A U.S. judge on Thursday ordered the Trump administration to pay at least a portion of the nearly $2 billion in owed foreign aid for previously completed projects by 6 p.m. Monday, an expeditious ruling that comes just one day after the Supreme Court rejected the Trump administration’s request to continue its freeze.

The decision from U.S. District Court Judge Amir Ali came after a more than four-hour court hearing Thursday, where he grilled both parties on their proposed repayment plans, and a timeframe for the government to comply with the $1.9 billion in owed foreign aid that has been completed.

At the end of the hearing, Judge Ali ordered the government to pay at least a portion of the $1.9 billion by Monday at 6 p.m.

‘I think it’s reasonable to get the plaintiffs’ invoices paid by 6 p.m. on Monday,’ said Judge Ali. ‘What I’ll order today is the first concrete step that plaintiffs have their invoices paid … [and] work completed prior to Feb. 13 to be paid by 6 p.m. on Monday, March 10th.’

That order previously set a deadline of Feb. 26 at 11:59 p.m. for the Trump administration to pay its outstanding debt to foreign aid groups.

The Justice Department had argued that the timeline was ‘impossible’ to comply with— a notion seemingly rejected by Judge Ali during Thursday’s hearing.

At one point, an attorney for the Justice Department asked for more time to get the payments out, citing the potential difficulty of getting financial transactions approved or completed over the weekend. In response, Judge Ali noted that the government had successfully paid out more than $70 million in the hours between Wednesday night and Thursday morning, noting that this ‘ought to be possible’ as well.

Judge Ali stressed during the Thursday hearing that the Feb. 26 deadline he previously set for the government to pay the $1.9 billion in foreign aid had passed.

Now, he said, the job given to him by the Supreme Court is to clarify the government’s role in repayment— instructions, he noted, that he tends to take ‘very seriously.’

The 5-4 Supreme Court decision one day earlier remanded the case back to the D.C. federal court, and Judge Ali , o hash out the specifics of what must be paid, and when. Judge Ali moved quickly following the high court’s decision, ordering both parties back to court Thursday to weigh plausible repayment schedules. 

But the early hours of Thursday’s hearing focused more on the government’s role and review of all foreign aid contractors and grants, which Trump administration lawyers told Judge Ali they had already completed and made final decisions for.

Stephen Wirth, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, objected to the administration’s ‘breakneck’ review of the contracts and grants, arguing that they ‘had one objective— to terminate as many contracts as possible.’

Lawyers were also pressed over whether the Trump administration can legally move to terminate projects whose funds are allocated and appropriated by Congress. 

This could eventually kick the issue back up to the Supreme Court.

At issue in the case was how quickly the Trump administration needed to pay the nearly $2 billion owed to aid groups and contractors for completed projects funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), at a time when the administration has issued a blanket freeze on all foreign spending in the name of government ‘efficiency’ and eliminating waste.

President Donald Trump has stated plans to cut some 90% of USAID foreign aid contracts and to slash an additional $60 billion in foreign aid spending.

In a Supreme Court filing, acting U.S. Solicitor General Sarah Harris said that while the plaintiffs’ claims were likely ‘legitimate,’ the time Judge Ali gave them to pay the outstanding invoices was ‘not logistically or technically feasible.’

Plaintiffs have argued that the lower court judge had ordered the Trump administration to begin making the owed foreign aid payments more than two weeks ago — a deadline they said the government simply failed to meet, or to even take steps to meet — indicating that the administration had no plans to make good on fulfilling that request.

President Trump on Thursday exempted most goods from Canada and Mexico covered under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) from his 25% tariffs for the next month.

The tariffs went into effect earlier this week and will now be reinstated April 2. 

On Tuesday, Trump imposed the 25% tariffs on the United States’ largest trading partners. 

‘If you are the administration and are trying to achieve — the outcomes they are trying to achieve, refused fentanyl, lower border crossings — these are a tool in the arsenal,’ Dan Greenhouse of Solus Alternative Asset Management told Fox News Thursday. 

Doug Holtz-Eakin, the president of the American Action Forum, didn’t agree. 

He told Fox News, ‘In the end, we’ve got taxes on American consumers and businesses. Those taxes are substantial. I think people underappreciate that this round taken at face value would be roughly four times larger than anything he did in his first presidency. The impacts would be substantial.’

Holtz-Eakin said it would add to inflation and slow economic growth.

‘Those are not things that the American people want,’ he said.  

Canada said earlier this week it will issue 25% retaliatory tariffs. 

A Canadian source told Reuters the country wouldn’t respond until it had seen the entirety of Trump’s amended tariff order. 

Trump announced the tariffs on his first day in office in January after declaring fentanyl deaths a national emergency. He said the drug makes its way from China to the U.S. via Mexican and Canadian imports. 

‘I can confirm that we will continue to be in a trade war that was launched by the United States for the foreseeable future,’ Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who will step down Sunday, told reporters Thursday. 

Trump has also imposed a 20% tariff on all Chinese goods. 

Trump had mentioned an exemption for Mexico earlier Thursday, but the new amendment also covers Canada. 

‘After speaking with President Claudia Sheinbaum of Mexico, I have agreed that Mexico will not be required to pay Tariffs on anything that falls under the USMCA Agreement,’ Trump wrote Thursday before including Canada in the exemption.

‘This Agreement is until April 2nd. I did this as an accommodation, and out of respect for, President Sheinbaum. Our relationship has been a very good one, and we are working hard, together, on the Border, both in terms of stopping Illegal Aliens from entering the United States and, likewise, stopping Fentanyl. Thank you to President Sheinbaum for your hard work and cooperation!’ 

Reuters contributed to this report. 

Two moderate Democrats who voted against censuring Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, suggested they did not believe Congress should be focused on such matters.

Ten Democratic lawmakers broke from their party to vote on a House GOP-led resolution to formally admonish Green for protesting during President Donald Trump’s address to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday night. 

The majority of those 10 are considered frontline Democrats in more moderate districts, while others, like Rep. Jared Moskowitz, D-Fla., are generally known to cross the aisle and work with Republicans.

Fox News Digital reached out to nine other Democrats representing moderate areas, who were part of the 198 total who opposed censuring Green.

Of those, just two – Reps. Jared Golden, D-Maine, and Josh Riley, D-N.Y. – offered responses.

‘In today’s environment, censure tends only to give a greater platform to the censured legislator. So I tend to lean in favor of free speech unless a clear red line is crossed,’ Golden told Fox News Digital.

The Maine Democrat’s written statement also included a link to a reference of his vote in favor of censuring ‘Squad’ member Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., over her anti-Israel comments.

He did, however, offer criticism for Green’s interruption of Trump’s speech.

‘I voted against censuring Rep. Green because I don’t believe he crossed that line – and I don’t believe it’s in the House’s interest to draw even greater attention to his misguided behavior,’ Golden explained.

Riley’s statement did not remark directly on Green but more broadly dismissed attention-seekers in Washington.

‘Upstate New Yorkers sent me to Congress to lower costs, create jobs, and ensure they get a fair shot. I wish we’d spent this morning focused on that instead of the drama and political theater in Washington,’ the first-term House Democrat said.

Riley won his seat in November by unseating former Rep. Marc Molinaro, R-N.Y., in a district that spans much of central New York state.

Green was censured in a 224 to 198 vote on Thursday morning after repeatedly disrupting the beginning of Trump’s primetime speech.

He shouted, ‘You have no mandate!’ at Trump and shook his cane in the air as the president touted Republican victories in the House, Senate and White House. Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., after giving a warning, had Green removed from the chamber.

The 77-year-old Democrat was unrepentant, posting on X on Thursday afternoon, ‘Today, the House GOP censured me for speaking out for the American people against [Trump’s] plan to cut Medicaid. I accept the consequences of my actions, but I refuse to stay silent in the face of injustice.’

The 10 Democrats who voted to censure Green are Reps. Ami Bera, D-Calif.; Ed Case, D-Hawaii; Jim Costa, D-Calif.; Laura Gillen, D-N.Y.; Jim Himes, D-Conn.; Chrissy Houlahan, D-Pa.; Marcy Kaptur, D-Ohio; Jared Moskowitz, D-Fla.; Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, D-Wash.; and Tom Suozzi, D-N.Y.

Green himself voted ‘present,’ as did first-term Rep. Shomari Figures, D-Ala.

President Donald Trump signed an executive order Thursday that would rescind security clearances and access to certain federal resources for Perkins Coie. It’s the law firm that hired the company responsible for crafting the so-called ‘Steele dossier’ containing salacious material about Trump’s alleged connections to Russia, which the president has denied. 

‘This is an absolute honor to sign,’ Trump told reporters Thursday. ‘What they’ve done, it’s just terrible. It’s weaponization. You could say weaponization against a political opponent, and it should never be allowed to happen again.’ 

Specifically, the executive order suspends security clearances for Perkins Coie employees until a further review evaluating its access to sensitive information is complete to determine if it aligns with the national interest. 

Additionally, the order cuts off access to sensitive information facilities for Perkins Coie employees and will limit the company’s access to government employees. The order also the federal government from hiring Perkins Coie employees without specific authorization. 

Likewise, the federal government is prohibited from hiring contractors that use the law firm.

The international law firm represented Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee in the 2016 election and former President Joe Biden after Trump challenged Biden’s win in the 2020 election.

Perkins Coie first came under scrutiny after Marc Elias, the former chair of the firm’s political law practice, hired opposition research firm Fusion GPS to conduct opposition research into presidential candidate Trump in April 2016 on behalf of Trump’s opponent, Clinton, and the Democratic National Committee.

Fusion GPS then hired former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele, who composed the so-called ‘Steele dossier.’ The document included scandalous and mostly unverified allegations, including details that Trump engaged in sex acts with Russian prostitutes.  

Trump repeatedly denied allegations included in the dossier and filed a lawsuit against Orbis Business Intelligence, a company Steele co-founded. Trump’s legal team claimed he ‘suffered personal and reputational damage and distress’ as a result of the dossier, but a judge in London pitched the lawsuit in February 2024. 

The dossier first became public in 2017 when BuzzFeed News published it. The Justice Department’s inspector general lambasted the agency and the FBI in 2019 for using the document to make a case in securing surveillance applications against former Trump campaign advisor Carter Page as part of the agency’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. 

Still, the inspector general determined that no political bias motivated the surveillance of Page or the launching of Russia investigations. 

Requests for comment by Perkins Coie were not immediately answered. 

Hamas’ treatment of the hostages it has been holding in captivity in the Gaza Strip is ‘intolerable,’ U.S. envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff said Thursday, warning that ‘it’s not going to be tolerated by President Trump.’ 

Witkoff spoke outside the White House a day after President Donald Trump met with eight former hostages in Washington and posted what he called a ‘last warning’ to Hamas on his Truth Social platform. 

‘We’re not going to sit here, do nothing and tolerate this kind of inhumane conditions,’ Witkoff said. ‘They lived in a terrible situation. By the way, who keeps dead bodies? Who does that? Who keeps people chained up downstairs? Who murders in front of other hostages? What’s happened here is intolerable, and it’s not going to be tolerated by President Trump.’ 

‘We had a wonderful day with the hostages yesterday… they got a treat a lifetime, they got to spend some time with President Trump. And we thought it was going to be a short period of time because his day was busy, but he ended up spending about an hour with them, with each of the hostages, pictures, and spent a lot of time listening to their stories about what happened to them in captivity. And he was clearly emotional about it as anybody would be,’ Witkoff also said. 

‘The president was pretty blunt,’ Witkoff added. ‘It’s time for Hamas to start acting in a responsible and reasonable way. And we don’t think that they have been doing that.’ 

However, the Palestinian terrorist group on Thursday dismissed Trump’s latest threat and refused to release more Israeli hostages without a permanent ceasefire deal in the Gaza Strip. 

Hamas spokesman Abdel-Latif al-Qanoua said the ‘best path to free the remaining Israeli hostages’ is through negotiations on a second phase of the ceasefire agreement.  

The first phase of the ceasefire, which lasted 42 days, ended on Saturday. A second phase was supposed to begin in early February, though only limited preparatory talks have been held so far. 

‘‘Shalom Hamas’ means Hello and Goodbye – You can choose,’ Trump said on Wednesday. ‘Release all of the Hostages now, not later, and immediately return all of the dead bodies of the people you murdered, or it is OVER for you.’ 

Trump added that he is ‘sending Israel everything it needs to finish the job,’ and that ‘not a single Hamas member will be safe if you don’t do as I say. 

‘Also, to the People of Gaza: A beautiful Future awaits, but not if you hold Hostages,’ the president wrote. ‘If you do, you are DEAD! Make a SMART decision. RELEASE THE HOSTAGES NOW, OR THERE WILL BE HELL TO PAY LATER!’ 

Fox News’ Stephen Sorace and the Associated Press contributed to this report. 

President Donald Trump’s choice to lead the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) flipped a question about vaccine processes around on a top Democratic senator during his confirmation hearing on Thursday, advising them to ask former President Joe Biden why he skipped a key step when it came to the COVID-19 booster. 

Dr. Marty Makary, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine professor and former Fox News medical contributor, went before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP), during which he answered questions regarding vaccines, chronic illness, food safety and abortion. 

‘So if you are confirmed, will you commit to immediately reschedule that FDA Vaccine Advisory Committee meeting to get the expert views?’ Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., asked Trump’s FDA pick. 

Her question came in reference to an FDA vaccine meeting that was reportedly postponed at the last minute. 

‘I would reevaluate which topics deserve a convening of the advisory committee members on [Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee] and which may not require a convening,’ Makary replied, noting he was not a part of the decision. 

Asked again by Murray, the FDA commissioner nominee said, ‘Well, you can ask the Biden administration that chose not to convene the committee meeting for the COVID vaccine booster.’

In 2021, Biden’s administration notably pushed through FDA approval for a COVID-19 booster for everyone over the age of 18. Per a press release at the time, ‘The FDA did not hold a meeting of the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee on these actions as the agency previously convened the committee for extensive discussions regarding the use of booster doses of COVID-19 vaccines and, after review of both Pfizer’s and Moderna’s EUA requests, the FDA concluded that the requests do not raise questions that would benefit from additional discussion by committee members.’

At the time, committee member Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia remarked, ‘We’re being asked to approve this as a three-dose vaccine for people 16 years of age and older, without any clear evidence if the third dose for a younger person when compared to an elderly person is of value.’

Fox News Digital asked Murray whether she was similarly concerned by Biden’s decision. The senator said in a statement, ‘In 2022, I had confidence that our public health agencies were following the latest science and listening to public health experts. I do not have that confidence now.’

‘We’re talking about Trump and RFK Jr. canceling a routine meeting that has taken place annually, for at least 30 years, to make recommendations for which influenza strains should be included in the flu vaccines for the upcoming flu season – there has been zero justification for its cancellation or any information about when it would be rescheduled,’ she continued. ‘The flu vaccine is safe, effective, and lifesaving – we need this advisory committee to meet so manufacturers have enough time to prepare the correct vaccines.’

Ahead of the Thursday hearing, Murray and fellow HELP Democratic Sens. Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin and Angela Alsobrooks of Maryland penned a letter to Makary, telling him, ‘We intend to use your nomination hearing next week to understand whether you support this ill-informed measure to slow critical public health decision-making.’ 

HELP Chairman Bill Cassidy, R-La., also inquired about the postponed meeting, asking Makary, ‘How will you ensure that advisory committees remain objective, transparent and still benefiting from the necessary expertise of external experts?’

The nominee told Cassidy, ‘You have my commitment to review what the committees are doing [and] how they’re being used.’

‘As you know, I was critical when that committee was not convened at all during one of the COVID booster guidance decisions by the FDA,’ Makary noted. 

He recalled that FDA leadership ‘at the time argued that they’re advisory, and we don’t have to convene them. That was repeatedly, throughout the Biden administration.’

President Donald Trump signed a memo Thursday directing government agency heads to ask federal judges to require financial guarantees to hold ‘activist’ groups that sue the government financially responsible if an injunction is found to be unnecessary.

The memo comes as the Trump administration faces more than 90 lawsuits stemming from executive orders, memos and executive proclamations issued since Jan. 20 that legal groups, labor organizations, and other state and local plaintiffs are challenging. 

Specifically, the memo instructs federal agencies to coordinate with Attorney General Pam Bondi to request federal courts adhere to a rule that mandates financial guarantees from those requesting injunctions. 

While federal judges ultimately have the final say on whether these financial guarantees are required, the Department of Justice can request under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(c) that judges implement the rule to require financial guarantees from plaintiffs that are equal to the potential costs and damages the federal government would incur from a wrongly issued preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order. 

The memo signed Thursday applies to all lawsuits seeking preliminary injunctions or temporary restraining orders ‘where the government can demonstrate monetary harm from the requested relief,’ according to a White House fact sheet. 

‘Agencies must justify security amounts based on reasoned assessments of harm, ensuring courts deny or dissolve injunctions if plaintiffs fail to pay up, absent good cause,’ the White House said in the fact sheet obtained by Fox News Digital. 

As a result, the White House said the order will rein in ‘activist judges’ and keep ‘litigants accountable.’  

‘Unelected district judges have issued sweeping injunctions beyond their authority, inserting themselves into executive policymaking and stalling policies voters supported,’ the White House said in its fact sheet. 

The lawsuits challenging the Trump administration already have started to make their way up to the Supreme Court. For example, the high court issued a 5-4 ruling Wednesday upholding a district judge’s order requiring the Trump administration to pay almost $2 billion in foreign aid money. 

The Supreme Court said that since the district court’s Feb. 26 deadline for the Trump administration to pay the USAID funding contracts has expired, it directed the case back to the lower court to hash out future payment plans. 

‘Given that the deadline in the challenged order has now passed, and in light of the ongoing preliminary injunction proceedings, the District Court should clarify what obligations the Government must fulfill to ensure compliance with the temporary restraining order, with due regard for the feasibility of any compliance timelines,’ the court said.

Fox News’ Kerri Urbahn and Breanne Deppisch contributed to this report. 

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., said her resistant applause when President Donald Trump called her ‘Pocahontas’ during his address to a joint session of Congress was to affirm ‘American support for Ukrainians.’ 

Warren told Nicholas Ballasy for Fox News Digital she was communicating the importance of American support for Ukraine, following Trump’s contentious meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in the Oval Office last Friday. 

‘What I was talking about is the importance of American support for the Ukrainians, who are fighting on the front lines for democracy and fighting back against an autocrat,’ Warren told Fox News Digital. 

Warren, a loyal Ukraine supporter since Russia’s invasion in 2022, said Russian President Vladimir Putin’s line does not stop with Ukraine. 

‘Everyone needs to understand: They take a bite out of Ukraine, they’re not giving up there. They’re coming for the rest of Europe, and we need to fight it,’ Warren said.

Warren told Fox News Digital on Tuesday night she ‘hit a nerve’ by applauding U.S. support for ‘Ukrainian patriots’ during President Donald Trump‘s speech. 

‘Sen. Warren, what did you think of President Trump calling you out by name?’ Fox News Digital asked Warren.

‘I actually hit a nerve when I applauded the United States’ support of Ukrainian patriots. If that hits a nerve for Trump, then it’s worth sitting through the rest of that speech.’

‘Millions of Ukrainians and Russians have been needlessly killed or wounded in this horrific and brutal conflict, with no end in sight. The United States has sent hundreds of billions of dollars to support Ukraine’s defense with no security,’ Trump said during his joint address. 

Responding to the loud applause from Warren and her fellow Democrats, Trump said ‘Pocahontas,’ a nickname Trump uses to mock Warren for claiming Native American heritage, wants ‘another five years’ of war in Ukraine. 

‘Do you want to keep it going for another five years? ‘Yeah, yeah,’ you would say. Pocahontas says yes,’ Trump said. 

Warren was one of several Democrats who slammed Trump after the meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in the Oval Office last Friday. 

‘Donald Trump is treating the destruction of a democracy as a political show — throwing Ukraine to the wolves and doing a favor for Putin. It’s shameful and dangerous. I’ve been to Ukraine, as have many Senate Republicans. I hope they speak up. Millions of lives are at stake,’ Warren said on X.

Warren and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., have visited Zelenskyy in Kyiv in a bipartisan show of American support for Ukraine. Throughout the war, Warren has not waned in her support of funding for Ukraine. 

However, Graham said after the ‘complete, utter disaster’ in the Oval Office that he didn’t know ‘if we can ever do business with Zelenskyy again.’ Graham said Zelenskyy needs to resign or ‘send somebody over that we can do business with, or he needs to change.’

Zelenskyy was asked to leave the White House after his public disagreement with Trump and Vice President JD Vance, a visit that was intended to result in the Ukraine-United States Mineral Resources Agreement.

Trump ordered a suspension of all U.S. military aid to Ukraine on Monday. Zelenskyy then sent a letter to Trump affirming his commitment to a peaceful negotiation and thanking the U.S. for its service to Ukraine.

Rep. Andy Ogles, R-Tenn., has filed a resolution to punish the Democrats who derailed House floor proceedings as Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, was censured on Thursday.

‘We have a country to run. The failed policies of Joe Biden is why they lost the House, why they lost the Senate, why they lost the presidency. They can lick their wounds all day, but they still have to behave on the House floor,’ Ogles told Fox News Digital in a brief interview.

‘We can disagree on issues and politics, but we’re gonna respect one another, and I’m tired of this crap.’

Ogles’ resolution is aimed at stripping committee assignments from the Democratic lawmakers who temporarily plunged the House into chaos on Thursday. 

He told Fox News Digital that he intends to deem the resolution ‘privileged,’ meaning House leaders will have two legislative days to take the measure up. 

It could be voted on as early as next week, when Ogles is planning on broaching the matter with House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La.

All but 12 House Democrats voted against censuring Green for disrupting President Donald Trump’s speech to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday night. Ten Democrats voted with Republicans to reprimand Green, while two, including the Texas lawmaker himself, voted ‘present.’

Before the formal censure could be read out to Green, however, Democrats upended House floor proceedings by gathering with the Texas Democrat and singing ‘We Shall Overcome.’ Johnson was forced to call the House into a recess after failing multiple times to quell the protest.

The House floor briefly descended into chaos as a small group of Republicans and Democrats continued confronting each other, with one Republican heard calling Democrats ’embarrassing’ for their behavior.

Ogles’ resolution, first obtained by Fox News Digital, directs the House Sergeant-at-Arms to ‘provide a determination’ of ‘which members ignored the speaker’s directive to leave the well of the House.’

‘Upon submission of that list to the speaker,’ they would be ‘removed from any standing committee on which they currently serve for the remainder of the 119th Congress,’ the text said.

Ogles first posted his intent to file his resolution on X.

‘The speaker, he’s a good man, he’s a Christian man. He has a kind heart. With grace gave them the opportunity to stop and they refuse to do so,’ Ogles told Fox News Digital. ‘So, look, if you wanna act like a petulant child on the House floor and you’re giving a warning and a reprimand, and you choose not to stop, then actions need to be taken.’

Green was removed from Trump’s joint address to Congress on Tuesday night after repeatedly disrupting the beginning of the president’s speech.

He shouted, ‘You have no mandate!’ at Trump as he touted Republican victories in the House, Senate and White House.

Johnson had Green removed by the Sergeant-at-Arms.

The 77-year-old Democrat was unrepentant when given the chance to speak out in his defense on Wednesday.

‘I heard the speaker when he said that I should cease. I did not, and I did not with intentionality. It was not done out of a burst of emotion,’ Green said. ‘I think that on some questions, questions of conscience, you have to be willing to suffer the consequences. And I have said I will. I will suffer whatever the consequences are, because I don’t believe that in the richest country in the world, people should be without good healthcare.’