Source: US International Brotherhood of Boilermakers
Breaking News
Since 1933, the Boilermakers have been working with the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) to build and maintain the infrastructure that powers the South. What began as a New Deal hydroelectric-focused endeavor has evolved over the past 90 years to coal, natural gas, nuclear and a planned, first-in-the-nation nuclear fusion generation facility. The generating assets within the TVA are diverse and efficient, delivering power to millions of southern households across seven states, powering the southern economy and stabilizing the national electric grid. TVA is a federally owned power authority that has been operating in partnership with the IBB for nearly 100 years, producing millions of man-hours for generations.
Since the Obama administration, several unsuccessful attempts have been made to privatize TVA. There are strong rumors that the Trump administration is considering privatization of TVA, meaning they would sell off the generating assets and infrastructure to the highest bidder, jeopardizing millions of Boilermaker man-hours. Additionally, privatizing TVA’s assets would cost families who live in the TVA jurisdiction an estimated additional $50 a month on their utility bill—a cost most working families cannot afford.
Below is the Boilermakers’ official statement urging against privatization of TVA. Boilermakers are strongly encouraged to contact their U.S. Senators using this action page link, which can and should be shared widely. The link will take you to an easy form that will automatically contact your Senator with a letter. It only takes a minute. This will help Boilermakers working on TVA projects and remind Washington that Boilermakers power America.
Boilermakers’ official statement on privatization of the Tennessee Valley Authority
Kansas City, Mo. (July 23, 2025) —Following is the official statement of the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, issued by International President Timothy Simmons, regarding U.S. Senate consideration of privatization of the Tennessee Valley Authority
We urge the Senate to slow down any attempt to privatize the Tennessee Valley Authority, as any such effort would have devastating effects across the South and our nation. Through the hard work of thousands of Boilermakers, TVA has been efficiently and effectively powering the South for over 90 years, building and maintaining a diverse portfolio of power generation assets across seven states. Disrupting TVA’s service to the South would, in turn, disrupt the nation, stalling out our ability to meet increasing power demands further stressed by the need to support the ever-evolving AI technology sector. In its current practice, TVA generates power that is affordable for every family and stabilizes the nation’s power grid. This is a classic case of “if it’s not broken, don’t fix it.”
All Boilermakers are encouraged to contact their U.S. Senators using this action link.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Cassandra Burke Robertson, Professor of Law and Director of the Center for Professional Ethics, Case Western Reserve University
In June 2025, Immigration Judge ShaSha Xu in New York City reportedly told lawyers in her courtroom: “We’re not really doing names publicly.” Only the government lawyers’ names were hidden – the immigrants’ attorneys had to give their names as usual. Xu cited privacy concerns, saying, “Things lately have changed.”
When one immigration lawyer objected that the court record would be incomplete without the government attorney’s name, Xu reportedly refused to provide it. In another case, New York immigration Judge James McCarthy in July referred to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, attorney as merely “Department” throughout the hearing.
New York immigration Judge Shirley Lazare-Raphael told The Intercept that some ICE attorneys believe it is “dangerous to state their names publicly.” This follows a broader pattern of ICE agents wearing masks during arrests to hide their identities.
This secrecy violates a fundamental principle that has protected Americans for centuries: open courts. Here’s how those courts operate and why the principle governing them matters.
Hiding of ICE attorneys’ names in court fits a broader pattern seen here outside a New York immigration courtroom of ICE agents wearing masks. AP Photo/Olga Fedorova
‘Presumption of openness’
The U.S. legal system is built on openness, with multiple layers of legal protection that guarantee public access to court proceedings.
This tradition of open courts developed as a direct rejection of secret judicial proceedings that had been used to abuse power in England. The notorious Star Chamber operated in secret from the 15th to 17th centuries, initially trying people “too powerful to be brought before ordinary common-law courts.”
But the Star Chamber eventually became a tool of oppression, using torture to obtain confessions and punishing jurors who ruled against the Crown. Parliament abolished it in 1641 after widespread abuses.
By the time American colonial courts were established, the reaction against the Star Chamber had already shaped English legal thinking toward openness. American courts adopted this principle of transparency from the beginning, rejecting the secretive proceedings that had enabled abuse.
Today, the term “star chamber” refers to any secret court proceeding that seems grossly unfair or is used to persecute individuals.
Many state constitutions also guarantee open courts – such as Oregon’s mandate that “no court shall be secret.”
While there’s no explicit law requiring attorneys to be publicly named, there’s also no policy allowing their names to be kept secret. The presumption is always toward openness.
In response to these recent developments, law professor Elissa Steglich said that she’d “never heard of someone in open court not being identified,” and that failing to identify an attorney could impair accountability “if there are unethical or professional concerns.”
Rules for anonymity
Courts sometimes allow anonymity, but only in specific circumstances.
Juries can be anonymous when there’s “substantial danger of harm or undue influence,” as legal expert Michael Crowell writes – like in high-profile organized crime cases or when defendants have tried to intimidate witnesses before. Even then, the lawyers still know the jurors’ names.
Similarly, parties to a lawsuit can sometimes use pseudonyms like “Jane Doe” when the case involves highly sensitive matters such as sexual abuse, or when there’s a real risk of physical retaliation.
What’s happening with ICE attorneys is different. There’s no formal court ruling allowing it, no specific safety findings and no established legal process.
Immigration courts have fewer protections
Immigration courts operate differently from regular federal courts. They are so-called “administrative courts” that are part of the executive branch, not the judicial branch.
These courts decide claims involving an individual’s right to stay in the U.S., either when the government seeks to remove someone from the country for violating immigration law or when an individual seeks to stay in the country through the asylum process.
Immigration judges lack the lifetime job protections that regular federal judges have. As executive branch government employees, they can be hired and fired, just like other Department of Justice employees.
People in immigration court also have fewer procedural protections than criminal defendants. They have no right to court-appointed counsel and must represent themselves unless they can afford to hire an attorney. The majority of immigrants appear without an attorney. Outcomes are better for those who can afford to hire counsel.
Immigration court records are also less accessible to the public than other federal court proceedings.
For years, the Board of Immigration Appeals, the nation’s highest immigration court, made less than 1% of its opinions publicly available. A federal court ruled that public disclosure was required; the Board of Immigration Appeals now posts its decisions online.
Because immigration courts operate with less oversight than regular federal courts, public observation becomes more critical.
Open courts aren’t just about legal procedure – they’re about democracy itself. When the public can observe how justice is administered, it builds confidence that the system is fair.
Federal agents patrol the halls of immigration court at the Jacob K. Javitz Federal Building on July 21, 2025, in New York City. Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images
Court watching protects transparency
Court watching has become an important way for citizens to ensure due process is honored, especially in immigration cases.
Observers can monitor whether proper legal procedures are being followed. They can watch for signs that attorneys are prepared, treating people respectfully and following court rules – regardless of whether those attorneys identify themselves.
Observers help track trends such as lack of legal representation, language barriers or procedural unfairness that can inform advocacy for reforms. This kind of public oversight is especially important in immigration court, where people often don’t have lawyers and may not understand their rights.
When community members bear witness to these proceedings, it helps ensure the system operates fairly and transparently.
State bar associations have clear standards about attorney conduct in court proceedings. The American Bar Association’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct emphasize that lawyers are “officers of the legal system” with duties to uphold its integrity.
Immigration judges, despite being government employees rather than lifetime-tenured federal judges, are also bound by judicial conduct codes that require them to uphold public confidence in the justice system. When judges allow or encourage anonymity without formal procedures or safety findings, they risk violating these ethical obligations.
Bar associations can investigate professional conduct violations and impose sanctions ranging from reprimands to suspension or disbarment. While enforcement against federal government lawyers has historically been uncommon, sustained documentation by court observers can provide the evidence needed for formal complaints.
While government attorneys, judges and other court personnel may face real safety concerns, hiding their identities in open court is unprecedented and breaks with centuries of legal tradition that requires accountability and transparency in our justice system.
As pressure mounts to process immigration cases quickly, courts are ethically and legally bound to ensure that speed doesn’t come at the expense of fundamental fairness and transparency.
Cassandra Burke Robertson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: United States Senator for Washington State Patty Murray
Washington, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, issued the following statement on another Government Accountability Office (GAO) decision announced this morning, which concludes that President Trump has illegally impounded funding provided by Congress for Head Start programs across America, in violation of the Impoundment Control Act (ICA):
“Today, a top government watchdog confirmed what we’ve known for months: President Trump has illegally held up vast sums of funding for Head Start programs across America—blocking funding that working families count on every day for pre-K and so many critical services Head Start offers.
“Because of Trump’s illegal impoundment of this funding that Congress provided, we have seen Head Start centers temporarily close, families scramble to make alternate plans, and needless stress and panic in communities nationwide—including in Washington state.
“Stealing money from preschool programs? No President in modern history has demonstrated such contempt for working and low-income American families as Donald Trump.
“Trump has signaled he would like to eliminate Head Start—but that’s not his choice to make. Congress delivered this funding for Head Start on a bipartisan basis, and instead of trying to destroy preschool programs and breaking our laws to hurt working families, President Trump needs to ensure every penny of these funds get out in a timely, consistent way moving forward—and he must also finally get out the rest of the investments he has been robbing the American people of.”
In its decision, GAO also highlighted the Trump administration’s complete unwillingness to provide any explanation or justification for their actions, which, in this case, impact hundreds of thousands of children and families in Head Start programs across the country. This is further evidence that claims by this administration of a commitment to radical transparency are a farce—as this administration continues to try to hide what it is doing, and how it is spending taxpayer dollars, from the American public.
In April, Senator Murray raised alarm bells about how President Trump was withholding nearly $1 billion in Head Start funding, and she led her colleagues in demanding that the funds get moving. A Head Start center in Lower Yakima Valley, Washington state, was forced to temporarily close because of the chaotic delays. Senator Murray has also consistently warned of how President Trump’s dismantling of the Office of Head Start is hurting families nationwide.
In its decision today, the GAO concluded that:
“As explained below, we conclude that HHS withheld these funds from expenditure in violation of the ICA. The Head Start Act requires the Secretary to prescribe procedures to assure that ‘financial assistance under this subchapter shall not be suspended, except in emergency situations, unless the recipient agency has been given reasonable notice and opportunity to show cause why such action should not be taken’. HHS’s actions here were inconsistent with this legal requirement. … As of 2024, there were approximately
1,600 grant recipients across all 50 states, the District of Columbia, five territories, and Palau. Grant recipients, known as Head Start agencies, can generally receive federal funds that cover up to 80 percent of the approved costs of an agency’s Head Start program. …. The Constitution grants the President no unilateral authority to withhold funds fromobligation. …. In addition, plaintiffs in numerous cases before federal district courts reported Head Start agencies’ inabilities to access Head Start grant funding. While we accept that the rate of an agency’s obligations or disbursements of a given appropriation may vary from year to year, we expect that an agency’s obligations and expenditures, at any time throughout the fiscal year, will reflect a ‘reasonable attempt by the agency to carry out the purposes of the appropriation.’ Moreover, we would not expect substantial variations in disbursement rates in this case, where disbursements are directed by the Head Start Act. …. If the Administration wishes to make changes to the appropriation provided for Head Start, it must propose legislation for consideration by Congress.”
Presidents do not wield the power to unilaterally withhold or block investments that have been enacted into law through what’s known as “impoundment.” This foundational principle has been affirmed time and again. The Impoundment Control Act (ICA) of 1974 makes this plain and establishes limited procedures the president can and must follow to propose delaying or rescinding enacted funding. The Impoundment Control Act also charges the GAO with the responsibility of investigating and reporting to Congress when the president illegally withholds funding.
The GAO has now acknowledged that it has opened 46 impoundment investigations and counting. Today’s announcement follows the GAO’s first decision in May in one of its ongoing investigations, which concluded Trump is illegally impounding funding for electric vehicle charging, and a subsequent investigation in June concluding Trump is illegally impounding funding for museums and libraries across America. The ICA authorizes the Comptroller General to file suit when the president illegally impounds funding.
Since his first hours in office, President Trump has illegally blocked funding owed to communities across the country through a variety of different means. Senate and House Appropriations Committee Democrats have been tracking Trump’s illegal funding freeze and found that, as of June 3, President Trump is blocking at least $425 billion in funding owed to the American people.
“Small business owners are matching the market with increased confidence,” CNBC reports in their latest Small Business Survey — which shows a renewed sense of economic optimism as President Donald J. Trump’s policies deliver results and as the landmark One Big Beautiful Bill takes effect.
Here’s what you need to know:
Nearly half of small business owners rate the economy as “excellent” or “good” — up from 30% in the previous quarter.
More than half of small business owners expect revenue to increase over the next year — up 10% from last quarter — and more describe their business conditions as “good.”
Fewer small business owners “have been, or expect to be impacted by tariffs.”
There has been a sharp decline in the number of small business owners who expect government regulations, tax policy, and trade policy to negatively impact their operations.
Confidence in President Trump has spiked, with nearly six-in-ten small business owners approving of his job performance — improving sentiment shared “across the political spectrum.”
SurveyMonkey’s Sam Gutierrez: “Small business owners who identify as Democrats report the largest increase in sentiment. They are much more optimistic about business conditions compared with the previous quarter.”
A HISTORIC TRADE AND INVESTMENT AGREEMENT WITH JAPAN: Yesterday, President Donald J. Trump announced a landmark economic agreement with Japan—one of America’s closest allies and most important trading partners.
This historic deal reflects the strength of the U.S.–Japan relationship and Japan’s recognition of the United States as the most attractive and secure destination for strategic investment in the world.
The agreement reaffirms the shared commitment of both nations to economic prosperity, industrial leadership, and long-term security. It delivers a powerful signal that the U.S.–Japan alliance is not only a cornerstone of peace in the Indo-Pacific, but also a driver of global growth and innovation.
With over $550 billion in a new Japanese/USA investment vehicle and enhanced access for American exports, this agreement marks a new chapter in bilateral cooperation—one that will unleash the full potential of the U.S. economy, strengthen vital supply chains, and support American workers, communities, and businesses for decades to come.
RESTORING AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL POWER: Japan will invest $550 billion directed by the United States to rebuild and expand core American industries.
This is the single largest foreign investment commitment ever secured by any country and will generate hundreds of thousands of U.S. jobs, expand domestic manufacturing, and secure American prosperity for generations.
At President Trump’s direction, these funds will be targeted toward the revitalization of America’s strategic industrial base, including:
Energy infrastructure and production, including LNG, advanced fuels, and grid modernization;
Semiconductor manufacturing and research, rebuilding U.S. capacity from design to fabrication;
Critical minerals mining, processing, and refining, ensuring access to essential inputs;
Pharmaceutical and medical production, ending U.S. dependence on foreign-made medicines and supplies;
Commercial and defense shipbuilding, including new yards and modernization of existing facilities.
The United States will retain 90% of the profits from this investment—ensuring that American workers, taxpayers, and communities reap the overwhelming share of the benefit.
This capital surge, combined with the trillions already secured under President Trump’s leadership, will be a key component of a once-in-a-century industrial revival.
ENSURING BALANCED TRADE THROUGH A PREDICTABLE TARIFF FRAMEWORK: As part of this agreement, imports from Japan will be subject to a baseline 15% tariff rate.
In addition to raising billions in revenue, this new tariff framework, combined with expanded U.S. exports and investment-driven production, will help narrow the trade deficit with Japan and restore greater balance to the overall U.S. trade position.
This approach reflects the United States’ broader effort to establish a consistent, transparent, and enforceable trade environment—one in which American workers and producers are no longer disadvantaged by outdated or one-sided trade rules.
By aligning with this framework, Japan affirms the strength and mutual respect of the U.S.–Japan economic relationship and recognizes the importance of durable trade grounded in fairness.
SECURING INCREASED MARKET ACCESS FOR AMERICAN PRODUCERS: For decades, U.S. companies have faced barriers when seeking access to Japan’s market. This agreement delivers breakthrough openings across key sectors:
Agriculture and Food:
Japan will immediately increase imports of U.S. rice by 75%, with a major expansion of import quotas;
Japan will purchase $8 billion in U.S. goods, including corn, soybeans, fertilizer, bioethanol, and sustainable aviation fuel.
Energy:
Major expansion of U.S. energy exports to Japan;
The US and Japan are exploring a new offtake agreement for Alaskan liquefied natural gas (LNG).
Manufacturing and Aerospace:
Japan has committed to purchase U.S.-made commercial aircraft, including an agreement to buy 100 Boeing aircraft;
Additional billions of dollars annually of purchases of U.S. defense equipment, enhancing interoperability and alliance security in the Indo-Pacific.
Automobiles and Industrial Goods:
Longstanding restrictions on U.S. cars and trucks will be lifted, granting U.S. automakers access to the Japanese consumer market; U.S. Automotive standards will be approved in Japan for the first time ever.
Broader openings for a range of industrial and consumer goods, leveling the playing field for American producers.
A GENERATIONAL SHIFT IN U.S.-JAPAN ECONOMIC RELATIONS: This agreement is not merely a trade deal—it is a strategic realignment of the U.S.-Japan economic relationship delivering for the American people.
For the first time, the terms of engagement place American industry, innovation, and labor at the center.
By securing historic investment and breaking open long-closed markets, President Trump has once again delivered a deal that no one else could deliver—a deal that will help to rebuild the American economy, strengthen our industrial foundation, and safeguard our national strength for decades to come.
President Trump is proving that when the United States leads from strength, the world follows—and America wins.
SECURING LONG-TERM ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP: This agreement reflects the strong and enduring relationship between the United States and Japan, and it advances the mutual interests of both nations.
By aligning on economic and national security, energy reliability, and reciprocal trade, the agreement establishes a foundation for shared prosperity, industrial resilience, and technological leadership.
President Trump has once again delivered a transformative outcome for the American people—ensuring that our workers, producers, and innovators are rewarded, respected, and empowered in the global economy.
Headline: Sanctuary City NYC Sees a More Than 400% Spike in ICE Detainers as DHS Prioritizes American People Over Criminal Illegal Aliens
lass=”text-align-center”>Sanctuary politicians forbid local law enforcement from any assistance on immigration matters, even to the point of refusing to assist with criminal arrest warrants WASHINGTON—The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced today U
S
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has issued 6,025 arrest requests to transfer custody, or detainers, in sanctuary New York City (NYC), since January 20, 2025
To put this into perspective, during the entire Biden Administration, ICE only issued 9,472 detainers in NYC
Under President Trump and Secretary Noem, there has been a more than 400 percent increase in the number of detainers lodged in NYC
Despite the 6,025 arrest detainers lodged, NYC has honored just a handful
In non-sanctuary cities, law enforcement would honor these requests and transfer these criminal illegal aliens to ICE law enforcement to detain and deport them
“In just six months ICE has issued over 6,000 detainers in NYC alone—that’s a more than 400 percent increase in the number of detainers lodged under Biden,” said Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin
“When sanctuary politicians like Mayor Eric Adams ignore ICE detainers, they are protecting criminal illegal aliens at the expense of American citizens
These are barbaric criminals with prior convictions for rape, murder, drug trafficking, and instead of holding them for ICE, sanctuary politicians release them back into your communities
These reckless policies have deadly consequences
Just this week, two illegal aliens who entered our country and were released under President Biden shot and nearly killed a brave off-duty CBP officer
Both criminal illegal aliens had been arrested previously for violent crimes and released by the NYPD
” ICE detainers are legal requests to state or local law enforcement to hold illegal aliens in custody and turn them over to immigration authorities
These individuals often have prior deportation orders, criminal convictions, or pose as national security threats
As ICE officers are arresting and removing the worst of the worst criminal illegal aliens, they are facing a record number of assaults against them
Assaults on ICE law enforcement have increased by 830 percent since Trump took office
This increase in violence is largely driven by anti-ICE rhetoric and further fueled by these sanctuary politicians and their reckless policies
DHS reaffirms our commitment to the American people—it will not be deterred by partisan attacks or activist pressure
ICE will continue placing detainers, enforcing immigration law, and defending public safety—because every American deserves to feel safe in their own neighborhood
Trump Approves Major Disaster Declaration for New Mexico
President Donald J
Trump Approves Major Disaster Declaration for New Mexico
WASHINGTON — FEMA announced that federal disaster assistance is available to the state of New Mexico to supplement recovery efforts in the areas affected by severe storms, flooding and landslides from June 23, 2025, and continuing
The President’s action makes federal funding available to affected individuals in Lincoln County
Assistance can include grants for temporary housing and home repairs, low-cost loans to cover uninsured property losses and other programs to help individuals and business owners recover from the effects of the disaster
Federal funding is also available to state, tribal and eligible local governments and certain private nonprofit organizations on a cost-sharing basis for emergency work and the repair or replacement of facilities damaged by the severe storms, flooding and landslides in Lincoln County
José M
Gil Montañez has been named the Federal Coordinating Officer for federal recovery operations in the affected areas
Additional designations may be made at a later date if warranted by the results of damage assessments
Individuals who sustained losses in the designated areas should first file claims with their insurance providers and then apply for assistance online at www
DisasterAssistance
gov, by calling 1-800-621-3362 or by using the FEMA App
If you use a relay service, such as video relay service (VRS), captioned telephone service or others, provide FEMA the number for that service
LAS VEGAS, NV – This week, U.S. Senator Jacky Rosen (D-NV) penned an op-ed in the Las Vegas Sun highlighting the devastating impacts that Donald Trump’s extreme tax and spending bill will bring to Southern Nevada. With the help of Republicans in Congress, Trump pushed through a bill that will gut access to healthcare services, cut funding for hospitals and food assistance programs, and even harm Nevada’s gaming industry.
Las Vegas Sun: Trump’s new extreme law is a big betrayal for Southern Nevada
By Senator Jacky Rosen
Key Points:
Earlier this month, Republicans in the House and Senate forced through President Donald Trump’s extreme tax and spending law — a devastating betrayal of hardworking Nevadans.
As one of your U.S. senators, I believe public service is about delivering results that improve people’s lives, and that’s why I am outraged by a law that guts critical programs for hardworking families so Washington Republicans can hand out massive tax breaks to billionaires.
Thanks to Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill, which is really a big, ugly betrayal, more than 100,000 people in our state will lose access to affordable health care, and more than a dozen hospitals in Southern Nevada are facing millions of dollars in funding cuts.
… according to a new report, University Medical Center stands to potentially lose $45 million from this extreme law. When hospitals lose funds, they can be forced to reduce services, hours or even close down, which hurts everyone.
By cutting Medicaid, Trump and congressional Republicans are making it harder for every Nevadan, regardless of whether they rely on Medicaid or not, to access the life-saving care they need.
Trump’s bill also makes major cuts to SNAP — a food assistance program that helps nearly 1 in 6 Nevadans put food on the table. SNAP also funds a significant number of local food banks in our communities that Nevadans rely on to get a meal.
This extreme law also includes a hidden provision targeting Nevada’s gaming industry. Under this new law, those who lose money playing blackjack, poker or other casino games will now owe taxes on money they lost. You read that right: Nevadans would be forced to pay the government taxes on money they didn’t win. It’s outrageous, and it will hurt our gaming industry — decimating our tourism industry along the way. This month, Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto and I tried to repeal this absurd provision by passing our bipartisan bill to fix it, but Senate Republicans blocked our efforts.
We should be making life easier for people, ensuring that hardworking families can have a fair shot at living the American dream. It’s not about putting one group over another; it’s about giving people an equal chance at success. That means lowering costs for families and holding big corporations accountable for price gouging; cutting taxes for the middle class and closing loopholes exploited by billionaires; and addressing crises like the lack of affordable housing so everyone can put a roof over their heads without breaking the bank.
Republicans’ tax and spending law fails every one of these tests. It slashes key lifelines for working people in order to hand out billions to the ultra-wealthy. That is not just bad policy — it’s shameful. As your senator, I will keep fighting to mitigate the harm of this reckless budget. I will work with my colleagues to stand up for Nevada families and push for policies that put people first.
I urge every Nevadan to stay engaged, speak out and join me in this fight. Together, we can protect our families, defend our communities and keep the promise of the American dream alive for everyone who calls Nevada home.
WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Senator Jacky Rosen (D-NV) joined Senate colleagues in introducing legislation to lower costs for first-time homebuyers. The current housing affordability crisis has hit Nevada particularly hard—Las Vegas home prices are at an all-time high. The First-Time Homebuyer Tax Credit Act will create a tax credit worth up to 10 percent of a home’s purchase price, up to $15,000, for low- and moderate-income first-time homebuyers. This credit would be available at the point of sale to help individuals and families without sufficient funds for a down payment to afford a home.
“The Trump Administration’s reckless policies are raising housing costs across the board and making it more difficult for hardworking Nevadans to achieve the American Dream,” said Senator Rosen. “I’m proud to help introduce a bill to help lower costs and make it easier for first-time homebuyers to afford a down payment. I’ll keep fighting to lower housing costs for hardworking families in our state.”
Senator Rosen has been fighting to lower housing costs for Nevadans. She recently joined a bipartisan bill to help lower housing costs and incentivize housing development in Nevada. Senator Rosen has also pushed the Trump Administration to reverse course on imposing tariffs on Canada and Mexico to prevent housing prices from rising even further. She also led her colleagues in a letter to Senate appropriators requesting they fund the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Veterans Affairs and Supportive Housing program.
Source: United States Senator for Wisconsin Tammy Baldwin
WASHINGTON, D.C. – As costs for working families rise under the Trump Administration, U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) introduced a package of bills to address the ongoing affordability crisis in Wisconsin. Baldwin’s affordability agenda will lower the cost of purchasing a home for first-time homebuyers, ensure families can find and afford high-quality child care, and crack down on big corporations’ price gouging.
“President Trump promised to lower costs for Wisconsinites, and instead he’s launching a trade war, kicking hundreds of thousands of Wisconsinites off their health insurance, and making life more expensive for hard-working families,” said Senator Baldwin. “Wisconsin families deserve some breathing room and deserve an agenda that works for them – not just for those in power, the wealthy, or well-connected. That’s why I’m pushing a package of commonsense bills that will help lower the costs of some of the biggest expenses in families’ budgets each month – housing, child care, and household goods.”
Below are the bills that Senator Baldwin and her colleagues introduced:
First-Time Homebuyer Tax Credit Act
The First-Time Homebuyer Tax Credit Act would lower the cost of purchasing a home for first-time buyers by establishing a refundable tax credit worth up to 10 percent of a home’s purchase price – up to a maximum of $15,000 – for first-time homebuyers. Under the First-Time Homebuyer Tax Credit Act, taxpayers would have the option of receiving the credit at the time of purchase by working with their mortgage issuer. Alternatively, taxpayers could elect to treat the purchase of their home as occurring in the prior taxable year to receive the credit before tax season if they are unable to qualify for the credit at the point of sale.
The median sales price of homes in Wisconsin increased by more than half (53.3%) in just five years. During those years, the state’s median household income increased by only 19.7%. The National Association of Home Builders has estimated that the material costs to build a new home might increase by as much as $10,000 due to Trump’s tariffs.
Price Gouging Prevention Act of 2025
The Price Gouging Prevention Act of 2025 would prohibit corporate price gouging by authorizing the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and state attorneys general to enforce a federal ban against grossly excessive price increases, regardless of a seller’s position in a supply chain. The bill would help enforcers establish when price gouging is occurring during a significant shift in the market and outline a standard of what a violation is. It would also create an affirmative defense to protect small businesses that raise prices in good faith to earn a profit, while establishing presumptions against dominant companies that brag about exploiting American consumers or exercise unfair leverage to get ahead. Additionally, the bill would strengthen requirements for public companies to disclose changes in pricing strategies during market shocks in their filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
Child Care for Working Families Act
The Child Care for Working Families Act would tackle the child care crisis head-on: ensuring families can afford the child care they need, expanding access to more high-quality options, stabilizing the child care sector, and helping ensure child care workers taking care of our nation’s kids are paid livable wages. The legislation will also dramatically expand access to pre-K, and support full-day, full-year Head Start programs and increased wages for Head Start workers. Under the legislation, the typical family in America will pay no more than $15 a day for child care—with many families paying nothing at all—and no eligible family will pay more than 7 percent of their income on child care. The bill would also address child care deserts by providing grants to help open new child care providers in underserved communities and to cover start-up and licensing costs to help establish new providers. Additionally, the legislation would ensure child care workers are paid a living wage and achieve parity with elementary school teachers who have similar credentials and experience. On average, Wisconsin child care for an infant costs $12,567 annually, or $1,047 per month.
Bill text for the Price Gouging Prevention Act can be found HERE and a one-pager HERE.
Bill text for the First-Time Homebuyer Tax Credit Act can be found HERE.
Bill text for the Child Care for Working Families Act can be found HERE and a pager HERE.
A full video from Senator Baldwin’s press conference is available HERE.
Source: United States Senator for Wisconsin Tammy Baldwin
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), ranking member on the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health, and Human Services, released the following statement after a nonpartisan, independent government watchdog found that the Trump Administration illegally withheld funding from Head Start facilities nationwide earlier this year, forcing some to close:
“This report proves what we’ve known all along: the Trump Administration broke the law and tried to take away preschool and child care services from Wisconsin’s working families because President Trump thinks the funding provided to the federal government is a slush fund for his personal use. It’s not. We have three branches of government, and when Congress approves funding, that is the law of the land that the President must follow. When funding to Head Start was frozen earlier this year, Donald Trump left families nationwide high and dry as preschool programs were forced to shutter, staff were laid off, and parents in some cases drove hours to find replacement child care,” said Senator Baldwin. “This non-partisan report shows that the Trump Administration not only turned their backs on thousands of working families, but they also think they are above the law. No one is above the law, and I’ll continue standing up and speaking out for Wisconsin families when President Trump breaks the law and tries to take away programs Wisconsin families rely on.”
Today, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report that found the Trump Administration and Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) illegally impounded funding approved by Congress for Head Start programs. This impacted Head Start programs across the country, causing at least one Wisconsin Head Start program to shut down earlier this year.
Senator Baldwin has been pressing the Trump Administration for months to answer for this illegal funding freeze. In April, she led a group of 41 Senators in calling out the Trump administration’s direct attacks on Head Start and demanding his Department of Health and Human Services immediately release Head Start funding, reverse the mass firing of Head Start staff, and stop gutting the offices that help ensure high-quality child care is available for thousands of children and families across the country. She also pressed HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy on this frozen funding at a Senate hearing in May. She visited a Head Start facility in Waukesha, Wisconsin to talk with families, leadership, and staff about the impact of the illegal funding freeze after they were forced to close their doors earlier this year.
Source: United States Senator for West Virginia Shelley Moore Capito
[embedded content]
To watch Chairman Capito’s opening statement, click hereor the image above.
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), Chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee, led a hearing on the nominations of Katherine Scarlett to be a Member of the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) and Jeffrey Hall to be an Assistant Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Below is the opening statementof Chairman Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) as delivered.
“At this hearing, we will consider the President’s nominations of Katherine Scarlett to serve as Chairman of the Council on Environmental Quality and Jeffrey Hall to serve as Assistant Administrator for the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance at the Environmental Protection Agency. So, thank you both for your willingness to serve. I want to give a special welcome to Katherine’s family…her husband Brian and her parents are here today, so thank you for joining us. And I know Jeffery has his parents and his wife here with him today, so thank you all for coming and being supportive.
“Established by the National Environmental Policy Act, also known as NEPA, the Council on Environmental Quality or CEQ as we call it, is part of the Executive Office of the President. The agency is primarily responsible for advising federal agencies on the implementation of NEPA, as well as developing and recommending environmental policies to the President.
“Katherine is very well-qualified to lead CEQ. In her current role as CEQ’s chief of staff, Katherine has supported the efforts of federal agencies to implement the bipartisan Fiscal Responsibility Act and ensure compliance with recent court decisions as agencies update their individual NEPA regulations and procedures.
“She also led efforts to modernize environmental review and permitting processes through President Trump’s Permitting Technology Action Plan, recently launching the ‘CE Explorer’ which allows for easy identification of the more than 2,000 categorical exclusions established by federal agencies.
“During the time of the first Trump Administration, Katherine served in senior roles at CEQ and also at the Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council. In the four years between her service in the executive branch, Katherine served on my staff here at EPW, playing a key role in shaping bipartisan provisions in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Economic Development Reauthorization Act, and the America’s Conservation Enhancement Reauthorization Act, so thank you for that.
“As my colleagues know, Ranking Member Whitehouse and I are diligently working on bipartisan legislation to reform the environmental review and permitting processes for all projects. I am hopeful that we can get a bill to the President’s desk for his signature. And when we do, I am confident that it will be implemented faithfully under Katherine’s leadership of CEQ.
“Today, we will also hear from Jeffrey Hall, thank you Jeffery for being here, President Trump’s nominee to lead the EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. OECA works with EPA regional offices, in partnership with state governments, tribal governments, and other federal agencies to promote regulatory compliance and enforce the nation’s environmental laws and regulations.
“The office targets the most serious water, air, and chemical pollution violations under laws such as the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act, CERCLA, and the Toxic Substances Control Act. In carrying out the EPA’s statutory authority, OECA must operate within the confines of our federal environmental laws, not invent novel violations to penalize regulated entities.
“The previous administration placed an outsized emphasis on penalizing regulated entities, rather than working with good faith actors in the regulated community to ensure compliance. Mr. Hall will be tasked with striking the right balance between the agency’s efforts to encourage compliance with our environmental laws, and targeting the entities flaunting those laws to ensure Americans have clean air, clean water, and clean land.
“Mr. Hall’s professional experience gives him the expertise to effectively lead this office. He has worked as a litigator, prosecutor, and legal advisor representing federal agencies, corporations, and individuals in a wide variety of litigation and in both civil and criminal enforcement procedures.
“I look forward to hearing how Mr. Hall will navigate the Agency’s enforcement and compliance priorities today.”
Source: United States Senator for Tennessee Bill Hagerty
WASHINGTON—Today, United States Senator Bill Hagerty (R-TN), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and former U.S. Ambassador to Japan, joined Open Interest on BloombergTVto discuss President Donald Trump’s new trade agreement with Japan, implications for China, and the Senate’s progress on appropriations and crypto legislation.
*Click the photo above or here to watch*Partial Transcript
Hagerty on the significance of the U.S.-Japan trade agreement: “I think this is putting us on a completely new playing field with our allies in Japan. I look forward to what we do with South Korea as well. Japan is going to become a major financier of projects that support all of our national security, our economic security, and our national security. When I was Ambassador to Japan, we negotiated two trade deals with the Japanese. These are not easy to do. And my hats off to the team– Secretary [Scott] Bessent, Secretary [Howard] Lutnick, and Ambassador [Jamieson] Greer– they have done a fantastic job and delivered a terrific deal.”
Hagerty on access for U.S. rice: “The Japanese are difficult to negotiate with, but they keep their word once a deal is made. I know that’s not true in every place in the world, but the Japanese certainly do. I know the negotiations have been tough; I’ve been in rice negotiations with the Japanese in the past. It’s almost a sacred issue in their agricultural sector, but rice has had an incredible run in terms of its price, creating a lot of inflation and pain domestically in Japan. I think this [deal] will be welcomed by the Japanese public to see more rice imported. It will take some of the pressure off the supply constraints that they have right now in the country.”
Hagerty on the implications the U.S.-Japan deal has on China: “This [deal] absolutely makes a huge difference with respect to China. What China can observe is that our allies are working with us, and we’re doing this in a way that maximizes economic opportunity here in the United States, making our nation stronger. A stronger America means that all of our allies benefit from this. It’s a good deal for Japan. Their stock market is up. Our stock market is up. Everybody’s loving this.”
Hagerty on future trade benchmarks: “I’m sure people will jump to that assumption [that 15 percent will become the new benchmark tariff level], but they don’t know the specifics of the deal. That will come down to the hard tax, and we’ll see how the negotiations go. I know that Ambassador Greer, Secretary Bessent, and Secretary Lutnick have spent a tremendous amount of time on this deal. Every deal will be unique. It’s going to be hard to superimpose that, but I’m certain that that’s where the industry will sort of target now that they see this come out with Japan.”
Hagerty on finalizing trade agreements: “Not every single agreement [will be wrapped by Aug. 1], but the ones that matter. They [the White House] have been very focused on delivering agreements with those countries with which we have significant trade deficits. And Secretary Bessent sums it up by saying there are about 18 countries that [trade agreements] matter. I talk often with Ambassador Greer. He’s got term sheets, and he’s been working through a very structured, very disciplined process. I’m optimistic that they will have terms set. I’m not saying they will have the final agreements papered, but the broad terms will be set.”
Hagerty on Senate August recess, nominee backlog, and government funding: “I think that [recess] is up to [Senator] Chuck Schumer. We’ve had maximum resistance from the Democrat side; they have not allowed a single one of our nominees to go through without putting us through maximum procedural hoops. That’s created a backlog. Every president needs to have their team on the ground and ready to go. Chuck Schumer is going to have to ask himself if he is going to keep kowtowing to the far left, or actually stand up and say: here’s what’s good for America. Let’s get it done. I’m ready to work through the weekend. … It’s important to talk to constituents. They elected us. Many of us are in cycle right now, myself included. But at the same time, we have an obligation and a duty to our constituents to make certain the government is functioning. And this resistance movement that tries to deprive the President of the team that he needs to execute is harmful to the economy. It’s harmful to our national security, so we have to address it.”
Hagerty on appropriations and shutdown risk: “An important thing that we never worked on when Chuck Schumer was the leader was putting appropriations bills on the floor. That’s happening this week. We’re looking at the Sept. 30 deadline responsibly. We’re trying to put our appropriation bills on the floor so we don’t wind up with an 11th-hour negotiation that winds up with the government teetering on a shutdown. I don’t think we’ll shut down. But again, that’s up to Chuck Schumer and the resistance movement. … I hope that we’ll be able to come to terms with the Democrats. They have not been willing to negotiate so far as we move on our appropriations bill. That really narrows the space that we’ve got to deal with as we come to the Sept. 30 deadline. It’s possible to get appointees taken care of. We don’t need to shut the government down, but it requires cooperation.”
Hagerty on the GENIUS Act and crypto market structure: “We’re working very hard [on the next phase of digital asset legislation]. We just put out a discussion draft this week on market structure. I’m very proud of my legislation, the GENIUS Act, which opens the door for digital assets in America. Compared to where we were a year ago, it’s a massive change. The U.S. markets are open to digital currencies and blockchain innovation. I’m excited about where we’re going. Our goal is to have this market structure bill move through expeditiously and get it done this fall.”
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Diana DeGette (First District of Colorado)
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, Reps. Diana DeGette (CO-01), Jamie Raskin (MD-08), and Jake Auchincloss (MA-04) introduced aCongressional resolutionrecognizing the importance of U.S. leadership in biomedical research and the federal government’s responsibility to protect and expand that leadership in the years to come.
The resolution highlights the historic role the United States has played in advancing medicine and science—from breakthroughs in cancer and HIV treatment to the rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines—and lays out a clear roadmap for how the federal government must act to strengthen biomedical innovation, insulate science from political interference, and improve public health outcomes for all Americans.
“Under the Trump administration, American leadership in biomedical research—which has saved countless lives through groundbreaking cures—has been under assault,” said DeGette. “NIH has long been the gold standard in biomedical research, and from the cure for hepatitis C to cutting-edge gene therapies, we’ve seen what’s possible when our scientists are empowered to pursue bold ideas and answer urgent medical challenges. But that progress is at risk of catastrophe. If we want to remain the global leader in innovation, the Trump administration must end its anti-science agenda, focus on empowering scientists, and ensure scientific inquiry is protected from political meddling.”
“Our resolution puts America back in position to lead in the biomedical research field and to protect this critical work from political interference,” said Raskin. “For the health and wellbeing of our people, the Trump Administration must stop its brutal onslaught against science, research, public health and the federal workforce.”
“America has led the world in biomedical research and innovation because it funds curiosity-driven basic science, elevates peer review over politics, and protects intellectual property,” said Auchincloss. “Congress either renews these commitments — or hands over biomedical leadership to China.
“As a nation, we have led the world in biomedical advancement for decades. This did not happen by accident–it happened through the unified support of presidents, congress, and the American public. By creating a publicly funded ecosystem where our best and brightest could pursue answers to problems that have followed humanity since our beginning, we have saved millions of lives. We cannot separate the benefits of this ecosystem from our committed investment in it,” said Stand Up for Science Founder and Executive Director Collete Delawalla.
“From working to find cures for rare diseases, cancers, and Alzheimer’s to conducting basic research that will form the basis of future biomedical breakthroughs, UAW members at the NIH and at academic research institutions across the country do lifesaving research every day,” said Rajiv Sicora, Legislative Director for the UAW. “But their work is under attack by the Trump administration’s attempts to gut the federal government’s role in scientific research, undermine scientific integrity and academic freedom, and decimate workers’ rights. We thank Congresswoman DeGette, Congressman Raskin, and Congressman Auchincloss for their clear-eyed attention to this crisis and their efforts to protect federal investments in biomedical research.”
The resolution emphasizes the indispensable role of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the world’s largest public funder of biomedical research, and calls for a doubling of federal biomedical investment over the next decade. It also urges Congress to prioritize workforce development, scientific independence, and translational research that brings lab discoveries directly into patient care.
The resolution also warns of recent political interference in scientific processes, including during the Trump administration, which has undermined grantmaking, delayed clinical trials, and politicized agency leadership—threatening long-term public health and global competitiveness.
On Tuesday, 23 September 2025, from 15:45 to 17:00, the FISC Subcommittee will hold a public hearing on “Tax implications of the Trump administration’s policies”. In light of recent shifts in U.S. tax policy under the Trump II administration, the hearing will assess its potential implications on EU businesses and the broader transatlantic tax landscape.
The discussion will focus on how recent U.S. measures may affect the competitiveness of European companies, particularly in relation to international tax frameworks such as the OECD’s Pillar Two and the possible application of digital services taxes (DSTs) in the EU. Experts will explore the broader consequences of these developments for international tax cooperation, as well as possible policy responses at EU level to ensure a fair and balanced global tax environment. The hearing will provide a platform to reflect on the evolving dynamics of EU-U.S. tax relations and consider how the EU can safeguard its interests in a rapidly changing global context.
overnor Kathy Hochul today announced the re-release of the ConnectALL Digital Equity Program Capacity Grant Request for Applications (RFA), committing over $5 million in State funding to continue New York’s digital equity grantmaking after federal funding was terminated by the Trump administration in May 2025. The ConnectALL Digital Equity Program will award grants across the state to support digital equity and inclusion projects that provide New Yorkers with devices, skills, and awareness needed to make use of affordable, reliable broadband service. Applications are due August 25, 2025 at 11:59 p.m. ET and must be submitted through the New York State Consolidated Funding Application Portal at https://apps.cio.ny.gov/apps/cfa.
“Digital access is essential for success in today’s world — whether it’s applying for a job, completing schoolwork, accessing health care, or staying connected to loved ones. In New York, we believe that access to affordable, reliable internet is a basic right, not a luxury,” Governor Hochul said. “That’s why we are taking action to ensure every New Yorker has the tools, skills, and support they need to thrive in the digital age. No matter the challenges, we will continue forging ahead — investing in communities, strengthening partnerships, and delivering on our promise of a more connected and equitable future.”
Empire State Development President, CEO and Commissioner Hope Knight said, “Digital equity is essential to economic mobility, educational access, and full participation in modern life. New York State remains unwavering in our commitment to ensuring that every community — urban, rural, and everything in between—can connect to the resources and opportunities the digital world offers. Through continued investment, strong partnerships, and innovative strategies, we are moving forward to close the digital divide and build a more inclusive future for all New Yorkers.”
Governor Hochul also announced a campaign to educate New Yorkers on the low-cost internet service options available under New York State’s Affordable Broadband Act (ABA) — the nation’s first legally mandated low-cost broadband option. Under the ABA, internet service providers are required to offer internet connections for $20/month or less and to promote and provide enrollment guidance to consumers.
By re-releasing the Digital Equity Program RFA, ConnectALL reaffirms the Governor’s commitment to address barriers to internet adoption and access and enhance the opportunities and security for New Yorkers using the internet by:
Increasing access to affordable broadband subscriptions
Providing access to internet devices
Expanding digital literacy programs
Protecting the privacy and safety of residents, and
Ensuring the accessibility of government services
ConnectALL will work with state and local partners to promote enrollment in low-cost internet options secured for eligible consumers through the Affordable Broadband Act.
This groundbreaking legislation has earned national recognition, with ConnectALL winning the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors (NATOA) Community Broadband and Digital Equity Award for 2025 Broadband Visionary/Legislative Achievement of the Year.
ConnectALL will partner with New York City and State agencies to engage with eligible households, make them aware of low-cost internet plans, and support their enrollment. This partnership will implement a multi-channel outreach strategy that includes multilingual flyers, text campaigns to households receiving public benefits, summer street and back-to-school outreach, information via NYC 3-1-1, and a plain language self-enrollment guide, among other actions. In addition, the State is investing $500,000 in 2-1-1 NY, a subsidiary of the United Way New York, to launch ABA support for 2-1-1 callers with screenings and targeted enrollment guidance for up to 10,000 low-income households seeking reduced-cost internet services outside of New York City.
Expanding New York’s Digital Infrastructure
Governor Hochul has made expanding broadband access a cornerstone of her administration’s efforts to create a more equitable New York. Through the ConnectALL initiative, New York State is investing over $1 billion to transform the state’s digital infrastructure, enhance competition among providers, and ensure that every New Yorker has access to reliable, affordable high-speed internet. To date, ConnectALL has overseen the successful launch and implementation of several programs to advance broadband access, including:
The Digital Equity Program is implementing the $50 million New York State Digital Equity Plan to close the digital divide. The Plan outlines New York’s statewide strategy to increase its capacity to improve digital literacy and digital job readiness skills, facilitate access to affordable internet and devices, enhance digital privacy and safety, and make government services more accessible through the internet.
The Municipal Infrastructure Program has awarded over $242 million to support construction of open access municipal broadband networks across the state. The program, funded by the U.S. Department of the Treasury under the American Rescue Plan’s Capital Projects fund, facilitates a variety of models of municipal broadband and public-private partnerships to provide New Yorkers with affordable, high-quality service options. Information on projects funded through this program is available on the ConnectALL Projects Dashboard (Beta).
The Affordable Housing Connectivity Program will bring new broadband infrastructure to homes in affordable and public housing leveraging federal support from the U.S. Treasury Department’s Capital Projects Fund as part of an overall $100 million investment. Information on projects funded through this program is available on the ConnectALL Projects Dashboard (Beta).
The Excelsior Broadband Network is a new statewide public broadband network. The first component of this project will be a new fiber line running the full length of the New York Thruway which will connect public broadband assets across the state and improve access to consistent high-speed internet and reliable cell phone service for communities across the state.
The Mobile Service Connectivity initiative will work with local stakeholders, state agencies, and industry to develop regional plans to expand cellular coverage across the state. The program will identify top opportunities to expand coverage and provide funding to deploy innovative, scalable solutions that can address gaps in wireless cellular coverage.
Source: United States Senator for Illinois Dick Durbin
July 22, 2025
During his opening, Durbin called out the Trump Administration for neglecting serious threats posed by unauthorized drone use as it focuses federal law enforcement efforts on mass deportation
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, today delivered an opening statement at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing entitled “Securing the Skies: Law Enforcement, Drones, and Public Safety.” During his opening remarks, Durbin criticized the Trump Administration’s unilateral focus on mass deportation at the expense of addressing serious threats posed by hostile foreign nations, cartels, and other malign actors. Further, Durbin expressed his frustration that Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem has failed to testify before the Committee on her agency’s unprecedented campaign of mass deportation.
Key Quotes:
“Thanks, Chairman Grassley, for holding this hearing to highlight the need to better combat the threat posed by unmanned aircraft systems, known as drones. As the use of drones continues to increase, these conversations are more important than ever.
“However, I want to first note that while we have witnesses from the Trump Administration, and they are welcome, this Committee has yet to hear from Homeland Security Secretary Noem on this issue and a broad array of other critical issues. Secretary Noem is overseeing an unprecedented campaign of mass deportations. She should answer for the indiscriminate arrests of law-abiding individuals by masked officials, and even the arrest and detention of U.S. citizens, including [a] veteran.”
“Why do I bring this up today? Because this Administration is diverting federal law enforcement away from countering threats to our nation in order to participate in its mass deportation campaign.”
“As we will discuss today, there is a real threat posed by hostile foreign nations, cartels, and other malign actors exploiting drone technology for espionage, cyber-attacks, and drug and weapons trafficking. So, we need to hear from Secretary Noem about why she is shifting the focus of the agency she leads away from these threats to our homeland in order to arrest immigrants with no criminal record [and with] deep roots in our country.”
“The FAA reports that over a million drones are currently registered in the United States for a broad range of commercial and recreational activities—from farming to photography to journalism. Law enforcement and government agencies also use drones for search and rescue, disasters, surveillance of criminal activity, and even traffic enforcement.”
“But, like any technology, drones can also be dangerous. Drone operators can create safety hazards simply by flying into restricted areas, even if they do so by accident. Criminals and foreign adversaries also use drones for cyber-attacks, espionage, and transportation of drugs, weapons, or other contraband—including into prisons and across our borders.”
“For example, if I am sitting at Wrigley Field during a ball game with my grandkids, and I see a drone in the sky, I want to know that drone is safe and is authorized to be there.”
“Currently, the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security are among four federal agencies with drone detection and mitigation authorities. These authorities allow DOJ and DHS to detect, track, monitor, seize, and even destroy drones that pose a credible threat to [places] such as federal courthouses, prisons, and mass gatherings.”
“The challenge we face now is how to update these authorities to enable law enforcement to protect us from nefarious drone activity without endangering civilian air traffic and people or property on the ground and [while] honor[ing] our First and Fourth Amendment. Addressing the threats posed by drones will require carefully tailored authorities with strong safeguards.”
“I hope that today’s hearing will be a step forward to reaching a bipartisan, bicameral agreement.”
Video of Durbin’s opening statement is available here.
Audio of Durbin’s opening statement is available here.
Footage of Durbin’s opening statement is available here for TV Stations.
Source: United States Senator for Illinois Dick Durbin
July 22, 2025
In today’s Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Durbin called on the Trump Administration to focus on real threats to national security rather than mass deportation efforts
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, today questioned witnesses at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing entitled “Securing the Skies: Law Enforcement, Drones, and Public Safety.” During his questioning, Durbin made clear that the Trump Administration should utilize its resources to address the serious threat of unauthorized drone usage, including at the U.S.-Mexico border and special events, rather than unilaterally focusing on the mass deportation of undocumented immigrants, many of whom do not have a criminal record.
“If you determine there’s a malicious drone overhead at one of these events, what do you do to mitigate the threat?” Durbin asked Michael Torphy, Unit Chief and Supervisory Special Agent at the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).
Mr. Torphy explained that FBI and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) implement flight restrictions during special events and that some drone manufacturers will provide a software barrier based on the geo-fence created by federal agencies. Mr. Torphy noted that FBI uses two forms of mitigation – ground interception in which FBI teams and law enforcement make physical contact with the unauthorized drone pilot and using technical countermeasures in which FBI uses technology to disrupt the unauthorized drone’s signal.
Durbin then asked Steven Willoughby, Director of the Counter-UAS Program Management Office at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), about DHS plans to address the threat of unauthorized drones used by drug traffickers while Secretary Noem continues to put a larger emphasis on deporting undocumented immigrants without a criminal record.
“Mr. Willoughby, part of your testimony suggests that in some ways we are fighting the last war when it comes to narcotics in this country, which is a scourge and kills so many innocent people. Of course, we are mindful that individuals transport these narcotics with the simplest forms of communication, transportation, trucks, and the like. But what you are suggesting is now they are flying these narcotics into this country. It’s an amazing number – 27,000 drones were detected in the last six months of 2024. You go through the various ways they are using to avoid detection in this situation. We just recently had a debate over a reconciliation bill, where we are investing billions, billions of dollars in detention facilities and new things that will be built at the border to deal with the human trafficking back-and-forth over the border. How much is it going to take for us to deal with the drone threat that you have outlined very specifically?” Durbin asked.
Mr. Willoughby replied that transnational criminal organizations are moving operations to locations along the border where DHS operators cannot interdict drones. Mr. Willoughby noted that significant investment is needed to properly detect drones operating along the border.
Durbin concluded by underscoring that DHS and FBI should be investing in resources to address unauthorized drone use rather than deport undocumented immigrants without a criminal record.
“This seems like a big undertaking. I will just say for the record, now that we know of those who are being deported in the mass deportation policy of President Trump, eight percent have a criminal record, which means that 11 out of the 12 we are deporting do not have a criminal record. And yet we are going through all of the infrastructure necessary and process necessary to deport them. It seems to me that if we are going after real threats, current threats, and growing threats to the United States, we should divert some of this money from the mass deportation, which is only deporting people who overstayed a visitor visa for example, instead of focusing on what you have identified as a scary prospect, the 2,000 mile border that is vulnerable to these narcotics and other dangerous elements that are being sent into our country,” Durbin said.
Video of Durbin’s questions in Committee is available here.
Audio of Durbin’s questions in Committee is available here.
Footage of Durbin’s questions in Committee is available here for TV Stations.
Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts Ed Markey
Markey says Trump’s AI Action Plan and Executive Order are “factually baseless and patently unconstitutional”
Set of Letters (PDF)
Washington (July 23,2025) – Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), a member of the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, today sent letters to the chief executive officers of Alphabet, Anthropic, Meta, Microsoft, OpenAI, and xAI, slamming Trump’s AI Action Plan and executive order that prohibits federal agencies from contracting for any artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm that is not “free from top-down ideological bias.”
In his letters, Senator Markey pointed out the double standard of Republicans complaining about biased AI chatbots even when Grok, the chatbot developed by Elon Musk’s AI company, acknowledged that it was trained to “appeal to the right.” Senator Markey urged the AI companies to fight this unconstitutional executive order and not become pawns in Trump’s effort to eliminate dissent in the United States.
Senator Markey writes, “In their broad claims about censorship by the tech platforms, Republicans continue to mistake fact-based outcomes for bias against conservatives. Although the right continues to lean heavily on anecdotal examples of Big Tech’s alignment with liberal viewpoints, it ignores even more egregious evidence to the contrary. For example, on May 1, 2025, Grok — the AI chatbot developed by xAI, Elon Musk’s AI company—acknowledged that ‘xAI tried to train me to appeal to the right.’ If OpenAI’s ChatGPT or Google’s Gemini had responded that it was trained to appeal to the left, congressional Republicans would have been outraged and opened an investigation. Instead, they were silent.”
Senator Markey continues, “Even if the claims of bias were accurate, the Republicans’ effort to use their political power — both through the executive branch and through congressional investigations — to modify the platforms’ speech is dangerous and unconstitutional. Through the AI executive order, Republicans are using state power to pressure private companies to adopt certain political viewpoints, in this case by pressuring the Big Tech companies to ensure that responses from AI chatbots meet some unspecified, vague definition of ideological neutrality. The details and implementation plan for this executive order remain unclear but it will create significant financial incentives for the Big Tech companies — many of whom have multi-million or multi-billion-dollar contracts with the federal government — to ensure their AI chatbots do not produce speech that would upset the Trump administration. This type of interference with private speech is precisely why the U.S. Constitution has a First Amendment.”
Source: United States Senator Peter Welch (D-Vermont)
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senator Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Ranking Member of the Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, sent his colleagues a memorandum with the new policy statements provided to career attorneys at the Civil Rights Division, which have not been made public.
The policy statements, transmitted to nine of the eleven sections of the Civil Rights Division by Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, largely replace long-standing enforcement priorities with President Trump’s executive orders and political priorities. The memo also sheds light on Assistant Attorney General Dhillon’s efforts to oust career attorneys through reassignments and resignations. Senator Welch’s office obtained data showing that since the beginning of President Trump’s second term, more than 368 individuals have left the Civil Rights Division and only two Section chiefs remain in place.
The directives in the memo have not been shared publicly by DOJ, which refused to provide them in response to a request by Senator Welch along with Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Dick Durbin, and Senators Hirono, Whitehouse, Schiff, Booker, and Padilla.
This afternoon, the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution will hold a hearing on the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, with witnesses Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, plus Gene Hamilton, President, America First Legal, and Alabama State Senator Robert Stewart. State Senator Stewart represents Lowndes County, Alabama, where the Civil Rights Division recently withdrew from a settlement following an 18-month investigation which found that officials’ enforcement of sanitation laws threatened Lowndes County residents, who are largely rural and Black.
Read the Executive Summary from Senator Welch’s memo below:
“The new information contained in this memorandum demonstrates the extent to which the longstanding enforcement objectives of each of the Division’s sections have been narrowed, changed, and in some cases reversed under AAG Dhillon’s leadership to mirror and advance President Trump’s political agenda. As stated in multiple of the new policy directives:
The zealous and faithful pursuit of this section’s mission requires dedication of the section’s resources, actions, attention, and energy to the priorities and objectives of the President.
“Created by the Civil Rights Act of 1957, Congress charged the Civil Rights Division with enforcing federal statutes that prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, disability, religion, familial status, national origin, and citizenship status. The Division is meant to prohibit discrimination in education, protect voting rights, prevent discrimination by federal funding recipients, investigate illegal bias in housing, and defend the rights of those with disabilities. It is common for the Division’s priorities to shift across presidential administrations, but the Division’s civil rights enforcement has always rested on this nonpartisan foundation.
“The new policy statements are woven together by a common thread—rather than prioritizing the enforcement of federal civil rights laws, career attorneys have been explicitly directed to faithfully and zealously dedicate their efforts to the “priorities and objectives of the President.” Most of the policy statements directly cite the President’s executive orders. Nearly half of the policy statements reference social issues President Trump has campaigned on, such as prohibiting gender-affirming care and preventing the “radical indoctrination” of elementary school students. Some policy statements fail to mention basic statutes the Division is tasked with enforcing.
“Also under AAG Dhillon’s leadership, career Division attorneys have been reassigned and pressured to resign. Since January 2025, more than 368 individuals have left the Division and only two Section Chiefs remain in place. There is no precedent, in the history of the Civil Rights Division, for dismantling the Division on this scale. AAG Dhillon has described her objective in leading the Division as “turning the train around and driving in the opposite direction[.]” She has done just that.”
Read and download the full memo here.
Senator Welch and Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) led their colleagues on the Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution in demanding answers from DOJ concerning the Trump Administration’s efforts to dismantle the Department’s Civil Rights Division. The lawmakers expressed deep concerns about several directives issued by the Trump Administration that could jeopardize the Division’s work to enforce and protect the Constitutional and statutory civil rights of the American people.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Reprepsentative Kathy Castor (FL14)
WASHINGTON, D.C.– Today, U.S. Reps. Kathy Castor (FL-14) and Derek Tran (CA-45) reintroduced legislation to provide continuous health care coverage for eligible children in Medicaid and CHIP. The Keep Kids Covered Act would expand the 12-month continuous eligibility (CE) protection for children, providing uninterrupted coverage for children until age 6 – a crucial time for their development – and for a 24-month period for children age 6 to 19.
Continuous eligibility requires states to cover children in CHIP and Medicaid for a defined period of time – without coverage lapse – regardless of changes in circumstances. Access to consistent, high-quality coverage is crucial for children’s development and well-being, particularly in their early years, enabling them to grow into healthy and productive adults. Not only does CE improve short- and long-term health coverage, it lowers costs and reduces churn and financial barriers to care. Too many children who are eligible for Medicaid or CHIP have lost coverage for procedural reasons, like missing paperwork. The Keep Kids Covered Act would ensure kids and families across the country have access to the lifesaving care they need and deserve. The bill would also ensure that former foster youth have CE until age 26, as the Affordable Care Act intended.
Over 37 million children rely on Medicaid and CHIP across the country, but Congressional Republicans’ Big Ugly Budget Bill puts children’s health at risk. At President Trump’s urging, they are cutting $1 trillion in funding from Medicaid, CHIP and the Affordable Care Act and enacting policies that will strip coverage from millions of children in order to give tax breaks to the wealthy and well-connected. Last week, President Trump announced that states will no longer be able to provide enhanced CE for kids with Medicaid and CHIP coverage. And in Florida, Governor DeSantis continues to break the law by throwing children off the state’s CHIP program in violation of the federal 12-month CE protection. Legislation like the Keep Kids Covered Act would act as a bulwark against these harmful state policies.
“In Florida and across the country, children pay the price when politicians rip health coverage away and create bureaucratic barriers to care,” said Rep. Castor. “The Keep Kids Covered Act will ensure eligible kids across the country can access reliable, stable Medicaid and CHIP coverage so they can live happy, healthy lives. Research has shown that children with health coverage do better in school and grow into more successful adults, lowering costs for everyone. While Congressional Republicans and President Trump have spent the past few months making it more difficult and expensive for kids to access critical health coverage, Democrats are fighting to protect our kids and their future. I’m grateful to my colleagues Rep. Derek Tran and Senator Michael Bennet, as well as the child and family advocates, for their partnership and support of this critical legislation.”
“As a father of young kids, I know how critical adequate health care is for our children to grow and thrive. No child should be denied access to medical treatment because President Trump and Congressional Republicans wanted to give their billionaire friends a tax break,” said Rep. Tran. “I’m proud to join Rep. Castor in introducing the Keep Kids Covered Act to bring down costs for hard-working families and ensure high-quality access to health care so all of our kids can stay healthy.”
“In the face of Republicans’ biggest attack on health care access yet, I’m grateful to Rep. Castor for her persistence in protecting health care for our nation’s children,” said Energy and Commerce Committee Ranking Member Frank Pallone, Jr. (NJ-06). “As the Big Ugly Bill is set to take health care away from millions of Americans, Democrats will keep fighting to minimize coverage gaps, burdensome paperwork requirements, and price hikes for families. The Keep Kids Covered Act is a critical tool in this fight against Republican cuts and will ensure young children continue to have health care coverage.”
“Pediatricians know how vital it is that children have uninterrupted access to health care coverage that supports them as they grow and develop. As its name states, the Keep Kids Covered Act would help ensure children enrolled in Medicaid and CHIP do not face gaps in coverage, providing families with certainty that their children can continue to receive the health care they need. The American Academy of Pediatrics thanks Representative Kathy Castor (D-Fla.) for introducing this important legislation and calls on lawmakers to swiftly advance it,” said Susan J. Kressly, MD, FAAP, American Academy of Pediatrics President.
“Every child deserves the opportunity to grow and thrive, and no child should miss out on essential health care because of a lapse in coverage,” said Margaret A. Murray, CEO of the Association for Community Affiliated Plans (ACAP). “For more than 20 years, ACAP has advocated for continuous eligibility for all people covered by Medicaid. We’re pleased that Representative Castor’s reintroduction of the Keep Kids Covered Act advances this priority by ensuring continuous coverage for children enrolled in Medicaid and CHIP.”
“First Focus Campaign for Children strongly supports the reintroduction of the Keep Kids Covered Act led by Representative Kathy Castor. The legislation makes an important investment in children by ensuring that they have continuous eligibility in Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) during their earliest and most critical years of development. This guarantee of coverage provides a powerful antidote to the recently passed budget reconciliation package, which cuts Medicaid and CHIP by hundreds of billions of dollars, jeopardizing the health and well-being of over 37 million children. The Keep Kids Covered Act is a practical, common-sense approach that will provide kids in Medicaid and CHIP with consistent health care coverage, laying a foundation of care that will benefit them throughout their lives.” — Bruce Lesley, President, First Focus Campaign for Children.
“Rep. Kathy Castor is fighting to protect children’s health care in the wake of Donald Trump and Republicans’ health care emergency,” said Protect Our Care Chair Leslie Dach.“Republicans’ actions are ripping coverage away from hard-working families and putting children at risk, but Democrats are working to ensure kids can stay covered and get the care they need to grow up healthy and strong. No child should lose care just because Republicans want to fund tax breaks for billionaires and big corporations.”
“Children’s hospitals witness the critical role Medicaid and CHIP play in providing essential care to more than half of the children they treat, particularly those with serious and complex medical needs. The Keep Kids Covered Act addresses the pressing issue of coverage gaps that can disrupt this vital care, ensuring that no child’s health suffers due to administrative hurdles. By providing continuous, multi-year coverage, this legislation offers much-needed stability and peace of mind to families facing challenging health circumstances. We commend Representatives Castor and Caraveo for their leadership in making sure all children have access to the consistent care they need to lead healthy, successful lives,” said Matthew Cook, President and CEO of the Children’s Hospital Association.
In addition to Reps. Castor and Tran, the Keep Kids Covered Act is cosponsored by Reps. Kim Schrier, Raul Ruiz, Marc Veasey, Nanette Barragán, Lizzie Fletcher, Greg Landsman, Jan Schakowsky, Jennifer McClellan, Darren Soto, Troy Carter, and Doris Matsui.
Endorsing organizations include: American Academy of Pediatrics, American Nurses Association, American Psychiatric Association, Association for Community Affiliated Plans, Association of Maternal & Child Health Programs, BayCare Health System—St. Joseph’s Children’s Hospital, Child Welfare League of America, Children’s Defense Fund, Children’s Hospitals Association, Colorado Children’s Campaign, Families USA, First Focus Campaign for Children, Florida Health Justice Project, Florida Policy Institute, Florida Voices for Health, March of Dimes, National Association of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners, National Foster Youth Institute, National League for Nursing, Nemour Children’s Health, Primary Development Corporation, Protect Our Care, The Center for Law and Social Policy, UnidosUS, ZERO TO THREE.
The full bill text of the legislation can be viewedhere.
A one-pager about the legislation is available here.
Pearl River, NY – 7/18/25… Today, Congressman Mike Lawler (NY-17) issued the following statement celebrating the Trump Administration’s decision to release funding for 21st Century Community Learning Centers. This follows Congressman Lawler’s direct advocacy to the Administration last week, urging the release of funds prior to the beginning of the school year.
“Today is a great day for students, families, and educators across New York and nationwide,” said Congressman Lawler. “The 21st Century Community Learning Centers program is a valuable investment with proven results, providing students with the academic tools they need to succeed.”
Congressman Lawler personally wrote to President Trump last week after concerns were raised by local educators and parents about potential disruptions to these essential services. He emphasized the need to release these funds to support communities that heavily rely on these programs.
“I would like to thank President Trump for responding promptly to our request, as well as recognizing the importance of these programs for our children’s futures. As always, I remain committed to ensuring students have every opportunity for success,” concluded Congressman Lawler.
Congressman Lawler is one of the most bipartisan members of Congress and represents New York’s 17th Congressional District, which is just north of New York City and contains all or parts of Rockland, Putnam, Dutchess, and Westchester Counties. He was rated the most effective freshman lawmaker in the 118th Congress, 8th overall, surpassing dozens of committee chairs.
Washington, D.C. – 7/17/25… Today, Congressman Mike Lawler (NY-17), Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle East and North Africa and House Financial Services Committee member, introduced the Syria Sanctions Accountability Act, legislation to modernize U.S. sanctions policy for a post-Assad Syria.
“This bill modernizes the existing sanctions regime on Syria, requires assessments on existing sanctions relief provisions, and sets out goals for the Syrian government to meet anti-money laundering and anti-corruption standards. As the Trump Administration is already reviewing sanctions policy, we must ensure they have the tools to do so that reflect the current security environment,” said Chairman Lawler.
The Syria Sanctions Accountability Act:
Directs the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network to provide a briefing to Congress on the exceptive relief for the Commercial Bank of Syria.
Instructs U.S. representatives to the IMF and World Bank to support regular economic monitoring in Syria, processes to improve financial connectivity in Syria, and priorities related to anti-money laundering, weapons non-proliferation, and anti-corruption policies in Syria.
Requires a formal assessment from the Export-Import Bank on the appropriateness of current country limitations concerning Syria.
Updates the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act by updating conditions to lift sanctions. This includes requiring the Syrian government to take verifiable steps to combat illicit proliferation of Captagon, ensuring the Syrian government is not engaged in the targeting or extrajudicial detention of religious minorities, and removing references to Russia and Iran that were originally placed in the law due to Assad’s relationship with these adversarial regimes.
“The al-Sharaa Administration certainly has a lot of work to do to reintegrate Syria with the U.S. and our allies. While this job should be difficult given the circumstances, it shouldn’t be impossible,” concluded Chairman Lawler.
Congressman Lawler is one of the most bipartisan members of Congress and represents New York’s 17th Congressional District, which is just north of New York City and contains all or parts of Rockland, Putnam, Dutchess, and Westchester Counties. He was rated the most effective freshman lawmaker in the 118th Congress, 8th overall, surpassing dozens of committee chairs.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Sara Jacobs (D-CA-53)
July 23, 2025
Representatives Sara Jacobs (CA-51), Lucy McBath (GA-06), Juan Vargas (CA-52), Eugene Vindman (VA-07), and Mark DeSaulnier (CA-10) have introduced the Charting My Path to Future Success Act, legislation to restore an abruptly discontinued federal program designed to help students with disabilities succeed in adulthood. Senators Tim Kaine (D-VA) and Edward Markey (D-MA) have introduced companion legislation in the Senate.
The bill directs the U.S. Department of Education to reissue the solicitation and award the contract for the “Charting My Path for Future Success Program,” a $45 million, ten-year initiative originally launched in 2019 during the first term of the Trump Administration. The program was abruptly canceled in February 2025 after more than $25 million had already been spent and just as participating students began receiving services.
Rep. Sara Jacobs said, “It’s a big step from high school to adulthood – whether that’s college, job training, or employment – and it’s an even bigger step for students with disabilities, who may need a little extra support. That’s why the Charting My Path for Future Success Program provided students with disabilities with support and resources during this crucial transition. But unfortunately, DOGE’s abrupt cancellation of this program has abandoned these students, stifling their opportunity and limiting their potential. I’m proud to support this bill to restore this program, initially created by the first Trump Administration, and help students with disabilities during one of the most important times in their lives.”
“Seeing your child grow up to thrive is the goal for every parent, and that takes on another level of significance when your child has a condition that makes learning more difficult. After years of recruiting families to participate and training teachers to be part of this program, the sudden cancellation abandoned students and families who rely on these services,” said Rep. Lucy McBath.
“The President and Secretary McMahon claimed that students with disabilities would not be negatively affected by their plans to gut the Department of Education, but they already are.Now, students and their families are being left behind and being forced to reckon with the possibility of a lifetime on disability assistance instead of a path to a stable job. I’m grateful to my House and Senate colleagues for joining me on this legislation. We won’t leave America’s students behind.”
“This program was created to better support teens with disabilities and help them plan for college, a career, and independence. Participating students reported feeling empowered and hopeful about their futures. Then, DOGE and Trump pulled the rug out from under these kids and families and cancelled the program with no warning in the middle of the school year,” said Rep. Juan Vargas. “The over 1,600 students enrolled in this program – including students in my district – deserve better. I’m proud to join my colleagues in introducing the Charting My Path for Future Success Act to restore this funding and support.”
“Students across Virginia’s Seventh District and our country deserve a real chance to thrive after high school. And yet, the Trump Administration just recklessly cut the ‘Charting My Path for Future Success’ program from Spotsylvania County Public Schools and I cannot let that stand,” said Rep. Eugene Vindman. “That’s why I am proud to introduce this bill – we owe it to students and families to re-start this program and prohibit the Administration from canceling it without Congressional approval.”
“As a staunch advocate for the disability community throughout my decades in public service and as a senior member of the Education Committee, I am proud to support this bill to bring back funding that the Department of Education recklessly eliminated for the Charting My Path for Future Success Program. The Administration’s ill-conceived contract cancellations brought needless uncertainty to school districts across the country, including Mt. Diablo Unified School District in the community I represent. This bill will help us to stand up for students with disabilities and their right to a quality education and the opportunity to reach their full potential,” said Rep. Mark DeSaulnier.
“Ripping away critical funding and resources for disabled students is cruel and hurts America’s future,” said Senator Kaine. “The Charting My Path for Future Success Program was established during Trump’s first term, but now Trump and DOGE have cancelled funding with no warning. Not only does this harm disabled students who are depending on this support, it also hurts the teachers and Spotsylvania schools whose jobs and school budgets depend on this funding. I’m proud to introduce the Charting My Path for Future Success Act to immediately reissue this funding and ensure all students are set up for success.”
“Yet again, the Trump administration has ripped away education funding that students, families, and communities were relying on. In Massachusetts and nationwide, students with disabilities and their families were thriving in the Charting My Path for Future Success program. Now, the Trump administration has abandoned those students,” said Senator Markey. “I am proud to join my colleagues in introducing the Charting My Path for Future Success Act to ensure we provide students with disabilities the support they need to thrive.”
Designed to support students with Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) across a wide range of disabilities, the program provided one-on-one and small group sessions, mentoring, and year-round tutoring. Thirteen school districts in 11 states were participating in the pilot, which had enrolled over 1,600 high school juniors and seniors and their families.
Participating districts include school systems in Georgia, Utah, Virginia, Massachusetts, California, Alaska, and New York.
The bill is endorsed by a coalition of disability advocacy organizations, including the Consortium for Constituents with Disabilities Education Task Force, the National Center for Learning Disabilities, The Arc of the United States, the Autism Society of America, the National Disability Rights Network, and the Council of Administrators of Special Education.
Source: United States Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-New Mexico)
WASHINGTON — U.S. Senators Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) and Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) and U.S. Representatives Teresa Leger Fernández (D-N.M.), Melanie Stansbury (D-N.M.), and Gabe Vasquez (D-N.M.) released the following joint statement, welcoming President Donald Trump’s granting of a Major Disaster Declaration for Lincoln County, while renewing their call for President Trump to grant a Major Disaster Declaration for Chaves, Otero, and Valencia Counties and authorize Public Assistance Categories C-G in the wake of severe flooding that took the lives of three people and damaged homes, businesses, and critical infrastructure.
“The loss of life and devastation in Ruidoso as a result of this catastrophic flooding is horrific and heartbreaking. After seeing the destruction firsthand and hearing from families who have lost everything, our thoughts remain with those mourning loved ones and the hundreds of New Mexicans forced to flee their homes or watch their businesses be destroyed. We are deeply grateful to the first responders, local leaders, medical providers, and rescue teams working tirelessly to help their communities recover.
“This Major Disaster Declaration for Lincoln County will unlock funding needed for disaster response, and we will continue to push President Trump to grant the State’s Major Disaster Declaration request for Chaves, Otero, and Valencia Counties and authorize additional Public Assistance to make sure that all New Mexicans impacted by this disaster are provided with the federal support necessary to rebuild.”
On July 10, the N.M. Delegation welcomed an emergency declaration for Chaves, Lincoln, Otero, and Valencia Counties. The emergency declaration opened up access to specific FEMA funds for immediate disaster response, including support for search and rescue and incident management efforts. An emergency declaration does not preclude a subsequent Major Disaster Declaration. Therefore, the N.M. Delegation pushed President Trump to approve a Major Disaster Declaration request from Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham.
Through a Major Disaster Declaration request, the State of New Mexico has requested Public Assistance, Category A through G, including Direct Federal Assistance for Lincoln County, Chaves County, Otero County, and Valencia County, as well as Individual Assistance, including Housing Assistance, Small Business Administration Disaster Assistance, Disaster Case Management, Transitional Sheltering Assistance, Serious Needs Assistance, Crisis Counseling, Disaster Legal Services, Disaster Unemployment, and Displacement Assistance for Lincoln County and Valencia County. The State also requested Hazard Mitigation statewide, as facilitated by New Mexico’s Natural Disaster Hazard Mitigation Plan.
The N.M. Delegation will continue to push President Trump to authorize Public Assistance Categories C-G and approve a Major Disaster Declaration request for Chaves, Otero, and Valencia Counties from Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham.
Additionally, on July 15, the N.M. Delegation called on the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Russ Vought and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Acting Director David Richardson to disburse critical and overdue funds that would provide immediate assistance in response to the catastrophic flash flooding in and around Ruidoso.
In a letter to OMB Director Vought and FEMA Acting Director Richardson, the Delegation urged OMB to release reimbursement funds from a project undertaken in the wake of last year’s South Fork and Salt Fires — currently stalled in “Large Project Review” — so they can be redirected to Lincoln County after recent severe flooding. The project in question was completed last year, has been fully reviewed by FEMA, and has an estimated cost of $7.7 million. These funds could be deployed immediately to assist Lincoln County and impacted residents as they continue to assess and respond to the recent severe flooding. But with no timeline provided to Lincoln County or the New Mexico Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management (DHSEM) for completing the “Large Project Review” by the Administration, the Delegations is demanding answers. Read the full letter here.
Source: United States Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-New Mexico)
WASHINGTON — U.S. Senators Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) and Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) and U.S. Representatives Teresa Leger Fernández (D-N.M.), Melanie Stansbury (D-N.M.), and Gabe Vasquez (D-N.M.) released the following joint statement, welcoming President Donald Trump’s granting of a Major Disaster Declaration for Lincoln County, while renewing their call for President Trump to grant a Major Disaster Declaration for Chaves, Otero, and Valencia Counties and authorize Public Assistance Categories C-G in the wake of severe flooding that took the lives of three people and damaged homes, businesses, and critical infrastructure.
“The loss of life and devastation in Ruidoso as a result of this catastrophic flooding is horrific and heartbreaking. After seeing the destruction firsthand and hearing from families who have lost everything, our thoughts remain with those mourning loved ones and the hundreds of New Mexicans forced to flee their homes or watch their businesses be destroyed. We are deeply grateful to the first responders, local leaders, medical providers, and rescue teams working tirelessly to help their communities recover.
“This Major Disaster Declaration for Lincoln County will unlock funding needed for disaster response, and we will continue to push President Trump to grant the State’s Major Disaster Declaration request for Chaves, Otero, and Valencia Counties and authorize additional Public Assistance to make sure that all New Mexicans impacted by this disaster are provided with the federal support necessary to rebuild.”
On July 10, the N.M. Delegation welcomed an emergency declaration for Chaves, Lincoln, Otero, and Valencia Counties. The emergency declaration opened up access to specific FEMA funds for immediate disaster response, including support for search and rescue and incident management efforts. An emergency declaration does not preclude a subsequent Major Disaster Declaration. Therefore, the N.M. Delegation pushed President Trump to approve a Major Disaster Declaration request from Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham.
Through a Major Disaster Declaration request, the State of New Mexico has requested Public Assistance, Category A through G, including Direct Federal Assistance for Lincoln County, Chaves County, Otero County, and Valencia County, as well as Individual Assistance, including Housing Assistance, Small Business Administration Disaster Assistance, Disaster Case Management, Transitional Sheltering Assistance, Serious Needs Assistance, Crisis Counseling, Disaster Legal Services, Disaster Unemployment, and Displacement Assistance for Lincoln County and Valencia County. The State also requested Hazard Mitigation statewide, as facilitated by New Mexico’s Natural Disaster Hazard Mitigation Plan.
The N.M. Delegation will continue to push President Trump to authorize Public Assistance Categories C-G and approve a Major Disaster Declaration request for Chaves, Otero, and Valencia Counties from Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham.
Additionally, on July 15, the N.M. Delegation called on the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Russ Vought and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Acting Director David Richardson to disburse critical and overdue funds that would provide immediate assistance in response to the catastrophic flash flooding in and around Ruidoso.
In a letter to OMB Director Vought and FEMA Acting Director Richardson, the Delegation urged OMB to release reimbursement funds from a project undertaken in the wake of last year’s South Fork and Salt Fires — currently stalled in “Large Project Review” — so they can be redirected to Lincoln County after recent severe flooding. The project in question was completed last year, has been fully reviewed by FEMA, and has an estimated cost of $7.7 million. These funds could be deployed immediately to assist Lincoln County and impacted residents as they continue to assess and respond to the recent severe flooding. But with no timeline provided to Lincoln County or the New Mexico Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management (DHSEM) for completing the “Large Project Review” by the Administration, the Delegations is demanding answers. Read the full letter here.
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Brian Mast delivered opening remarks at a full committee hearing titled, “FY26 State Department Posture: Bureau of Political Affairs.”
Watch Here
-Remarks-
Under the Biden administration, the State Department, in my opinion, operated without clear lines of command. I believe that it blurred responsibilities in many cases and had a culture that prioritized process over the outcomes that the State Department would produce.
I would use the DEI office as an example, where they were worried about what the bucket of applicants looked like, rather than the outcomes of those applicants and what they were delivering for the American taxpayer. That was a direct quote from the former DEI Secretary Abercrombie-Winstanley.
That has changed under President Trump and Secretary Rubio.
This Committee is working to restore real command and control at the State Department—something that the Pentagon has had for decades, and something that the State Department desperately needs.
We’re crafting the first comprehensive, standalone State Department Authorization bill in over twenty years—this is not meant as a gesture, it is meant as a serious institutional overhaul.
We’re not doing this for symbolism; we’re doing it because there needs to be common sense and logic within our diplomacy.
Our goal is simple: bring order, bring clarity, and bring effectiveness to a department that too often prioritized institutional interests above the American interest.
A perfect example is how members of Congress in too many cases are more concerned about somebody being fired from the State Department after 10-15 years of employment. When they should be asking how productive those employees were and what were the measurable outcomes that were provided by them approving transgender operas, or drag show tutorials, or DEI musicals, or LGBTQ comic books abroad.
Under President Biden, the Department suffered from a structural identity crisis. Maybe policy was developed by one group, altered by another, and implemented by a third, often with no clear authority or accountability. Turf wars between regional and functional bureaus slowed everything down.
The Under Secretary for Political Affairs is treated as “first among equals,” but that phrase itself reveals to me a problem: too many equals, not enough leadership. No mission succeeds without a chain of command, and I believe that diplomacy is no exception.
The State Department must operate like a strategic institution with a clear hierarchy, mission clarity, decisive leadership, and measurable outcomes. It should not be a think tank that looks at the world as an academic exercise with no measurable outcomes.
And our reforms aim to do just that.
Some will resist this. They’ll defend the status quo as if it’s sacred. But we’ve seen what that status quo produces: mission drift, strategic confusion, and a sprawling bureaucracy that’s often more focused on virtue signaling than actually projecting American strength abroad.
Let us be clear: this is not about copying the Pentagon—it’s about applying common sense. At DOD, policy is made at the top through a chain of command that is recognizable to everybody.
At the State Department, that discipline has been missing. We don’t expect the State Department to be soldiers in uniform, but we should expect it to have a command structure that is recognizable and followed.
We can’t afford what has happened to happen again — not when adversaries like China and Iran are using every tool at their disposal to undermine American power, we can’t have foreign service officers that free lance social experimentation.
Our vision is straightforward. Functional bureaus and undersecretaries should focus on developing policy, clear, coherent, and grounded in national interest. Regional bureaus, with their area expertise, should adapt and execute that policy on the ground. This creates a clear flow of authority, streamlines operations, and ensures accountability at every level.
What we have had are regional bureaus providing loose oversight of embassies that frequently operate like personal fiefdoms rather than the implementing arm of the State Department. Under President Biden, we had embassies funding gender inclusive leadership through ultimate frisbee in India for $100K or spending $425K to help Indonesian coffee companies be more gender and climate friendly.
This hearing is part of a broader effort to realign the State Department with the mission it was meant to serve: putting America First as the State Department of the United States of America. That requires more than tweaks—it requires structural change, cultural change, and a willingness to change the old order.
I want to thank our witness for appearing today, and we look forward to your insight as we take the first steps toward restoring command and control, discipline, and mission focus at the United States Department of State.
Source: The Conversation – USA – By Cassandra Burke Robertson, Professor of Law and Director of the Center for Professional Ethics, Case Western Reserve University
In June 2025, Immigration Judge ShaSha Xu in New York City reportedly told lawyers in her courtroom: “We’re not really doing names publicly.” Only the government lawyers’ names were hidden – the immigrants’ attorneys had to give their names as usual. Xu cited privacy concerns, saying, “Things lately have changed.”
When one immigration lawyer objected that the court record would be incomplete without the government attorney’s name, Xu reportedly refused to provide it. In another case, New York immigration Judge James McCarthy in July referred to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, attorney as merely “Department” throughout the hearing.
New York immigration Judge Shirley Lazare-Raphael told The Intercept that some ICE attorneys believe it is “dangerous to state their names publicly.” This follows a broader pattern of ICE agents wearing masks during arrests to hide their identities.
This secrecy violates a fundamental principle that has protected Americans for centuries: open courts. Here’s how those courts operate and why the principle governing them matters.
Hiding of ICE attorneys’ names in court fits a broader pattern seen here outside a New York immigration courtroom of ICE agents wearing masks. AP Photo/Olga Fedorova
‘Presumption of openness’
The U.S. legal system is built on openness, with multiple layers of legal protection that guarantee public access to court proceedings.
This tradition of open courts developed as a direct rejection of secret judicial proceedings that had been used to abuse power in England. The notorious Star Chamber operated in secret from the 15th to 17th centuries, initially trying people “too powerful to be brought before ordinary common-law courts.”
But the Star Chamber eventually became a tool of oppression, using torture to obtain confessions and punishing jurors who ruled against the Crown. Parliament abolished it in 1641 after widespread abuses.
By the time American colonial courts were established, the reaction against the Star Chamber had already shaped English legal thinking toward openness. American courts adopted this principle of transparency from the beginning, rejecting the secretive proceedings that had enabled abuse.
Today, the term “star chamber” refers to any secret court proceeding that seems grossly unfair or is used to persecute individuals.
Many state constitutions also guarantee open courts – such as Oregon’s mandate that “no court shall be secret.”
While there’s no explicit law requiring attorneys to be publicly named, there’s also no policy allowing their names to be kept secret. The presumption is always toward openness.
In response to these recent developments, law professor Elissa Steglich said that she’d “never heard of someone in open court not being identified,” and that failing to identify an attorney could impair accountability “if there are unethical or professional concerns.”
Rules for anonymity
Courts sometimes allow anonymity, but only in specific circumstances.
Juries can be anonymous when there’s “substantial danger of harm or undue influence,” as legal expert Michael Crowell writes – like in high-profile organized crime cases or when defendants have tried to intimidate witnesses before. Even then, the lawyers still know the jurors’ names.
Similarly, parties to a lawsuit can sometimes use pseudonyms like “Jane Doe” when the case involves highly sensitive matters such as sexual abuse, or when there’s a real risk of physical retaliation.
What’s happening with ICE attorneys is different. There’s no formal court ruling allowing it, no specific safety findings and no established legal process.
Immigration courts have fewer protections
Immigration courts operate differently from regular federal courts. They are so-called “administrative courts” that are part of the executive branch, not the judicial branch.
These courts decide claims involving an individual’s right to stay in the U.S., either when the government seeks to remove someone from the country for violating immigration law or when an individual seeks to stay in the country through the asylum process.
Immigration judges lack the lifetime job protections that regular federal judges have. As executive branch government employees, they can be hired and fired, just like other Department of Justice employees.
People in immigration court also have fewer procedural protections than criminal defendants. They have no right to court-appointed counsel and must represent themselves unless they can afford to hire an attorney. The majority of immigrants appear without an attorney. Outcomes are better for those who can afford to hire counsel.
Immigration court records are also less accessible to the public than other federal court proceedings.
For years, the Board of Immigration Appeals, the nation’s highest immigration court, made less than 1% of its opinions publicly available. A federal court ruled that public disclosure was required; the Board of Immigration Appeals now posts its decisions online.
Because immigration courts operate with less oversight than regular federal courts, public observation becomes more critical.
Open courts aren’t just about legal procedure – they’re about democracy itself. When the public can observe how justice is administered, it builds confidence that the system is fair.
Federal agents patrol the halls of immigration court at the Jacob K. Javitz Federal Building on July 21, 2025, in New York City. Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images
Court watching protects transparency
Court watching has become an important way for citizens to ensure due process is honored, especially in immigration cases.
Observers can monitor whether proper legal procedures are being followed. They can watch for signs that attorneys are prepared, treating people respectfully and following court rules – regardless of whether those attorneys identify themselves.
Observers help track trends such as lack of legal representation, language barriers or procedural unfairness that can inform advocacy for reforms. This kind of public oversight is especially important in immigration court, where people often don’t have lawyers and may not understand their rights.
When community members bear witness to these proceedings, it helps ensure the system operates fairly and transparently.
State bar associations have clear standards about attorney conduct in court proceedings. The American Bar Association’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct emphasize that lawyers are “officers of the legal system” with duties to uphold its integrity.
Immigration judges, despite being government employees rather than lifetime-tenured federal judges, are also bound by judicial conduct codes that require them to uphold public confidence in the justice system. When judges allow or encourage anonymity without formal procedures or safety findings, they risk violating these ethical obligations.
Bar associations can investigate professional conduct violations and impose sanctions ranging from reprimands to suspension or disbarment. While enforcement against federal government lawyers has historically been uncommon, sustained documentation by court observers can provide the evidence needed for formal complaints.
While government attorneys, judges and other court personnel may face real safety concerns, hiding their identities in open court is unprecedented and breaks with centuries of legal tradition that requires accountability and transparency in our justice system.
As pressure mounts to process immigration cases quickly, courts are ethically and legally bound to ensure that speed doesn’t come at the expense of fundamental fairness and transparency.
Cassandra Burke Robertson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation – USA – By Cassandra Burke Robertson, Professor of Law and Director of the Center for Professional Ethics, Case Western Reserve University
In June 2025, Immigration Judge ShaSha Xu in New York City reportedly told lawyers in her courtroom: “We’re not really doing names publicly.” Only the government lawyers’ names were hidden – the immigrants’ attorneys had to give their names as usual. Xu cited privacy concerns, saying, “Things lately have changed.”
When one immigration lawyer objected that the court record would be incomplete without the government attorney’s name, Xu reportedly refused to provide it. In another case, New York immigration Judge James McCarthy in July referred to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, attorney as merely “Department” throughout the hearing.
New York immigration Judge Shirley Lazare-Raphael told The Intercept that some ICE attorneys believe it is “dangerous to state their names publicly.” This follows a broader pattern of ICE agents wearing masks during arrests to hide their identities.
This secrecy violates a fundamental principle that has protected Americans for centuries: open courts. Here’s how those courts operate and why the principle governing them matters.
Hiding of ICE attorneys’ names in court fits a broader pattern seen here outside a New York immigration courtroom of ICE agents wearing masks. AP Photo/Olga Fedorova
‘Presumption of openness’
The U.S. legal system is built on openness, with multiple layers of legal protection that guarantee public access to court proceedings.
This tradition of open courts developed as a direct rejection of secret judicial proceedings that had been used to abuse power in England. The notorious Star Chamber operated in secret from the 15th to 17th centuries, initially trying people “too powerful to be brought before ordinary common-law courts.”
But the Star Chamber eventually became a tool of oppression, using torture to obtain confessions and punishing jurors who ruled against the Crown. Parliament abolished it in 1641 after widespread abuses.
By the time American colonial courts were established, the reaction against the Star Chamber had already shaped English legal thinking toward openness. American courts adopted this principle of transparency from the beginning, rejecting the secretive proceedings that had enabled abuse.
Today, the term “star chamber” refers to any secret court proceeding that seems grossly unfair or is used to persecute individuals.
Many state constitutions also guarantee open courts – such as Oregon’s mandate that “no court shall be secret.”
While there’s no explicit law requiring attorneys to be publicly named, there’s also no policy allowing their names to be kept secret. The presumption is always toward openness.
In response to these recent developments, law professor Elissa Steglich said that she’d “never heard of someone in open court not being identified,” and that failing to identify an attorney could impair accountability “if there are unethical or professional concerns.”
Rules for anonymity
Courts sometimes allow anonymity, but only in specific circumstances.
Juries can be anonymous when there’s “substantial danger of harm or undue influence,” as legal expert Michael Crowell writes – like in high-profile organized crime cases or when defendants have tried to intimidate witnesses before. Even then, the lawyers still know the jurors’ names.
Similarly, parties to a lawsuit can sometimes use pseudonyms like “Jane Doe” when the case involves highly sensitive matters such as sexual abuse, or when there’s a real risk of physical retaliation.
What’s happening with ICE attorneys is different. There’s no formal court ruling allowing it, no specific safety findings and no established legal process.
Immigration courts have fewer protections
Immigration courts operate differently from regular federal courts. They are so-called “administrative courts” that are part of the executive branch, not the judicial branch.
These courts decide claims involving an individual’s right to stay in the U.S., either when the government seeks to remove someone from the country for violating immigration law or when an individual seeks to stay in the country through the asylum process.
Immigration judges lack the lifetime job protections that regular federal judges have. As executive branch government employees, they can be hired and fired, just like other Department of Justice employees.
People in immigration court also have fewer procedural protections than criminal defendants. They have no right to court-appointed counsel and must represent themselves unless they can afford to hire an attorney. The majority of immigrants appear without an attorney. Outcomes are better for those who can afford to hire counsel.
Immigration court records are also less accessible to the public than other federal court proceedings.
For years, the Board of Immigration Appeals, the nation’s highest immigration court, made less than 1% of its opinions publicly available. A federal court ruled that public disclosure was required; the Board of Immigration Appeals now posts its decisions online.
Because immigration courts operate with less oversight than regular federal courts, public observation becomes more critical.
Open courts aren’t just about legal procedure – they’re about democracy itself. When the public can observe how justice is administered, it builds confidence that the system is fair.
Federal agents patrol the halls of immigration court at the Jacob K. Javitz Federal Building on July 21, 2025, in New York City. Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images
Court watching protects transparency
Court watching has become an important way for citizens to ensure due process is honored, especially in immigration cases.
Observers can monitor whether proper legal procedures are being followed. They can watch for signs that attorneys are prepared, treating people respectfully and following court rules – regardless of whether those attorneys identify themselves.
Observers help track trends such as lack of legal representation, language barriers or procedural unfairness that can inform advocacy for reforms. This kind of public oversight is especially important in immigration court, where people often don’t have lawyers and may not understand their rights.
When community members bear witness to these proceedings, it helps ensure the system operates fairly and transparently.
State bar associations have clear standards about attorney conduct in court proceedings. The American Bar Association’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct emphasize that lawyers are “officers of the legal system” with duties to uphold its integrity.
Immigration judges, despite being government employees rather than lifetime-tenured federal judges, are also bound by judicial conduct codes that require them to uphold public confidence in the justice system. When judges allow or encourage anonymity without formal procedures or safety findings, they risk violating these ethical obligations.
Bar associations can investigate professional conduct violations and impose sanctions ranging from reprimands to suspension or disbarment. While enforcement against federal government lawyers has historically been uncommon, sustained documentation by court observers can provide the evidence needed for formal complaints.
While government attorneys, judges and other court personnel may face real safety concerns, hiding their identities in open court is unprecedented and breaks with centuries of legal tradition that requires accountability and transparency in our justice system.
As pressure mounts to process immigration cases quickly, courts are ethically and legally bound to ensure that speed doesn’t come at the expense of fundamental fairness and transparency.
Cassandra Burke Robertson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Ashley Hinson (IA-01)
Bill ensures all Americans can continue to enjoy Iowa Ag Products & blocks blue-state bacon bans
Washington, D.C. — Today, Congresswoman Ashley Hinson (IA-02) introduced the Save Our Bacon Act to protect access to interstate commerce for Iowa family farmers and lower grocery prices for consumers. California and Massachusetts have proposed arbitrary mandates on production practices for farmers in other states. The Save Our Bacon Act would alleviate this overregulation by prohibiting state and local governments from interfering with the production of livestock in other states.
“California’s Proposition 12 and Massachusetts’ Question 3 pose a major threat to family farms and food security—both in Iowa and across the country. The Save Our Bacon Act reaffirms livestock producers’ right to sell their products across state lines, without interference from arbitrary mandates. This legislation will stop out-of-touch activists—who don’t know the first thing about farming—from dictating how Iowa farmers do their job.
“Since day one in Congress, I’ve fought to keep food affordable and protect local producers. Under the Trump Administration, rural America will continue to be at the forefront of policy conversations that impact producers’ ability to feed and fuel the world—and there will be no bacon ban on my watch.” – Congresswoman Ashley Hinson
“With Proposition 12, California has set out-of-touch, arbitrary requirements for how producers should operate their farming businesses. California activists now claim to know what’s best for the producers who have raised livestock from generation to generation. The Save Our Bacon Act will allow Iowa’s farmers to continue doing what they do best – feeding our country and the world.” – Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds
“California needs to keep its hands off our bacon. No other state should dictate how Iowans farm, let alone California’s bureaucrats. The Save Our Bacon Act stops California’s overreach, protects hog farmers, and lets states like Iowa regulate how their own farmers raise livestock. I want to thank Representative Hinson for her work on this important legislation, and I urge Congress to pass it and stand up for livestock producers across the nation.” – Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird
“I applaud Congresswoman Hinson for introducing legislation to address the overreach of California’s Prop 12 and restore robust interstate commerce. As the nation’s leading pork-producing state, Iowa plays a critical role in maintaining the safest, most abundant, and most affordable food supply in the world. Allowing states like California to dictate farming practices only creates a patchwork of requirements that drive up production costs and food prices for consumers. This important legislation, which previously earned bipartisan support in the House Agriculture Committee’s passage of last year’s Farm Bill, is essential to safeguarding Iowa’s agriculture and preventing any single state from setting a precedent that undermines the foundation of our food supply. This legislation would protect Iowa’s farmers from burdensome out-of-state regulations that threaten our rural economies and communities, and I urge the House and Senate to send this legislation to President Trump for his signature.” – Iowa Secretary of Agriculture Mike Naig
“We sincerely appreciate Representative Hinson for consistently engaging with family farmers and championing legislation that provides the certainty we need to pass along our farms to the next generation. Without legislation to shield America’s 60,000+ pork-producing family farms from heavy-handed, multi-state regulations, many producers otherwise would be faced with business-crushing decisions.” – National Pork Producers Council President Duane Stateler, a pork producer from McComb, Ohio
“We appreciate Rep. Hinson’s leadership in fighting to protect Iowa pig farmers, who work hard every day to care for their animals and produce safe, high-quality pork. The Supreme Court made it clear the best option is for Congress to address California’s Prop 12 to prevent a patchwork of conflicting state regulations. Since Prop 12 took effect, the law has negatively impacted both consumers and producers. We urge Congress to act this year and support Rep. Hinson’s efforts to stop this burdensome mandate.” – Aaron Juergens, a pig farmer from Carroll County who serves as president of the Iowa Pork Producers Association.
“Iowa Farm Bureau members are thankful for Rep. Hinson’s unwavering support for Iowa agriculture and being a champion for fair interstate commerce through the introduction of the Save Our Bacon Act. When states enact laws that restrict or ban the sale of any type of goods from other states, they hinder market access for both farmers and businesses. This creates a negative ripple effect, as these entities struggle with arbitrary business standards and increased costs. Farm families and consumers are grappling with record-high prices, and without congressional action to strengthen the Interstate Commerce Clause, consumers will face fewer choices and higher costs at the grocery store.” – Iowa Farm Bureau Federation
Background:
In 2018, California passed Proposition 12, which prohibits the sale of certain meat and poultry products unless they are produced in compliance with the state’s arbitrary animal housing requirements.
In May 2023, the US Supreme Court upheld Proposition 12 in a 5 – 4 decision, with the Court noting that Congress has the authority to determine how states may interfere with interstate commerce.
California makes up nearly 15% of the national market for pork, leading many Iowa livestock producers to choose between complying with another state’s mandate and losing access to a major market for their products. Similar state-level mandates – such as Massachusetts’ Question 3 – create further uncertainty for livestock producers and risk an unworkable patchwork of state regulations for American farmers.
Research from economists has shown that mandates like Prop 12 come at a significant cost to both producers and consumers. Following the implementation of Prop 12, the cost per pound of pork loin in California increased by 41%. Estimates also show that pork producers face costs of up to $4,000 per sow to comply with California’s arbitrary mandate.
Rep. Hinson has been a tireless champion for Iowa pork producers against this overreach.
In December 2023, Rep. Hinson testified before the House Agriculture Committee to share stories from farmers in Iowa about the negative impact that mandates like Prop 12 would have on their operation.
In a recent House Appropriations Committee hearing, Hinson asked USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins about the potential consequences of laws like Prop 12. Secretary Rollins called mandates like Prop 12 “unsustainable.”
On July 9, the Trump Administration’s Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against the State of California over state laws that have caused grocery prices to skyrocket, including Prop 12.
This bill was introduced with Representatives Feenstra, Nunn, Miller-Meeks, Sam Graves, Rouzer, Murphy, Messmer, Adrian Smith, Flood, LaMalfa, Alford, Dusty Johnson, Bost, Newhouse, Mark Harris, Finstad, Wied, and Rose.
The bill text can be found here. Click here to read exclusive reporting by Bloomberg News.
