Trump fires DHS secretary Kristi Noem, replaces her with Sen. Markwayne Mullin
Sen. Markwayne Mullin speaks during a Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee hearing on Capitol Hill on February 25, 2026 in Washington. (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump on Thursday said Republican Sen. Markwayne Mullin will replace Kristi Noem as Department of Homeland Security secretary.
Trump made the announcement on social media Thursday afternoon saying he was “pleased to announce that the Highly Respected United States Senator from the Great State of Oklahoma, Markwayne Mullin, will become the United States Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS), effective March 31, 2026.”
“The current Secretary, Kristi Noem, who has served us well, and has had numerous and spectacular results (especially on the Border!), will be moving to be Special Envoy for The Shield of the Americas, our new Security Initiative in the Western Hemisphere we are announcing on Saturday in Doral, Florida. I thank Kristi for her service at ‘Homeland,'” Trump said in the post.
The news that the Oklahoma senator would take over Noem’s job came after several sources told ABC News that Trump had called Republicans and top allies asking if he should fire her.
The president had privately expressed deep frustration over Noem’s testimony during the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Tuesday, those sources with direct knowledge of the conversations said.
The sources said the president was upset with a particular moment during the hearing when Republican Sen. John Kennedy questioned Noem about a taxpayer-funded $220 million ad campaign. Noem repeatedly suggested the president was aware of the campaign and signed off on it.
A senior administration officials tells ABC News that the president did not sign off on a $220 million ad campaign.
“Absolutely not,” the senior administration official said.
Kennedy told reporters Thursday that Trump even called him about it.
“I’m not going to speak for him. You folks know him. You can ask him yourselves, but his, I want to put it this way, his recollection and her recollection are different,” Kennedy said.
Tuesday’s hearing was just the latest in several incidents that have sparked concern among Trump administration officials and some Republicans on Capitol Hill, sources tell ABC News.
Just days ago, Noem and her top adviser Corey Lewandowski made the decision to temporarily suspend TSA Precheck amid the partial government shutdown — which later had to be reversed after the White House stepped in, according to sources.
Noem has faced criticism in recent weeks over her handling of Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations in Minneapolis after the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti by federal law enforcement. She was removed from leading operations in the state following the scrutiny, and Border Czar Tom Homan was sent in to take over.
During a Cabinet meeting in January, the president did not call on Noem to speak.
Rep. Jeff Hurd arrives for the House Republican Conference caucus meeting at the Capitol, May 6, 2025. (Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump made a stunning reversal Friday by again backing a Colorado House Republican for reelection a month after he publicly scorned him and endorsed his opponent.
In a lengthy social media post, Trump said he would no longer back Hope Scheppelman’s bid in the Republican primary for Rep. Jeff Hurd’s seat in Colorado’s 3rd Congressional District, after she accepted an offer to join his administration.
“Together with them, we decided that Congressman Jeff Hurd, of Colorado’s 3rd Congressional District, should in no way, shape, or form, be impeded from winning the District in that the Democrat alternative is a DISASTER for our Country,” he said in his social media post.
In February, Trump withdrew his endorsement of Hurd, lashing out against him in a social media post after he voted to rebuke the president’s tariffs on Canada.
“Hurd is one of a small number of Legislators who have let me and our Country down,” Trump said in the February social media post.
In Friday’s announcement, the president changed his mind.
“Every true MAGA supporter and Republican, if they truly care about saving our Country, will do everything in their power to unify together, and defeat the Crazed Radical Left Democrats this November,” he said.
The district has been red since 2011, and has traditionally been seen as a strong Republican area.
Trump said he spoke with Scheppelman, a Navy veteran and nurse, and her husband, about his decision and offered both of them positions in his administration in a “capacity to be determined.”
“Hope and Steven are wonderful and patriotic Veterans of our U.S. Navy, and loyal supporters of our Historic MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN Movement,” Trump said in the post.
Hurd thanked Trump for the endorsement in an X post Friday.
“The President and I share the same goals: securing the border, American energy dominance, and helping working families,” he said.
Scheppelman, whose social media pages feature a picture of her and Trump posing with thumbs-up signs, said in a statement on X that she would suspend her campaign given Trump’s request.
She said Hurd “now has the opportunity to correct his naive voting record and support President Trump, and our slim Republican majority in the U.S. House, in our shared battle to save the country we love.”
“If he does not, I will run again in 2028 and defeat [Hurd] in order to give the citizens of Colorado’s 3rd district, and all of America, the representation we deserve,” Scheppelman added.
Trump’s involvement a welcome development for House Republicans and Speaker Mike Johnson protecting a historically small majority this fall.
By backing Hurd, the GOP avoids another contentious primary in a long red district, as the incumbent is running unopposed.
Alex Kelloff, a Democratic candidate running for the House seat, responded to the president’s announcement Friday on X.
“Trump is worried we’re going to win this seat, a testament to all the work our campaign has been doing the last 11 months,” he said.
The Colorado primary is set for June 30.
-ABC News’ Benjamin Siegel contributed to this report.
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick testifies before the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, February 10, 2026. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick on Tuesday was grilled on Capitol Hill about his past association with Jeffrey Epstein, following revelations that the two men remained in contact years after Lutnick suggested he had distanced himself from the convicted sex offender.
Lutnick strongly denied any wrongdoing, but one Democrat said he had “totally misrepresented” the extent of their relationship “to the Congress, to the American people and to the survivors of his despicable criminal and predatory acts.”
Appearing before a Senate Appropriations subcommittee, Lutnick was asked repeatedly about his correspondence with Epstein detailed in files recently released by the Justice Department, and President Donald Trump’s commerce secretary revealed he visited Epstein’s Caribbean island in 2012 with his family and others.
“I did have lunch with him, as I was on a boat going across on a family vacation. My wife was with me, as were my four children and nannies,” Lutnick testified under questioning by Democratic Sen. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland.
Lutnick told Van Hollen that another couple and their children were with them during the visit.
“We had lunch on the island, that is true, for an hour, and we left with all of my children, with my nannies and my wife all together,” he said.
When asked if he saw anything inappropriate during his visit, Lutnick responded, “The only thing I saw with my wife and my children and the other couple and their children was staff who worked for Mr. Epstein on that island.”
Lutnick, who lived next door to Epstein for over a decade, previously suggested he had distanced himself from Epstein back in the mid-2000s prior to Epstein’s conviction in 2008.
“So, I was never in the room with him socially, for business or even philanthropy. If that guy was there, I wasn’t going because he’s gross,” Lutnick said on the “Pod Force One” podcast back in October.
“That’s my story. A one and absolutely done,” Lutnick said.
A spokesperson for the Department of Commerce told ABC News on Monday, “Mr. and Mrs. Lutnick met Jeffrey Epstein in 2005 and had very limited interactions with him over the next 14 years.”
However, the documents released over a week ago showed one email from Epstein’s schedule for May 1, 2011, showing plans for drinks with Lutnick.
Legal documents also showed both Lutnick and Epstein invested in the same business in 2012.
Lutnick testified that he did not have lunch with Epstein in 2011. He also testified that he had no idea about an email from the documents that said Epstein had expressed interest in meeting his nanny.
“I had no idea what that was about. Had nothing to do with me,” he testified.
Van Hollen questioned why Lutnick would make the visit even though Epstein had already been convicted.
“You made a very big point of saying that you sensed that this was a bad person in 2005 and then, of course, in 2008, he was convicted of soliciting prostitution of a minor and yet, you went and had this trip and other interactions,” the senator said.
Lutnick told the committee that he had “nothing to hide, absolutely nothing,” and would speak to the committee about sharing his own records as they relate to Jeffrey Epstein.
“I have done absolutely nothing wrong,” he testified.
Democratic Sen. Chris Coons also criticized Lutnick.
“It troubles me that you took your family to lunch on his island, that you had appointments with him. Please disclose everything. Put this to rest, because this is an issue of grave concern to my constituents,” Coons told Lutnick. “President Trump ran on releasing the Epstein files.”
Lutnick again maintained he had limited interactions with Epstein.
“I did not have anything you could call a relationship, anything you could call an acquaintance,” he told Coons
The White House has defended Lutnick, following the release of the new Epstein files.
“The entire Trump administration, including Secretary Lutnick and the Department of Commerce, remains focused on delivering for the American people,” White House spokesman Kush Desai said in a statement Monday.
Several Democratic lawmakers, however, have called on Lutnick to resign because of his appearance in the files.
“It’s now clear that Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick has been lying about his relationship with Epstein. He said he had no interactions with Epstein after 2005, yet we now know they were in business together. Lutnick must resign or be fired,” Rep. Robert Garcia, the ranking Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, said in an X post Sunday.
Republican Rep. Thomas Massie also called for Lutnick to resign.
“So, he’s got a lot to answer for. But really, he should make life easier on the president, frankly, and just resign,” Massie told CNN Sunday.
Lutnick did not respond to questions from ABC News prior to the hearing about those calls for him to step down.
House Speaker Mike Johnson voiced confidence in Lutnick, telling reporters Tuesday that bipartisan calls for his resignation are “absurd.”
“Howard Lutnick is a great commerce secretary who’s done an extraordinary job for the country, and Thomas Massie should stop playing political games,” he said.
Reporters pressed the speaker on whether he harbors any concerns about Lutnick given his ties to Epstein.
“I don’t know anything about that. I know Howard as an individual, and I trust his word on it,” Johnson said.
An excavator works to clear rubble after the East Wing of the White House was demolished, Oct. 23, 2025. (Eric Lee/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — The federal judge presiding over a challenge to the White House ballroom project signaled deep skepticism of the Trump administration’s argument that the president has the legal authority to undertake the East Wing renovations and to fund them with private donations.
In a hearing on Thursday, U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon pressed an administration lawyer on both of those issues — as he questioned whether the president has the power to tear down part of what he called “an icon that’s a national institution,” and described the intent to fund it with private gifts as a “Rube Goldberg contraption” that would evade congressional oversight.
The National Trust for Historic Preservation filed a lawsuit last month seeking to stop the ballroom construction until the project completes the federal review process standard for federal building projects and the administration seeks public comment on the proposed changes.
The National Trust, the privately funded nonprofit designated by Congress to protect historic sites, was seeking a preliminary injunction.
At the end of the hour-long hearing Thursday, Judge Leon said he will likely not issue a decision this month, but “hopefully” in February. He said he expects the losing side to appeal.
In a statement provided to ABC News, White House spokesman Davis Ingle said: “President Trump is working 24/7 to Make America Great Again, including his historic beautification of the White House, at no taxpayer expense. These long-needed upgrades will benefit generations of future presidents and American visitors to the People’s House.”
The size and cost of the project have increased since first being unveiled. In November, Trump said the project would cost $400 million, after an initial estimate of $200 million. The White House has said the project will be funded by private donations.
Judge Leon, a George W. Bush appointee, said the Trump administration appears to be making an “end run” around congressional oversight with the president’s plan to privately raise $400 million for the ballroom project, and he admonished the Justice Department’s lawyer to “be serious” in justifying a legal rationale for it.
While the case presents a series of complicated and overlapping legal issues, the judge spent much of the hearing focused on just two federal statutes — one, which says that no “building or structure” can be built on any federal public grounds in the District of Columbia “without express authority of Congress,” and another that calls for yearly appropriations for the “maintenance, repair, alteration, refurnishing [and] improvement” of the White House.
Leon noted that Republicans control both houses of Congress, and that the president could have gone to lawmakers to seek approval for the demolition and rebuild. He also suggested the $2.5 million Congress recently appropriated for White House maintenance was for “very small-size projects,” not a ballroom.
Justice Department lawyer Yaakov Roth responded that Trump didn’t want $400 million in taxpayer money to be used for the project, when he could solicit gifts to the National Park Service to fund it instead. Roth also noted that Congress was never asked in Gerald Ford’s era to approve the building of a swimming pool, or a tennis pavilion during Trump’s first term.
“[Your argument for using NPS’s gift authority] on an icon that’s a national treasure is, what? The ’77 Gerald Ford swimming pool?” Leon asked. “You compare that to ripping down the East Wing? C’mon! Be serious.”
Leon said he saw “no basis” in the legislative history of the park service’s gift authority that would allow Trump to use it to raise $400 million to build a new White House ballroom. “None,” Leon said. “Zero.”
Arguing for the National Trust, attorney Tad Heuer described the president as a “temporary tenant of the White House, not the landlord.” Leon suggested “steward” might be a more fitting term.
“He is not the owner,” Heuer said.
As Roth took the podium to begin his argument on behalf of the administration, he attempted to convince the judge that the National Trust has no standing to sue. Leon abruptly cut him off.
“I’m very comfortable with standing in this case,” Leon said. “Sorry to disappoint you. You’ll get your chance at the Court of Appeals.”
Roth warned the judge that an order halting construction at this stage could expose the existing White House structure to damage and potentially lead to security concerns, since it’s widely believed that a replacement for a previously-existing underground bunker is part of the project. The National Trust has said it would not object to continued construction on the security portion of the work.
“It can’t be divided out that way,” Roth said of the security-related construction, “unless we want the court to be the project manager on site.”
Leon declined to issue an order from the bench. He said the coming winter storm made it unlikely he would issue a ruling on the National Trust’s motion for a preliminary injunction before the end of this month.
ABC News’ Michelle Stoddard contributed to this report.
Editor’s Note: An earlier version of this story misidentified an attorney for the National Trust for Historic Preservation. The story has been corrected and updated.
