Trump, in historic first, attends Supreme Court arguments on birthright citizenship
US President Donald Trump departs the North Portico of the White House in Washington, DC, US, on Wednesday, April 1, 2026. (Shawn Thew/EPA/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump attended oral arguments at the Supreme Court on Wednesday, a historic first for a sitting president, as the justices consider his executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship.
“I’m going,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Tuesday.
No cameras are allowed inside the courtroom. Trump’s motorcade arrived outside the building on Wednesday morning shortly before arguments began. His motorcade later departed the court after Solicitor General John Sauer’s presentation on behalf of the government.
Trump previously floated attending arguments last year when the court took up his global tariff policy, but ultimately he did not attend.
Trump has repeatedly attacked the Supreme Court in the wake of the ruling invalidating most of his tariffs, including two justices he appointed, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett.
“I love a few of them, I don’t like some others,” Trump said on Tuesday when asked which justices he would be listening for most closely.
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.
Lower courts have struck down Trump’s executive order.
American Civil Liberties Union Legal Director Cecillia Wang argued on behalf of the class of plaintiffs. Wang herself is a birthright citizen, born in Oregon to Taiwanese parents.
ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero addressed Trump’s attendance, saying he will “watch the ACLU school him in the meaning of the Constitution and birthright citizenship.”
“Any effort to distract from the gravity and importance of this case will not succeed. The Supreme Court is up to the task of interpreting and defending the Constitution even under the glare of a sitting president a couple dozen feet away from them,” he said.
Construction on the Marriner S. Eccles Federal Reserve building in Washington, DC, US, on Monday, Jan. 12, 2026. (Pete Kiehart/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — Prosecutors from the U.S. attorneys office in Washington were turned away Tuesday after they made an unannounced visit to the Federal Reserve, where they allegedly requested a tour of renovations that have attracted scrutiny from the Trump administration, sources familiar with the matter confirmed to ABC News.
The unusual visit prompted immediate backlash from an attorney for Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, who wrote a letter to D.C. U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s office, citing the recent ruling from a federal judge that blocked subpoenas to the bank after determining DOJ’s criminal probe was driven by President Donald Trump’s political animus towards Powell.
Robert Hur, who formerly served as special counsel who investigated former President Joe Biden’s handling of classified documents and now represents Powell, warned DOJ in the letter reviewed by ABC News that future efforts to initiate contact with Fed representatives should be negotiated through legal counsel.
“As you know, Chief Judge [James] Boasberg has concluded that your interest in the Federal Reserve’s renovation project was pretextual. Should you wish to challenge that finding, the courts provide an avenue for you; it is not appropriate for you to try to circumvent it,” Hur said. “I ask that you commit not to seek to communicate with my client outside the presence of counsel.”
According to Hur’s letter, attorneys from Pirro’s office, Carlton Davis and Steven Vandervelden, and a case agent showed up at the Fed’s headquarters, stating they wished to “check on progress” and that they asked for a “tour.”
A source said they were then told they could not access the site without preauthorized clearance from Fed management and were given the contact information for the Fed’s legal counsel, after which the three left the area.
“Any construction project that has cost overruns of almost 80% over the original construction budget deserves some serious review,” Pirro said in a statement on X after the prosecutors were turned away. “And these people are in charge of monetary policy in the United States?”
Pirro publicly vented her frustrations about Boasberg’s ruling that effectively blocked her office from investigating Powell, which she has vowed to continue appealing despite threats from Republican Sen. Thom Tillis to block any confirmation of Powell’s replacement until the criminal probe is resolved.
The probe centered on Powell’s testimony to Congress last year about cost overruns in a multibillion-dollar office renovation project.
Trump on Wednesday again threatened to fire Powell if he does not step down when his term as chair ends May 15.
“I’ll have to fire him, OK, if he’s not leaving on time — I’ve held back firing him. I’ve wanted to fire him, but I hate to be controversial, you know, I want to be uncontroversial,” Trump said in an interview with Fox Business’ Maria Bartiromo.
Legal experts have questioned if Trump has the authority to fire Powell. His attempt to fire Fed Governor Lisa Cook last year is currently awaiting a decision at the Supreme Court.
The confrontational visit also comes as Pirro’s name has repeatedly been floated as a potential permanent replacement for Pam Bondi as the next attorney general.
Powell rebuked the investigation in a video message in January as a politically motivated effort to influence the Fed’s interest rate policy.
Pirro, at a press conference in March, denied that politics played any role in her probe of Powell and the focus was whether public money has been wasted as a result of the Fed’s renovations, and potential false statements to Congress by Powell about the operations.
The US Treasury building in Washington, DC, US, on Tuesday, June 17, 2025. (Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — Wednesday is Tax Day, the last day of this year’s tax season, and the average refund for filers is up 11% compared to last year’s filing season, according to new Treasury Department data.
The average refund this filing season is “over $3,400,” the Treasury Department data said.
The data, which is as of Tuesday, also showed that “over 53 million filers claimed at least one of President Trump’s signature new tax cuts,” which includes provisions from Trump’s sweeping legislation that was passed last year.
Treasury has also announced that more than 5 million filers have opened so-called Trump Accounts for children who were eligible under the law.
“Treasury and the IRS have worked tirelessly to ensure our tax system works for the people it is meant to serve,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a press release on Wednesday. “From the shop floor to the kitchen table, taxpayers are feeling the difference of the largest tax cuts in our nation’s history, and millions of Americans are keeping more of what they earn and seeing their paychecks go further than ever before.”
Over 25 million filers have claimed No Tax on Overtime, with an average deduction of over $3,100, the department’s data noted, while more than 30 million seniors have claimed the Enhanced Deduction for Seniors, with an average deduction of over $7,500.
The data also showed that more than 105 million filers have claimed the permanently doubled standard deduction — the specific dollar amount that reduces the amount of income on which people are taxed.
A U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) sign stands at the agency’s headquarters in Washington, D.C., U.S., on Thursday, Dec. 11, 2014. Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg via Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — The Senate, now facing an impasse in negotiations, did not cast votes on a government funding deal on Thursday, sending the government ever closer to a partial shutdown with a little more than 24 hours until funding runs out.
Senate Democrats announced earlier Thursday they had struck an agreement with the White House to move forward with a plan that would see the Department of Homeland Security funding bill separated from a package of five other bills. Programs funded by the five-bill package would be funded until the end of September. DHS would be funded for two additional weeks to allow lawmakers to negotiate on other provisions in the package.
The Senate must get unanimous agreement to move forward with this plan if it wants to hold votes before Friday night’s deadline. As it stood Thursday night, there seemed to be objections by senators on both sides of the aisle gumming up the works.
“Tomorrow’s another day, and hopefully people will be in a spirit to try and get this done tomorrow,” Majority Leader John Thune said as he was leaving the Capitol late Thursday.
If Senators can’t win over the objectors by Friday, they’ll force the government into a partial shutdown. The Senate will reconvene at 11 a.m. Friday to see if they can reach an agreement. Any agreement they do reach would still need to be approved by the House, so at least a brief partial shutdown is, at this stage, highly likely.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., is the Senate’s most vocal objector to the deal. He stormed into Republican Leader John Thune’s office earlier tonight calling the agreement stuck between Democrats and the White House a “bad deal” and telling reporters he was objecting to its advancement.
Graham called the treatment of ICE officers “unconscionable” as he was asked about his objections to proceeding.
“From a Republican point of view, the cops need us right now. They are being demonized. They’re being spat upon. They can’t sleep at night,” Graham said. “Are they right to want to change some ICE procedures? Absolutely. But I’m not going to lead this debate for two weeks before I can explain to the American people what I think the problem is. The problem is, structurally, for four years, the country was ruined.”
Graham also seems to be opposed to the deal because it would strip a controversial provision, passed in a stopgap funding bill earlier this year, that allows senators to file lawsuits if their phone records are accessed without notice. Graham was one of seven Republican senators whose phone toll data were accessed by Special Counsel Jack Smith during his investigation into the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.
“I am not going to ignore what happened,” Graham said. “If you were abused, your phone records were illegally seized, you should have your day in court.
It seems there may be other senators who have separate challenges with the funding bill plan as well, but it’s not yet clear who those senators are.
Minority Leader Chuck Schumer placed blame on Republicans for the stall in votes tonight.
“Republicans need to get their act together,” he said as he left the Capitol.
But when pushed on whether any Democrats had outstanding objections to the bill that might stall things, Schumer didn’t give a clear answer.
Thune said there remains “snags on both sides” stopping the bill from advancing but wouldn’t give details about Democratic objections.
“They’ve got a couple issues on their side they’ve got to clear them up, we’ve got some things we’ve got to work on. But hopefully by sometime tomorrow we’ll be in a better spot,” Thune said.
It is likely that even if the Senate passes the bills, there will still be a short partial shutdown — the bills would need to go back to the House for consideration. It seems unlikely the House, which is in recess until Monday, could pass any of these bills before Friday night’s funding deadline.
Earlier Thursday, House Speaker Mike Johnson told ABC News’ Selina Wang that bringing the House back before Monday “may not be possible.”
“So, we have got some logistical challenges, but we’ll do it as quickly as we can and get everybody back,” Johnson said at the premiere of the “Melania” film. “And if there is a short-term shutdown, I think we’ll get it reopened quickly.”
Asked earlier Thursday if he was on board with the deal struck by Democrats in the Senate, Johnson said he had not yet seen details of the bill. But when asked if he supports Democrats’ demands to reign in federal agents — including prohibiting face masks and requiring body cameras — Johnson said “No.”
Democrats called to separate the DHS funding following the deaths of Renee Good, a mother of three who was fatally shot by an immigration enforcement officer in Minneapolis earlier this month, and became more urgent after the death of Alex Pretti, an ICU nurse, who was killed in a shooting involving federal law enforcement over the weekend.
After Democratic urging, a critical mass of Republicans seemed prepared Thursday afternoon to support an agreement.
Earlier Thursday, Senate Democrats voted unanimously to block the package of six funding bills, with it failing to advance by a vote of 45-55. It would have needed at least 60 votes to proceed. Multiple Republicans also cast votes against the package.
Coming into the negotiations, Senate Democrats laid out a list of additional demands including: ending roving patrols, ensuring federal agents are held to the same use of force policies that apply to state and local law enforcement, preventing agents from wearing masks and requiring body cameras.
On Thursday, President Donald Trump struck an optimistic tone about averting a shutdown.
“Hopefully we won’t have a shutdown and we’re working on that right now. I think we’re getting close,” Trump said during his Cabinet meeting. “The Democrats, I don’t believe want to see it either, so we’ll work in a very bipartisan way.”
