(NEW YORK) — Voters head to the polls on Tuesday for New Jersey’s primary elections, which will set up the state’s 2025 gubernatorial election — the results of which could be a potential harbinger for the mood of the country ahead of 2026’s critical midterm elections.
The Democratic candidates are sparring over how to best respond to President Donald Trump’s agenda in the Garden State and each hopes to keep the state’s governorship in Democratic hands. The state’s current governor, Democrat Phil Murphy, can’t run again after serving two terms.
There are six candidates in the Democratic primary. Polling has shown that Rep. Mikie Sherrill, a former Navy helicopter pilot who represents the state’s 11th Congressional District, leads the crowded Democratic field, but the race could still be anyone’s to win.
The other Democratic candidates are Rep. Josh Gottheimer, who represents the state’s 5th District; Newark Mayor Ras Baraka; Jersey City Mayor Steve Fulop; New Jersey Education Association President Sean Spiller; and former state Senate president Steve Sweeney.
Republicans, meanwhile, hope to flip New Jersey’s governorship red in November and also have a crowded primary field. President Donald Trump has endorsed former state assemblyman Jack Ciattarelli, who ran for governor in 2021, narrowly losing to Murphy.
“This year’s election for governor is critical for New Jersey’s future. You’ll decide whether New Jersey is a high tax, high crime, sanctuary state,” Trump said during a rally held by telephone last week. “New Jersey is ready to pop out of that blue horror show.”
Ciattarelli faces conservative radio personality Bill Spadea, state Sen. Jon Bramnick, former Englewood Cliffs Mayor Mario Kranjac, and contractor Justin Barbera.
The contest is on track to become the priciest election in New Jersey history, with over $85 million spent on advertising as of last Wednesday, according to a report from media tracking agency AdImpact.
Among Democrats, Gottheimer has the most ad spending supporting him ($22.8 million), followed by Fulop ($17.8 million).
Ciattarelli leads among Republicans with $5.9 million in ad spending or reservations supporting him, dwarfing Spadea’s $2.2 million and Bramnick’s $1.2 million.
About 70% of broadcast ad airings have mentioned Trump, according to AdImpact.
-ABC News’ Emily Chang and Halle Troadec contributed to this report.
(LOS ANGELES) — President Donald Trump and California’s Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom escalated their confrontation on Monday over the handling of protests in Los Angeles triggered by Trump’s immigration crackdown.
After Newsom had objected to Trump sending in the National Guard without his consent, Trump on Monday afternoon ordered hundreds of Marines into the city as well.
Earlier Monday, arriving back at the White House after spending the weekend at Camp David, Trump had told reporters he would arrest Newsom if he were “border czar” Tom Homan — hours after Homan said there had been “no discussion” about arresting Newsom.
“I would do it if I were Tom. I think it’s great,” Trump told reporters on the South Lawn.
Newsom quickly fired back.
“The President of the United States just called for the arrest of a sitting Governor,” Newsom posted on Instagram along with a video of Trump’s comments. “This is a day I hoped I would never see in America. I don’t care if you’re a Democrat or a Republican this is a line we cannot cross as a nation — this is an unmistakable step toward authoritarianism.”
“These are the acts of a dictator, not a President,” Newsom posted on X.
At a White House event Monday afternoon, Trump was asked by ABC News White House Correspondent Karen Travers what crime Newsom had committed that would warrant his arrest.
“I think his primary crime is running for governor because he’s done such a bad job,” Trump responded.
Homan himself earlier Monday pushed back on the idea he was going to arrest Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, both Democrats.
In an interview with NBC News over the weekend, Homan had not ruled out the possibility — prompting Newsom to respond: “He knows where to find me.”
Homan on Monday morning, during an interview on Fox, commented further on his remarks to NBC.
“The reporter asked about, ‘Could Governor, Governor Newsom, or Mayor Bass, be arrested? I said, ‘Well, no one’s above the law, if they cross the line and commit a crime. Absolutely they can.’ So, there was no discussion about arresting Newsom,” he said.
“I’ve said it many times, You can protest, you got your First Amendment rights, but when you cross that line, you put hands on an ICE officer, or you destroy property, or ICE says that you’re impeding law enforcement … That’s a crime, and that the Trump administration is not going to tolerate. You cross that line we’re gonna see prosecution in the Department of Justice,” Homan said.
House Speaker Mike Johnson expressed solidarity with the president after the president suggested Newsom should be arrested.
“I heard that for the first time sitting next to the president when they asked him that question at the White House. I don’t know what all that involves, but he gave comment there, and I’ll stick by what he said,” Johnson said, adding that he also agrees with the Trump’s decision to send in the National Guard, predicting it will have a “deterrent effect.”
“We have to maintain the rule of law, and if the state and local leaders are unable or unwilling to do so, it is the job of the federal government to step in,” Johnson told reporters outside the White House.
Trump on Monday also doubled down on his decision over the weekend to deploy the National Guard to California, over Newsom’s objections.
Trump said in 2020 that a request from a governor was needed to send in the National Guard. On Monday, ABC News asked Trump what changed between his statement then and now.
“Well, the biggest change from that statement is we have an incompetent governor,” Trump said. Trump contended his administration was “straightening out his problems.”
“I mean, I think we have it very well under control. I think it would have been a very bad situation. It was heading in the wrong direction. It’s now heading in the right direction,” Trump said.
Trump has long expressed a desire to quash protests he considered dangerous by using the military, though the use of federal troops on U.S. soil is mostly prohibited by the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act. Trump deployed the National Guard in this situation under Title 10 of the U.S. Code.
Asked if he would deploy Marines to Los Angeles on Monday, Trump had said “we’ll see what happens.”
Shortly after the president’s comments, a U.S. official confirmed to ABC News 700 Marines from Twentynine Palms, California, had been ordered to assist on the streets of Los Angeles, although it was unclear exactly what role they would play.
Newsom said the state is suing the administration over Trump deploying the National Guard.
“He flamed the fires and illegally acted to federalize the National Guard,” Newsom wrote on social media. “The order he signed doesn’t just apply to CA. It will allow him to go into ANY STATE and do the same thing. We’re suing him.”
ABC News’ John Parkinson contributed to this report.
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump and California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom are engaged in a bitter fight over the handling of protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement continue in Los Angeles — and both also are framing their confrontation in familiar, sharp political terms.
On Monday, the president said it would be a “great thing” if border czar Tom Homan arrested Newsom; in response, the California governor fired back that the comment is an “unmistakable step toward authoritarianism.”
In a sign of how much politics is driving the confrontation, Trump, when asked on Monday afternoon by ABC News what crime Newsom has committed to warrant his arrest, Trump said the governor’s “primary crime is running for governor because he’s done such a bad job.” Newsom responded on X, “Donald Trump admits he will arrest a sitting governor simply because he ran for office.”
With the protests, Trump, who has characterized them as “violent, insurrectionist mobs” and “Gavin Newscum inspired Riots,” has deployed National Guard members to Los Angeles. Newsom has asked the administration to rescind the deployment and said Monday that he is suing the Trump administration, claiming Trump illegally federalized the National Guard.
But Trump is not only criticizing the protesters — he is blasting the Democrats leading the state and the city, calling them failures.
“The very incompetent ‘Governor,’ Gavin Newscum, and ‘Mayor,’ Karen Bass, should be saying, ‘THANK YOU, PRESIDENT TRUMP, YOU ARE SO WONDERFUL. WE WOULD BE NOTHING WITHOUT YOU, SIR,'” Trump wrote on his social media platform on Monday. “Instead, they choose to lie to the People of California and America by saying that we weren’t needed, and that these are ‘peaceful protests.'”
Trump has long been critical of the leadership in most Democratic-run states, often focusing his ire on California.
The situation, separately, gives Trump the chance to take high-profile action on immigration enforcement — a key issue for the president during his 2024 campaign and one that has remained a priority during the first few months of his administration. A recent poll from Marquette Law School taken in early to mid-May found that Trump had positive or around even job approval on border security and immigration.
Newsom, for his part, has explicitly accused the White House of exacerbating the situation for political gain.
“They want a spectacle. They want the violence,” he said in an email to supporters sent through his political action committee on Sunday night. “They think this is good for them politically.” Since then, he’s posted a blizzard of attacks on Trump via social media.
The White House responded to an ABC News request for comment late Monday afternoon.
“Gavin Newsom’s feckless leadership is directly responsible for the lawless riots and violent attacks on law enforcement in Los Angeles. Instead of writing fundraising emails meant to score political points with his left-wing base, Newsom should focus on protecting Americans by restoring law and order to his state,” Abigail Jackson, a White House spokeswoman, said.
Newsom and Trump have long been at odds, although the two had a brief detente in their relationship in the past few months.
In the aftermath of wildfires in January that devastated the Los Angeles region, Trump visited the city toward the end of the month and was greeted on the tarmac by Newsom with several handshakes and an embrace; Newsom also met with Trump in Washington in early February, and told CNN afterwards, “I have just all the confidence in the world that it’s going to be a strong partnership moving forward.”
But Newsom, around that time, also approved $50 million for funds that could be used in legal battles against the federal government.
And Newsom grew more critical of Trump in the months afterward — attacking the president’s tariff policy in an ad that aired on Fox News where he said the “tariffs punish families.”
The Trump administration has appeared to direct punishment at California as well. Earlier this month, Trump vowed to impose “large scale fines” on California after a transgender teen competed in a California state final competition in track and field. Last week, the Trump administration signaled that it would cut federal funding for a high-speed rail project in the state.
Newsom, separately, has begun to build a national profile amid speculation that he could run for president in 2028, which included stoking more speculation through a buzzy podcast launch in March. Newsom is term-limited and cannot run for governor in 2026.
While the Los Angeles situation is tied to Newsom’s current work as governor and not to any current or future campaign, it puts him back in the national spotlight and at the center of one of the nation’s highest-profile political issues, standing up to Trump.
Newsom referenced what he framed as the national stakes in his response to Trump’s comments on his potential arrest: “This is a day I hoped I would never see in America… this is a line we cannot cross as a nation.”
ABC News’ Molly Nagle and Michelle Stoddart contributed to this report.
(LOS ANGELES) — Protests in Los Angeles are entering their fourth day over the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown.
President Donald Trump, over the weekend, called protesters “violent, insurrectionist mobs” after he deployed the National Guard despite objections from California’s Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom.
The escalatory step is prompting a host of legal questions, including how far Trump is willing to go to use his authority to curb protests over his administration’s immigration raids.
On Sunday, Trump was asked by ABC News Senior Political Correspondent Rachel Scott if he is prepared to invoke the 1807 Insurrection Act. The last time the act was used was in 1992 during the Los Angeles riots.
“Depends on whether or not there is an insurrection,” Trump replied.
When asked by Scott if he thought an insurrection was taking place in Los Angeles, Trump replied, “No, no. But you have violent people, and we are not going to let them get away with it,” Trump said at the time. But by Sunday night, he was referring to the protesters on his Truth Social platform as “violent, insurrectionist mobs” and “paid insurrectionists.”
Asked to define insurrection, Trump said, “You actually really just have to look at the site to see what’s happening.”
Trump notably did not rule out sending active-duty Marines to California after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said they were standing by. A U.S. official confirmed on Monday afternoon that 700 Marines from Twentynine Palms, California, have been ordered to assist in Los Angeles.
The bar for sending active-duty Marines? “The bar is what I think is,” Trump had said on Sunday.
What to know about the Insurrection Act
Generally, the use of federal troops on U.S. soil is mostly prohibited. The 1878 Posse Comitatus Act limits the military from being involved in civilian law enforcement unless Congress approves it or under circumstances “expressly authorized by the Constitution.”
One exception is the Insurrection Act, a 218-year-old law signed by President Thomas Jefferson.
The Insurrection Act states, in part: “Whenever there is an insurrection in any State against its government, the President may, upon the request of its legislature or of its governor if the legislature cannot be convened, call into Federal service such of the militia of the other States, in the number requested by that State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to suppress the insurrection.”
Another provision states it can be used “whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any State by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings.”
Some legal experts have warned the law is overly broad and vague, and there have been various calls for it to be reformed to provide greater checks on presidential power.
The Insurrection Act has been invoked in response to 30 crises over its history, according to the Brennan Center for Justice, including presidents Dwight D. Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy to desegregate schools after the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in Brown v. Board of Education.
Most of its uses involved federal troops being deployed, though a few situations were resolved after troops were ordered to respond but before they arrived on the scene, the Brennan Center noted.
When it was last used in 1992 by President George H.W. Bush to send the National Guard to Los Angeles, it was at the request of then-Gov. Pete Wilson as riots exploded in the city after the acquittal of four white police officers charged in the beating of Rodney King.
If Trump were to invoke the act, he would likely be doing so against Newsom’s wishes — something that hasn’t been done since President Lyndon B. Johnson in the 1960s to deal with civil unrest.
How Trump mobilized the National Guard
Trump did not invoke the Insurrection Act when he activated and deployed the National Guard to Los Angeles.
Instead, he cited Title 10 of the U.S. Code — which contains a provision that allows the president to call on federal service members when there “is a rebellion or danger of rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States” or when “the President is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States.”
According to a presidential memorandum, Trump said he was sending National Guard to “temporarily protect ICE and other United States Government personnel who are performing Federal functions, including the enforcement of Federal law, and to protect Federal property, at locations where protests against these functions are occurring or are likely to occur based on current threat assessments and planned operations.”
The memo stated that 2,000 National Guard troops could be deployed for 60 days or “at the discretion” of Hegseth.
Troops called up under Title 10 fall generally are prevented from direct involvement in law enforcement duties under the Posse Comitatus Act, unless Trump invokes the Insurrection Act or other limited exceptions apply.
Gov. Newsom said on Monday the state is suing the administration over Trump deploying the National Guard.
“He flamed the fires and illegally acted to federalize the National Guard,” Newsom wrote on social media. “The order he signed doesn’t just apply to CA. It will allow him to go into ANY STATE and do the same thing. We’re suing him.”
(WASHINGTON) — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is expected to testify before a House panel on Tuesday, his first time on Capitol Hill since being sworn in five months ago and as questions swirl about the deployment of troops to Los Angeles as part of an immigration crackdown.
Hegseth planned to appear before the House Appropriations Defense Subcommittee alongside Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff, and acting Pentagon Comptroller Bryn Woollacott MacDonnell to discuss the administration’s upcoming 2026 budget request.
During the hearing, Hegseth is widely expected to dodge many of the specifics on the military’s spending blueprint, which has not been released, and instead highlight recent gains in recruiting numbers and new technology initiatives in the Army.
But overshadowing much of his testimony will be the Pentagon’s decision to send some 4,800 troops, including 700 Marines, to Los Angeles following several days of clashes between protesters and law enforcement there. The troops, known as Task Force 51, are being called under a law known as Title 10, which allows the president to send military forces to protect federal property and personnel.
Gen. Eric Smith, commandant of the Marine Corps, is scheduled to testify separately Tuesday before the Senate Armed Services Committee.
On the eve of Hegseth’s testimony, Rep. Betty McCollum on Minnesota, the top Democrat on the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, accused President Donald Trump of deliberately escalating the situation in Los Angeles by pushing for military reinforcements not requested by California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom. She called decision to send Marines in particular “outrageous.”
“The active duty military has absolutely no legal role in domestic law enforcement. President Trump and Secretary Hegseth should read the Constitution and follow the law,” she said.
The Pentagon has not had a news conference since the deployment of troops to Los Angeles, referring reporters with questions about the mission to Hegseth’s posts on X.
On X, Hegseth said the troops were needed to protect federal immigration officers and detention buildings.
“There is plenty of room for peaceful protest, but ZERO tolerance for attacking federal agents who are doing their job. The National Guard, and Marines if need be, stand with ICE,” Hegseth said in a statement.
U.S. officials said the troops would carry guns and ammunition separately for use only in self-defense and to protect federal property. They would not patrol the streets or help law enforcement arrest protesters, the officials said.
Unclear is whether Trump is preparing to invoke the Insurrection Act, an 1807 law that says the president can call on a militia or the U.S. armed forces if there’s been “any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy” in a state that “opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.”
On his Truth Social platform on Sunday, Trump referred to the L.A. protesters as “violent, insurrectionist mobs” and “paid insurrectionists.”
When asked if Hegseth had spoken with Trump on Monday, Pentagon press secretary Kingsley Wilson told ABC News, “the Secretary is in regular contact with the President regarding the National Guard presence in Los Angeles.”
Following his testimony, Hegseth is expected to travel with the president to Fort Bragg in North Carolina on Tuesday to participate in activities tied to the Army’s 250th birthday celebration.
Under Hegseth, the military has taken over control of hundreds of miles along the U.S. southern border with Mexico in an effort to tamp down unauthorized entry by migrants. He’s also eliminated programs aimed at increasing diversity among military personnel, slashed the number of general officers and initiated efforts to build a $175 billion U.S. missile defense shield.
At the same time, Hegseth also faces reports of dysfunction and infighting among his personal staff at the Pentagon. Since his Jan. 25 swearing in, Hegseth has fired or sidelined several of his own top political advisers and he’s gone without a chief of staff since April.
Tuesday’s hearing also would be Hegseth’s first appearance since revelations that he relied on a commercial messaging app known as Signal to relay details about a pending military attack to other high-ranking officials and others, including his wife. Hegseth’s use of Signal is now under internal investigation by the Defense Department’s inspector general.
From left, Ed Kelly, general president of the International Association of Fire Fighters, Reps. Josh Gottheimer, D-N.J., Tom Suozzi, D-N.Y., and Mikie Sherrill, D-N.J., conduct a news conference to advocate for inclusion of the state and local tax (SALT) deduction in the Build Back Better Act reconciliation bill, outside the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday, December 8, 2021. (Photo By Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
(TRENTON, NJ) — Voters head to the polls on Tuesday for New Jersey’s primary elections, which will set up the state’s 2025 gubernatorial election — the results of which could be a potential harbinger for the mood of the country ahead of 2026’s critical midterm elections.
The Democratic candidates are sparring over how to best respond to President Donald Trump’s agenda in the Garden State and each hopes to keep the state’s governorship in Democratic hands. The state’s current governor, Democrat Phil Murphy, can’t run again after serving two terms.
There are six candidates in the Democratic primary. Polling has shown that Rep. Mikie Sherrill, a former Navy helicopter pilot who represents the state’s 11th Congressional District, leads the crowded Democratic field, but the race could still be anyone’s to win.
The other Democratic candidates are Rep. Josh Gottheimer, who represents the state’s 5th District; Newark Mayor Ras Baraka; Jersey City Mayor Steve Fulop; New Jersey Education Association President Sean Spiller; and former state Senate president Steve Sweeney.
Republicans, meanwhile, hope to flip New Jersey’s governorship red in November and also have a crowded primary field. President Donald Trump has endorsed former state assemblyman Jack Ciattarelli, who ran for governor in 2021, narrowly losing to Murphy.
“This year’s election for governor is critical for New Jersey’s future. You’ll decide whether New Jersey is a high tax, high crime, sanctuary state,” Trump said during a rally held by telephone last week. “New Jersey is ready to pop out of that blue horror show.”
Ciattarelli faces conservative radio personality Bill Spadea, state Sen. Jon Bramnick, former Englewood Cliffs Mayor Mario Kranjac, and contractor Justin Barbera.
The contest is on track to become the priciest election in New Jersey history, with over $85 million spent on advertising as of last Wednesday, according to a report from media tracking agency AdImpact.
Among Democrats, Gottheimer has the most ad spending supporting him ($22.8 million), followed by Fulop ($17.8 million).
Ciattarelli leads among Republicans with $5.9 million in ad spending or reservations supporting him, dwarfing Spadea’s $2.2 million and Bramnick’s $1.2 million.
About 70% of broadcast ad airings have mentioned Trump, according to AdImpact.
-ABC News’ Emily Chang and Halle Troadec contributed to this report.
(WASHINGTON) — Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy told ABC News’ Martha Raddatz that his defense minister told him Friday the U.S. had transferred anti-drone weapons which defended against Russian attacks.
Zelenskyy said the U.S. would divert “20,000 missiles” from Ukraine’s arsenal to the Middle East, where it appears the U.S. would use them for its own force protection.
“Without the help of the United States, we will have more losses,” Zelenskyy told Raddatz in Kyiv last week.
The move comes as Russia ramps up its drone attacks and after Ukraine struck deep inside Russia with its own drones last week, shocking Russia in a clandestine operation.
Overnight Sunday, Russia launched 479 drones and 20 missiles into Ukraine in an attack the Ukrainian Air Force called an “absolute record” for a Russian aerial offensive.
The Pentagon declined to confirm the assets were being relocated.
The Ukrainian president said the assets were “not expensive, but [a] special technology” which specifically defended against Shahed drones.
The Shaheds are an inexpensive drone originally made by Iran and imported by Moscow. Russia now mass produces them.
The Wall Street Journal reported last week that the Pentagon authorized a transfer of an anti-drone technology utilized by Ukraine to take down Russian drones.
“We counted on these 20,000 missiles,” Zelesnkyy told Raddatz in their exclusive Friday sit-down. He said that earlier in the day, “my Minister of Defense told me that United States moved it to the Middle East.”
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump and California’s Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom escalated their confrontation on Monday over the handling of protests in Los Angeles triggered by Trump’s immigration crackdown.
After Newsom had objected to Trump sending in the National Guard without his consent, Trump on Monday afternoon ordered hundreds of Marines into the city as well.
Earlier Monday, arriving back at the White House after spending the weekend at Camp David, Trump had told reporters he would arrest Newsom if he were “border czar” Tom Homan — hours after Homan said there had been “no discussion” about arresting Newsom.
“I would do it if I were Tom. I think it’s great,” Trump told reporters on the South Lawn.
Newsom quickly fired back.
“The President of the United States just called for the arrest of a sitting Governor,” Newsom posted on Instagram along with a video of Trump’s comments. “This is a day I hoped I would never see in America. I don’t care if you’re a Democrat or a Republican this is a line we cannot cross as a nation — this is an unmistakable step toward authoritarianism.”
At a White House event Monday afternoon, Trump was asked by ABC News White House Correspondent Karen Travers what crime Newsom had committed that would warrant his arrest.
“I think his primary crime is running for governor because he’s done such a bad job,” Trump responded.
Homan himself earlier Monday pushed back on the idea he was going to arrest Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, both Democrats.
In an interview with NBC News over the weekend, Homan had not ruled out the possibility — prompting Newsom to respond: “He knows where to find me.”
Homan on Monday morning, during an interview on Fox, commented further on his remarks to NBC.
“The reporter asked about, ‘Could Governor, Governor Newsom, or Mayor Bass, be arrested? I said, ‘Well, no one’s above the law, if they cross the line and commit a crime. Absolutely they can.’ So, there was no discussion about arresting Newsom,” he said.
“I’ve said it many times, You can protest, you got your First Amendment rights, but when you cross that line, you put hands on an ICE officer, or you destroy property, or ICE says that you’re impeding law enforcement … That’s a crime, and that the Trump administration is not going to tolerate. You cross that line we’re gonna see prosecution in the Department of Justice,” Homan said.
Trump on Monday also doubled down on his decision over the weekend to deploy the National Guard to California, over objections from Newsom.
Trump said in 2020 that a request from a governor was needed to send in the National Guard. ABC News asked Trump what changed between his statement then and now.
“Well, the biggest change from that statement is we have an incompetent governor,” Trump said.
Trump has long expressed a desire to quash protests he considered dangerous by using the military, though the use of federal troops on U.S. soil is mostly prohibited by the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act. Trump deployed the National Guard in this situation under Title 10 of the U.S. Code.
Asked if he would deploy Marines to Los Angeles on Monday, Trump had said “we’ll see what happens.”
Shortly after the president’s comments, a U.S. official confirmed to ABC News 700 Marines from Twentynine Palms, California, had been ordered to assist on the streets of Los Angeles although it was unclear exactly what role they would play.
Newsom said the state is suing the administration over Trump deploying the National Guard.
“He flamed the fires and illegally acted to federalize the National Guard,” Newsom wrote on social media. “The order he signed doesn’t just apply to CA. It will allow him to go into ANY STATE and do the same thing. We’re suing him.”
Jemal Countess/Getty Images for Student Borrower Protection Center,
(WASHINGTON) — Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., is requesting the Department of Education’s Office of Inspector General review the Department of Government Efficiency’s alleged “infiltration” of the agency’s internal federal student loan database.
“The full extent of DOGE’s role and influence at ED remains unknown,” Warren wrote in a letter first obtained by ABC News.
“This lack of clarity is not only frustrating for borrowers but also dangerous for the future of an agency that handles an extensive student loan portfolio and a range of federal aid programs for higher education,” she added.
The internal federal student aid (FSA) systems handle the $1.6 trillion student loan portfolio for more than 40 million borrowers. It’s unclear whether DOGE has made any changes to student loan data.
“The Department is refusing to tell Americans who’s digging through their personal data and if their data is safe,” Warren wrote in a statement to ABC News. “I’m pushing for an independent investigation into what the Department of Education is hiding from us.”
The OIG office is the statutory, independent entity within the department responsible for identifying fraud, waste, abuse, and criminal activity involving department funds, programs, and operations, according to its website.
Warren and a group of Democratic senators, including Sens. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., Ben Ray Lujan, D-N.M., Ed Markey, D-Mass., Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., Tina Smith, D-Minn., Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., Cory Booker, D-N.J., and Ron Wyden, D-Ore., accuse the Department of Education of refusing to comply with her monthslong congressional investigation into what, if any, records have been accessed by DOGE employees that could be sensitive.
“[The Education Department] further refused to disclose any information about the scope of DOGE’s access to sensitive student borrower data, including whether or not DOGE was granted access to the National Student Loan Data System or any other database that holds sensitive federal student loan borrower data,” they wrote in the letter to Department of Education Acting Inspector General René L. Rocque.
Billionaire Elon Musk and the DOGE team gained access to several federal agencies earlier this year. The team was tasked to slash federal spending and help dismantle the education department.
At a House Appropriations Committee hearing on the department’s fiscal year 2026 budget last month, Education Secretary Linda McMahon said the DOGE employees working at the department had the same access any of the agency’s employees would be granted.
McMahon has also said that DOGE was conducting a “solid audit” of the agency and she appreciates their work to help identify waste, fraud and abuse.
The news comes ahead of Warren’s first ever meeting with McMahon. Warren sent McMahon dozens of questions ahead of the meeting as she hopes to discuss student loan repayment and forbearances, access to student aid and debt relief, among other topics.
However, in February, Warren opened an investigation into DOGE’s influence at the agency. The department’s responses to her investigation did not indicate how a DOGE employee who previously had “read-only access” to files had those privileges “revoked,” whether this employee has “retained access” to any other internal databases, and what actions the agency has done to ensure that sensitive information would not be “released or misused,” according to Warren’s letter to the inspector general.
In its responses, the department said it couldn’t answer the senator’s questions due to “ongoing litigations,” the letter added.
“These responses failed to diminish our concerns about borrowers’ privacy and whether the Department may have violated the law or the federal government’s procedures in handling this data,” senators wrote in the letter.
ABC News reached out to the Education Department and the White House about DOGE’s access to borrower data but did not receive a reply before this story was published.
In April, Warren launched her “Save Our Schools” campaign in opposition to President Donald Trump’s and McMahon’s efforts to dismantle the department. The senator has previously investigated the firing of FSA employees and how a reduction in staff at the agency could have “dire consequences” for borrowers.
“ED should immediately restore all fired [Federal Student Aid] employees responsible for reviewing student aid complaints and refrain from taking any measures to deter the submission of complaints,” Warren and a group of Democratic senators wrote in a letter to McMahon in March.
Recently, congressional Democrats insisted McMahon cooperate with a separate inspector general review of the administration’s plan to shutter the smallest Cabinet-level agency. A group of lawmakers on the Education and Workforce, Oversight, Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and Appropriations committees in the House and Senate sent the secretary a letter requesting she comply with the federal watchdog.
“The OIG must be allowed to do its job,” they wrote. “We urge the Department to immediately meet its obligation under the law to fully comply with the OIG’s review.
“Congress and the public need to understand the full extent and impact of the Administration’s actions on the Department and the students, families, and educational communities it may no longer be able to serve,” they added.
McMahon’s “final mission” as the 13th education secretary is to abolish the department, but the administration’s first steps to diminish the agency was denied in a federal appeals court loss last week.
The Department of Education has since filed an appeal with the Supreme Court.
(WASHINGTON) — Pentagon investigators are looking into whether Department of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth personally wrote the text messages detailing the military’s plans to strike Houthi targets in Yemen or whether other staffers typed out those details, according to two people familiar with the ongoing probe.
The Defense Department’s Office of Inspector General has spent several weeks interviewing Hegseth’s current and former staff members to figure out how United States strike details taken from a classified system wound up in a commercial messaging app known as Signal.
“Because this is one of the DOD IG’s ongoing projects, in accordance with our policy we do not provide the scope or details to protect the integrity of the process and avoid compromising the evaluation,” DOD IG spokesperson Mollie Halperin told ABC News.
The details were relayed in two chat groups that included Hegseth – one with Vice President JD Vance and other high-ranking officials, and a second one that included Hegseth’s wife, who is not employed by the government.
It remains unclear how soon the findings will be released. Hegseth is scheduled to testify for the first time as defense secretary on Tuesday, where Democratic lawmakers are expected to question his handling of classified and sensitive information.
The sharing of the details reportedly occurred around the same time in mid-March when key members of President Donald Trump’s National Security Council, including Hegseth, inadvertently shared details about the March 15 missile strike in Yemen with the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic.
Much of the same content was shared in the second encrypted chat with family members and others — a chat group that Hegseth had created on his personal phone during his confirmation process that included his wife, Jennifer Hegseth, the two officials told ABC News.
In addition to looking at whether the information was classified and who wrote it, investigators are also asking whether any staff members were asked by Hegseth or others to delete messages, according to one person familiar with the IG probe.
The government is required under law to retain federal communications as official records.
