As Elon Musk's slash-and-burn budget cuts hit Republican and Democratic areas alike, some GOP lawmakers are privately back-channeling with the Trump administration to try to shield their constituents from the fallout.

Why it matters: Republicans have largely cheered on DOGE in public — but behind the scenes, many of President Trump's allies fear potential political backlash to the cuts, and are scrambling to limit the damage.

• Of the 60 congressional districts with the most federal workers, a slight majority are represented by Republicans, Axios previously reported.

What we're hearing: Several House Republicans told Axios they have succeeded in — or at least contributed to — getting DOGE to reverse certain cuts through private back-channeling.

• Rep. Cliff Bentz (R-Ore.) said he raised concerns about job cuts at the Bonneville Power Administration: "Whether it was my remarks back to DOGE or somebody else's, it got fixed. They ... hired back 30 people."
• Said Rep. Zach Nunn (R-Iowa): "When we have heard from constituents who have been directly impacted by this in a way that harmed them, I have reached out directly to the agencies and teams."
• Nunn cited Agriculture Department cuts that "could ... have impacted farmers" in his district, telling Axios he "talked to the administration on it, they recognized it, they heard it, and we got those positions reinstated."

State of play: Musk's DOGE has implemented abrupt, sweeping changes across the federal government through mass workforce purges and the dismantling of entire programs and agencies.

• The moves have drawn significant legal pushback, but Musk wants DOGE to continue to grow, saying Monday on Fox Business' "Kudlow" show that he aims to roughly double DOGE's size.
• GOP lawmakers also have faced backlash at town halls in their districts over the DOGE cuts, prompting House Republicans' campaign chief to encourage a shift from in-person to virtual town halls.

Zoom out: Other Republicans have gone public with their concerns. Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) said in a local media interview that Tinker Air Force Base in his state "cannot operate if we lose 600 civilian employees there."

• He also decried cuts to another Oklahoma military installation, McAlester Ammunition Plant: "We will not be able to keep aircraft in the air long-term for the Air Force. That is really important for us to be able to have."
• Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.) this week praised DOGE for reversing cuts to his district: "After working closely with DOGE and the administration, I am thrilled to announce that common sense has prevailed."

The other side: Democratic lawmakers — many of whom have been vehemently opposed to the DOGE cuts — complain that they lack the same pipeline to voice their concerns that their Republican counterparts enjoy.

• Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.) told Axios: "I have not heard of any Democrats getting that kind of treatment. I think Tom Cole, obviously, has better connections with the oligarchs than we do."
• "I'm trying to help people, but so far I've not come with any back channel to Donald Trump," said Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.), whose district in the D.C. suburbs has one of the largest concentrations of federal workers.

The bottom line: "That is no way to run a government," Huffman said. "That is, sort of, the ultimate partisan crony capitalism ... but apparently that's what we've come to these days."

Go deeper: Musk plans to double DOGE staff amid federal government cuts

Some Democrats are starting to publicly second-guess the party's stances on transgender rights and DEI programs — positions they've long embraced on principle, but now see as potential political liabilities.

Why it matters: The issues are creating a divide among some of the most powerful people in the party, including California Gov. Gavin Newsom and a few others widely seen as potential 2028 candidates for president.

• Newsom sent ripples through the party last week during a podcast interview with MAGA influencer Charlie Kirk. Echoing a GOP talking point, Newsom said he believed transgender women and girls playing in women's sports was "deeply unfair."

The big picture: The remark by Newsom, a former San Francisco mayor and longtime supporter of LGBTQ causes, stung many progressives as a betrayal.

• Whether it represented a true shift in belief or a move of political convenience, it reflected a growing argument between Democrats — whether they should be more pragmatic on some social issues, or stand on principle at a critical moment.
• The backdrop for the debate is how Democrats — namely presidential nominee Kamala Harris — struggled last year to respond as Republicans spent tens of millions on ads bashing transgender women and girls in sports, and declaring that "Kamala is for they/them, Donald Trump is for you."

Some Democrats quietly agree with Newsom. Others say emphatically that the party should support transgender people and others now targeted by Trump administration policies.

• The Human Rights Campaign, a prominent LGBTQ+ advocacy group, said in a statement: "Our message to Gov. Newsom and leaders across the country is simple: The path to 2028 isn't paved with the betrayal of vulnerable communities. It's built on the courage to stand up for what's right, and do the hard work to actually help the American people."

Asked if Newsom supports any changes in the law to address fairness in women's sports, the governor's office declined to specify any.

• On his podcast, Newsom also criticized how some Democrats introduce themselves with their pronouns. "I had one meeting where people started going around the table with the pronouns," he said. "I'm like: 'What the hell? Why is this the biggest issue?'"

Rahm Emanuel — former Chicago mayor and U.S. ambassador to Japan, who has played coy about a 2028 White House run — told Axios: "Some kids in the classroom are debating which pronouns apply, and the rest of the class doesn't know what a pronoun is. That's a crisis."

• Emanuel has said Democrats in power should focus on the historic decline in children's reading abilities in the aftermath of the pandemic.
• Democrats "can't be a party that believes in equity and allows two-thirds of your kids who can't read," he said last week in a speech at the Economic Club of Chicago.

Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, a 2028 presidential contender who's openly gay, removed his pronouns from his profile on X in recent months, according to the Internet Archive.

• A Buttigieg spokesperson didn't respond to Axios' request for comment.

Zoom in: Democratic lawmakers also are fracturing about their positions on DEI programs and how to talk about race.

• Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Service Committee, told The New Yorker that some DEI programs go "off the beam, to my mind, when they imply that racism, bigotry and settler colonialism is the unique purview of white people. ... You don't need to imply that all white people are racists, and that all white people are oppressors."
• Newsom told Kirk that "not one person ever in my office has ever used the word LatinX."

Between the lines: The term "woke" went mainstream during Black Lives Matter protests in 2014 and through Trump's first term, signifying a person who was alert to prejudice and discrimination that much of society didn't acknowledge.

• For millions of Americans, Trump and Republicans have turned "woke" into an insult — and a political dog whistle.
• "Our country will be woke no longer," Trump said in his address to Congress.

Zoom out: Trump has tried to put Democrats on the defensive on these issues in his first weeks in office.

• He signed several executive orders aimed at transgender and DEI policies implemented by President Biden, schools and businesses.
• One order banned transgender women and girls from competing in girls' and women's sports, prompting the NCAA to change its policy on transgender athletes.

During last week's address, Trump highlighted the story of a high school volleyball player who suffered brain damage when a transgender girl hit the ball hard onto her head.

• "From now on, schools will kick the men off the girls' team or they will lose all federal funding," Trump said. "We've ended the tyranny of so-called diversity, equity and inclusion policies all across the entire federal government."

Republicans in Congress have been forcing Democrats to take votes on legislation focused on transgender people.

• Republicans last week brought up legislation to prohibit schools receiving government funding from allowing transgender women and girls to participate in women's sports.

Democrats unanimously opposed the measure in the Senate. But privately, they're workshopping their future responses to GOP attacks on transgender rights, Axios' Stephen Neukam and Hans Nichols report.

• Some Democratic lawmakers have disagreed with the GOP-led legislation, but not the issue.

"I support fair play and safety and do not support transgender athletes competing in girls' and women's sports when it compromises those principles," Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) said in a statement after the vote.

• But Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.), who has voted against his party on various issues, voted no and wrote on X: "The small handful of trans athletes in PA in a political maelstrom deserve an ally, and I am one."

One of the biggest forces that contributed to President Trump's defeat in 2020 also helped propel him to the White House in 2024.

Why it matters: The pandemic pushed voters — from young men to suburban parents — to the right, fueling Trump's decisive victory and raising questions about Democrats' ability to hold onto once-reliable blocs.

Catch up quick: Covid was a top issue in 2020 exit polls, with 52% of voters saying controlling the virus itself was more important than rebuilding the post-pandemic economy.

• That mindset shifted over the next four years, as closed schools, inflation and isolation frustrated voters — and changed many of their votes.

"Younger voters are in the process of understanding who they are and what their values are, and that was disproportionately shaped by Covid," says John Della Volpe, director of polling at the Harvard Kennedy School Institute of Politics. "It intensified economic anxiety and created this survivalist mindset."

• "Democrats helped create this vacuum, which was filled by Trump and Trump-aligned podcasters and influencers."

Case in point: In 2020, voters under 30 broke for Joe Biden by 24 points, but in 2020, Kamala Harris only won the youth vote by 4 points, The Atlantic reports.

And many parents in deep blue cities and towns flipped their politics after seeing the effect of school closures and Covid isolation on their kids.

• When schools shut down, "I was always deeply concerned that the tradeoff for children would be grave," says Natalya Murakhver, a Manhattan mom, who organized the parent-led lawsuit to fully reopen New York City schools. "You cannot stop growing up, and growing up entails the social relationships that can only be had in a physical space."
• Murakhver says she voted for Democrats her entire adult life, including for President Biden in 2020, but cast her ballot for Trump in 2024. For her, the turning point was when the Biden administration started walking back its pledge to reopen schools within its first 100 days.

Zoom out: Some experts saw this coming. Pandemics corrode citizens' faith in government — especially, and not surprisingly, among impressionable young people.

• Those who experience these events from the ages of 18 to 25 are more likely to develop a lasting lack of trust in political institutions and leaders, according to a study from the Systemic Risk Center at the London School of Economics.
• "You can think of epidemics as somewhat of a stress test for governments. Leaders have to respond fast and with the right policies," says Orkun Saka, the study's author. "There is almost no way to get it completely right. When you get it especially wrong, there is a deep scar in the eyes of the young generation."

The bottom line: Five years on, pandemic-era policies have ended, but the economic pain and divisions triggered by Covid linger and continue to influence politics.

• "I'm still a registered Democrat," Murakhver says. "But I feel party-less, which probably is a healthy place to be."

Democratic Sen. Elissa Slotkin (Mich.) slammed Elon Musk's DOGE team that's radically transforming the federal government during her rebuttal to President Trump's address to Congress on Tuesday.

Why it matters: In her brief remarks, Slotkin emphasized her bipartisan career history while emphasizing that "America wants change." She knocked the Trump administration's approach, adding: "There's a responsible way to make change and a reckless way."

• She took aim at Musk, who she said, along with his "gang of 20-year-olds," is acting with "no oversight, no protections against cyber-attack[s], no guardrails on what they do with your private data."
• "We can make that change without forgetting who we are as a country and as a democracy," she said.

Driving the news: Slotkin emphasized unity and patriotism, noting at the beginning of her remarks that she represents a state that Trump won in November.

• She called for the need to "expand and protect the middle class," while slamming trump as "trying to deliver an unprecedented giveaway to his billionaire friends."
• The Democrat also called for fixing the "broken immigration system," saying that securing the border without fixing the system "is dealing with the symptom not the disease."
• "America is not perfect. But I stand with the majority of Americans who believe we are still exceptional, unparalleled," Slotkin said.
• "And I would rather have American leadership over Chinese or Russian leadership any day of the week."

The big picture: Slotkin's remarks came immediately after Trump's joint address to Congress, which he used to tout his executive blitz during his first weeks in office, saying he's just "getting started."

• Trump's speech drew numerous public disruptions from Democrats in the chamber.
• Some key people in his orbit, including Musk, attended the speech at the U.S. Capitol.

Between the lines: In the weeks since Trump's inauguration, Democrats have been flooded with calls from constituents who want the part to do more to push back against Trump policies.

Go deeper: Who is Elissa Slotkin, the Democrat rebutting Trump's joint address

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

The battle over a single state Supreme Court seat in Wisconsin is on track to be among the most expensive judicial races in history, fueled by donations from big fundraising names such as Elon Musk and George Soros.

Why it matters: Democrats and Republicans alike see the Wisconsin race as having outsized importance in politics, stretching far beyond the Dairy State.

• The April 1 election will determine the tilt of an ideologically divided bench in a purple state where state-level decisions carry national implications for abortion rights, legislative redistricting and election laws.
• State Supreme Court races historically have been under-the-radar affairs. But they've risen to national prominence recently, accelerated by the U.S. Supreme Court's 2022 decision to overturn the federal right to abortion. States now determine whether to allow the procedure.

Driving the news: Although technically nonpartisan, the Wisconsin race — between Brad Schimel, a judge in Waukesha County and former GOP attorney general, and Susan Crawford, a Dane County judge — has become a proxy for national party figures seeking to exert their influence in a high-profile, off-year election.

• Roughly $30 million already has been spent on the race, which appears on pace to break — or at least rival — the record-breaking $50 million that was spent on the state's Supreme Court race in 2023.
• If Schimel wins, the seven-member court will have a conservative majority until at least 2026. If Crawford wins, the court will have a liberal majority until at least 2028. Liberals have held the majority on the court since 2023.

Zoom in: What distinguishes this year's election from the 2023 race are the donations flowing in from prominent national donors — particularly Musk, who was the biggest donor of the 2024 presidential election.

• Musk, who has become one of the most powerful people in Washington, wrote on X in January that it is "very important to vote Republican" in the Wisconsin race.

By the numbers: According to data from the tracking firm AdImpact, at least $17 million has been spent on advertising for Crawford's campaign, compared to roughly $16 million for Schimel's.

• A Musk-backed conservative nonprofit, Building America's Future, had spent more than $3 million on advertising in the race as of Friday, per AdImpact. His America PAC has spent at least $404,000 on radio ads.
• Democratic megadonor Soros donated $1 million to the Wisconsin Democratic Party in January, campaign finance filings show. Billionaire Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker donated $500,000 and LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman donated $250,000.
• Shortly after these donations, the party transferred more than $2 million to Crawford's campaign, per the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

State of play: "It's remarkable how much national money has poured into that state, but it's all about a very competitive political environment nationally," said Michael Kang, an election law professor at Northwestern University.

• The outside spending is "another illustration of how these have transformed from pretty quiet local races to nationalized elections that in some ways feel just like a high stakes U.S. Senate race," said Douglas Keith, a senior counsel in the Brennan Center's Judiciary Program.

The intrigue: The outside donations have raised questions about possible conflicts of interest, and whether the candidates would step aside if they were to hear a case involving a donor.

• Musk's Tesla Inc. has sued Wisconsin over the company being blocked from opening new dealerships in the state, a case that could wind up before the state Supreme Court, per Wisconsin Public Radio.

What they're saying: "Republicans including billionaire Elon Musk are pouring in historic amounts of cash to buy this state Supreme Court seat because they understand the stakes as well as we do," Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee spokesperson Sam Paisley said in a statement.

• The DLCC announced this week that it was adding the state Supreme Court races in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania to their map of targeted races.

What to watch: Off-year elections tend to see much lower turnout than those in midterm and presidential years, but the race will provide an early test of the strength of President Trump's coalition. Trump won the state in November.

• "If you are someone who is looking forward to the 2026 or 2028 elections, ... election law takes place in the states, so if you're trying to influence the rules under which those elections take place, you might be interested in who sits on state high courts," Keith said.

Go deeper: Courts foiling GOP's late push for election changes

Editor's note: This story has been corrected to reflect that Building America's Future as of Friday had spent more than $3 million in advertising in the race (not given it directly to Schimel's campaign), per AdImpact.

President Trump signed an executive order on Wednesday empowering DOGE to scrutinize how federal agencies spend money, the latest expansion of Elon Musk's cost cutting powers.

Why it matters: Trump, who hours earlier backed Musk's email to federal employees asking them to outline what they accomplished at work last week, is giving the billionaire SpaceX founder extra teeth to upend government through his work on DOGE.

Driving the news: The executive order asks agencies to work with a DOGE team lead to review contracts and grants, and cut or modify them "where appropriate," per the White House.

• It also asks agencies to build a system to "record every payment" spent on the agency's contracts and grants and provide a "brief, written justification for each payment."
• The executive order also asks agency heads to work with their DOGE team lead to build a system to record approval for federally-funded travel or conferences — and provide written justification for conferences or non-essential travel.
• The order also requires federal agencies to identify federal properties that are no longer needed that can be disposed of.

The big picture: The executive order comes as Musk continues to dramatically transform the federal government, just over one month into Trump's second term in office.

• Musk has taken sweeping steps to try to cut the federal workforce, sometimes sparking confusion among employees and the agencies themselves.
• Approximately half of the federal workforce has answered Musk's email asking them to detail their accomplishments, the White House said Tuesday.
• The White House earlier on Wednesday sent an email to federal agencies, warning them to prepare for mass layoffs.

Go deeper: Trump: Federal employees who didn't respond to Musk email are on firing "bubble"

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

Federal workers who didn't respond to Elon Musk's request to outline what they did at work "are on the bubble," President Trump said during the first Cabinet meeting of his second term.

Why it matters: Trump's comments came as he was flanked by every one of his confirmed agency heads, including some whose departments' explicitly told their federal employees not to respond to Musk's email last week.

• Musk, who spoke Wednesday before any member of Trump's Cabinet, said that he received the president's permission to send the email to federal employees requesting they outline the five things they accomplished.
• Musk, who on Wednesday described the email to federal employees as a "pulse check review," had said failure to respond to his email would be treated as a resignation.

Driving the news: "Those million people that haven't responded though, Elon, they are on the bubble ... I wouldn't say that we're thrilled about it, they haven't responded," Trump said.

• "Those people are on the bubble as they say, maybe they're gonna be gone," Trump added.
• Later in the Cabinet meeting, Trump told reporters that he thinks Musk wants to send out another email asking federal employees what they've accomplished, which the president called a "good idea."
• The White House said Tuesday that more than 1 million federal employees responded to Musk's email, about half of the full federal workforce.

State of play: Trump's comments came just after the White House directed federal agencies to prepare for mass lay-offs, or reductions-in-force, Axios' Emily Peck reported.

• The agencies were given two weeks to prepare for the widespread layoffs.
• Reducing the size of the federal workforce has been a central focus of the early days of the Trump administration, with Musk taking the lead through sweeping, abrupt changes.
• At the beginning of the meeting, Trump said to his Cabinet that if anybody is "unhappy" with Musk, "we'll throw him out of here."

Zoom out: Trump took questions from reporters for about an hour during the public portion of his Cabinet meeting on Wednesday afternoon.

• The president spoke on a wide range of topics, including the Russia-Ukraine war and his $5 million "gold cards" proposal. He also let Musk speak on 'DOGE,' among other topics.

Go deeper: Jolted Republicans beg Elon Musk to ease up with DOGE

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

A judge on Monday rejected the Associated Press' emergency motion to rescind the White House ban against its access to some press events, as he sought more details on the circumstances surrounding the case.

Why it matters: It's a win for the White House — at least for now — as they seek to restrict the AP's access, following the news organization's decision to use Gulf of Mexico rather than Gulf of America.

Driving the news: In a hearing on Monday afternoon, Judge Trevor McFadden requested more details about the events that the AP has been barred from and the number of reporters allowed into larger events.

• McFadden didn't find any reason to immediately stop the administration's ban, but he said that case law seems to be against it.

The big picture: The ruling comes after the White House asked the judge to allow it to continue barring the AP from some press events. It argued in a court filing on Monday that access to the president is at his discretion and not a constitutional right.

• The filing said that just because the AP "may have long received special media access to the president does not mean that such access is constitutionally compelled in perpetuity."
• The White House hailed the judge's order, saying in a statement, "asking the president of the United States questions in the Oval Office and aboard Air Force One is a privilege granted to journalists, not a legal right."

The other side: "We look forward to our next hearing on March 20 where we will continue to stand for the right of the press and the public to speak freely without government retaliation," AP spokesperson Lauren Easton said in a statement.

Catch up quick: The Associated Press named White House deputy chief of staff Taylor Budowich, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt and White House chief of staff Susie Wiles in their suit filed last week in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

• The AP accused the White House of violating its First Amendment rights after the outlet's reporters were barred from attending some events, like Oval Office meetings and Air Force One press pools, after the AP's continued use of Gulf of Mexico in its reporting.

The big picture: The White House is targeting AP because of the preeminent role it plays in shaping mainstream news media language via its influential stylebook and, therefore, how other outlets report on the president and his administration.

• Republicans believe the AP has become institutionally geared toward the left.
• Trump advisers say AP's photographers were blocked as well, thereby depriving the organization of the revenue it earns from selling pictures on its news wire.
• AP says its style guide is non-biased and is continually updated to provide accurate, fair and neutral information.

The intrigue: Ed Martin, the interim U.S. attorney for D.C., falsely referred to his office as "President Trumps' lawyers" [sic] in a post on X on Monday. Martin wrote that his team is "vigilant in standing against entities like the AP that refuse to put America first."

• Martin is not a personal lawyer for Trump. As a U.S. attorney for D.C., he is the top prosecutor for the city, with a big portfolio, including white collar and national security investigations and nearly all street-level crime, Axios' Cuneyt Dil reported.
• Per the office's website, "The United States Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia is committed to ensuring the fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans."

Between the lines: Trump has installed loyalists at all levels of U.S. government. He's repeatedly promised to use Justice Department officials to seek retribution against his perceived enemies.

• His administration's recent demand that charges against New York City mayor Eric Adams be dismissed led several top prosecutors in New York and D.C. to resign.

The other side: The White House Correspondents Association, an almost 800-member independent press group, filed an amicus brief on Sunday on the AP's behalf.

• It argues that the free speech and integrity of not just the plaintiffs is at stake.
• The brief says that the administration's actions "will chill and distort news coverage of the President to the public's detriment" — a harm that extends beyond just the AP.
• The WHCA also argues that the independent pool system — a rotation of the association's member reporters who follow the president — is a key part of coverage on the White House beat, calling it the "first draft of history of events of domestic and global importance."

Go deeper: AP sues Trump officials over Oval Office ban, citing First Amendment

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

French far-right leader Jordan Bardella canceled planned remarks at CPAC Friday, after ex-Trump adviser Steve Bannon made a "gesture referring to Nazi ideology," according to a statement to French news agency Agence France-Presse.

Why it matters: Bardella's change of plans is the strongest rebuke yet of Bannon, who, during his remarks at the annual conservative conference made a gesture that appeared to mimic a Hitlergruß, or Nazi salute.

• "This is a lie … It's a wave … I acknowledged a crowd after the best speech @ CPAC," Bannon told Axios.
• Bannon added that he sees Bardella as "gutless ... not tough enough to be a leader of France — he's a spokesmodel."
• A CPAC representative did not respond to a request for comment Friday.

Driving the news: "At this forum, (Thursday), while I was not present in the room, one of the speakers allowed himself, out of provocation, a gesture referring to Nazi ideology," Bardella said in a statement to AFP.

• "As a result, I have taken the immediate decision to cancel my speech scheduled for this afternoon at the event."

The big picture: The Bannon incident comes about a month after Trump-ally Elon Musk also made a hand gesture that drew comparisons to a Nazi salute.

• Despite blowback, Musk dismissed the criticisms, writing on X: "Frankly, they need better dirty tricks. The 'everyone is Hitler' attack is sooo tired."

Go deeper: ADL condemns Musk's Nazi "jokes" after salute controversy

Axios' Alex Isenstadt contributed reporting.

With a compliant Republican-led Congress virtually in President Trump's pocket, the courts appear to be the main guardrail for his push to remake government and boost his presidential power.

Why it matters: Trump's most sweeping executive orders have drawn a series of legal challenges — which his administration has vowed to fight, even as it sends mixed signals over whether it will abide by court decisions.

• More than 70 lawsuits now have been filed against aspects of Trump's agenda, and more than two dozen court rulings have paused some of Trump's executive orders.
• Trump already has filed an appeal to the Supreme Court in a dispute over whether the president can fire the head of an independent agency. It's the first of what's likely to be many challenges that will wind up at the doorstep of the nation's highest court.
• Last summer, the high court granted presidents broad immunity for "official acts" they carry out.

Driving the news: Trump's actions related to the major parts of his presidential agenda — immigration, DOGE, federal workforce changes and trans rights — have drawn the bulk of the legal challenges.

• Three federal judges have ordered a freeze on Trump's Day 1 executive order to end birthright citizenship.
• A judge on Tuesday kept the order paused, rejecting a bid from Trump to halt one of several federal injunctions against it, per Bloomberg Law.

Elon Musk's role in transforming the government has come under scrutiny in recent legal filings, as unions and private citizens seek to block the billionaire SpaceX founder's access to potentially private information.

• In a win for Musk, a federal judge on Tuesday declined, at least for now, to block DOGE from firing federal employees or gaining access to certain government databases.
• A different federal judge this month temporarily blocked DOGE's access to data systems at the Treasury Department.
• Some cases over Musk and his team's access to different databases are pending.

Other aspects of the Trump administration's efforts to upend the federal government workforce also have drawn legal challenges, including some still awaiting a judge's decision.

• Judges have temporarily blocked Trump's decision to put thousands of employees at the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) on leave and freeze funding for some government programs.
• A different judge, meanwhile, has let stand Trump's offer to pay federal employees through Sept. 30 if they resign.

Trump's efforts to roll back rights for transgender people also have drawn legal challenges, increasing the chances that a high-profile suit ends at the Supreme Court.

• A federal judge has temporarily blocked Trump's order that would transfer incarcerated transgender women to men's prison facilities, and would block them from receiving medical treatments for gender transitions.
• A judge has not yet issued a ruling on lawsuits challenging Trump's orders saying the U.S. government would recognize only two sexes, male and female, and ban transgender people from serving in the military.

What to watch: As the courts become the battleground for challenges to Trump's sweeping executive orders, Trump has said he'll follow court orders — though some of his top allies have cast doubt on that.

• Vice President Vance said this month that "judges aren't allowed to control the executive's legitimate power," a sentiment that has since been echoed by Musk and other Republicans.
• Democrats on Capitol Hill are bracing for Trump to flout a major court ruling — and they're meeting with state attorneys general, top lawyers, litigation firms, constitutional experts and advocacy organizations to prepare their response, Axios' Andrew Solender reported.

Go deeper: Tests of Trump's power on fast tracks to the Supreme Court

President Trump told Axios' Marc Caputo on Tuesday that he will continue to restrict the Associated Press' access to the White House "until such time as they agree that it's the Gulf of America."

Why it matters: Trump has targeted the AP, which has said it will continue to use the 400-year-old Gulf of Mexico instead of Trump's preferred Gulf of America, as part of longstanding Republican complaints about the AP Stylebook's language guides around race, gender, and immigration.

• Trump has limited AP reporters' access to the White House and Air Force One over the dispute.

Driving the news: "The Associated Press just refuses to go with what the law is and what has taken place, it's called the 'Gulf of America' now," Trump told Axios during a press conference at Mar-a-Lago on Tuesday.

• "It's not called the Gulf of Mexico any longer. … We're going to keep them out until such time they agree that it's the Gulf of America."

What they're saying: AP spokesperson Lauren Easton said in a statement addressing Trump's comments "this is about the government telling the public and press what words to use and retaliating if they do not follow government orders."

• Easton said the White House "has restricted AP's coverage of presidential events because of how we refer to a location."
• She added: "The Associated Press has provided critical and independent coverage of the White House for over 100 years," Easton added.

Between the lines: Axios reported Monday that one of the main reasons the Trump White House is limiting AP reporters' access is because of what aides see as liberal bias in the wire's influential stylebook, a characterization that the AP rejects.

Go deeper: Scoop: Why Trump targets AP

Editor's note: This story has been updated with comment from AP spokesperson Lauren Easton additional details.

Every Arizona swing voter in our latest Engagious/Sago focus groups said they approve of President Trump's actions since taking office — and most also support Elon Musk's efforts to slash government.

Why it matters: Public opinion can constrain presidents when Congress does not. But these 11 voters — all of whom backed Joe Biden in 2020 but switched to Trump last November — said they're good with Trump aggressively testing disruptive, expansionist expressions of presidential power that are piling up in court challenges.

• It's needed to "get America back on track," one participant said.

What we're watching: One notable area of disagreement with Trump: The idea of the U.S. displacing Palestinians and taking over and redeveloping Gaza. These swing voters want Trump to stick with Americans' needs inside the U.S.

• Some would like to see him do more, sooner, to rein in consumer costs. But several said they don't mind that Trump's early actions haven't primarily focused on inflation — even when that was their top issue in the election — and said they can be patient if prices don't come down for a while.
• Several doubt the warnings that tariffs may translate to long-term price increases for American consumers.
• Several expressed views that "waste, fraud and abuse" are so prevalent that government agencies can be slashed or eliminated without hurting services on which they depend.

How it works: The voters participated in two online focus groups, conducted Feb. 11. They included 11 Arizonans who backed Trump last year, after rejecting Trump for Biden in 2020. Eight were independents, two were Republicans and one was a Democrat.

• While a focus group is not a statistically significant sample like a poll, the responses show how some voters are thinking and talking about current events.

What they're saying: "I agree we need the Constitution and we need rules and procedures," said Courtney L., 34. "But at the same time, how are we going to make big changes? If someone like Trump [is] being unconventional, we need him to be doing these things, to be making these executive orders and making these big changes for big changes to happen."

• "I like how he's cleaning house in the government," said Jonas G., 55.
• "I approve because I believe he's transparent, and we haven't had that for the last four years," said Ann B., 54.
• Other respondents were supportive of Trump's executive orders on immigration and efforts to eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives.

Seven of the 11 voters rejected that the president is trying to deliberately "flood the zone" to dilute attention on any one action.

• Trump "has to get started early on as soon as he gets elected into office, get to work," said Melvin G., 30.
• "He said he was going to do this, this, this and this, and this is what he is starting to get done," said Ann B.

Eight of the 11 respondents also said they approve of Musk's efforts in the administration.

• Few had concerns Musk is motivated by personal gain — or that his status as the world's richest man, who controls companies with billions of dollars in government contracts and faces investigations and regulatory hurdles, presents conflicts of interest.

The big picture: The number of executive orders that Trump has issued in his first weeks in office is unprecedented, a strategy that has overwhelmed Democrats trying to mount any semblance of a resistance. But Trump's rapid changes to government have already hit numerous legal roadblocks — and many of these challenges could eventually end up at the Supreme Court.

• Vice President JD Vance and other prominent Republicans this week expressed the sentiment that "judges aren't allowed to control the executive's legitimate power."
• This view has raised concerns from Democrats and even some GOP lawmakers that the Trump administration could flout an eventual court ruling.

The Arizona swing voters rejected concerns Trump could subvert the judiciary.

• "That wouldn't happen. I'm not even thinking about it," said Jonas G., when asked about the hypothetical of Trump rejecting a Supreme Court decision.
• Ann B. said it's "fearmongering."

The bottom line: "These swing voters are delighted by Musk's Trump-endorsed government housecleaning," said Rich Thau, president of Engagious, who moderated the focus groups.

• "The prospect of a looming constitutional crisis is completely inconceivable to them."
• Trump, Vance and Musk "should be ecstatic" about the 11 swing voters' feedback "and Democrats should be scared to death."

Go deeper: Tracking Trump's executive actions by category

The House Budget Committee released a budget blueprint Wednesday proposing $2 trillion in spending cuts.

Why it matters: The House is going bigger and bolder than the Senate with its proposed budget resolution to implement President Trump's legislative agenda — but they're also a step behind.

• The blueprint follows days of stalled negotiations between GOP hard-liners and leadership over how deep spending cuts should go. The budget panel is set to vote on it Thursday.
• The draft dropped as the Senate Budget Committee convened to vote on its own narrower bill on the border, energy and defense.

Driving the news: The blueprint calls for at least $4.5 trillion in tax cuts and a $4 trillion debt limit increase.

• Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) called the proposal "a key step to start the process in delivering President Trump's America First agenda."
• "This resolution reflects our collective commitment to enacting the President's full agenda—not just a part of it," Johnson wrote Wednesday on X.
• "There's still much work to be done, but we are starting on the right path."

State of play: House Republicans have been facing pressure to finalize a budget resolution, setting up a de facto game of chicken between the two chambers.

• Senate Republicans want two bills — an initial one addressing border security, energy and defense, and another addressing tax cuts.
• But their House counterparts prefer one bill, resulting in an escalating standoff.
• Johnson said Tuesday he would not bring Senate Budget Chair Lindsey Graham's version of a budget reconciliation bill to the House floor.

Zoom out: Graham, meanwhile, contends that the White House prefers the narrower approach he's embraced.

• Two Trump officials urged GOP senators Tuesday to fast-track $175 billion in new border money, Axios' Stef Kight reported.
• "The best evidence yet of where the White House is is that briefing we had," Graham told reporters Tuesday. "Why would they come over ... begging for money if they didn't want to move?"
• "I'm just asking the House to listen to these guys," he added.

Editor's note: This story has been corrected to reflect that Mike Johnson is a Republican (not a Democrat) and updated with additional reporting.

Every one of President Trump's most sweeping executive orders is now being challenged in court by multiple lawsuits.

Why it matters: They're setting the stage for historic Supreme Court showdowns that could test Trump's push to remake the federal government — and increase his power.

• They also could provide roadmaps for how to stop him.

The big picture: Less than four weeks into Trump's term, the Justice Department is already defending signature parts of his agenda in more than 50 lawsuits.

• Judges have temporarily stopped several of his top priorities from taking effect — at least for now.
• But in many cases the White House is purposely pushing its legal limits, inviting this tsunami of legal challenges — signaling the administration's confidence that the conservative-led Supreme Court will back Trump when the time comes.

State of play: Three big pieces of Trump's agenda — immigration, trans rights and slashing the federal bureaucracy — seem particularly likely to make it to the high court, which last summer granted presidents broad immunity for "official acts" they carry out.

Immigration

Three federal judges — in New Hampshire, Maryland and Washington state — have ordered a freeze on Trump's Day 1 executive order to end birthright citizenship, including one who called it "blatantly unconstitutional."

• At least 22 states and other organizations have sued over Trump's order.
• Legal analysts mostly agree that Trump is likely to lose this one in the end.

With so many active cases on the matter, it's too soon to say which lawsuit is most likely to land on the Supreme Court's docket. But because it's such a sweeping policy — and because birthright citizenship is a constitutional question — the issue will be ripe for the court's review.

The federal workforce

Trump's effort to slash federal programs and the federal workforce has run into some snags in court, but it's an area on which legal experts believe he's likely to have the Supreme Court on his side.

• Some of the myriad challenges to Trump's various cuts are very specific, and will only pertain to certain employees or programs.
• But others raise bigger questions about the president's authority to fire federal workers. The Supreme Court already has taken an expansive view of that power.

Where it stands: Judges have temporarily blocked Trump's "buyout" deadline for federal workers and his decision to put thousands of employees at the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) on leave.

• As long as the administration keeps cutting workers one tranche at a time, there will be virtually no end to lawsuits challenging the moves.

What we're watching: When a case focuses on the details of how the White House carried out a spending cut, Trump could take some losses — at least temporary ones, analysts said.

• But the more the Justice Department can turn this universe of litigation into a big-picture referendum on the president's power over the federal workforce, the more likely it is to win — and win big.

Transgender rights

The Supreme Court seems likely to rule later this year that states can ban gender-affirming care for minors — a potential signal that Trump's moves to roll back federal protections for trans people probably will fare well.

• But they'll be some of the highest-profile suits the Justice Department will have to defend.

Where it stands: A federal judge temporarily blocked Trump's order that would transfer incarcerated transgender women to men's prison facilities, and would block them from receiving medical treatments for gender transitions.

• Trump also signed executive orders saying the U.S. government would recognize only two sexes, male and female, and ban transgender people from serving in the military.
• Lawsuits have been filed against both orders, but no judge has issued a ruling.

Between the lines: As congressional Democrats try to mount their resistance against Trump administration actions, they're likely to begin filing amicus briefs to support challenges.

• "We will be involved in all of them, and we're of course doing everything we can to speak up and to give heart and courage to the judges who are doing it," Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) the ranking member on the House Judiciary Committee, told reporters last week.

What to watch: As the courts become a battlefield for challenges to many of Trump's orders, some of the president's most vocal allies are questioning whether judges have authority of judges over many of the president's actions.

• Vice President Vance said Sunday that "judges aren't allowed to control the executive's legitimate power."
• Vance's comment, which has been echoed by Elon Musk and other Republicans, foreshadow what's likely to be a tense battle in courtrooms nationwide over Trump's norm-breaking changes to government.

Go deeper: Court rulings test limits of Trump's power

Joe Biden has left Washington, but he still seems to be living rent-free in Donald Trump's mind.

Why it matters: Trump has brought his grievance-laden playbook against Biden to the White House and frequently derides his Democratic rival — in speeches, executive orders, off-the-cuff comments and social media posts.

• Trump's criticisms follow a strategy he's used since he first took office in 2017: Accuse his predecessor of doing a terrible job (then it was Barack Obama, now Biden) and blame them for any problems or setbacks.

Driving the news: This time it began moments after Trump was sworn in on Jan. 20. With Biden sitting just a few feet away, Trump said in his inaugural speech that the outgoing president had left the country in "decline."

• Since then, Trump has issued dozens of executive orders, many of which he cast as remedies for problems he claimed Biden or his administration created.
• As investigators began looking into the deadly in-air collision near Reagan National Airport last week, Trump — without evidence — blamed the Biden administration's diversity programs for the crash.
• In a Truth Social post Sunday, Trump took aim again, announcing that he'd ordered airstrikes against the Islamic State in northern Somalia and accusing "Biden and his cronies" of not acting quickly enough to "get the job done."

That's just a sample of Trump's darts at Biden.

• He also trashed Biden's border policies as "stupid," and cast the former president as weak on everything from relations with China to disaster response and inflation.

Zoom in: It's not just Trump. His allies have made a sport of criticizing the Biden White House.

• Press secretary Karoline Leavitt last week attributed the increase in egg prices during Trump's first week in office to the Biden administration's "mass killing of more than 100 million chickens" amid concerns about bird flu.
• She also cast Biden as a president who slept on the job.
• Democrats counter that Trump's moves dismantling the federal government in D.C. threaten to become far more destructive than beneficial.

Between the lines: Trump and Biden, who was Obama's vice president, have had a bitter rivalry for years.

• Trump blames his many legal troubles on Biden and his administration's Justice Department.
• Even after Biden dropped out of the 2024 presidential race and was replaced on the Democratic ticket by Kamala Harris, Trump continued to bash Biden.

What they're saying: "Anything bad that happens on your watch, you try to find someone else to blame, and Donald Trump has a good foil in Joe Biden," Arizona-based Republican political consultant Barrett Marson told Axios, referring to Biden's low favorability ratings.

• "Trump is untethered to facts and ... will blame Biden and Democrats for anything that goes wrong," Marson said.
• But he added that with Republicans' in full control of the federal government and the rapid pace at which Trump is dismantling many Biden administration policies, "he's going to run out of that excuse quickly."

Go deeper: Trump gets a jump on his presidency — with Biden's help

Ken Martin was elected on Saturday to serve as the next chair of the Democratic National Committee, putting him at the helm of a party trying to rebuild its image after a disappointing 2024 cycle.

Why it matters: Martin, the longtime chair of the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, wants to help the party get "back to basics" with a revamped messaging strategy aimed at winning back working-class voters who have drifted to the right.

• Martin, considered a favorite heading into the Saturday vote, beat out fellow midwesterner Wisconsin Democratic Party chair Ben Wikler and half a dozen other candidates.
• Martin won 246.5 votes from the DNC's 448 voting members, multiple outlets reported.

Driving the news: In the crowded race for DNC chair, Martin's pitch zeroed on his winning record as chair of the Minnesota DFL. In the 14 years in charge, his party did not lose a single statewide race, giving him a 25-0 record.

• Martin wants to take his winning state record to the national level, a message that clearly resonated with Democrats still reeling from losses up and down the ballot on Nov. 5.
• "My record is unrivaled and unmatched in terms of winning elections and building power around the issues we care about," Martin told the Minnesota Reformer.
• Martin demonstrated his strong fundraising prowess as DFL chair, a skill that he'll now need to leverage at the national level. Fundraising is one of the biggest jobs for the DNC chair.

Between the lines: As a longtime party leader and DNC vice chair, Martin locked up support among party officials across the country but bigger names were split over who to support.

• Wikler drew the public backing of former Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other big names like Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.

The big picture: The race for DNC chair comes after an election cycle that put President Trump in the White House and Republicans in control of both houses of Congress.

• As DNC chair, Martin will help lead the party's strategy and messaging, including by appearing on media himself to represent the party.
• He will also have influence over setting the order for the 2028 Democratic primary, which could see Minnesota moving up its spot in the calendar.

Go deeper: Minnesota DFL chair Ken Martin in the running to lead DNC

Axios' Torey Van Oot contributed reporting.

Editor's note: This story has been updated with the vote total.

Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg swiftly shot back against President Trump's criticisms of him during a Thursday press conference, less than a day after a deadly plane collision outside Washington D.C.

Why it matters: Buttigieg's comments represent one of his strongest public rebukes of Trump since he took office last week.

• Buttigieg, an outspoken Democratic surrogate during the 2024 campaign, is widely considered a 2028 presidential contender.

Driving the news: Buttigieg defended his record as Transportation Secretary, saying, "we put safety first, drove down close calls, grew Air Traffic Control, and had zero commercial airline crash fatalities out of millions of flights on our watch."

• "As families grieve, Trump should be leading, not lying," Buttigieg said.
• Buttigieg also said that "one of [Trump's] first acts was to fire and suspend some of the key personnel who helped keep our skies safe."
• "Time for the President to show actual leadership and explain what he will do to prevent this from happening again," he added.

State of play: During his first press conference after the fatal plane crash, Trump expressed his condolences for the lives lost before skewering his political rivals and the FAA's diversity, equity and inclusion programs.

• Trump took specific aim at Buttigieg, saying: "A real winner. Do you know how badly everything has run since he's run the Department of Transportation? He's a disaster."

Between the lines: Buttigieg drew heightened scrutiny during his time as Transportation Secretary, as he navigated multiple transportation crises.

• Republicans repeatedly criticized Buttigieg over his handling of the crises, often trying to paint him as underqualified.

Go deeper: Trump touts national unity over air disaster before bashing Biden and Obama

The Democratic Party is the most unpopular it's been in polling that dates back to 2008, according to a new survey from Quinnipiac University.

Why it matters: Democrats are struggling to repair their image with voters after a bruising 2024 election that put President Trump in the White House and Republicans in control of both houses of Congress.

• Democratic lawmakers are grappling — and in some cases, experimenting — with how best to respond to Trump's rapid, sweeping changes in the early days of his administration.

By the numbers: 57% of registered voters have an unfavorable opinion of the Democratic Party, the highest percentage since Quinnipiac started asking the question in 2008.

• 45% of voters have an unfavorable opinion of the Republican Party.

43% of voters have a favorable opinion of the Republican Party, the highest since 2008.

• By contrast, 31% of registered voters have a favorable opinion of the Democratic Party.
• That's the largest favorability advantage the GOP has had over the Democratic Party since 2008, according to Quinnipiac.

Between the lines: Democrats face an uphill climb. A CNN poll conducted by SSRS earlier this month found that 70% of U.S. adults would describe themselves as disappointed with today's politics.

• The same CNN poll found that 58% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents say that the party needs major changes or to be completely reformed.

Reality check: The Republican Party had worse numbers during much of the first year of Trump's first term than what Democrats are seeing now.

• The percentage of voters with an unfavorable view of the Republican Party hovered around 60% in 2017, with a peak of 67% in August, according to Quinnipiac.

Go deeper: Dems warm to conservative media after rough 2024

The Justice Department (DOJ) on Wednesday moved to dismiss former special counsel Jack Smith's case against Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, President Trump's former co-defendants in his classified documents case.

Why it matters: It's the latest sign that the Justice Department is moving swiftly to wipe any proceedings in connection with the criminal cases that had involved Trump.

The big picture: The cases against Nauta and De Oliveira were still pending, even as the criminal case against Trump had already been tossed out.

• The Justice Department in a Wednesday court filing requested a dismissal of an appeal that would have reinstated the charges against Nauta and De Oliveira.

State of play: The Justice Department after the 2024 presidential election moved to wind down the criminal cases against Trump to comply with a longstanding policy that sitting presidents can't be prosecuted.

• After Smith dismissed the two criminal cases against Trump following his election win, it was unclear if the special counsel would release the report on the classified documents case.
• Former Attorney General Merrick Garland, however, had said that he would not release the report because Nauta and De Oliveira's cases were still pending at the time.

Go deeper: Judge dismisses Trump's federal classified docs case

Editor's note: This story was updated with additional context.

A potential constitutional crisis erupted Tuesday over the Trump administration's surprise federal funding freeze, jolting Democrats into action after months of strategic paralysis.

Why it matters: For the first time since President Trump won the election, the so-called Resistance is showing signs of life.

Senate Democrats moved with rare dexterity to block a GOP-led bill in one of the few places where they have real leverage, and blanketed social media with panicked reports from their constituents.

• House Democrats called an emergency meeting for Wednesday to plot a "comprehensive three-pronged counteroffensive" — targeting appropriations, litigation and communications.

Nonprofits — later joined by Democrat-led states — stormed the federal court system with lawsuits, leading a judge to temporarily halt the funding freeze at 5pm ET Tuesday.

What they're saying: "This is cruelty, this is lawlessness, this is a heist done on a national scale," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) told reporters in one of several press conferences by top Democrats, vowing to "fight this every way we can."

• "We need Democrats to use every procedural maneuver to grind things to [a] stop and use every media tool to raise alarm and allow public pressure to build," Ezra Levin, co-founder of progressive group Indivisible, said in a statement.
• "Shut down the Senate, refuse to allow them to steamroll, and take this fight to every town hall, courtroom, and news outlet."

State of play: The White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) sent shockwaves through Washington on Monday night with a memo directing agencies to "temporarily pause" grants, loans and federal financial assistance programs to ensure they align with Trump's priorities.

• "This is not a blanket pause," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt stressed as she was bombarded with questions about the freeze in her first press briefing Tuesday.
• "Social Security benefits, Medicare benefits, food stamps, welfare benefits, assistance that is going directly to individuals will not be impacted by this pause," she said.

Leavitt then told reporters she would check into whether Medicaid — the nation's largest health insurance program, covering 72 million mostly low-income Americans — would be affected.

• In the meantime, reports flooded in from all 50 states about Medicaid reimbursement systems being inaccessible — prompting the White House to issue a statement acknowledging an online "outage."
• "We have confirmed no payments have been affected — they are still being processed and sent. We expect the portal will be back online shortly," Leavitt said.

The big picture: For more than a week, Trump has overwhelmed his critics with an unrelenting flood of executive orders, government purges and bureaucratic maneuvering.

• On Tuesday alone, Trump offered to buy out any federal employees who resign by Feb. 6, and signed an executive order aiming to restrict youth gender-affirming care — diverting headlines from the funding freeze.
• Some of Trump's moves have pushed the lines of legality, including his mass firing of government watchdogs and purging of pro-worker influence at the National Labor Relations Board.
• But nothing has broken through like the funding memo, which sent state governments, nonprofits, schools, emergency workers and even some GOP officials scrambling to determine whether they'd be affected.

Between the lines: Besides billions of dollars in federal funding, something far more fundamental could be at stake in the coming legal battle — Congress' power of the purse.

• Trump and his nominee for OMB director, Russ Vought, have argued that the Impoundment Control Act — a Nixon-era law that restricts presidents from withholding funding passed by Congress — is unconstitutional.
• An FAQ sheet distributed by the OMB Tuesday claims Trump's "temporary pause" doesn't constitute an "impoundment." But that hasn't satisfied Democrats, given Vought's defense of the impoundment power in his confirmation hearing.
• "What happened last night is the most direct assault on the authority of Congress, I believe, in the history of the United States," Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) warned Tuesday.