Politics

(WASHINGTON) — The Senate is plowing ahead toward a final vote on President Donald Trump’s sweeping tax and immigration bill, as Republicans rush to get it across the finish line by July 4.

The self-imposed deadline by Trump meant a rare weekend session for lawmakers, one filled with partisan drama and some GOP infighting on the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act.”

On Monday morning, senators began a “vote-a-rama” — votes on proposed amendments to the megabill.

There is no limit to the number of amendments lawmakers can seek. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, the chamber’s top Democrat, promised his party would bring amendment after amendment during the marathon session. Democrats forced a reading of the 940-page bill over the weekend, which took nearly 16 hours.

“Every senator will soon have an opportunity to reject this nonsense and vote for common-sense budgeting. Americans will be watching,” Schumer said on Monday as he slammed Trump’s bill as a break for billionaires that will hurt working-class families.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune defended the bill as delivering Trump’s campaign promises to eliminate tax on tips and overtime pay while boosting spending for defense and border security.

“It’s been a long debate,” Thune said in his own floor remarks ahead of the votes on amendments. “I know people are weary. But at the end of the day, we want to get this done so that this country is safer and stronger and more prosperous, not only for today but for future generations of Americans.”

The vote-a-rama is the last hurdle before a vote on final passage of the bill in the Senate.

There is little room for error in the Republican-controlled chamber. A procedural vote on Saturday night to open debate on the bill narrowly passed in a 51-49 vote after two Republican defections.

GOS Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky and Thom Tillis of North Carolina voted against advancing the bill. Tillis railed against the changes to Medicaid in the bill, saying it would hurt his constituents and would represent a betrayal of Trump’s promise not to touch the entitlement program upon which millions of people rely for health care coverage.

Tillis’ opposition drew Trump’s ire, with the president threatening to support a primary challenger to the two-term senator. Tillis then suddenly announced he would not seek reelection, saying later he texted Trump on Saturday night suggesting he “probably needed to start looking for a replacement.”

“I respect President Trump. I support the majority of his agenda, but I don’t bow to anybody. When the people of North Carolina are at risk. And this bill puts them at risk,” Tillis said.

What’s next for OBBB in the House?

If the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” passes in the Senate, it will have to go back to the House for members to consider the changes made to the bill.

House Republican leaders say Wednesday is the earliest chance for a megabill vote.

“Members are advised that votes are now expected in the House as early as 9 a.m. Wednesday, July 2. Please stay tuned to future updates for additional information regarding this week’s schedule,” a notice from Majority Whip Tom Emmer’s office said.

Republican leaders have told members they will receive 48 hours notice before a vote is called and will have 72 hours to review the bill text.

The House passed the Trump megabill by just one vote back in May. The Senate version of the bill will face an uphill battle in the House, given the GOP’s razor-thin majority.

California moderate Republican Rep. David Valadao said he will vote no given the Medicaid changes in the Senate bill. Several conservatives, including Reps. Chip Roy of Texas, Josh Breechen of Oklahoma and Eric Burlison of Missouri have also expressed opposition to the Senate’s version of the bill.

House Speaker Mike Johnson and other Republican leaders worked through the weekend to lock down the votes even as several lawmakers have expressed opposition to the Senate’s version, which is still not finalized. Johnson can only afford to lose 3 defections if all members are voting and present.

ABC News’ Alexandra Hutzler contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The Trump administration is threatening all of Harvard University‘s federal funding after it said it found the university to be in “violent violation” of the Civil Rights Act, according to a new letter sent to the university that was viewed by ABC News.

The letter, sent to Harvard’s President Alan Garber on Monday, detailed the findings of an investigation into antisemitism on the campus by the Department of Health and Human Services Office for Civil Rights. The letter said the investigation found that Harvard is in violation of Title VI, which prohibits discrimination based on race, color or national origin.

In response, Harvard once again condemned the Trump administration’s threats to strip it of federal funds and defended its work to combat alleged antisemitism.

“Harvard is far from indifferent on this issue and strongly disagrees with the government’s findings,” a Harvard spokesperson wrote in a statement to ABC News.

“Harvard has made significant strides to combat bigotry, hate and bias. We are not alone in confronting this challenge and recognize that this work is ongoing. We remain committed to ensuring members of our Jewish and Israeli community are embraced, respected, and can thrive at Harvard,” the statement added.

ABC News’ Arthur Jones contributed to this report.

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The Supreme Court on Monday said it will hear a Republican challenge to limits on federal campaign spending in its next term, which will begin in October.

Congress has capped the amount of money parties and campaign organizations can spend on advertising in direct coordination with the candidates, but the justices will hear arguments on whether those caps are legal.

The case, NRSC v. Federal Elections Commission, centers on whether “coordinated party expenditure” limits are unconstitutional under the First Amendment.

The court’s decision in the campaign finance dispute could open the floodgates for coordinated spending into the 2026 midterms elections.

National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Rep. Richard Hudson and National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman Sen. Tim Scott celebrated the Supreme Court taking up the case.

“The government should not restrict a party committee’s support for its own candidates,” they said. “These coordinated expenditure limits violate the First Amendment, and we appreciate the Court’s decision to hear our case. Coordinated spending continues to be a critical part of winning campaigns, and the NRCC and NRSC will ensure we are in the strongest possible position to win in 2026 and beyond.”

Coordinated party expenditure limits for 2025 range from $127,200 to $3,946,100 for Senate races, depending on each state’s voting age population. For House nominees in states with only one representative, the limit is $127,200; and for House nominees in all other states, the limit is $63,600.

The Supreme Court on Monday added seven cases to its docket for next term, with more to be announced later this week. In another high-profile case, Cox Communications v. Sony Entertainment Group, the court will consider questions who bears responsibility for the illicit sharing of copyrighted music over the internet.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Iranian-affiliated cyber actors and hacktivist groups “may still conduct malicious cyber activity,” according to a joint bulletin from U.S. law enforcement agencies.

“Based on the current geopolitical environment, Iranian-affiliated cyber actors may target U.S. devices and networks for near-term cyber operations,” the bulletin from the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), FBI, NSA and Defense Department says.

“Defense Industrial Base (DIB) companies, particularly those possessing holdings or relationships with Israeli research and defense firms, are at increased risk. Hacktivists and Iranian-government-affiliated actors routinely target poorly secured U.S. networks and internet-connected devices for disruptive cyberattacks,” according to the bulletin.

All of this comes after Israel and Iran “declared ceasefire and ongoing negotiations towards a permanent solution,” according to the alert.

“Over the past several months, Iranian-aligned hacktivists have increasingly conducted website defacements and leaks of sensitive information exfiltrated from victims,” the alert says. “These hacktivists are likely to significantly increase distributed denial of service (DDoS) campaigns against U.S. and Israeli websites due to recent events.”

The alert says that it hasn’t just been over the past few months that Iranian cyber actors have been active. The agencies point to numerous instances in 2023 and 2024 when the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) compromised Israeli-backed technology, and after the start of the conflict between Hamas and Israel, IRGC-backed actors carried out cyber attacks as a form of protest.

“Activities like website defacements, leakage of sensitive information, and distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) campaigns against U.S. websites have been common attack methods in the past,” the alert says.

In a statement, the agencies say they haven’t seen any malicious activity, but are issuing the warning for critical infrastructure organizations to be on alert.

“We strongly urge organizations to review our joint fact sheet and implement recommended actions to strengthen our collective defense against this potential cyber activity,” the statement says.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Republican Sen. Thom Tillis said Sunday that he will not seek reelection next year in battleground North Carolina. The stunning announcement comes just hours after President Donald Trump said he will start fielding primary challengers to run against Tillis following the senator’s vote against advancing Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act to a vote in the Senate.

“In Washington over the last few years, it’s become increasingly evident that leaders who are willing to embrace bipartisanship, compromise, and demonstrate independent thinking are becoming an endangered species,” Tillis wrote in a statement announcing his decision.

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Sen. Lindsey Graham said it’s “too early to tell” if Iran has given up its nuclear ambitions following U.S. strikes against key nuclear facilities in the country, but the Trump ally said he believes it’s still the regime’s “desire” to make a nuclear weapon.

On Friday, President Donald Trump seemed to dismiss the potential for Iran to resume its enrichment program, telling reporters, “The last thing they’re thinking about right now is enriched uranium.”

Pressed by “This Week” co-anchor Jonathan Karl about those comments and whether Iran has given up its “ambitions to be a nuclear power,” Graham said, “Too early to tell. I do agree that the three sites were obliterated.”

But, the South Carolina Republican argued that while Iran is “done with that enrichment program,” the regime is “not done wanting to destroy Israel or trying to come after us.”

“Operation Midnight Hammer was a tremendous military success. It set the program back, I think, a couple years,” Graham said. “But the question for the world, does the regime still desire to make a nuclear weapon? The answer is yes. Do they still desire to destroy Israel and come after us? The answer is yes. Until that changes, we’ve got to keep our — we’re in trouble.”

Trump has suggested there may be a meeting with the Iranians at some point soon. Graham said he believes Iran must publicly affirm Israel’s sovereignty before any such meeting should occur.

“Here’s the requirement to sit down and talk: They have to say, for the first time, the Iranian regime, ‘We recognize Israel’s right to exist. We don’t like the state, we don’t like what they do, but we recognize Israel has the right to exist as a people,'” Graham said. “If they can’t say that, you’re never going to get a deal worth a damn. So before you sit down with the Iranians, make them say publicly for the first time, ‘Israel has a right to exist,’ and they can’t say that, that tells you all you need to know about who you’re dealing with.”

Here are more highlights from Graham’s interview:

Graham says Trump told him “it’s time to move” on Russia sanctions bill

Graham: So what does this bill do? If you’re buying products from Russia and you’re not helping Ukraine, then there’s a 500% tariff on your products coming to the United States. India and China buy 70% of Putin’s oil. They keep his war machine going. My bill has 84 co-sponsors. It would allow the President to put tariffs on China and India and other countries, to get them — stop them from supporting Putin’s war machine, to get him to the table for the first time yesterday, the President told me —

Karl: You were playing golf with him.

Graham: Yeah, I was playing golf with him. He says, ‘It’s time to move, move your bill.’ ‘There’s a waiver in the bill, Mr. President, you’re in charge of whether or not it’s to be implemented.’ But we’re going to give President Trump a tool in the toolbox he doesn’t have today. After the July break, we’re going to pass a bill that would allow the president —

Karl: And he’s going to sign it?

Graham: Yeah, I think we’re in good shape, but he has a waiver. It’s up to him how to impose it, but we’re trying to get Putin to the table.

On the Supreme Court decision on injunctions: “Judge-shopping needs to stop.”

Graham: So the ruling was, a single judge cannot stop policy for the entire country — that’s beyond the mandate of a federal district court judge. You still have judicial review, but it has to go up the chain. A single judge can’t stop a program for the entire country. And that’s a good thing, because people were going judge shopping. The right would go judge —

Karl: I mean, you were going judge-shopping back in the day.

Graham: Everybody goes judge-shopping!

Karl: I’m old enough to remember when you were all in favor of the injunction against DAPA (Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents) under Obama.

Graham: Totally! I mean — and I’m here to say, judge-shopping needs to stop. We need to have a system where if you’re going to enjoin policy for the nation, it’s done at a higher level than a single judge for the left or the right.

On Trump attacking fellow Republican Sen. Thom Tillis
Karl: The president went on a tirade against Tillis last night, said he’s going to meet with primary challengers, said that he’s grandstanding on all of this. What do you make of that? Is it grandstanding?

Graham: I’ve been on the receiving end of that (laughs).

Karl: Yes, you have.

Graham: He runs hard, and he can forgive. We’re trying to do hard things that should be done and have to be done. We’re $37 trillion in debt. Medicaid has grown 50% in five years. It’s about to take over Medicare. What we’ve done [in this bill] is limited the growth to 6% for two years, 4% after that, so Medicaid is not cut.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries hesitated to endorse presumptive Democratic New York City mayor nominee Zohran Mamdani but praised his “successful” campaign and messaging.

“I have not,” Jeffries said when asked by “This Week” co-anchor Jonathan Karl about if he had endorsed the self-proclaimed democratic socialist candidate.

Jeffries said he spoke to Mamdani on Wednesday and plans to meet in person soon in Central Brooklyn.

“I congratulated him on the campaign that he ran, a campaign that clearly was relentlessly focused on the high cost of living in New York City and the economy. He outworked, he out-communicated, and he out-organized the opposition, and that’s clearly why he was successful,” he added.

Pressed on why he was holding back from endorsing Mamdani, Jeffries said “We don’t really know each other well.”

“Well, our districts don’t overlap. I have never had a substantive conversation with him. And so that’s the next step in terms of this process … to discuss his vision for moving the city forward and addressing the issues that are important to the communities that I represent,” he said.

Jeffries brushed off a question about how Mamdani’s win relates to the future of the Democratic Party.

“I think it will continue to be important for all of us on the Democratic side to address relentlessly the issue of the lack of affordability in this country. Donald Trump promised to lower costs on Day 1. Costs haven’t gone down, they’re going up,” he said.

On Mamdani and antisemitism charges

Jeffries said Mamdani will need to “clarify” his position on Israel and antisemitism.

“Globalizing the Intifada, by way of example, is not an acceptable phrasing,” he said. “He’s going to have to clarify his position on that as he moves forward. With respect to the Jewish communities that I represent, I think our nominee is going to have to convince folks that he is prepared to aggressively address the rise in antisemitism in the city of New York, which has been an unacceptable development.”

On House briefing on US strikes on Iran

Pressed on Friday’s classified briefing in the House on the U.S. strikes on Iran, Jeffries was skeptical of the information provided by the Trump administration.

“Why did they not seek the congressional authorization required by the Constitution for this type of preemptive strike?” he asked. “I still haven’t seen facts presented to us as a Congress to justify that step, and I certainly haven’t seen facts to justify the statement that Donald Trump made that Iran’s nuclear program has been completely and totally obliterated.”

On the Supreme Court’s birthright citizenship ruling

On Friday, the Supreme Court granted a partial stay of nationwide injunctions against President Donald Trump’s executive order to effectively end birthright citizenship. Jeffries called the decision “unfortunate” and “reckless.”

“If there is any instance where nationwide injunctions are appropriate, it would be in a manner like what we’ve just experienced in terms of birthright citizenship, which is clearly a part of the Constitution. If you are born as a child in the United States of America, you are a citizen. So, it was a procedural setback that was quite unfortunate, and it was a reckless decision, in my view,” he said.

He said Democrats will need to “intensify our efforts” in district courts or work on a class action suit on behalf of individuals “adversely impacted.”

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Speaking at the Faith and Freedom Coalition summit in Washington, D.C., an annual evangelical gathering in the nation’s capital, Republican leaders showcased an emerging line of attack against Democrats to energize voters and defend their congressional majorities: the ascent of New York state lawmaker Zohran Mamdani, a 33-year-old Democratic socialist on track to become the Democratic nominee for mayor of New York City.

Mamdani upset former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo on Tuesday with a campaign that zeroed in on affordability: He pledged to raise taxes to He pledged to raise taxes on the wealthy and corporations, help fund city-owned grocery stores, eliminate bus fares and expand public housing initiatives.

His win vaulted him into the national conversation overnight — Republicans across Washington using it as a new opportunity to depict Democrats as “radical socialists” and out of step with the country.

The National Republican Congressional Committee, House Republicans’ campaign arm, has also been quick to link the national Democratic Party to Mamdani.

Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.), who represents a swing district outside New York City and served with Mamdani in the state legislature in Albany, posted on X that Democrats in New York “will pay the price for this insanity at the ballot box.”

“Look at what we just had happen in New York,” Republican National Committee Chair Michael Whatley said Friday, adding, “This is where the Democrats are going. They are open borders, inflationary spending, weak America.”

While some progressive Democrats have embraced Mamdani, some of the party’s leaders have stopped short of endorsing him. Some moderate Democrats representing New York’s suburbs have criticized him and declined to back his campaign.

A critic of Israel’s government, Mamdani has faced allegations of antisemitism over past comments and proposals. In response, he has emphasized policies to combat antisemitism, said that he wants to focus on city issues and has said he supports Israel’s right to exist as a state with equal rights for all.

Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, in a speech at the same conference as Whatley, also criticized Mamdani while seeking to tie him to Democrats.

“Listen, the progressive left will not stop. They will not stop trying to lead us down a path to socialism, and therefore we can never stop … Look what happened in New York. They nominated a mayoral candidate who would make Bernie Sanders blush,” Youngkin said.

“But it’s not just New York. This is the challenge that we continually face and why we have to continually remind ourselves that elections have consequences,” he said.

Ralph Reed, a Republican operative and chairman of the Faith and Freedom Coalition, told reporters Friday that Mamdani’s victory, and a general election win in November, would put him at the center of the Democratic Party as the leader of the country’s largest city.

“The mayor of New York City is one of the most prominent political figures, not only in the United States, but in the world,” he said. “I don’t care if you’re Rudy Giuliani or Ed Koch or, you know, [Michael] Bloomberg, or you know, whoever it is. It’s a big deal. I mean, whether the Democrats would want it or not if he won the primary, he’s helping to define that party.”

ABC News has reached out to Mamdani’s campaign for comment on the comments made at the conference.

When he was asked by ABC News Senior Political Correspondent Rachel Scott on Wednesday about Republicans seizing on his self-identification as a Democratic socialist to paint all Democrats similarly, Mamdani responded, “You know, I see that so many New Yorkers, especially the ones we saw [on primary] night, are not actually concerned — they’re excited, by a recognition of the inequality they’re facing in their own lives.”

Some Republicans have launched what some are calling Islamophobic attacks against Mamdani. Born in Uganda, Mamdani, who is a Muslim of Indian descent lived in the United States since he was 7 years old and became a naturalized citizen in 2018.

House Republican Rep. Andy Ogles of Tennessee wrote on Thursday that he was requesting the Department of Justice open an investigation into Mamdani’s citizenship, specifically his naturalization application.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, (R-Ga.), in response to Mamdani’s victory, posted a digitally-altered image of the Statue of Liberty covered in a burqa.

Several Muslim Democratic members of Congress have strongly pushed back against Ogles’ letter, calling on Democratic leaders to denounce the attacks.

U.S. Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), André Carson (D-Ind.), and Lateefah Simon (D-Calif.) wrote in a joint statement on Friday, “These hateful, Islamophobic, and racist tropes have become so entrenched and normalized in our politics… They directly contribute to the ongoing dehumanization and violence against Muslim Americans.”

At a press conference on Friday, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), who has stopped short of endorsing Mamdani but plans to meet with him, called Ogles’s effort “disgusting.”

U.S. Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.), who has strongly criticized Mamdani over his views and endorsed Cuomo in the mayoral primary, wrote on X on Thursday, “It is no secret that I have profound disagreements with Zohran Mamdani. But every Democrat — and every decent person — should speak out with moral clarity against the despicable Islamophobic attacks that have been directed at him.”

Other House Democrats also came to Mamdani’s defense over the comments.

Reed, who said he was not familiar with Ogles or Greene’s posts, suggested other Republicans should focus on criticizing Mamdani’s policies and legislative record.

“I haven’t even seen it, but I wouldn’t think that would be a dominant message,” he told reporters. “There’s so much material on this guy.”

Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), who won her seat last November while Trump carried the state of Michigan on the presidential level, downplayed the disagreements inside the party, and argued that Mamdani’s victory in New York underscored voters’ focus on the economy across the country.

“People, just like in November, are still really focused on costs and the economy, and their own kitchen table math, and they’re looking for a new generation of leadership,” Slotkin said on Thursday. “It reinforces that you may disagree on some key issues, but understanding that people are concerned about their family budget, that is a unifying thing for a coalition.”

ABC’s Tiffany Li contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The Supreme Court on Friday granted a partial stay of nationwide injunctions issued by district judges against President Donald Trump’s executive order to effectively end birthright citizenship.

The 6-3 opinion came from Justice Amy Coney Barrett. The court’s three liberal justices dissented.

The court, however, said it was not deciding whether the executive order from Trump was constitutional, rather focusing on whether a single judge has the authority to issue universal injunctions.

“Government’s applications for partial stays of the preliminary injunctions are granted, but only to the extent that the injunctions are broader than necessary to provide complete relief to each plaintiff with standing to sue,” the opinion read.

“Amazing decision, one we’re very happy about,” Trump told reporters in a rare appearance in the White House briefing room shortly after the court announced its decision.

“This morning the Supreme Court has delivered a monumental victory for the Constitution, the separation of powers and the rule of law in striking down the excessive use of nationwide injunctions to interfere with the normal functioning of the executive branch,” he said.

However, legal challenges will continue to Trump’s Day 1 order to deny citizenship to children born on U.S. soil to unlawful immigrants or those on a temporary immigrant status, as the court did not rule on the merits of the cases.

The individual plaintiffs in these cases remain protected under the injunctions issued.

“Prohibiting enforcement of the Executive Order against the child of an individual pregnant plaintiff will give that plaintiff complete relief: Her child will not be denied citizenship,” Barrett said. “Extending the injunction to cover all other similarly situated individuals would not render her relief any more complete.”

Trump can move forward immediately, though, with developing plans to implement the birthright citizenship order, which does not take effect for 30 days.

Friday’s decision is a boost for Trump in his crusade against nationwide injunctions that have blocked some of the executive actions he’s taken so far in his second term.

Supporters of nationwide injunctions say they serve as an essential check to potentially unlawful conduct and prevent widespread harm. Critics say they give too much authority to individual judges and incentivize plaintiffs to try to evade random assignment and file in jurisdictions with judges who may be sympathetic to their point of view.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor read her dissent aloud from the bench, criticizing the court’s majority.

“No right is safe in the new legal regime the Court creates,” Sotomayor wrote. “Today, the threat is to birthright citizenship. Tomorrow, a different administration may try to seize firearms from lawabiding citizens or prevent people of certain faiths from gathering to worship.”

“The majority holds that, absent cumbersome class-action litigation, courts cannot completely enjoin even such plainly unlawful policies unless doing so is necessary to afford the formal parties complete relief,” she added. “That holding renders constitutional guarantees meaningful in name only for any individuals who are not parties to a lawsuit. Because I will not be complicit in so grave an attack on our system of law, I dissent.”

President Trump first celebrated the court ruling as a “GIANT WIN” in a post on his conservative social media platform.

“Even the Birthright Citizenship Hoax has been, indirectly, hit hard. It had to do with the babies of slaves (same year!), not the SCAMMING of our Immigration process,” Trump wrote. “Congratulations to Attorney General Pam Bondi, Solicitor General John Sauer, and the entire DOJ.”

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump took a victory a lap on Friday after the Supreme Court limited nationwide injunctions issued by lower court judges against his executive order to effectively end birthright citizenship.

“This was a big one, wasn’t it?” Trump said as he walked into the White House briefing room.

While Trump celebrated the 6-3 court decision as a “monumental win,” the justices did not weigh in on whether his executive order is constitutional and allowed legal challenges to continue.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.