Mayors from ‘sanctuary cities’ testify before Congress
Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — The Mayors of Boston, Chicago, Denver and New York City are testifying on Wednesday in front of the House Oversight Committee during a blockbuster hearing on sanctuary cities.
Boston Mayor Michelle Wu, Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson, Denver Mayor Mike Johnston and New York City Mayor Eric Adams are all set to defend their actions on immigration enforcement in their respective cities as Republicans on the committee have already warned they won’t be holding back.
“The mayors here today each lead so-called ‘sanctuary cities,’ and let’s be clear, these policies only create sanctuary for criminals,” Chairman James Comer, a Republican, said in his opening remarks.
“Today, mayors Wu, Johnson, Johnston and Adams will be publicly accountable for their failure to follow the law and protect the American people.”
Sanctuary cities often have limited cooperation with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which enforces U.S. immigration laws around the country. Sanctuary cities often have policies that are welcoming to illegal immigrants.
Wednesday’s committee hearing comes as President Donald Trump’s administration officials have ramped up their immigration enforcement efforts with Attorney General Pam Bondi shutting down federal grants to sanctuary cities and multiple threats “border czar” Tom Homan has issued toward these mayors if they refuse to comply.
On Tuesday, Bondi said efforts to crack down on immigration enforcement would increase in Boston, citing a lack of effort from Wu to prosecute undocumented immigrants.
“As a result of the Mayor’s decision to side with public safety threats over law-abiding citizens, DOJ will have no choice but to increase efforts in the city of Boston. Criminals will be prosecuted, illegal aliens will be arrested, and justice will be served,” Bondi posted on X.
Democrats immediately criticized the Trump administration, arguing the overreach of federal officials has led to unlawful detentions and created fear in communities.
“Republicans have hauled before us the mayors of four major American cities to frame them as lawless, because those cities have some limits on how intrusively and aggressively their own officials can conduct federal immigration operations and responsibilities,” Ranking Member Gerry Connolly said.
“Let’s be clear, the state and local laws that Republicans have issue with today are in full compliance with federal law. They do not obstruct ICE from carrying out its duties, and they are backed by evidence demonstrating that they keep people safe.”
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump on Friday said he’s had “good talks” with Russia’s President Vladimir Putin but not with Ukraine as the U.S. pushes negotiations to end the three-year conflict that began when Putin’s forces invaded its sovereign neighbor.
The comment, made at a gathering of Republican and Democratic governors at the White House, comes as Trump ramps up criticism of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
“I’ve had very good talks with Putin,” Trump said. “And I’ve had not such good talks with Ukraine.”
“They don’t have any cards, but they play it tough,” Trump said of Ukraine. “But we’re not we’re not going to let this continue. This war is terrible. It wouldn’t never happened if I were president. But it did happen.”
At a high-level meeting held in Saudi Arabia this week, U.S. and Russian officials agreed to start working together on peace negotiations — marking a seismic diplomatic shift in U.S. foreign policy.
Notably absent from the talks was Ukraine. Zelenskyy criticized the U.S. and Russia for going over Ukraine’s head, and said his country will not accept any agreement they don’t have a hand in negotiating.
Trump responded by calling Zelenskyy a “dictator” and framed Zelenskyy as an illegitimate leader due to the postponement of the country’s 2024 presidential elections until after the war.
The White House has been repeatedly asked if Trump also considers Putin a dictator, but officials, including national security adviser Michael Waltz, have dodged the question.
Zelenskyy pushed back, pointing to polls that show him above 50% and describing Trump’s assertion as parroting Russian “disinformation.”
Trump continued to lash out at Zelenskyy on Friday.
“I’ve been watching for years, and I’ve been watching him negotiate with no cards. He has no cards. And you get sick of it. You just get sick of it. And I’ve had it,” Trump said of Zelenskyy during a interview with Fox News Radio’s Brian Kilmeade.
During the interview, Trump was repeatedly pressed about who was to blame for the war but he sidestepped each time. He at one point seemed to concede that Russia did attack Ukraine, but still blamed Ukraine for not making concessions.
“Every time I say, oh, it’s not Russia’s fault, I always get slammed by the fake news. But I’m telling you, Biden said the wrong things,” Trump said. “Zelenskyy said the wrong things.”
Trump seemed particularly upset about a mineral resources deal that Ukraine rejected. A U.S. official with knowledge of the negotiations said a new version of the proposal has been put on the table.
While Trump has been critical of Zelenskyy, Retired Gen. Keith Kellogg — the U.S. special envoy for Ukraine — praised him as “courageous” after meeting with him Thursday.
“A long and intense day with the senior leadership of Ukraine. Extensive and positive discussions with [Zelenskyy] the embattled and courageous leader of a nation at war and his talented national security team,” Kellog wrote on his personal X account.
(WASHINGTON) — After a weekend of confusion, the Trump administration on Monday afternoon told federal agencies they don’t have to direct workers to comply with Elon Musk’s request for information about their activities at work, and that doing so is voluntary, according to two sources familiar with the matter.
The Office of Personnel Management — effectively the human resources agency for the federal government — updated agency human resources officers on a Monday call over Elon Musk’s call for the Trump administration to fire federal workers who did not reply to an email asking them to submit an email listing their accomplishments from the previous week.
Adding to the confusion are Trump’s own comments Monday, when he told journalists in the Oval Office there was a “lot of genius” behind Musk’s proposal, and that workers would be “sort of semi-fired” if they don’t respond.
OPM did not respond to a request for comment on the instructions given to federal agencies.
In the latest effort by the Department of Government Efficiency to investigate efficiency and reduce the size of the government, employees were asked in an email from the Office of Personnel Management on Saturday to list five accomplishments over the previous week and reply by 11:59 p.m. ET on Monday.
Musk threatened on social media that employees would face termination if they do not comply. The original email sent to employees did not include such an ultimatum, leaving some employees unaware of the threat.
However, some federal agencies told employees not to respond to the OPM email, some advised that employees should reply and others said that replying is “voluntary,” creating uncertainty among the rank and file.
Musk’s ultimatum raised questions about how much authority he holds in the government. While the White House argued in a court filing that Musk has no true power, Musk doubled down on his ultimatum Monday morning, warning that “Those who do not take this email seriously will soon be furthering their career elsewhere.”
Trump endorsed the email while taking questions Monday with French President Emmanuel Macron.
“I thought it was great because we have people that don’t show up to work, and nobody even knows if they work for the government,” Trump said. “So, by asking the question, ‘Tell us what you did this week,’ what he’s doing is saying, ‘Are you actually working?'”
“And then if you don’t answer like you’re sort of semi-fired or you’re fired because a lot of people are not answering because they don’t even exist,” Trump said.
Asked later Monday about the change in OPM policy, a White House official said, “DOGE is moving fast, at the direction of POTUS, and that’s exactly the point.”
“It’s all about efficiency, even internally,” the official added.
In a statement, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said, “Everyone is working together as one unified team at the direction of President Trump. Any notion to the contrary is completely false.”
Mixed messages
Federal employees on Saturday began receiving the OPM email with the subject line “What did you do last week” that demanded they list “5 bullets of what you accomplished last week and CC your manager,” according to multiple sources and an email reviewed by ABC News.
The subject line came from Musk’s playbook: “What did you get done this week?” is the same message he sent to the CEO of Twitter (now X) Parag Agrawal before Musk bought the company and fired the CEO.
A spokesperson from the Office of Personnel Management said Saturday that “agencies will determine any next steps.”
Yet management at multiple agencies told their staff that they were waiting on further guidance and, in some cases, told them to hold off on replying, according to multiple sources.
Employees at the Justice Department were told that they did not need to respond to the OPM request, according to an email obtained by ABC News. The Defense Department told employees who received the email to “please pause any response.” The Pentagon official filling in as the Department’s top personnel officer said that DOD would review any performance of personnel according to its own procedures, but added that “when and if required” it would coordinate responses to OPM’s email.
Newly confirmed FBI Director Kash Patel also told staff to “please pause any responses” to the email.
Employees at agencies including the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the United States Department of Energy were told by senior staff that they were waiting on further guidance and, in some cases, told to wait for further notice before responding.
NASA acting Administrator Janet Petro informed employees on Monday before OPM’s guidance went out that responding to the email was optional and that not responding would have “no impact to your employment,” according to an email obtained by ABC News.
“Employees may have already responded or may still choose to respond. You are not required to respond, and there is no impact to your employment with the agency if you choose not to respond,” Petro wrote in the email.
Other agencies directed employees to reply. Speaking to Fox News on Monday morning, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy explained why his employees should respond to Musk’s email.
“If you can’t come up with five things that you did, maybe you shouldn’t be employed here,” Duffy said, calling it an “easy task” that “happens in the private sector all the time.”
Leadership at the Treasury Department sent an agency-wide email Monday morning instructing all employees — including those at the IRS — to comply with OPM’s email by the deadline, according to an email obtained by ABC News.
However, the email still left some employees confused, particularly because it does not clarify whether failure to respond by the deadline could result in termination.
Federal workers who don’t follow Musk on social media could be unaware there’s an ultimatum on the table. While the administration did ask federal employees to list their accomplishments, the email did not state that those who failed to respond by the deadline would be fired.
Employees across agencies told ABC News they hadn’t seen Musk’s threats until they were asked for their reaction to them.
One IRS employee told ABC News that when they asked their direct managers whether not responding would result in them being fired, they were told, “We are only to adhere to official emails and ignore any directives not communicated through official channels.”
Another employee in management at the IRS said staff are “freaking out.”
Managers at the Department of Veterans Affairs told employees to respond to the email. One manager at the agency told ABC News that workers are “scared.”
“It’s not an exaggeration,” they said. “Everybody is afraid they are going to lose their jobs on a daily basis. There’s this fear that you’re going to open your email and you will be terminated.”
How much authority does Musk have?
It is not clear if Musk has the authority to terminate employees in this manner. However, he continues to act as if he does, threatening employees on Monday morning with administrative leave if they do not return to work this week.
White House lawyers attested in federal court that Musk “has no actual or formal authority to make government decisions.”
Trump aides have also said publicly that Musk is operating in an advisory capacity as a special government employee.
While Trump has said that Musk cannot do anything without his approval, the president has publicly heralded Musk as the leader of DOGE and lauded him for the job he’s doing in that capacity. On Saturday, shortly before the OPM email went out, Trump posted on his Truth Social platform, “ELON IS DOING A GREAT JOB, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE HIM GET MORE AGGRESSIVE.”
-ABC News’ Devin Dwyer, Peter Charalambous, Selina Wang, Emily Chang and Michelle Stoddart contributed to this report.
(WASHINGTON) — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered an immediate pause on gender-affirming medical care procedures for all active-duty service members in a memo that was addressed to senior Pentagon leadership and military command.
The Feb. 7, 2025, memo, which was obtained today by ABC News, also ordered an immediate pause on all new promotions in the military for individuals “with a history of gender dysphoria.”
“Effective immediately, all new accessions for individuals with a history of gender dysphoria are paused, and all unscheduled, scheduled, or planned medical procedures associated with affirming or facilitating a gender transition for Service members are paused,” the memo says.
“Individuals with gender dysphoria have volunteered to serve our country and will be treated with dignity and respect,” the memo continued, adding that the Department of Defense would provide “additional policy and implementation guidance” to service members “with a current diagnosis or history of gender dysphoria.”
The memo came after President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Jan. 28 rescinding Biden administration policies that permitted transgender service members to serve openly in the military based on their gender identity. The executive order is being challenged in federal court by prominent LGBTQ+ advocacy groups, including Human Rights Campaign, which filed a pair of lawsuits against the Trump administration on behalf of active-duty transgender service members.
The executive order directed the Department of Defense to revise the Pentagon’s policy on transgender service members and stated that “expressing a false “gender identity” divergent from an individual’s sex cannot satisfy the rigorous standards necessary for military service.”
The order further argued that receiving gender-affirming medical care is one of the conditions that is physically and mentally “incompatible with active duty.”
“Consistent with the military mission and longstanding DoD policy, expressing a false ‘gender identity’ divergent from an individual’s sex cannot satisfy the rigorous standards necessary for military service,” the order continued.
Hegseth echoed this sentiment in the Feb. 7 memo, saying that “efforts to split our troops along lines of identity weaken our Force and make us vulnerable. Such efforts must not be tolerated or accommodated.”
Human Rights Campaign and Lambda Legal filed a federal lawsuit on Thursday on behalf of six active-duty transgender service members, challenging the Trump administration over the president’s ban on transgender service members.
“By categorically excluding transgender people, the 2025 Military Ban and related federal policy and directives violate the equal protection and due process guarantees of the Fifth Amendment and the free speech guarantee of the First Amendment,” the lawsuit said. “They lack any legitimate or rational justification, let alone the compelling and exceedingly persuasive ones required. Accordingly, Plaintiffs seek declaratory, and preliminary and permanent injunctive, relief.”
A similar lawsuit against the Trump administration was filed on Jan. 28 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by advocacy groups GLAD Law and the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR) on behalf of six additional active duty service members.
“By categorically excluding transgender people, the 2025 Military Ban and related federal policy and directives violate the equal protection and due process guarantees of the Fifth Amendment and the free speech guarantee of the First Amendment,” the lawsuit said. “They lack any legitimate or rational justification, let alone the compelling and exceedingly persuasive ones required. Accordingly, Plaintiffs seek declaratory, and preliminary and permanent injunctive, relief.”
A similar lawsuit against the Trump administration was filed on Jan. 28 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by advocacy groups GLAD Law and the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR) on behalf of six additional active duty service members.
ABC News reached out to the White House regarding the lawsuits but requests for comment were not returned.
The immediate impact of the memo on transgender service members is unclear, but ABC News has reached out to the plaintiffs in each of those lawsuits for comment.
Shannon Minter, lead counsel of NCLR, told ABC News in a statement on Monday that Hegseth’s memo “underscores the urgency of the need for court intervention.”
“The administration is already taking steps to implement the ban even before the stated deadlines in the original executive order,” Minter said. “Transgender applicants are already being turned away and transgender service members are being targeted and denied medically necessary care.”
Court records show that a hearing in this case is scheduled on February 18 in the D.C. district court, where Judge Ana Reyes is presiding over the case.
ABC News’ Briana Stewart contributed to this report.
