President Trump on Wednesday announced an order to open a detention center at Guantanamo Bay to house up to 30,000 immigrants suspected of being in the country illegally.

The big picture: Trump made the announcement just before signing the Laken Riley Act, which requires the detention of undocumented immigrants accused of certain crimes such as theft.

Driving the news: "We have 30,000 beds in Guantanamo to detain the worst criminal illegal aliens threatening the American people," Trump said.

• "We don't want them coming back so we're going to send them out to Guantanamo," he continued.

Zoom in: There were still 15 prisoners being held at Guantanamo Bay as of the Pentagon's Jan. 6 update, but a separate facility will hold immigrants.

• The White House directed the secretaries of Defense and Homeland Security "to take all appropriate actions to expand the Migrant Operations Center at Naval Station Guantanamo Bay to full capacity."

Zoom out: Holding immigrants in facilities is by far the largest cost of the deportation process.

• An Axios review of various estimates put yearly detention costs at $66 billion under Trump's possible mass deportation plan.
• ICE only has about 38,000 people in detention — prioritizing noncitizens the border patrol arrested at the Southwest border and noncitizens with criminal histories, according to ICE's annual report.

A backlog of 3.7 million cases in immigration courts, where immigrants are entitled to make their case to stay in the country, means detained immigrants could wait months, if not years, for their hearing.

• To hold more people from a raid surge would require a mass building project of "soft detention" centers, or temporary facilities, to house people.
• The Trump administration will have to award private contracts to build such detention centers, and offer health care and education to detainees.

Editor's note: This story has been updated with details from the White House's order.

Go deeper: All undocumented immigrants are "criminals," Trump administration says

The U.S. Office of Personnel Management issued guidance Wednesday instructing federal agencies on how to carry out President Trump's executive order targeting transgender protections.

Why it matters: It's the latest in a series of moves aimed at stripping away civil rights and protections from transgender Americans in policies that will also greatly impact nonbinary people. 

Details: The memo instructs heads of government departments and agencies to do the following, no later than 5pm Friday:

• Notify employees whose job descriptions include initiatives relating to gender ideology that they're being put on administrative leave;
• Ensure intimate spaces designed for women are designated by biological sex rather than gender identity;
• Turn off emails settings that ask users for gender pronouns;
• Disband employee resource groups that "inculcate or promote gender ideology;"
• And ensure all forms say "sex" instead of "gender."

Between the lines: The guidance on designating intimate spaces by biological sex could lay the foundation for banning transgender people from using restrooms in federal buildings that align with their gender identity.

• Office of Personnel Management did not immediately respond to Axios' request for comment on the subject Wednesday evening.

Catch up quick: Trump took the first step toward rolling back protections for transgender people on his first day of his term, signing an executive order that the federal government would only recognize two sexes — male and female.

• As such, only those two sexes will be recognized for official documents such as passports and visas.
• "'Sex' is not a synonym for and does not include the concept of 'gender identity,'" the order stated.

More from Axios:

• Trump targets transgender protections in new executive order
• Trump's road map for defunding gender-affirming care
• Trump targets transgender service members in new order ahead of expected ban

The Laken Riley Act is the first bill President Trump signed into law Wednesday after returning to office — an early victory for his immigration policy agenda.

Why it matters: The new law will require the detention of undocumented immigrants accused of certain crimes such as theft. Federal immigration officials have warned it could impact 60,000 people.

• Trump has vowed his administration will zero in on immigration and border security after Republicans for four years decried the Biden administration's approach to border security.

What is the Laken Riley Act?

The Laken Riley Act requires the Department of Homeland Security to detain certain non-U.S. nationals who have been arrested for burglary, theft, larceny or shoplifting.

• It also authorizes states to sue the federal government for "decisions or alleged failures related to immigration enforcement," per the bill text.

Zoom in: The bill is named after a 22-year-old Georgia nursing student who was murdered last year while jogging by an undocumented immigrant who had previously been arrested on theft charges. The Venezuelan man convicted of killing Riley has been sentenced to life in prison.

• Republicans frequently pointed to Riley's death as evidence of the need for stronger border policies.

Bipartisan support

The bill received bipartisan support and quickly was on track to be the first one passed out of the 119th Congress.

• It was one of a dozen pieces of legislation listed in the House GOP's rules package that passed this month, allowing it to be voted on under a streamlined process.
• The House previously passed the bill last March, with 37 Democrats voting in favor of it. But it did not get a vote in the then-Democratic Senate.

Where it stands: The bill passed the House last week 263-156, with 46 Democrats voting for it.

• 48 Democrats had voted for an earlier version of the bill this month, before the Senate added two amendments.
• One of the additions would require Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to detain any undocumented immigrants accused of assaulting a law enforcement officer.
• After adding the two amendments, the Senate passed the measure on Jan. 20 in a 64-35 vote, with 12 Democrats voting for it.

ICE warning about Laken Riley Act enforcement

ICE warned Congress that the Laken Riley Act could require detention for 60,000 people, and that the agency would need billions of dollars and thousands more detention beds to comply with the law, Axios reported.

• The agency said that without emergency funding, they could be forced to release tens of thousands of immigrants, including potentially some deemed to be public safety threats.
• The Laken Riley Act does not include money for enforcing the new detention requirements.

Reality check: Less than 0.5% of the 1.8 million cases in immigration courts during the past fiscal year — involving about 8,400 people — included deportation orders for alleged crimes other than entering the U.S. illegally, an Axios review of government data found.

• The federal government has prioritized deporting immigrants with criminal records since the Obama administration, Amy Maldonado, an immigration lawyer in Michigan, tells Axios.
• Study after study has indicated that immigrants — those in the U.S. legally or undocumented — commit crimes at lower rates than U.S. citizens, Axios' Russell Contreras reports.

More from Axios:

• ICE warns Laken Riley Act could force it to release detained migrants
• House passes immigration crackdown as first act of 2025
• Scoop: Schumer's private signals on Laken Riley Act

President Trump ordered a temporary pause on federal grant, loan and financial assistance programs this week — but lawmakers and legal experts say the move is illegal, as he needs Congress' approval to suspend funding.

The big picture: The freeze that a federal judge on Tuesday temporarily halted could face trouble in Congress, where Democrats have indicated a lawsuit is forthcoming.

• Republicans largely back the Trump administration move. But in the House, where Republicans hold a slim majority, Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.) has publicly expressed reservations about the freeze.
• The situation has echoes of the 1974 Impoundment Control Act, which restricts a president from cutting funding without the approval of Congress.
• The law that passed after then-President Nixon canceled billions in spending could serve as a roadmap for what's to come with the Trump administration's order.

What is the Impoundment Control Act of 1974?

The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 requires the president to submit a request to Congress to withhold funds.

• Congress then has 45 days to decide whether to approve the president's request. It can also choose how much of the funding to rescind.
• If Congress doesn't act within that time period, the funds must be spent.

Zoom out: The law also created the House and Senate budget committees and the Congressional Budget Office.

Why was it enacted?

The law was signed after then-President Nixon canceled billions in spending, impounding $7.7 billion during the 1973 fiscal year and about $12.8 billion two years earlier.

• Some Congress members believed Nixon abused the power of impoundment by withholding funds from programs he opposed.
• Nixon said in 1973 that he would "not spend money if the Congress overspends, and I will not be for programs that will raise the taxes and put a bigger burden on the already overburdened American taxpayer."
• He declared at the time an "absolutely clear" constitutional right to impound funds as he deemed appropriate.
• His administration refused to release Congressionally appropriated funds for certain programs, according to the House Budget Committee, including highway and water control funds.

Trump's argument

Trump and his allies have argued the Impoundment Control Act is unconstitutional and that he has the power to rescind funding authorized by Congress.

• "Conservative advocates have argued that until the presidency of Nixon, who took office in 1969, it was understood that the Constitution gave Congress the power to set a ceiling on spending, but the president had the authority to spend less," per Reuters.
• Trump said in a 2023 campaign video that he wants to use impoundment "to squeeze the bloated federal bureaucracy for massive savings." He also argued the law allows Congress to seize power from the executive branch.
• Cutting government spending was a big campaign platform for Trump and he created a whole new department tasked with cutting waste and streamlining bureaucracy.

What they're saying: White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said during a briefing Tuesday that the freeze is to ensure "every penny that is going out the door is not conflicting with the executive orders and actions that this president has taken."

• She argued the pause was "certainly within the confines of the law" and characterized it as part of a government spending review.

Flashback: The Government Accountability Office, which monitors compliance of the Impoundment Control Act, found that Trump violated the law during his first term by withholding security aid for Ukraine.

Experts weigh in on legality

Georgetown law professor David Super told Axios Tuesday the Supreme Court unanimously held in the 1975 Train v. New York decision that the president is required to follow statutes directing that appropriated funds be spent.

• Although the Impoundment Control Act provides some limited exceptions, "it explicitly prohibits the President from pausing or deferring spending because he disagrees with the policies underlying the spending," Super said via email.
• The exceptions include allowing the president to defer funds if needed to allow for greater needs later in the year, if efficiencies have allowed savings, or if some provision of law specifically allows such a deferral.

Yes, but: In each case, it can be done only by sending a special message to Congress under a section of the act that specifically says that policy disagreements are not permissible reasons.

• "The President has not claimed to have any of the three permissible reasons and has not sent the required message to Congress," Super said regarding Trump's memo.
• "He is free to ask Congress to rescind any funding he believes is misguided, but he may not ignore the law," he added.

Constitutional showdown looms in the courts

Democratic attorney generals and Congress members announced they're suing the Trump administration over the freeze.

What they're saying: "Not only does this administration's new policy put people at risk, but it is plainly unconstitutional," New York Attorney General Letitia James said at a briefing announcing the lawsuit.

• "The president does not get to decide which laws to enforce and for whom. When Congress dedicates funding for a program, the president cannot pull that funding on a whim."

Go deeper: Trump's funding freeze temporarily halted by federal judge

A federal judge on Tuesday temporarily halted President Trump's effort to temporarily pause federal grant, loan and financial assistance programs.

The big picture: U.S. District Judge Loren L. AliKhan blocked Trump's order minutes before it was to take effect, with an administrative stay that expires Monday.

• AliKhan in her order wrote she was issuing a preliminary injunction in order to "preserve the status quo while the court considers the merits of the case."

Zoom in: The judge's order is in response to a complaint filed earlier Tuesday by the National Council of Nonprofits, the American Public Health Association, the Main Street Alliance and SAGE.

• They argued the funding freeze targets grant recipients based on their opinions on issues like climate change or diversity, equity and inclusion.
• Trump's memo "will have a devastating impact on hundreds of thousands of grant recipients who depend on the inflow of grant money," the complaint said.

Zoom out: Democratic attorney generals and members of Congress also said they plan to sue over the freeze.

Context: The Office of Management and Budget sent a memo to federal agencies Monday night directing them to "temporarily pause all activities related to obligation or disbursement of all Federal financial assistance."

• The memo created confusion among federal agencies and state governments, and some states reportedly lost access to a portal used to manage Medicaid spending.
• The White House said in a follow-up memo Tuesday, that "the pause does not apply across-the-board" and is "expressly limited" to funding areas like DEI targeted by Trump's executive orders.

Editor's note: This article has been updated with new details throughout.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt on Tuesday defended President Trump's firings of at least a dozen agency inspectors general, saying Supreme Court precedent allows him the broad power to fire federal employees.

The big picture: The legality of the ousters last week has been questioned by Democrats and even by some Republicans.

• The law states a 30-day notice must be given to Congress in writing before firing an inspector general — which did not happen with the Trump dismissals.

What she's saying: Asked about the firings in her first White House press briefing, Leavitt said it's the belief of the White House and the White House Counsel's Office that Trump was within his executive authority to do so.

• "He is the executive of the executive branch, and therefore he has the power to fire anyone within the executive branch that he wishes to," she said.
• She indicated the firings were done through a memo sent out by the White House Presidential Personnel Office.

Zoom in: Leavitt said the White House rests the legality of the firings on the Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau case that went before the Supreme Court in 2020.

• The court ruled the president can generally remove executive officers but with two exceptions, one which requires Congressional oversight and the other for so-called "inferior" federal officers who don't have policymaking or administrative authority.

Between the lines: During his first term, Trump often clashed with and ousted IGs, prompting Congress to pass a law in 2022 requiring presidents to provide them with 30 days' notice and a "substantial rationale" for such firings.

• Trump defended his actions over the weekend, telling reporters, "Some people thought that some were unfair or some were not doing their job. And it's a very standard thing to do."

Zoom out: Trump continued with more controversial removals this week, firing the acting chair of the National Labor Relations Board, the general counsel of the labor board and the three Democratic members of a top independent intelligence review board.

• He's also wiped nearly all of the government's cybersecurity and surveillance advisers from its roster.

Go deeper: Scoop: Top House Dems plot first big battle with Trump

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and President Trump appeared to take different stances Monday on China's artificial intelligence developments.

Why it matters: Interest in Chinese company DeepSeek's rapid advancements in AI sent U.S. tech stocks tumbling on Monday, as the mobile app climbed to no.1 on Apple's rankings of free iPhone apps.

Context: DeepSeek's latest models of showed capabilities rivaling those of U.S. competitors, all while being built at a fraction of the cost.

What they're saying: Johnson during a press briefing Monday called China's government "a terrible trading partner, saying: "They abuse the system, they steal our intellectual property."

• Apparently alluding to DeepSeek, he said: "They're now trying to get a leg up on us in AI as you've seen in the last day or so."

Separately, Trump said during in an address to House Republicans Monday at his Doral, Florida, resort the "release of DeepSeek AI from a Chinese company should be a wakeup call for our industries that we need to be laser focused on competing to win."

• He said the technology could be "a positive development."

Our thought bubble, via Axios' Ben Berkowitz: The tone of Trump's remarks, and their contrast with Johnson's, stand as another sign of his softening stance on China in this administration versus the last.

• It's not clear whose view on DeepSeek will win out, though it's a fair bet Congress will hear Trump's message loud and clear.

Go deeper: Trump threatens 10% tariff on China as of Feb. 1

Immigrants across the U.S. have been on edge as they anticipate a wave of Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids ordered by the Trump administration.

The big picture: President Trump has already acted on his promise to crack down on undocumented immigrants through large-scale deportation. With more arrests and detainments to come, ICE's tactics are becoming clearer.

• Trump declared a national emergency on the U.S.-Mexico border hours after being sworn in as president. The administration also announced it's ending the policy of avoiding arrests in churches, schools, hospitals, funerals, weddings and public demonstrations.
• Undocumented immigrants may be unsure of the laws pertaining to the rights of federal agents, whether it be on allowing entry or making arrests.
• Here are the key actions seen or anticipated so far:

Processes and documents to know about

The Department of Homeland Security expanded its use of a process called "expedited removal" last week.

Expedited removal essentially puts undocumented people at greater risk of being placed in a rapid deportation process, according to the National Immigration Law Center.

• It can remove their opportunity to appear before an immigration judge or fight their case.
• It expands expedited removal to apply nationwide, rather than just near the southern border.
• If someone has been in the country less than two years, they can be subjected to the process.

Zoom in: Individuals arrested by ICE have a better chance to fight their case in immigration court if they can prove how long they've been in the U.S., Nicole Hallett, director of the Immigrants' Rights Clinic at the University of Chicago, told Axios.

• A lease or bank statement can help an undocumented person provide "proof or evidence that they've been in the country for more than two years," she said.

When ICE can enter a private place

The Fourth Amendment provides the greatest constitutional protections in a private home, Andres Guerra, an immigration attorney with the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, told Axios.

Here are the situations where ICE or a federal officer can enter a home:

• By presenting an arrest warrant, ICE can enter the home of an individual who is known to reside at that address. ICE can also enter with a search warrant for that property. Both would require a judge's signature.
• If they receive consent, a federal officer can enter a home, Guerra said, adding that they can obtain that through trickery, though not coercion.
• In exigent circumstances, like when they might be responding to an emergency, or if they can hear or detect an emergency happening inside the premises.

What ICE can do in a public place

In a public place, there's less of a sphere of protection, so immigration agents can initiate contact with an individual, Guerra said.

• Individuals have no obligation to provide any documentation, information or even their identity to the immigration official, he added.
• Agents can use an arrest warrant signed by a judge to arrest somebody in a public place. They can also use an order of removal or deportation signed by a judge.

What to look for in an ICE warrant

Administrative warrants are issued by an ICE officer, giving ICE the authority to arrest someone and put them in removal proceedings.

• That administrative warrant, however, does not give ICE the authority to enter a private home or to enter other private buildings or areas that are not open to the public, Hallett said.
• For that, ICE agents need a judicial warrant that's signed by a judge.

Between the lines: Most of the time, ICE does not have judicial warrants, Hallett said. They usually have administrative warrants.

• It can be confusing for people because they're both called a warrant, so people may think that the agent has the right to enter their home, she said. But once consent has been provided, agents are allowed to enter.
• "So they're kind of counting on this confusion to get people to consent and to allow ICE to enter a home," Hallett said.
• "What you want to look for is that the warrant is signed by a U.S. district judge, not an ICE officer," she explained. "If it is signed by a U.S. district judge, then you do have to let them enter because that's a valid warrant."

Are the rules different in places with sanctuary policies?

There are no differences in what ICE has to show when entering a private home in places/cities with sanctuary policies.

• The only difference in sanctuary jurisdictions is that local law enforcement will not be helping with immigration enforcement, Hallett said.

Go deeper: Schools tell parents their kids are safe from ICE arrests on campus

President Trump has signed an executive order aimed at revamping the Federal Emergency Management Agency, in the latest sign he's seeking to change how the agency handles disasters that hit the nation.

The big picture: Sunday's announcement of the order comes days after the president said he was considering "getting rid of" FEMA altogether, as he and others in the GOP have in recent months complained the agency's disaster response has been biased against Republicans.

• Trump could significantly impact state and federal disaster response by withholding federal disaster declarations and preventing certain types of aid from flowing to states, at least for a time. He's threatened to do so in wildfire-hit California.
• He's yet to name a head to oversee FEMA.

Driving the news: Trump signed the order after visiting communities impacted by historic fires in Southern California on Friday during his first presidential trip of his second term.

• The order calls for the creation of a task force, dubbed the Federal Emergency Management Agency Review Council, to review FEMA and recommend changes in a report to Trump.
• The group will be composed of the secretaries of homeland security and defense, along with private-sector subject matter experts, per the order.

Between the lines: The task force could recommend getting rid of the agency.

• But only Congress can get rid of FEMA.

Our thought bubble: There is agreement among many experts in the disaster management community that some reforms to FEMA are necessary, Axios' Andrew Freedman says.

• However, governors are likely to push back against attempts to have them shoulder the full burden of disaster response given their comparative lack of resources.

Go deeper: Trump suggests states should handle emergency response instead of FEMA

Editor's note: The headline has been updated to clarify that the executive order calls for an examination of overhauling FEMA. 

President Trump bragged about overturning Roe v. Wade in a video address to tens of thousands of attendees at the March for Life anti-abortion rally in Washington, D.C., on Friday.

The big picture: Trump had shied away from abortion while campaigning after it became a winning issue for Democrats. His speech Friday found him once again leaning into a core priority for many Republicans.

• The annual March for Life comes one day after Trump pardoned 23 anti-abortion activists who were convicted of illegally blockading a reproductive health clinic in D.C.

Driving the news: In a recorded video address, Trump called Roe v. Wade an "unconstitutional decision" that kicked off "50 years of division and anger."

• He vowed to "stop the radical Democrat push for a federal right to unlimited abortion-on-demand, up to the moment of birth and even after birth," repeating a false claim he's made in the past.
• After flip-flopping on a national ban, Trump vowed on the campaign trail to leave abortion to individual states. Vice President JD Vance previously expressed support for a national ban, and Trump once called a national ban after 15 weeks "very reasonable."
• "In my second term, we will again stand proudly for families and for life," Trump said.

Vance, attending in person, touted the "return of the most pro-family, most pro-life American president of our lifetime."

• He said it's the task of the government to make it easier to afford having children.
• "We need a culture that celebrates life at all stages, one that recognizes and truly believes that the benchmark of national success is not our GDP number or our stock market, but whether people feel that they can raise thriving and healthy families in our country," the VP added.

Zoom out: Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis also addressed the rally Friday afternoon, and told the crowd: "Since we were able to beat Amendment Four, Florida's not only the place where woke goes to die, it's the place where babies go to live."

• House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) gave remarks earlier too.

What they're saying: "President Trump governed as a pro-life president during his first term, which resulted in a long list of accomplishments," March for Life leaders Jeanne Mancini and Jennie Bradley said in a statement Thursday.

• "We look forward to working with him and Vice President Vance as they dismantle the Biden Administration's aggressive and unpopular abortion agenda and once again put wins on the board for vulnerable unborn children and their mothers."

What we're watching: Anti-abortion groups see limiting access to mifepristone as a top priority in Trump's term, but the president in a December Time magazine interview committed to protecting access to the abortion pill.

Flashback: Trump in 2020 became the first sitting president to attend the March for Life rally in person.

March for Life 2025: in photos

Go deeper: These states backed both Trump and abortion rights

Editor's note: This is a developing story. Check back for updates.

The U.S. Department of Education took initial steps to carry out President Trump's anti-DEI executive order Thursday, putting employees on paid administrative leave and tossing out resources.

The big picture: The move comes after Trump instated a sweeping executive order revoking decades of federal diversity and affirmative action practices and gutting mechanisms historically used to root out discrimination and guarantee equal opportunity.

• The Education Department called its existing DEI initiatives "harmful" and said getting rid of them is "the first step in reorienting the agency toward prioritizing meaningful learning ahead of divisive ideology in our schools."

Zoom in: The department said in a press release Thursday that it removed or archived hundreds of guidance documents, reports and training materials that include mentions of DEI.

• It also put employees charged with leading DEI initiatives on paid administrative leave and canceled ongoing DEI training and service contracts totaling over $2.6 million.
• More than 200 web pages from the department's website that housed DEI resources were identified for removal.
• Additionally, the department withdrew its Equity Action Plan and dismissed its Obama-era Diversity & Inclusion Council along with the Employee Engagement Diversity Equity Inclusion Accessibility Council within the Office for Civil Rights.

Our thought bubble: Without inclusion efforts, there's no mechanism to address inequities or educate people on the realities of systemic injustice, Axios' Delano Massey writes.

• Erasing DEI dismantles tools meant to reflect history accurately and foster understanding — leaving underserved communities without a voice or redress.

Go deeper: Trump rolls back bedrock civil rights measure in sweeping anti-DEI push

President Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship is "blatantly unconstitutional," a federal judge said Thursday, temporarily blocking it nationwide, multiple outlets reported.

The big picture: The decision came a day after the president offered his first defense of the order, which seeks to end birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. to noncitizen parents and undocumented immigrants.

• The president's order would also extend to parents in the country legally but temporarily, like foreign students, workers or tourists.

Driving the news: U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour sided for now with four states that sued — Arizona, Illinois, Oregon and Washington.

• They had argued the 14th Amendment and Supreme Court case law guarantee the right to birthright citizenship.
• The temporary restraining order is in effect for 14 days, the judge said.

Zoom out: Trump signed the order on his first day in office Monday, and was swiftly met by lawsuits from every state with a Democratic attorney general.

• The case ruled on Thursday is just one of five lawsuits brought by 22 states, along with other challenges filed by immigrants rights organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union.

Flashback: Trump had floated the prospect of ending birthright citizenship in his first term too, but didn't follow through at the time.

Go deeper: Trump offers first defense of birthright citizenship order in court filing

Editor's note: This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.

The Defense Department announced Wednesday it's sending an additional 1,500 troops to the southern border to carry out President Trump's immigration orders.

The big picture: Soon after being sworn in, Trump signed executive orders declaring a national emergency at the U.S.-Mexico border and calling for more barriers as part of an crackdown on undocumented immigrants.

Driving the news: Acting Defense Secretary Robert Salesses said in a statement Wednesday that he's carrying out a series of actions to gain "complete operational control of the southern border."

• The Department of Defense will send an additional 1,500 people, along with helicopters and intelligence analysts "to support increased detection and monitoring efforts," Salesses said.
• There are already about 2,500 U.S. National Guard and Reserve forces there.

Zoom in: The Pentagon will also provide military aircraft to support the Department of Homeland Security's deportation flights of more than 5,000 undocumented immigrants from the areas of San Diego, California; and El Paso, Texas.

• The DOD will also start helping with the construction of temporary and permanent physical barriers at the border, aimed at curtailing illegal border crossings and trafficking.

What they're saying: "This is just the beginning," Salesses said.

• "President Trump directed action from the Department of Defense on securing our nation's borders and made clear he expects immediate results. That is exactly what our military is doing under his leadership."

The other side: Civil liberties groups promised to take legal action against any misuse of military on civilian populations.

• The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) tells Axios they are gathering information and will look at taking action.

Go deeper: Trump's orders unleash sweeping limits on immigration, asylum

Editor's note: Russell Contreras contributed reporting.

MrBeast, one of the most successful internet creators, may join a bid by real estate mogul and Project Liberty founder Frank McCourt to buy TikTok's U.S. arm, McCourt told Axios' Sara Fischer in Davos on Wednesday.

Why it matters: McCourt has said that he's gotten $20 billion in commitments to his bid but hasn't detailed who the investors are — as the popular app's future has remained in flux.

Zoom in: The group in on the bid is composed of "all the major investment firms that you would imagine," including private equity firms, large family offices and alternative asset managers, McCourt said.

• In addition, he suggested the existing investors in Chinese-owned ByteDance will also want to roll over their investments into a U.S. TikTok spin-off.

What he's saying: McCourt said he's spoken to MrBeast — born Jimmy Donaldson — who has publicly expressed interest in buying TikTok. "MrBeast is going to be a part of this bid, too. So he's very entrepreneurial," McCourt said.

• "We welcome everyone," McCourt said.
• A spokesperson for McCourt later told Axios, "We have only had conversations with MrBeast. Nothing set in stone."
• Representatives for MrBeast did not immediately respond to Axios' request for comment.

Asked if he'd partner with Oracle CEO Larry Ellison and X owner Elon Musk, McCourt responded, "if there was an agreement on the values and principles."

Between the lines: "There is oodles of capital here. That's not the issue at all," McCourt said. "It's really the politics of this that's very, very challenging."

By the numbers: When asked if his bid would be enough to suffice the deal given the value of TikTok's U.S. arm is uncertain, McCourt said he believes his $20 billion bid accurately reflects the value.

• "You can buy shares of ByteDance on the secondary market now at a valuation with a $200 billion-plus number in front of it for the entire company," he said.
• "U.S. TikTok represents about 8%, and we're talking about buying that piece without the technology," he continued.
• The law requires that any future U.S. arm of the platform be disentangled from the Chinese technology that runs it.

Catch up quick: TikTok restored its service Sunday after going dark the previous night. A U.S. law passed last year had set a deadline of Jan. 19 for the app to face a ban unless sold to a U.S. owner.

• President Trump, on his first day in office, signed an executive order to delay enforcing the law by 75 days.

What to watch: The investor group has been in touch with ByteDance through bankers, McCourt said. But other than acknowledging receipt of the offer, "ByteDance is silent right now," he said.

• Their offer was the only one that went to the Justice Department, got approved and was ready to go if ByteDance signed it, according to McCourt.

What he's saying: As companies are increasingly pulling back on moderation, McCourt suggested that if his deal goes through, he would not regulate TikTok's free speech policy, privacy policy or moderation policy.

• "We need technology that is actually optimizing for what we as society want for these policies," he said. "What we have right now is a few people deciding."
• McCourt views this as a unique opportunity to solve a national security issue, help fix the Internet and begin the third generation of the Internet where users are in charge.

Catch up quick: McCourt launched Project Liberty, which includes both a for-profit company and a non-profit institute, in 2021 to help build and advocate for a safer and more equitable internet.

• He announced his intentions to assemble an investor group to buy the app in May, shortly after the bipartisan law that would instate a ban was signed.
• Alongside its research and policy efforts, Project Liberty has also developed its own blockchain-based, decentralized web infrastructure in an effort to make social media safer and more secure.
• In 2022, MeWe, a free and subscription-based social media platform that bills itself as a privacy-focused alternative to Facebook, became the first social network to launch using Project Liberty's decentralized social networking protocol (DSNP).

Go deeper: China signals willingness to allow TikTok sale

President Trump on Tuesday announced billions in private sector investments to grow artificial intelligence in the U.S. and build massive new data centers for OpenAI.

The big picture: OpenAI, SoftBank, Oracle and the UAE's MGX will convene under a joint venture called Stargate, and will commit $100 billion to start with a potential of up to $500 billion over four years.

• The new company will create more then 100,000 American jobs, Trump said.
• Stargate will open a data center project in Texas and later expand to other states.

Driving the news: "This monumental undertaking is a resounding declaration of confidence in America's potential under a new president," Trump said Tuesday.

• SoftBank CEO Masayoshi Son, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and Oracle founder and chairman Larry Ellison appeared with Trump at the White House for the announcement.
• Son will serve as the company's chairman, according to an Oracle press release.
• Arm, Microsoft, NVIDIA, Oracle and OpenAI are the initial technology partners, per the release.

Zoom out: The announcement comes a day after Trump signed an executive order rescinding a Biden-era executive order regulating AI.

Flashback: SoftBank's Son made a similar promise of $50 billion investment in Dec. 2016 on the eve of Trump's first term.

Our thought bubble: Trump will take credit for these spending commitments, but the rush to build AI data centers has been building for two years, and this money would likely have flowed regardless of who occupied the White House.

Go deeper: Biden warns against extreme wealth and rise of "tech industrial complex"

President Trump's near-total pardon of Jan. 6 rioters was denounced by the Fraternal Order of Police, the largest police union in the U.S., and the International Association of Chiefs of Police on Tuesday.

The big picture: The groups said they're deeply discouraged by pardons and commutations made by both the Biden and Trump administrations of individuals convicted of killing or assaulting law enforcement officers.

Driving the news: The groups said in a statement they firmly believe those convicted of such crimes should serve full sentences.

• "Allowing those convicted of these crimes to be released early diminishes accountability and devalues the sacrifices made by courageous law enforcement officers and their families," per the statement.
• "When perpetrators of crimes, especially serious crimes, are not held fully accountable, it sends a dangerous message that the consequences for attacking law enforcement are not severe, potentially emboldening others to commit similar acts of violence," the unions said.

Between the lines: The group did not specifically mention which pardons they were referring to, but the only ones issued in the second Trump administration concerning such violent assaults involve Jan. 6. 

Zoom in: Newly inaugurated Trump signed an executive order on Monday granting a "full, complete and unconditional pardon" to the vast majority of Jan. 6 defendants charged with participating in the Capitol riot four years ago.

• Among the roughly 1,500 pardoned and 14 others whose sentences were commuted were leaders of the extremist groups Proud Boys and Oath Keepers who were convicted of the seditious conspiracy for their roles in the attack.
• Representatives for Trump did not immediately respond to Axios' request for comment. Representatives for Biden could not immediately be reached for comment.

Flashback: The Fraternal Order of Police endorsed Trump in 2016, 2020 and 2024.

More from Axios:

• GOP Senate resistance hits Trump over Jan. 6 pardons
• Trump pardons most Jan. 6 defendants
• The most notorious Jan. 6 defendants pardoned by Trump

President Trump on Tuesday announced he signed a full and unconditional pardon for Ross Ulbricht, the creator of the unlawful Silk Road marketplace who was convicted of drug trafficking charges.

The big picture: Trump vowed on the campaign trail to commute Ulbricht's sentence as he sought backing to be the Republican Party's presidential nominee from Libertarians, who view the Silk Road founder as a hero.

Flashback: Ulbricht was sentenced in 2015 to life in prison without the possibility of parole after being convicted on charges that included distributing narcotics online.

What he' saying: Trump said on Truth Social that he called Ulbricht's mother to inform her of the pardon "in honor of her and the Libertarian Movement, which supported me so strongly."

• He added, "The scum that worked to convict him were some of the same lunatics who were involved in the modern day weaponization of government against me."

Go deeper: Trump pardons most Jan. 6 defendants

President Trump fulfilled his campaign pledge Monday to pull the U.S. out of the World Health Organization (WHO).

The big picture: The U.S. is the WHO's top donor, contributing about $130 million per year to help cover its global health preparedness and response, along with efforts to address HIV, tuberculosis, and childhood vaccination, per Devex.

• Trump started the process to withdraw from WHO during his first term, claiming the agency failed badly responding to COVID-19 and had not demonstrated its independence from China.
• However, then-President Biden reversed it on his first day in office.

Driving the news: Monday's executive order states that the U.S. issued a notice about its withdrawal in 2020 "due to the organization's mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic ... and other global health crises, its failure to adopt urgently needed reforms, and its inability to demonstrate independence from the inappropriate political influence of WHO member states."

• Additionally, "the WHO continues to demand unfairly onerous payments from the United States, far out of proportion with other countries' assessed payments," it continues, noting China pays less despite having a larger population.

Go deeper: Trump's executive order blitz likely to hit health

Editor's note: This a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.

President-elect Trump is expected to launch his second term with a slew of executive orders as soon as Day 1 in office.

The big picture: Trump, with more support from Republicans and voters than in his first term, has expressed every intention of using executive power to address the border and immigration.

• Axios reported Monday that Trump was expected to bring as many as 200 executive actions, including orders.
• Trump's first-day actions were expected to include declaring an emergency at the U.S.-Mexico border, Jan. 6 pardons and a TikTok reprieve after the popular app briefly went dark over the weekend.

Zoom out: Trump issued more than 220 executive orders during his first term — the most in a single term since former President Carter.

• President Biden had signed 155 executive orders as of last week.

What is an executive order?

This directive is a signed, consecutively numbered official document through which the president manages the operations of the federal government, per the National Archives.

• Such an order directs a federal official or administrative agency to engage in a course of action or refrain from a course of action.
• Some executive orders can take effect immediately, while others require time for a federal agency to take action.

Between the lines: An executive order is enforceable as long as the action is within the president's Constitutional authority.

What can't an executive order do?

A president can't issue a new law if it surpasses the power given to them by the Constitution or Congress.

• Executive orders that require action by an agency are subject to the federal Administrative Procedure Act, which requires a public comment period for new rules and does not allow rules deemed "arbitrary and capricious."

Can an executive order be revoked?

Yes, a president who issued the executive order can revoke it.

• An incumbent president also has the power to nix an executive order issued by their predecessor — as Biden did in early 2021 when he revoked several executive orders issued during the Trump administration.
• Congress, too, has the power to overturn an executive order by passing legislation that invalidates it, according to the American Bar Association. The president can veto the legislation, but Congress can override that with a two-thirds majority.
• Congress can also halt an executive order from taking effect by denying necessary funding for an action.

Courts, too, have the power to stay enforcement or ultimately overturn an executive order that is found to be beyond the president's constitutional authority.

• For example, a judge in January 2020 blocked Trump's executive order that allowed state and local governments to refuse accepting refugee resettlements.
• The ruling was upheld by a federal appeals court a year later.

Go deeper: Trump's 100 executive orders

Editor's note: This story has been updated with additional developments.

Mayors across the country, representing nearly 35 million Americans, are warning of a severe and worsening housing shortfall, according to a new survey from the U.S. Conference of Mayors.

The big picture: There aren't enough homes in the U.S. to keep up with demand, with some estimates putting total housing shortage in the millions of units.

• A lack of affordable homes to buy or rent are keeping prices high. That's paired with record-high mortgage rates, putting monthly payments out of reach for many.

Zoom in: Mayors from 120 cities in 43 states responded to the national survey from the U.S. Conference of Mayors and the American Institute of Architects.

• The study found that the housing deficit will increase by more than two million more units in the next five years.

By the numbers: 42% of households spend more than 30% of their income on rent, mortgage payments and other housing costs, per the report.

• The median rental price increased 18% over the past three years, to $1,779.81.
• The median sale price increased 21% in the same period to $488,272, according to the report.

Between the lines: The survey found that mayors believe inaction at the federal level will exacerbate an already deepening crisis.

• 89% of the mayors surveyed indicated that flexible and direct funding for cities to stimulate housing supply, preservation, or access is important.
• While the mayors value existing federal housing programs, they strongly urged for an expansion, including of low-income housing credits and housing vouchers.

Zoom out: The cost of housing was a key issue during the 2024 presidential race, making clear it's a top-of-mind issue for Americans.

• Vice President Harris had framed the housing shortage largely as a problem of supply, Axios' Emily Peck reported. Harris' solution, broadly, was to build more homes.
• President-elect Trump painted it as mostly as a demand issue and blamed the housing shortage on immigrants.

Flashback: Today's housing shortage is rooted in the 2008 housing bust when a huge number of homebuilders went out of business, from which the industry never recovered, Peck reports.

• Go deeper: Read the 20-page report.

More from Axios:

• Why Harris and Trump can't stop talking about housing
• America's housing shortage is keeping home prices high
• America's housing shortage explained in one chart