Politics

(WASHINGTON) — While the U.S. Department of Education cannot be dissolved completely under the law, the Supreme Court’s decision on Monday to lift an injunction against the Trump administration’s efforts to gut the agency took the first step in that direction — a move that could ripple to students around the country.

The Supreme Court’s decision, for now, allows the Trump administration to fire hundreds of employees who had been on paid administrative leave for months to officially be let go. The layoffs are supposed to take effect in August, according to internal Education Department emails obtained by ABC News, right as many of the nation’s schools return for a new school year.

The ruling allows the massive reduction in force to deliver on President Donald Trump’s mission to reduce fraud, waste, abuse and spending within the federal government — and return education power and decisions back to the states.

But what does this mean for America’s students?

Former Department of Education employees and education advocates told ABC News that they worry this ruling could harm the most vulnerable children in the country.

“This isn’t just about jobs,” former teacher and Department of Education liaison Dani Pierce told ABC News in a statement, adding “it’s about abandoning the people and programs that protect students’ rights, support educators and ensure equity in schools across the country.”

The Education Department, the smallest cabinet-level agency, was put in place to safeguard disadvantaged students, aiding them with financial support and civil protections, advocates say. By reducing the size and scope of the agency — now leaving it with about half of its staff — experts and advocates tell ABC News that disadvantaged students are at risk.

“The U.S. Supreme Court have dealt a devastating blow to this nation’s promise of public education for all children,” Skye Perryman, president and CEO of left-leaning Democracy Forward — a public education advocacy nonprofit — said in a statement to ABC News. “We will aggressively pursue every legal option as this case proceeds to ensure that all children in this country have access to the public education they deserve.”

The department’s main responsibilities of administering the $1.6 trillion federal student loan portfolio and assisting low-income and disabled youth will likely be impacted the most, Education Department sources tell ABC News.

Rachel Gittleman, a management and program analyst formerly of the Education Department’s Ombudsman Office, told ABC News that her position was a backstop for the Federal Student Aid (FSA) office. After Monday’s ruling, Gittleman warned student loan borrowers may not receive the same support.

“I think it makes repayment of student loans even harder than it already was,” she said. “It makes these systems, the federal student loan system, which is already a largely dysfunctional and broken system to begin with — I think it makes those harms even greater.”

However, Secretary of Education Linda McMahon said the department will help employees impacted by the cuts find new jobs and rehome different statutory functions of the agency, including student loans to treasury and funding for students with disabilities to the Department of Health and Human Services. McMahon has also said that no statutory funding the agency administers will be cut.

The Supreme Court’s decision was welcome news to many in the education community.

Tiffany Justice, chair of the Parental Rights Initiative at The Heritage Foundation, has been a leading voice in the conservative movement to bolster the Trump administration’s argument.

Justice called the ruling “fantastic news” that is putting parents back into the driver’s seat of education decisions.

“Can’t wait for @EDSecMcMahon to be able to unleash the full power of reform on the bloated, inefficient, bureaucracy at @usedgov,” Justice said in a post on X on Monday.

Neal McCluskey, an education analyst at libertarian think tank Cato Institute, is also a staunch supporter of abolishing the agency. He took a victory lap on Monday.

“There is nothing unconstitutional about the executive branch trying to execute the law with fewer people,” McCluskey wrote in a statement to ABC News. “The administration should certainly work to eliminate the unconstitutional, wasteful Department of Education, but if it had wanted to do that unilaterally, it would have fired everyone.”

Meanwhile, conservative education leaders such as Wyoming State Superintendent of Public Instruction Megan Degenfelder have long said that the federal government should not have a role in education.

She told ABC News that underserved student services can be transferred to other departments and stressed that in Wyoming their priorities “are the same as President Trump’s priorities.”

“I do not see a place for the U.S. Department of Education to exist now,” Degenfelder said in an interview with ABC News.

“Our founding fathers designed our country, our government, in a way that states would have the ultimate authority when it comes to education.”

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

WASHINGTON — Mike Waltz, the former national security adviser who left his position in May in the wake of the Signal chat controversy in March, will face a confirmation hearing Tuesday on Capitol Hill for his nomination as United Nations ambassador.

Waltz came under intense scrutiny in March for inadvertently adding a journalist to a Signal chat with top Trump officials discussing a U.S. military strike on Houthi rebels in Yemen.

President Donald Trump nominated Waltz to the U.N. post at the same time he announced Secretary of State Marco Rubio would take over Waltz’s post on an interim basis.

Trump defended Waltz in public, telling NBC News the day after details came to light in an article by The Atlantic Editor-in-Chief Jeffrey Goldberg that Waltz “has learned a lesson and is a good man.”

Waltz later told Fox News that “I take full responsibility. I built the group.”

Waltz is likely to face some uncomfortable questions from Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Democratic Sen. Tammy Duckworth, a member of the committee, told CBS News in May after Trump announced the shuffle that Waltz’s confirmation hearing would be “brutal.”

In an interview with “ABC News Live,” Goldberg said he received a message request on Signal from Waltz, or someone “who’s purporting to be Mike Waltz” in March. Goldberg said he accepted the request and several days later he was added to a group that included Vice President JD Vance and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, with Waltz apparently creating the chat.

Goldberg told ABC News a “long conversation” occurred between the group chat members on March 14, discussing “whether or not they should or shouldn’t take action in Yemen.”

The next day, he said he received a text in the chain from someone claiming to be Hegseth, or “somebody identified as Pete,” providing what Goldberg characterized as a war plan. The message included a “sequencing of events related to an upcoming attack on Yemen.”

Hegseth, Waltz and other White House officials denied the group had shared “war plans” in the chat but Pentagon acting Inspector General Steven Stebbins announced he was starting an investigation into Hegseth’s use of Signal during the Yemen attack. A U.S. official confirmed to ABC News that the IG was looking into a second Signal chat in which Hegseth shared timing for the attack with his wife, brother and attorney.

Before taking the role as national security adviser, Waltz served three terms in Congress representing Florida’s 6th Congressional District and sat on the Intelligence, Armed Services and Foreign Affairs committees. He was the first Green Beret to be elected to Congress.

During the presidential campaign, he was a key Trump surrogate on defense and foreign policy.

Before running for elected office, Waltz served in various national security policy roles in the George W. Bush administration in the Pentagon and White House. He retired as a colonel after serving 27 years in the Army and the National Guard.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

WASHINGTON — It was the first White House Faith Office summit with business leaders, but that didn’t stop President Donald Trump from using expletives and charged language against his foes in a room full of business leaders who contribute to faith-based charitable work.

For nearly an hour, Trump rambled about multiple topics his administration has tackled so far, ranging from tariffs to transgender people in sports while veering into tangents about his previous legal battles and first administration.

He spent little time, however, getting into the specifics of his newly established Faith Office.

Trump touted recent actions he made limiting the participation of transgender women in women’s sports, arguing how only two genders are recognized in America.

“We’ve restored the fundamental principle that God created two genders, male and female, that was a tough one. And we’re defending parents’ rights where the parents’ rights have been taken away from them in schools. You look at some of these school boards, it’s like they’re brutal dictatorships. And we brought it all back.”

The crowd cheered at Trump’s rhetoric; however, transgender advocates have argued how notions like that hurt the transgender community.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention defines sex as “an individual’s biological status as male, female, or something else. Sex is assigned at birth and associated with physical attributes, such as anatomy and chromosomes.”

In his freewheeling speech, Trump argued he was centering American culture around faith in his freewheeling speech, heavily criticizing Democrats as unfaithful.

“I’ll tell you religion took a big hit because of the way they treated all of us,” Trump said of Democrats. “And, we now have a confident nation, an optimistic nation, and we have one nation under God. And we’ll always keep that term.”

Trump also directly attacked former President Joe Biden, a devout Catholic, arguing without evidence that Biden wasn’t faithful enough and sought to persecute religious leaders.

“I think one of the reasons we won so bad is they really wanted to take God and religion out of your lives, and there was nobody to, you know, look up to. There was just nobody. It was – we were freewheeling and we can’t free wheel. No, we have to bring religion back into the country. And we’re starting to do that, I think, at a very high level,” Trump said.

“As president, I’ve ended the radical left war on faith, and we’re once again protecting religious freedom instead of destroying it. And God is once again welcomed back into our public square. It’s very important,” he added.

Trump used profanity while talking about his indictments, calling them “bull—-” and other explicit language throughout his speech in front of the faith-based group.

His attacks also extended to Republicans, calling Federal Reserve Chair Jermone Powell “a knucklehead. Stupid guy,” and attacking the intelligence of politicians like former Sen. Mitt Romney and his former Energy Secretary Rick Perry.

Trump lightly talked about his faith when reflecting on the one-year anniversary of the attempted assassination on him in Butler, Pennsylvania. Trump stated that he was saved by God to make the country great.

“It was only one year ago this week that my time on Earth nearly ended. And if you look at that, God was with me. Because that’s something in theory, I should not — I should not be with you,” he said. “I believe it that my life was saved by God to really make America great again.”

On the campaign trail, the president spent time courting faith leaders throughout the country, often refusing to soften his language in those venues as well.

Trump has previously even quipped about how Franklin Graham, the president of Samaritan’s Purse and a Trump ally, would ask him to temper his cursing.

“‘Mr. President, it’s Franklin Graham, and I just want to tell you, I love what you do, I love what you say. I love your stories. I think they’re great, and keep telling them, but they’d be even better if you wouldn’t use foul language,’” Trump told a campaign rally in October.

“So I thought about it, and I said, ‘I’m going to try.’ And I did try, and I’m not sure, I’m not sure I’d make the emphasis quite as good.”

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump has come to the defense of Attorney General Pam Bondi amid an all-out revolt among his MAGA base over the administration’s handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files.

But his effort over the weekend to quell the outrage only seemed to add fuel to to the fire.

“What’s going on with my ‘boys’ and, in some cases, ‘gals?’ They’re all going after Attorney General Pam Bondi, who is doing a FANTASTIC JOB! We’re on one Team, MAGA, and I don’t like what’s happening,” Trump wrote in a lengthy post to his conservative social media platform on Saturday evening.

“We have a PERFECT Administration, THE TALK OF THE WORLD, and ‘selfish people’ are trying to hurt it, all over a guy who never dies, Jeffrey Epstein,” Trump continued.

Trump’s post was ratioed, meaning the post received far more replies than likes or re-posts, often a sign of widespread disapproval — despite Trump’s platform Truth Social being home to many of his most diehard supporters.

Some of Trump’s fiercest defenders have continued to target the attorney general, warning the president that the issue is not going away and could cost him heading into next year’s midterms.

“People make their own choices and decisions, but mark my word, the lack of actual results at the DOJ and lack of transparency that translates into incompetence will cost the GOP House and Senate seats. Don’t say I didn’t warn you,” Laura Loomer, who has been leading the charge for months against Bondi, posted on X.

Conservative commentator Megyn Kelly, who endorsed and campaigned for Trump in 2024, was still putting heat on Bondi even after Trump’s post.

“I’m sure it’s a relief for Pam Bondi to hear the president is still in her corner. Unfortunately, huge swaths of the party are not. She repeatedly misled on Epstein. Then didn’t have the courage to explain herself. Suddenly, she’s camera shy & no Qs allowed. Good luck!” Kelly wrote on X.

At the conservative Turning Point USA conference in Florida on Friday, Fox host Laura Ingraham asked if the crowd to clap if they were satisfied with the results of the Epstein investigation. The crowd loudly booed in response.

But on Monday, Turning Point USA co-founder and conservative commentator Charlie Kirk said Trump had called him and that he would trust the administration and wanted to move on from the controversy.

Kirk said Trump told him over the weekend that he still backed Bondi, sources confirmed to ABC News. Trump made the call after being shown a clip of Kirk seeming to support Bongino over Bondi at the Turning Point summit, sources said.

Notably, in recent days and weeks, Kirk has not been one of the MAGA voices leading the charge regarding the Epstein files controversy, and has at times been more trying to calm things down inside the base as other voices on the right raise the alarm.

At the same time, Trump’s former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon pushed for action regarding Epstein, posting online that Trump should “Give Epstein Evidence to the Special Prosecutor — NOW.”

Meanwhile, Lara Trump, President Trump’s daughter-in-law and a Fox News host, told MAGA influencer Benny Johnson on Monday that she believed there did need to be “more transparency” regarding the administration’s handling of the Epstein case and said she believed “that that will happen,” predicting more information would be released “sooner rather than later.”

Lara Trump’s message to the MAGA base: “But to everybody out there who’s all worked up about it, there’s no great plot to keep this information away that I’m aware of.”

The political firestorm kicked off after the Justice Department and FBI released a memo stating they found no evidence the deceased financier kept a “client list” of associates whom he blackmailed or conspired with to victimize dozens of women. No further charges are expected in connection with their probes into Epstein, the memo stated.

The department also released hours of footage as part of its review, which officials say further confirmed Epstein died by suicide while in custody in his jail cell in Manhattan in 2019.

Bondi, in particular, has come under fire over her comments to Fox News in February when asked about Epstein’s alleged “client list.” She told the outlet at the time, “It’s sitting on my desk right now to review.”

Bondi argued in a Cabinet meeting last week that she was simply referring to a file on Epstein.

“I was asked a question about the client list, and my response was, it’s sitting on my desk to be reviewed, meaning the file along with the JFK, MLK files as well. That’s what I meant by that,” Bondi said.

Trump in his social media post on Saturday sought to put his own spin on the Epstein files, claiming without any evidence they were created by some of his political foes, including former President Barack Obama, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the Biden administration.

The Epstein files have also caused infighting within the administration.

Last week, Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino had a fiery confrontation with Bondi over how she has handled the review of the Epstein files and the Monday memo, sources familiar with the matter told ABC News.

Sources said that Bongino has recently suggested to allies he may resign.

Trump was asked by ABC News on Sunday if Bongino was still his deputy director of the FBI. Trump responded by saying, “Oh, I think so.”

“I did, I spoke to him today, Dan Bongino, very good guy. I’ve known him a long time. I’ve done his show many, many times, and he sounded terrific, actually. No, I think he’s in good shape,” Trump said.

Trump, in his social media post, insisted that his administration is achieving success and shouldn’t get sidetracked by this. He encouraged both Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel to focus on other things he deems as a priority, like voter fraud or the 2020 election.

“LET PAM BONDI DO HER JOB — SHE’S GREAT!” Trump wrote.

In another show of support, Trump brought Bondi along to the FIFA Club World Cup final in New Jersey on Sunday night.

 

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Senate Republicans are expected to spend the week rushing to try to deliver President Donald Trump a package that formalizes some of the cuts made by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency by striking $9.4 billion from the previously approved federal budget.

Congress has until the end of the week to send the bill to Trump’s desk, but the path forward for the rescissions package remains a bit murky ahead of a series of critical votes on it this week.

The package, which narrowly passed the House in May, would cull back funding from Public Broadcasting Service and National Public Radio, and would also formalize many of the cuts to U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), a foreign aid arm of the government that was heavily targeted by DOGE earlier this year.

Unlike many bills in the Senate, Republicans can pass the package with a simple majority of votes. Senate Majority Leader John Thune said on Monday that he “hopes” to hold two procedural votes on Tuesday that would advance the White House’s rescissions package and then move forward with an amendment process to shore up GOP support for the bill ahead of its final vote.

But at present, there are a few vocal opponents of the package who have made clear that they want to see major changes implemented. And some Senate Republicans are raising alarm bells about cuts that make up the bedrock of the package.

A number of Republicans that represent states with rural communities — such as Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Mike Rounds of South Dakota — have expressed concerns about cuts to public broadcasting that could affect the ability of certain communities to access emergency alerts.

Sen. Susan Collins, the chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, has been the most vocally skeptical Republicans of the whole package, in part because of the cuts to public broadcasting.

“There is a lot of what the Corporation for Public Broadcasting does that I support, such as the 70 percent of the money that goes to the emergency fund to local stations. They maintain the emergency alert systems. They do public programming,” Collins said to reporters on Capitol Hill Thursday.

Collins has also joined a number of Republicans in expressing concern about cuts in the bill to PEPFAR, a historically bipartisan and popular HIV and AIDS relief program championed by former President George W. Bush. The House-approved version of the bill would formalize $400 million in cuts to the program as part of its larger swath of cuts to USAID.

Thune said he hopes an upcoming amendment process lessens concerns among Republicans.

“We’re hearing people out, and we are obviously weighing what an amendment process on the floor … might look like,” Thune told reporters at the Capitol on Monday.

Thune said that the amount of support he’d have to pass the package would be dependent on their amendment process.

“There has been a lot of back and forth, as you might expect, over the weekend, and we’ll probably have more report on that tomorrow,” he said.

On Thursday, in a post on social media, Trump threatened to withhold his support for any Republican who votes against this package.

“It is very important that all Republicans adhere to my Recissions [sic] Bill and, in particular, DEFUND THE CORPORATION FOR PUBLIC BROADCASTING (PBS and NPR), which is worse than CNN & MSDNC put together. Any Republican that votes to allow this monstrosity to continue broadcasting will not have my support or Endorsement. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

Collins, a rare moderate Republican in the Senate, is up for reelection in 2026 and has not yet announced whether she intends to run.

Senate Republicans may attempt to modify the bill on the Senate floor to make it more palatable to holdouts, but seriously modifying or eliminating cuts implemented in any part of the package would be a blow to the cuts Republicans want to tout. Also, $9.4 billion is already a relatively small value in comparison to the trillions in spending the government does annually.

The procedural process on the Senate floor is also complicated with limited time to execute. The Senate is expected to kick things off on Tuesday with a vote to move the bill out of the Senate Appropriations Committee to the Senate floor, since the legislation was not formally advanced by the committee.

If the Senate manages to clear a number of procedural votes, they’ll also have to hold a vote-a-rama, during which lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have the opportunity to vote on an unlimited number of amendments to the package. These processes can sometimes last through the night.

If the Senate amends the package in any way, it will have to go back to the House and pass again. Under the rules governing rescissions packages like this, Congress must complete work within 40 days of a request for rescission being issued by the White House. That means Congress has until Friday to complete this whole process.

Sen. Rand Paul, one of the conference’s deficit hawks who notably voted against Trump’s megabill late last month due to spending concerns, said on CBS News’ “Face the Nation” on Sunday that he said he believes the final vote on the package will be “close.”

“I suspect it’s going to be very close. I don’t know if it will be modified in advance, but I can’t really honestly look Americans in the face and say that I’m going to be doing something about the deficit if I can’t cut $9 billion,” Paul told CBS’s Margaret Brennan.

ABC News’ Isabella Murray contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Former President Joe Biden, in an interview with the New York Times published on Sunday, said that he personally made every clemency and pardon decision during the last few weeks of his presidency — including those made with an autopen.

However, he and aides told the Times that some decisions for large batches of pardons were based on broad categories that various people fell into, not based on reviewing individuals on a case-by-case basis. Biden said he approved the categories and standards for choosing who to pardon.

“I made every single one of those. And — including the categories, when we set this up to begin with,” Biden said of the clemency and pardon decisions.

In December, Biden pardoned his son, Hunter Biden, who was convicted on tax evasion and federal gun charges; commuted the sentences of nearly 1,500 people on home confinement; and pardoned 39 people who were convicted of nonviolent crimes.

In January, he pardoned nearly 2,500 nonviolent drug offenders; on the last day of his presidency, he issued preemptive pardons to potential targets of the incoming Trump administration and to several close family members.

President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans have also focused their ire on Biden’s use of an autopen device to sign pardons and other documents, claiming either that the pardons Biden approved are void because they were signed using an autopen, or that it matters who controlled the autopen when the pardons were signed. Trump has said he has used an autopen for some trivial matters, but criticized its use for pardons.

In June, Trump ordered Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate whether the Biden administration sought to conspire to cover up his mental state while in office, and to look through Biden’s use of the autopen.

Biden defended the use of autopen.

“The autopen is, you know, is legal. As you know, other presidents used it, including Trump. But the point is that, you know, we’re talking about a whole lot of people.”

“They’re liars,” Biden also said of Trump and Republicans. “They know it … they’ve had a pretty good thing going here. They’ve done so badly. They’ve lied so consistently about almost everything they’re doing. The best thing they can do is try to change the focus and focus on something else.”

He called the furor “consistent with Trump’s game plan all along … if I told you three years ago, we’d have a president doing this, I think you’d look at me in the eye and say, ‘What, are you, crazy?'”

Asked about the Times’ report Monday morning, Trump called Biden’s use of autopen a “tremendous scandal.” The president once again claimed without evidence that Biden wasn’t aware of what was being signed.

“I guarantee you he knew nothing about what he was signing, I guarantee you,” Trump said in the Oval Office.

Biden’s latest remarks come as Trump and Republicans continue to argue that Biden was not the one making decisions to grant pardons or clemencies, or in charge of decisions more broadly during his presidency.

In May, Senate Republicans announced their plans to launch the probe into Biden’s mental fitness while in office, including his use of autopen.

The House Oversight Committee is also conducting an investigation into Biden’s health in office. Last week, Biden’s former White House physician Dr. Kevin O’Connor briefly appeared before the Oversight Committee behind closed doors, where he declined to cooperate, invoking the Fifth Amendment and asserting physician-patient privilege.

The Times said it reviewed emails from the Biden White House that corroborated that it had put in place a process where Biden made decisions before clemency records were signed by an autopen device. ABC News has not obtained or reviewed these emails.

For larger categories of individuals being considered to be pardoned, the Times reported, Biden did not approve every single name, but approved what standards would be used to figure out which people would get their sentences adjusted. Biden himself did discuss pardons for higher-profile figures, such as former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley, according to the New York Times’ report.

“Well, first of all, there’s categories. So, you know, they aren’t reading names off for the commutations for those who had been home confinements for, during the pandemic,” Biden told the Times.

“So the only things that really we read off names for were, for example, you know, was I, what was I going to do about, for example, Mark Milley? Mark’s a good guy. We know how vindictive Trump is and I’ve no doubt they would have gone after Mark for no good reason … I told them I wanted to make sure he had a pardon because I knew exactly what Trump would do — without any merit, I might add,” Biden told the Times.

The Times said there were some small changes made to the lists of people set to receive pardons after Biden had approved the category based on new information from the Bureau of Prisons, and that aides did not bother to run the revisions by Biden before putting the pardons through autopen, although the aides saw that as routine.

Biden further defended the decision to pardon his family members because Trump would “go after me through my family,” he told the Times.

“I know how vindictive he is. I mean, everybody knows how vindictive he is,” Biden told the Times. “So we knew that they’d do what they’re doing now. And my family didn’t do anything wrong … and all it would do is, if they, if he went after them, would be, is run up legal bills.”

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Senate Republicans are expected to spend the week rushing to try to deliver President Donald Trump a package that formalizes some of the cuts made by Elon Musks’ Department of Government Efficiency by striking $9.4 billion from the previously approved federal budget.

Congress has until the end of the week to send the bill to Trump’s desk, but the path forward for the rescissions package remains a bit murky ahead of a series of critical votes on it this week.

The package, which narrowly passed the House in May, would cull back funding from Public Broadcasting Service and National Public Radio, and would also formalize many of the cuts to U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), a foreign aid arm of the government that was heavily targeted by DOGE earlier this year.

Unlike many bills in the Senate, Republicans can pass the package with a simple majority of votes. But at present, there are a few vocal opponents of the package who have made clear that they want to see major changes implemented. And some Senate Republicans are raising alarm bells about cuts that make up the bedrock of the package.

A number of Republicans that represent states with rural communities — such as Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Mike Rounds of South Dakota — have expressed concerns about cuts to public broadcasting that could affect the ability of certain communities to access emergency alerts.

Sen. Susan Collins, the chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, has been the most vocally skeptical Republicans of the whole package, in part because of the cuts to public broadcasting.

“There is a lot of what the Corporation for Public Broadcasting does that I support, such as the 70 percent of the money that goes to the emergency fund to local stations. They maintain the emergency alert systems. They do public programming,” Collins said to reporters on Capitol Hill Thursday.

Collins has also joined a number of Republicans in expressing concern about cuts in the bill to PEPFAR, a historically bipartisan and popular HIV and AIDS relief program championed by former President George W. Bush.

The House-approved version of the bill would formalize $400 million in cuts to the program as part of its larger swath of cuts to USAID.

On Thursday, in a post on social media, Trump threatened to withhold his support for any Republican who votes against this package.

“It is very important that all Republicans adhere to my Recissions [sic] Bill and, in particular, DEFUND THE CORPORATION FOR PUBLIC BROADCASTING (PBS and NPR), which is worse than CNN & MSDNC put together. Any Republican that votes to allow this monstrosity to continue broadcasting will not have my support or Endorsement. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

Collins, a rare moderate Republican in the Senate, is up for reelection in 2026 and has not yet announced whether she intends to run.

Senate Republicans may attempt to modify the bill on the Senate floor to make it more palatable to holdouts, but seriously modifying or eliminating cuts implemented in any part of the package would be a blow to the cuts Republicans want to tout. Also, $9.4 billion is already a relatively small value in comparison to the trillions in spending the government does annually.

The procedural process on the Senate floor is also complicated with limited time to execute. The Senate is expected to kick things off on Tuesday with a vote to move the bill out of the Senate Appropriations Committee to the Senate floor, since the legislation was not formally advanced by the committee.

If the Senate manages to clear a number of procedural votes, they’ll also have to hold a vote-a-rama, during which lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have the opportunity to vote on an unlimited number of amendments to the package. These processes can sometimes last through the night.

If the Senate amends the package in any way, it will have to go back to the House and pass again. Under the rules governing rescissions packages like this, Congress must complete work within 40 days of a request for rescission being issued by the White House. That means Congress has until Friday to complete this whole process.

Sen. Rand Paul, one of the conference’s deficit hawks who notably voted against Trump’s megabill late last month due to spending concerns, said on CBS News’ “Face the Nation” on Sunday that he said he believes the final vote on the package will be “close.”

“I suspect it’s going to be very close. I don’t know if it will be modified in advance, but I can’t really honestly look Americans in the face and say that I’m going to be doing something about the deficit if I can’t cut $9 billion,” Paul told CBS’s Margaret Brennan.

ABC News’ Isabella Murray contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — About two dozen state attorneys general and Democratic governors sued the Trump administration on Monday for withholding more than $6 billion in federal funds for several education programs nationwide.

“This is plainly against the law,” North Carolina Attorney General Jeff Jackson told ABC News in an exclusive interview ahead of the lawsuit.

The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court of Rhode Island. It includes the attorney general of the District of Columbia, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, and Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear.

“It’s against the Constitution,” Jackson explained, adding, “It’s against the Impoundment Act. From a legal standpoint, this is not a hard case.”

The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 says Congress must consider and review executive branch withholdings of budget authority, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office. The law requires the president to report any withholdings promptly to Congress.

Federal aid for schools is typically allocated each year on July 1, but aid was paused on June 30 in an ongoing programmatic review of education funding, according to a Department of Education memo sent to Congress obtained by ABC News.

“If the courts don’t act promptly, the consequences will be dire,” Jackson warned, arguing that districts face immediate harm as the school year approaches.

Jackson said the funding review also broke the constitutional separation of powers as the executive branch unilaterally halted congressionally authorized money for programs that serve millions of America’s students.

The Department of Education referred questions to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which told ABC News many of the programs “grossly misused” government funds to promote a “radical leftwing agenda.” The Impoundment Control Act specifically states OMB should specify the duration of proposed partial-year deferrals. However, in a statement to ABC News, an OMB spokesman said no decisions have yet been made.

Even though no funding has been cut, Jackson condemned the administration, contending the effect of the pause is going to be massive and could result in North Carolina firing about 1,000 educators. He said workforce training, teacher preparation, suicide prevention and after-school programs could all be shuttered.

“Everybody knows when it comes to juvenile crime, you want a safe place for teenagers to be able to go, to be able to keep them out of trouble,” Jackson told ABC News. “Nobody thinks that eliminating after-school programs across the entire country is a good idea.”

The pause has so far included Title II-A grants for effective educator instruction, Title IV-B grants for after-school programming, Title IV-A grants for student support, Title III-A funding for English Language Acquisition, Title I-C funding for Migrant Education and grants for adult education, according to the department’s memo to Congress.

Parents groups, nonprofits, and education advocates decrying the review are also expected to mount lawsuits against the administration, according to sources familiar.

“This is one of those moments where something really big and potentially really damaging could be getting ready to occur,” Jackson said.

“I’m going to do everything that I can to stop it,” he added. “It would be great if parents across the country lent their voices to this cause. I think everybody needs to hear from them.”

The funding pause comes as the administration has threatened to dismantle the Department of Education, reduced nearly half the agency’s staff and made cuts to grants and programs that run afoul of its priorities.

Jackson and state education leaders around the country believe vulnerable students will bear the brunt of any delayed funding. Alabama, California, and Washington state’s education chiefs slammed the review, saying they haven’t been given a timetable on when it might be completed. OMB has not said when it will make a decision.

Alabama State Superintendent of Education Eric Mackey said this will affect students with the “greatest need” as the stalled funding meets his state’s ongoing educator shortage.

“The loss of funding for those rural, poor, high poverty school districts, is just going to be, you know, more fuel for the fire that makes it more difficult to educate children in those communities,” Mackey told ABC News.

The National Education Association, the country’s largest labor union that represents teachers and other education professionals, estimates Alabama could lose about $100 million if the funds aren’t reinstated, Washington would be out $150 million, and more than $900 million in funding remains halted in California by the administration.

“It is a huge threat to our districts, many of whom don’t have the reserves to cover the balance here,” California State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond told ABC News.

“They built their budgets based on the expectation that federal funds would flow, as they have for many years, and so it creates threats for local districts that they may have to lay staff off. It raises threats for us as a state agency that provides technical assistance to many districts. You know, how will we continue to fund these positions?” he said.

Both California and Washington state’s attorneys general joined the lawsuit. The education programs likely can’t withstand a review that stretches into the school year, state education leaders say.

“If we don’t have assurances that the money is going to be there [by September], school districts will have already started cutting programs,” Washington State Superintendent of Public Instruction Chris Reykdal told ABC News. “We will start our school year under the belief that we’re going to go at least a year without these funds,” he said.

Meanwhile, as districts in Alabama return to school within three weeks, Mackey warned some programs may be eliminated for years to come.

“Let’s say we get eight, nine months down the road, and we’re still in this pause situation and the funds haven’t come. Then, I think as we begin to budget for the 2026-2027 school year then you’re going to see a lot of programs cut,” Mackey said.

“People, as long as they can, will hold out. But if they see that this is kind of a permanent thing, that that funding is just not going to be consistent, then they are going to have to go with the more conservative approach,” he added.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Former President Joe Biden, in an interview with the New York Times published on Sunday, said that he personally made every clemency and pardon decision during the last few weeks of his presidency — including those made with an autopen.

However, he and aides told the Times that some decisions for large batches of pardons were based on broad categories that various people fell into, not based on reviewing individuals on a case-by-case basis. Biden said he approved the categories and standards for choosing who to pardon.

“I made every single one of those. And — including the categories, when we set this up to begin with,” Biden said of the clemency and pardon decisions.

In December, Biden pardoned his son, Hunter Biden, who was convicted on tax evasion and federal gun charges; commuted the sentences of nearly 1,500 people on home confinement; and pardoned 39 people who were convicted of nonviolent crimes.

In January, he pardoned nearly 2,500 nonviolent drug offenders; on the last day of his presidency, he issued preemptive pardons to potential targets of the incoming Trump administration and to several close family members.

President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans have also focused their ire on Biden’s use of an autopen device to sign pardons and other documents, claiming either that the pardons Biden approved are void because they were signed using an autopen, or that it matters who controlled the autopen when the pardons were signed. Trump has said he has used an autopen for some trivial matters, but criticized its use for pardons.

In June, Trump ordered Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate whether the Biden administration sought to conspire to cover up his mental state while in office, and to look through Biden’s use of the autopen.

Biden defended the use of autopen.

“The autopen is, you know, is legal. As you know, other presidents used it, including Trump. But the point is that, you know, we’re talking about a whole lot of people.”

“They’re liars,” Biden also said of Trump and Republicans. “They know it … they’ve had a pretty good thing going here. They’ve done so badly. They’ve lied so consistently about almost everything they’re doing. The best thing they can do is try to change the focus and focus on something else.”

He called the furor “consistent with Trump’s game plan all along … if I told you three years ago, we’d have a president doing this, I think you’d look at me in the eye and say, ‘What, are you, crazy?'”

Asked about the Times’ report Monday morning, Trump called Biden’s use of autopen a “tremendous scandal.” The president once again claimed without evidence that Biden wasn’t aware of what was being signed.

“I guarantee you he knew nothing about what he was signing, I guarantee you,” Trump said in the Oval Office.

Biden’s latest remarks come as Trump and Republicans continue to argue that Biden was not the one making decisions to grant pardons or clemencies, or in charge of decisions more broadly during his presidency.

In May, Senate Republicans announced their plans to launch the probe into Biden’s mental fitness while in office, including his use of autopen.

The House Oversight Committee is also conducting an investigation into Biden’s health in office. Last week, Biden’s former White House physician Dr. Kevin O’Connor briefly appeared before the Oversight Committee behind closed doors, where he declined to cooperate, invoking the Fifth Amendment and asserting physician-patient privilege.

The Times said it reviewed emails from the Biden White House that corroborated that it had put in place a process where Biden made decisions before clemency records were signed by an autopen device. ABC News has not obtained or reviewed these emails.

For larger categories of individuals being considered to be pardoned, the Times reported, Biden did not approve every single name, but approved what standards would be used to figure out which people would get their sentences adjusted. Biden himself did discuss pardons for higher-profile figures, such as former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley, according to the New York Times’ report.

“Well, first of all, there’s categories. So, you know, they aren’t reading names off for the commutations for those who had been home confinements for, during the pandemic,” Biden told the Times.

“So the only things that really we read off names for were, for example, you know, was I, what was I going to do about, for example, Mark Milley? Mark’s a good guy. We know how vindictive Trump is and I’ve no doubt they would have gone after Mark for no good reason … I told them I wanted to make sure he had a pardon because I knew exactly what Trump would do — without any merit, I might add,” Biden told the Times.

The Times said there were some small changes made to the lists of people set to receive pardons after Biden had approved the category based on new information from the Bureau of Prisons, and that aides did not bother to run the revisions by Biden before putting the pardons through autopen, although the aides saw that as routine.

Biden further defended the decision to pardon his family members because Trump would “go after me through my family,” he told the Times.

“I know how vindictive he is. I mean, everybody knows how vindictive he is,” Biden told the Times. “So we knew that they’d do what they’re doing now. And my family didn’t do anything wrong … and all it would do is, if they, if he went after them, would be, is run up legal bills.”

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.