Trump’s attempt to remake the Kennedy Center faces key legal test
Exterior of the Kennedy Center on the Potomac River, Washington, D.C., undated. (Photo by Hulton Archive/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump’s attempt to remake the Kennedy Center faces a critical legal test on Tuesday morning.
A federal Judge in Washington, D.C., is set to hear arguments about an attempt by Rep. Joyce Beatty, D-Ohio, to block the renaming, planned closure and renovation of the performing arts center.
Beatty, an ex officio trustee of the Kennedy Center, initially brought her lawsuit last year to challenge its renaming to the Trump-Kennedy Center, an action she described as “more reminiscent of authoritarian regimes than the American republic.”
“This is a flagrant violation of the rule of law, and it flies in the face of our constitutional order. Congress intended the Center to be a living memorial to President Kennedy—and a crown jewel of the arts for all Americans, irrespective of party,” her lawsuit said.
In the months since her lawsuit was filed, the board of the Kennedy Center – handpicked by Trump, who serves as the chairman of the board – voted to shutter the famed institution for a two-year renovation project.
Beatty’s lawsuit has grown to cover both the renaming and the closure of the center, arguing the moves were unlawful and violated the duties of the organization’s board.
“Turning the Kennedy Center into a lifeless husk for two years would also constitute a fundamental breach of Defendants’ most basic fiduciary obligations as trustees,” lawyers for Beatty argued in a court filing.
Lawyers for the Trump administration pushed back on the lawsuit and argued that the renovation is in the best interest of the Kennedy Center.
“Renewal will affirmatively fulfill the Board’s responsibilities to repair and improve the Center in a manner consistent with ‘high quality operations’ while minimizing costs to taxpayers and reducing safety risks that result from conducting renovations during public operations,” lawyers with the Department of Justice argued.
Judge Christopher Cooper handed Beatty a win last month when he ruled that she is entitled to a “meaningful opportunity to provide input” and should not be “categorically barred” from speaking during board meetings. However, Judge Cooper stopped short of ruling on the weightier questions of Beatty’s ability to vote during board meetings or the legality of the changes to the Kennedy Center.
President Donald Trump pauses as he finishes speaking about the Iran war from the Cross Hall of the White House on Wednesday, April 1, 2026, in Washington. (Alex Brandon-Pool/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — The White House, in their budget request for the 2027 fiscal year, is asking Congress to approve roughly $1.5 trillion for defense — a record-breaking military spending request as the U.S. remains in its fifth week of war with Iran.
That is a $445 billion, or a 42% increase from the 2026 total level, according to the White House. Non-defense spending is reduced by $73 billion, or 10%, according to the budget released by the White House on Friday.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, accompanied by U.S. President Donald Trump (R), and his son X Musk, speaks during an executive order signing in the Oval Office at the White House on February 11, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — One year after Elon Musk began an unprecedented attempt to eliminate swaths of the federal government, newly released deposition videos are providing a never-before-seen look at two of the people responsible for the largest mass termination of federal grants in the National Endowment for the Humanities’ history.
According to the depositions and other materials released as part of a civil lawsuit related to the funding cuts, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) relied on ChatGPT to identify more than $100 million in grants related to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) that were later cancelled.
When President Donald Trump returned to office last January, he empowered Musk to slash federal spending as a lead adviser in the newly created DOGE. Within days, all agencies were directed to put DEI staff on leave and related programs were shuttered.
In lengthy depositions, two DOGE employees — Justin Fox and Nate Cavanaugh — defended the effort to cut “useless agencies” as part of DOGE’s attempt to reduce the federal deficit.
“You don’t regret that people might have lost important income … to support their lives?” an attorney asked Cavanaugh about the grant cancellations.
“No. I think it was more important to reduce the federal deficit from $2 trillion to close to zero,” Cavanaugh said.
“Did you reduce the federal deficit?” the attorney asked.
“No, we didn’t,” Cavanaugh said.
With backgrounds in tech and finance, neither man worked in government prior to joining DOGE last year. Cavanaugh said they originally determined which grants could be cut based on if they included certain words — like “DEI, DEIA, Equity, Inclusion, BIPAC, LGBTQ” — though the final decision about cuts was up to the head of individual agencies.
“Do you think it’s inappropriate in any way that someone in their 20s with no experience with grants for the federal government was making personal judgment calls about what grants to cancel?” an attorney asked.
“Um, no. I don’t think it’s inappropriate,” Cavanaugh said, arguing that he did not need formal education or experience to make informed judgments.
“So presumably you read some of these books that would have informed you on how to cancel a grant based on DEI,” the attorney asked.
“Um, I did not read a book, um, on how to discern whether a grant includes DEI or not. I read the actual description of the actual grant,” Cavanaugh said.
Fox said they instead turned to OpenAI’s ChatGPT to help sift through the thousands of grants awarded by the National Endowment for the Humanities.
According to court filings, the men prompted ChatGPT by asking, “From the perspective of someone looking to identify DEI grants, does this involve DEI? Respond factually in less than 120 characters.· Begin with ‘Yes.’ o. ‘No.’ followed by a brief explanation.· Do not use ‘this initiative’ or ‘this description’ in your response.”
Fox was repeatedly pressed by attorneys to explain certain funding decisions, such as defunding a language center — described as a “wasteful, noncritical spend” — or projects related to Black history and civil rights.
“Why is a documentary about Holocaust survivors DEI?” an attorney asked.
“It’s a gender-based story that’s inherently discriminatory to focus on this specific group,” Fox said.
According to the depositions and legal documents, the men did not provide a clear definition for DEI or take additional steps to ensure the decisions were not discriminatory — arguing it was not necessary because AI software was not the final decision-maker.
“Did you do anything to ensure that ChatGPT’s perception of DEI as applied here wouldn’t discriminate on the basis of sex?” an attorney asked, prompting another objection.
“It didn’t matter,” Fox said.
DOGE’s efforts in multiple federal agencies and departments last year faced opposition and lawsuits, with critics raising concerns about the group’s effectiveness and its access to sensitive data.
Both Fox and Cavanaugh defended the funding decisions, arguing the cuts were necessary to reduce the deficit, though they never achieved their goals.
“Did you ever find it problematic that you were, alongside Nate, short-listing for termination projects that had hits on words like Black, homosexual, LGBTQ+?” an attorney asked, prompting an objection and follow up question.
“We were identifying wasteful spend in the government based on administration direction. That was the whole reason we were there, was to find savings,” Fox said, though he acknowledged the deficit was never reduced.
Their work cutting grants from the National Endowment for the Humanities was memorialized in a social media post by DOGE, which vowed that any future grants would be “merit-based and awarded to non-DEI, pro-America causes.”
According to the depositions, some of the saved funds were spent on the National Garden of American Heroes — a sculpture garden to commemorate the country’s 250th anniversary.
In this June 3, 2025, file photo, Karine Jean-Pierre speaks at an event at 92NY in New York. (John Lamparski/Getty Images, FILE)
(WASHINGTON) — With a polarized political climate approaching the high-stakes 2026 midterm elections, more Americans are identifying as independents than ever before, according to a Gallup poll conducted throughout 2025.
A record-high 45% of Americans called themselves political independents in 2025. The figure is a record since Gallup started measuring in 1988 — with the previous high for independents at 43% in 2014, 2023 and 2024.
Gallup found that an equal share of Americans identified as Republicans and Democrats — 27% each.
These findings come as the midterm elections approach in November and several tight races are expected as Republicans in the House try to maintain their slim majority so they can work to push President Donald Trump’s agenda. Both Republicans and Democrats will have to appeal to independents to win any tight races nationwide.
Thomas Nickel, an 85-year-old who lives in California, told ABC News that he has been independent for several years after leaving the Democratic Party. Nickel left his former party because he said he believes Democrats have not pushed hard enough for issues that are “necessary” — specifically mentioning health care coverage. He said universal health coverage is a priority for him, which he said he believes neither party has focused on.
Trump, who has been a vocal critic of President Barack Obama’s Affordable Care Act, unveiled his new health care proposal earlier this month, which presents a proposal to shift government insurance subsidies directly to consumers through health savings accounts and take advantage of his “most favored nation” drug price initiative. However, Trump’s proposal has left experts unsure on how impactful these ideas could be.
When asked about his thoughts on the president’s recent health care proposal, Nickel called it “ridiculous,” and added that an average person won’t be able to afford to pay for their own insurance with money they would receive directly. When asked what he would like to see Democrats do, Nickel noted that the ACA is “a step in the right direction,” but that “there’s going to be 25% of people that can’t even afford the health care premiums for the Medicare assistance.”
A Louisiana resident who did not want to disclose his name told ABC News that he is an independent because of how “divisive” politics have become. He said he remains a registered Republican so that he can vote in Republican primaries. Some states hold closed primaries where only voters registered with a certain party can vote in that party’s primary; other states hold open primaries where voters of any affiliation can vote in the primary of any party.
“I think, in recent years, especially the last decade or so, things have gotten so divisive that it feels like the minority on both sides speak for the majority,” he said, adding that he believes both parties “had alienated their voter base by being so polarizing.” He cited the Trump administration’s push to acquire Greenland as “a game of Risk,” but didn’t give specifics on Democrats’ actions he found polarizing.
Zach Servis — a 27-year-old independent who lost his bid for mayor for Jackson, Mississippi, last year — also said that the political climate is “way too polarized and hateful.”
Servis said he left the Republican Party around 2020 during the height of COVID after recognizing what he described as “hypocrisy” of his former party. He pointed to Republicans not supporting social programs such as the ACA, but willingness to help other countries — something he said is not in line with Trump’s “America First” slogan.
Looking ahead to this year’s midterm elections, Servis said he believes that independent voters have enough “power to shift which side wins.”
“I think that independent politics have an opportunity to shape this midterm where some of these parties are going to have to shift a little bit in how they win these voters — and if they’re not willing to come a little more to the middle or reach across the aisle, they’re going to risk people crossing the aisle entirely and voting even for a party they don’t believe in because at least that person’s willing to listen,” Servis said.
Generational shifts in political affiliations
The increase in the share of independents is partly attributable to a larger percentage of younger generations of Americans remaining independent as they age — compared to older generations who are less likely to remain unaffiliated, according to Gallup.
Generation Z, born between 1997 and 2007, has the highest percentage of independents, with 56% identifying as independent, Gallup found.
Gen Z is also less likely to identify as Republican compared to older generations, with 17% identifying as Republican compared to 37% of the Silent Generation (born before 1946).
Gallup found 27% of Gen Z identifying as Democrats compared to 32% of the Silent Generation.
Karine Jean-Pierre, who became an independent after serving in the Biden administration as White House press secretary, told ABC News that she believes the growing percentage of independents is not “temporary” and will continue to reshape the electorate in this 2026 election year.
“I do think there’s power amongst independents. The thing that is changing the electorate is changing in the sense of that you’re seeing more and more independents,” Jean-Pierre told ABC News.
Jean-Pierre also noted that younger generations may be reluctant to join a political party as a way to “express moral concern” over U.S. involvement in global issues.
She also noted that young independents deserve a seat at the table as the midterms approach.
“I don’t think independents, especially young independents, are disengaged,” Jean-Pierre said. “I think what they’re doing is they’re growing numbers — put pressure on both political parties to earn support with real policy results, rather than just assuming loyalty based on branding or identity.”
The Gallup poll was conducted throughout 2025 among 13,454 U.S. adults nationwide and has a margin of error of +/- 1 percentage point.
