Republican-led House voting on renaming Gulf of Mexico
ABC News
(WASHINGTON) — The Republican-led House is voting Thursday on Democratic Rep. Jared Huffman’s motion to send legislation formalizing the Gulf of Mexico’s proposed name change to Gulf of America back to committee.
The legislation, which was introduced by Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, codifies an executive order from President Donald Trump to rename the body of water.
Its fate in the Senate is more of a challenge, given that it will need bipartisan cooperation to overcome a filibuster.
“Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper or other record of the United States to the Gulf of Mexico shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘Gulf of America,'” the bill text states.
The measure also instructs each federal agency to update each document and map in accordance with the name change, which Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum will oversee.
“Codifying the rightful renaming of the Gulf of America isn’t just a priority for me and President Trump, it’s a priority for the American people. American taxpayers fund its protection, our military defends its waters, and American businesses fuel its economy,” Greene argued in a post on X.
One of Trump’s first executive orders when he started his second term was to rename the Gulf of Mexico.
Speaker Mike Johnson has endorsed the bill, which is expected to clear the lower chamber in a party-line vote.
“We’ve been working around the clock to codify so much of what President Trump has been doing … to make sure that we put these into statutory law so that it can’t be reversed and erased by an upcoming administration,” Johnson said at a news conference on Tuesday.
House Democrats, including Leader Hakeem Jeffries, have criticized the measure.
“Why is the top thing that House Republicans — going to do this week on their legislative agenda renaming the Gulf of Mexico?” Jeffries said at a news conference Monday. “Because Donald Trump and House Republicans are on the run. They are on the run.”
(WASHINGTON) — The Supreme Court on Friday granted the Trump administration’s request to categorically revoke humanitarian parole for more than 530,000 immigrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela and order them out of the country.
The court did not explain its order staying a lower court decision that temporarily blocked the administration’s abrupt policy change.
In March, the Department of Homeland Security revoked protections for migrants from five countries issued by the Biden administration. The agency gave them 30 days notice to leave the country unless they had legal protection under another program.
A number of migrants and immigrant advocacy groups sued over the move, alleging that federal law did not give DHS Secretary Kristi Noem discretion to categorically eliminate humanitarian protections — only to do so on a case-by-case basis. A federal district court agreed.
The high court’s decision means the Trump administration can move forward with it’s policy change even as the litigation continues in lower courts on the merits.
Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor dissented.
Jackson, writing in opposition, accused the court’s majority of callously “undervalu[ing] the devastating consequences of allowing the Government to precipitously upend the lives and livelihoods of nearly half a million noncitizens while their legal claims are pending.
“Even if the Government is likely to win on the merits, in our legal system, success takes time,” Jackson wrote, “and the stay standards require more than anticipated victory. I would have denied the Government’s application because its harm-related showing is patently insufficient.”
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to terminate “Temporary Protected Status” for approximately 350,000 Venezuelans who were protected from deportation and allowed to work in the United States.
While the administration’s moved to restrict immigration and turn away refugees from countries like Afghanistan and Haiti, it recently accepted white South African refugees — prompting criticism.
The administration’s falsely claimed a genocide is taking place against white Afrikaner farmers, which South Africa’s president pushed back on during a meeting with President Donald Trump in the Oval Office.
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump on Wednesday will unveil in the White House Rose Garden what are expected to be broad-based “reciprocal tariffs” on imports as part of his “America First” agenda.
It’s a moment months in the making for the president who has repeatedly billed it as “Liberation Day,” claiming it will free the U.S. from dependence on foreign goods and saying “we’re going to be getting back a lot of the wealth that we so foolishly gave up to other countries.”
“April 2, 2025, will go down as one of the most important days in modern American history,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters on Tuesday.
But it’s a serious political gamble for Trump, who made his way back to the White House in no small part because of his promise to better the economy.
Some economists, though, have raised concerns his moves could cause the economy to slide into a recession and markets seesawed ahead of Wednesday’s announcement, slated for 4 p.m. ET, after the markets end trading.
The White House has been mum on details ahead of Wednesday’s announcement, only confirming that the tariffs will go into effect immediately upon being announced.
Some options debated in recent weeks, ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Selina Wang reported, were a 20% flat tariff rate on all imports; different tariff levels for each country based on their levies on U.S. products; or tariffs on about 15% of countries with the largest trade imbalances with the U.S.
Trump was still meeting with his tariff team on Tuesday to finalize the details, Leavitt said, “perfecting” the policy “to make sure this is a perfect deal for the American people and the American worker.”
Since his inauguration, Trump has implemented levies on specific products, including steel and aluminum. He’s also put into place some tariffs on goods from China, Canada and Mexico.
The actions have strained relations with Canada and Mexico, two key allies and neighbors. Prime Minister Mark Carney said last week the U.S. and Canada’s deep relationship on economic, security and military issues was effectively over.
Canada has vowed retaliatory tariffs and Mexico said it will give its response later this week. The European Union, too, said it has a “strong plan to retaliate.”
But Trump and administration officials are plowing full steam ahead, arguing America’s been unfairly “ripped off” by other nations for years and it’s time for reciprocity.
“It’s simple: if you make your product in America, you will pay no tariffs,” Leavitt said on Tuesday.
The economy was the top issue for voters in the 2024 presidential election, with Americans casting blame on President Joe Biden for high prices and Trump promising to bring families financial relief.
The administration has painted tariffs as a panacea for the economy writ large, arguing any pain experienced in the short term will be offset by what they predict will be major boosts in manufacturing, job growth and government revenue.
But it’s unclear how much leeway the public is willing to give Trump to get past what he has called “a little disturbance.”
Already, little more than two months into Trump’s second term, polls show his handling of the economy is being met with pushback.
An Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research survey published on Monday found a majority of Americans (58%) disapprove of how Trump has been handling the economy.
On his protectionist trade negotiations with other nations, specifically, 60% of Americans said they disapproved of his approach so far. It was his weakest issue in the poll among Republicans.
Trump’s GOP allies on Capitol Hill have say they’re placing trust in the president, but acknowledged some uncertainty to start.
“It may be rocky in the beginning but I think this will make sense for Americans and it will help all Americans,” House Speaker Mike Johnson said at his weekly press conference with other members of Republican leadership.
“You’re going to see prices shift,” Rep. Rich McCormick, a Georgia Republican, told ABC News Correspondent Jay O’Brien. “We’re accountable to the American people. We represent them, if they’re speaking loud enough … I think the president has been very good at reacting to the public.”
Senate Democrats were planning to try to force a vote aimed at curtailing Trump’s authorities to impose levies on Canada.
Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, in a press conference alongside other Democrats on Tuesday, slammed Trump’s recent comments that he “couldn’t care less” if foreign automakers raise prices due to tariffs — levies that are also going into effect on Wednesday.
“America you hear that? Donald Trump says he couldn’t care less if you pay more,” Schumer said.
“The president has justified the imposition of these tariffs on, in my view, a made-up emergency,” said Sen. Tim Kaine, a Virginia Democrat.
(WASHINGTON) — The Federal Emergency Management Agency denied North Carolina’s request for the agency to match 100% of the state funds for Helene cleanup, according to a letter sent from the acting FEMA administrator to the governor of North Carolina.
“After a careful and thorough review of all the information available, including that contained in your initial request for a cost share adjustment and appeal, we have concluded that an extension of the 100 percent federal cost share for debris removal and emergency protective measures, including direct federal assistance for an additional 180 days under major disaster declaration FEMA-4827-DR is not warranted,” acting Administrator David Richardson wrote in the letter.
The cost-sharing request comes from a Biden administration directive to match 100% of the funds that the state puts in to share costs of the disaster cleanup after Hurricane Helene devastated the state as a Category 4 storm in September 2024.
Over 230 people were killed by the storm, with at least 72 in Buncombe County, North Carolina, alone, amid record flooding throughout western North Carolina
Traditionally, there is a cost-sharing model with a 75% federal absorption of costs to 25% for states, but that was changed under the Biden administration to match the costs 100%.
It is unclear how FEMA would split costs between states and the federal government for future disaster relief.
In a statement, North Carolina Gov. Josh Stein said the denial will cost state residents “hundreds of millions of dollars.”
“The money we have to pay toward debris removal will mean less money towards supporting our small businesses, rebuilding downtown infrastructure, repairing our water and sewer systems and other critical needs,” he said.
The funding debate is occurring as the Department of Homeland Security weighs how to eliminate the agency while still giving states funding for disasters.
At the center of the plan is Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, who has personally weighed how to cut the agency.
“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,” Noem said on May 8, adding that the agency has “failed” in its mission and should be eliminated or downsized. “He wants to empower local governments and support them and how they respond to their people,”
FEMA has not responded to ABC News’ request for comment.
Still, an internal review of FEMA this month indicated the agency is “not ready” for the 2025 hurricane season.
“As FEMA transforms to a smaller footprint, the intent for this hurricane season is not well understood, thus FEMA is not ready,” the review said, citing staffing limitations, hiring and a lack of coordination with states as the Trump administration attempts to reorganize and diminish FEMA.
The decision comes as the United States anticipates above-average hurricane activity on the Atlantic coast this year, with between 13 and 19 named storms expected.
