Senate advances legislation to withhold pay from senators during government shutdowns
The U.S. Capitol Building dome, on May 12, 2026, in Washington, DC. (Graeme Sloan/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — In an unanimous 99-0 vote, the Senate on Wednesday advanced a resolution to withhold pay from senators during a government shutdown.
Republican Sen. Pete Ricketts did not vote on the resolution, which was introduced by Republican Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana.
The vote was a procedural one. The legislation now moves toward final passage, and is expected to pass with resounding support.
The legislation, which would take effect after the November 2026 election, would instruct the secretary of the Senate to place senators’ paychecks on hold during the duration of any future federal government shutdowns. Those payments would be released to lawmakers only after the government reopens.
While multiple similar House bills have been introduced, it’s unclear if legislation in the lower chamber will pass.
“Take your brain with you, because this is about shared sacrifice. This is about putting our money where our mouth is,” Sen. Kennedy said on the Senate floor ahead of Wednesday’s vote.
Kennedy’s resolution comes after federal workers faced a historic 43-day government shutdown late last year caused by a deadlock between parties over Affordable Care Act subsidies.
During that time, approximately 670,000 federal workers were furloughed, 60,000 workers outside the federal government lost their jobs and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) recipients lost out on benefits all while members of Congress continued to get paid — highlighting the disparity of financial pain endured by members of Congress and the people they serve.
Calls for withholding pay from members of Congress continued to grow this year during the record 75-day partial shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security. Transportation Security Administration agents, Coast Guard members and other department employees went without pay as a stalemate played out on Capitol Hill over immigration enforcement funding and oversight reforms.
Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC) speaks to a crowd during a fundraising event with the South Carolina Democratic Party at the Columbia Museum of Art on February 27, 2026 in Columbia, South Carolina. T (Photo by Sean Rayford/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — Longtime Democratic Rep. Jim Clyburn told ABC News on Thursday that he is running for reelection, not announcing his retirement.
Clyburn, 85, later made the announcement official at South Carolina Democratic Party HQ in Columbia, where he promised to mount a “vigorous campaign” as he pursues an 18th term in the House of Representatives.
Amid speculation that he may opt to retire, the former House majority whip admitted he seriously considered it and consulted with his three daughters and polled constituents. He said the message he received was, “We don’t want you to leave.”
“So, I’m responding to the people down here,” Clyburn said.
After more than 33 years in the House, what is left unfinished for Clyburn to accomplish?
“We exist in pursuit of a more perfect union,” Clyburn said. “There’s nobody here today who thinks that this country is perfect. It is not a perfect country. But I don’t think there’s anybody today who believe that we should give up on that pursuit of perfection, and I’m here today to say I do believe that I’m very well equipped and healthy enough to move into the next term, trying to do the things that are necessary to continue that pursuit of perfection.”
Clyburn’s potential reelection would push his political survival beyond Democratic Reps. Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer, who are retiring at the end of the current term on Jan. 3, 2027.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and House Democrats need a net gain of just three seats to seize the majority in November’s midterm elections.
“He was among those who asked me to stay,” Clyburn said of Jeffries. “He expressed an interest in my being a part of his leadership if he were to take the House back.”
Clyburn helped propel former President Joe Biden to the White House in 2020, throwing his endorsement behind Biden days before the South Carolina primary after three consecutive primary victories by Bernie Sanders as a field of Democrats vied for the party nomination.
Biden awarded Clyburn with the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2024.
“Always grounded in faith, family and service, Jim has guided South Carolina and our country with a steady hand and honest heart for over the last half century,” Biden said. “I would not be standing here as president making these awards were it not for Jim. I mean that sincerely.”
Clyburn on Thursday would not say whether, if he is reelected, it would be his final term.
“This could very well be my last term, and it could very well not be,” Clyburn said. “We’ll just see how things go.”
Clyburn’s announcement comes as an increasing number of members of Congress are retiring, including Pelosi, 85, Hoyer, 86, and Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell, 84.
Clyburn said in a 2021 interview with Axios that there is a path for the next generation and that if they wanted his seat, to “come get it.”
“The path is there for the next generation; I never asked anyone to die for me. I don’t know why people come saying you need to step aside for me. No. If you want my seat, come get it,” Clyburn said at the time.
Still, the U.S. Congress has gotten younger as a whole, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of representatives and senators who took office at the start of the 119th Congress.
The median age of voting members of the House of Representatives is now 57.5 years. That’s down from 57.9 at the start of the 118th Congress (2023-2025), 58.9 in the 117th Congress (2021-2023).
The Senate, following the death or retirement of some of its oldest members, has begun to reverse its aging trend. The new Senate’s median age is 64.7 years, down from 65.3 at the start of the previous Congress.
U.S. President Donald Trump speaks to reporters during a news conference at Trump National Doral Miami on March 9, 2026 in Doral, Florida. (Roberto Schmidt/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump is traveling to Hebron, Kentucky, on Wednesday to deliver another speech focused on economic messaging. But this time, it’s in the district of Rep. Thomas Massie, the six-term Republican that the president is actively working to oust.
Just two months ahead of a contentious Republican primary between Massie and Trump-endorsed former Navy SEAL Ed Gallrein, the president is set to make two stops in the area: at a packaging facility in Hebron, Kentucky, and then at ThermoFisher in Reading, Ohio, where he’ll discuss efforts to lower prescription drug prices.
The visit comes amid an ongoing, bitter feud between Massie and Gallrein — one of the party’s few significant MAGA proxy battles this year. The race is also one of the most expensive House GOP primaries of the 2026 cycle.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said earlier this week that Trump will be joined by Ohio and Kentucky lawmakers “who he greatly admires and respects and supports.” Massie won’t be at any of Wednesday’s events alongside Trump; a Gallrein spokesperson confirmed to ABC News that he will be in attendance for the president’s event.
Massie has long been the subject of Trump’s ire, but it has ramped up this cycle with Massie’s unwavering push for the release of the files about convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein as well as his opposition to significant legislation championed by the president, including his chief domestic policy package.
In October, Trump said Massie needed to be “thrown out of office,” after the congressman objected to a short-term funding bill backed by the president– also saying, “[Massie] SHOULD BE PRIMARIED, and I will lead the charge against him.”
Trump then nudged Gallrein to enter the race, backed him, and the fifth-generation farmer launched his bid that month.
In a social media post on Monday, Gallrein said the “rally will be a huge moment for our campaign and for the people of Northern Kentucky.” Gallrein wrote Monday on X.
In an interview with ABC affiliate WCPO about the president’s visit and his race against Gallrein, Massie said he’s glad Trump is visiting the district and “paying attention to local issues.”
“I suspect he’s also going to try and help my opponent, but you know that’s really all my opponent has going for him. He’s promised to be a rubber stamp when he gets to Washington, D.C., and I don’t think people here want a rubber stamp.”
Massie told WCPO he will not make Trump’s visit due to prior commitments.
Massie also said the president would “discover” support for the positions he champions, including a focus on releasing the Epstein files and staying out of foreign wars.
“What they’ll discover is Trump fans in KY-4 and across the entire commonwealth also support my work on the Epstein files, reigning in spending, ending forever wars, draining the swamp, and food freedom!” Massie said in a social media post on Tuesday regarding the president’s upcoming visit to his district.
Ahead of his visit, Trump attacked Massie on his social media platform, saying, “I predict that ‘Representative’Thomas Massie will go down as the WORST Republican Congressman in the long and fabled history of the United States Congress.”
“Massie, who is running against a great American Patriot in the Kentucky Primary, will hopefully lose BIG,” added Trump, who reiterated his endorsement of Gallrein in another post.
The president’s rhetoric toward Massie is not new — in 2020, Trump called on the GOP to “throw Massie out of Republican party” following the congressman’s opposition to a coronavirus relief bill. Still, Massie won his primary by 62 points. In 2022, Trump endorsed Massie for reelection, calling him a “conservative warrior.” Massie won by nearly 60 points that year.
But with Massie on the outs with Trump once again, Kentucky’s primary election — which will take place on May 19 — is expected to remain contentious.
On Tuesday, Massie attempted to paint his opponent as the “Trump traitor,” claiming Gallrein dropped his Republican affiliation after Trump became the party’s presidential nominee in 2016.
“Woke Eddie Gallrein abandoned President Trump’s Republican party – a complete dereliction of his MAGA duty,” the narrator of a recent Massie ad says.
Gallrein spokeswoman Alexandra Wilkes acknowledged that Gallrein changed his voter registration in the past, but pinned the blame on Massie for this decision.
“Ed briefly changed registration out of frustration with the broken system Congressman Massie created in his district, which hurt the Republican Party, and he is proud to stand with President Trump and true conservative Republicans,” Wilkes said in a statement, slamming Massie for “pretending to be a Trump ally.”
Gallrein is also supported by Kentucky Rep. Andy Barr, who is also running for Senate, to replace outgoing Sen. Mitch McConnell. Barr’s decision to endorse against Massie was significant, given that Massie is a part of his delegation. Trump has not yet endorsed in the Kentucky Senate race, and Barr is among the top three GOP candidates working for his endorsement.
U.S. Supreme Court building on March 31, 2026 in Washington, DC. (Roberto Schmidt/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — For more than a century, an American birth certificate has been a key to unlocking the benefits of American citizenship.
Most parents of newborns on U.S. soil have simply needed proof of birth from a hospital to apply for social security numbers, passports and early life benefits for their children. Into adulthood, the birth certificate has been universally recognized as proof of citizenship for voter registration, employment, home loans and military service.
A landmark case before the Supreme Court on Wednesday will determine whether that longstanding cultural norm and legal precedent will continue, or whether sweeping bureaucratic changes that could impact millions will soon take effect.
President Donald Trump is asking the justices to uphold his Day 1 executive order eliminating birthright citizenship under a novel interpretation of the 14th Amendment and requiring parents to prove their own legal status before citizenship is granted to their children.
All lower courts that have considered the case struck the order down.
The amendment, which was ratified in 1868, says all “persons born or naturalized in the U.S. and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” are citizens. Congress later codified the same language in federal citizenship law in 1940.
“Look at the dates of this long ago legislation – THE EXACT END OF THE CIVIL WAR!” Trump posted on social media Monday. “It is about the BABIES OF SLAVES!”
Trump argues children born to parents who are not American citizens or legal permanent residents were never considered “subject to the jurisdiction” of the U.S. because they still owe political “allegiance” to a foreign nation.
Courts and the government, however, have repeatedly interpreted the 14th Amendment to unambiguously confer citizenship on all children born on U.S. soil, including to babies of unauthorized noncitizens and temporary residents, such as international students, foreign nationals who are in the U.S. on tourist visas and seasonal workers.
“The [14th] Amendment, in clear words and in manifest intent, includes the children born, within the territory of the United States, of all other persons, of whatever race or color, domiciled within the United States,” wrote Justice Horace Gray in an 1898 Supreme Court opinion addressing the status of children born to noncitizens.
Immigrant advocates and civil liberties groups insist Trump’s order is blatantly unconstitutional — contrary to the plain text of the Constitution and history of the citizenship clause — and would unleash “chaos” nationwide.
“The impacts on this country would be catastrophic,” said ACLU attorney Cody Wofsy, who is leading the case against the order.
“Most directly, the children who would be stripped of their citizenship would be … subject to arrest, detention and deportation from the only country they’ve ever known,” Wofsy said.
An estimated 255,000 children born every year on U.S. soil to noncitizen parents could lose legal status under Trump’s order, according to the Migration Policy Institute. Some may have difficulty establishing citizenship in any country, effectively being born as “stateless.”
“Babies [born to parents] from countries like Nepal, Afghanistan, Bhutan, where there is not a clear pathway to citizenship in their home countries,” said Anisa Rahm, legal director of the South Asian American Justice Collaborative. “So therefore, where do they belong?”
While the administration insists the order will only apply to children born after it takes effect, legal scholars have warned that a ruling striking down birthright citizenship could have retroactive consequences.
“The citizenship of other Americans could be called into question,” said Winnie Kao, an attorney with the Asian Law Caucus, one of the groups that brought a class-action suit against the administration over the order.
“Vast swaths of U.S. law would need to be reexamined because they are premised on birthright citizenship,” added Kao. “It will also be a total administrative and bureaucratic nightmare for everyone — even for parents who are U.S. citizens.”
An ABC News review of Trump administration plans for implementing a new citizenship policy across federal agencies suggests a more involved and potentially complicated process for new parents than currently exists, if the executive order takes effect.
The Social Security Administration says birth certificates would no longer be sufficient documentation to obtain a new Social Security Number for a newborn.
“SSA will require evidence that such a person’s mother and/or father is a U.S. citizen or in an eligible immigration status at the time of the person’s birth,” the agency wrote in a July 2025 guidance memo.
Parents would first need to submit their own citizenship documentation by mail, phone or online, the agency said. Alternatively, parents could provide a “self-attestation” of citizenship subject to “state and federal penalties for perjury,” according to the memo.
The State Department says it would adopt similar verification measures for passport applicants.
For children born to lawful but temporary immigrants — who would no longer be eligible for citizenship — the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services says parents would need to register to obtain the same temporary legal status for their kids.
Federally funded benefits for children, like nutrition assistance and health care services, provided by the Department of Health and Human Services would also require extensive documentation by all parents to prove their children were citizens at birth, the agency said in a memo.
During oral arguments last year in a predecessor case involving Trump’s birthright citizenship order, Justice Brett Kavanaugh — often a key vote in hotly contested cases — voiced concern about whether the government would be able to carry out citizenship checks for parents of the more than 3.6 million babies born in the U.S. each year.
“Federal officials will have to figure that out essentially,” U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer told the justice under questioning.
“How?” Kavanaugh responded skeptically.
“So, you can imagine a number of ways –” Sauer began.
“Such as?” Kavanaugh quipped. “For all the newborns? Is that how it’s going to work?”
Sauer replied at the time that the administration did not have all the details worked out because courts had blocked the executive order in full.
Polls show the nation is sharply divided over the issue of American citizenship for newborn children of unauthorized immigrants. Half of adults — 50% — say they should receive U.S. citizenship; 49% say they should not, according to an April 2025 Pew Research Center survey.
