Latest news with #executiveActions


Fox News
02-07-2025
- Politics
- Fox News
Probe into Biden's alleged mental decline cover-up deepens with more former White House officials to testify
The House Oversight Committee is expanding its investigation into an alleged cover-up of former President Joe Biden's mental decline and possible unauthorized executive actions, and nine former senior White House officials will testify in the coming weeks. An Oversight Committee aide familiar with the interview schedule told Fox News Digital five more former senior White House staff members have agreed to appear voluntarily for transcribed interviews. Ronald Klain, former chief of staff under Biden; Steve Ricchetti, former counselor to the president; Mike Donilon, former senior advisor to the president; Bruce Reed, former deputy chief of staff for policy; and Anita Dunn, former senior advisor to the president for communications, will appear for transcribed interviews July 24 through Aug. 7. According to the aide, two other former high-ranking Biden White House officials, Ashley Williams, former special assistant to the president, and Annie Tomasini, former deputy director of Oval Office operations, former assistant to the president and deputy chief of staff, are voluntarily appearing for transcribed interviews on July 11 and July 18, respectively. Not all former Biden officials, however, have agreed to testify voluntarily. Oversight Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., has issued subpoenas compelling Dr. Kevin O'Connor, Biden's physician, and Anthony Bernal, a former assistant to the president and senior advisor to the first lady, to appear for depositions. The aide said O'Connor's deposition is scheduled for July 9, while Bernal's is schedule for July 16. These interviews are part of the committee's ongoing investigation into the alleged attempted cover-up of Biden's decline and the potentially unauthorized issuance of sweeping pardons and other executive actions by senior White House officials usurping Biden's presidential authority. Comer has been on the hunt for who was making decisions in Biden's inner circle during the president's apparent mental decline. Last Friday, he sent letters to former Biden White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, former White House chief of staff Jeff Zients, former senior deputy press secretary Andrew Bates and former special assistant to the president Ian Sams, demanding they present themselves for transcribed interviews with the oversight committee. In his letters, Comer says the committee believes that the four top Biden staffers have "critical" information on "who made key decisions and exercised the powers of the executive branch during the previous administration, possibly without former President Biden's consent." He said that "if White House staff carried out a strategy lasting months or even years to hide the chief executive's condition — or to perform his duties — Congress may need to consider a legislative response." Comer set interview dates for late August and early September and gave the four senior officials until July 4 to confirm they would comply with the demands voluntarily or if they will "require a subpoena to compel your attendance for a deposition." In a statement to Fox News Digital last week, Comer said that "as part of our aggressive investigation into the cover-up of his cognitive decline and potentially unauthorized executive actions, we must hear from those who aided and abetted this farce."


Arab News
23-06-2025
- Business
- Arab News
The Republican attempt to discourage Trump lawsuits has hit a big obstacle
WASHINGTON: Republicans have hit a roadblock in an effort that could deter nonprofits, individuals and other potential litigants from filing lawsuits to block President Donald Trump over his executive actions. As Trump faces lawsuits nationwide, GOP lawmakers had sought to bar federal courts from issuing temporary restraining orders or preliminary injunctions against the federal government unless the plaintiffs post what in many cases would be a massive financial bond at the beginning of the case. The proposal was included in the Senate version of Trump's massive tax and immigration bill, but ran into trouble with the Senate parliamentarian, who said it violates the chamber's rules. It is now unlikely to be in the final package. Federal judges can already require plaintiffs to post security bonds, but such funds are commonly waived in public interest cases. The GOP proposal would make the payment of the financial bond a requirement before a judge could make a ruling, which critics said would have a chilling effect on potential litigants who wouldn't have the resources to comply. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer hailed the parliamentarian's ruling in a press statement and called the GOP effort 'nothing short of an assault on the system of checks and balances that has anchored the nation since it's founding.' 'But Senate Democrats stopped them cold,' Schumer said. Lawmakers are running scores of provisions by the Senate parliamentarian's office to ensure they fit with the chamber's rules for inclusion in a reconciliation bill. The recommendations from Elizabeth MacDonough will have a major impact on the final version of the legislation. On Friday, she determined that a proposal to shift some food stamps costs from the federal government to states would violate the chamber's rules. But some of the most difficult questions are still to come as Republicans hope to get a bill passed and on Trump's desk to be signed into law before July 4th. Republicans could still seek to include the judiciary provision in the bill, but it would likely be challenged and subject to a separate vote in which the provision would need 60 votes to remain. The parliamentarian's advice, while not binding, is generally followed by the Senate. Republicans and the White House have been highly critical of some of the court rulings blocking various Trump orders on immigration, education and voting. The courts have agreed to block the president in a number of cases, and the administration is seeking appeals as well. In April, the House voted to limit the scope of injunctive relief ordered by a district judge to those parties before the court, rather than applying the relief nationally. But that bill is unlikely to advance in the Senate since it would need 60 votes to advance. That's left Republicans looking for other avenues to blunt the court orders. 'We are experiencing a constitutional crisis, a judicial coup d'etat,' Rep. Bob Onder, R-Missouri, said during the House debate.


Al Arabiya
23-06-2025
- Business
- Al Arabiya
The Republican attempt to discourage Trump lawsuits has hit a big obstacle
Republicans have hit a roadblock in an effort that could deter nonprofits, individuals, and other potential litigants from filing lawsuits to block President Donald Trump over his executive actions. As Trump faces lawsuits nationwide, GOP lawmakers had sought to bar federal courts from issuing temporary restraining orders or preliminary injunctions against the federal government unless the plaintiffs post what, in many cases, would be a massive financial bond at the beginning of the case. The proposal was included in the Senate version of Trump's massive tax and immigration bill but ran into trouble with the Senate parliamentarian, who said it violates the chamber's rules. It is now unlikely to be in the final package. Federal judges can already require plaintiffs to post security bonds, but such funds are commonly waived in public interest cases. The GOP proposal would make the payment of the financial bond a requirement before a judge could make a ruling, which critics said would have a chilling effect on potential litigants who wouldn't have the resources to comply. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer hailed the parliamentarian's ruling in a press statement and called the GOP effort 'nothing short of an assault on the system of checks and balances that has anchored the nation since its founding.' 'But Senate Democrats stopped them cold,' Schumer said. Lawmakers are running scores of provisions by the Senate parliamentarian's office to ensure they fit with the chamber's rules for inclusion in a reconciliation bill. The recommendations from Elizabeth MacDonough will have a major impact on the final version of the legislation. On Friday, she determined that a proposal to shift some food stamp costs from the federal government to states would violate the chamber's rules. But some of the most difficult questions are still to come as Republicans hope to get a bill passed and on Trump's desk to be signed into law before July 4th. Republicans could still seek to include the judiciary provision in the bill, but it would likely be challenged and subject to a separate vote in which the provision would need 60 votes to remain. The parliamentarian's advice, while not binding, is generally followed by the Senate. Republicans and the White House have been highly critical of some of the court rulings blocking various Trump orders on immigration, education, and voting. The courts have agreed to block the president in a number of cases, and the administration is seeking appeals as well. In April, the House voted to limit the scope of injunctive relief ordered by a district judge to those parties before the court rather than applying the relief nationally. But that bill is unlikely to advance in the Senate since it would need 60 votes to advance. That's left Republicans looking for other avenues to blunt the court orders. 'We are experiencing a constitutional crisis – a judicial coup d'état,' Rep. Bob Onder, R-Mo., said during the House debate.


Washington Post
23-06-2025
- Politics
- Washington Post
The Republican attempt to discourage Trump lawsuits has hit a big obstacle
WASHINGTON — Republicans have hit a roadblock in an effort that could deter nonprofits, individuals and other potential litigants from filing lawsuits to block President Donald Trump over his executive actions. As Trump faces lawsuits nationwide, GOP lawmakers had sought to bar federal courts from issuing temporary restraining orders or preliminary injunctions against the federal government unless the plaintiffs post what in many cases would be a massive financial bond at the beginning of the case.

Associated Press
23-06-2025
- Business
- Associated Press
The Republican attempt to discourage Trump lawsuits has hit a big obstacle
WASHINGTON (AP) — Republicans have hit a roadblock in an effort that could deter nonprofits, individuals and other potential litigants from filing lawsuits to block President Donald Trump over his executive actions. As Trump faces lawsuits nationwide, GOP lawmakers had sought to bar federal courts from issuing temporary restraining orders or preliminary injunctions against the federal government unless the plaintiffs post what in many cases would be a massive financial bond at the beginning of the case. The proposal was included in the Senate version of Trump's massive tax and immigration bill, but ran into trouble with the Senate parliamentarian, who said it violates the chamber's rules. It is now unlikely to be in the final package. Federal judges can already require plaintiffs to post security bonds, but such funds are commonly waived in public interest cases. The GOP proposal would make the payment of the financial bond a requirement before a judge could make a ruling, which critics said would have a chilling effect on potential litigants who wouldn't have the resources to comply. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer hailed the parliamentarian's ruling in a press statement and called the GOP effort 'nothing short of an assault on the system of checks and balances that has anchored the nation since it's founding.' 'But Senate Democrats stopped them cold,' Schumer said. Lawmakers are running scores of provisions by the Senate parliamentarian's office to ensure they fit with the chamber's rules for inclusion in a reconciliation bill. The recommendations from Elizabeth MacDonough will have a major impact on the final version of the legislation. On Friday, she determined that a proposal to shift some food stamps costs from the federal government to states would violate the chamber's rules. But some of the most difficult questions are still to come as Republicans hope to get a bill passed and on Trump's desk to be signed into law before July 4th. Republicans could still seek to include the judiciary provision in the bill, but it would likely be challenged and subject to a separate vote in which the provision would need 60 votes to remain. The parliamentarian's advice, while not binding, is generally followed by the Senate. Republicans and the White House have been highly critical of some of the court rulings blocking various Trump orders on immigration, education and voting. The courts have agreed to block the president in a number of cases, and the administration is seeking appeals as well. In April, the House voted to limit the scope of injunctive relief ordered by a district judge to those parties before the court, rather than applying the relief nationally. But that bill is unlikely to advance in the Senate since it would need 60 votes to advance. That's left Republicans looking for other avenues to blunt the court orders. 'We are experiencing a constitutional crisis, a judicial coup d'etat,' Rep. Bob Onder, R-Mo., said during the House debate.