The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) appeared to defy President Donald Trump’s executive order to withdraw the U.S. from the World Health Organization (WHO) after the U.S. agency said it would participate in a conference with the global organization.
The CDC confirmed this week that it will go ahead and partake in a biannual conference on the influenza vaccine led by the WHO.
"CDC will be actively participating virtually at the WHO vaccine consultation meeting for the recommendation of viruses for 2025-26 Northern Hemisphere Vaccine this week," a CDC spokesperson told Fox News.
The agency did not clarify if it received an exemption from Trump’s executive order, which required all officials to stop working with the WHO.
Trump signed the executive order to withdraw the U.S. from the WHO just hours after taking office last month. The president cited reasons such as WHO's "mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic," the "failure to adopt urgently needed reforms," and "unfairly onerous payments" forced on the U.S.
Days after signing the order, Trump said during a Las Vegas rally that he was open to potentially rejoining the WHO if the global body were "to clean it up a bit."
The WHO issued a statement shortly after Trump's order, lamenting the president's decision and expressing hope that the U.S. will rethink the move.
During Trump's first term, in July 2020, he took steps to withdraw the U.S. from the WHO but his successor, former President Joe Biden, eventually reinstated the nation's participation in the global health initiative.
Fox News Digital’s Alex Schemmel contributed to this report.
Texas Democratic Rep. Jasmine Crockett caused a social media firestorm after telling Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) chief Elon Musk to "f--- off" in the latest example of her public opposition to the newly formed agency’s push to cut government waste and spending.
"F--- off," Crockett told reporter Joe Gallina outside Capitol Hill on Tuesday when asked what she would tell Elon Musk if she could tell him anything.
Crockett’s reaction immediately drew blowback from conservatives on social media, who took issue with the liberal firebrand’s tone.
"The face of the American left, ladies and gentlemen," conservative account Johnny MAGA posted on X.
"Please make Jasmine Crockett the spokesperson of the Democrat Party," former GOP congressional candidate Kathleen Anderson posted on X.
"Classy as ever…," Washington Examiner White House correspondent Paul Bedard posted on X.
Crockett’s office did not respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital.
Many Democrats in Congress have been highly critical of Musk and DOGE, arguing that the billions in cuts the agency has announced are slashing important government resources and being done too quickly.
"DOGE is pretty cruel. Let's be blunt about that," Gov. Josh Green, D-Hawaii, said during a press conference last week with other Democratic governors. "These are people in our states that have worked long careers, very dedicated servants, and they're getting kicked out of their lives."
A recent poll, amplified by Musk on social media, suggests that a majority of the American people support DOGE's mission.
The Harvard CAPS-Harris poll revealed a majority of Americans support reducing wasteful government spending. Most voters agree there should be a government agency dedicated to efficiency and that DOGE is helping to make major spending cuts, the nonprobability-based poll found.
Gov. Janet Mills of Maine is attempting to capitalize on her moment in the national spotlight after she got into a public dust-up with President Donald Trump last week over her state's defiance of his executive order demanding biological males who identify as transgender stay out of women's sports.
The pair got into a verbal skirmish on Friday at the White House after Trump said the night prior that Maine would not receive any federal funding until it started taking action to prevent transgender women from competing on women's sports teams.
"We're going to follow the law, sir. We'll see you in court," Mills said after Trump asked if she would comply with his order. "Enjoy your life after governor, because I don't think you'll be an elected official afterward," Trump shot back.
A Maine state representative confirmed to Fox News Digital that following the verbal skirmish on Friday, Mills began sending out mass fundraising texts to Maine residents that cited her altercation with Trump, which played out on national TV.
"On Friday at a bipartisan meeting of governors, Donald Trump threatened to deny Maine school children federal funding unless we fall in line with his personal demands," Mills' text campaign said. "He even stated that he was ‘the law,’ never mind Congress or the states. I told him we'd see him in court."
Mills went on to say that while Trump campaigned on lowering prices for everyday Americans, he is now using his new power to "punish his enemies."
"I want to make one thing clear: Maine will not be intimidated by the president's threats," the campaign said. "The work to push back against Trump and his agenda begins at the state level. Can you donate $10 to the Maine Democratic Party to make sure they have the resources to fight for our state?"
The same week Trump threatened to withhold funding from Maine for not complying with his executive order on women's sports, a transgender woman who competed as a man until June last year won first place in the women's pole vault at Maine's Class B state indoor championship.
Maine's primary governing body for high school athletics, the Maine Principal's Association, confirmed that it did not intend to follow Trump's executive order after it came out. Rather, the association said they would defer to state law that makes it illegal to determine someone's athletic eligibility on the basis of their gender identity.
Sarah Perry, a civil rights attorney who has extensive experience litigating Title IX issues, said that in addition to Trump's executive order, Maine is also flouting directives from the Department of Education and previously established precedent from a slew of cases that challenged former President Joe Biden's Title IX regulations allowing athletic eligibility to be determined by one's preferred gender identity.
"Within six weeks [after Biden's Title IX ruling] we had 11 federal lawsuits brought by 26 states, in addition to a handful of others – the Biden administration has lost every time," Perry pointed out.
Perry added that besides the obvious risk of losing funding, these states also open themselves up to federal Title IX investigations, something she said could potentially force them to comply with Trump's demands.
Fox News Digital attempted to reach out to the governor's office for comment but did not hear back.
FIRST ON FOX: A pro-life medical group is urging New York Gov. Kathy Hochul to reverse course on a recently passed state law that shields the identities of healthcare providers who prescribe and mail the abortion pill mifepristone.
In a letter to Hochul on Wednesday, the American Association of Pro-Life OBGYNs (AAPLOG) said the law "recklessly endangers" patients who cannot follow up with their provider in the case of complications.
"Concealing doctors’ identity recklessly endangers the patients we’re meant to serve," the group wrote. "It compounds the risks of telehealth prescription of mifepristone without in-person consultations, and the barriers it creates to identifying prescribing physicians could mean the difference between life and death for patients."
Contact with the prescribing physician is an essential component of any follow-up care, the OBGYNs wrote, "which is so common and necessary with mifepristone that it was required as part of the original FDA approval."
"Many irresponsibly understate the risks of drug-induced abortions, but the dangers for women who take it are all too real," the group wrote.
The group appealed for reconsidering the law, stating, "This new law makes doctors less accessible to the patients they’re serving" and "erects hurdles for patients with follow-up questions." They also warned it could introduce "time-consuming and potentially fatal roadblocks" to consultations in cases of complications.
Mifepristone, the most commonly used medication for medical abortions for up to 10 weeks gestation, is the first combination of an oral abortion. A second medication, misoprostol, is usually taken 24 to 48 hours later to expel the fetus. A dozen states have passed laws in the last year to restrict access to abortion pills.
"Women taking the drug may require transfusion, develop sepsis, or need surgery to complete their abortion," the OBGYNs wrote.
"The rate of complication for drug-induced abortion is four times higher than for surgical abortions. In fact, 2.9-4.6 percent of patients taking the drug will need to be seen in the emergency room, as happened in the case of the Louisiana patient reported days before New York enacted its legislation."
AAPLOG Action Executive Director Rebecca Weaver told Fox News Digital the law is "essentially allowing pro- abortion states to override the pro-life states … and allowing the mailing of the abortion drugs."
"It's kind of overriding and undercutting what Dobbs was prescribing to move forward after the overturning of Roe," Weaver said.
Hochul signed the legislation into law in early February following the indictment of New York physician Margaret Carpenter, her company and an associate by a grand jury in West Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana. They were accused of using telemedicine to prescribe abortion pills to a minor who suffered complications.
The New York law, effective immediately, allows providers' names to be omitted from abortion pill packaging and bottles and instead replaced with the name of their healthcare practice.
Louisiana authorities discovered the doctor's identity after it was found on the abortion pill label.
"After today, that will no longer happen," Hochul said at the bill signing.
Fox News Digital has reached out to Hochul's office for comment.
The FBI is reportedly beginning an investigation into allegations that the agency, when headed by then-Director James Comey, launched a "honeypot" operation to infiltrate the 2016 Trump campaign with two female agents.
The Washington Times reported that the agency is looking into an alleged 2015 operation, which was revealed by a whistleblower in a disclosure to the House Judiciary Committee last year and was said to involve two agents acting as "honeypots" while traveling with the Trump team. "Honeypots" typically refer to undercover agents who act romantically interested in a target in order to draw out information.
In the disclosure, a copy of which was obtained by Fox News Digital, the whistleblower is said to be an FBI employee and was involved in an "off-the-books" investigation targeting Trump. The whistleblower reportedly claimed that they knew Comey had ordered a probe into Trump and had "personally directed it" shortly after Trump announced he was running for president.
The whistleblower claimed two agents were inserted into the high levels of the campaign and were directed to act as "honeypots" and traveled with Trump and his campaign staff. But the investigation was allegedly closed because a media outlet obtained a photograph of one of the agents and was about to publish it. The whistleblower said they observed one or more employees being directed to never discuss the operation with anyone, including those involved in the operation.
The Washington Times reported that the bureau, now headed by FBI Director Kash Patel, is looking for those employees.
"The FBI has no comment," the agency told Fox News Digital when reached for comment Wednesday.
Patel previously served as the chief investigator for the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence’s probe into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. Throughout his investigation, he led the effort to uncover FISA abuse and exposed the FBI and the DOJ’s unlawful actions before federal court to illegally surveil Americans, including members of the 2016 Trump campaign.
The alleged honeypot investigation is said to be separate from a 2016 FBI investigation, known as "Crossfire Hurricane," which investigated whether the Trump campaign was colluding with Russia to influence the outcome of the election.
Trump fired Comey in May 2017. Days later, Robert Mueller was appointed as special counsel to take over the "Crossfire Hurricane" probe and investigate whether the Trump campaign had colluded with Russia to influence the 2016 election cycle. That investigation yielded no evidence of criminal conspiracy or coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia to influence the 2016 election.
Attorneys for New York City Mayor Eric Adams asked a U.S. judge to dismiss with prejudice all charges against their client on Wednesday, citing alleged prosecutorial misconduct and an "extraordinary" flurry of leaks that they argued would have violated Adams' right to a fair trial.
The filing comes nearly two weeks after the Justice Department filed a motion to dismiss the corruption case against Adams, and after the presiding judge in the case, U.S. District Judge Dale Ho, declined to immediately grant the request to do so.
In the new filing, Adams' legal team asked Judge Ho to grant the Justice Department's request to drop charges swiftly and prejudice, arguing that the actions by prosecutors had violated multiple statutory and court rules, including long-established Justice Department policies aimed at curbing prosecutorial misconduct.
They also cited the "extraordinary" amount of leaked information from prosecutors that they argued would have violated Adams' right to a fair trial; noting in particular a Feb. 12 resignation letter by former acting U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon, which lawyers said would have "destroyed whatever presumption of innocence Mayor Adams had left."
"In addition to violating Mayor Adams’s fundamental constitutional rights and ability to receive a fair trial, the government’s leaks violated numerous statutory and court rules, including the Justice Department’s own longstanding policies aimed at curbing prosecutorial misconduct," they argued in the filing.
The charges against Adams will remain intact until Judge Ho agrees to dismiss them.
Adams was indicted last fall on five federal corruption and bribery charges tied to the alleged solicitation of illegal campaign contributions and the alleged receiving of luxury travel perks on behalf of Turkish foreign nationals, according to Justice Department documents.
Adams pleaded not guilty to all charges and has strenuously denied any wrongdoing.
U.S. Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove asked federal prosecutors earlier this month to drop all corruption charges against the mayor— an unusual move, and one that requires the formal sign-off of the presiding judge in the case.
In the motion to dismiss, Bove said the legal proceedings against Adams were detracting from other Justice Department priorities, such as illegal immigration and violent crime.
However, Judge Ho declined to immediately grant the motion to dismiss at a court hearing last week, telling Bove and Adams' legal team that he needed more time to further consider the facts.
Ho also appointed former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement to argue against the motion to dismiss and to look into the Justice Department's motives for dismissing the charges.
He has instructed legal briefs to be filed on March 7 and, if necessary, said there would be a hearing on March 14.
"This is a very complicated situation, at least from where I sit," Ho said after the roughly 90-minute hearing last week, adding, "I’m not going to shoot from the hip right here on the bench."
Not dropping the charges against Adams is highly unusual, and no U.S. appellate court has ever sided with a federal judge who declined to grant an unopposed motion to dismiss.
The Justice Department did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment on its view of the new filing and if it agreed with the assertion that the case against Adams should be dismissed with prejudice.
The House Oversight and Accountability Committee hearing on Tuesday was slated to discuss billions of dollars in government waste identified by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), but first devolved into chaos when one Democrat repeatedly referred to the leader of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) as "President Musk" and to President Donald Trump as the "grifter in chief."
Chairman Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., kicked off the hearing by accusing Democrats of declining to participate with Republicans in their oversight plan.
"Instead of working together that the Democrats informed us that they have amendments to the plan but are refusing to discuss them with me in advance. They kept any changes. They wanted a secret," Comer said in opening remarks. "Democrats have rejected every opportunity offered to contribute to the oversight plan. So how am I supposed to incorporate secret opinions that they refuse to share? You may be asking yourself, ‘Why would the Democrats do that?’ Democrats say they want to participate in oversight, but if that were true, why would they decline multiple opportunities to actually engage in the plan for that oversight? Because they don't want to participate. They want to stonewall and engage in theater."
Comer further charged that Democrats "would rather hear themselves talk about President Trump and the evil Elon Musk than work together on actual oversight that the American people are demanding," adding that polling this week suggests "the American people overwhelmingly support the work President Trump and DOGE are doing."
Ranking Member Gerry Connolly, D-Va., shot back, criticizing the Republicans' oversight plan over what he deemed leniency toward the Trump administration.
"The sins of omission in this plan are damning," Connolly contended. "My amendment would restore the committee's proper role as a watchdog, not a lapdog."
"People like the grifter in chief Trump and President Musk are openly using their public offices to enrich themselves to the tune of billions of dollars," Frost charged. "So if we want to look at waste, fraud and abuse, which I'm down to do, why is there a complete silence on the other side of the aisle about looking at the complete grifter that is the President of the United States and the richest man on the earth…. Why don't we investigate the real corruption?"
An objection was raised by Rep. Clay Higgins, R-La., and Comer called a point of order. Frost contended he could refer to Elon Musk as the president and Connolly asserted that the First Amendment had not been suspended.
Comer asked Frost if he would like to "revise" his remarks regarding the president, who is protected by House and committee rules of decorum, but Frost did not back down.
"I'll say President Musk and grifter in chief Trump," Frost began, before another point of order was called.
Committee members began to shout over one another, until Comer again gave Frost a chance to revise his statements.
"President Musk and the President of the United States, Donald Trump, who is engaged in grifting of the American people, often use their public offices to enrich themselves," Frost said, until Comer stopped him.
Addressing the motion against Frost for "disparaging the president," Comer told Frost, "If you're willing to request unanimous consent to withdraw the disparaging comments about President Trump, I guess you can disparage Elon Musk if you want."
"I will withdraw grifter in chief," Frost said. "I will say the president's grifting because you spent the last two years saying President Biden was corrupt."
"I can say that Trump is grifting. What I will withdraw is calling him grifter in chief," Frost added.
Comer said Frost was barred from further participating in the hearing, but Connolly challenged the chair's ruling and called for a vote.
It was voted that Frost's words should be taken down, and he was not permitted to speak for the rest of the hearing, but he interjected, "It's despicable that this committee is going to silence me."
"Mr. Ranking Member, I'm going to have the sergeant remove him if he doesn't refrain," Comer said.
Rep. Melanie Stansbury, D-N.M., and other Democrats further shouted in defense of "free speech," before Comer again attempted to get the hearing back on course.
"We have a hearing on waste, fraud and abuse that hasn't even begun," Comer said. "The organizational thing just normally lasts five or 10 minutes. We've been in here 35 minutes arguing over the same things…. We've got to get to business. If we want to eliminate waste, fraud and abuse, we've got witnesses waiting. We have tried to do this. The debate has gone on well beyond what was expected."
After about 40 minutes of back and forth, the hearing went into recess. When it returned, the committee heard from GAO Comptroller General Gene Dodaro regarding the watchdog's recommendations for DOGE.
Frost continued the feud online, writing in an X post, "James Comer can hide behind the Sergeant in Arms and try to have me removed, arrested, and silenced… But that’s not going to stop me from calling out Donald Trump’s grift and his bullsh--"
"These snowflakes are really pissed off about me saying President Musk and calling Trump the Grifter-in-Chief. I guess the truth can be tough for some people," he added from his campaign account.
EXCLUSIVE: As most leaders in deep blue Washington state double down on sanctuary policies and refuse to cooperate with federal immigration authorities, Sheriff Bob Songer of Klickitat County is pledging to support federal immigration enforcement in any way he can, telling Tom Homan to "put me on speed dial."
In December, Songer published a video through the Klickitat County Sheriff's Office's official Facebook page in which he said the Biden administration had "allowed our country to be invaded" and publicly vowed to help ICE enforce immigration law.
Songer’s stance flies directly in the face of Washington’s migrant sanctuary laws, which prohibit law enforcement from assisting federal authorities in enforcing immigration laws.
It also puts him at odds with other law enforcement authorities in the state and Democratic Gov. Bob Ferguson, who has vowed to "protect law-abiding Washington families" including the "overwhelming majority of undocumented residents" who he said are "decent, hard-working, law-abiding residents."
Uncowed by this, Songer - who, after serving in law enforcement for 56 years, is currently serving his third term as sheriff - said, "I will cooperate with ICE 100 percent because they're doing the right thing."
In an interview with Fox News Digital, he explained that, despite being a small, rural county in Washington, illegal immigrants regularly pass through the county and very often receive government benefits paid for by the taxpayers.
"When people have invaded our country across the southern border and even the northern border, Canada, our government, it's their job to protect our American citizens by preventing that invasion," he said. "Why would any governor, any mayor, any county commissioner, or any sheriff or police chief knowingly allow criminals, serious criminals for murder, rape, whatever, protect them from immigration, protect them from ICE?"
"So why am I standing up against that?" he continued. "You bet I'm saying that Tom Homan, if you wish to contact me, I'll give you my phone number, he can have me on speed dial."
Songer said there are two main reasons for his bold stance. First, he believes Washington’s sanctuary law is unconstitutional, and secondly, he feels the U.S. citizens of Klickitat County are demanding it.
"I honestly believe that it's the best thing for our citizens," he explained, adding: "You know what's neat about an elected sheriff versus police chief … an elected sheriff is elected by the people. His or her only boss is the people, not the governor, not the county commissioners, not anybody but the people themselves. That's the sheriff's boss."
Responding to criticisms from Democrats and the media that not all illegal immigrants should be arrested and deported by ICE, Songer said, "They’ll try to tell you, ‘well, those who just waded across the Rio Grande, that's a civil infraction,’ that’s bull, it's a crime under federal law. Period. No matter what their intentions were."
"They're coming into this country across the border with no legal representation at all. In other words, they know they're breaking the law. Why not? They get free phones, free medical, free sign up, it's Christmas for them," he said. "And at the same time, our government, Democrat government, they didn't give a d--- about veterans or homeless that are U.S. citizens."
"I know Washington State is a blue, blue, blue sanctuary state. It's scary to live in this kind of atmosphere," he concluded. "But I wanted to make it clear and make it known to Tom Homan and President Trump and Vance, the vice president, that as long as I'm in office … I will totally cooperate with it and I want them to know that all they got to do is reach out and ask for assistance in Klickitat County, and I'll be there, standing at attention and willing to carry out the duties."
FIRST ON FOX: CIA Director John Ratcliffe is unconcerned by speculation that agents who are fired under Department of Government Efficiency cuts may take the nation’s secrets to foreign adversaries.
"Any individual who would be willing to sell the Nation’s secrets to a foreign adversary has no place working at the Agency that plays an incredible role in keeping Americans safe every day," Ratcliffe told Fox News Digital in a statement.
CNN reported on Monday that mass firings and buyouts offered to agents were under discussion among CIA "top leadership," who were apparently worried that losing their jobs might prompt disgruntled former officers to take their classified intelligence to foreign intelligence services like those of China or Russia.
"You’re telling me that a professional setback could cause people to risk the consequences of treason and betray their country, and your argument is that those are the kind of people who should stay inside CIA?" a source familiar with the CIA head’s thinking added to Fox News Digital.
"There’s a general sense that it’s more of a justification for maintaining the status quo, but if potential traitors are there, it’s hard to argue the solution is for them to continue maintaining access to the nation’s secrets."
"You’re just rolling the dice that these folks are gonna honor their secrecy agreement and not volunteer to a hostile intelligence service," an unnamed U.S. official reportedly told CNN.
The CIA and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence recently tried to fire 51 employees who worked on diversity issues, and newer employees are potentially on the chopping block to comply with a government-wide effort to root out probationary employees before they earn civil service protection.
A judge put the diversity firings on pause after agents sued to stop them. Kevin Carroll, an attorney who represents 19 of the CIA officers affected, said his clients were just "regular American intelligence officers" who had been assigned to complete diversity tasks on a rotational basis or in addition to their day jobs.
"Some of these people are like 18 years in, they're a couple years short of their pensions. So firing them instead of just letting them first look for another job in the agency or elsewhere in the intel community, is a lack of due process," he told Fox News Digital. "These people had regular career paths within the intel community and were slotted into these jobs for a bit. That's all."
A judge will determine whether to offer injunctive relief on Thursday.
The CIA also offered buyouts to employees who offered to resign, in line with a government-wide push to trim the federal workforce, but it’s not clear how many employees were offered and accepted the offer.
Earlier this month, the agency reportedly sent an unclassified email listing the names of agents, first name and last initial, who had been there less than two years to the White House, prompting concerns those names could fall into the wrong hands.
Though the exact number of people employed by the CIA is classified, the agency is known to employ thousands who engage in covert collection and analysis of intelligence, both at its Virginia headquarters and overseas.
Foreign adversaries like China and Russia are known to target former U.S. intelligence officials, offering them large sums of money for the classified information they are privy to. The Justice Department has charged multiple former military and intel officials for providing information to China.
The CIA was known for friction with the White House during Trump's first administration but was hit with a wave of retirements in 2021 and 2022 as those who were recruited after the September 11, 2001, attacks hit their 20-year mark. The agency hit a recruiting high point again in 2024.
The House of Representatives has adopted a resolution that will eventually become a massive multi-trillion-dollar bill full of President Donald Trump's priorities on the border, defense, energy and taxes.
In a major victory for House GOP leaders, the resolution passed in a 217 to 215 vote.
All Democrats voted against the measure, along with lone Republican rebel Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., who was concerned about its effect on the national deficit.
The next step is now for the relevant House committees to meet and build their own proposals, which will eventually be returned into the framework and negotiated into a compromise deal with the Senate.
It was a dramatic scene in the House chamber on Monday night as Republican leaders delayed formally ending a vote for roughly 45 minutes as they worked to convince conservative fiscal hawks to support the legislation.
Impatient Democrats called out loud for the vote to be closed as Republicans huddled in varied groups.
Two people on the House floor told Fox News Digital that President Donald Trump got involved at one point, speaking to one of the holdouts, Rep. Victoria Spartz, R-Ind., by phone.
Reps. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., and Warren Davidson, R-Ohio, could be seen on the phone at other points on the House floor as well, but it's not clear if they were speaking with Trump.
At one point, House GOP leaders appeared to lose confidence that they had enough support and abruptly canceled the planned vote.
Moments later, however, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle were rushing back to the House floor and Fox News Digital was told the vote would be held.
Meanwhile, three House Democrats who had been absent early in the day returned for the Tuesday evening vote in dramatic fashion.
Rep. Brittany Pettersen, D-Colo., who had a baby roughly a month ago, returned to the House floor with her infant to oppose the bill. And Rep. Kevin Mullin, R-Calif., who was recently hospitalized for an infection, appeared in the chamber aided by a walker.
House and Senate Republicans are aiming to use their majorities to advance Trump's agenda via the budget reconciliation process.
It's a Senate maneuver that lowers the threshold for passage from two-thirds to a simple majority, but it's used when a party controls both houses of Congress and the White House because it allows that party to pass its policy goals even under the slimmest margins.
And Republicans are dealing with slim margins indeed; with current numbers, the House GOP can afford no more than one defection to pass anything without Democratic votes if all liberals are voting.
On the Senate side, Republicans can lose no more than two of their own in the reconciliation process.
The House resolution aimed to increase spending on border security, the judiciary and defense by roughly $300 billion, while seeking at least $1.5 trillion to $2 trillion in spending cuts elsewhere.
As written, the House bill also provided $4.5 trillion to extend President Donald Trump's 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act provisions, which expire at the end of this year.
An amendment negotiated by House Budget Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington, R-Texas, and conservatives on his panel would also force lawmakers to make $2 trillion in cuts, or else risk the $4.5 trillion for Trump's tax cuts getting reduced by the difference.
The resolution also fulfilled Trump's directive to act on the debt limit, raising it by $4 trillion or roughly two years.
A bipartisan deal struck in 2023 saw the debt limit suspended until January 2025. Now, projections show the U.S. could run out of cash to pay its debts by spring if Congress does not act.
The resolution's odds were touch and go for much of the week so far, since House lawmakers returned from a week-long recess period Monday.
Several fiscal conservatives had demanded more assurances from House GOP leadership that Republicans would seek deep spending cuts to offset the cost of Trump's priorities.
Republican lawmakers in more competitive districts are concerned some cuts may go too far, however.
The resolution directs the House Energy & Commerce Committee to find at least $880 billion in spending cuts – which those lawmakers fear will mean severe cuts for federal programs like Medicaid.
Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., pushed back against fears of such cuts during his weekly press conference on Tuesday.
"Medicaid is hugely problematic because it has a lot of fraud, waste and abuse. Everybody knows that. We all know it intuitively. No one in here would disagree," Johnson said. "What we're talking about is rooting out the fraud, waste, and abuse. It doesn't matter what party you're in, you should be for that because it saves your money, and it preserves the programs so that it is available for the people who desperately need it."
It was also supported by a wide swath of Republicans, including conservative Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, a member of the House Budget Committee that approved the bill earlier this month.
"It's the best bill we're going to get," Gill said while praising Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington, R-Texas, for his efforts. "If I were writing it then I'd write it differently, but this is the best we're gonna get it."
Rep. Randy Feenstra, R-Iowa, said he was eager to begin working on "cutting taxes for Iowans, securing our border, unleashing American energy production, and eliminating waste and fraud in our government."
A number of states are stepping up to aid the Trump administration in its efforts to arrest and deport millions of illegal immigrants, with Republican states countering the pushback against the operation from "sanctuary" jurisdictions.
The Florida Sheriff’s Association announced last week that jails in all of Florida’s 67 counties have now entered into 287(g) agreements, which originate from a Clinton-era immigration law and allow Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to delegate immigration functions to state and local law enforcement.
Additionally, Gov. Ron DeSantis announced earlier this month that the Florida Highway Patrol, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, and the Florida State Guard had also entered into agreements.
"With the head of steam that President Trump has, being swept into office with this as the centerpiece of his agenda, now is the final time, final opportunity to end the illegal immigration crisis in this country once and for all, we need to be willing partners with the federal administration," he said at a press conference.
ICE said the agreements allow state and local authorities to "to act as a force multiplier in the identification, arrest, and service of warrants and detainers on foreign-born individuals arrested on local criminal charges."
A number of state and local law enforcement agencies entered into 287(g) agreements during the first Trump administration, but there were no new additions during the Biden administration, which largely limited interior enforcement.
President Donald Trump signed an executive order in January green-lighting new 287(g) agreements. The agreements come in three forms: a jail enforcement model to identify removal of immigrants with charges or convictions arrested by state or local law enforcement; a task force model that allows agencies to enforce immigration law during police duties; and a warrant service officer program that allows ICE to train agencies to execute warrants in their jails.
ICE now says that as of this week, they have jail agreements with 60 law enforcement agencies in 16 states, warrant agreements with 80 law enforcement agencies in 12 states and task force agreements with 15 agencies in six states.
While many of those agreements were signed in 2019 and 2020, agreements signed in 2025 include agencies from Florida, Idaho, Nevada, Texas, Kansas and Oklahoma, according to ICE's website.
There are additional pending applications from local agencies in Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Maryland, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Texas, Tennessee and Wyoming, according to ICE.
Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach announced last week that his office and the Kansas Bureau of Investigation were entering into agreements that see agents receive ICE training.
"All across Kansas, illegal aliens who are dangerous criminals or gang members are released back to the streets on a regular basis. That will end. This agreement will ensure that those criminals are deported," Kobach said.
Meanwhile, Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt announced agreements with Oklahoma’s Department of Public Safety, Bureau of Narcotics and Bureau of Investigation.
"Law enforcement can't do their jobs with one hand tied behind their back. By working directly with ICE, our law enforcement officers now have additional tools to keep dangerous criminals off our streets and protect Oklahomans," Stitt explained. "Oklahoma is proud to lead the way in strengthening border security from the state's side and enforcing the rule of law."
The agreements show the willingness of authorities in states across the country to help the Trump administration in its promise to ramp up arrests and deportations of illegal immigrants.
It counteracts the moves by "sanctuary" jurisdictions that limit or forbid local or state cooperation with ICE. The Trump administration has already started legal action against some of those jurisdictions, and has been pushing back against officials who are touting those policies.
The bruise seen on the back of President Donald Trump’s hand is from him "constantly" shaking other people’s hands, the White House said.
Trump was photographed earlier this week with a bruise on his right hand as he met with French President Emmanuel Macron at the White House.
"President Trump is a man of the people," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told NBC News. "His commitment is unwavering, and he proves that every single day."
The White House did not immediately respond Wednesday morning to a request for comment by Fox News Digital.
Around Thanksgiving last year, Trump, during an interview with TIME magazine, was asked about the bruising, and he said, "It’s from shaking hands with thousands of people."
Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, a Democrat, spoke out against a proposed resolution that condemns the U.S. Supreme Court's 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges gay marriage ruling.
The resolution declares that "the Michigan House of Representatives reaffirms the definition of marriage as put forth by the Michigan voters and enshrined in our Constitution: a union between one man and one woman."
The state's constitution stipulates "the union of one man and one woman in marriage shall be the only agreement recognized as a marriage or similar union for any purpose."
The opinion asserts "same-sex couples may exercise the fundamental right to marry. No longer may this liberty be denied to them."
The proposed resolution is being pushed by state Rep. Josh Schriver and multiple other Michigan state lawmakers.
"Has Obergefell v. Hodgesnot widened a portal, where gays, queers, transsexuals, polygamists, minor-attracted persons, and other perverts advance attacks on our children?" Schriver asked.
"Now is the time to do the right thing. Now is the time to reassert the sovereignty of Christ as our king. Now is the time to restore the authority of God and submit our will to He who knows what's best," he declared.
Whitmer decried the effort in a video, saying that "some extreme members" are requesting for the nation's high court "to overturn marriage equality."
"Here's my response to that: Hell no," she declared in the video posted to social media on Tuesday.
The town of West Boylston, Massachusetts, voted to fire its administrator following a dispute over a Trump flag hanging in the police station.
The vote took place during a closed-door Zoom meeting "to discuss the reputation, character, physical condition or mental health, rather than professional competence, of an individual, or to discuss the discipline or dismissal of, or complaints or charges brought against, a public officer, employee, staff member or individual."
The result was a 4-1 vote to remove former Town Administrator James Ryan.
The dispute allegedly began when Ryan toured the police station in January and viewed a Trump flag hanging in its gymnasium. At the time, Ryan claimed the flag was a civil rights violation, according to a statement.
Police Chief Dennis W. Minnich, Sr., removed the flag but alleges that Ryan later had a town employee sneak into the police station after hours to verify the flag was removed. According to him, at that time a new flag was then hanging, but has since been taken down.
Minnich says he was "targeted" and sent a three-page memo to the Board of Selectmen to request "an immediate and thorough review" of Ryan’s actions.
"Either he’s gone or I’m gone," Minnich said Friday. "I’m going to take all vacation time until this is resolved. I’m not reporting to the guy. I don’t trust him. There’s no trust there."
The select board said Ryan's firing had nothing to do with the police dispute, but him allegedly sending an employee inside the station that could have seen private information.
Ryan’s attorney, John Clifford, said in a statement that his client was "disappointed" with the select board’s decision.
"James acknowledges that he could have handled the situation differently, but his insistence that there be no political signs in a public building was completely justified," the statement read. "In tonight’s meeting, James expressed his sincere regret that he had any role in what became an embarrassment and distraction for the entire town. While he knows he may have made some mistakes as a very new town administrator, he is not responsible for the controversy that has ensued."
"James will be reviewing his options with respect to litigating his termination, but he would like to make it clear that he has no ill feelings toward town employees, volunteer officials, or the citizens of West Boylston. He remains grateful for the short opportunity to serve in West Boylston and wishes the town the best of luck in the future."
A new Gallup-Walton Family Foundation survey released Wednesday shows that nearly half of rural Generation Z Americans feel they can't find fulfilling work in their communities and are considering moving.
Rural Gen-Zers are also nearly 20 percentage points more likely to feel that way than their urban brethren.
Urban young people also have a higher confidence in their ability to land crucial internships out of school, and parents of rural youths are similarly concerned about quality-of-life issues for their grown children and in their ability to accomplish their goals.
Forty-nine percent of Gen Zers believe they can find a worthy job at home. Thirty-eight percent say they’re confident in their internship searches.
The pressures of the contemporary occupational landscape are also leading 77% of Gen Z adults to seek to move away from their hometowns, if they are able.
But that feeling is met with countervailing sentiment against leaving home.
More than half of urban Gen Zers say they are comfortable relocating out of state or even outside the U.S., while about half in rural areas prefer to entertain moving to another place within their state, at most.
About two-fifths would consider moving out of state and only a few percent would think to leave the U.S. for a job.
"The desire to stay closer to home contrasts with those in urban areas who are more likely to say they would like to leave their state (54%), or even the country (15%)," the poll found.
"Career and education opportunities strongly influence young people's decisions to relocate, but rural Gen Zers often face limited access compared to their urban peers," said Stephanie Marken, senior partner for U.S. research at Gallup.
"Expanding access to job training, career opportunities and higher education in rural areas could help more young people stay connected to their communities while pursuing their goals."
Only one-fifth of adult Gen Z Americans who have moved away from their home areas mentioned the ability to live financially comfortably.
Many, however, still love their hometowns despite a changing job landscape in recent years and decades.
The panel was conducted in November, the week of the presidential election.
Pollsters sampled 3,963 people ranging in age from 12 to 27 in all 50 states plus Washington, D.C.
They were randomly selected using an address-based methodology, but the polling firm also said it uses random-digit telephone dialing to cover both landlines and cellphones.
The margin of error was +/- 2.3 percentage points overall. A total of 382 respondents were in rural areas with a 7.3 percentage point margin, and 2,969 were from urban areas with a 2.7 percentage point margin of error.
Despite facing fewer job and education opportunities, rural Gen Zers remain deeply connected to their communities, with their desire to move only slightly numerically higher than their urban peers (82% vs. 78%).
The co-leader of the poll, the Walton Family Foundation, was launched by late Walmart founder Samuel Walton and his wife, Helen.
The foundation seeks to improve the U.S. education system, communities and waterways, particularly in northwest Arkansas, where the family and mega-store chain are both based.
