Latest news with #TrumpAgenda
CNN
3 hours ago
- Business
- CNN
Senate barrels toward weekend vote on Trump agenda as GOP support still in limbo
President Donald Trump's push to pass his massive agenda in the Senate is hanging by thread as GOP leaders barrel toward a critical vote this weekend that, as of Friday night, is still short of the support to pass. Just hours after Senate Majority Leader John Thune informed senators they would take a critical first vote on Saturday, a key GOP centrist senator warned he would vote against proceeding to the package unless there are major changes – and several other holdouts are uncertain on how they'll land. That warning shot came from Sen. Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican who is up for reelection next November and has been one of the most vocal critics of the Medicaid cuts used to help pay for Trump's tax cuts and spending cuts package. Speaking to reporters Friday, Tillis again raised concerns over the bill's 'fundamentals' and cuts to Medicaid and suggested his vote wouldn't change unless the measure 'transforms radically overnight.' Losing Tillis on Saturday's expected procedural vote – which will be closely watched by Trump – would be a major blow to Senate GOP leaders, who can only afford to lose three Republican votes to advance the bill. Thune and GOP leaders have spent months building to this moment, racing to draft the bill as quickly as possible in an effort to ensure Trump's agenda is on his desk by the Fourth of July. If the bill fails its first procedural vote on Saturday, GOP leaders will have to retool the package, amounting to a huge setback for Trump. And it's not just about that Independence Day timeline: GOP leaders fear that any delay in passing Trump's agenda would embolden the party's critics to seek more changes – which could lead their fragile coalition to fall apart. Already, outspoken fiscal hawk Sen. Rand Paul is planning to vote against it over the plan's inclusion of a $5 trillion debt-limit increase. And Tillis is not the only Republican threatening to oppose the bill over the proposed cuts to Medicaid. Sens. Josh Hawley, Lisa Murkowski, Jerry Moran and Susan Collins have all made similar remarks as they've worked with leadership to trim those provisions. But simply restoring that Medicaid funding may not be enough to win Thune those votes on the floor – it could also cost him votes among Senate GOP hardliners. Sen. Ron Johnson has railed on how the bill is projected to balloon the budget deficit, and another fiscal hawk, Sen. Mike Lee, has suggested he and Johnson along with Sen. Rick Scott could vote as a bloc on Saturday. None have yet to say how they'll vote on the key initial procedural vote Saturday. If all goes to plan, Senate leaders will land the 51 GOP votes to formally begin debating Trump's agenda and then tee up one of the chamber's storied traditions: a series of round-the-clock amendment votes known as vote-a-rama. Democrats will use this overnight session to push on any number of GOP weak points on the bill, particularly Medicaid and other safety net programs. The Senate could then vote on final passage sometime in the middle of the night Saturday or Sunday morning. And if successful, the House would return mid-week to take up the bill with the hope of Trump signing it at the White House on July 4. One of the biggest hurdles for Republicans is the race to rewrite text in compliance with the Senate's complex budget rules, which are governed by the nonpartisan parliamentarian. In recent days, the parliamentarian has ruled against key GOP provisions – from the so-called provider tax, which helps states fund their Medicaid programs to some provisions of a government spectrum auction. That forces the Senate GOP to dial back those provisions, or else Trump's bill would be subject to a Democratic filibuster. Several Republicans said Friday night they need to see the final bill text – which has not been released – before judging whether they would open debate on the sweeping measure. 'I don't have the bill, how can I vote on something I don't know' what's in it, Johnson said. Hawley, who has been deeply concerned about Medicaid cuts, also said the vote hinges on what's in the bill: 'Got to see the text.' Senate GOP leaders hope to release a mostly final version of the bill Friday night or Saturday morning, but the full version may not be ready before the anticipated Saturday vote to open debate, since the Senate Finance Committee is still furiously working to make sure its language complies with the budget rules. The Finance provisions are key because of both tax and health provisions – specifically, Medicaid. 'I still don't have final language from Finance yet, which obviously is of tremendous concern to me given the Medicaid provisions,' Collins said. Multiple GOP senators dismissed concerns about speeding ahead with the vote without final text in hand. 'We discussed this thing ad nauseam,' Ohio Sen. Bernie Moreno said, estimating that Republicans have met on this bill for 'thousands' of hours so far this year. 'The final tax is not out. But we know where we are going.' Sen. Eric Schmitt of Missouri added: 'When you have legislation like this, you're going to have things you need to work through until the very end.' This story has been updated with additional details.
CNN
8 hours ago
- Business
- CNN
Senate barrels toward weekend vote on Trump agenda as GOP support still in limbo
Senate Republicans are barreling toward a critical vote on President Donald Trump's agenda on Saturday, with GOP leaders pressuring their members to support a bill that has yet to be fully drafted. Senate Majority Leader John Thune and his leadership team informed their members at a private meeting Friday that they aimed to hold their first vote to advance the bill Saturday at noon, according to multiple GOP senators. 'We got a few things we're waiting on, outcomes from the parliamentarian … but if we could get some of those questions, issues landed then my expectation is at some point tomorrow we'll be ready to go,' Thune said. But it is not yet clear if enough Senate Republicans will support the plan to pass it. 'We will find out tomorrow,' Thune said. Thune and his team are still working to resolve some of the thorniest issues, including how to win over centrists who are concerned about cuts to Medicaid or other safety net programs while appeasing fiscal hawks who have demanded their party go even further with those cuts. Thune himself acknowledged that holding a vote midday Saturday was 'aspirational' and added: 'We'll see.' The South Dakota Republican outlined the tentative plan during a Friday meeting with House Speaker Mike Johnson and the treasury secretary, part of a full-court press by GOP leaders and Trump's team to line up the GOP behind the bill. GOP leaders know that a lot needs to fall in place for that Saturday vote: Their party is still rewriting key parts of the bill to comply with the chamber's special budget rules and has yet to release final text. If all goes to plan, though, the Senate would vote on final passage sometime in the middle of the night Saturday or Sunday morning. And if successful, the House would return mid-week to take up the bill with the hope of Trump signing it at the White House on July 4. At least one GOP senator is still publicly chafing at that plan: Kentucky's Rand Paul, who was sharply critical of the new spending in the bill as he emerged from the GOP meeting. 'The car is still speeding off the cliff,' Paul said, saying it would do nothing to rein in deficits. Senior Republicans have been anticipating that on the vote they may lose Paul, who strongly opposed parts of the bill, including raising the nation's debt limit. But if that happens, Thune can only lose two more GOP votes and still pass the bill. One other key vote, centrist Alaska GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski, told reporters Friday she's still waiting to see details of GOP's plans on nutritional assistance programs, known as SNAP. She would not say if she is leaning for or against the bill. One of the biggest hurdles for Republicans is the race to rewrite text in compliance with the Senate's complex budget rules, which are governed by the nonpartisan parliamentarian. In recent days, the parliamentarian has ruled against key GOP provisions — from the so-called provider tax, which helps states fund their Medicaid programs to some provisions of a government spectrum auction. That forces the Senate GOP to dial back those provisions, or else Trump's bill would be subject to a Democratic filibuster. Senate GOP leaders are aiming to release a mostly final version of the bill Friday night, but the full version may not be ready before the Saturday vote, since the Senate Finance Committee is still furiously working to make sure its language complies with the budget rules. 'The vast majorities of issues have been resolved and some of this will be done in parallel working here for the sake of time. But I think we're going to get there,' Sen. Steve Daines of Montana said, adding that the Senate has gotten through '90 to 95%' of the parliamentarian's process, also known as a 'Byrd bath,' named for the late Sen. Robert Byrd, a Senate rules enthusiast. Multiple GOP senators dismissed concerns about speeding ahead with the vote without final text in hand. 'We discussed this thing ad nauseam,' Ohio Sen. Bernie Moreno said, estimating that Republicans have met on this bill for 'thousands' of hours so far this year. 'The final tax is not out. But we know where we are going.' Sen. Eric Schmitt of Missouri added: 'When you have legislation like this, you're going to have things you need to work through until the very end.'
Yahoo
10 hours ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Supreme Court gives Trump more power after ‘birthright citizenship' ruling curbs nationwide injunctions
The Supreme Court's conservative majority has stripped federal courts' authority to issue nationwide injunctions that have blocked key parts of Donald Trump's agenda. Friday's 6-3 ruling, written by Trump appointee Justice Amy Coney Barrett, states that federal judges went too far blocking his executive order that seeks to unilaterally redefine who gets to be a citizen. Those nationwide injunctions 'exceed the equitable authority that Congress has given to the federal courts,' according to the ruling. The ruling opens the door for partial enforcement of Trump's executive order, putting thousands of American-born children at risk of being denied their constitutional rights. Trump's executive order will be blocked for another 30 days, however, allowing lower courts to revisit the scope of their injunctions and giving time for opponents to file new legal challenges. Department of Justice attorneys will now 'promptly file' legal challenges in cases where the president's executive actions were temporarily blocked, Trump told reporters at the White House. Moments after the ruling, plaintiffs filed a new lawsuit that would protect citizenship rights for all newborn Americans, not just in the states that initially sued. But the ruling does not definitively resolve challenges to birthright citizenship. A series of federal court rulings across the country earlier this year struck down the president's attempt to block citizenship from newborn Americans who are born to certain immigrant parents. The government argued those decisions should only impact the individual states — and the unborn children of pregnant mothers in them — who sued him and won. Opponents have warned that such a decision would open a backdoor to begin stripping away constitutional rights. In a blistering dissent, Justices Sonia Sotomayor called the court's ruling 'a travesty for the rule of law.' Allowing the president to unilaterally redefine who gets to be a U.S. citizen in states subject to Trump's rewriting of the 14th Amendment would create a patchwork system of constitutional rights and citizenship benefits — including voting rights. More than 150,000 newborns would be denied citizenship every year under Trump's order, according to the plaintiffs. 'Make no mistake: Today's ruling allows the Executive to deny people rights that the Founders plainly wrote into our Constitution, so long as those individuals have not found a lawyer or asked a court in a particular manner to have their rights protected,' Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote in her dissent. The court's decision gifted Trump the 'prerogative of sometimes disregarding the law' that opens the door to 'put both our legal system, and our system of government, in grave jeopardy,' Jackson warned. 'It is not difficult to predict how this all ends,' she wrote. 'Eventually, executive power will become completely uncontainable, and our beloved constitutional Republic will be no more." In January, more than 20 states, immigrants' advocacy groups and pregnant plaintiffs sued the administration to block the president's executive order. Three federal judges and appellate court panels argued his order is unconstitutional and blocked the measure from taking effect nationwide while legal challenges continue. During oral arguments, the Supreme Court's liberal justices appeared shocked at the president's 'unlawful' measure. But the administration used the case not necessarily to argue over whether he can change the 14th Amendment but to target what has become a major obstacle to advancing Trump's agenda: federal judges blocking aggressive executive actions. The government asked the court to limit the authority of federal judges to issue nationwide injunctions, which have imperilled a bulk of the president's agenda. In cases across the country, plaintiffs have pushed for injunctions as a tool for critical checks and balances against an administration that critics warn is mounting an ongoing assault against the rule of law. More than half of the injunctions issued over the last 70 years were against the Trump administration, according to the Harvard Law Review, as Trump pushed the limits of his authority. In arguments to the Supreme Court, Trump's personal attorney John Sauer, who was appointed by the president to serve as U.S. solicitor general, called the 'cascade of universal injunctions' against the administration a 'bipartisan problem' that exceeds judicial authority. Trump's allies, however, have relied on nationwide injunctions to do the very same thing they commanded the Supreme Court to strike down. Critics have accused right-wing legal groups of 'judge shopping' for ideologically like-minded venues where they can sue to strike down — through nationwide injunctions — policies with which they disagree. After the government's arguments fell flat in front of a mostly skeptical Supreme Court last month, Trump accused his political opponents of 'playing the ref' through the courts to overturn his threat to the 14th Amendment. The 14th Amendment plainly states that 'all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.' For more than 100 years, the Supreme Court has upheld the definition to apply to all children born within the United States. But under the terms of Trump's order, children can be denied citizenship if a mother is undocumented or is temporarily legally in the country on a visa, and if the father isn't a citizen or a lawful permanent resident. The president's attempt to redefine citizenship is central to his administration's sweeping anti-immigration agenda. His administration has also effectively ended entry for asylum seekers; declared the United States under 'invasion' from foreign gangs to summarily remove alleged members; and stripped legal protections for more than 1 million people — radically expanding the pool of 'undocumented' people now vulnerable for arrest and removal. The administration 'de-legalised' tens of thousands of immigrants, and thousands of people with pending immigration cases are being ordered to court each week only to have those cases dismissed, with federal agents waiting to arrest them on the other side of the courtroom doors. The White House has also rolled back protections barring immigration arrests at sensitive locations like churches and bumped up the pace of immigration raids in the interior of the country. To carry out the arrests, the administration has tapped resources from other state and local agencies while moving officers from federal agencies like the FBI and DEA to focus on immigration. There are more people in immigration detention centers today than in any other point in modern history.
Yahoo
11 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Comparing the House and Senate proposals for Trump's sweeping policy bill
Congressional Republicans are hoping to send their sweeping tax and spending cuts package, otherwise known as the 'big, beautiful bill,' to President Donald Trump's desk by July 4. But first, senators – whose package must comply with certain Senate-specific budget reconciliation rules – must garner enough support for their version in a deeply divided GOP conference. The House narrowly passed its own version of the Trump agenda bill last month. While many of the provisions are largely similar in the Senate's legislation, several are quite different, which is also causing some tension and may delay the bill's progress. The two chambers would have to agree on one text before delivering the megabill to Trump for his signature. Here's how the House and Senate have approached key provisions of the package: CNN's Ella Nilsen and Molly Reinmann contributed to this report.
The Independent
13 hours ago
- Politics
- The Independent
Supreme Court decision hands Trump citizenship powers victory
The Supreme Court 's conservative majority, in a 6-3 ruling, limited federal courts' authority to issue nationwide injunctions that have blocked key parts of Donald Trump 's agenda. Written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the ruling stated that federal judges exceeded their authority by blocking Trump's executive order attempting to redefine who gets to be a citizen. Liberal justices, including Ketanji Brown Jackson, strongly dissented, warning the decision put the legal system and government in 'grave jeopardy'. Critics argue the ruling could lead to a patchwork system of constitutional rights and citizenship benefits, potentially denying citizenship to over 150,000 newborns annually under Trump's order. The administration sought to curb nationwide injunctions, which have significantly impeded its executive actions.
