(TENNESSEE) -- As protesters accused them of racial gerrymandering, Tennessee state lawmakers passed into law on Thursday a new congressional map that could allow Republicans to flip the state’s lone Democratic-held seat, notching the GOP another win in the mid-decade redistricting scramble.

Republican Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee signed the bill into law Thursday afternoon.

The session was interrupted by chaotic scenes with lawmakers shouting over protesters' voices and at one point forcing police clear the balcony above the House floor before it voted on the new map.

The new map breaks up the state’s current 9th Congressional District, which is primarily made up of Memphis, and the state’s only majority-Black district. The district is currently represented by Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen.

The legislature also passed bills on Thursday that will allow the state to legally redistrict outside of the normal once-a-decade cycle, as well as providing funding to help implement the new map in time for the 2026 elections.

Impact on the midterms and representation in Congress

With the map passed, it paves the way for President Donald Trump and Republicans to gain an additional House seat in the next Congress, increasing their chances of maintaining control of the House as they continue their redistricting battle across the country.

Tennessee Democrats will likely not have any representation in Congress next year if Republicans flip the seat and the map will dilute the Black vote by breaking up Memphis.

But legal challenges against the map are expected.

Cohen said Thursday he will file a lawsuit against the new map.

Cohen posted on X after the vote "[President Donald] Trump knows he HAS TO rig the game to keep his majority in November. And the TN GOP was willing to go along with it. It’s shameful. Next stop is the courts."

Cohen had said earlier this week on CNN that the Republicans' redistricting effort was a foregone conclusion, adding that he hopes the new congressional map can take effect in 2028 rather than 2026. 

The speed at which the process occurred was remarkable -- it was only last week that the Supreme Court struck down Louisiana's congressional map as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander, dealing a blow to Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. 

And just one day after the Supreme Court’s ruling in Louisiana v. Callais, Trump posted on Truth Social that he spoke with Lee and that the governor said he would work to redraw the state’s congressional maps in order to net another GOP seat for Tennessee in the House. Lee called a special session the next day, April 30, to review the state's congressional map.

Potential redistricting efforts are also currently underway in Louisiana, Alabama and South Carolina, although each state has different procedural or legal barriers to overcome.

With Tennessee's new map, Republicans potentially could flip 14 Democratic-held seats in Texas, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio and Florida. Democrats could pick up 10 from new maps passed in California, Utah and Virginia.

Acrimonious debate and protests in the state capitol

The proposed congressional map underwent much acrimonious debate and protest inside the legislature on Thursday before it was passed.

On the House floor, Democratic representatives condemned the map, saying it would dilute the Black vote in the state. At one point, chants of "our house!" started in the House gallery.

As the vote came up for the new map on the House side, chaos erupted in the room. A trooper was asked to clear out the balcony above the House floor as people protested.

Earlier, Democratic State Rep. Justin Pearson, who is running for Congress in the 9th District that will be broken up on the new map, said that “what is happening here is immoral and wrong.”

“This is about attacking, targeting and cracking District 9 into pieces for more political and racial dominance and white supremacy in the state of Tennessee. And we need to realize that the Callais decision that you all are basing your decisions off of that gutted the Voting Rights Act, that that Voting Rights Act was paid in blood,” Pearson said.

Pearson later confronted law enforcement officers, ABC affiliate WKRN reported, as they worked on clearing the House gallery of protestors. Pearson later said his brother KeShaun Pearson was arrested.

After the House passed the bill and it was taken up in the Senate, Republican state Sen. John Stevens spoke in support of the new map over audible protests and yelling.

“Tennessee is a conservative state, and I submit its congressional delegation should reflect that. The proposed map ensures that,” Stevens said.

He later said, “This bill represents Tennessee's attempt to maximize our partisan advantage and allow Tennesseans to support a national Congress to be a Republican majority.”

But Democratic state Sen. London Lamar, who is Black, slammed the new map during debate as an attack on Black voters and said it “diminishes Memphis.”

“This map does not reflect Memphis. It diminishes Memphis. It slices our city into pieces and stretches our communities hundreds of miles away to places of different needs, different economies, different histories and different lived realities,” she said. “You cannot take a majority-Black city, fracture its voting power and then tell us race has nothing to do with it. Racism does not become less racist because it's called partisan.”

Later, chants of “Hands off Memphis!” rang out and another lawmaker soon unfurled a banner that read “NO JIM CROW 2.0 - STOP THE TN STEAL.”

The Senate passed the map soon after.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

With six months until the high-stakes midterm elections, the Democratic Party is struggling to raise money and keep up with its GOP counterparts, leading to frustrations among some donors with Democratic National Committee leadership and its chair Ken Martin.

At the end of March, the Republican National Committee outraised the DNC $21.2 million to $11.4 million, according to new reports filed with the Federal Election Commission. The RNC reported having nearly eight times more cash on hand -- $116 million to the DNC’s $13.8 million. In addition, the DNC is a little over $18 million in debt, according to FEC filings.

Democrats, though, are performing better than they did in 2018 at this point in the cycle when the party had raised $7 million and had little more than $9 million cash on hand. The party had just under $6 million in debt at that time, too.

Multiple Democratic bundlers, strategists and donors told ABC News that they are still angry over how funds were allocated during the 2024 presidential election -- and frustrated at Martin's unwillingness to publicly release a DNC audit that examined what went wrong for Democrats in 2024.

After Martin won his campaign to be DNC chair in 2025 following the presidential election, he committed to conducting a review of the 2024 election and making it public. However, Martin has yet to release the full audit, saying instead he's focused on looking forward and has released "lessons" from the audit.

Democratic officials and leaders -- including Democratic Sen. Brian Schatz, who is poised to become the No. 2 Senate Democrat after the midterms -- have urged for the report to be released as they look toward the midterms.

"What’s in the report that you wouldn’t want publicized?" "Pod Save America" host and former Obama administration speechwriter Jon Favreau asked Martin during an episode released April 28.

Martin replied that there was no "smoking gun" and that he wants to "keep the focus on the lessons."

A longtime DNC finance member, who spoke to ABC News on the condition of anonymity, noted many donors are still questioning how funds were allocated during the 2024 race and the unreleased results of the DNC’s promised audit.

The member said donors were upset that, despite the DNC’s massive fundraising during the 2024 election, Kamala Harris didn’t win a single battleground state. It raised concerns about allocations toward paid media, voter outreach and, most troubling for many donors, the amount of money that went to consultants.

But following the 2024 election and Martin taking over the reins at the DNC, there has been a shift toward investing in state parties long before elections, as well as podcasts, influencers and more modern forms of public relations and communications

Cooper Teboe, a Democratic strategist in California, told ABC News that donors are "feeling incredibly jaded, incredibly unhappy" with the DNC over the 2024 election -- with some questioning whether their financial contributions make a difference.

"We're coming off of record fundraising for Democrats that seem to really not move the needle," Teboe said. "So, folks have been in a position of, well, does my money actually do anything? Does my money do anything to change the needle?"

DNC spokesperson Mia Ehrenberg said the party is investing in ways that will help Democrats win.

"Democrats are putting our resources into the field, building infrastructure to power wins today and for years to come, and delivering overperformances all across the country, meanwhile Republicans are losing elections at a humiliating rate in spite of their billionaire donors,” Ehrenberg said in a statement to ABC News.

As frustrations with Martin over how he’s handling his job grow, a few members have started exploring options and rules for removing a chair, a source familiar with the situation told ABC News -- although the source framed the efforts as very informal and focused on asking about the process.

"I don't see Ken as a leader. The DNC reached out to me probably six months ago, and I told them to take me off their list, that it's a waste of their time to send me anything, and the more they send, the less chances they ever have of getting me back," said one longtime Democratic donor, who is now focused on individual candidates as opposed to the national committee.

Asked about his job to raise money for the party on "Pod Save America," Martin said "the job of the DNC chair is singular: It's to win," adding that he has been helping the party succeed in that effort.

Michael Knapp, a DNC member, said he supports Martin's work as chair, telling ABC News that Martin "came in with a clear mandate to shift the DNC towards long-term party building."

"[Ken’s] investing in state parties, organizing, partisan voter registration, infrastructure ... the things that actually win elections over time," Knapp said to ABC News in a text message.

"On the fundamentals of the job, I think he's very strong. The DNC's raising significant grassroots money even while paying down inherited debt," Knapp also said.

Daniel Weiner, director of the Brennan Center for Justice’s elections and government program, told ABC News that historically, the party out of power has had an "uphill battle with fundraising that’s not unique to this moment."

“Frankly, over the years, the president has become much more habituated to raising the sort of big money that you would expect an incumbent to raise, and that Democratic incumbents have also raised, to some degree,” Weiner said. “And so we see the more traditional pattern emerging of the party in power just raises a lot more money than the party out of power."

A longtime DNC finance member said frustrations with the DNC have led donors to focus on "individual elections as opposed to the DNC as an organization."

While the national party is struggling to raise money, individual Democratic candidates are seeing a massive cash infusion ahead of November’s midterm elections, as donors show greater interest in investing in individual candidates.

Many of the Democratic Party’s top Senate candidates posted gainful fundraising hauls for the first quarter of 2026, massively outraising their Republican opponents, according to FEC filings.

"I think folks are very desperate for new leaders and new voices in the party, and I think that's why you're seeing the party infrastructure raising less, because the donors, both the donor class and the grassroots, want to see what is out there to define the future of the Democratic message and that's just not going to come from the DNC," Teboe said.

One senior Democratic official in touch with donors and party leaders told ABC News that while many big donors are frustrated by the results of the last election, an increasing number are expected to get off the sidelines and contribute more to various Democratic candidates and organizations through the summer and fall.

"Donors can be complicated," she told ABC News.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) -- Amid intensifying scrutiny of the Senate Republican proposal to spend up to $1 billion on security for the new White House ballroom, top Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Secret Service officials say the money would also be spent on "other critical missions."

Those missions, they said, would include securing "frequently visited venues" outside of the White House. 

In a letter to congressional leaders obtained by ABC News, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin and Secret Service Director Sean Curran described the proposed billion-dollar package as "critical funding to address urgent needs in response to the unprecedented increase in threats against the President and other public officials."

Mullin and Curran said that the shooting at the White House Correspondents' Association Dinner last month as well as a shooting near the National Mall earlier this week show a need for a secure White House ballroom.

The letter said the security upgrades to the "East Wing Modernization Project" will "afford needed protection for the President, his family, and visitors, along with the below-ground security functions."

The officials noted that, per the text of the Senate reconciliation bill, "none of these funds will be used to support non-security improvements at the White House."

The Senate proposal, released earlier this week, would provide $1 billion for the Secret Service "for the purposes of security adjustments and upgrades, including within the perimeter fence of the White House Compound to support enhancements by the United States Secret Service relating to the East Wing Modernization Project." 

Without spelling out how much of the billion dollars would be spent on the ballroom construction project specifically, the officials said the funding would also be directed toward other locations, including "frequently visited venues facing heightened risk due to their public visibility and static nature."

The text of the Senate's bill makes no reference to "frequently visited venues" outside of the White House that Mullin and Curran mentioned in their letter.

Also, Mullin and Curran said the additional money would also go toward training USSS agents, USSS training facilities, the Secret Service's Special Operations Division's work on drones and biological and "other emerging threats," as well as securing "high profile national events that require significant planning."

Overall, the $1 billion package is described in the letter as a "critical infusion to ensure the safety of the current President and future Presidents."

​By comparison, ​to fund all of its operations, USSS receives more than $3 billion a year from Congress via the regular appropriations process.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) -- Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick testified behind closed doors on Wednesday about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, making him the first Trump cabinet official to face questions as part of the House Oversight Committee investigation into the late financier.

Lutnick agreed to the voluntary transcribed interview after months of criticism over his relationship with Epstein -- who was once Lutnick's neighbor -- and past statements distancing himself from the notorious sex offender.

During an interview last year with The New York Post, Lutnick described Epstein as "gross" and claimed that he said in 2005 he would "never be in the room with that disgusting person ever again" after touring Epstein's New York City mansion.

However, documents released by the Department of Justice showed that Lutnick planned a visit to Epstein's private island in 2012 -- years after Epstein pleaded guilty to two prostitution-related charges in 2008.

"We are looking forward to visiting you," Lutnick's wife emailed Epstein's assistant. "We would love to join you for lunch."

When asked about the documents in February, Lutnick acknowledged he visited the island and said that he did not see anything inappropriate during his visit.

"I did have lunch with him, as I was on a boat going across on a family vacation. My wife was with me, as were my four children and nannies," Lutnick testified on Capitol Hill in February.

While the DOJ's Epstein files included a photo from that trip, the Department of Justice acknowledged they temporarily removed the photo before restoring it following backlash. A DOJ official claimed that the photo was temporarily removed with a "batch of files that were flagged for nudity," though the photo did not contain any nudity and did not include any redactions when it was restored.

Lutnick also appeared to enter a business deal with Epstein in 2012, according to documents released by the Department of Justice. Both men signed business documents in 2012 to acquire an advertising company called Adfin.

Other documents released by the DOJ showed Epstein agreed to donate $50,000 in 2017 related to a dinner hosted in Lutnick's honor.

During his New York Post interview last year, Lutnick said he believed that Epstein may have used blackmail to get the "sweetheart deal" he received during his first criminal case in 2008.

"I assume, way back when, they traded those videos in exchange for him getting that 18-month sentence, which allowed him to have visits and be out of jail. I mean, he's a serial sex offender. How could he get 18 months and be able to go to his office during the day and have visitors and stuff? There must have been a trade," Lutnick said.

But those allegations contrast with statements from multiple Trump administration officials who have insisted that Epstein neither trafficked young women for people beyond himself nor held compromising information about high-profile individuals,

"There is no credible information. None. If there were, I would bring the case yesterday that he trafficked to other individuals," FBI Director Kash Patel said last year.

When asked about Lutnick's relationship with Epstein in February, President Trump described Lutnick as a "very innocent guy" and suggested he would be willing to testify.

"Well, Howard would go in and do whatever he has to say," Trump said. "He's a very innocent guy, doing a good job."

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) -- Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch responded publicly to personal attacks by President Donald Trump in an interview with ABC News Live Prime anchor Linsey Davis, suggesting he is determined to remain "independent" and "fearless" in fulfilling his duty despite harsh criticism from the president who appointed him.

After Gorsuch voted with Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Amy Coney Barrett and the court's three liberals to invalidate Trump's sweeping global tariffs in February, the president lashed out at his nominees Gorsuch and Barrett, calling them a "disgrace," "disloyal," "unpatriotic," "fools and lapdogs," and "an embarrassment to their families."

Gorsuch told Davis the comments prompted him to reflect on the ideals enshrined in the Declaration of Independence.

"We want independent judges, people who are fearless and able to apply the law without respect to persons, as our judicial oath says, right? That's why we're giving life [tenure] to anybody, and it's quite an honor," Gorsuch said when asked for his reaction to Trump. "It's a humbling privilege to be able to serve in this capacity, and I'm just one link in a long chain."

Gorsuch, who rarely does media interviews, spoke with ABC News ahead of publication of a new children's book, "Heroes of 1776: The Story of the Declaration of Independence," officially released Tuesday.

"We tell the story about the debate that led up to [the Declaration]. It almost didn't go through," the justice said of the nation's founding charter, penned 250 years ago this year. "None of this is inevitable, and it isn't inevitable that it will survive. America's biggest enemy is itself. I believe we have to recommit every generation ... if we're going to carry those ideals forward."

Even before he was confirmed in 2017, Gorsuch was forced to respond to extraordinary attacks on the federal judiciary by a sitting president, after Trump in his first term targeted judges who blocked controversial policies. Then-Judge Gorsuch described Trump's behavior as "disheartening" and "demoralizing."

Now, the conservative justice, 58, who will mark a decade on the high court bench next year, said he shares Roberts' concern that a surge in personal attacks against judges is "dangerous," even if intense criticism can be fair game.

"Part of the job of the judge is to accept criticism. Right? Everybody's got a right to free speech," Gorsuch said. "It's a raucous thing in democracy, and that's good. That's great. And part of that is part of our story. Part of our story too, is realizing, again, that the person sitting across from you probably loves his country every bit as much as he did."

Gorsuch said he was "heartbroken" by the recent attempted assassination of Trump at the White House Correspondents' Dinner and that the episode appeared to be part of a broader deterioration of civility in politics.

"What keeps me up at night is disagreements that we have, and our sometimes incapacity to realize the humanity of the people we disagree with," he said.

Gorsuch has publicly maintained a friendly personal relationship with senior liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor, making several joint appearances in an effort to promote civics education and attempt to shore up faith in the Court as an institution.

"When I disagree with my colleagues ... I never question that the person sitting across from me loves this country every bit as much as I do, that they love the Constitution and Declaration [of Independence], and that they're doing their best."

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) -- President Donald Trump on Wednesday defended the cost increase of his massive White House ballroom construction project, the price tag of which has jumped from $200 million to nearly $400 million.

"The only reason the cost has changed is because, after deep rooted studies, it is approximately twice the size, and a far higher quality, than the original proposal, which would not have been adequate to handle the necessary events, meetings, and even future Inaugurations," Trump wrote in a post to his social media platform.

"The original price was 200 Million Dollars, the double sized, highest quality completed project will be something less than 400 Million Dollars. It will be magnificent, safe, and secure!" the president added.

Trump's defense comes after his relentless criticism of Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell's oversight of a multi-billion-dollar renovation of the central bank's headquarters in Washington, D.C. The cost of the Fed renovation increased, which the central bank said was due to rising costs of labor and material as well as unforeseen damage to the property.

The White House previously said it aimed to raise the $400 million through private donations, and Trump himself repeatedly promised no taxpayer money would be used to build the ballroom.

"So we did this, no charge to the taxpayer whatsoever," Trump said about the ballroom in February. "This was all donations made by friends of mine and people that are -- that love our country."

But now, Republicans in Congress are proposing $1 billion for security-related aspects of the construction project.

On Tuesday, Senate Republicans said that they are aiming to secure $1 billion in funding for the Secret Service for security-related aspects of the East Wing renovation, including the ballroom project, as part of a broader funding package for immigration enforcement.

Trump's social media post on Wednesday defending the higher costs made no mention of the proposed $1 billion infusion from Congress.

It's unclear exactly how the Secret Service would spend the money -- and the public may never know given that much of the agency's spending related to White House security is classified.

But in federal court and in the president's own social media posts, the administration has offered some examples of the security features that Trump has in mind.

In a filing in the ballroom lawsuit last month, the Justice Department said the protective enhancements to the East Wing project would include "missile resistant steel columns, Military-grade venting, drone-proof ceilings and bullet, ballistic, and blast proof glass," all aimed at forming a "fortified structural buffer" on the east side of the complex that would gird not only the ballroom, but also the main White House residence and the offices in the West Wing.

That April 27 filing also said the upgrades would include "bomb shelters, a state of the art hospital and medical facilities, Top Secret military installations, structures, and equipment, protective partitioning, and other features."

Welcoming the proposed help from Republican lawmakers, a White House spokesman said on Monday that they "rightly recognized the need for these funds."

Several Democrats criticized the Republican plan to allocate $1 billion toward the project.

"Donald Trump promised that ZERO taxpayer dollars will be used for his ballroom. He lied," House Minority Whip Katherine Clark, the No. 2 House Democrat, wrote on X.

Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin, the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, called it a "vanity project."

"While Americans are struggling to make ends meet as a result of President Trump’s failed policies, Republicans are focused on providing tens of billions of dollars for the President’s vanity ballroom project and cruel mass deportation campaign," Durbin said in a statement. "Republicans are in danger of losing control of Congress in November, so they are going outside the usual bipartisan appropriations process to fund these unpopular policies through the end of the Trump Administration."

ABC News' Benjamin Siegel contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) -- Senate Republicans are aiming to secure $1 billion in funding for security-related aspects of the White House ballroom project as part of a broader, roughly $70 billion funding package for immigration enforcement, which they aim to pass with little-to-no support from Democrats.

Republicans began unveiling aspects of their reconciliation package late Monday night. Included within the bill is a $1 billion allocation to the Secret Service for "the purposes of security adjustments and upgrades ... relating to the East Wing Modernization Project, including above-ground and below-ground security features."

The funding can only be used for security-related aspects of the project, according to the bill text.

The Trump administration has previously said it aims to raise $400 million in private donations to pay for the ballroom, and has said it will cost the taxpayer nothing.

President Donald Trump said in October that the ballroom would be "paid for 100% by me and some friends of mine," referencing donors.

"The government is paying absolutely nothing," Trump said.

Democratic lawmakers have introduced legislation that they have titled "The Stop Ballroom Bribery Act" to regulate the project and impose restrictions on donations.

A group of GOP senators led by Sen. Lindsey Graham introduced separate legislation that would provide $400 million in funding. The senators on that bill say their proposal is to offset the cost of the ballroom by using customs fees. Because it is not in a reconciliation bill, it will almost certainly fail to pass if it even gets a vote on the Senate floor.

Republican Sen. Rand Paul put forward a separate bill that would authorize the ballroom but not fund it. He attempted to pass that by unanimous consent last week and it failed.

This bill text comes as Republicans have increasingly called for the construction of the ballroom following the shooting at the White House Correspondents' Association Dinner last month. They say a secure facility is necessary for the president and Cabinet members to gather with large groups on the White House grounds.

The White House said Tuesday that "Congress has rightly recognized the need for these funds."

"Due in part to the recent assassination attempt on President Trump at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, the proposal would provide the United States Secret Service with the resources they need to fully and completely harden the White House complex, in addition to the many other critical missions for the USSS," White House spokesman Davis Ingle said in a statement. "As President Trump has repeatedly said, the White House must be a safe and secure complex that generations of future presidents and visitors to the People’s house can enjoy."

In a statement to ABC News on Tuesday, a spokesperson for Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley said the bill does "does not fund ballroom construction," but "provides funds for Secret Service enhancements that will ensure all presidents, their families and their staffs are adequately protected."

The ballroom has been the target of a lawsuit filed late last year by historic preservationists, with a federal judge finding it to be illegal without the approval of lawmakers.

In a filing in the case last month, the Trump administration said that the security enhancements to the East Wing project would include "missile resistant steel columns, Military-grade venting, drone-proof ceilings and bullet, ballistic, and blast proof glass," all aimed at forming a "fortified structural buffer" to protect not only the ballroom, but also the main White House residence and the offices in the West Wing.

That April 27 Justice Department filing, which read in part like a social media post written in the president's own voice, also said the upgrades would include "bomb shelters, a state of the art hospital and medical facilities, Top Secret military installations, structures, and equipment, protective partitioning, and other features."

District Judge Richard Leon ruled in late March that building the ballroom without congressional authorization violated the law. While Leon carved out an exception for work that would be necessary to ensure the "safety and security of the White House," he later clarified his decision to allow for "below-ground construction" on the project, as well as anything above ground that would be "strictly necessary" to secure and protect that work.

Leon’s injunction has been administratively stayed by a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, pending oral argument at a hearing set for next month. The appeals court's order means that, for now, work on both the ballroom and the project's security-related features can continue.

For weeks, Republicans have been working to put forward a funding package in response to political gridlock that left Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the U.S. Border Patrol without their regular annual appropriations. Though these agencies received funding through the previously passed One Big Beautiful Bill, Republicans say more funding is needed, and they’re looking to secure $26 billion for U.S. Customs and Border Protection and $38 billion for ICE in this just-released bill.

Republicans are aiming to pass the funding using a budgeting tool called reconciliation, which, if successful, would allow Republicans to send this funding to Trump's desk without the support of a single Democrat and without the possibility of a filibuster. But there are rules governing this process, and it’s not yet clear whether the Senate parliamentarian, who must determine whether items in a reconciliation package are "substantive to the budget," will green light the ballroom security funding or other items in the bill.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said Tuesday that Republicans are "on a different planet" than American families with their spending priorities.

"Republicans looked at families drowning in bills and decided what they really needed was more raids and a Trump ballroom," Schumer wrote in a post on X Tuesday.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(FULTON COUNTY, Ga.) -- The Department of Justice last month demanded the names and contact information for every election worker in Fulton County, Georgia, involved in the 2020 election, according to court filings disclosed this week.

The Fulton County Board of Registrations and Elections is now asking a federal court in Atlanta to quash the grand jury subpoena from federal agents, which requested the names, addresses, phone numbers and emails for any staff member who worked the 2020 election.

"Its purpose is to target, harass, and punish the President's perceived political opponents; it is grossly overbroad and untethered to any reasonable need; it cannot yield any evidence that could result in a criminal prosecution," lawyers for the Fulton County officials said in the motion filed Monday with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.

The subpoena appears to escalate the Trump administration’s pressure on Fulton County amid an ongoing federal investigation into purported irregulates in the 2020 election.

Driven in part by Trump allies who unsuccessfully sought to use debunked theories to overturn the election, federal agents in January seized all the ballots and records from the 2020 election.

For months, Fulton County officials have urged a federal judge to order the records be returned, though that judge has not yet issued a ruling.

DOJ attorneys have insisted that the search was based on evidence of potential misconduct and accused Fulton County officials of speculating about "some kind of grand conspiracy."

In the motion filed on Monday, lawyers for Fulton County called the recent subpoena the "latest effort to target and harass the President's perceived political enemies." They argue that the statute of limitations for any alleged crime has run out and that the investigation lacks a legitimate basis.

"Grand juries do not exist to conduct roving inquiries untethered to a prosecutable criminal case," the motion said.

Robb Pitts, the chairman of the Fulton County Board of Commissioners, described the subpoena as an "outrageous federal overreach designed to intimidate and to chill participation in elections" in a statement.

The DOJ did not immediately respond to ABC News' request for comment.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) -- With Iranian forces attacking commercial vessels near the Strait of Hormuz and oil infrastructure in the United Arab Emirates, President Donald Trump on Monday stopped short of saying the U.S.-Iran ceasefire has been violated. 

"[It was] not heavy firing," Trump said in a phone call with ABC News when asked if the ceasefire had been violated. "We'll let you know. Ships are moving. You know, we moved quite a few last night -- big ones. There was no firing. I guess there has been some recently. I'm looking into it."

Over the past several hours, Iran fired on a South Korean ship near the Strait of Hormuz, and fired missiles and drones on the UAE. Plus, according to CENTCOM, U.S. forces fired on six Iranian fast boats and intercepted several Iranian missiles and drones.

Trump told ABC that "Iran "better hope [the ceasefire] remains in effect. The best thing that can happen to them is that we keep it in effect."

And what happens if the ceasefire is broken?

"I'll let you know, like I'll let everyone else know," the president said. "We just heard about this, and we'll find out about it. What should happen is South Korea should get involved. It was a South Korean ship that got hit. And I would think, if you have a ship that's hit, you should immediately send some people."

"Right now, we we're being very nice. We're taking care of the world," Trump added.

On the Iran's firing of missiles and drones at the UAE, Trump said "they were shot down for the most part."

"One got through. Not huge damage," he said.

So we shouldn't overreact?

"Overreacting is very bad for them," Trump said. "Not for me."

And what does this all mean about the prospects for ending the war?

"We have it under control," Trump said. "One way or the other, we win. And you know why, Jon? I always win. You found that out a long time ago."

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) -- Justice Samuel Alito on Monday issued an administrative stay of a lower court order that had rolled back access to mifepristone nationwide.

The move restores expanded access to the abortion pill without the need for an in-person doctor's visit, for now. The pill can once again be prescribed via telemedicine and obtained via mail or pharmacy, a practice approved by the Food and Drug administration in 2023. 

Justice Samuel Alito did not explain his decision.

The order from Alito is set to expire May 11, suggesting the full court will act by that time on whether to grant an extended stay of the lower court ruling as litigation over the safety of mifepristone guidelines continues.

The state of Louisiana, which bans abortion at all stages of pregnancy with limited exceptions, originally brought the case in a bid to block mail-order access to the abortion pill, alleging federal regulators did not properly consider safety risks when discontinuing an in-person doctor visit requirement. 

Drug makers, public health organizations and abortion rights advocates insist legally mandated reviews were conducted and that the drug has a lower adverse effects rate than penicillin and Viagra.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which Alito oversees, on Friday issued a nationwide order barring the commonly used abortion drug from being dispensed by telehealth providers or distributed by mail as litigation continues. The order was effective immediately.

The two primary makers of mifepristone, Danco Laboratories and GenBioPrio, on Saturday asked the Supreme Court to lift a lower court’s ruling.

"The resulting chaos for patients, providers, pharmacies, and the drug-regulatory system is a quintessential irreparable harm that underscores the need for emergency relief from this Court," lawyers for Danco Laboratories wrote in their filing.

In 2024, the Supreme Court unanimously rejected a similar legal challenge to mifepristone, concluding that the doctors and anti-abortion groups who sued over the drug did not have standing. 

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) -- Rudy Giuliani is hospitalized in critical condition and "is recovering from pneumonia" after being on ventilator, his spokesman said. 

The 81-year-old former New York City mayor is critical but stable, spokesman Ted Goodman said in a statement on Sunday.

He "is being monitored as a precautionary measure," Goodman said in a followup statement on Monday.

Giuliani served as New York City's mayor from 1994 to 2001. Goodman noted in Monday's statement that Giuliani "ran toward the towers to help those in need" on Sept. 11, 2001, "which later led to a diagnosis of restrictive airway disease."

"This condition adds complications to any respiratory illness, and the virus quickly overwhelmed his body, requiring mechanical ventilation to maintain adequate oxygen and stabilize his condition," he said. "He is now breathing on his own, with his family and primary medical provider at his side."

Restrictive lung disease refers to a group of conditions where the lungs can’t fully expand, so people take in less air and often feel short of breath, according to the CDC.

After his term as mayor, Giuliani was a personal lawyer to President Donald Trump, who wrote about Giuliani's hospitalization in a social media post on Sunday. The president called Giuliani "a True Warrior, and the Best Mayor in the History of New York City, BY FAR."

A spokesperson for Eric Adams, who was the city's mayor from 2022 to 2025, noted Giuliani's service in a statement.

"From his years as a federal prosecutor to leading New York City through its darkest day on 9/11, he stood with this city when it needed him most," Adams spokesperson Todd Shapiro said.

People with restrictive lung disease face a higher risk of pneumonia because stiff or scarred lungs make it harder to clear mucus and fight infection.

Studies show patients with interstitial lung disease have significantly higher hospitalization and death rates from pneumonia than the general population, especially in older adults and those with advanced disease.

There are about 650,000 cases of interstitial lung diseases in the U.S. Various conditions that fall within this diagnosis are linked to 9/11 exposure and are covered by the World Trade Health program. 

- ABC News' Isabella Murray, Darren Reynolds and Liz Neporent contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) -- The Indiana Hoosiers -- 2025 College Football Playoff national champions -- will visit the White House on Monday, May 11, according to a source familiar with the team's plans.

It's unclear whether former Indiana quarterback and Heisman Trophy winner Fernando Mendoza will attend. Mendoza was the first player chosen in April's NFL draft.

ABC News reached out to the White House about the upcoming visit but did not receive an immediate response.

Led by a late-game touchdown run by Mendoza, the Hoosiers' undefeated season was capped off in storybook fashion this past January, when the team defeated the Miami Hurricanes 27-21 for their first-ever championship.

Indiana Head Coach Curt Cignetti is also expected to attend.

The White House trip is an honor bestowed to the championship winning teams in both college and professional sports. It's often coupled with visits to Capitol Hill but the source couldn't determine whether the team's schedule would feature a trip to Congress.

President Donald Trump welcomed several NCAA collegiate champions to the White House last month.

The Hoosiers' expected visit comes amid Trump's efforts to "save" college sports. The president signed an executive order last month urging Congress to "expeditiously" pass legislation that addresses the future of competition and opportunity in all college sports, especially football and basketball.

Meanwhile, the Hoosiers championship also comes as name, image, and likeness (NIL) deals have been scrutinized by the White House and lawmakers in Washington concerning pay-for-play and player eligibility.

Looking to repeat as national champions, the Hoosiers finished spring practice last week with a reloaded squad that features top transfer portal pickups, quarterback Josh Hoover and wide receiver Nick Marsh.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) -- President Donald Trump announced Friday that he will increase tariffs on European Union cars and trucks to 25% next week, claiming in a social media post that the EU is "not complying with our fully agreed to Trade Deal."

"Based on the fact the European Union is not complying with our fully agreed to Trade Deal, next week I will be increasing Tariffs charged to the European Union for Cars and Trucks coming into the United States. The Tariff will be increased to 25%," Trump wrote in a post to his social media platform.

While the president did not specify what tariff authority he was invoking, it appears that the administration will use Section 232, which authorizes him to "adjust the imports" of goods that the secretary of commerce finds to have been imported in a manner that threatens U.S. national security.

Trump, departing the White House Friday afternoon, reiterated that the tariff was coming because "as usual, they were not adhering to the agreement that we have."

ABC News has reached out to the White House for additional comment on tariff authority.

Trump, in his social media post, touted American automobile production capabilities, claiming that U.S. manufacturing plants "will be opening soon" and that "over 100 Billion dollars" is being invested, though he did not say where the alleged money was coming from.

"It is fully understood and agreed that, if they produce Cars and Trucks in U.S.A. Plants, there will be NO TARIFF. Many Automobile and Truck Plants are currently under construction, with over 100 Billion Dollars being invested, A RECORD in the History of Car and Truck Manufacturing," Trump added in his post.

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

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) -- The Trump administration is seeking the participation of other countries to form an international coalition to help reopen the Strait of Hormuz, according to an internal cable sent this week by the State Department to posts around the world.

Dubbed the "Maritime Freedom Construct," the coalition would help with coordinating diplomatic efforts, including aligning on sanctions and information sharing to help with safe transit through the waterway, according to a U.S. official.

The cable called on diplomats to announce the formation of the new coalition and "ask for partner participation" by Friday.

The Maritime Freedom Construct would take steps to ensure safe passage, including providing real-time information, safety guidance, and coordination to ensure vessels can transit the waters securely, the cable said.

The Wall Street Journal first reported on the cable.

"The MFC's efforts will enhance maritime domain awareness and support the safe passage of commercial operators and their crews," a State Department official said.

The United Kingdom and France have already launched a multilateral effort involving 30+ nations toward securing the strait that could eventually involve deploying military assets if a peace deal is reached, according to those countries' governments. 

However, last week during a Pentagon press briefing, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth mocked the European efforts, saying Europe might want to start having "less fancy conferences in Europe and get in a boat."

He dismissed the U.K. and French effort aimed at ensuring the future security of the critical Gulf waterway as "silly."

"Europe and Asia have benefited from our protection for decades, but the time for free-riding is over," he said.

Shahram Irani, Iran's Navy commander, called the U.S. blockade "piracy" and the U.S. as "maritime terrorists."

"The Strait of Hormuz is closed from the Arabian Gulf, meaning they have no right of passage from there, and there is no entry. As soon as they come, operational and tactical action is taken against them," he said.

He went on to call the blockade piracy and american actions as "maritime terrorists"

On Thursday, United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres warned the consequences of continued disruptions to the global energy supply caused by the Iran war and the closure of the strait "grow worse with each passing hour."

Guterres the worst-case scenario could be "the specter of a global recession" if disruptions to the strait continue through 2026. Even in the best case, if restrictions were relieved today, "supply chains will take months to recover" and warned that developing countries will be hit the hardest by economic instability.

According to the cable, the coalition will be led by the departments of State and Defense through U.S. Central Command.

The State-led component, based in Washington, D.C., will serve as the diplomatic operations hub, uniting partners and the commercial shipping industry. The Pentagon component operating out of CENTCOM headquarters in Florida would coordinate real-time maritime traffic and communicate directly with vessels transiting the Strait, the cable said.

"It will provide a platform to coordinate diplomatic actions and socialize and align economic measures designed to impose costs on Iran for disrupting maritime security," the State official said.

ABC News' Desiree Adib contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) -- Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told a Senate committee on Thursday that dissent from the "cheap seats" in Congress sought to undermine the military's efforts in its war in Iran only two months into the campaign.

"Defeatists from the cheap seats who, two months in, seek to undermine the incredible efforts that have been undertaken and the historic nature of taking on a 47-year threat," Hegseth said in his opening statement.

The statement was similar to what he told the House Armed Services Committee on Wednesday in the first of two hearings on the Pentagon's 2027 budget plan in which he faced questions on the war in his first public appearances before Congress since the war started in February.

In both hearings, Hegseth asserted the the U.S.'s "biggest adversary" in the war is from within.

"Unfortunately, as I said yesterday, and I'll say it again today, the biggest adversary we face at this point are the reckless naysayers and defeatist words of congressional Democrats and some Republicans," he said.

Hegseth later told Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal, "It's defeatist Democrats like you that cloud the mind of the American people" and "otherwise fully support" not preventing Iran from pursuing a nuclear weapon.

The hearings were scheduled to discuss the Pentagon's request for a $1.5 trillion budget for 2027, the most the Pentagon has ever requested. In Wednesday's hearing, Jules Hurst III, the Pentagon comptroller, testified the war has so far cost $25 billion. The Pentagon has said it will ask for $200 billion in supplemental funding for the campaign, though on Thursday Hegseth denied the request would be that much.

In both hearings, Hegseth asserted the the U.S.'s "biggest adversary" in the war is from within.

"Unfortunately, as I said yesterday, and I'll say it again today, the biggest adversary we face at this point are the reckless naysayers and defeatist words of congressional Democrats and some Republicans," he said.

Democratic Rep. Chrissy Houlahan pushed back against Hegseth's assertion on Wednesday, telling him, "Mr. Secretary, you reserved more words and more time and more vitriol to condemn Democrats than you did for [Chinese President Xi Jinping] and for [Russian Federation President Vladimir] Putin combined. It's pretty telling to me that you decided to use your words and your time for that."

Leaving Thursday's hearing, Blumenthal told reporters, "Secretary Hegseth seems to feel that by attacking the committee, he somehow is persuading the American people. "It's exactly the opposite -- his antagonism and seeming reluctance to tell the truth, I think, is doing this administration and the country a tremendous disfavor. And by refusing to come clean, give us precise numbers on costs, when we know that the true figures are higher than what has been told us, I think just undermines his credibility."

Democrats and some Republicans in Congress have questioned the rationale behind launching the campaign against Iran, its endgame and the strains it has put on the economy and alliances with U.S. partners.

Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand challenged Hegseth over the Trump administration's premise that an attack on the U.S. by Iran was imminent.

"There's no evidence that we are safer because of this war. We did not have any evidence that Iran intended to imminently attack this country in any way, shape or form. So, I disagree with your assessment that we are under threat," she said.  

"Do you not believe them when they say 'Death to America'?" Hegseth asked.

"Listen, our adversaries use rhetoric all the time. What I'm concerned about is we are not safer," she responded.

The war's impact on Iran and the U.S.

Sen. Jack Reed, the ranking Democrat on the committee, said that the war has put the U.S. "in a worse strategic position," pointing out that the Strait of Hormuz had closed because of the war and Iran's nuclear material remained unaddressed and telling Hegseth his declaration of victory on April 8 was premature.

"Mr. Secretary, I am concerned that you have been telling the president what he wants to hear, instead of what he needs to hear," Reed said. "Bold assurances of success are a disservice to both the commander-in-chief and the troops who risk their lives based on them. Our military has performed heroically. But military force without a sound strategy is a path to long-term defeat."

Reed also said cultural erosion has taken place in the military and would lead to "lasting harm." He pointed to Kid Rock's recent "joy ride" with Hegseth in Army attack helicopters, the firing of several senior officers, and "troubling" statements he said the secretary had made about the conduct of the war.

"You have made troubling statements about showing 'no mercy' and 'no quarter' to the Iranians: orders that would constitute war crimes," Reed said.

He later revealed some figures from unclassified assessments, saying, "Iran retains more than 40% of its drone arsenal and 60% of its ballistic missile launches, compared with prewar levels.

Hegseth said Trump seized "an opportunity" to attack Iran in a weak position.

"Our military objectives have been stunningly effective," he said. "So we've put the president in a very strong position to ensure Iran never gets a nuclear weapon. That's, that's the takeaway, that's been underneath every single aspect of this."

Firings of Pentagon officials

Reed also pressed Hegseth on the firings of a number of senior military leaders. Nearly two dozen have been fired or sidelined under Hegseth, by ABC News' count.

"Did the president direct you to single out female and Black officers to be dismissed?" Reed asked. 

"Senator, of course not. And as we've emphasized at this department from the beginning, the only metric is merit," Hegseth fired back.

Reed said he thought Hegseth's personnel decisions reflected bigotry and followed a religious- instead of merit-based interest. 

"I think that direction from your behavior is an intense interest in Christianity, in nationalism and in not recognizing the talents of women and nonwhite gentlemen. And that's the wrong direction," Reed said. 

"I don't know what you're insinuating, Senator, but I am not ashamed of my faith in Jesus Christ," Hegseth said.

Reed agreed he "shouldn't be" ashamed, but was skeptical whether the secretary was "neutral" about faith-based decisions.

"I am a believer. I'm quite open in that," Hegseth responded. "And our department allows for a multitude of faiths, so I don't, I don't know what you're suggesting. I've heard the likes of things that people like you suggest to try to smear my character and I won't give in to it."

Sen. Joni Ernst, one of a small number of Republicans who have expressed frustration with the dismissals, told Hegseth "I was disappointed that their retirements were hastened by you and the administration," pointing to the departures of former Army chief of staff Gen. Randy George and former Army vice chiff of staff Gen. James Mingus.

Threats from others

Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, appeared to agree with Senate Armed Services Chairman Roger Wicker's assertion that Russia has tried to to undermine the U.S. operation in Iran.

"General Caine, there's no question that Vladimir Putin's Russia is taking serious action to undermine our efforts for success in Iran. Is there any question about that?" Wicker asked. 

"I think there's actions and activities. [I'm] mindful of the hearing room we're in, but there's, there's, there's definitely some action there," Caine said. Wicker described the war against Iran as a success.

Wicker said Iran was part of an axis of aggressors with China, Russia and North Korea.

"This growing alliance cannot be denied," the chairman said, adding later that "ties have never been closer among these fou. ... dictatorships."

War Powers Resolution

Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine invoked the War Powers Resolution, which holds that the administration has 60 days to conduct military operations then must either inform Congress it needs an additional 30 days to wind down operations, or begin bringing forces home. 

Hegseth indicated that was not applicable because the clock stopped during the current ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran.

"We are in a ceasefire right now, which our understanding means the 60-day clock pauses or stops in a ceasefire," the secretary said.

Kaine said that was dubious.

"I do not believe the statute would support that. I think the 60 days runs, maybe tomorrow, and it's going to pose a really important legal question for the administration ... we have serious constitutional concerns and we don't want to layer those with additional statutory concerns," he said.

The 1973 War Powers Resolution gives the president latitude to conduct military strikes for a 60-day window, which closes Friday. The law allows for a one-time 30-day extension for the president to act without the consent of lawmakers.

For the sixth time, the Senate on Thursday failed to advance an Iran War Powers Resolution by a vote of 50-47, though in a sign that more Republicans could start to flip as the marker is surpassed, GOP Sen. Susan Collins for the first time voted with Democrats in favor of advancing the legislation. 

Strikes on alleged drug-carrying boats

Kaine also said he'd seen classified legal rationales for strikes on boats allegedly smuggling drugs in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean and the facts of nearly 50 of those operations. He said there was a "profound mismatch" between the targeting criteria and the military actions taken.

Kaine encouraged his colleagues to read targeting criteria and get briefed about it, and at the files of all the strikes that have taken place.

"I've done that with the first 46 strikes or so, and I think there's a profound mismatch between what is occurring and the underlying assumptions in the legal opinion. And I would just encourage my colleagues to dig into this."

Hegseth said the targeting was not "willy-nilly," likening the alleged drug traffickers to al Qaeda. 

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) -- After months of resistance, the House on Thursday passed the Senate-backed Department of Homeland Security funding bill, which funds all agencies inside DHS except immigration enforcement operations.

The bill passed via voice vote. There was no recorded vote requested.

The measure now heads to President Donald Trump's desk now for signature -- effectively ending the record-long DHS shutdown after 76 days. Trump will sign the funding bill later Thursday, according to a White House official. 

DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin had warned extra funding to pay his department's employees would have "dried up" by the first week of May.

The House took action just before Congress leaves for a weeklong recess.

"This will relieve pressure from the Department of Homeland Security," Johnson told reporters after the vote. "We're not going to have lines at TSA. Everybody will get their paychecks now. We'll get moving forward."

While the package funds most of DHS -- the Transportation Security Administration, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Coast Guard, the Secret Service and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency -- it does not include funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and parts of Customs and Border Protection.

Republicans are working on a separate budget bill to fund those agencies through reconciliation, a process that will allow them to pass legislation without any Democratic support.

Late Wednesday night, House Republicans narrowly approved a budget blueprint that would provide billions of dollars to ICE and CBP, funding the agencies for the remainder of Trump's term.

Trump set a June 1 deadline for Republicans to fund the immigration enforcement agencies.

The DHS funding fight kicked into high gear after two American citizens were fatally shot by federal agents during Trump's immigration crackdown in Minneapolis.

Democrats said they would not support funding without significant reforms to ICE and CBP's operating procedures. But talks between Democrats and the White House in March ultimately yielded no breakthrough.

"Democrats got absolutely nothing for their political charade and shenanigans," Johnson said on Thursday.

Sen. Chuck Schumer, the chamber's top Democrat, criticized Johnson for waiting weeks to vote on the DHS funding bill that passed the Senate by unanimous consent on March 27.

"Over a month of unnecessary pain for millions of Americans brought to you by the House GOP," Schumer posed on X.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said the House GOP "kept the Department of Homeland Security shut down because of their toxic demand to spend billions of taxpayer dollars on ICE brutality."

ABC News Capitol Hill Correspondent Jay O'Brien pressed Johnson on why the House didn't act on the measure sooner. The speaker defended his decision to stall the vote, saying he waited until Republicans passed the budget resolution for ICE and CBP before moving on funding for the rest of DHS.

"They wanted to orphan these two critical agencies that are under the umbrella of Homeland Security, I remind everybody on the Hill all the time, Department of Homeland Security is the third-largest department of the federal government. It has critical responsibilities," Johnson said.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) -- President Donald Trump said on Thursday that he is nominating Dr. Nicole Saphier to be the next surgeon general.

Trump made the announcement on social media, calling Saphier a "STAR physician who has spent her career guiding women facing breast cancer through their diagnosis and treatment while tirelessly advocating to increase early cancer detection and prevention."

Saphier is the director of breast imaging at Memorial Sloan Kettering Monmouth in New Jersey and a regular medical contributor on Fox News.

According to her profile on the Memorial Sloan Kettering website, she has experience "performing minimally invasive, image-guided procedures of the breast, kidney, pancreas, liver, thyroid and lymph nodes."

Her nomination comes just two months after Trump's previous nominee, Dr. Casey Means, appeared before the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) committee for her confirmation hearing.

During the hearing, Means indicated she supports vaccines but stopped short of recommending certain shots.

Means, who has a medical degree but does not hold an active medical license, appeared hesitant to say that some vaccines, such as the flu vaccine, prevent serious disease.

Sen. Bill Cassidy, who chairs the HELP committee and is a physician, noted that two children died last year from measles and pushed Means on whether she would encourage parents to vaccinate their children with the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine.

Means initially stressed personal autonomy and responded that she supported vaccination and that every patient should have a conversation with their doctor about getting vaccinated.

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

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) -- Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry and Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill on Thursday said that the Supreme Court’s ruling on Wednesday against the state's congressional map means that the planned May 16 congressional primaries won’t proceed as scheduled as lawmakers consider drawing a new map.

"The Supreme Court previously stayed an injunction against the State’s enforcement of the current Congressional map. By the Court’s order, however, that stay automatically terminated with yesterday’s decision. Accordingly, the State is currently enjoined from carrying out congressional elections under the current map. We are working together with the Legislature and the Secretary of State’s office to develop a path forward," they wrote in the statement.

Landry told at least some Republican House candidates in Louisiana that he plans on Friday to suspend the state's primaries, according to multiple Republican sources.

A Republican source told ABC News that the governor called one candidate on Wednesday and said he is making calls to all of the candidates that he plans on Friday to suspend the election using executive power. The Washington Post was first to report about the governor's calls.

The source said it was unclear if this will apply to all of the planned primaries, which include a closely watched Senate primary, or just the primaries for the House that would be impacted by a new congressional map.

ABC News has reached out to Landry's office and the office of the Louisiana secretary of state. 

The Supreme Court's ruling on Wednesday reverses lower court decisions that said Louisiana's map, drawn after the 2020 census, violated the Voting Rights Act because only one of six districts was majority Black. More than a third of the state's voting age population is Black. 

Those courts had ordered Louisiana to add a second majority-Black district, a process which in turn explicitly relied on race. In his opinion, Justice Samuel Alito said that move infringed on the rights of white voters under the 14^th Amendment's equal protection clause.

Absentee ballots in Louisiana have already been sent out, and votes have likely been cast, although early voting in person does not start until Saturday, May 2. Absentee voting is relatively limited in Louisiana and requires a valid excuse.

Democratic Rep. Troy Carter from Louisiana said on Wednesday at the Congressional Black Caucus press conference that elections are too close at this point for congressional maps to change. 

“We are in the 2026 election cycle now. The Supreme Court has set precedent just four years ago in a case in Louisiana, they ruled the district to be unconstitutional, said it's too close to the election now, therefore we will do it in the next cycle," Carter said, later adding that "if precedent matters, then clearly this is something that will have to be taken up in 2028 cycle, not the 2026."

But the Louisiana's existing map cannot be used, according to the Supreme Court's ruling. Technically the state could revert back to its original 2022 map with one majority-Black district or redraw a new map entirely. Some legal experts have argued Louisiana could still keep its current map for the May primaries.

On Thursday, Murrill put in a filing with the Supreme Court saying, "Louisiana currently 'is prohibited from using SB8’s map of congressional districts for any election'. The Governor and Attorney General are thus working with the Legislature-- which is in session until June 1 -- to immediately produce a constitutional map and electoral process for Louisiana."

On Wednesday, Landry praised the ruling, but declined to say if it would have an impact on those primaries or not.

"Look, I think that anyone who jumps to conclusions right now -- I think it's going to take us at least 24 hours to really pore through the opinion to understand what exactly that opinion is telling us," he told reporters. But he left the option open to a map redraw: "I mean, look, the Supreme Court picked an interesting time to be able to drop that on us… the court decides to give it to us on the eve of the election. What are they telling us? Are they telling us we have to draw? Telling us we don't have to draw?"

ABC News' Devin Dwyer and Hannah Demissie contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) -- President Donald Trump doubled down on his claim that the term "86" is a "mob term" for a killing as former FBI Director James Comey faces a federal indictment over a social media post of seashells arranged to read "86 47."

"'86' is a mob term for 'kill him.' They say 86 him! '86 47' means 'kill President Trump,'" Trump wrote in a social media post Wednesday night, before going on to assail Comey as a "Dirty Cop" who "knows this full well!"

Comey, who was indicted on Tuesday by a federal grand jury in North Carolina, made an initial court appearance on Wednesday after self-surrendering to law enforcement at the courthouse in the Eastern District of Virginia. Comey did not enter a plea.

The former FBI director, who was fired in 2017 by Trump during the president's first term, faces one charge of threats against the president and successors, and one charge of transmitting a threat in interstate commerce.

The indictment centers on a controversy that erupted nearly a year ago when Comey, in a since-deleted Instagram post, shared a picture showing the numbers "86 47" written in seashells on the beach with the caption "Cool shell formation on my beach walk."

"EIGHT MILES OUT, SIX FEET DOWN! Didn’t he also lie to the FBI about this??? I think so!" Trump said on Wednesday night, describing his apparent interpretation of what the eight and six represent.

The Merriam-Webster dictionary, which lists several definitions of "eighty-six," says the most common use for the informal saying is to describe a way "to refuse to serve" or "to eject or ban" a customer from a restaurant or bar. The dictionary says it's often used as a way to say something has been removed. The American Heritage dictionary says the term may have derived as a rhyming slang for "nix."

The origin of the president’s assertion that the term comes from the mob is unclear. A search of scripts from the American Film Institute's top 10 gangster films shows no instance of the phrase being used, despite Trump referring reporters to mob movies on Wednesday.

"You ever see the movies? '86 ’em' -- the mobster says to one of his wonderful associates, '86 'em.' That means kill 'em. It’s -- I think of it as a mob term," he said.

Republican Sen. Thom Tillis said he did some of his own research on the term.

"I searched to the end of the internet last night, I can't find one example where the number 86 had anything to do with any violent threat. So hopefully there's more to it than just the picture in the sand," Tillis told reporters on Wednesday. "Otherwise, I just think it's another example of where we're going to regret this because we're setting a fairly low bar and political physics, like I've said around here for years, is what it is. For every action, there's an equal and opposite reaction."

Tillis later added, "maybe there's deep history in the use of this word and communicating threats. I just can't find it anywhere."

The Department of Justice in announcing that the indictment that had been handed up said that "a reasonable recipient [of Comey's image] who is familiar with the circumstances would interpret as a serious expression of an intent to do harm to the President of the United States."

And while the president has repeated his claim that Comey's post was a call for him to be killed, Trump appeared to hedge when asked directly Wednesday whether he believed his life was in danger.

"Probably, I don’t know," he said. "You know, based on -- based on what I’m seeing out there, yeah."

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) -- After drama and delay, House Republicans narrowly approved a blueprint for legislation to fund immigration enforcement agencies, the first step in the GOP's plan to reopen the Department of Homeland Security.

The party-line vote, which was held open for more than five hours, was called at 10:39 p.m. on Wednesday after Speaker Mike Johnson and Republican leaders huddled with holdouts.

Reps. Harriet Hageman of Wyoming, Andrew Clyde of Georgia, Andy Harris of Maryland, Michael Cloud of Texas and Victoria Spartz of Indiana flipped their votes to yes after hours of discussion. Rep. Kevin Kiley of California, an Independent who conferences with Republicans, voted present.

The final vote was 215-211-1.

The budget resolution kicks off the drafting process of a bill that Republicans said would provide billions of dollars to Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection for the remainder of President Donald Trump's term.

Trump has set a June 1 deadline for Republicans to fund the immigration enforcement agencies.

Republicans are using reconciliation, a lengthy and complex process, to overcome Democratic opposition.

Democrats have said they won't support funding for ICE and CBP without reforms to their operating procedures, after two American citizens in Minneapolis were fatally shot by federal agents earlier this year.

DHS has been shut down since mid-February, making it the longest shutdown in U.S. history.

The shooting at the White House Correspondents Association dinner at the Washington Hilton on Saturday rekindled the DHS funding fight. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt called the funding lapse a "national emergency."

But it's currently unclear when House Republican leaders plan to put a Senate-passed bill to fund the rest of DHS on the floor for a vote.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.