs are not entitled to the relief sought.
• Summary judgment ruling — Susman Godfrey LLP v. Executive Office of the President (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-01107 — Defendants filed their motion to dismiss Susman's amended complaint, for the same reasons contained in their previous motion to dismiss. On that same day, Susman filed a motion for summary judgment , requesting that the court declare the EO unlawful and enjoin Defendants from implementing or enforcing the EO, for the same reasons contained in their previous motion for summary judgment.
• Case update — President and Fellows of Harvard College v. US Department of Health and Human Services (D. Mass.) 1:25-cv-11048 — Plaintiff submitted an amended complaint adding to its filings. The amended complaint includes: additional Defendants, the US Department of Agriculture, the Secretary of Agriculture, the US Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development; and additional factual allegations relating to letters received in May from the National Institutes of Health, the US Department of Agriculture, the US Department of Energy, the National Science Foundation, and the US Department of Education.
• Case update — Washington State Association of Head Start and Early Childhood Assistance and Education Program, et al, v. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., et al (W.D. Was — Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint , which included: the Office of Head Start as an additional defendant; supplemental facts related to the Pennsylvania and Wisconsin Head Start members' language, disability, family support services and their impact on students and their families; supplemental facts related to the HHS-directed layoff and other subsequent layoffs in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, additional facts related to the purported termination of Head Start research projects; and additional allegations related to the delayed decisionmaking on the status renewal of Head Start programs.
• Dismissal entered — Iverson v. New York (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-01353 — The Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the case because he had received a “specific license” that mooted the relief requested. Judge Christopher Cooper ordered the dismissal that same day.
• Motion granted — Sanchez Puentes v. Garite (W.D. Tex.) 3:25-cv-00127 — Judge Briones granted the government's request to stay the district-wide relief granted in the April 25 order pending appeal.
• Motion to dismiss decided — Zacarias Matos v. Venegas (S.D. Tex.) 1:25-cv-00057 — Following a joint status report and motion to dismiss request, the court ordered the case dismissed without prejudice.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — Rona v. Trump (S.D.N.Y.) 1:25-cv-03114 — Defendants filed their opposition to Plaintiffs' preliminary injunction motion.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — State of California v. Trump (N.D. Cal.) 3:25-cv-03372 — Plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary injunction, requesting that the court restrain Agency Defendants from implementing or enforcing the IEEPA Tariff EOs.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — State of Maryland v. Corporation for National and Community Service (D. Md.) 1:25-cv-01363 — Defendants responded in opposition to Plaintiffs' preliminary injunction motion. In the event the preliminary injunction is granted, Defendants requested that it be limited to only the Plaintiff States.
• Ruling vacated — AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition v. United States Department of State (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00400 — Judge Ali denied the Defendants' motion for an indicative ruling and vacated the administrative stay.
• Motion denied — Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto v. United States Department of Health and Human Services (N.D. Cal.) 3:25-cv-02847 — The Ninth Circuit denied Defendants' motion for a stay, and the government petitioned for an en banc review on May 28.
• Motion denied — CREW v. DOGE (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00511 — The D.C. Circuit dissolved the administrative stay and denied the defendants' petition for a writ of mandamus.
• Motion to dismiss decided — Chung v. Trump (S.D.N.Y.) 1:25-cv-02412 — Defendants replied in support of their motion to dismiss, further emphasizing their belief that the court lacks jurisdiction over Chung's claim.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — American Oversight v. Hegseth (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00883 — Plaintiffs filed a reply in support of its motion for a preliminary injunction.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — King County v. Turner (W.D. Wash.) 2:25-cv-00814 — Defendants filed their opposition to Plaintiffs' preliminary injunction motion, reiterating their belief that the court does not have jurisdiction over the matter.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — Schlacter v. U.S. Department of State (D. Md.) 1:25-cv-01344 — Plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary injunction and supporting memorandum .
• Summary judgment ruling — Aviel v. Gor et al (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00778 — Plaintiff filed a consolidated reply in support of their motion for summary judgment and opposition to Defendants' cross-motion for summary judgment.
• Case update — Ireland v. Hegseth (D.N.J.) 1:25-cv-01918 — Plaintiffs move to voluntarily dismiss this action without prejudice, which the court grants.
• Case update — Oregon v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (Ct. Intl. Trade) 1:25-cv-00077 — State Attorney General of California submitted an amicus brief in support of Plaintiffs.
• Dismissal entered — Gribbon et al. v. Musk (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00422 — Plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the action.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — American Federation of Government Employees, et al. v. Office of Personnel Management et al (S.D.N.Y.) 1:25-cv-01237 — Defendants filed their opposition to Plaintiffs' preliminary injunction motion, arguing Plaintiffs' submissions in support of their motion rely on inadmissible evidence.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — Open Technology Fund v. Kari Lake (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00840 — Plaintiff filed a reply in support of its preliminary injunction motion, claiming that the court has jurisdiction, Plaintiff is likely to suffer irreparable harm without immediate relief, and the balance of equities and public interest favor granting the preliminary injunction.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — Project on Government Oversight, Inc. v. Trump (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00527 — Plaintiff filed a renewed motion for a preliminary injunction and supporting memorandum . Plaintiff requested that the court order Defendants to collect, retain, and preserve their records pursuant to a FRA-compliant recordkeeping policy.
• Case update — Abrego Garcia v. Noem (D. Md.) 8:25-cv-00951 — Following a hearing, Judge Xinis ordered the unsealing of Secretary Rubio's Declaration asserting state secrets and for the government to supplement the Declaration by May 23.
• Case update — Center for Taxpayer Rights v. IRS (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00457 — Plaintiff filed an amended complaint .
• Case update — Community Economic Development Center of Southeastern Massachusetts v. Bessent (D. Mass.) 1:25-cv-12822 — Plaintiffs amended their complaint to be a class action complaint for others similarly situated.
• Case update — Doe et al v. EEOC (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-01124 — State Attorneys General submitted an amicus brief in support of Plaintiffs.
• Case update — Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-01270 — Plaintiffs filed an unopposed motion for a renewed preliminary injunction.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — Jones v. Trump (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00401 — Plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary injunction, on the grounds that the DEIA ban and mass layoffs are causing the suspension and degradation of services and will cause irreparable harm to Plaintiffs.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — Washington State Association of Head Start and Early Childhood Assistance and Education Program, et al, v. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr — The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals granted the joint motion to stay the appellate proceedings until the resolution of United States v. Skrmetti or until further order from the court. SCOTUS issued its decision in Skrmetti on June 18, holding that the Tennessee law prohibiting medical treatments for transgender minors is not subject to heightened scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and satisfies rational basis review.
• Stay motion decided — State of Washington et al. v. Donald J. Trump et al. (W.D. Wash.) 2:25-cv-00244 — The D.C. Circuit, in a 2-1 decision, granted the Defendants' stay pending appeal , which was extended until Oct. 27, 2025.
• Stay pending appeal decided — National Treasury Employees Union v Trump (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00935 — Defendants filed their opposition to Plaintiffs' motion for a summary judgment, stressing Plaintiffs lack standing to bring the lawsuit.

Supporting reports

• House Republicans Block Investigation into Hegseth's Use of Signal — House Republicans blocked an effort by Democrats to investigate Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s use of Signal by adding a provision into a rule that prevents votes on "resolutions of inquiry." This move limits congressional oversight of executive actions.

Supporting reports

• Motion to dismiss decided — Centro de Trabajadores Unidos v. Bessent (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00677 — Defendants replied to Plaintiffs' opposition to their motion to dismiss, emphasizing their belief that Plaintiffs' alleged harms are conjectural and hypothetical.
• Motion to dismiss decided — Pacito v. Trump (W.D. Wash.) 2:25-cv-00255 — Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the first supplemental complaint, alleging a variety of both substantive and procedural shortcomings in the Plaintiffs' first supplemental complaint.
• Motion to dismiss decided — The Intercept v. DOGE (S.D.N.Y.) 1:25-cv-02404 — Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the case arguing Plaintiff failed to plausibly allege that USDS and DOGE are “agencies” subject to FOIA.

Supporting reports

• Elon Musk's FAA project involves nondisclosure agreements — Staffers for Elon Musk's "Department of Government Efficiency" are working on a multimillion-dollar communications project called "Project Lift" at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). FAA employees involved in the project have been required to sign nondisclosure agreements, limiting transparency about the project's details and objectives.
• Trump Administration Grants Classified Network Access to Musk's Team — NPR reported that two members of Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency were issued accounts on classified networks containing top-secret details about the country's nuclear weapons. This access raises significant security and oversight concerns.

Supporting reports

• Summary judgment ruling — Protect Democracy Project v. OMB (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-01111 — Protect Democracy withdrew its April 22 motion and filed a motion for a preliminary injunction or summary judgment in the alternative. In its memorandum in support of the updated motion, Protect Democracy requests that the Defendants be enjoined from refusing to publicly post apportionments of OMB.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — Protect Democracy Project v. OMB (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-01111 — Defendants filed their opposition to Protect Democracy's motion for a preliminary injunction. Protect Democracy replied in further support of its motion on May 5. Defendants filed a sur-reply to Protect Democracy's preliminary injunction motion on May 5 as well.

Supporting reports

• White House issued promotional release claiming week 13 achievements — The White House published a promotional release titled "Week 13 Wins" listing claimed accomplishments across manufacturing, border enforcement, foreign policy, prescription drug pricing, environmental deregulation, government procurement, Title IX investigations, and DEI program dissolutions. The document attributes announcements to private companies (Abbott, NVIDIA, Honda, Ellwood Group), border enforcement statistics, diplomatic actions, executive orders, and agency investigations. No new instruments are formally issued in this document; it aggregates and promotes actions stated to have occurred during the week of April 11–18, 2025.

Supporting reports

• DOGE claims $130 billion in savings but faces verification challenges — DOGE announced on its website that it has saved $130 billion since Trump's inauguration, averaging approximately $2 billion per day. However, Market Watch reported that this figure is significantly lower than the $4 billion per day that Elon Musk pledged to cut in a Fox News interview. Reporters and analysts have difficulty confirming DOGE's claims, and erroneous claims and examples of claimed savings have been documented as disappearing from the list of purported cost-saving cutbacks.
• DOGE removes federal identification numbers from website source code — Bloomberg reported that DOGE removed federal identification numbers from its website's source code, making it particularly difficult for fact-checkers and analysts to identify specifically which grants and contracts the agency is referring to when claiming savings. This action makes it difficult or impossible to verify which vendors the government has targeted for cuts.

Supporting reports

• Protect Democracy Project sued OMB over removal of federal funding database — The non-profit organization Protect Democracy Project sued the Office of Management and Budget and its director Russell Vought for removing a database on the office's website that shows how federal funding is disbursed to agencies. The lawsuit challenges the removal of transparency information.
• OMB removes federal spending transparency tracker; watchdog group sues for restoration — Russell Vought, director of the Office of Management and Budget, deactivated a public tracker that disclosed how the federal government spends congressionally appropriated funds. Vought justified the removal by claiming the tool required disclosure of "sensitive, predecisional and deliberative information." The non-profit watchdog group Protect Democracy filed suit in US District Court in Washington DC on Monday, alleging the removal violated federal law requiring OMB to publicly post apportionment documents. The Government Accountability Office also challenged Vought's rationale, noting that apportionments are legally binding decisions and cannot be predecisional. The suit seeks a court declaration that the removal was unlawful and restoration of the tracker.
• Protect Democracy Project files lawsuit against DOGE and OMB over federal funding transparency — The Protect Democracy Project filed a lawsuit against the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and OMB Director Ross Vought, alleging that the Trump administration is violating the law by taking down a government website that displayed how federal funding is disbursed to agencies. The complaint states that the website "went dark, without explanation" and argues that Congress mandated transparency for apportionments to prevent abuses of power and strengthen oversight.

Supporting reports

• Trump announces $1 trillion military budget for fiscal year 2026 — On April 7, President Trump announced plans to propose a $1 trillion military budget for fiscal year 2026, representing a $107 billion increase from current spending. Trump stated during a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that the increase was necessary to strengthen U.S. military capacity. This reverses Trump's February position that military spending of nearly $1 trillion was excessive and should be reduced through arms-control negotiations with China and Russia. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth endorsed the proposal.
• White House warned Trump would veto tariff approval bill — The White House warned that Trump would veto a bill that would require approval from Congress to impose new tariffs.
• CNBC reported false rumor of Trump tariff pause, causing market volatility — CNBC reported a false rumor that Trump would announce a 90-day pause on tariffs after Fox host Brian Kilmeade asked White House Economic Advisor Kevin Hassett if Trump would consider such a pause. The rumor caused stock markets to rally sharply mid-morning. When the White House denied the report as "fake news," markets declined again. The false report originated from Hassett's non-committal response that "the president is gonna decide what the president is gonna decide."
• White House denied tariff pause report as fake news — The White House social media account responded to the CNBC report of a tariff pause by stating "Wrong. Fake News. Not only did Director Hassett not say this, POTUS has been clear - 'it all has to change, but especially with CHINA!!!'" The denial clarified that Trump has not agreed to any tariff pause.
• Peter Navarro stated tariffs are not a negotiation but a national emergency response — White House trade advisor Peter Navarro told Fox News that the tariffs represent "a national emergency based on a trade deficit that's gotten out of control because of cheating," explicitly rejecting the characterization of tariffs as a negotiating tactic. This statement contradicted other administration messaging suggesting tariffs were leverage for trade negotiations.
• Trump posted on Truth Social that his policies will never change — President Trump posted on Truth Social stating "MY POLICIES WILL NEVER CHANGE," signaling that tariff policy would not be reversed despite market turmoil and economic concerns. This statement contradicted earlier messaging that tariffs were negotiating tactics.
• White House issued fact sheet stating tariffs remain in effect until trade deficit threat is resolved — The White House released a fact sheet claiming that tariffs would remain in effect "until such a time as President Trump determines that the threat posed by the trade deficit and underlying nonreciprocal treatment is satisfied, resolved, or mitigated." This statement indicated tariffs were not temporary negotiating tools but permanent policy subject only to Trump's subjective determination.
• Trump announces 90-day pause on reciprocal tariffs — Hours after reciprocal tariffs took effect on April 9, 2025, Trump announced a 90-day pause on them, with the exception of China, where he increased tariffs to 125%. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt characterized the move as part of Trump's negotiating strategy, referencing "The Art of the Deal." The pause came after stock markets had fallen sharply and amid widespread economic warnings.
• Trump announces 90-day tariff pause with modified rates, triggering market volatility and insider-trading allegations — On Wednesday, April 9, Trump announced a 90-day pause on his tariff plan, replacing his original broad tariffs with a 10% blanket rate on most countries through July, while raising China tariffs to 145% effective immediately. The announcement triggered a historic market rally Wednesday afternoon, followed by sharp sell-offs Thursday as economists warned the effective tariff rate was worse than worst-case scenarios. Democrats alleged possible insider trading and market manipulation; Republicans praised the move as strategic negotiation.
• Trump reversed course on tariffs with 90-day pause — After tanking the stock market, Trump reversed course on his "Liberation Day" tariffs. He announced a 90-day pause on a steep hike in tariffs on most countries, except for China, which he said would now face duties of 125%.
• Senators and representatives questioned insider trading related to tariff announcements. — Multiple members of Congress raised concerns about potential insider trading in the hours before Trump's tariff announcement. Senator Adam Schiff stated he would investigate whether Trump and associates tipped off friends to profit from market movements. Senator Bernie Sanders expressed skepticism that people with advance knowledge of the tariff reversal did not profit. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez called for disclosure of stock purchases made in the prior 48 hours and urged a ban on congressional insider trading. Senator Chris Murphy characterized the situation as "an insider trading scandal brewing."
• Trump's approval rating fell to 41% in new Quinnipiac poll. — A new Quinnipiac poll showed President Trump's approval rating at 41% with 53% disapproval. CNN analyst Harry Enten noted that only two presidents have had net negative approval ratings at this point in their term: Donald Trump in his first term and Donald Trump in his second term.
• White House refused to release list of 75 countries allegedly requesting tariff deals. — President Trump claimed that leaders of 75 countries had called "kissing my ass" to request trade deals, prompting him to lift most tariffs. When NBC News requested the list of these 75 countries, the White House refused to release it. The refusal raised questions about the veracity of Trump's claim and the basis for the tariff reversal.
• 30-year mortgage rates surge to 7.1% — The average mortgage rate on 30-year fixed-rate mortgages surged 1.3 basis points to 7.1% on this date. Matthew Graham, COO of Mortgage News Daily, characterized the week as the worst for bond markets in terms of 10-year yield jumps for anyone whose career began after 1981, indicating severe market volatility tied to administration policy.

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.

Supporting reports

• Trump dismissed Atlantic report on classified messaging breach — When asked about Jeffrey Goldberg's Atlantic article detailing the classified messaging breach, President Trump stated he knew nothing about the incident and dismissed The Atlantic as "a magazine that's going out of business." Trump declined to engage substantively with the security breach allegations.
• Secretary Hegseth denied texting war plans, contradicted by Signal messages — Asked by a reporter about the Signal group chat, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said "Nobody was texting war plans." This claim was directly contradicted by the chain of messages later published by The Atlantic, which included exact timings of strikes and information about planes and drones used—information that was highly classified at the time.
• Secretary of Defense Hegseth and administration officials denied classified information was shared in Signal chat — Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, and President Trump made public statements asserting that no classified information was shared in the Signal group chat discussing Yemen military strikes. Hegseth told reporters "Nobody was texting war plans." Gabbard testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee that "There was no classified material that was shared in that Signal group." Ratcliffe stated his communications "did not include classified information." Trump told reporters the information "wasn't classified." These statements were later contradicted when The Atlantic published screenshots of the messages showing precise attack details.
• The Atlantic published screenshots of classified Signal messages discussing Yemen military strikes — The Atlantic published screenshots of the Signal group chat messages in which senior administration officials discussed and planned military strikes against Houthi targets in Yemen. The messages revealed that Secretary of Defense Hegseth had uploaded precise attack details including timing and targeting information before the operation commenced. The publication followed administration officials' repeated denials that classified information had been shared, and came after The Atlantic's reporters determined there was clear public interest in disclosing the information.

Supporting reports

• Musk criticized the Musk Watch DOGE Tracker — Elon Musk publicly criticized the Musk Watch DOGE Tracker, a tool that revealed discrepancies in Musk's claims about budget cuts by DOGE. While Musk asserted that DOGE had implemented $105 billion in cuts, the Tracker showed only $8.6 billion were verifiable. Musk's critique did not address the Tracker's methodology but instead focused on perceived hypocrisy in the Tracker's claims. The Tracker also highlighted the severe consequences of these cuts, including increased deaths from malaria and polio. Musk's attack appears to be a response to the Tracker exposing inaccuracies in his statements.

Supporting reports

• Musk's DOGE savings claims overstated by 92% — The Musk Watch DOGE Tracker has revealed that Elon Musk's claims of saving $105 billion through the U.S. DOGE Service are significantly overstated. The Tracker, which analyzes the purported savings, found that only $8.6 billion of the claimed savings can be verified. The discrepancy arises from Musk's use of inflated figures, such as the "Potential Award Amount" instead of the "Current Award Amount" for canceled contracts. This methodology results in a 92% overstatement of savings. The Tracker aims to provide transparency and accountability regarding these claims.

Supporting reports

• USAID staff ordered to destroy records — Staffers at the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) received an email instructing them to shred or burn agency records, despite laws requiring the preservation of federal documents. This action raises concerns about potential evidence destruction related to government operations.
• Case update — American Federation of Government Employees v. Trump (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00352 — Defendants responded to the March 11 TRO motion and included an affidavit by Carr. Defendants stated that the instruction to destroy documents “had nothing to do with this litigation,” was done to clear space formerly occupied by USAID, and were copies “where the originally classified document is retained by another government agency and for which there is no need for USAID to retain a copy.”
• USAID staff ordered to destroy agency records — On March 12, 2025, staff at the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) received an email instructing them to shred or burn agency records, despite laws requiring the preservation of federal documents.