Sen. Dick Durbin announces retirement after decades in Congress
Tierney L. Cross/Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — Longtime Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., announced Wednesday that he will not seek reelection in 2026 and will retire after serving for over four decades in Congress.
“In my heart, I know it’s time to pass the torch,” Durbin said in the video. “The threats to our democracy and way of life are real, and I can assure you that I will do everything in my power to fight for Illinois and the future of our country every day of my remaining time in the Senate.”
Durbin, 80, has served in the Senate since 1997 and won reelection to the Senate four times. Coupled with his time in the House, Durbin has served in Congress for 44 years.
“We are also fortunate to have a strong Democratic bench ready to serve,” Durbin said in the video. “We need them now more than ever.”
His departure will set up a contentious race among Illinois Democrats vying to fill the seat in a solidly blue state.
“It has been an honor serving alongside Sen. Dick Durbin in Congress. I have long admired his focus on creating jobs in Illinois, bringing down costs for working families and protecting benefits for veterans and seniors,” Rep. Eric Sorensen, D-Ill., said following Durbin’s announcement. “As a dedicated public servant for more than four decades, Sen. Durbin has been a strong voice for Illinoisans, ushering into law many historic bills as a long-time leader in the U.S. Senate. I am grateful for the legacy he leaves behind that has helped improve millions of our Illinois neighbors.”
It will also leave a void in Democratic leadership in the Senate. Durbin, as Democratic whip, has served as the Senate’s No. 2 Democrat since 2004. Now, Democrats will need to reshuffle to fill Durbin’s position.
There are a number of younger Senate Democrats who have been working to make names for themselves this Congress, and its not clear who might jump into that leadership race. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., is currently the No. 3 Senate Democrat, and Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., is the No. 4 Senate Democrat. Either of them could enter the contest.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., praised Durbin in a statement following the announcement.
“Dick Durbin has been more than a colleague — he’s been a trusted partner, one of the most respected voices in the Senate for decades, my dear friend, and, of course, my former roommate,” Schumer said. “His deep commitment to justice, his tireless advocacy for Americans in need, and his wisdom in leadership have left an indelible mark on this institution, the United States, and his beloved Illinois. The Senate — and the country — are better because of his service. To my friend, Dick: Thank you, for everything.”
Durbin has served as the top Democrat, in his capacity as either chairman or ranking member, of the Senate Judiciary Committee since 2021. He helped to confirm 235 federal judges under former President Joe Biden.
Durbin is now the fourth Democrat to announce plans not to run in 2026. Sens. Gary Peters, D-Mich., Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., and Tina Smith, D-Minn., are also retiring. Sen. Michael Bennet is running for Colorado governor despite his term not ending until 2028, and if he wins, he will vacate a fifth Democratic seat.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency has sparked concerns within the intelligence community after it posted information about an agency that oversees U.S. intelligence satellites to its newly launched government website.
The DOGE website, updated earlier this week to include information about the federal workforce across agencies, contained details about the headcount and budget for the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), an intelligence agency responsible for designing and maintaining U.S. intelligence satellites, according to a review by ABC News.
Multiple intelligence community sources told ABC News that this likely represents a significant breach.
John Cohen, an ABC News contributor and former acting undersecretary for intelligence and analysis at the Department of Homeland Security, said that anytime any details about U.S. citizens working for one of the intel agencies is released, it puts their safety in jeopardy.
A former CIA official who served on classification review boards called the incident a “significant” breach, “particularly if it involves the budget and personnel of the NRO,” adding that “it could be even more significant if it involves declassifying sensitive information under executive authority.”
Mick Mulroy, an ABC News national security and defense analyst and a former CIA officer, said “I do not know whether classified information has been publicly disclosed but there are several reasons that the size, budget, and of course names of those in the intelligence community should not be publicly disclosed.”
“Our adversaries want to collect as much information as they can to determine what we are doing, how we are doing, the extent of our investment in intelligence collection and of course the identity of those involved so the can be targeted for intelligence purposes,” Mulroy said.
HuffPost was first to report the information on DOGE’s website.
Following the publication of this report, a Trump administration official told ABC News, “DOGE is sharing OPM data from under the Biden administration. The headcount for this agency has been publicly available on OPM’s website. This is the same intelligence community that wrote in a letter that Hunter Biden’s laptop was Russian disinformation. Their lack of credibility is not up for debate.”
The bottom of the DOGE.GOV page states, “Workforce data excludes Military, Postal Service, White House, intelligence agencies, and others.”
(WASHINGTON) — House Democrats are demanding the White House preserve the independence of the Smithsonian Institution after President Donald Trump signed an executive order in late March that directed federal agencies and the Smithsonian to eliminate what the order calls “anti-American” and “improper” content from the vast network of museums and national parks.
The top Democrat of the House Administration Committee, Rep. Joe Morelle, and other Democrats who have oversight of the Smithsonian Institution sent a letter, first obtained by ABC News, to Vice President JD Vance, who serves as a member of the Smithsonian’s Board of Regents.
“We urge you to reject any effort to effectuate the goals of the Proclamation and to preserve the 175-year tradition of curatorial independence that has come to define the Smithsonian Institution,” the lawmakers wrote, raising concerns over Trump’s order.
The order, entitled “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History,” directs Vance to eliminate what it claims are “improper ideology” from all areas of the institution, which consists of 21 museums, 14 education and research centers and the National Zoo in Washington, D.C.
“Unfortunately, we now stand at the brink of seeing the Smithsonian at its worst: shaped solely by the views and ideology of one individual as a means of expanding his political power,” the letter states.
The letter is the latest effort by Democrats to push back on one of several actions taken by the White House to roll back diversity, equity and inclusion efforts across the federal government.
The order also directs Vance and Secretary of Interior Doug Burgum to restore federal parks, monuments, memorials and statues “that have been improperly removed or changed in the last five years to perpetuate a false revision of history or improperly minimize or disparage certain historical figures or events.”
“If this Proclamation were to be implemented, the Smithsonian’s curatorial independence and excellence would be eliminated, and 175 years of this tradition would end,” the lawmakers warn.
Trump, in the order, singled out the National Museum of African American History and Culture which he said perpetuated “race-centered” and “divisive” ideas.
“This flagrant attempt to erase Black history is unacceptable and must be stopped. The attempt to paper over elements of American history is both cowardly and unpatriotic,” the letter states.
The Smithsonian Institution was first established by Congress with funding from British scientist James Smithson.
(WASHINGTON) — Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy comes to the White House on Friday to ink a deal that would give the U.S. access to his country’s mineral resources — an agreement that President Donald Trump has cast a way to ensure American taxpayers get paid back for supporting Ukraine in its war with Russia.
“We’ll be digging. We’ll be dig, dig, digging. Dig, we must,” Trump said on Thursday, saying the U.S. would be “doing a substantial amount of work” in Ukraine “taking the rare earth, which we need in our country very badly.”
“It’ll be great for Ukraine,” he continued. “It’s like a huge economic development project. So, it’ll be good for both countries.”
Zelenskyy, meanwhile, has spoken about the deal in different terms — describing it as a means to an end: keeping U.S. backing.
If not the full-fledged military security guarantee he wants, Trump administration officials have said a U.S. economic investment on the ground in Ukraine could serve as a kind of barrier to a further Russian invasion.
“I will meet with President Trump,” the Ukrainian leader said on Wednesday. “For me, and for all of us in the world, it is crucial that America’s assistance is not stopped. Strength is essential on the path to peace.”
ABC News spoke to officials and analysts to break down what’s in the deal, and what the agreement could mean for Ukraine’s future and efforts to end the war after three grueling years.
What is — and isn’t — in the deal
Officials familiar with the negotiations say that under the terms of the deal, the U.S. and the Ukraine will work together to unearth deposits of valuable minerals and other natural Ukrainian resources.
Unlike the original proposal, this framework does not call for Kyiv to use the proceeds from the sale of those resources to pay the U.S. $500 billion — which the Trump administration previously characterized as “payback” for the roughly $183 billion spent in response to Russia’s invasion, according to the U.S. special inspector general in charge of overseeing Ukrainian aid.
Instead, the deal aims to create an investment fund for Ukraine’s post-war reconstruction that will be jointly owned by both countries, they say, and that additional negotiations on the control of that fund and its operation will take place will take place after the initial deal is cemented.
Other factors will depend on the free market.
“The profitability of the fund is entirely dependent on the success of new investments in Ukraine’s resources,” said Gracelin Baskaran, the director of the Critical Minerals Security Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and Meredith Schwartz, a research associate at the same program.
“Therefore, the response of private industry is key to the success of the fund and will determine how much value the United States ultimately derives,” they added.
But officials say the Ukrainians also made concessions. Officials say Kyiv initially wanted the terms of the deal to include concrete security guarantees for Ukraine — something the current framework lacks.
“However, the idea is that with joint U.S.-Ukraine investment in the nation’s resources, the United States will continue to have a stake in Ukraine’s security, stability, and lasting peace and therefore be incentivized to uphold and defend Ukrainian security,” Baskaran and Schwartz said.
If it proves successful, Baskaran and Schwartz say the U.S. may boost its mineral security — but that the results could take decades to come to fruition.
“Mining is a long-term effort — so the United States may not yield benefits for another 20 years,” they said.
Trump himself has acknowledged the uncertainty.
“You know, you dig and maybe things aren’t there like you think they’re there,” he said on Thursday.
A different tune from Trump
After repeatedly bashing Zelenskyy in recent days, Trump softened his tone on Thursday.
Asked if he still believed Zelenskyy was a dictator — an assertion he made just over a week ago — Trump answered, “Did I say that? I can’t believe I said that,” before brusquely moving on to the next questioner.
Later in the day, Trump also offered praise for Zelenskyy and Ukrainian fighters’ valor on the battlefield.
“We’ve given him a lot of equipment and a lot of money, but they have fought very bravely. No matter how you figure it, they have really fought,” he said. “Somebody has to use that equipment. And they have been very brave in that sense.”
Ukrainian officials who have been urging Zelenskyy to accept the mineral pact are likely to see this turnaround as proof positive for their main argument — that signing off on Trump’s deal will boost ties between the Trump administration and Kyiv, while drawing out negotiations would further sour the president’s view of Zelenskyy.
But whether any bonhomie will last is unclear.
“Critical mineral resource access is the latest arena for Trump to focus his transactional methods of diplomacy,” Baskaran and Schwartz argue. “But the viability of the deal remains to be seen as tensions continue to rise between the two world leaders.”
Trump is not known for his patience, and some U.S. officials anticipate slow-moving results from the agreement could leave Trump frustrated.
Or, if the two clash during their high-stakes White House meeting, the president could become embittered toward Zelenskyy again even sooner where Trump is likely to spotlight potential benefits the mineral agreement holds for the U.S. and the Ukrainian leader is likely to push for additional American security guarantees.
But the president shared only positive predictions on the eve of the meeting.
“I think we’re going to have a very good meeting,” he said. “We’re going to get along really well. Okay. We have a lot of respect. I have a lot of respect for him.”
John E. Herbst, senior director of the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center and a former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, argues the very fact that the meeting between Zelenskyy and Trump is taking place is a good sign for Ukraine.
“Zelenskyy’s visit highlights how far he has come from two weeks back, when Trump spoke of seeing Putin as many as three times in the near future, or even last week, when senior Russian and US officials were meeting in Riyadh,” he said. “Yet now it is Zelenskyy, not Putin, in the Oval Office.”
The other negotiations
While much of the public focus has shifted toward negotiations over the mineral deal in recent weeks, talks ultimately aimed at ultimately ending the war in Ukraine have quietly continued on a separate track.
On Thursday, American and Russian officials met in Istanbul for more than 6 hours to discuss increasing staff at their respective embassies in Moscow and Washington — a move Secretary of State Marco Rubio previously said was essential for furthering potential areas cooperation between the countries, including resolving the war in Ukraine.
Officials from sides reported a favorable outcome from the meeting, and predict that an larger diplomatic footprint could create momentum for peace talks and a potential summit between Trump and Russian leader Vladimir Putin.
As a chorus of European leaders have tried to encourage Trump to include American security guarantees for Ukraine to enforce a truce with Russia, the president has continued to say he trusts Putin to hold up his end of a deal.
“I’ve known him for a long time now,” Trump said. “I don’t believe he’s going to violate his word. I don’t think he’ll be back. When we make a deal, I think the deal is going to hold.
But ahead of his meeting with the U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer, he added a potentially important caveat.
“You know, look, it’s, trust and verify, let’s call it that,” he said.
Clifford D. May, founder and president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, argues it’s imperative that the president is clear-eyed in his dealings with Putin.
“As President Trump attempts to negotiate a halt to Russia’s war against Ukraine, it’s not unreasonable for him to show respect for Mr. Putin (as he has been) if he believes that will make Mr. Putin more likely to agree to concessions,” he said.
“But it’s imperative that President Trump harbor no illusions about Mr. Putin – about his character, ambitions, ideology, and his abiding hatred for American greatness,” May added.
