Category: Politics

(WASHINGTON) — A district judge ruled on Wednesday that the government’s deportations of eight men convicted of violent crimes to South Sudan was “unquestionably violative of this Court’s order” after ruling earlier this week that the Department of Homeland Security maintain custody of the migrants.

Judge Brian Murphy, of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, had issued an order on Tuesday directing the government to maintain custody of anyone covered by his preliminary injunction who is in the process of being removed to South Sudan or any other country “to ensure the practical feasibility of return if the Court finds that such removals were unlawful.”

“It was impossible for these people to have a meaningful opportunity to object to their transfer to South Sudan in that time frame,” he said, arguing that due process was not possible since the migrants received their notices of removal on the evening of May 19 and then taken out of the detention facility the next morning.

DHS confirmed the eight migrants were placed on a deportation flight from Texas headed to war-torn South Sudan on Monday, officials said ahead of the hearing, though they cautioned this would not be the migrants’ final destination.

Ahead of the hearing, DHS held a news conference in Boston on the deportations in which Assistant Homeland Security Secretary Tricia McLaughlin told reporters that “no country on earth wanted to accept them because their crimes are so uniquely monstrous and barbaric.”

“A local judge in Massachusetts is trying to force the United States to bring back these uniquely barbaric monsters who present a clear and present threat to the safety of the American people and American victims,” McLaughlin said. “While we are fully compliant with the law and court orders, it is absolutely absurd for a district judge to try and to dictate the foreign policy and national security of the United States of America.”

When asked where the eight men are, McLaughlin said she “can’t disclose where their current whereabouts are right now” but that they were still in DHS custody. Officials declined to identify their final destination, citing security concerns.

“I would caution you to make the assumption that their final destination is South Sudan. As far as that agreement goes, I would definitely refer you to the State Department’s more specifics,” she added.

Officials said the men’s countries of origin refused to accept them, so DHS in partnership with the State Department found a country that would accept them through a “safe third-country agreement.”

“I can say that their home countries refuse to take these individuals back,” acting U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director Todd Lyons said.

“ICE detention isn’t punitive. We detain and remove after six months or 180 days. If we don’t have a country that’ll take their citizens back, we do have an option to find a safe third country,” Lyons said.

However, McLaughlin argued to reporters that the eight migrants were given due process.

“We are following due process under the U.S. Constitution. These individuals have been given and their lawyers have been given plenty of prior notice. As far as those actual agreements, we can get back to you with more information from the State Department,” she said.

Murphy said the violation will now need to be remedied.

In response, plaintiffs’ attorney Trina Realmuto argued during the court hearing that the plane should be returned to the U.S. and the men should be afforded the due process that she said “can only take place on U.S. soil.”

Drew Ensign, an attorney for the Department of Justice, asked the court to fashion as narrow a remedy as possible and suggested that an option is for the due process required by the injunction to take place without bringing the plane back to the U.S. However, Ensign could not immediately answer Murphy’s question about whether that is possible.

ICE released names and other details regarding those deported on Wednesday. Several were convicted of first-degree and second-degree murder.

Kyaw Mya, a citizen of Burma, was convicted of lascivious acts with a child-victim less than 12 years of age. Nyo Myint, a citizen of Burma, was convicted of first-degree sexual assault involving a victim mentally and physically incapable of resisting.

Another was convicted of robbery, possession of a firearm and driving under the influence.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The United States officially accepted a luxury jet to use as Air Force One from Qatar, the Department of Defense confirmed to ABC News on Wednesday.

“The secretary of defense has accepted a Boeing 747 from Qatar in accordance with all federal rules and regulations,” Sean Parnell, chief Pentagon spokesman, said in a statement.

“The Department of Defense will work to ensure proper security measures and functional-mission requirements are considered for an aircraft used to transport the president of the United States,” he added.

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

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — A last-minute White House meeting that sources tell ABC News is between President Donald Trump, Speaker Mike Johnson and House Republican holdouts on Wednesday afternoon comes as the “One Big, Beautiful Bill Act” appears to be in big, bad trouble.

The critical meeting, which will include the House Freedom Caucus, comes as GOP leaders are scrambling to get the bill back on track after negotiations went south with hard-liners overnight.

House leadership sources tell ABC News that Johnson is keen to put the megabill on the floor Wednesday night to try to force holdouts to pick a side. But, hard-liners are balking, pledging to vote no and kill the bill’s momentum.

All eyes will be on Trump to see if he can move the needle and convince the holdouts to change their positions. Wednesday’s meeting comes after he spoke to Republicans on Capitol Hill Tuesday in an effort to persuade them to back his signature bill — at one point threatening to primary those who vote against it.

The GOP is far from unified around the bill with several sticking points among Republican hard-liners primarily regarding Medicaid work requirements and a cap on state and local tax deductions.

Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Harris, one of the holdouts, said there is “no way” the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” passes in the House Wednesday — despite Johnson’s goal of putting the bill on the floor as early as Wednesday after it clears the Rules Committee. Johnson is still working to secure the votes of the more than a dozen Republicans who are seeking additional changes to the legislation. Without changes, there is enough opposition to defeat it as Johnson can only afford to lose three votes.

“We’re further away from a deal,” Harris said on Newsmax Wednesday morning. “This bill actually got worse overnight. There is no way it passes today.”

House Rules Committee hearing going strong

House Republicans’ efforts to push through Trump’s bill are ongoing as a House Rules Committee hearing is still going strong after it started at 1 a.m. ET Wednesday. Committee chairs and ranking members continue to debate the details of the more than 1,000 page “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” which has changes to Medicaid, state and local tax deductions, SNAP food assistance, immigration policy and more.

The GOP is far from unified around the bill with several sticking points among Republican hard-liners primarily regarding Medicaid work requirements and a cap on state and local tax deductions.

Key components of the legislation are set to come up in the Rules Committee Wednesday morning, which will focus on tax provisions, overhaul of SNAP and Medicaid cuts. However, GOP leaders have still not released expected changes — negotiated by hard-liners and moderates — to the tax and budget bill.

Rules Committee Chair Rep. Virginia Foxx emphasized that Republicans need to move forward on their bill to “ensure our economic survival.” She added that Republican changes to the package will be unveiled at some point during the hearing.

Rep. Jim McGovern, the top Democrat on the Rules Committee, lambasted Republicans’ reconciliation bill.

“I’ve got a simple question. What the hell are Republicans so afraid of? What the hell are you so scared of that you guys are holding this hearing at 1 o’clock in the morning. It’s a simple question that speaks to the heart of what’s going on here, and one that I’m going to keep on asking, if Republicans are so proud of what is in this bill, then why are you trying to ram it through in the dead of night?” McGovern said.

On Wednesday morning, House Democratic leaders led by Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries pushed back on the bill by introducing an amendment — one of the more than 500 amendments submitted by both Democrats and Republicans to the reconciliation package — to strike all provisions that they say would “cause millions of Americans to lose healthcare and food assistance.”

“Unfortunately, we are here today discussing a bill that would make that American dream harder to reach for millions by increasing costs for families, hardworking American families, and gutting the things that they need to survive and thrive,” Jeffries said, adding that the bill, if enacted, would force nearly 14 million people off health insurance.

Jeffries said that if the bill passes, “hospitals will close, nursing homes will shut down, and people will die in all of your districts.” He also attacked the potential overhaul to the federal food assistance program — SNAP.

Jeffries called the megabill “one, big ugly bill” that will “hurt the American people.”

Minority Whip Katherine Clark focused on the impacts the GOP’s bill will have on health care for women like access to fertility treatments and screenings.

“I hope this amendment gives you all pause when the women in this country deserve health care, and I hope you will think about the moms struggling to get by and stay healthy for the sake of their children and their families. It is not too late to do right by them,” she said.

Overnight, several Republican members left as Democrats burned the midnight oil — introducing various amendments to the package.

Ranking Member Bennie Thompson of Homeland Security expressed frustration with the process overnight.

“I described Homeland Security portion of this bill as putting lipstick on a pig. I come from an agricultural district as well as a part of the country. So let me use another farming analogy to wrap up: We may be here in the dead of night, but you do not need the light of day to smell manure. The American people are not going to be fooled by any middle-of-the-night, manure-slinging here,” the Mississippi Democrat said, adding that it “stinks to high heaven.”

Overnight, several committee chairs and ranking members testified before the powerful panel including Armed Services, Budget, Oversight, Natural Resources, Financial Services, Judiciary, Homeland Security, Transportation, Ways and Means, Energy and Commerce, Agriculture and Education.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The Department of Homeland Security has confirmed that eight migrants convicted of violent crimes were placed on a deportation flight from Texas headed to war-torn South Sudan on Monday, officials said on Wednesday.

Although they are going to the African nation, officials cautioned this would not be their final destination.

Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin told reporters, “No country on earth wanted to accept them because their crimes are so uniquely monstrous and barbaric.”

“A local judge in Massachusetts is trying to force the United States to bring back these uniquely barbaric monsters who present a clear and present threat to the safety of the American people and American victims. While we are fully compliant with the law and court orders, it is absolutely absurd for a district judge to try and to dictate the foreign policy and national security of the United States of America,” McLaughlin said.

Judge Brian Murphy of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts issued an order on Tuesday directing the government to maintain custody of anyone covered by his preliminary injunction that is currently being removed to South Sudan or any other country “to ensure the practical feasibility of return if the Court finds that such removals were unlawful.” Another hearing is set for Wednesday in Boston, with U.S. officials ordered to appear.

When asked where the eight men are, McLaughlin said she “can’t disclose where their current whereabouts are right now” but that they were still in DHS custody. Officials declined to identify their final destination, citing security concerns.

“I would caution you to make the assumption that their final destination is South Sudan. As far as that agreement goes, I would definitely refer you to the State Department’s more specifics,” she added.

Officials said the men’s countries of origin refused to accept them, so DHS in partnership with the State Department found a country that would accept them through a “safe third-country agreement.”

“I can say that their home countries refuse to take these individuals back,” acting U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director Todd Lyons said.

“ICE detention isn’t punitive. We detain and remove after six months or 180 days. If we don’t have a country that’ll take their citizens back, we do have an option to find a safe third country,” Lyons said.

McLaughlin told reporters that the eight migrants were given due process.

“We are following due process under the U.S. Constitution. These individuals have been given and their lawyers have been given plenty of prior notice. As far as those actual agreements, we can get back to you with more information from the State Department,” she said.

ICE released names and other details regarding those deported on Wednesday. Several were convicted of first-degree and second-degree murder.

Kyaw Mya, a citizen of Burma, was convicted of lascivious acts with a child-victim less than 12 years of age. Nyo Myint, a citizen of Burma, was convicted of first-degree sexual assault involving a victim mentally and physically incapable of resisting.

Another was convicted of robbery, possession of a firearm and driving under the influence.

ABC News’ James Hill contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The U.S. Department of Justice said on Wednesday that it is moving to drop police reform agreements, known as consent decrees, that the Biden-era department reached with the cities of Louisville, Kentucky, and Minneapolis. The court-enforceable agreements were born out of probes launched after the 2020 police killings of Breonna Taylor and George Floyd.

The agreements with Minneapolis and Louisville, which were intended to address allegations of systemic unconstitutional policing and civil rights violations, were both held up in federal court and have faced several delays, with the DOJ requesting various extensions to file documents requested by the federal judges in each case.

Amid the delays, Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara told ABC News in a February interview that while the Trump administration could intervene in the process, since the agreements have already been filed in federal court, whether they are ultimately approved is not up to the White House, but “ultimately in the federal judge’s hands.”

Officials in Minneapolis and Louisville told ABC News in February that the cities are still committed to the reforms outlined in the agreements and plan to implement changes with or without the support of the Trump administration.

The consent decrees each lay out a roadmap for police reform to rectify civil rights violations that the DOJ uncovered and, if approved by a federal judge, the court will appoint an independent monitor to oversee the implementation of the reforms and actions outlined in the agreement.

Kevin Trager, a spokesman for Louisville Mayor Craig Greenberg, told ABC News in February that the city and police are committed to the reforms agreed upon in the consent decree, “regardless of what happens in federal court.”

“Louisville Metro Government and LMPD will move forward and honor our commitment to meaningful improvements and reforms,” Trager said.

Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey told ABC News in Febaruary that the city had “not heard directly” from the Trump administration regarding the consent decree, but the city plans to move forward with the terms of the agreement “with or without support from the White House.”

“It’s unfortunate the Trump administration may not be interested in cooperating with us to improve policing and support our community, but make no mistake: we have the tools, the resolve, and the community’s backing to fulfill our promise to the people of Minneapolis. Our work will not be stopped,” Frey said.

Following the new announcement from the DOJ on Wednesday, ABC News reached out to officials in Minneapolis and Louisville for additional comment.

The DOJ’s Civil Rights Division is also planning to close its investigations into police departments in Phoenix; Trenton, New Jersey; Memphis, Tennessee; Mount Vernon, New York; Oklahoma City; and the Louisiana State Police, according to the announcement.

Additionally, the department said it will be “retracting” findings released during the Biden administration against departments alleged to have engaged in widespread misconduct against citizens.

“Overboard police consent decrees divest local control of policing from communities where it belongs, turning that power over to unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats, often with an anti-police agenda,” Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon said in a statement announcing the moves. “Today, we are ending the Biden Civil Rights Division’s failed experiment of handcuffing local leaders and police departments with factually unjustified consent decrees.”

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

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — House Republicans have worked through the night to move a megabill advancing President Donald Trump’s legislative agenda through a key committee — aiming to overcome division in the conference and advance the package to a House floor vote as soon as Wednesday.

The House Rules Committee hearing is going strong Wednesday morning after it started at 1 a.m. ET Wednesday with committee chairs and ranking members debating the details of the more than 1,000 page “One Big Beautiful Bill Act.”

The GOP is far from unified around the bill with several sticking points among Republican hard-liners primarily regarding Medicaid work requirements and a cap on state and local tax deductions. Trump spoke to Republicans on Capitol Hill Tuesday in an effort to persuade them to back his signature bill — at one point threatening to primary those who vote against it.

Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Harris, one of the holdouts, said there is “no way” the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” passes in the House Wednesday — despite Speaker Mike Johnson’s goal of putting the bill on the floor as early as Wednesday after it clears the Rules Committee. Johnson is still working to secure holdouts’ votes, and still appears to lack the votes to pass the legislation on the House floor.

“We’re further away from a deal,” Harris said on Newsmax Wednesday morning. “This bill actually got worse overnight. There is no way it passes today.”

Key components of the legislation are set to come up in the Rules Committee Wednesday morning, which will focus on tax provisions, overhaul of SNAP and Medicaid cuts. However, GOP leaders have still not released expected changes — negotiated by hard-liners and moderates — to the tax and budget bill.

Rules Committee Chair Rep. Virginia Foxx emphasized that Republicans need to move forward on their bill to “ensure our economic survival.” She added that Republican changes to the package will be unveiled at some point during the hearing.

Meanwhile, Rep. Jim McGovern, the top Democrat on the Rules Committee, lambasted Republicans’ reconciliation bill.

“I’ve got a simple question. What the hell are Republicans so afraid of? What the hell are you so scared of that you guys are holding this hearing at 1 o’clock in the morning. It’s a simple question that speaks to the heart of what’s going on here, and one that I’m going to keep on asking, if Republicans are so proud of what is in this bill, then why are you trying to ram it through in the dead of night?” McGovern said.

Overnight, several Republican members left as Democrats burned the midnight oil — introducing various amendments to the package.

Ranking Member Bennie Thompson of Homeland Security expressed frustration with the process overnight.

“I described Homeland Security portion of this bill as putting lipstick on a pig. I come from an agricultural district as well as a part of the country. So let me use another farming analogy to wrap up: We may be here in the dead of night, but you do not need the light of day to smell manure. The American people are not going to be fooled by any middle-of-the-night, manure-slinging here,” the Mississippi Democrat said, adding that it “stinks to high heaven.”

There have been 537 amendments submitted from both Democrats and Republicans to the reconciliation package.

Overnight, several committee chairs and ranking members testified before the powerful panel including Armed Services, Budget, Oversight, Natural Resources, Financial Services, Judiciary, Homeland Security, Transportation, Ways and Means, Energy and Commerce, Agriculture and Education.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Democratic Rep. Gerry Connolly of Virginia has died, his office announced Wednesday morning. He was 75 years old.

“It is with immense sadness that we share that our devoted and loving father, husband, brother, friend and public servant, Congressman Gerald E. Connolly, passed away peacefully at his home this morning surrounded by family,” a statement from his family read.

Connolly had served in Congress since 2009. He was a champion for federal workers, pushing back in recent months against the Trump administration and Elon Musk’s overhaul of the government.

“We were fortunate to share Gerry with Northern Virginia for nearly 40 years because that was his joy, his purpose, and his passion. His absence will leave a hole in our hearts, but we are proud that his life’s work will endure for future generations,” his family said.

Just last month, Connolly said he was stepping down from the top Democratic position on the influential House Oversight Committee because his cancer had returned. Connolly had defeated New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for the committee chair in December.

He had been diagnosed with cancer of the esophagus in November.

“When I announced my diagnosis six months ago, I promised transparency,” he said in his statement last month. “After grueling treatments, we’ve learned that the cancer, while initially beaten back, has now returned. I’ll do everything possible to continue to represent you and thank you for your grace.”

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINTON) — Officially titled the “One Big, Beautiful Bill Act,” this megabill fulfills a laundry list of President Donald Trump’s campaign promises from taxes to border security.

As House Republicans continue to negotiate the final details of the legislation, here’s a look at some possible ways the bill could affect everyday Americans, according to recent estimates.

Keep in mind, the Senate is likely to significantly change this bill and the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) continues to review the legislation.

Some potential impacts:

• More than an estimated 8 million recipients could lose Medicaid coverage, according to a CBO analysis requested by House Democrats. Republicans say they’re targeting able-bodied adults and undocumented immigrants, but other beneficiaries could also be impacted.
• Cuts SNAP food assistance by roughly $230 billion over 10 years, narrowing participation in the program servicing roughly one-in-eight Americans each month
• Extends the 2017 Trump tax cuts
• Fulfils Trump’s campaign promises of no taxes on tips and no taxes on overtime work
• Provides $50 billion wall to renew construction of Trump’s border wall
• Commits roughly $150 billion in defense spending for shipbuilding and ‘Golden Dome’ missile defense system
• It’s important to note, the impacts of the bill are estimates based on early analysis by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. The estimates – and legislative text – have not been finalized.

Changes in Medicaid work requirements

Republicans say their main goal is reducing “waste, fraud, and abuse” within Medicaid, the health care program for lower income Americans and those with disabilities, in order to achieve hundreds of billions in savings over the next decade.

Early estimates requested by House Democrats put the number of people who could lose coverage at more than 8 million, but that number continues to fluctuate and the Congressional Budget Office has not yet released its final score of the GOP bill, which is not yet even finalized itself.

The bill imposes new work requirements on able-bodied Medicaid recipients aged 19-64 who don’t have dependents, which includes working at least 80 hours per month. The bill also requires states to conduct eligibility redeterminations at least every 6 months for all recipients.

The legislation also removes undocumented migrants from Medicaid eligibility (per the White House, this accounts for approximately 1.4 million undocumented migrants losing coverage provided through state Medicaid programs).

Under the bill’s current text, these work requirements don’t kick in until 2029, as President Trump leaves office. But House Republican hardliners are looking at moving that date up to 2026 or 2027 in their negotiations with leadership.

The bill also increases copays for Medicaid recipients who make more than the federal poverty limit, for single beneficiaries that’s just over $15,500. They would be required to pay an extra $35 dollar copay in some visits.

It also increases the required Medicaid paperwork for income and residency verification as lawmakers look to crack down on people who are “double-dipping” in multiple jurisdictions. These additional steps are expected to especially impact seniors and others who can’t promptly respond.

SNAP cuts

The bill tightens eligibility requirements for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), what used to be called “food stamps” program, which helped roughly 42 million low-income people per month buy groceries in 2024.

Adults aged 55-64 and children would face additional work requirements to qualify for SNAP benefits.

The bill also shifts some SNAP costs to the states. The program is currently 100% federally funded. This bill requires states to share in at least 5 percent of SNAP benefit costs starting in 2028.

The SNAP cuts total an estimated $230 billion over 10 years.

The changes could have an indirect impact on school lunch programs, requiring some previously eligible families to apply for access and impact federal reimbursement payments for some school districts.

No tax on tips and overtime pay

This addition to the bill helps Trump fulfill one of his major campaign promises — exempting workers who receive tips from paying federal income taxes on them, as long as they make less than $160,000 a year. The tax break would expire at the end of 2028, after the next presidential election, according to the proposal.

Expanding Trump tax cuts

Makes tax cuts from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act permanent that fiscal hawks complain adds trillions of dollars to the deficit over the next decade; does not include a tax increase on the wealthiest earners. Trump posted last week that the proposal shouldn’t raise taxes on high-earners, “but I’m OK if they do!!!”

Creation of MAGA savings account for children

The bill would create so-called MAGA savings accounts for parents to open for their children. The contribution limit for any taxable year is $5,000. It includes a pilot program to start the accounts with $1,000.

Raising the SALT cap

The current bill raises the deduction limit of state and local taxes from your federal income tax filing from $10,000 to $30,000 for joint filers making less than $400,000 per year.

Republicans from states such as New York and California are pushing House Republican leadership to further increase that cap to help their constituents. Hardliners warn increasing that limit would worsen the deficit.

On the campaign trail, Trump promised to eliminate the SALT cap first imposed by the 2017 tax law he signed during his first term.

More money for border security enforcement

The legislation provides almost $50 billion to revive construction of Trump’s wall along the U.S.-Mexico border and it makes changes to immigration policy.

The bill includes $4 billion to hire an additional 3,000 new Border Patrol agents as well as 5,000 new customs officers, and $2.1 billion for signing and retention bonuses.

There’s also funds for 10,000 more Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers and investigators.

It includes major changes to immigration policy, imposing a $1,000 fee on migrants seeking asylum, which has never been done before in the United States.

The bill includes a $4 trillion increase to the statutory debt limit as Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent calls on Congress to act by the end of July.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem incorrectly responded to a lawmaker’s question on the definition of habeas corpus during a Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing on the Department of Homeland Security budget for the upcoming year on Tuesday.

Sen. Maggie Hassan, D-N.H., asked Noem, “What is habeas corpus?”

The secretary responded, saying, “Habeas corpus is a constitutional right that the president has to be able to remove people from this country.”

“Excuse me, that’s — that’s incorrect,” Hassan interjected.

“Habeas corpus is the legal principle that requires, requires that the government provide a public reason for detaining and imprisoning people. If not for that protection, the government could simply arrest people, including American citizens, and hold them indefinitely for no reason,” she said.

“Habeas corpus is the foundational right that separates free societies like America from police states like North Korea,” Hassan added. “As a senator from the ‘Live Free or Die’ state, this matters a lot to me and my constituents and to all Americans.”

Hassan then asked, “Secretary Noem, do you support the core protection that habeas corpus provides that the government must provide a public reason in order to detain and imprison someone?”

“I support habeas corpus,” Noem responded. “I also recognize that the president of the United States has the authority under the Constitution to decide if it should be suspended or not.”

Hassan interrupted Noem, saying, “It has never been done. It has never been done without approval of Congress. Even Abraham Lincoln got retroactive approval from Congress.”

Later in the hearing, Noem denied any involvement in a reported reality television show featuring the Department of Homeland Security in which immigrants would compete for U.S. citizenship.

“We have no knowledge of a reality show,” Noem said. “There may have been something submitted to the department, but I did not know anything about this reality show until the reporter reached out.”

Noem then took aim at The Wall Street Journal’s reporting, saying, “That article — in fact, they had to change it later because they lied so bad, and they had us on the record saying I had no knowledge of a reality show. The department didn’t — there may have been something submitted somewhere along the line because there are proposals pitched to the department, but me and my executive team have no knowledge of a reality show and it’s not under consideration.”

“That article was completely inaccurate, completely inaccurate and false, and the fact that they printed it when they knew it was false was a dereliction of their work,” she added.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump is hosting South Africa President Cyril Ramaphosa at the White House on Wednesday amid tensions between the two nations over the U.S. resettlement of white South Africans.

Trump and other top officials have claimed that a race-based “genocide” is unfolding against white farmers in the country. South African officials, including Ramaphosa, have vehemently pushed back, arguing that is not the case.

“It’s a genocide that’s taking place,” President Trump said last week. “Farmers are being killed. They happen to be white. But whether they are white or Black makes no difference to me. But white farmers are being brutally killed, and their land is being confiscated in South Africa.”

That same day, the first flight of Afrikaners arrived at Washington Dulles International Airport.

Ramaphosa responded that the individuals who went to the U.S. “do not fit the definition of a refugee” — someone who is leaving their country out of fear of persecution due to race, religion, political opinion or nationality.

“And I had a conversation with President Trump on the phone, and I — he asked, he said, ‘What’s happening down there?'” Ramaphosa said. “And I said, ‘President, what you’ve been told by those people who are opposed to transformation back home in South Africa is not true.'”

The South African government, in a statement last week, said its police statistics on farm-related crimes “do not support allegations of violent crime targeted at farmers generally or any particular race.”

The dozens of Afrikaners who arrived in the U.S. last week had their applications fast-tracked under an executive order issued by Trump in February titled, “Addressing Egregious Actions of the Republic of South Africa.”

The order contends the South African government passed a law allowing it to “seize ethnic minority Afrikaners’ agricultural property without compensation” in a “shocking disregard of its’ citizen rights.” It instructs that the U.S. will not provide aid or assistance to the nation, and that the U.S. “promote the resettlement of Afrikaner refugees.”

The law passed by South Africa cited by the administration aims to address land injustices established during apartheid. It states land can be expropriated in the public interest and in most cases must be subject to compensation, the amount of which must have been agreed to by the owners or approved by court. Experts say the law is comparable to similar legislation around the world regarding eminent domain.

In addition to Trump’s executive order, his administration expelled South Africa’s Ambassador Ebrahim Rasool from the U.S. earlier this year.

Trump has been scrutinized for prioritizing Afrikaners while moving to restrict immigration from elsehwere, including from Afghanistan, Venezuela and Haiti.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio was asked to defend the administration’s position while testifying before a Senate panel on Tuesday.

“I think those 49 people that came strongly felt they were persecuted, and they passed every sort of check mark that needed to be checked off,” Rubio said. “The president identified it as a problem and wanted to use it as an example.”

Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia said he believed the claim there is persecution of Afrikaner farmers was “completely specious” and noted the U.S. hadn’t let in Black South Africans during apartheid.

“I think that the United States has a right to allow into this country and prioritize the allowance of who they want to allow it come in,” Rubio responded.

Elon Musk, a South African native and a top adviser to the president during his second term, has also been vocal about the plight of South African landowners, amplifying claims of “white genocide.”

Ramaphosa on Tuesday projected optimism about the upcoming talks with Trump.

“We’re always ready and we hope to have really good discussions with President Trump and his fellow government colleagues. Looking forward to a really good and positive meeting, and we’re looking forward to a really good outcome for our country, for our people, for the jobs in our country and good trade relations,” Ramaphosa told reporters as he arrived at the South African Embassy in Washington.

He said trade is the “the most important, that is what has brought us here” and that they want to strengthen economic ties between the two nations in a video posted to X. Ramaphosa also said he and Trump will discuss Israel as well as Russia and Ukraine.

Ramaphosa didn’t mention the United States’ prioritization of the resettlement of white South African refugees in the videos posted to social media, though he vowed to protect South Africa’s sovereignty.

“We will always do what is best for South Africans,” he said.

ABC News’ Shannon Kingston contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.