National

(NEW YORK) — As part of his plan to cut alleged federal government waste, President Donald Trump is literally pinching pennies, ordering his Treasury Secretary to stop the U.S. Mint from producing new 1-cent coins.

In an announcement Sunday on his Truth Social platform, Trump said the cost of minting the coin featuring the profile of the country’s 16th president, Abraham Lincoln, is more than twice the currency’s face value.

“For far too long the United States has minted pennies, which literally cost us more than 2 cents. This is wasteful!” Trump wrote. “I have instructed my Secretary of Treasury to stop producing new pennies. Let’s rip the waste out of our great nation’s budget, even if it’s a penny at a time.”

According to the U.S. Mint, the cost of producing a single penny has more than doubled in recent years, from 1.76 cents in 2020 to 3.69 cents in 2024.

Printing a paper $1 bill is cheaper than producing a penny, which, according to the U.S. Mint, is comprised of 97.5% zinc and 2.5% copper and requires a smelting process to mold the metals. According to the Federal Reserve, it costs Treasury’s Bureau of Engraving and Printing 3.2 cents to print a $1 note – less than the cost of minting a penny.

The U.S. Mint reported losing $85.3 million on making pennies in fiscal year 2024, according to the Mint’s annual report to Congress.

Is it legal?

It remains unclear if Trump has the power to retire the coin, which has been part of the fabric of America for 233 years, 116 years with Lincoln’s portrait embossed on it.

The move would likely require the approval of Congress. Even though it’s part of the U.S. Treasury, “Congress authorizes every coin and most medals that the U.S. Mint manufactures and oversees the Mint’s operations under its Public Enterprise Fund,” according to the U.S. Mint’s website.

However, Laurence H. Tribe, the Carl M. Loeb University Professor of Constitutional Law Emeritus at Harvard Law School, told the Associated Press that the U.S. Code, a list of general and permanent federal statues, gives Trump’s Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent, the authority to scrap the penny.

While the courts and others debate whether many of Trump’s executive orders pass legal muster, “this action seems to me entirely lawful and fully constitutional,” Tribe said.

If Trump gets his way, the penny will become the 12th U.S. currency denomination to be retired, joining the half-cent coin, the 2-cent coin, the 20-cent piece and the “trime” – a silver three-cent piece issued from 1851 to 1873, Caroline Turco, assistant curator of the Money Museum in Colorado Springs, Colorado, told ABC News.

“We retired them for multiple different reasons, but normally because they were not being used or they just became too expensive to produce,” said Turco.

Is it a good idea?

Mark Weller, executive director of Americans for Common Cents – a Washington, D.C., organization that provides research to Congress and the executive branch on the benefits of the penny – believes that eliminating the coin “is an absolutely horrible idea.”

“It would be bad for consumers and it would be bad for the economy,” Weller told ABC News. “It really would, in fact, not save money, but it would increase government losses and have some unintended economic consequences.”

Weller said doing away with the penny would prompt the U.S. Mint to increase production of the nickel. According to the U.S. Mint, the cost of minting a single nickel is nearly 14 cents, almost three times the coin’s face value and more than three-and-a-half times the cost of minting a penny.

“Without the penny, nickel production could nearly double, which would increase the Mint’s losses,” Weller said. “So, it’s just hard to understand how you could produce more nickels that are losing more money than the penny and say you’re going to save money.”

Weller further said that ditching the penny could lead to the cost of goods going up for American consumers.

“If there’s one thing most economists agree on is that private business has a profit motive. So, the assumption would be that they would price things in a way that they would round up, not round down,” Weller said.

Although digital payments are increasingly more common, Weller said cash remains a crucial tool, “especially for someone economically underserved and under-banked.”

“The majority of Americans want to keep the penny,” Weller said. “A very large number abhor the idea of rounding transactions.”

The U.S. Mint produced 3.2 billion pennies in fiscal year 2024, according to the Mint’s annual report to Congress, with an estimated 250 billion pennies currently in circulation.

History of the penny
Turco, whose museum is the education branch of the American Numismatic Association, told ABC News that one big misconception about the penny is that, technically, it has never existed in the United States.

“The American system does not have a ‘penny.’ That is a misnomer,” Turco said. “We have a cent because when we rebelled against the British they had pennies and that is a British word.”

Turco said the 1-cent piece was first produced in the United States in 1793 and was originally the size of the present-day quarter.

Turco said Lincoln, whose likeness is also on the $5 bill, was added to the coin in 1909.

If Trump’s wishes are met, the United States wouldn’t be the first country to eliminate the coin, Turco said. Canada, for example, decided to phase out its penny in 2012. In the U.S., the Department of Defense stopped using pennies at its overseas bases in 1980 because it became too expensive to ship them.

Regardless of the penny’s fate, Turco said she believes it will always be a part of the United States, at least colloquially, adding that such phrases as “a lucky penny” and “a penny saved is a penny earned” will likely always be a part of the American lexicon. And, perhaps ironically, the penny’s value could increase if its discontinued.

“I think collectors will still enjoy having them,” Turco said. “But I don’t think that the value of a penny will just skyrocket overnight.”

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Two weeks after the Department of Justice, now under new leadership following Donald Trump’s reelection, moved to dismiss their appeal of Trump’s classified documents case, a circuit court formally dismissed the appeal of a case that once accused the president of mishandling some of the nation’s most sensitive secrets.

The dismissal marks the end of a series of federal criminal cases that once dogged Trump’s political future.

“Appellant’s ‘Unopposed Motion to Dismiss Appeal’ is GRANTED. This appeal is DISMISSED,” said the one-page order issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit.

Recently appointed Acting U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida Hayden O’Bryne moved to dismiss the appeal against Trump’s former co-defendants on Jan. 29.

Trump previously faced 40 criminal counts — including violations of nine separate federal laws — for allegedly holding on to classified documents after leaving the White House in 2021 and thwarting investigators’ efforts to retrieve the documents from his Mar-a-Lago estate. He pleaded not guilty to all charges in 2023.

Trump, along with longtime aide Walt Nauta and Mar-a-Lago staffer Carlos De Oliveira, pleaded not guilty in a superseding indictment to allegedly attempting to delete surveillance footage at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate.

Last summer, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon — who Trump appointed to the bench during his first term — dismissed the indictments against Trump, bucking decades of legal precedent by finding that special counsel Jack Smith had been unconstitutionally appointed.

Smith appealed Cannon’s decision but was ultimately forced to drop the appeal against Trump after Trump was reelected in November, due to a longstanding Department of Justice policy prohibiting the prosecution of a sitting president.

After O’Bryne moved to dismiss the appeal against Nauta and De Oliveira last month, Tuesday’s dismissal closes the book on the case.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(PALM BEACH, Fla.) — An off-duty corrections officer in Florida was shot and killed in a “targeted attack,” according to police.

The incident occurred at 7:32 p.m. when deputies from the Palm Beach Sheriff’s Office in Florida were dispatched to reports of gunfire in the 1400 block of NW Avenue D, in Belle Glade, according to a statement from the Palm Beach Sheriff’s Office on Tuesday

“The victim is an off-duty PBSO Corrections Deputy, who was taken to St. Mary’s Hospital, but unfortunately was pronounced dead shortly after arriving,” authorities said. “Further investigation determined that this incident was targeted.”

Officials have not yet named the deputy but did confirm that the officer killed was 39-years-old and had been with the agency for three years, police said.

Authorities also did not release any information on their investigation or why they were able to conclude that the attack was targeted at the officer involved.

A ceremonial escort took place on Tuesday evening in honor of the slain offifer from St. Mary’s Hospital to the Medical Examiner’s Office.

“We are distraught to say the least,” said the Palm Beach Sheriff’s Office.

Authorities said that additional information will be provided as it becomes available.

The investigation is currently open and ongoing.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(MIAMI) — A New Jersey man was charged with threatening flight passengers, attendants and crew members on a flight from Miami, Florida, to Newark, New Jersey.

According to the complaint, Luis Vaquero made “threats of physical violence against a disabled minor and mocking a group of Jewish passengers.”

It said that he also threatened a flight attendant when they refused to serve him more alcohol.
When the plane arrived at Newark Liberty International Airport on Sunday, the captain made an announcement that law enforcement would be removing a passenger, according to the complaint.

It said that Vaquero then left his seat and began banging on the flight deck door and cursing at the captain while the plane was taxiing.

When the plane arrived at the gate, the complaint said the captain emerged from the flight deck and Vaquero approached him, screaming in his face and threatening him until law enforcement officers boarded the plane and escorted Vaquero off.

“The defendant is charged with threatening flight crew members and passengers while traveling to Newark,” Acting United States Attorney Vikas Khanna said in a press release. “We are committed to keeping the skies safe for flying and will prosecute those who criminally interfere with the professionals responsible for ensuring passenger safety.”

“It all culminated in a terrifying attack and attempted breach of the flight deck when witnesses say he banged on the cockpit door and confronted the pilot,” Acting Special Agent in Charge Terence G. Reilly said in the release.

“The harrowing flight and other similar incidents onboard airplanes recently are creating tension and fear for fliers and crew members,” Reilly added. “FBI Newark has a warning for those who think it may not be a big deal—they’re breaking federal law, and they will be brought to justice.”

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — The chances of an asteroid striking Earth within the next decade has doubled in a matter of weeks, according to NASA astronomers.

The asteroid, discovered just after Christmas and named 2024 YR4, could strike the planet in December 2032 as it approaches during another journey around its orbit, according to NASA’s Center for Near Earth Object Studies.

When the detection of the asteroid was announced last month, NASA predicted just a 1.3% probability of it hitting Earth. The likelihood has increased to 2.1%.

The overall probability may be low, but a 2% chance of an asteroid strike is “uncommon,” Davide Farnocchia, navigation engineer with NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, told ABC News.

“Getting something with a probability this high, like 2%, which is high for us,” he said.

On the Torino scale — the method for categorizing the impact hazard associated with near-Earth objects — 2024 YR4 is ranking at three out of 10, Farnocchia said, adding that most space objects rank at a zero.

The object was discovered in late December as it made a close approach towards Earth, but it is now moving away, Farnocchia said.

The elongated shape of the orbit takes the asteroid around the sun and into Earth’s vicinity before it ventures far out between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter.

Because of the unusual orbit, the asteroid will disappear starting in April until 2028, according to NASA.

The uncertainty surrounding this space rock is still prominent as astronomers race to find out as much as they can about the asteroid before they lose sight of it.

“We don’t want to take any chances,” he said.

The asteroid measures between 130 feet and 330 feet in diameter and large enough to potentially cause localized damage were it to strike a populated city, according to NASA.

In 1908, the Tunguska asteroid, which was a similar size, flattened trees over an area of about 1,250 miles after it exploded in the skies over Siberia.

The worldwide astronomy community is paying close attention to this asteroid and any others that could potentially impact the planet using multiple telescopes as well as measurements to detail the objects’ positions in space, Farnocchia said.

“We are tracking this object every night,” he said.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(BOSTON) — A federal judge in Boston said Monday he will continue to pause the Trump administration’s plan to offer a deferred resignation buyout to tens of thousands of federal employees until he issues a ruling on a preliminary injunction.

Three federal employee unions — with the support of 20 Democratic attorneys general — have argued that the Office of Personnel Management’s deferred resignation offer is an “unlawful ultimatum” to force the resignation of government workers under the “threat of mass termination.”

The pause, ordered by U.S. District Judge George A. O’Toole Jr., came just hours ahead of the program’s midnight deadline, which itself was extended by four days following a temporary restraining order that continues to remain in effect.

During an hour-long hearing Monday, a lawyer for the Department of Justice framed the deferred resignation offer as a “humane off-ramp” for federal employees before President Donald Trump enacts sweeping changes to “rebalance and reorganize the federal workforce.”

“President Trump campaigned on a promise to reform the federal workforce,” DOJ attorney Eric Hamilton said, outlining Trump’s plan to reduce the size of the federal government and his return-to-office executive order. “We understand these announcements may have come as a disappointment for some in the federal workforce.”

Hamilton argued that any further delay of the buyout would cause irreparable harm because the Trump administration plans to enact the next steps of reshaping the federal government as soon as the buyout window closes.

Elena Goldstein, a lawyer representing the unions that brought the challenge, hammered the Trump administration for attempting to enforce an “unprecedented program” with a “slapdash exploding deadline”

“For the last two weeks, confusion has rained for millions of career civil servants,” Goldstein said. “This is a program of unprecedented magnitude that raises questions about the rationality of OPM’s decision-making.”

The buyout offer, part of Trump’s effort to trim the size of government through billionaire Elon Musk’s newly formed Department of Government Efficiency, was sent out two weeks ago in an email with the subject line “Fork in the Road” — the same language Musk used when he slashed jobs at Twitter after taking over that company in 2022.

The offer, from the Office of Personnel Management, offered full pay and benefits until September for any federal employee who accepted a deferred resignation by Feb. 6, with no obligation to work after they accepted the agreement.

While Goldstein acknowledged that Trump has the right to downsize the federal government, she emphasized that OPM has not gone through any of the steps necessary to carry out such a sweeping move — including analyzing the cost and benefits of their approach, evaluating its impact on the government’s function, and accessing potential conflicts of interest for Musk. She added that the exact terms of the buyout are “shifting” for thousands of employees who have gotten inconsistent guidance from their agency.

“OPM appears to be making this up as they are going along,” she said. “When the government wants to decide, there are ways to do this correctly … none of that happened here in the two weeks since they enacted this program.”

Arguing for the government, Hamilton criticized the plaintiffs’ argument as “legally incoherent and at odds with their theory of the case,” because a further delay of the buyout would “insert more uncertainty” into the lives of federal employees.

While the plaintiffs raised concerns that the buyout program violates federal law by using money that Congress never appropriated, Hamilton attempted to push back on the claim that the buyout changes the government’s financial obligations.

“Nothing about the voluntary resignation changes anything about the federal government’s financial obligations. It just changes what employees are expected to do and not do during their period of employment,” Hamilton said.

Goldstein argued that a preliminary injunction is necessary to prevent what she said was an unlawful offer to reshape the federal government while the Trump administration continues to “put additional pressure on employees.”

“This is an unprecedented action taken on an unprecedented timeline,” she said.

Just hours ahead of Thursday’s original deadline for employees to accept the offer, Judge O’Toole — who was nominated to the bench by President Bill Clinton — temporarily blocked the offer until Monday so he could consider issuing a temporary restraining offer pausing the order.

“I enjoined the defendants from taking any action to implement the so-called ‘Fork Directive’ pending the completion of briefing and oral argument on the issues,” Judge O’Toole said in his ruling. “I believe that’s as far as I want to go today.”

The Trump administration, in response, “extended” the deadline for the offer, which more than 65,000 federal employees have already taken.

“We are grateful to the judge for extending the deadline so more federal workers who refuse to show up to the office can take the Administration up on this very generous, once-in-a-lifetime offer,” press secretary Karoline Leavitt said last week.

The unions who brought the lawsuit argued that Trump exceeded his authority as president with the offer, which they described as a “slapdash resignation program.”

According to the plaintiffs, Trump’s offer violates federal law, lacks congressionally appropriated funding, and does not offer employees reassurance that the president would follow through with the offer. Their claim in part relies on a federal law from the 1940s called the Administrative Procedure Act that governs how federal agencies create and enforce rules.

“In the tech universe, ‘move fast and break things’ is a fine motto in part because they’re not playing with the public’s money, and it’s expected that most initiatives are going to fail,” Loyola Marymount law professor Justin Leavitt told ABC News. “Congress knows that, so in 1946 they basically said, ‘When agencies do stuff … they have to be careful about it. They’ve got to consider all aspects of the problem.”

The plaintiffs also argued that the buyout is unlawful because it relies on funding that Congress has yet to appropriate, violating the Antideficiency Act.

“Defendants’ ultimatum divides federal workers into two groups: (1) those who submit their resignations to OPM for a promised period of pay without the requirement to work, and (2) those who have not and are therefore subject to threat of mass termination,” the lawsuit said.

Lawyers for the federal government have pushed back on those claims, arguing that Trump has the legal authority to provide the buyout for employees within the federal branch, and that any further delay would do more harm than good.

“Extending the deadline for the acceptance of deferred resignation on its very last day will markedly disrupt the expectations of the federal workforce, inject tremendous uncertainty into a program that scores of federal employees have already availed themselves of, and hinder the Administration’s efforts to reform the federal workforce,” DOJ attorney Joshua E. Gardner wrote in a filing last week.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — A federal judge will hear arguments Monday on efforts by a group of California public university students to block Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency from accessing highly sensitive federal student loan records maintained by the Department of Education.

An organization representing more than 200,000 students enrolled in California’s public universities has brought suit seeking a temporary restraining order to block DOGE from accessing the student loan records as part of its effort to slash government spending.

The lawsuit, one of several that DOGE is facing, alleges that individuals associated with DOGE are illegally attempting to access the personal and financial information of the more than 42 million borrowers — accounting for more than 12% of the U.S. population — who have federal student loans.

A handful of people working with DOGE were spotted at the Department of Education last week and some now have access to the agency’s records and files, according to sources familiar with the matter.

“The scale of the intrusion into individuals’ privacy is enormous and unprecedented,” the lawsuit said, alleging that Musk’s team could access the bank account numbers, income information, dates of birth, and social security numbers of millions through the Education Department’s Office of Federal Student Aid.

DOGE workers are now listed in the Department of Education’s email directory, meaning they were hired as employees, sources also told ABC News.

The Department of Education is the smallest cabinet-level agency, with 4,400 employees. Some 1,400 employees work in the department’s FSA office, which distributes money — including loans and grants — for students to pursue higher education.

The University of California Student Association lawsuit, filed against Acting Secretary of Education Denise Carter, alleged that DOGE has engaged in a “systematic, continuous, and ongoing violation of federal laws” meant to protect the security of data held by the federal government.

“People who take out federal student loans to afford higher education should not be forced to share their sensitive information with ‘DOGE.’ And federal law says they do not have to,” the lawsuit said. The lawsuit also raised concerns with the lack of transparency surrounding DOGE, which they alleged might share the sensitive information with third parties.

“Because Defendants’ actions and decisions are shrouded in secrecy, individuals do not have even basic information about what personal or financial information Defendants are sharing with outside parties or how their information is being used,” the lawsuit said.

Last week, Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer wrote a letter to Carter requesting information about whether Musk and his team have been provided access to National Student Loan data, among other sensitive borrower information.

“There are over 40 million federal student loan borrowers in the United States,” the senators, along with 14 others, wrote. “It is not at all clear that DOGE officials meet the strict criteria that would allow them to access this sensitive information protected by federal law–or whether DOGE officials have gained access to other sensitive ED databases as part of their efforts to “reform” the agency,”

The senators also asked Carter to describe what safeguards are in place to ensure that student loan data is not misused. The letter urged Carter to ensure that Musk and his team have not been provided access to any other databases managed by the department.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(ALBANY, N.Y.) — New York government employees are barred from downloading DeepSeek’s artificial intelligence application onto state devices due to security concerns, Gov. Kathy Hochul announced Monday.

The DeepSeek chatbot, known as R1, responds to user queries just like its U.S.-based counterparts, such as the popular ChatGPT. But the China-based DeepSeek has code hidden in its programming that has the built-in capability to send user data directly to the Chinese government, experts told ABC News.

“Public safety is my top priority,” Hochul said in a statement. “New York will continue fighting to combat cyber threats, ensure the privacy and safety of our data, and safeguard against state-sponsored censorship.”

Last year, Hochul issued guidance for the “responsible use of AI” in New York’s government to help improve operations while “protecting privacy, managing risk and promoting accountability, safety and equity,” according to the governor’s office.

Rep. Josh Gottheimer, D-N.J., who serves on the House Intelligence Committee, told ABC News he thinks DeepSeek should be banned “from all government devices immediately.”

“No one should be allowed to download it onto their device. And I think we have to inform the public,” he said.

Gottheimer and Darin LaHood, R-Ill., introduced a bipartisan bill to ban DeepSeek from all government devices last week.

“The Chinese Communist Party has made it abundantly clear that it will exploit any tool at its disposal to undermine our national security, spew harmful disinformation, and collect data on Americans. Now, we have deeply disturbing evidence that they are using DeepSeek to steal the sensitive data of U.S. citizens. This is a five alarm national security fire,” Gottheimer said in a statement.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott banned DeepSeek on government devices, the first states to do so, on Jan. 31.

President Donald Trump was asked on Friday whether he believed DeepSeek was a national security threat, to which he replied, “No, I mean, I think it’s happening. It’s a technology that’s happening. … It’ll be a lot less expensive, the AI, we’re talking about, will be a lot less expensive that people originally thought. That’s a good thing. I view that as a very good development, not a bad development.”

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(PHILADELPHIA) — Dozens of people were arrested in Philadelphia after fans took to the streets to celebrate the Eagles’ Super Bowl victory, police said.

Philadelphia police reported nearly 50 arrests following the Eagles’ win against the Kansas City Chiefs in New Orleans on Sunday.

Among those, five people were arrested for assault on police, authorities said. There were also two arrests for aggravated assault, one for recklessly endangering another person and one for misdemeanor disorderly conduct in the third degree, police said.

Additionally, police said 29 people were arrested for disorderly conduct and issued code violation notices.

There were eight arrests for vandalism incidents, including against four city sanitation trucks, two banks and two retail stores, police said. The businesses were all in Center City on Walnut Street.

Amid the raucous celebrations, fans were captured passing a downed traffic light pole on a packed street, and a large fire was seen near an intersection.

The Super Bowl victory celebrations will continue on Friday, when the city hosts the parade to mark the Eagles’ commanding 40-22 win over the Chiefs.

Police similarly reported disorderly conduct and other incidents after the Eagles won the NFC championship game in Philadelphia on Jan. 26, which sent them to the Super Bowl.

Thirty-one people were issued citations for disorderly conduct or failure to disperse, police said at the time.

Two shootings, a stabbing and a car crash that injured multiple pedestrians were also among several “significant” incidents reported amid the NFC championship celebrations, police said.

Tragically, an 18-year-old Temple University student died after he fell from a light pole while celebrating the win, officials said.

ABC News’ Alexandra Faul contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(DETROIT) — A 13-year-old was apprehended for allegedly targeting young girls in a string of home invasions in Michigan, authorities said.

The teen was allegedly involved in nine break-ins in Pontiac and two in Detroit, Oakland County Sheriff Michael Bouchard said.

On Feb. 4, the suspect — who was wearing a ski mask and was armed with a knife — choked a sleeping 10-year-old girl, according to the sheriff’s office. The girl screamed, and then her mom saw the suspect run down the stairs and out of the house, the sheriff’s office said.

“This is the worst nightmare for any parent — that somebody might be trying to climb in through a window to get after their kids, especially a young teenage girl,” Bouchard said at a news conference.

There were few physical injuries, but Bouchard stressed the immense “emotional trauma” of being targeted in bed.

The break-ins began two years ago, Bouchard said. The suspect allegedly looked for unlocked windows and had a knife during several incidents, he said.

Charges are not yet clear. The 13-year-old’s parent has been cooperative, Bouchard said.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.