Politics

(WASHINGTON) — A group of bipartisan senators met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Friday morning ahead of the tense exchange between the Ukrainian leader, President Donald Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance.

Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., Chris Coons, D-Del., and Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., as well as other Democratic and Republican senators, gathered for an hourlong “encouraging” meeting with Zelenskyy ahead of his visit to the White House, the three lawmakers posted on their social media accounts.

“Just finished an encouraging meeting in Washington with President @ZelenskyyUa and a bipartisan group of Senators to discuss our ongoing partnership with Ukraine,” Coons wrote on X, accompanied by a selfie with Zelenskyy, Graham and Klobuchar.

“Really good bipartisan meeting before President Zelensky heads to the White House. We stand with Ukraine.🇺🇦” Klobuchar wrote in a post on X.

“So honored to take part in the hour-long discussion with President Zelensky and Senators Coons, Graham, and other Democratic and Republican Senators this morning. There is strong bipartisan support in the Senate for Ukraine’s freedom and democracy,” she added.

Graham, in a video, also said he met with Zelenskyy, adding that he was headed to the White House for the signing of the minerals deal.

“This is a half a trillion dollars that will enormously benefit the American economy. Ukraine is the richest country in Europe when it comes to critical minerals,” Graham said. “These minerals are necessary for us to compete and win the 21st century economy. President Trump was very excited, President Zelenskyy is very excited about this economic deal.”

However, the deal now appears to be in jeopardy after Zelenskyy, Trump and Vance sparred in the Oval Office and subsequently canceled the deal-signing ceremony.

Graham at the White House later Friday appeared to change his tune from his morning remarks, saying, “I have never been more proud of the president. I was very proud of J.D. Vance standing up for our country.”

“What I saw in the Oval Office was disrespectful, and I don’t think we can do business with Zelenskyy ever again,” he said.

“He made it hard for the American people to believe he is a good investment,” he added. “He either needs to resign and send somebody over that we can do business with or he needs to change.”

Still, Klobuchar and Coons came out with posts on X in defense of the Ukrainian president after his exchange in the Oval Office, particularly the moment in which Vance accused Zelenskyy of being “disrespectful” toward his American hosts.

“Answer to Vance: Zelenskyy has thanked our country over and over again both privately and publicly. And our country thanks HIM and the Ukrainian patriots who have stood up to a dictator, buried their own & stopped Putin from marching right into the rest of Europe. Shame on you,” Klobuchar wrote.

“Every time I’ve met with President Zelenskyy, he’s thanked the American people for our strong support. We owe him our thanks for leading a nation fighting on the front lines of democracy — not the public berating he received at the White House,” Coons wrote.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Congressional Republicans on Friday were nearly unanimous in their praise of President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance after they and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy had a fiery exchange before live cameras in the Oval Office.

Speaking to reporters in the White House driveway right afterward, South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham predicted that the shouting match could end U.S. support for Zelenskyy, calling the meeting a “complete, utter disaster.”

“Somebody asked me, am I embarrassed about Trump. I have never been more proud of the president. I was very proud of JD Vance standing up for our country. We want to be helpful. What I saw in the Oval Office was disrespectful, and I don’t know if we can ever do business with Zelenskyy again,” Graham, the Senate Budget Committee Chairman, said. “The way he handled the meeting, the way he confronted the president, was just over the top.”

He suggested Zelenskyy might need to consider resigning.

“He either needs to resign and send somebody over that we can do business with, or he needs to change,” Graham said.

“Thanks to President Trump – the days of America being taken advantage of and disrespected are OVER,” Speaker Mike Johnson posted on X.

“Zelenskyy could have left the White House today with a peace deal for his country, ending this conflict. Instead, he chose to disrespect our President and nation,” Rep. Diane Harshbarger, R-Tenn., posted on X. “Thank you, President Trump and Vice President Vance, for standing up for our country!”

Rep. Victoria Spartz, an Indiana Republican who is Ukrainian-born, said Zelenskyy is doing the Ukrainian people a “serious disservice” by insulting the American president.

“This is not a theater act but a real war!” she posted on X. “Zelensky is doing a serious disservice to the Ukrainian people insulting the American President and the American people – just to appease Europeans and increase his low polling in Ukraine after he failed miserably to defend his country.”

“No funding to Ukraine. This gross disrespect will not stand,” GOP Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of Florida posted on X. “Time for everyone in Congress to drop their Ukraine pins.”

“America First in action,” freshman Texas Republican Brandon Gill posted on X. “Thank you, @realDonaldTrump and @JDVance for prioritizing our people first and for promoting peace!”

Democrats, on the other hand, were dismayed by the jarring, if not unprecedented, diplomatic performance.

“Trump and Vance are doing Putin’s dirty work,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said. “Senate Democrats will never stop fighting for freedom and democracy.”

“A hero and a coward are meeting in the Oval Office today. And when the meeting is over, the hero will return home to Ukraine,” Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., posted on X.

“What we saw in the Oval Office today was beyond disgraceful,” Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., posted on X. “Trump and Vance berating Zelenskyy — putting on a show of lies and misinformation that would make Putin blush — is an embarrassment for America and a betrayal of our allies.They’re popping champagne in the Kremlin.”

Sen. Chris Coons, a Delaware Democrat, said, “Every time I’ve met with President Zelenskyy, he’s thanked the American people for our strong support. We owe him our thanks for leading a nation fighting on the front lines of democracy – not the public berating he received at the White House.”

Sen. Tina Smith of Minnesota said, “That press conference was choreographed for an audience of one and he sits in Moscow. Once, we fought tyrants. Today Trump and Vance are bending America’s knee. And that weakens us.”

“President Trump and his administration continue to embarrass America on the world stage,” House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries said in a statement. “Today’s White House meeting with the President of Ukraine was appalling and will only serve to further embolden Vladimir Putin, a brutal dictator.”

One moderate House Republican, Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska, a major Ukraine ally on Capitol Hill, joined Democrats in defending Ukraine — though he stopped short of criticizing the president or vice president.

“Some want to whitewash the truth, but we cannot ignore the truth. Russia is at fault for this war,” Bacon posted on X.

Later, in an updated statement, he said, “A bad day for America’s foreign policy. Ukraine wants independence, free markets and rule of law. It wants to be part of the West. Russia hates us and our Western values. We should be clear that we stand for freedom.”

Democratic Rep. Mike Quigley, co-chair of the Congressional Ukraine Caucus and member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, said Trump “chose the side of dictators.”

“What just happened in the Oval Office was one of the most embarrassing moments in American history,” Quigley, from Illinois, exclaimed. “The world order that was established after the Second World War is dead.”

Pennsylvania Republican Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick said, “It was heartbreaking to witness the turn of events that transpired in today’s meeting regarding Ukraine’s future. It is time to put understandable emotions aside and come back to the negotiation table. This can and will be fixed. A strong, sovereign Ukraine is essential for global stability in the face of Putin’s ongoing aggression.”

ABC News’ Oren Oppenheim contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Transgender service members are fighting back against the Pentagon’s recent announcement requiring the separation of transgender people from the military.

Lt. Cmdr. Geirid Morgan has served in the Navy for 14 years as part of the medical service corps. She told ABC News that as an openly transgender woman, seeing the ban in “black and white” was “jarring.”

“I just want everyone to know that [transgender military members] have been serving honorably and effectively for a decade now,” Morgan said. “We serve in almost every job role you can imagine in the military. We have doctors, lawyers, fighter pilots, special operations personnel.

“This is a calling, this is a this is a life of sacrifice, a life of service. This isn’t just a job, this isn’t just a career,” Morgan added. “We’re all over the place. We’re doing the jobs. We’re doing it effectively, and that’s it.”

Morgan is part of a lawsuit filed earlier this month by the Human Rights Campaign and Lambda Legal against President Donald Trump following his executive order banning transgender service members from the military.

On Wednesday night, the Pentagon’s new transgender policy, as approved by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, was disclosed in a memo filed as an exhibit file by the Defense Department in another court case challenging Trump’s order.

The memo requires the Pentagon to form a procedure to identify transgender troops by March 26 and separate them from the military by June 25, unless they receive an exemption. This would include service members receiving some form of treatment or hormones for that diagnosis of gender dysphoria, as well as those who have gone through a gender-affirming surgery.

“I’m going to put my uniform on every day, go to work, do my job with the best of my abilities for as long as I’m able to,” Morgan added.

Sasha Buchert, an attorney for Lambda Legal who served in the military while openly transgender, told ABC News that the recent Pentagon memorandum does not come as a surprise.

“This is exactly what we anticipated, and it’s exactly how we framed up our complaint and our motion for preliminary injunction,” Buchert said on Thursday. “The executive order, frankly, is dripping with animus, and we expected nothing less than exactly what we got today. So there is absolutely no surprises, and it’s absolutely shameful.”

When asked what else could be expected of the Trump administration regarding transgender service members, Buchert said there is “no bottom” to how extreme the administration may take things.

“Of all of the national security priorities that we have and all of the domestic priorities we have as a country, they’ve chosen transgender people as a top priority of things to work on,” Buchert said. “I think it’s shameful and disgraceful and has caused great harm to both transgender military service members and their families, but also to the military at large.”

“This is just plain wrong,” Buchert added. “This is the opposite of a meritocracy.”

The lawsuit, Shilling v. Trump, claims the ban on transgender service members is unconstitutional and violates fairness principles. Plaintiffs include transgender service members from a range of military branches affected by the Trump administration.

Buchert added that removing thousands of transgender service members will negatively affect the military financially given the U.S. military investment in each troop’s training and development. A 2020 Palm Center study found the removal of these troops would cost nearly $1 billion.

There are currently 4,240 active-duty, National Guard and Reserve service members who have been diagnosed with gender dysphoria, a defense official previously told ABC News.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — After a month of fits and starts, a final hammer came down on the U.S. Agency for International Development on Wednesday night when the State Department, which had previously said it was going to review all foreign aid, announced that review was over and it had decided to terminate nearly 10,000 government contracts worth about $60 billion in humanitarian work abroad.

The cancellations left aid organizations reeling Thursday.

Many, for weeks, had been advocating behind closed doors for their projects to continue and applying for waivers in order to deliver immediate, lifesaving aid while the review process was underway. Several organizations on Thursday decided to start to speak out as they face a future with almost all U.S. foreign aid cut off.

“Any type of communicable disease, I think we will see rage rampant. I think we will see increased conflict in the world. I think we will see increased terrorism in the world. And so, I think, the implications are going to be really dire in terms of the instability that this creates in already very unstable regions of the world,” said Jocelyn Wyatt, CEO of Alight, an international organization that provides food, medicine and services for refugees in 20 countries around the world.

Like all international aid organizations, four days after President Donald Trump’s inauguration, Alight was told to suspend all programming funded through U.S. grants and contracts.

Wyatt described scrambling to keep her organization’s health care clinics afloat. They had to shutter programs in Uganda and Myanmar but were able to secure waivers from the State Department for lifesaving humanitarian aid to keep their operations going in Somalia, Sudan and South Sudan.

But as of Thursday, all of Alight’s U.S. contracts have been canceled going forward, even contracts related to those programs that had received waivers to continue in the last few weeks.

Now, Wyatt said Alight is closing 33 health care clinics in Sudan, many in areas where they were the only health care provider, as well as water and sanitization services in three refugees camps in the country and another 13 clinics in Somalia.

According to Wyatt, their clinics see 1,200 people a day in Somalia alone, including about 700 malnourished children a day at designated feeding centers where the children get weighed and provided with supplemental food.

“We are unable to provide any services to those severely malnourished children, and so it’s really a matter of days or weeks before many of them will die,” she told ABC News during an interview Thursday. “The toll, the human lives that will be lost, is unfathomable.”

Thursday appeared to be a watershed moment for humanitarian leaders who, so far, had been reticent to speak put publicly out of concern that their organizations could face backlash or see grants and contracts suffer.

David Miliband, president and CEO of the International Rescue Committee, called the termination of contracts “a devastating blow.”

“These are people who depend on the U.S.-funded services for the basics of survival. These programs are not just numbers on a spreadsheet; they represent real lives and real futures,” he wrote in a statement, calling on the U.S. government to reconsider. “The countries affected by these cuts — including Sudan, Yemen, Syria — are home to millions of innocent civilians who are victims of war and disaster. We now face the starkest of stark choices about which services can be protected, and are calling on the American public, corporations and philanthropists to show that America’s generosity of spirit and commitment to the most vulnerable has not been lost.”

“We are no longer the shining city on a hill,” one humanitarian leader, who requested to speak anonymously out of fear of retribution for his organization, said to ABC News in an interview Thursday.

“It seems cruelty is the point. This is not about putting America first. This will kill people around the world,” the leader added.

While aid organizations expected a review of their work with the new administration, the scope and scale of the cuts have been shocking and will mean many aid organizations will be forced to dramatically cut their work or shutdown all together.

The termination notices were included in a court filing late Wednesday as leading aid organizations sued the federal government over nearly $2 billion in past payments they say they are owed for work already completed during the first part of this year.

The filing stated that almost 5,800 USAID awards for future work, and approximately 4,100 distributed through the State Department, will be terminated, while around 500 USAID awards and roughly 2,700 State Department awards will be retained.

Alight typically relies on U.S. foreign aid dollars for about 30% of their revenue and they have already had to lay off hundreds of staff members as they also wait for payments due from the U.S. federal government for work previously done.

Still, Wyatt said her organization will survive and worries about others that will not as well as the impact it will have on the people they serve.

Despite the turmoil of the last few weeks, she was reticent to speak publicly out of a concern that her organization and the clients they serve, could be impacted and retaliated against.

She said she understands the new administration’s push to evaluate taxpayer spending and foreign aid and that she was prepared to undergo an evaluation of their organization and make sure it aligned with Trump’s American First foreign policy.

But now that all of her contracts have been cancelled, Wyatt hopes to raise awareness and apply public pressure.

International Medical Corps, one of the largest first responder and disaster relief organizations in the world, wrote in a statement that they received cancellation notices for “the majority of our U.S. government-funded programs” late Wednesday night.

“As a result, we are in the process of closing affected programs. Though we receive funding from a variety of sources, this loss of funding will significantly impact our lifesaving global operations. To navigate this challenge, we will need to implement substantial changes across the organization in the coming days and weeks,” the statement read.

The IMC, which works in over 30 countries and last year alone said they provided direct health care services to over 16.5 million people, had received about half of its funding from the U.S. It is also currently runs two of the only field hospitals still operational in Gaza.

Global Refuge, formerly Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, wrote in a statement Thursday that the contract terminations did not amount to a “simple review of federal resources,” but instead, “seeks to end America’s longstanding religious tradition of helping the least among us.”

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump is expected to sign a historic executive order designating English as the United States’ official language, a White House official confirmed to ABC News.

The order marks the first time the country has ever had a national language.

The executive order rescinds a Clinton-era mandate that required agencies and recipients of federal funding to provide extensive language assistance to non-English speakers. Under the new order, agencies will have the flexibility to decide how and when to offer services in languages other than English.

It’s not yet clear when Trump is expected to sign the executive order.

The move comes amid Trump’s crusade to curb government support for programs promoting diversity, equity and inclusion. On his first day in office, the president signed an order directing federal agencies to terminate all “equity-related” grants or contracts and later signed a follow-up order requiring federal contractors to certify that they don’t promote DEI.

The White House is defending the action, saying that while hundreds of languages are spoken across the United States, English is the most widely used. Also, the White House maintains that establishing a national language unifies the country and its citizens.

“Establishing English as the official language promotes unity, establishes efficiency in government operations, and creates a pathway for civic engagement,” the White House wrote in a memo provided to ABC News.

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy comes to the White House on Friday to ink a deal that would give the U.S. access to his country’s mineral resources — an agreement that President Donald Trump has cast a way to ensure American taxpayers get paid back for supporting Ukraine in its war with Russia.

“We’ll be digging. We’ll be dig, dig, digging. Dig, we must,” Trump said on Thursday, saying the U.S. would be “doing a substantial amount of work” in Ukraine “taking the rare earth, which we need in our country very badly.”

“It’ll be great for Ukraine,” he continued. “It’s like a huge economic development project. So, it’ll be good for both countries.”

Zelenskyy, meanwhile, has spoken about the deal in different terms — describing it as a means to an end: keeping U.S. backing.

If not the full-fledged military security guarantee he wants, Trump administration officials have said a U.S. economic investment on the ground in Ukraine could serve as a kind of barrier to a further Russian invasion.

“I will meet with President Trump,” the Ukrainian leader said on Wednesday. “For me, and for all of us in the world, it is crucial that America’s assistance is not stopped. Strength is essential on the path to peace.”

ABC News spoke to officials and analysts to break down what’s in the deal, and what the agreement could mean for Ukraine’s future and efforts to end the war after three grueling years.

What is — and isn’t — in the deal

Officials familiar with the negotiations say that under the terms of the deal, the U.S. and the Ukraine will work together to unearth deposits of valuable minerals and other natural Ukrainian resources.

Unlike the original proposal, this framework does not call for Kyiv to use the proceeds from the sale of those resources to pay the U.S. $500 billion — which the Trump administration previously characterized as “payback” for the roughly $183 billion spent in response to Russia’s invasion, according to the U.S. special inspector general in charge of overseeing Ukrainian aid.

Instead, the deal aims to create an investment fund for Ukraine’s post-war reconstruction that will be jointly owned by both countries, they say, and that additional negotiations on the control of that fund and its operation will take place will take place after the initial deal is cemented.

Other factors will depend on the free market.

“The profitability of the fund is entirely dependent on the success of new investments in Ukraine’s resources,” said Gracelin Baskaran, the director of the Critical Minerals Security Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and Meredith Schwartz, a research associate at the same program.

“Therefore, the response of private industry is key to the success of the fund and will determine how much value the United States ultimately derives,” they added.

But officials say the Ukrainians also made concessions. Officials say Kyiv initially wanted the terms of the deal to include concrete security guarantees for Ukraine — something the current framework lacks.

“However, the idea is that with joint U.S.-Ukraine investment in the nation’s resources, the United States will continue to have a stake in Ukraine’s security, stability, and lasting peace and therefore be incentivized to uphold and defend Ukrainian security,” Baskaran and Schwartz said.

If it proves successful, Baskaran and Schwartz say the U.S. may boost its mineral security — but that the results could take decades to come to fruition.

“Mining is a long-term effort — so the United States may not yield benefits for another 20 years,” they said.

Trump himself has acknowledged the uncertainty.

“You know, you dig and maybe things aren’t there like you think they’re there,” he said on Thursday.

A different tune from Trump

After repeatedly bashing Zelenskyy in recent days, Trump softened his tone on Thursday.

Asked if he still believed Zelenskyy was a dictator — an assertion he made just over a week ago — Trump answered, “Did I say that? I can’t believe I said that,” before brusquely moving on to the next questioner.

Later in the day, Trump also offered praise for Zelenskyy and Ukrainian fighters’ valor on the battlefield.

“We’ve given him a lot of equipment and a lot of money, but they have fought very bravely. No matter how you figure it, they have really fought,” he said. “Somebody has to use that equipment. And they have been very brave in that sense.”

Ukrainian officials who have been urging Zelenskyy to accept the mineral pact are likely to see this turnaround as proof positive for their main argument — that signing off on Trump’s deal will boost ties between the Trump administration and Kyiv, while drawing out negotiations would further sour the president’s view of Zelenskyy.

But whether any bonhomie will last is unclear.

“Critical mineral resource access is the latest arena for Trump to focus his transactional methods of diplomacy,” Baskaran and Schwartz argue. “But the viability of the deal remains to be seen as tensions continue to rise between the two world leaders.”

Trump is not known for his patience, and some U.S. officials anticipate slow-moving results from the agreement could leave Trump frustrated.

Or, if the two clash during their high-stakes White House meeting, the president could become embittered toward Zelenskyy again even sooner where Trump is likely to spotlight potential benefits the mineral agreement holds for the U.S. and the Ukrainian leader is likely to push for additional American security guarantees.

But the president shared only positive predictions on the eve of the meeting.

“I think we’re going to have a very good meeting,” he said. “We’re going to get along really well. Okay. We have a lot of respect. I have a lot of respect for him.”

John E. Herbst, senior director of the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center and a former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, argues the very fact that the meeting between Zelenskyy and Trump is taking place is a good sign for Ukraine.

“Zelenskyy’s visit highlights how far he has come from two weeks back, when Trump spoke of seeing Putin as many as three times in the near future, or even last week, when senior Russian and US officials were meeting in Riyadh,” he said. “Yet now it is Zelenskyy, not Putin, in the Oval Office.”

The other negotiations

While much of the public focus has shifted toward negotiations over the mineral deal in recent weeks, talks ultimately aimed at ultimately ending the war in Ukraine have quietly continued on a separate track.

On Thursday, American and Russian officials met in Istanbul for more than 6 hours to discuss increasing staff at their respective embassies in Moscow and Washington — a move Secretary of State Marco Rubio previously said was essential for furthering potential areas cooperation between the countries, including resolving the war in Ukraine.

Officials from sides reported a favorable outcome from the meeting, and predict that an larger diplomatic footprint could create momentum for peace talks and a potential summit between Trump and Russian leader Vladimir Putin.

As a chorus of European leaders have tried to encourage Trump to include American security guarantees for Ukraine to enforce a truce with Russia, the president has continued to say he trusts Putin to hold up his end of a deal.

“I’ve known him for a long time now,” Trump said. “I don’t believe he’s going to violate his word. I don’t think he’ll be back. When we make a deal, I think the deal is going to hold.

But ahead of his meeting with the U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer, he added a potentially important caveat.

“You know, look, it’s, trust and verify, let’s call it that,” he said.

Clifford D. May, founder and president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, argues it’s imperative that the president is clear-eyed in his dealings with Putin.

“As President Trump attempts to negotiate a halt to Russia’s war against Ukraine, it’s not unreasonable for him to show respect for Mr. Putin (as he has been) if he believes that will make Mr. Putin more likely to agree to concessions,” he said.

“But it’s imperative that President Trump harbor no illusions about Mr. Putin – about his character, ambitions, ideology, and his abiding hatred for American greatness,” May added.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The Department of Education launched a first-of-its-kind website, “EndDEI.Ed.Gov,” just hours before a deadline warning institutions to end discrimination or they will be subject to federal funding consequences.

The new online portal went live on Thursday for the community to submit discrimination-focused complaints.

“The Department of Education will utilize community submissions to identify potential areas for investigation,” the new website said. The Education Department also vowed to maintain the confidentiality of the submissions to the fullest extent permitted by law.

“DEI needs to go,” Moms for Liberty co-founder Tiffany Justice, who helped orchestrate the launch of the site, told ABC News. “DEI has re-segregated our schools in many ways, and our children are forced to see race in ways that they never did.”

The conservative firebrand, who called herself a messenger for parents, said she’s been working on the website for a long time. Justice added that the site demonstrates that President Donald Trump’s Department of Education is putting power back in the hands of parents.

“For years, parents have been begging schools to focus on teaching their kids practical skills like reading, writing and math, instead of pushing critical theory, rogue sex education and divisive ideologies — but their concerns have been brushed off, mocked or shut down entirely,” Justice said in the release.

The new website says, “Schools should be focused on learning,” and has four boxes to fill out, including email, school district, ZIP code and description of complaint. At the bottom of the site, there’s a spot to upload an optional file.

The launch comes as a 1,000-word “Dear Colleague” letter sent by acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Craig Trainor emphasized the agency will strictly enforce the Title VI civil rights law stressing that discrimination on the basis of race is “illegal.” The letter is critical of diversity, equity and inclusion practices and programs, which conservatives have criticized for years.

But education advocates decried the letter for its attacks on DEI. The Education Trust Senior Vice President Wil Del Pilar told ABC News that DEI was designed to “provide opportunities.”

“The whole point of these types of policies is, No. 1, to end segregation, right?” Del Pilar said. “Programs that were designed to provide opportunities or to create awareness for folks were designed to improve diversity at those institutions, not to further harm diversity at the institution.”

And education groups opposing the memo, including the American Federation of Teachers, sued the department, acting Education Secretary Denise Carter and Trainor because it could “irreparably harm” students and educators, according to the lawsuit. The lawsuit said the memo chills free speech and violates the First Amendment, and it labeled the letter as vague and unconstitutional.

National Parents Union President Keri Rodrigues said the Trump administration has struck a tone of retribution with its recent actions and that the nation’s most vulnerable students will be harmed if the department goes after school districts.

“I just think that they’re looking for any weapon to attack and cause chaos,” Rodrigues told ABC News. “And basically, this [deadline] is just going to be adding another log to the fire at this point.”

Cato Institute education analyst Neal McCluskey said “Dear Colleague” letters are inherently nebulous and don’t have the force of law.

“They’re basically the administration telling you this is how we’re going to enforce the law,” McCluskey told ABC News. “It itself doesn’t have any force of law. It’s really just informing people, ‘Hey, we have a new view of what the regulations are.'”

The letter gave institutions a Feb. 28 deadline to comply with the Department of Education.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(DES MOINES, IOWA) — Iowa lawmakers voted Thursday to strike gender identity from state civil rights protections.

The state’s civil rights law currently protects against discrimination in the workplace, school, accommodations, housing and more based on someone’s “age, race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, religion, or disability.”

The recent legislation on gender identity quickly made its way through the legislature, though not without facing large protests from critics who believe the bill will open up further discrimination against transgender people.

Transgender Americans — who are estimated to make up less than 1% of the U.S. population over the age of 13 — have been the target of hundreds of Republican-backed bills each year in recent years.

The new Iowa bill is one of more than 450 anti-LGBTQ bills in the U.S. being tracked this year by the American Civil Liberties Union.

Supporters of the legislation came to the Thursday hearing with a plethora of arguments — including concerns about religious freedoms, privacy in public accommodations and the belief that there are only two sexes.

“It would not be wise on the slippery slope of the sand using fluid definitions and feelings. Instead, let’s courageously build it on the tested, immovable foundations of fixed endings and historical truth,” said one community member.

The bill notes an exception for people who experience differences or disorders in sexual development — sometimes known as intersex — as covered by the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.

Opponents say that the legislation targets a small, vulnerable population and will worsen discrimination often faced by transgender people.

One community member, who said they were an Iowa educated and trained family medicine physician, said the lives of their patients depend on the outcome of the bill.

“As a doctor, I see firsthand how social determinants like stable housing, employment and access to public spaces are critical to my patients’ health,” they said. “The protections in our Civil Rights Code are not abstract. They are lifelines. When a person is denied housing because of their gender identity, they face higher risks of homelessness, violence and worsened physical and mental health.”

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Several U.S. Agency for International Development staffers cleared out their offices at the agency’s Washington headquarters on Thursday, saying they were disheartened after Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency laid them off or placed them on leave.

“The more I talk about it, the more I want to cry,” said Amanda, who worked in science and technology at USAID and did not want to share her last name out of fear of retribution, as she waited to enter the building to get her things. “It’s heartbreaking.”

Many staffers said they received an email late Sunday informing them they were placed on administrative leave and were later assigned 15-minute windows to enter the building and gather their belongings. Worldwide, 4,080 USAID workers were placed on leave on Monday, and there was a “reduction in force” of an additional 1,600 workers, a State Department spokesman told the Associated Press.

Those picking up their belongings on Thursday were cheered on by hundreds of friends, family and supporters outside as they exited the building with bankers boxes, reusable bags and suitcases.

“It feels profoundly disrespectful to workers, to people who are dedicating themselves to making things better globally, making things better elsewhere so that they don’t come here, so the problems don’t come here,” Melissa, who also did not share her last name, said of the short time they were allotted.

She previously worked on democracy programs in Ukraine and anti-corruption efforts.

“I mean and we’re all people, right,” she added. “We have kids to take care of, we have parents to take [care] of who are aging and we’re all struggling with that as well.”

Caitlin Harwood, a mother of a 4-year-old girl and a 9-month-old, said she is “worried” about her next paycheck and is unsure what is next for her.

A country desk officer with USAID for Mozambique, she told ABC News that while she believes the government could be made more efficient, she takes issue with the way Musk’s team has done it.

“I think there’s a way to go about that. I don’t think anybody would have been as terrified as they are now if they had come through and said we are going to have a program review,” Harwood said.

“So, this is not efficiency, and it’s actually costing the American people billions in dollars in wasted food, wasted medicine,” Harwood added.

Ben Thompson worked in communications prior to being laid off by USAID and said he had been under a “communications freeze” since the early days of the Trump administration.

“Powerful, evil men are targeting a lot of good people who have dedicated their lives to something bigger than themselves, which is something that somebody like Elon [Musk] can’t relate to,” Thompson told reporters. “This clearly isn’t about government waste, fraud and abuse. He’s not going through with a fine-toothed comb — he’s tearing down our institutions for fun.”

Samantha Power, the USAID administrator under former President Joe Biden, went inside the Ronald Reagan Building, which houses the agency’s headquarters, and spoke with workers Thursday morning.

“What is being done is one of the biggest blunders in American foreign policy history. It is one that generations of Americans will look back on in horror,” Power told ABC News. “But the way it’s being done, the cruelty, the savagery, the mercilessness, is an outrage, and it should, whatever you think about foreign assistance — to treat American public servants who want to do nothing more than serve their country, serve the American people, to treat them in the way they are being treated should chill and horrify all of us.”

Power said she hoped USAID workers “remember the lives you’ve touched.”

Some supporters gathered outside had traveled hours to be in Washington to cheer on workers as they exited the building.

Diana Putman told ABC News she drove 3 1/2 hours to get to Washington from Pennsylvania that morning “because I needed to be here to support my colleagues.”

Putman retired from USAID in 2022 after spending her entire decadeslong career with the agency. She followed in the footsteps of her father, who had begun working with USAID in March 1962 — just five months after it was founded.

“USAID literally is the preeminent development agency of the world, and our soft power has meant so, so much around the world for the last 60-plus years,” Putman said. “The positive face of the American people will no longer be seen around the world.”

When supporters arrived, black tape had been placed over the name of USAID on the signs outside of the Ronald Reagan Building. Kate Parsons, a worker who was laid off last week from the the USAID Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance, ripped the tape off. She said she’d come out to support her colleagues.

“I don’t know who put that tape up, but I know that USAID is still here. We are still here,” Parsons told ABC News.

“Only Congress can shut down USAID — it’s a government agency. The current leadership is trying to dismantle it. They’re trying to do it so quickly and so sloppily that people don’t notice or people can’t stop it, but they haven’t fired us all yet,” Parsons added. “This fight is not done yet.”

USAID workers said they want the public to be proud of the work they did.

“We love the American people. We’re here to serve. That’s what bureaucrats are,” Harwood, the mom of two young children, said when asked about her message to the public. “We are nonpartisan. We had a mission. We were so proud to serve it. And we hope we did you proud.”

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.