(WASHINGTON) — Ed Martin, the outgoing Washington, D.C., U.S. attorney who will soon start his role as DOJ’s pardon attorney and chief of the so-called “Weaponization Working Group,” said he plans to review and scrutinize the last-minute pardons issued by former President Joe Biden.
Martin’s appointment to several powerful positions at the Justice Department — following his rejected confirmation by the U.S. Senate — appears to have emboldened him to more aggressively pursue political targets of President Donald Trump, according to a series of recent interviews with right-wing media outlets and his Tuesday press conference.
“I do think that the Biden pardons need some scrutiny. And they need scrutiny because we want pardons to matter and to be accepted and to be something that’s used correctly. So I do think we’re going to take a hard look at how they went and what they did,” Martin told ABC News during the press conference.
“If they’re null and void, I’m not sure how that operates, but I can tell you we’ve had already, I’ve had in my current position, or my position as US Attorney, we had been taking a look at some of the conduct surrounding the pardons and the Biden White House,” he said.
Martin, however, did say that he doesn’t think Biden’s use of “auto-pen” is necessarily a problem, even though Trump suggested that’s what he believes makes them invalid.
Martin also suggested that officials whom he’s unable to charge should be publicly shamed, despite DOJ policy that clearly states that prosecutors should avoid any public comments about uncharged people.
“There are some really bad actors, some people that did some really bad things to the American people. And if they can be charged, we’ll charge them. But if they can’t be charged, we will name them, and we will name them. And in a culture that respects shame, they should be people that are shamed. And that’s a fact. That’s the way things work, and so that’s how I believe the job operates,” Martin said.
On his final day in office, Biden issued several last-minute pardons to family members, including his brother, James Biden and his wife, Sara, his sister, Valerie, and her husband, John Owens, his brother, Francis. The former president had also pardoned his son, Hunter, for tax and gun crimes a month prior.
Biden pardoned Dr. Anthony Fauci, who worked under the Biden administration to coordinate the nation’s COVID-19 response and faced public scrutiny from President Donald Trump.
The former president also pardoned retired Gen. Mark Milley, a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who scrutinized Trump’s role in the deadly Jan. 6 insurrection.
Similarly, Biden pardoned Jan. 6 Committee members who investigated Trump over the insurrection.
(WASHINGTON) — The Trump administration’s move to prioritize the resettlement of white South African refugees in the United States even as it has turned away refugees from countries including Afghanistan and Haiti has sparked allegations of hypocrisy and a double standard, as well as questions about who is footing the bill for the new arrivals.
On Monday, the State Department said it had welcomed 59 Afrikaners whose applications to come to the U.S. were fast-tracked under President Donald Trump’s executive order issued in February titled, “Addressing Egregious Actions of the Republic of South Africa.” The order called on the administration to “prioritize humanitarian relief, including admission and resettlement” for Afrikaners, a South African minority group descended primarily from Dutch settlers, “who are victims of unjust racial discrimination.”
State Department Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau, the second-highest-ranking U.S. diplomat, was on hand to greet the new arrivals’ charter flight, and department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce signaled in a statement that additional Afrikaners will soon follow in their footsteps.
“In the coming months, we will continue to welcome more Afrikaner refugees and help them rebuild their lives in our great country,” she said.
However, the State Department has dodged questions about how that travel is being funded.
Typically, when a refugee who is resettled in the U.S. cannot afford the cost of travel, the State Department provides the refugee with an interest-free, repayable loan to fund the travel, which is administered through the International Organization for Migration, a United Nations agency. Refugees also sign a promissory note guaranteeing they will repay the loan before they depart their country of origin.
But the International Organization for Migration told ABC News it was not involved in administering loans for any of the 59 people who arrived at Washington Dulles International Airport this week, and the Trump administration has repeatedly declined to say whether they paid their own way.
“State Department’s Migration and Refugee Assistance account funds a variety of programs and activities aimed at providing humanitarian assistance to refugees, displaced persons and other vulnerable populations,” a State Department official told ABC News when pressed about the costs.
“This includes activities related to resettling refugees in the United States, such as processing and their initial placement,” the official added.
For decades, the State Department has defended its longstanding policy of making refugees fund their own way to the U.S., arguing it ensures each person assumes responsibility for his or her own success in a new country and that it helps establish credit history.
Critics of the Trump administration’s policy say it is not the only way white South African refugees have received preferential treatment.
On the same day the 59 Afrikaners landed in the Washington, D.C., area, the Department of Homeland Security announced it would terminate temporary protected status, or TPS, for Afghans already in the U.S. — revoking deportation protections issued by the Biden administration in 2021 after the Taliban takeover in Afghanistan.
“We’ve reviewed the conditions in Afghanistan with our interagency partners, and they do not meet the requirements for a TPS designation,” Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said. “Afghanistan has had an improved security situation, and its stabilizing economy no longer prevent them from returning to their home country.”
The Trump administration has also moved to rescind TPS designations for Haiti, Venezuela and Cameroon. Additionally, refugee admissions from other countries have dropped drastically, and financial support for resettlement agencies has also undergone drastic cuts.
Meanwhile, there are doubts about the severity of the security situation that prompted the president to expedite the resettlement of Afrikaners.
Trump’s executive order directly mentioned a controversial South African land seizure law enacted in early 2025 that allowed the country’s government to take land without offering the owners compensation where it is “just and equitable and in the public interest” to do so.
But so far, the South African government has said no land has been seized under the law.
On Monday, Trump also spoke of violent attacks against Afrikaners.
“It’s a genocide that’s taking place,” the president said. “Farmers are being killed. They happen to be white. But whether they are white or Black makes no difference to me. But white farmers are being brutally killed, and their land is being confiscated in South Africa.”
Following South Africa’s apartheid era, white and Black landowners have been the target of violent farm attacks. The South African government said the primary motive for the attacks is robbery, but white nationalist groups and others have claimed they are racially motivated.
Trump has been a critic of the South African government’s handling of the situation for years, and in 2018, he posted that he asked that then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo “closely study the South Africa land and farm seizures and expropriations and the large scale killing of farmers.”
Elon Musk, a South African native and a top adviser to the president during his second term, has also been vocal about the plight of South African landowners, amplifying claims of “white genocide.”
South African President Cyril Ramaphosa has denied any persecution.
“A refugee is someone who has to leave their country out of fear of political persecution, religious persecution or economic persecution,” Ramaphosa said on Monday. “They don’t fit that bill.”
Some groups in the U.S. that frequently work with the government to resettle refugees have also pushed back on the Trump administration’s prioritization of Afrikaners, with at least one, the Episcopal Migration Ministries, saying it won’t play a part in resettling them.
“In light of our church’s steadfast commitment to racial justice and reconciliation and our historic ties with the Anglican Church of Southern Africa, we are not able to take this step,” Presiding Bishop Sean Rowe said in a statement.
ABC’s Armando Torres-García, Luke Barr and Ely Brown contributed to this report.
(CAIRO) — Egypt’s Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities announced this week it had successfully recovered a rare trove of smuggled artifacts from the United States, concluding a three-year diplomatic effort between the countries.
Gilded coffin lids from the Pharaonic era, gold funerary masks and what’s believed to be fragments of Queen Hatshepsut’s ancient temple were among the 25 items accepted in Cairo on Monday.
The items spanned centuries and included a range of styles from different eras of ancient Egyptian civilization, the ministry said.
A portrait of a mummy from Faiyum, Egypt, a gold coin from the reign of Ptolemy I — a Greek general and successor of Alexander the Great — and jewelry pieces that date back 2,400 years were also among the items returned, according to the ministry.
The pieces were recovered in New York City in coordination between Egypt’s consulate, the New York District Attorney’s Office and American security agencies, the Egyptian antiquities ministry said in a press release.
Officials did not specify how the artifacts were smuggled from Egypt or how they surfaced in America, but said the recovery was part of a continued effort to “combat illegal trade in cultural properties.”
Similarly, in 2016 the U.S. returned a collection of stolen artifacts to Egypt, including an ancient wooden sarcophagus, a mummy shroud and mummified hand.
“While we recognize that cultural property, art, and antiquities are assigned a dollar value in the marketplace, the cultural and symbolic worth of these Egyptian treasures far surpasses any monetary value to the people of Egypt,” U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director Sarah R. Saldaña in a statement at the time.
That same year, Immigration and Customs Enforcement had returned more than 200 artifacts to India, as well as a stolen copy of Christopher Columbus’ 1493 letter describing his discoveries in the Americas to Italy.
(AUSTIN, TEXAS) — Two juveniles were arrested and charged with capital murder after allegedly shooting a man and striking him with a vehicle during a carjacking, according to the Austin Police Department.
The suspects, a 12-year-old male and a 13-year-old male, were arrested and charged with capital murder by terroristic threat, after allegedly killing 20-year-old Anthony Salas earlier this month, police confirmed to ABC News.
At approximately 2:58 a.m. on May 3, the Travis County Sheriff’s Office received a 911 call from a family “reporting their vehicle had been stolen from their driveway” in Del Valle, Texas, police said in a press release.
Then at approximately 3:21 a.m. the same morning, the Austin Police Department received a call that reported a “person was hit by a vehicle” near the Del Valle Elementary School, police said.
Officials responded to multiple scenes and interviewed multiple witnesses, determining that the victim, Salas, was “shot, hit with a vehicle and killed as he attempted to recover his family’s stolen vehicle near the intersection,” police said.
The juvenile suspects appeared to “burglarize multiple vehicles throughout south and east Austin” late on May 2 into the morning of May 3, police said.
Previously, police issued a reward of up to $1,000 for any information that led to an arrest of the individuals.
(WASHINGTON) — Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg is heading to Iowa Tuesday, fueling speculation that he is mounting a bid for the White House in 2028.
On Tuesday evening, Buttigieg — who served in President Joe Biden’s Cabinet as secretary of the Department of Transportation — will make his in-person, public post-administration debut by headlining a town hall with progressive veterans’ group VoteVets Action Fund in Cedar Rapids.
His visit comes after he didn’t rule out a presidential bid during an interview on Tuesday.
In a Substack Live interview with independent journalist Anand Giridharadas on Tuesday, Buttigieg discussed his thought process regarding running for office broadly, and the potential of running for president in 2028 more specifically.
Before making such a decision Buttigieg says he has to “assess the office and what it calls for” as well as “assess what I bring to the table.” He said he’s employed that process to decide to run for other positions.
“… There are times I follow that process and decided to run. And there are times I followed that process and decided not to run. And the process can lead you to surprising places,” he said.
Still, he said he is a “long way off” from a decision.
Buttigieg, the former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, first rose to national prominence when he ran in the 2020 Democratic presidential primary. During Biden’s 2024 presidential campaign — and later, Vice President Kamala Harris’ own campaign after Biden left the race — Buttigieg served as a key campaign surrogate and was floated as a potential running mate for Harris, who ultimately chose Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz.
Now Buttigieg is set to speak in Iowa — a state where its caucus often serves as the earliest indication of how America’s voters will choose their primary candidates.
Major General Paul Eaton, chairman of VoteVets Action Fund, is expected to introduce Buttigieg as “a fellow veteran and someone who understands what is at stake for all Americans,” according to remarks first shared with ABC News.
Eaton is expected to say that the reason the group has chosen to hold its town hall in Iowa is to reach those “on the ground, in the heartland, in a so-called red state, talking not just about what has happened but what we can do in response and how we can continue to put pressure on Trump but also the members of Congress who refuse to do their jobs.”
And in the first 100 days or so of President Donald Trump’s administration, Buttigieg has taken his message far and wide. He has launched his own Substack, appeared on numerous podcasts and been a regular voice on cable news.
“Pete has always had a ‘go everywhere and talk to everyone’ mindset. This is an opportunity to hear from the men and women who served our country about challenges they’re facing in the chaos of the current administration and what’s needed for a more secure future, outside of the Washington media bubble and podcast studios,” a Buttigieg spokesperson said in a statement to ABC News.
But now Buttigieg is taking his vision out on the open road. And according to a spokesperson, isn’t stopping with Iowa.
“You can expect to see him continuing this conversation with Americans across the country,” the spokesperson said.
And he subtly hinted at this expanded tour during the conclusion of his appearance on Sirius XM’s Smartless podcast, hosted by actors Jason Bateman, Sean Hayes and Will Arnett, remarking: “I’ll be around. I’ll be out there.”
This trip comes as other Democrats whose names have circulated as potential presidential material are making public appearances in important voting states. Both Maryland Gov. Wes Moore and Walz will be featured guests at the South Carolina’s Democratic Party’s statewide conference at the end of the month. Walz will also appear at the California Democrats’ convention that same weekend.
Moore and Walz have publicly denied plans for a 2028 presidential run.
ABC New’s Justin Gomez contributed to this report.
(WASHINGTON) — The Democratic National Committee’s Credentials subcommittee has recommended that the party should once again hold vice-chair elections over complaints that there were issues with how the balloting was conducted — a move that places its vice chairs David Hogg and Malcolm Kenyatta in jeopardy of losing their positions.
The recommendation, made after the committee’s vote on Monday, comes after the party-wide officer races in February. The subcommittee’s deliberations were based on a challenge filed by vice chair candidate Kalyn Free on how the election was conducted.
Free’s counsel argued that the way some of the voting was conducted allowed Hogg and Kenyatta to unfairly receive more votes than Free, who also sought a vice-chair role.
The resolution is not the final decision and neither Kenyatta nor Hogg are stripped of their titles in the meantime; it will have to be adopted or rejected by the entire DNC body in an electronic or in-person vote. The timing of this wider vote is unclear, but party officials said in statements after the vote that they want to act quickly.
The vote was based on a challenge Free filed in late February, before the eruption of a dispute between Hogg, whose separate organization Leaders We Deserve is supporting primary challengers to Democratic incumbents, and others in the party who believe the DNC needs to remain neutral.
But Hogg, a Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting survivor who aims to reform the Democratic Party, claimed Monday that the committee vote can’t be disentangled from his dispute with the party.
“While this vote was based on how the DNC conducted its officers’ elections, which I had nothing to do with, it is also impossible to ignore the broader context of my work to reform the party which loomed large over this vote,” Hogg said in a statement after Monday’s vote.
Hogg argued that because of his announcement that his organization would support primary challengers, the DNC has “made it clear they were going to remove me… I ran to be DNC Vice Chair to help make the Democratic Party better, not to defend an indefensible status quo that has caused voters in almost every demographic group to move away from us. The DNC has pledged to remove me, and this vote has provided an avenue to fast-track that effort.”
Kenyatta, in a thread posted on X late Monday night, said he respects the vote, but is frustrated by it. He criticized the focus on Hogg, emphasizing his own work as a vice chair.
“I disagree with the ruling, but ultimately the committee voted and I respect their votes — even when I really disagree. Second, the press has been breathless in covering the main character they’ve chosen — David Hogg. They are rushing to do it again. I call BS,” Kenyatta, a Pennsylvania state representative, wrote.
Kenyatta called the committee’s move a “slap in the face.” He added that he has done the work to keep the vice chair job and is “frustrated” Hogg wants to make it all about him.
In a statement to ABC News early Tuesday morning, Free, the DNC member and vice chair candidate who initially challenged the results, applauded the credentials committee for “righting this wrong.”
Free wrote, “I have always known that the Democratic Party is the party of free and fair elections. Today, the credentials committee of the DNC confirmed that correcting mistakes in process, and protecting democracy is more important than saving face. This was never about Malcolm Kenyatta or David Hogg. For me, this was about ensuring that the Democratic Party lives up to our ideals as the only political party to believe in and stand up for a free and fair democracy.”
In response to the decision, DNC Chair Ken Martin said he was “disappointed to learn that before I became Chair, there was a procedural error in the February Vice Chair elections.”
He added: “I thank all of our officers for their service, including Vice Chairs Kenyatta and Hogg, and look forward to continuing to work with them in their officer posts as this matter is resolved.”
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump spent the bulk of what was billed as a “major foreign policy address” to outline his vision for the Middle East instead touting his domestic policies and heaping praise on Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman while speaking at the U.S.-Saudi Investment Forum on Tuesday.
Four years after the U.S. intelligence community report was released that concluded that the crown prince approved the assassination of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, Trump lauded the crown prince for his leadership and friendship.
“He’s your greatest representative, greatest representative. And if I didn’t like him, I’d get out of here so fast. You know that, don’t you? He knows me well. I do — I like him a lot. I like him too much. That’s why we give so much, you know? Too much. I like you too much,” Trump said while speaking in Saudi Arabia.
The speech marks a remarkable turn from the United States, especially considering the international condemnation then-President Joe Biden received when he visited Saudi Arabia in 2022 and famously fist-bumped the crown prince. While Biden once labeled Saudi Arabia a “pariah,” Trump celebrated the kingdom, its leader and its potential.
“For the people of this room, the days of economic misery under the last administration are rapidly giving way to the greatest economy in the history of the world,” Trump said.
Speaking to members of the royal family and some of the most powerful business leaders in the world, Trump credited the crown prince for Saudi Arabia’s recent economic development.
“Riyadh is becoming not just a seat of government but a major business, cultural and high-tech capital of the entire world,” Trump said.
“Mohammed, do you sleep at night? How do you sleep?” Trump said as the crowd applauded. “Critics doubted that it was possible, what you’ve done, but over the past eight years, Saudi Arabia has proved the critics totally wrong.”
Throughout his remarks, the crown prince smiled on, applauding and laughing at Trump’s jokes, with billionaire Elon Musk seated prominently over his shoulder.
The president also announced he will be ordering the end of sanctions against Syria and suggested he did so at Saudi Arabia’s request, as well as Turkey’s.
“Oh, what I do for the crown prince,” Trump quipped. “The sanctions were brutal and crippling and served as an important, really an important function, nevertheless, at the time. But now it’s their time to shine.”
Trump then touted his immigration policies, his win in November and his own economic agenda.
“The United States is the hottest country, with the exception of your country,” he told Prince Mohammed. “I have to say right, I won’t. I’m not going to take that on. No, Mohammed, I’m not going to take that on. Wouldn’t that be a terrible thing if I made that full statement? But I will get to it. You’re hotter, at least as long as I’m up here. You’re hotter.”
(NEW YORK) — President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariffs are an “unprecedented and unlawful expansion” of executive power, a lawyer for a group of small businesses told a federal court Tuesday morning.
The hearing at the Court of International Trade in Manhattan marks the first time a federal court has taken up the question of whether Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs are legal.
According to Jeffrey Schwab – a lawyer from the conservative Liberty Justice Center representing the plaintiffs – the question isn’t even close. Schwab argued that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act – a 1977 law that gives the president the right to regulate commerce during national emergencies – does not give Trump the right to unilaterally to impose tariffs.
He added that Trump’s purported emergency of trade deficits has been a problem for years and fail to meet the legal standard for an emergency of being brief, rare and not ongoing.
“This case is so far outside of what an emergency is and what an unusual and extraordinary threat is that this Court could easily say that it is not an emergency,” Schwab argued.
When the three judge panel hearing the case – including judges appointed by Presidents Obama, Trump and Reagan – pushed for a legal standard on which to issue their future ruling, Schwab said the unlawfulness of the tariffs is so obvious that the judges shouldn’t overthink it.
“I’m asking this court to be an umpire and call a strike, you’re asking me, well, where’s the strike zone? Is it at the knees or slightly below the knees?” Schwab said. “I’m saying it’s a wild pitch and it’s on the other side of the batter and hit the backstop, so we don’t need to debate that.”
The lawsuit was filed last month by a group of small businesses, including a New York liquor distributor, Utah pipe company, Virginia electronics store, Pennsylvania-based tackle shop, and Vermont cycling company. Each company argued they rely on imports from countries like China and Mexico and would be irreparably harmed by what they called Trump’s “unprecedented power grab illegal.”
The small business argue that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not give the president the power to unilaterally impose tariffs like Trump did last month with a blanket tariff rate and higher rates for certain countries.
They described the national emergency Trump used to justify the tariffs as a “figment of his own imagination” because the United States has operated with massive trade deficits for years without causing economic harm.
“If actually granted by statute, this power would be an unlawful delegation of legislative power to the executive without any intelligible principle to limit his discretion,” they argued.
Lawyers with the Department of Justice have pushed back on the lawsuit, saying that Congress permits the president to impose some tariffs, and Trump’s invoking of a national emergency makes his power “broader,” justifying the sweeping tariffs. They have also argued that a court order blocking the tariffs would unlawfully encroach on the president’s authority.
“Plaintiffs’ proposed injunction would be an enormous intrusion on the President’s conduct of foreign affairs and efforts to protect national security under IEEPA and the Constitution,” they argued.
At least six separate lawsuits have targeted Trump’s use of tariffs, including a case filed by the state of California and a coalition of twelve state attorneys general. While some of the cases were filed in district courts, the cases have gradually been transferred to the Court of International Trade, making Tuesday’s argument the first time a panel of judges hears a challenge to Trump’s tariffs.
Last month, the court rejected an emergency request for a temporary order to block the tariffs, finding that the businesses failed to prove that an “immediate and irreparable harm” would stem from the tariffs.
Tuesday’s argument will be heard by a panel of three judges – Gary S. Katzmann, Timothy M. Reif, and Jane A. Restani – who were appointed by Presidents Obama, Trump and Reagan respectively.
Tucked away in a corner of New York’s Foley Square, the Court of International Trade has nationwide jurisdiction on trade disputes and has recently focused its energy on more niche issues, like honey customs disputes and mattress imports. Tuesday’s oral argument is set to provide the most high-profile hearing for the court in recent memory.
(NEW YORK) — A federal judge on Tuesday seized control of New York City’s notorious jail complex on Rikers Island, which will now be run by an official who reports directly to the court.
In a 77-page ruling, Judge Laura Taylor Swain wrote that she found the conduct of city over the last nine years “leaves no doubt that continued insistence on compliance with the court’s orders by persons answerable principally to political authorities would lead only to confrontation and delay.”
She also wrote “that the current management structure and staffing are insufficient to turn the tide within a reasonable period; that defendants have consistently fallen short of the requisite compliance with court orders for years, at times under circumstances that suggest bad faith; and that enormous resources — that the city devotes to a system that is at the same time overstaffed and underserved — are not being deployed effectively.”
The manager, who will report to the judge, will work with the city’s jails commissioner and will be “empowered to take all actions necessary” to fix the complex.
“While the necessary changes will take some time, the court expects to see continual progress toward these goals,” the judge wrote.
New York Mayor Eric Adams addressed the ruling during a news conference at city hall on Tuesday, saying that Rikers’ problems were “decades in the making.” He claimed that the legal requirement that the jail close in 2027 limited his administration’s ability to address them.
“It stated you can’t make any capital improvements on Rikers Island,” Adams said. “We can’t spend money on Rikers Island to improve the conditions.”
Mayoral candidate Scott Stringer, who previously served as the city’s comptroller, praised the judge’s ruling as “long-overdue but necessary” in a statement released on Tuesday.
“For decades, Rikers has represented a systemic failure of multiple mayoral administrations — plagued by violence, neglect, and dangerous and inhumane conditions,” he said. “While I applaud this decision, I do not view it as a victory; instead, it is a scathing indictment of our city’s failed leadership.”
(WASHINGTON) — House Republicans are plowing ahead Tuesday to advance key components of their bill to fund President Donald Trump’s agenda — including taxes and Medicaid cuts — even as they remain at odds over several critical issues.
Sources tell ABC News that dueling, dramatic hearings are expected to drag deep into the night and into Wednesday as Democrats try to challenge Republicans’ efforts to write those sections of Trump’s “big, beautiful bill.”
Democratic members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which has jurisdiction over energy and health care programs, plan to offer several doomed amendments and might try an unusual move of calling impromptu witnesses to testify about how Medicaid impacts their life. Republicans are likely to block both efforts.
Dozens of people in wheelchairs chanting “No cuts to Medicaid!” tried to block the doors of the Energy and Commerce markup before it began and were blocked by Capitol Police. Several were arrested.
The markup in the House Ways and Means Committee, which has jurisdiction over taxes, is also expected to slide into the night amid an internal GOP battle over caps to the State and Local Tax deduction. Democrats are expected to trash the bill as a massive break for the wealthiest taxpayers.
While the GOP plan proposes massive cuts to Medicaid, it does not include some of the most drastic cuts that Republican hardliners were pushing for, putting its passage in flux amid a conservative revolt.
Texas Republican Rep. Chip Roy said Monday he’s opposed to the proposals and needs “significant” changes to support the final package.
“I remain open-minded because progress has been made based on our forceful efforts to force change. But we cannot continue down the path we’ve been going down – and we will need SIGNIFICANT additional changes to garner my support,” he said in a post on X.
Asked on Tuesday if he was worried about members like Roy getting behind the bill,” House Speaker Mike Johnson responded, “No one is going to get 100 percent of what we want. Chip is one of my best friends. We communicated within the last hour, and we’ll talk again today. I think we get everybody to yes.”
Trump has repeatedly promised to not cut Medicaid and he and Republicans said they’ll come up with savings by cutting waste and fraud in the program.
Before heading off on a four-day trip to the Middle East on Monday, he urged Republicans to “UNIFY” around the bill and said the executive order he signed Monday that would “slash the cost of prescription drugs” and the “hundreds of billions of tariff money coming in” should be factored into the bill’s scoring.
With Republicans in control of both chambers of Congress, they are using a process called reconciliation that only requires a simple majority for passage to fast-track their legislation.
Republicans unveiled legislative text over the weekend that outlined their plans to slash Medicaid spending by imposing work requirements for recipients, make more frequent eligibility checks, and penalize states like New York and California that offer Medicaid to illegal immigrants.
The Congressional Budget Office wrote in a letter to Energy and Commerce Chairman Brett Guthrie that the proposal met its lofty target for $880 billion of savings over the next decade.
The Energy and Commerce committee resisted pressure from hardliners like Roy who demanded GOP leaders propose lowering the percentage the federal government pays to states’ Medicaid programs or include per-capita caps on federal Medicaid payments to states.
The health portions would save about $715 billion, according to CBO. However, at least 8.6 million more Americans will go uninsured.
Some culture war issues were addressed in the bill, including a provision to strip Medicaid funding from organizations that offer abortion services such as Planned Parenthood.
The legislation has already received pushback from Republicans in the Senate who will have to go along with it, including Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley, who wrote an opinion piece in the New York Times Monday warning against moves to cut Medicaid.
“This wing of the party wants Republicans to build our big, beautiful bill around slashing health insurance for the working poor. But that argument is both morally wrong and politically suicidal,” Sen. Hawley wrote.
Meanwhile, the Ways and Means Committee, which is marking up the tax portion of the bill, outlined a permanent extension of Trump’s 2017 Tax Cuts and Job Act, as well as making good on his campaign promises like no tax on tips and no tax on overtime.
The plan would temporarily increase the child tax credit, create a MAGA savings account for children and temporarily increase the standard tax deduction. It also calls for a $4 trillion increase to the debt ceiling, which Congress must address by mid-July to avoid default.
Some moderate Republicans have been adamant about not cutting into Medicaid, a benefit many of their constituents rely on.
The legislation also includes one of the most controversial components — a tax proposal that would hike the cap on state and local tax deductions (SALT) from $10,000 to $30,000 for those earning less than $400,000, which some moderate Republicans from states with higher taxes say is not enough.
New York Rep. Nick LaLota said he is “still a hell no” in a post on X.
Rep. Mike Lawler of New York told Bloomberg TV the proposal was “woefully inadequate,” adding that he will vote against the bill if it comes to the floor.
“We will continue to work in good faith with leadership, with the administration to get this done, but we need to have an honest and serious discussion about the issue,” he added.
Here’s what’s in the bill:
Medicaid cuts
Medicaid work requirements: The bill would impose work requirements on able-bodied Medicaid recipients — at least 80 hours per month — or require enrolling in an educational program for at least 80 hours or some combination per month.
More frequent eligibility checks: The legislation would require states to conduct more frequent eligibility determinations — from every 12 months to every six months.
Prohibits Medicaid funds for gender transition for minors: The measure would ban federal Medicaid funds from going to gender-affirming care for transgender minors.
Blocks Medicaid funding for non-citizens: Federal funding would be blocked from going to states that provide health care coverage under Medicare for migrants in the country without authorization.
Targets Medicaid funding for organizations that provide abortions: The measure includes language that would essentially prohibit health care providers who offer abortion services from receiving Medicaid funds.
Drug pricing: The bill makes a change to the Inflation Reduction Act and allows drugs to be exempt from Medicare’s drug price negotiation if they are approved to treat multiple diseases.
Cuts energy programs in Inflation Reduction Act: The proposal would cut Inflation Reduction Act programs like spending on electric vehicles, claw back climate-related federal funding and phase out clean energy credits.
Tax provisions
No tax on tips: A huge tax break for the service industry and a provision that was also trumpeted by Kamala Harris as the Democratic nominee for president, though she tied the tax break to an increase for the federal minimum wage. This is temporary and would expire at the end of 2028.
No tax on overtime: Would relieve millions of Americans who work overtime. This is temporary and would also expire at the end of 2028.
Extension of 2017 Tax Cuts and Job Act: Makes tax from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act permanent; does not include a tax increase on the wealthiest earners. Trump posted last week that the proposal shouldn’t raise taxes on high-earners, “but I’m OK if they do!!!”
Creation of MAGA savings account for children: The contribution limit for any taxable year is $5,000. It includes a pilot program to start the accounts with $1,000.
SALT: Lifts state and local tax deduction cap to $30,000 with an income phase-down above $400,000. Married couples filing taxes separately are subject to a $15,000 cap and phase-down above $200,000 income.
Debt limit increase: The measure calls for increasing the debt limit by $4 trillion. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said last week lawmakers must address the debt limit by mid-July to avoid a default.
Enhanced tax deduction for seniors: Seniors would get a $4,000 higher standard tax deduction subject to income limits. This is temporary and would also expire at the end of 2028.
Hikes excise tax on colleges: Those with endowments over $2 million per student would increase from 1.4% to 21%, targeting Ivy League schools. Religious schools would be exempt.
Child tax credit: A temporary increase from $1,000 to $2,500 through 2028 and to $2,000 after that. Recipients will be required to have a Social Security number.
Deduction for qualified business: The bill would increase the deduction for qualified business income from 20% to 22%.
Extends increased estate and gift tax exemption: Would increase the estate and gift tax exemption to $15 million.
Elevates standard tax deduction: The measure includes some new tax cuts like temporarily elevating the standard deduction by $2,000 to $32,000 for 2025 for joint filers and by $1,000 to $16,000 through 2028.
