Acting FEMA head fired a day after he testified against closing the agency: Sources
(Chris Allan/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — Cameron Hamilton, who had been acting administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, was fired Thursday, a day after telling Congress the agency should not be disbanded, putting him at odds with President Donald Trump’s suggestions that FEMA be downsized or dissolved.
The change at the top of the agency that coordinates federal disaster relief comes a few weeks before the start of of hurricane season on June 1.
“Cameron Hamilton is no longer the Senior Official Performing the Duties of Administrator,” Julia Moline, the acting chief of staff, wrote in an email to all employees Thursday that was reviewed by ABC News.
According to sources familiar with the situation, Hamilton was called to Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s office at 10:30 a.m. Thursday. He returned to the FEMA office a short time later and told staff he was fired, according to sources.
Speaking to the House Appropriations Committee on Capitol Hill on Wednesday, Hamilton told lawmakers that FEMA should not be disbanded, putting him at odds with public comments from Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem that the agency has “failed” and should be “eliminated” or downsized.
“I do not believe it is in the best interests of the American people to eliminate the Federal Emergency Management Agency,” he told lawmakers.
His comments came on the same day as Noem testified before the same committee.
“The president has indicated he wants to eliminate FEMA as it exists today, and to have states have more control over their emergency management response. He wants to empower local governments and support them and how they respond to their people,” Noem said.
Trump has been sharply critical of the agency’s work, and suggested that the federal government send funds directly to states to assist with disaster relief, rather than have a role coordinating responses to major disasters.
David Richardson, who recently served as DHS assistant secretary for countering the weapons of mass destruction office, will now lead the agency on an interim basis, an administration official told ABC News.
The email sent to all FEMA employees also announced the news of Richardson’s new role.
“Effective today, David Richardson is now serving as the Senior Official Performing the duties of the FEMA Administrator,” a FEMA spokesperson told ABC News. “Cameron Hamilton is no longer serving in this capacity.”
A DHS spokesperson also confirmed to ABC News that Richardson is serving as acting administrator but didn’t mention Hamilton.
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the Social Security Administration on Tuesday distanced himself from some of the actions taken at the agency by officials linked to Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency.
Frank Bisignano, a veteran Wall Street executive and GOP donor tapped to lead the agency delivering $1.5 trillion annually to more than 70 million people, told the Senate Finance Committee when asked about DOGE’s work on agency systems and databases that he will conduct a “total review” of the activities at the SSA if he is confirmed.
He also denied ever having spoken to acting SSA Commissioner Leland Dudek, who is reportedly aligned with Musk’s team efforts, and initially said he has not been a part of any management and policy discussions with the DOGE teams.
Last week, Dudek briefly threatened to shut down the agency after a federal judge blocked DOGE officials from accessing databases, only relenting when the judge issued a clarification saying his understanding of the ruling was “incorrect.”
But under questioning from Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., Bisignano admitted he had been in communication with Mike Russo, an agency official now serving as chief information officer, and said they knew each other from the private sector. Russo has been aligned with DOGE’s work and has facilitated its activities at the SSA, according to multiple reports.
“I don’t know him as a DOGE person,” Bisignano said.
On the broad DOGE activities, he said, “I’m happy to work with anybody who can help us, and I am fundamentally about efficiency myself.”
Bisignano, currently the CEO of Fiserv, a financial data and payment company, argued his private sector experience will allow him to improve the quality and speed of the agency’s service to the public.
He called Social Security “the most bipartisan thing we have” and denied that he has “thought about” privatizing the agency.
“It’s not a word that anybody’s ever talked to me about, and I don’t see this institution as anything other than a government agency that gets run for the benefit of the American public,” he told Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I.
Democrats have repeatedly suggested the Trump administration’s actions toward the agency, such as designating field offices for closure, firing staffers and requiring people to show up at a field office to verify their identities, instead of doing so over the phone, are meant to “hollow out” the SSA.
“This approach is a prelude to privatizing Social Security and handing it over to private equity,” Wyden said.
Democrats also challenged Bisignano on Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick’s comments on a podcast last week in which the billionaire said his mother-in-law wouldn’t care about missing a payment from the agency and that only people committing fraud complain about services.
“I don’t think anyone would appreciate not getting their Social Security check on time,” Bisignano said.
“So they’re not fraudsters?” asked Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, D-Nev.
“It would be hard to get to that conclusion,” he replied.
Asked if he agreed with Musk’s comments about the program being a “Ponzi scheme,” Bisginano said it is “a promise to pay.”
Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., appeared to extract a commitment from Bisignano to review the firings at the agency.
“When you have a system that is not working now, do you think it’s a great idea to lay off half the employees?” Sanders asked.
“Do I think it’s a great idea to lay off half the employees when the system doesn’t work? I think the answer is probably no,” he replied.
Some Republican senators defended the DOGE actions at the agency, and most said they hope the administration will improve services and protect accessibility for those who want to be served at SSA field offices.
Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont., played the SSA’s waiting music from his phone and claimed his staffers were put on hold for hours and disconnected when they tried to test the agency’s 1-800 number on Monday.
“We will meet beneficiaries where they want to be met, whether that’s in person, in an office, online or on the phone,” Bisignano said.
In the past, Bisignano has said he would like to use artificial intelligence to find fraud at the agency, which Musk has claimed is rampant.
According to a 2024 report from the SSA inspector general, less than 1% of payments were improper between 2015 and 2022 and “most” of those were overpayments.
(WASHINGTON) — One hundred days ago this week, just hours after taking the oath of office and reveling before a crowd of thousands at Capital One Arena, President Donald Trump signed the first executive orders of his second term.
With the stroke of his pen, he maintained he could freeze environmental and other agency regulations Congress had authorized. With another, he withdrew the U.S. from an international climate agreement.
“You’re witnessing the dawn of the golden age of America,” he told the roaring crowd. “That’s what it’s going to be.”
Overall, he’s issued more than 130 executive orders and even more memorandums, declared at least eight national emergencies and engaged in a showdown with the courts that has prompted debate on whether a constitutional crisis is underway.
Driving much of his action is a legal theory advocated by conservatives that the Constitution gives a president nearly unquestioned control over the federal government.
Trump and his top officials also contend that he’s simply working to implement the agenda that Americans voted for in November.
But other constitutional and legal experts who spoke with ABC News call it unparalleled overreach.
“This really is unprecedented,” Elizabeth Goitein, the senior director of the Brennan Center’s Liberty and National Security Program, told ABC News.
“We’ve seen really broad theories of executive power advanced in previous administrations,” Goitein said. “There’s been a steady trend over the last few decades towards increasingly broad views of executive power, especially after 9/11. But this is unprecedented and it’s different in kind, not just in degree.”
Trump, in a recent interview with Time to mark 100 days, disagreed.
“Well, I don’t feel I’m expanding it,” Trump told the magazine when asked about amassing presidential power. “I think I’m using it as it was meant to be used.”
Trump’s ‘government by executive order’
Nearly every day since Jan. 20, Trump has signed executive actions in the Oval Office, often in front of television cameras. He’s signed the greatest number of executive orders in his first 100 days of any president going back 88 years.
“He’s trying to do government by executive order on a whole range of issues,” said David Schultz, a constitutional law expert at Hamline University.
Following Trump’s lead, his administration has carried out a dramatic purge of what Congress had set up as independent agencies, firing tens of thousands of employees, even those with civil service protections. He’s also sought to wipe out diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives across the federal government.
Trump signed an order to diminish the Department of Education, with the ultimate goal of wiping away the agency established by law. He’s tried to effectively end birthright citizenship, which is enshrined in the 14th Amendment and has been upheld repeatedly by the Supreme Court.
To move forward with his immigration and economic policies, Trump has declared national emergencies that Goitein, an expert on presidential emergency powers, said are unjustified.
Despite border crossings being down, Trump invoked the 1798 wartime Alien Enemies Act to deport hundreds of Venezuelan migrants his administration alleged to be gang members, affording them little to no due process.
He invoked the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act in order to impose sweeping tariffs on virtually all U.S. trading partners. Though it is Congress, not the president, that has the power to impose taxes and regulate trade — and the emergency power used by Trump makes no mention of tariffs.
At times, he’s used the power of the presidency to pursue retribution on political opponents. Seemingly contrary to his promise to end the “weaponization” of government and the justice system, he’s signed orders targeting specific law firms that took on clients or cases he disagreed with politically. He directed the Justice Department to investigate Chris Krebbs and Miles Taylor, two officials from his first term who’ve criticized him or challenged his 2020 election falsehoods.
Trump’s harshest critics say some action verges on authoritarianism, noting his open respect for “strongman” leaders, including China’s President Xi Jinping, Russia’s Vladimir Putin and Hungary’s Viktor Orban.
“Sometimes you need a strongman,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity last September while campaigning.
Pushback from the courts — but not from Congress
“Our Framers were envisioning that if a president tried to do things like this, Congress would step in,” said Schultz. “And right now, it looks like partisanship is more powerful than checks and balances.”
Despite having Republican majorities (albeit narrow ones) in the House and Senate, Trump has opted to largely go it alone on his agenda in his first 100 days. Republicans on Capitol Hill, so far, appear uninterested or unwilling to seriously challenge him.
“We’re all afraid,” GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski, one of the few Republicans to be critical of Trump, told her Alaskan constituents last month. Murkowski added that “retaliation is real.”
While congressional pushback has been minimal, a clear clash is underway between the Trump administration and the courts as various groups and individuals challenge his policies.
Trump has berated judges who ruled against him as “radical left” and called for District Judge James Boasberg’s impeachment. He and Vice President JD Vance openly floated the idea of not abiding by lower court orders — “He who saves his Country does not violate any Law,” Trump posted on social media — though later said they would comply with decisions from the Supreme Court.
Chief Justice John Roberts issued a rare statement in rebuke of the rhetoric — and though he didn’t mention Trump by name, the context was clear.
In a major escalation of the administration’s standoff with the courts, the FBI last week arrested a Milwaukee judge, Hannah Dugan, and accused her of obstructing immigration agents. An attorney for Dugan said she will “defend herself vigorously and looks forward to being exonerated.” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, when asked about the incident, left open the possibility of the Justice Department taking more action against federal judges or even Supreme Court justices if they were obstructing the arrest of anyone suspected of being in the country illegally.
“He thinks he can either ignore or bully his way through,” Schultz said of Trump’s posture toward the judiciary. “And so far, he’s got a mixed record at best in terms of being able to do that.”
Several legal experts and presidential scholars who spoke to ABC News expressed concern that the courts will become inundated by Trump’s moves as his second term continues, and the system of checks and balances will continue to break down.
“The separation of powers is probably the most important protection that we have against presidents becoming kings,” said Goitein. “If this is the new normal, then we can say goodbye to democracy.”
(LAS VEGAS) — To Cherie DeVille, one of the adult entertainment industry’s most popular stars, pornography — and its easy accessibility online — is a fundamental freedom protected by the First Amendment.
“This isn’t a whim or something that I’m going to do for a week. I love this job,” said the former physical therapist turned sex worker who has millions of followers on social media. “It’s very good business for me.”
To parents with young children, like Dawn Hawkins of Virginia, America’s multibillion-dollar porn juggernaut is a social poison infiltrating families via the internet.
“How are we going to teach our children healthy intimacy and boundaries and consent when what they’re viewing across multiple platforms is sharing really the opposite message,” said Hawkins, who wants stricter controls for sexually-explicit content.
The age-old debate over the widespread availability of pornography in America will enter a new phase this spring as the U.S. Supreme Court decides whether states can legally require websites hosting adult content to perform electronic age verification of all users.
A green light for online age checks could dramatically alter how millions of U.S. adults access sexually explicit content on their phones, tablets, and computers and potentially build a more stringent safety barrier for children than what currently exists.
The decision will come at a time when hardcore porn is booming business and easier to obtain than ever before, with the rapid proliferation of adult film studios, live camera websites, social media platforms, and online networks of amateur creators. Many sites have no paywall or age verification gateways.
“It’s not a matter of if my kids are going to be exposed to pornography. It’s a matter of when. It’s definitely going to happen,” said Hawkins, a mother of 5 who also heads the National Center on Sexual Exploitation, which has led an effort to crack down on the porn industry.
Hawkins and many national parent organizations have voiced growing concern in recent years that software filters and parental controls on personal electronics – installed by manufacturers and long considered the primary line of defense for families – have not been effective at keeping explicit content from kids.
More than 70% of men and 40% of women say they’ve consumed sexually explicit content in the past year, according to a recent study in the Journal of Sexual Medicine. American teens have reported similar levels of exposure in studies reviewed by ABC News.
Public health experts say young people who view sexually explicit content are more likely to start having sex earlier, engage in unsafe sex, and have multiple partners.
“As long as we’re prioritizing adults’ access to this content and not also prioritizing children’s safety, we are going to destroy the next generation,” said Hawkins. “We are just asking that the pornography companies put a fence around it and make sure that those accessing this content are of age.”
Nineteen states have recently passed laws mandating that sites containing sexually-explicit material harmful to children require all users to upload a copy of their digital or government ID, or perform a biometric scan, in order to verify that they are over 18. Legislators say the measures are common sense steps similar to age checks at brick-and-mortar stores.
“It’s possible to prove your age entirely on your own cell phone. So, no personal data need ever leave the palm of your hand,” said Iain Corby, executive director of the Age Verification Providers Association, an industry trade group that sells technology to adult websites.
Third-party apps — used widely by porn sites across Europe — can make the verification process fast, free, and secure for consumers, Corby said.
“The simple case might be using a driver’s license. So you would be redirected to an agency’s website, and then once you’ve done a photo of your I.D., you do a selfie. And then we check that the two match,” Corby said. “We just tell that website that you’re over 18 – not your name, not your face, and not even your actual date of birth. Just that you were over 18.
“Another option works in a very similar way to facial estimation, but in fact, it’s based on how you move your hands,” added Corby, demonstrating the biometric scan technology for ABC News.
The porn industry, backed by the American Civil Liberties Union, says online age-verification requirements are unconstitutional, infringing on adult rights by putting privacy at risk and impeding access to legal content.
Decades of Supreme Court precedent have upheld the constitutionality of pornographic material and adults’ right to access it. In two separate cases, the court previously ruled that the government can’t mandate age verification of users online before allowing them to see explicit material.
“Whenever the government is passing a law in the name of protecting kids, I think there are serious questions to be asked about whether what it’s really doing is saying this speech is bad for everyone,” said Vera Eidelman, an ACLU attorney. “And that’s exactly what the First Amendment exists to protect against.”
Industry advocates say the onus should remain on parents and technology companies, which they claim have the capacity to install smarter content filters and other safety monitoring controls on devices used by kids.
“Kids are going to do what they’re going to do. You know, you don’t ban alcohol because kids can get a fake ID or because they can drink from their parents’ liquor cabinet,” said Ken Fields, an adult film actor who opposes electronic age verification laws. “You do the best you can to try to keep that from happening within reason without infringing on the legal rights of legal adults and citizens.”
The Texas law at issue before the Supreme Court applies to websites with more than one-third of sexually-explicit content harmful to children. It does not apply to search engines or social media sites. Critics say it could also limit teenagers’ access to public health and sexual health resources unrelated to porn.
“I think their heart is in the right place. The execution is not there,” said Nick from Colorado, an attendee at the AVN Expo in Las Vegas last month, the nation’s annual adult entertainment convention. “There’s a way to do it, it’s just not the way it’s being done.”
Several participants, who all declined to share their last names, told ABC News they worried about a loss of anonymity when surfing to adult websites. “If you do absolutely upload your driver’s license, who gets it? So where does that information go?” said Meredith from Tennessee.
“There’s a lot of ways you can get shamed, whether it’s at work or other places,” said Brett from Florida. “It’s more of a privacy concern than anything else.”
During Supreme Court oral arguments last month in a major test case from Texas, a majority of justices appeared sympathetic to the states’ efforts to limit kids’ exposure to sexually explicit material, despite long standing precedent opposing overly burdensome requirements on adults, including electronic age checks.
A decision is expected by the end of June.
“It’s going to be a massive amount of monetary loss, and I think you’re going to see an explosion of illegal, unethical porn because they don’t care and they won’t comply,” said DeVille. “I do not care what you think about porn. This should terrify you because this is a massive government overstep in one of our most cherished things in the United States.”
To Hawkins, a favorable decision would be a sigh of relief.
“The burden can’t only be on parents,” she said of the need to keep children away from pornography. “Something like demanding age verification on these nefarious websites is such a simple, commonsense measure that that would drastically help protect kids from exposure.”
