White House says it didn’t ask USTA to help censor reactions to Trump US Open appearance
Attorney General Pam Bondi, President Donald Trump, and granddaughter Arabella Kushner attend the men’s singles final of the US Open Tennis Championships in New York City, September 7, 2025. (Clive Brunskill/Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — The White House said it didn’t ask the U.S. Tennis Association to censor reactions to President Donald Trump during his attendance at the U.S. Open over the weekend.
“That’s not true,” a White House official told ABC News on Sunday. “We did not ask anyone to censor.”
USTA officials earlier responded to a report that they had asked broadcasters to censor any reactions or protests aimed at Trump as he appeared at the tournament’s men’s final in New York on Sunday.
“We regularly ask our broadcasters to refrain from showcasing off-court disruptions,” USTA spokesperson Brendan McIntyre told ABC News.
The Athletic, a sports publication from The New York Times, published a report on Saturday that described a USTA memo to broadcasters. The Athletic reported that it had reviewed the memo.
“We ask all broadcasters to refrain from showcasing any disruptions or reactions in response to the President’s attendance in any capacity,” the USTA said in the memo, according to The Athletic.
The president drew boos and some cheers when he arrived at Arthur Ashe stadium in Queens, where Trump grew up.
Trump, arriving back at Joint Base Andrews after the championship match, said he “really enjoyed” it and said the fans were “great.”
“I loved it. First of all, the two players have unbelievable talent. It just seemed they hit the ball harder than I’ve ever seen before. Incredible talent and I enjoyed it. I used to go all the time but, you know, lately, it’s a little bit more difficult. I really enjoyed it.”
Trump said the “fans were really nice.”
“I didn’t know what to expect. Usually, you would say that would be a somewhat progressive, as they say nowadays, crowd. Sometimes — some people would call it liberal. But we’ll use the word they like to use, progressive. But they were great, the fans were great.”
(WASHINGTON) — Mike Waltz, former national security adviser who left his position in May in the wake of the Signal chat controversy in March, faced questions Tuesday from Democratic senators over the episode in his confirmation hearing for his nomination as United Nations ambassador.
Waltz insisted, as White House officials have since the incident, that no classified information was shared in a group chat that he inadvertently invited a journalist to that discussed details of a strike against Houthi rebels in Yemen. And he suggested the use of Signal was not only appropriate — but actually prudent, given the guidance he was following.
“That engagement was driven by and recommended by the Cyber Security Infrastructure Security Agency, by the Biden administration … the use of signal is not only as an encrypted app. It’s not only authorized. It was recommended in Biden’s, the Biden era, CISA guidance,” he told Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del.
“We followed the recommendation — almost the demand to use end-to-end encryption — but there was no classified information shared,” he told Coons.
Coons said he “was hoping to hear from you that you had some sense of regret over sharing what was very sensitive, timely information about a military strike on a commercially available app that’s not, as we both know, the appropriate way to share such critical information.”
“Senator, I think where we have a fundamental disagreement is there was no classified information on that, on that chat,” Waltz replied.
But Sen. Tim Kaine,D-Va., pointed out that investigations at the Pentagon by the Inspector General and the Air Force have not reached a conclusion on the question — although Kaine didn’t suggest Waltz himself shared classified information.
“I shouldn’t and can’t comment on ongoing investigations” at the Pentagon, Waltz said.
“The fact of the matter is,” Kaine said, “there are two investigations going on at the Pentagon precisely to determine in an objective and independent way whether classified information was shared, [or] at a minimum … attack plans with sensitive military information that shouldn’t have been shared.
Sen. Mike Lee, a Republican from Utah, introduced Waltz before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and touted his experience.
“He is a seasoned policy mind, a skilled negotiator with a track record of diligently pursuing American interests unapologetically and with the appropriate amount of caution and attention to detail that those things deserve,” Lee said.
Florida Republican Sen. Rick Scott said Waltz would “exceed expectations” in the role at the United Nations.
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, the ranking Democrat on the committee, focused her opening remarks on criticism of the Trump administration’s cuts to the U.S. diplomatic budget.
“President Trump has said that the U.N. must return to its core mission of peace and security, but the administration is also proposing to slash U.S. contributions to the U.N. and eliminate the entire U.N. peacekeeping budget, increasing the likelihood that American soldiers will be sent into combat zones, and making China the largest U.N. peacekeeping and financial contributor,” Shaheen said, noting that at the same time, China was ramping up its investments in the U.N.
“Mr. Waltz, I urge you to take this threat seriously,” she added.
Waltz came under intense scrutiny in March for inadvertently inviting The Atlantic Editor-in-Chief Jeffrey Goldberg to a Signal chat with Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Vice President JD Vance and other top national security officials discussing details of the strike on the Houthis.
President Donald Trump nominated Waltz to the U.N. post at the same time he announced Secretary of State Marco Rubio would take over the national security adviser on an interim basis.
Sen. Jacky Rosen, D-Nev., pressed Waltz on remaining on the White House payroll despite no longer serving as national security adviser.
“Can you confirm for us whether you have been receiving a salary from the White House since being let go from the NSA?” Rosen asked.
“Thank you, Senator. I was not fired. The president never said that, nor did the vice president. I was kept on as an adviser, transitioning a number of important — a number of important activities, and now hope to be confirmed,” Waltz responded, calling reports of his dismissal “fake news.”
“You know, fake news can’t be the answer to everything,” Rosen retorted.
Before taking the role as national security adviser, Waltz served three terms in Congress representing Florida’s 6th Congressional District and sat on the Intelligence, Armed Services and Foreign Affairs committees. He was the first Green Beret to be elected to Congress.
During the presidential campaign, he was a key Trump surrogate on defense and foreign policy.
Before running for elected office, Waltz served in various national security policy roles in the George W. Bush administration in the Pentagon and White House. He retired as a colonel after serving 27 years in the Army and the National Guard.
-ABC News’ Katherine Faulders, Will Steakin, Mary Bruce, Hannah Demissie and Michelle Stoddart contributed to this report.
The Court did not formally explain its decision. It overruled two lower courts which had imposed a temporary restraining order after concluding that ICE had likely violated the Fourth Amendment by targeting suspects based primarily on race or ethnicity and language.
In a concurring statement agreeing with the decision, Justice Brett Kavanaugh explained that he believed the government had a “fair prospect of success on the merits” in the litigation and should not be hindered in using the strategy for now.
“Apparent ethnicity alone cannot furnish reasonable suspicion,” Kavanaugh wrote. “Under this Court’s case law regarding immigration stops, however, it can be a relevant factor.”
He also questioned whether the advocacy groups and individual plaintiffs challenging the government policy had sufficient standing to bring the legal challenge to begin with.
The Court’s three liberal justices dissented.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor called the decision a “grave misuse” of the Court’s emergency docket, rather than let the case continue to play out in lower courts.
“We should not have to live in a country where the Government can seize anyone who looks Latino, speaks Spanish, and appears to work a low wage job. Rather than stand idly by while our constitutional freedoms are lost, I dissent,” she wrote.
Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin said on X the ruling is a “win for the safety of Californians and the rule of law.”
“DHS law enforcement will not be slowed down and will continue to arrest and remove the murderers, rapists, gang members and other criminal illegal aliens that Karen Bass continues to give safe harbor,” she posted.
U.S. Congressional District maps are displayed as the Senate Special Committee on Congressional Redistricting meets to hear invited testimony on Congressional plan C2308 at the Texas State Capitol on August 6, 2025 in Austin, Texas. Brandon Bell/Getty Images
(AUSTIN, Texas) — Texas Democrats on Friday again defied Republican Gov. Greg Abbott and the state GOP and did not show for a vote on a Republican-proposed redistricting plan
Shortly after, the state’s Republican attorney general went to court to try to remove some of them from office.
The GOP-proposed new congressional maps would give Republicans more seats in Congress — potentially allowing the GOP to keep control of the U.S. House of Representatives in Washington.
Despite threats of arrest, restriction on pay and calls from the governor that they be removed from office, the majority of the Democrats did not appear for the special session when the Texas House convened Friday afternoon and no quorum was reached.
Democratic state Rep. Gene Wu, the Texas House minority leader, earlier told ABC News Thursday that he believes his caucus would hold out on Friday and once again deny the legislature a quorum, though he said they would be willing to come back to Austin if state Republicans promise to focus solely on other issues before the special session, including flood mitigation and disaster preparedness.
Members who were present Friday do not have to return in person until Monday at 2 p.m. ET, when the Texas House Republicans will attempt to reach a quorum for the fourth time.
Democrats who have fled the state appear likely to stay away until Aug. 19, the end of the special session.
The defiance took place as Abbott has also requested the Texas Supreme Court to remove Wu from office.
Wu’s attorneys repsonded Friday afternoon asking the court to deny the governor’s request.
The attorneys argue, in part, that the court does not have jurisdiction over state legislators, that Rep. Wu would have a right to a jury trial, which the state supreme court cannot provide. That the governor does not have the standing to bring the case, according to Wu’s attorneys who added Abbott’s suit would “fail in any court.”
His lawyers also argued that the state constitution covers lawmakers for quorum breaking in certain circumstances.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton told Fox News on Friday that he is willing to take other Democrats to court if they don’t return.
“If they show up today, we’re all happy, we can get our business done, and everybody is good. If they do not show up, we will be in an Illinois courtroom … [trying] to get them back to the state of Texas, hold them in contempt, and if they refuse to come, hopefully put them in jail,” he said.
He shrugged off concerns that the optics of arresting Democrats would give them a public opinion win.
“I think in Texas — I don’t know what it’s like in other states, but I do know in Texas, people expect their representatives to go to work,” Paxton said.
Paxton said on Friday afternoon that he had filed a lawsuit with the Texas Supreme Court petitioning for 13 of the over 50 Texas House Democratic members who left the state to break quorum to be removed from their positions.
The filing argued that these members “have absented themselves from the State with the express purpose of denying the House a quorum so that the Legislature as a whole cannot carry out its constitutional lawmaking function.”
“These cowards deliberately sabotaged the constitutional process and violated the oath they swore to uphold. Their out-of-state rebellion cannot go unchecked, and the business of Texas must go on,” the AG said in a statement.
Texas House Speaker Dustin Burrows targeted the wallets of the absent Democrats in an effort to draw them back.
On Thursday, he sent a memo to all members and their staffs requiring that any member who is absent from the special session to break quorum must collect their monthly paycheck in person. Direct deposits were suspended for those skipping out until the House reaches quorum, according to memo.
Burrows says that he expects more suits filed in other states to come after the one filed by Abbott Thursday to try to enforce the civil arrest warrants out of state, and that another legislator contacted the Sergeant at Arms of the Illinois House of Representatives asking for their assistance in bringing back members.
He added later that if the Department of Public Safety civilly arrests “our absent colleagues” during the weekend, legislators are on call and need to come back to Austin with a minimum of six hours’ notice.
Abbott has called for the Democrats’ arrest, and Republican Sen. John Cornyn has called on the FBI to track down those elected officials.
Congressional Democrats who sit on the House Judiciary and House Oversight Committee sent a letter Friday to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI director Kash Patel asking them to clarify and explain if and how their agencies are involved in locating Democratic Texas lawmakers who left the state to prevent a quorum in order to stop the new congressional maps.
“We write with great concern about the abuse of federal public safety resources for completely political purposes and without a law enforcement rationale that is reportedly taking place right now,” the members wrote.
The governor said in a podcast released Friday that he was willing to go further than creating more than five new seats the GOP could flip if the Democrats continued to block the GOP effort.
“We may make it six or seven or eight new seats we’re going to be adding on the Republican side,” he said during an interview on the podcast “Ruthless.”
In the meantime, Texas Democrats have fled to various blue states, including Illinois and California.
California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom is slated to hold a news conference with those Democrats Friday afternoon, along with Rep. Nancy Pelosi and California state Democrats to show their support.
“The governor and state leaders have floated a potential statewide ballot measure that would reaffirm California’s commitment to national independent redistricting and allow voters to temporarily adjust the state’s congressional map only if Texas or other GOP-led states manipulate theirs,” Newsom’s office said in a statement.
California Democrats are preparing to respond to Texas Republicans’ proposed new congressional districts by possibly targeting five GOP-held districts in the Golden State, sources recently confirmed to ABC station KGO-TV. But the office of the California Secretary of State told ABC News that if legislators don’t move fast, it becomes nearly impossible for the state to run a statewide election that meets federal standards.
ABC station KGO-TV’s Monica Madden contributed to this report.
