As President Trump marks his first 100 days in office on Tuesday, the administration is touting all of their fulfilled campaign promises when it comes to Social Security, an issue where he has been much maligned by Democrats and some in the media.

‘I am proud of the extraordinary work by our dedicated employees at SSA to help deliver on President Trump’s promise to protect Social Security,’ Lee Dudek, acting commissioner of the Social Security Administration (SSA), told Fox News Digital in a statement.

‘They have worked tirelessly to improve customer service while safeguarding Americans’ hard-earned benefits from waste, fraud, and abuse. It will take time to fully recover from the disastrous policies of the previous administration, which led to sky-high wait times for customer service and unconscionable delays for benefit decisions,’ Dudek continued. ‘But SSA employees are leading the turnaround by refocusing their work on frontline customer service, modernizing IT for a better customer experience, and bolstering program integrity.’ 

The administration, which has called Trump’s first 100 days the most successful of any administration, says that it has made ‘significant strides’ in moving the Social Security Fairness Act forward and has paid over $14.8 billion in retroactive payments to over 2 million individuals affected by the Windfall Elimination Provision and Government Pension Offset.

Trump’s moves on Social Security come as Democrats, including former President Joe Biden, have accused the administration of plotting to slash Social Security benefits, particularly through the Department of Government Efficiency’s (DOGE’s) efforts to reform the agency. 

However, the administration says that it is focused on reforms, not cutting benefits, and a White House official told Fox News Digital that SSA has identified over $1 billion in cost avoidance or efficiencies for fiscal year 2025 ‘through new, common-sense approaches in areas such as payroll, information technology, contracts and grants, real property, printing, travel, and purchase card policies.’

Examples include reducing software licensing, salvaging and repairing tables and chairs, returning leased motor vehicles, converting in-person training to online, streamlining case assignment and tracking systems, and reducing travel card spending allowances. 

Additionally, the White House official says the agency has made strides in implementing fraud prevention tools, including tools that help identify fraudulent claims via telephone.

Many, including DOGE chief Elon Musk, have raised concerns about the accuracy of Social Security records, particularly when it comes to data related to whether a person is deceased or still on the rolls despite being well over 100 years old. 

The White House told Fox News Digital that progress has been made on that front as well to improve the accuracy of death data and called that effort a ‘high priority’ that was a low priority in the previous administration.

Musk has drawn the ire of Democrats by referring to Social Security as a ‘Ponzi scheme.’

Fox News Digital spoke to an expert earlier this year who made the case that Musk has a point in using the term ‘Ponzi scheme.’

‘Musk’s statement about Social Security being the world’s biggest Ponzi scheme does have validity,’ James Agresti, president of the nonprofit research institute Just Facts, told Fox News Digital in response to pushback from Musk’s claim, which included a ‘false’ rating from Politifact. 

‘A Ponzi scheme operates by taking money from new investors to pay current investors. That’s the definition given by the SEC, and contrary to popular belief, that’s exactly how Social Security operates.’

The House on Monday overwhelmingly passed a bill backed by first lady Melania Trump that cracks down on the posting of explicit images, including ‘deep fake’ nudes generated of people by artificial intelligence, without consent. 

The Tools to Address Known Exploitation by Immobilizing Technological Deepfakes on Websites and Networks – known as the TAKE IT DOWN Act – was approved by a 409-2 vote and now heads to President Donald Trump’s desk. 

The measure ‘generally prohibits the nonconsensual online publication of intimate visual depictions of individuals, both authentic and computer-generated, and requires certain online platforms to promptly remove such depictions upon receiving notice of their existence,’ according to the bill summary. 

It specifically prohibits online publication of ‘intimate visual depictions’ of an adult subject ‘where publication is intended to cause or does cause harm to the subject, and where the depiction was published without the subject’s consent or, in the case of an authentic depiction, was created or obtained under circumstances where the adult had a reasonable expectation of privacy,’ as well as ‘a minor subject where publication is intended to abuse or harass the minor or to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person.’ 

‘Violators are subject to mandatory restitution and criminal penalties, including prison, a fine, or both,’ according to the bill summary. ‘Threats to publish intimate visual depictions of a subject are similarly prohibited under the bill and subject to criminal penalties.’ 

The legislation also requires platforms to establish a process where victims of revenge porn can notify them of the existence of images and request removal. The bill says platforms then have 48 hours to remove those images.

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, introduced the TAKE IT DOWN Act in January, and it was approved by the upper chamber in February. It was brought to the House by Rep. Maria Salazar, R-Fla.

Two Republicans – Reps. Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Eric Burlison of Missouri – were the only House members to vote against the legislation on Monday.  

Massie acknowledged that the TAKE IT DOWN Act ‘would impose federal criminal and civil penalties for publishing unauthorized intimate pictures generated with AI.’

‘I’m voting NO because I feel this is a slippery slope, ripe for abuse, with unintended consequences,’ Massie wrote on X. 

House Republicans on Monday praised the first lady, Cruz and Salazar for leading the ‘crucial legislation’ to ‘create a safer digital future and protect our kids from deepfake exploitation.’ 

‘The passage of the TAKE IT DOWN Act is a historic win in the fight to protect victims of revenge porn and deepfake abuse,’ Cruz wrote on X. ‘This victory belongs first and foremost to the heroic survivors who shared their stories and the advocates who never gave up. By requiring social media companies to take down this abusive content quickly, we are sparing victims from repeated trauma and holding predators accountable.’

‘This day would not have been possible without the courage and perseverance of Elliston Berry, Francesca Mani, Breeze Liu, and Brandon Guffey, whose powerful voices drove this legislation forward,’ the senator wrote, adding that he was especially grateful to colleagues, including Melania Trump and Salazar, as well as Democrats Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, and Rep. Madeleine Dean of Pennsylvania, ‘for locking arms in this critical mission to protect Americans from online exploitation.’

‘Advancing this legislation has been a key focus since I returned to my role as First Lady this past January,’ Melania Trump wrote on X. ‘I am honored to have contributed to guiding it through Congress. By safeguarding children from hurtful online behavior today, we take a vital step in nurturing our leaders of tomorrow. #BeBest’ 

During President Trump’s first term, the first lady established the BE BEST awareness campaign, which ‘focused on the well-being of children and highlighted the people and programs dedicated to ensuring a better future for the next generation,’ according to the White House. Melania Trump also established Fostering the Future, a BE BEST initiative, ‘which provides college-level scholarships to those aging out of the foster care system.’

President Donald Trump has spent the first 100 days of his second White House term signing a flurry of executive orders aimed at delivering on his policy priorities: slashing government spending, cracking down on illegal immigration and eliminating many diversity and equity initiatives enacted under the Biden administration.

The more than 150 executive orders Trump has signed far outpace those of his predecessors. But they have also triggered a torrent of lawsuits seeking to block or pause his actions, teeing up a high-stakes showdown over how far Trump can push his Article II powers before the courts can or should intervene. 

It’s a looming constitutional clash spinning like a top through the federal courts; a blink-and-you’ll-miss-it set of hearings and appeals and emergency orders that deal with weighty issues of due process and First Amendment protections guaranteed by the Constitution. 

Trump’s critics argue the fast-paced strategy is meant to confuse and overwhelm his opponents. His supporters counter that it allows him to strike with maximum precision and sidestep a clunky, slow-moving Congress as the president pursues his top priorities.

In his first 100 days, administration lawyers have gone to bat in courtrooms across the country to defend Trump’s early executive orders and halt a wave of lawsuits and emergency restraining orders aimed at blocking them. 

Trump, meanwhile, has steadfastly maintained that he would ‘never defy’ the Supreme Court as recently as in an interview last week. 

‘I’m a big believer in the Supreme Court and have a lot of respect for the justices,’ Trump told Time Magazine.  

Critics say he already has.

‘The second Trump administration has taken the guardrails off of the norms that historically governed the rule of law and is undertaking steps to enhance the perceived power of the executive branch to the detriment of the two other co-equal branches,’ Mark Zaid, an attorney who has gone toe-to-toe with the Trump administration in several court cases this year, told Fox News Digitial.

‘These actions threaten the fundamental notion of our democracy, particularly as the Administration seeks to eliminate due process protections in a quest for power.’

The biggest fights so far have centered around the Trump administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act, a 1798 wartime law, to deport certain migrants to El Salvador. Another major case to watch will be challenges to Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship. 

Two separate federal judges, in D.C. and Maryland, have suggested they could move to begin possible contempt proceedings against some Trump officials for refusing to comply with their orders.

In one case, a judge issued a scathing rebuke against Trump officials for failing to return a Maryland resident and alleged gang member who was wrongfully deported to El Salvador this year. Separately, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg said there was probable cause to find Trump administration officials in criminal contempt for defying his order to return deportation flights to El Salvador on March 15.

The Trump administration has fought back, questioning the authority of lower courts to stop his agenda. The Supreme Court agreed to hear oral arguments on a challenge to some of the nationwide injunctions, beginning with a birthright citizenship case in early May.

Meanwhile, White House officials have railed against the ‘activist’ judges who they say have overstepped and are acting with a political agenda to block Trump’s policies. They’ve blasted judges for pausing Trump’s transgender military ban, reinstating USAID programs and blocking Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing federal offices.

Some congressional allies have threatened impeachment against judges who defy Trump, but so far Congress has not advanced any impeachment articles.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt declined this week to rule out the arrest of federal judges, including Supreme Court justices.

Asked at a press briefing about the hypothetical on Monday, Leavitt referred the matter to the Justice Department but said a judge in New Mexico was arrested in ‘a clear-cut case of obstruction.’

‘And so anyone who is breaking the law or obstructing federal law enforcement officials from doing their jobs is putting themselves at risk of being prosecuted, absolutely,’ she said.

Jonathan Turley, a law professor and Fox News contributor, told Fox News Digital that he sees Trump’s early actions as getting ahead of the 2026 primaries and moving with maximum force to implement his agenda.

Trump ‘knows that he has no alternative but to push ahead on all fronts if he is going to make meaningful progress on his promised reforms,’ Turley told Fox News. 

‘The midterm elections are looming in 2026. If the Democrats retake the House, he knows that he can expect investigations, impeachments and obstruction. That means that he has to expedite these cases and establish his lines of authority in areas ranging from migration to the markets.’

President Donald Trump’s second term has taken the world by storm in his first 100 days, leaving allies and adversaries scrambling to respond to new U.S. tariffs, stalled peace negotiations and hardball diplomacy from the White House.

On the campaign trail, he pledged to hit allies and foes alike with massive tariffs, end Russia’s war in Ukraine within 24-hours and threatened that ‘all hell’ would break out if all hostages were not freed from the clutches of Hamas in Gaza by the time he entered the Oval Office.

While Trump has been able to make good on some of his promises, other ambitions remain unmet. Here’s what Trump has accomplished and what challenges remain:

Where Russia’s war in Ukraine stands

Trump last week conceded that his pledge to end the three-year-old war in Ukraine within 24 hours of taking office was ‘figurative,’ acknowledging it was never a realistic goal. The conflict has claimed a reported 1 million casualties.

‘I said that as an exaggeration,’ he told reporters. 

While Trump has faced criticism over his ability to bring Russian President Vladimir Putin to the negotiating table, his team — led by Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Secretary of State Antony Rubio — has made some headway, securing a 30-day ceasefire protecting Ukraine’s energy infrastructure.

But Putin has so far refused to enter any other brokered agreements, despite Kyiv’s willingness to play ball even after the historic Oval Office blow-up between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in February.

Though Trump appeared to hold a grudge against Zelenskyy after Ukraine rejected a proposed mineral deal — even blaming him in part for Russia’s illegal invasion — relations between the two leaders appeared to improve over the weekend. Trump also set a new ultimatum for Putin, issuing a deadline to reach a ceasefire deal.

‘Two weeks or less,’ Trump told reporters Sunday, though he later added a bit more time would be acceptable. ‘We’ll see what happens over the next few days. We’ll probably learn a lot.’

Trump said he was ‘surprised and disappointed’ after Putin last week levied a barrage of missiles at Ukraine’s capital city of Kyiv in a strike that killed 12 civilians and injured nearly 100 more.

‘I want him to stop shooting, sit down and sign a deal,’ Trump said in reference to Putin. ‘We have the confines of a deal, I believe, and I want him to sign it and be done with it and just go back to life.’

Trump has not said how or whether he will hold Putin accountable if he doesn’t agree to a ceasefire and the White House has not responded to Fox News Digital’s repeated questions regarding the issue.

Gaza ceasefire

Before entering office, Trump repeatedly threatened Hamas that ‘all hell’ would break out if they didn’t return all hostages by the time he arrived at the White House. 

But the Palestinian terror group has ignored his threats and rejected Trump’s February proposal to turn the Gaza Strip into the ‘Riviera of the Middle East,’ saying it would adhere to a ceasefire agreement brokered between the terrorist organization and Israel, mediated by the U.S., Qatar and Egypt. 

Trump has not hit Hamas, nor have his negotiations to release hostages looked all that different from his predecessor’s.  

The first phase of what was intended to be a three-phase ceasefire saw the return of 33 hostages taken by Hamas, the majority of whom were abducted in the Oct. 7, 2023 attack on Israel, as well as the release of 1,800 Palestinian prisoners held by Jerusalem. 

But 59 hostages remain in Gaza, including American-Israeli Edan Alexander, and hopes of a second phase collapsed after negotiations stalled on terms surrounding future hostage releases, and in March Israel reignited military operations in the Gaza Strip.

A Qatari official on Sunday said the main hiccup in securing a ceasefire following the latest round of talks last week is that Israel has not presented a clear solution to end the war in exchange for hostage releases, Reuters reported. 

Trump on Friday said he pushed Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu to reopen aid corridors into Gaza, which have been blocked since March 2, in order to allow food and medicine to reach Palestinians, though humanitarian corridors have not yet been opened. 

Iran nuclear agreement

Trump on Sunday said he believes a deal to end Iran’s nuclear program can be achieved ‘without having to start dropping bombs all over the place.’

Details on nuclear negotiations between the U.S. and Iran in Oman on Saturday, in which the third round of talks were held, remain nil, though Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi reportedly told Iranian state media they were ‘very serious and work-focused.’ 

Araghchi described the hours-long talks as having finally ‘entered into deeper and more detailed discussions,’ though no specifics of the negotiations have been released. 

It remains unclear if the Trump administration is pursuing a halt to Tehran’s nuclear advancement or a complete disarmament arrangement, which would see the destruction of Iran’s centrifuge facilities and its stockpiles of near-weapons-grade enriched uranium. 

It also remains unclear how much time the president will allow for the negotiations to carry on. 

Relations with China deteriorate

Relations between the U.S. and China have hit a level of animosity not seen between the two superpowers since Washington normalized ties with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in the 1970s. 

The initial U.S.-China trade war started during Trump’s first term, in which he hit China with 25% tariffs on $50 billion in Chinese goods in April 2018.

Beijing responded by slapping reciprocal tariffs on $50 billion worth of U.S. goods, mostly targeting U.S. agricultural products worth some $16.5 billion — a trade war that saw the loss of a quarter of a million U.S. jobs by January 2021, according to the U.S.-China Business Council (USCBC).

From the campaign trail, Trump threatened to hit China with 60% tariffs — which he nearly did in early April when he announced an additional 34% tariff on top of the existing taxes already in place. 

But what had already sent geopolitical shockwaves and sparked near-immediate market concerns was further escalated just over a week later when Trump ratcheted up tariffs on Beijing to 145%. 

China has responded by hitting Washington with its own 125% reciprocal tariffs on U.S. imports and, according to a Bloomberg report on Monday, cargo supply shipments have already dropped by 60%.

Americans are expected to begin feeling the pains of the trade war come mid-May.

Trump said last week he had reached some 200 trade deals with countries affected by his sweeping tariffs — measures that hit nearly every U.S. trading partner, including longtime allies. He paused the tariffs for 90 days earlier this month following intense backlash.

The status of trading relations with U.S. partners remains unclear, along with whether the administration will implement the blanket tariffs on those nations come July.

The 25% tariffs on steel, aluminum and imported vehicles remain in effect.

The White House did not directly respond to Fox News Digital’s questions regarding next steps Trump will takes when it comes to handling thus far unresolved conflict in Ukraine and the Gaza Strip.

A White House spokesman instead said, ‘President Trump inherited widespread foreign conflicts and a weak standing on the world stage from Joe Biden. Now, America is strong again, hostages are free from Gaza, Marc Fogel and Ksenia Karelina are home, hundreds of Houthi and other terrorists have been eliminated, and we are closer to peace than ever before. 

‘This President will never get the credit he deserves for his vast foreign policy accomplishments, but Americans know they are freer and safer under his leadership,’ the spokesman added.

Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, D-Wash., described Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., during her 2022 campaign as unrepresentative of American voters, but campaign finance reports revealed she collected at least $31,000 from the former House speaker and her political action committees during her three years in Congress. 

‘I want to make my position clear that I will not vote for Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House,’ Perez told The Columbian in 2022. ‘I look around, I look at my community, and I don’t see leadership in Congress looking like that.’

Despite the moderate Democrat rejecting Pelosi’s leadership on the campaign trail, campaign finance reports show that since she took office in 2022, Gluesenkamp Perez and her Super PAC, Marie Gluesenkamp Perez Campaign Defense Fund, have accepted at least $31,000 from Pelosi and her affiliated Super PACs, including PAC to the Future and Nancy Pelosi for Congress.

According to U.S. Census data, the $31,000 represents more than one third of the median household income for residents in Washington’s third congressional district, which includes Clark County and Vancouver, Washington, the district’s largest city.

‘We need more and more normal people to run for Congress. We need more people that work in the trades,’ Gluesenkamp Perez told Politico in 2023, as she described a Democratic Party out of touch with middle-class Americans. 

‘Just like her pal Nancy Pelosi, Marie Gluesenkamp Perez will say and do anything to get elected,’ Congressional Leadership Fund, the super PAC dedicated to maintaining the Republican majority in the U.S. House of Representatives, spokeswoman Torunn Sinclair, told Fox News Digital. 

‘That’s not a quality Washington State families want in their congresswoman.’

Gluesenkamp Perez was first elected to represent Washington in the U.S. House of Representatives in 2022 and won re-election in 2024, narrowly defeating her Republican challenger, Joe Kent, for the second time in two House cycles. 

The Washington congresswoman is considered one of the most vulnerable House Democrats in 2026, just as she was in 2024 after winning her 2022 race by less than two points. Republicans are likely to target her seat as an opportunity to widen their majority in the House. 

While Republicans slam Gluesenkamp Perez for flip-flopping on Pelosi, she is also facing the fury of her own party as hundreds of Democratic constituents protested at her town hall on Thursday. 

According to local reporting, including KGW News, protesters held up signs that read, ‘Shame on you,’ and chanted, ‘Vote her out,’ as Gluesenkamp Perez explained why she voted in support of the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act. 

The SAVE Act, which passed in the House earlier this month, requires voters to obtain proof of citizenship in-person before they register for a federal election and will remove noncitizens from voter rolls. It has been widely rejected by Democrats since its conception, and 208 House Democrats voted against the bill. 

‘I do not support noncitizens voting in American elections – and that’s common sense to folks in Southwest Washington. Voting in our nation’s elections is a sacred right belonging only to American citizens, and my vote for the SAVE Act reflects that principle,’ Gluesenkamp Perez said after voting in support of the SAVE ACT, despite facing vocal opposition from constituents on Thursday for doing so. 

Gluesenkamp Perez also faced disapproval from Washington state Democrats for voting to censure Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, after he shouted and shook his cane during President Donald Trump’s joint address to Congress earlier this year.  

Gluesenkamp Perez’s campaign did not respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment by deadline. 

It has been 100 days since the new U.S. administration took office amid a clear policy of ‘America First.’ 

But for American families like mine, families whose loved ones are still held hostage by Hamas for over 560 days, we should have already seen results from this policy. My son, Itay Chen, a dual U.S.-Israeli citizen, remains in captivity. So do four other Americans: Edan Alexander, Omer Neutra, Judy and Gadi Weinstein. Every day that passes without their return is another day of anguish, uncertainty, and pain.

As a father, I wake up every morning hoping this will be the day I get the call from the White House telling me my son is coming home. When President Donald Trump won the election, I felt a renewed sense of hope. I believed that his leadership, strength, and personal concern for American hostages would lead to real movement. And I deeply thank President Trump for demanding the release of all hostages even before his inauguration that led to the release of 33 hostages in Gaza, including two U.S. citizens. 

I believe he cares profoundly, but the truth is, the first 100 days of this administration have not delivered what the president himself demanded – releasing all of the U.S. hostages in Gaza and sending a clear message that holding U.S. hostages anywhere is a liability, not an asset. 

This is not a critique made in anger. It is a plea made in desperation. I understand that diplomacy is complex. I know that the negotiations around hostages—especially in a war zone and involving multiple international actors— require discretion, patience, and nuance. But I also know that time is not on our side. As the weeks pass, the fear grows that the window to bring our loved ones back is narrowing and they will disappear forever.

We have seen this administration act boldly in other arenas to implement the America First policy, particularly when it comes to economic policy. Tariffs and financial pressure have already been deployed as tools of American strength. 

Why not apply similar pressure now to release the U.S. hostages? Instead of the administration being proactive, U.S. families like mine, out of despair, are taking matters into our own hands. We’ve been lobbying Congress to impose direct financial sanctions against Hamas, pressuring banks and financial institutions to freeze assets and urging stricter enforcement of existing measures. Just this month, U.S. families filed a lawsuit against Bashar Masri, an American businessman charging that he provided assistance in constructing infrastructure that allowed Hamas militants to carry out their cross-border rampage, including killing 45 U.S. citizens. We’ve urged the Administration, the Department of Justice and the Treasury to expand these efforts. 

The administration can, and must, do more. Americans – children, fathers, sisters – are all still being held in underground tunnels by a terrorist organization, in conditions we can barely imagine. The previous administration told the American families the way to release our family members would be via Israel as a proxy. Though the plan did not work, the Biden administration kept doubling down on the same plan despite not getting the expected results. 

The Trump administration inherited this policy and should re-evaluate the game plan. President Trump is an extremely gifted negotiator. His team successfully released several U.S. citizens from war zones with direct negotiations. As such, why is President Trump not directly negotiating for the release of U.S. citizens in Gaza, but instead using third parties such as Qatar to negotiate for the release of U.S. citizens? In January, we saw what the president’s direct involvement can do to release hostages. The U.S. has a legal obligation to get its citizens out of harm’s way and if the proxy is not capable of releasing them, then the U.S. must find a different path to release its citizens.  

Trump administration officials have sent a clear message to the world that American lives are not bargaining chips. This administration has the opportunity to reinforce that principle—to lead with strength and show that ‘America First’ means never leaving Americans behind.

I will not lose hope. My faith in America’s power and promise is unbroken. But that hope needs to be matched with action. For Itay. For the other hostages. For the credibility – and the soul – of a nation that is seeking to reset the table with the world based on a true ‘America First’ policy. What a victory it would be if President Trump, in his upcoming visit to the Middle East, will bring on his plane back home the 5 U.S. hostages from Gaza.

Rep. Shri Thanedar, D-Mich., announced on Monday that he introduced seven articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump.

‘Donald Trump has repeatedly demonstrated that he is unfit to serve as President and represents a clear and present danger to our nation’s constitution and our democracy,’ Thanedar said in a news release.

The articles allege wrongdoing by Trump including ‘Obstruction of Justice and Abuse of Executive Power,’ ‘Usurpation of Appropriations Power,’ ‘Abuse of Trade Powers and International Aggression,’ ‘Violation of First Amendment Rights,’ ‘Creation of an Unlawful Office,’ ‘Bribery and Corruption,’ and ‘Tyrannical Overreach’

‘His unlawful actions have subverted the justice system, violated the separation of powers, and placed personal power and self-interest above public service. We cannot wait for more damage to be done. Congress must act,’ Thanedar said of the president.

Fox News Digital reached out to the White House for comment but did not receive a response by the time of publication.

The impeachment push will almost certainly fail to go anywhere in the GOP-controlled House of Representatives, but marks the third instance of a representative filing impeachment articles against Trump.

The House impeached Trump twice during his first term in office, but in both cases the respective Senate votes failed to reach the threshold necessary for conviction — the second impeachment took place just before Trump left office, with the Senate acquittal coming after his term was over.

Thanedar was born in India and became an American citizen in 1988, according to his House website. 

He has served in the U.S. House of Representatives since early 2023.

Canada’s Liberal Party is projected to win the country’s federal election for the fourth consecutive time.

The Liberals are led by Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, who took over after Justin Trudeau resigned.

As of late Monday, the Liberal Party was also leading with 137 seats won in Parliament as opposed to the 98 seats held by the Conservative Party.

A party needs to win 172 seats in order to hold the majority.
 

This is a breaking news story. Check back for updates.

The U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., issued a ruling Monday to restore a lower court’s order barring the Trump administration’s planned mass layoffs at the Consumer Financial Protections Bureau (CFPB).

The court ruled 2-1 to restore an earlier ruling by federal Judge Amy Berman Jackson, an Obama appointee, which temporarily halted the Trump administration’s reductions in force (RIF) at CFPB, which would have cut the agency’s staff by 90 percent.

Before Jackson’s ruling, the agency was slated to carry out a reduction in force of roughly 1,400 employees, which would have left just several hundred in place. 

Following a legal challenge against the reduction filed in the D.C. district court in early February, Jackson issued a preliminary injunction in late March, finding that the plaintiffs would likely succeed on the merits.

The order directed the government to ‘rehire all terminated employees, reinstate all terminated contracts, and refrain from engaging in reductions-in-force or attempting to stop work through any means.’ 

Jackson then ordered another halt to plans earlier this month, shortly after an appeals court narrowed her earlier injunction. Jackson noted that within several days of an appeals order narrowing her initial injunction, CFPB employees were told the agency would do ‘exactly what it was told not to do,’ which was to carry out a RIF. 

Jackson blocked the administration from moving forward with any layoffs or from cutting off employees’ access to computers at the bureau until she had time to hear from the officials in question.

Jackson said she was ‘willing to resolve it quickly,’ but noted that she is ‘deeply concerned, given the scope and scope of action.’

Lawyers with the Justice Department sought to appeal Jackson’s order earlier this year, arguing in a filing that the injunction ‘improperly intrudes on the executive [branch’s] authority’ and goes ‘far beyond what is lawful.’

Jackson is set to hear testimony from officials slated to carry out the RIF procedures on Tuesday. 

Pakistan’s defense minister on Monday said he believes an incursion by India is ‘imminent’ as tensions remain heightened following a militant attack in India’s Kashmir region last week, which saw the killing of 26 people, first reported Reuters. 

India, which has not named any group it suspects of leading the attack but said it believes Pakistan to have backed the militants involved in the assault, has reportedly engaged in an aggressive hunt to find those involved in the deadliest attack in two decades. 

According to a BBC report, Indian authorities have used explosives to demolish properties allegedly linked to the suspects, more than 1,500 people have been detained for questioning and troops from both India and Pakistan have exchanged cross-border small arms fire.

‘We have reinforced our forces because it is something which is imminent now. So in that situation, some strategic decisions have to be taken, so those decisions have been taken,’ Pakistan Defense Minister Khawaja Muhammad Asif told Reuters on Monday from the capital city of Islamabad. 

Asif did not say why he thought a possible incursion from India was imminent, but noted that allies in the Gulf had been informed, who in turn had apparently communicated the situation on the ground with officials in China and the U.S.

The New York Times on Monday similarly reported that India appeared to be building its case for possible military intervention as Prime Minister Narendra Modi had been engaging in mass diplomatic outreach by speaking with more than a dozen world leaders about the situation.

The feud between India and Pakistan predates last week’s attack by nearly 80 years, following Britain’s decision to end its direct rule in the region following World War II and enact the 1947 Partition of British India, which essentially divided modern-day India and Pakistan based on Hindu and Muslim populations — though it caused massive unrest and displacement along religious lines.

The partition also gave the diverse Jammu and Kashmir region the ability to choose if it wanted to join either newly established nation. 

Ultimately, the conflict ongoing today stems from the previous monarch of the region’s initial attempt to seek independence, followed by its decision to join India in exchange for security against invading Pakistani militias.

India and Pakistan have engaged in several wars and cross-border skirmishes in the decades since. 

While President Donald Trump said last week that resolving the decades-old conflict was down to New Delhi and Islamabad to sort out, the State Department said it was working with both sides to encourage a ‘responsible solution.’