Elon Musk, who runs multiple successful companies in addition to heading up President Donald Trump's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), has stepped down from his position.
Given that, the obvious conversation at this point is who President Trump will choose to replace Musk, who admittedly is a one-of-a-kind type of brilliant mind.
According to Fox News, there's already quite a bit of speculation as to possible replacement options, as Trump has vowed that the work DOGE has done so far will continue under his administration.
Interestingly enough, the White House has already commented on the situation, saying that for now, Musk will likely not be replaced and DOGE employees will continue their work as usual.
Musk announced his departure from the cost and waste-cutting government unit, adding that he was thankful to President Trump for allowing him the opportunity to head up the DOGE group.
"As my scheduled time as a Special Government Employee comes to an end, I would like to thank President @realDonaldTrump for the opportunity to reduce wasteful spending," Musk wrote in an X post.
As my scheduled time as a Special Government Employee comes to an end, I would like to thank President @realDonaldTrump for the opportunity to reduce wasteful spending.
The @DOGE mission will only strengthen over time as it becomes a way of life throughout the government.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 29, 2025
The White House implied that DOGE will continue how it has operated, with a simple shift in that the leaders in Trump's Cabinet will continue to implement the same waste-cutting strategies that Musk oversaw.
Fox News noted:
Speaking with reporters on Thursday, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed that "the DOGE leaders are each and every member of the president's cabinet and the president himself, who is wholeheartedly committed to cutting waste, fraud and abuse from our government."
In other words, it doesn't appear that Musk will be replaced.
Users across social media reacted to the news of Musk's departure, and many expressed their sadness to see him go.
"You are the only Government employee I have ever been sad to see go. Ever," one X user wrote.
Another X user wrote, "Exposing the D.C. swamp takes grit most folks don’t have, and you stepped up when others backed down. Thank you !! Now it’s our turn to finish the job. Let’s make DOGE’s legacy permanent and codify, codify, codify."
While Musk may not be replaced in the near future, it looks as though DOGE will be in good hands when he's gone.
President Donald Trump doesn't mess around when it comes to firing people who no longer serve his mission or have opposing viewpoints, as he places top priority on loyalty to his cause.
According to The Hill, the president authorized the firing of National Portrait Gallery director Kim Sajet, noting that she's "highly partisan" and a "supporter" of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI).
It's the latest effort by the Trump administration to weed out the DEI nonsense that took over the U.S. government under President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris.
Financial and election records backed Trump's claim of Sajet's partisanship, with documents showing her donations to a long list of high-profile Democrats, including former Vice President Kamala Harris.
Trump released a statement on Sajet's firing, claiming that "many" people -- presumably advisers and staffers -- requested that he terminate her employment due to her obvious liberal ideology.
"Upon the request and recommendation of many people, I am herby terminating the employment of Kim Sajet as Director of the National Portrait Gallery," Trump wrote in a Truth Social post.
He added, "She is a highly partisan person, and a strong supporter of DEI, which is totally inappropriate for her position. Her replacement will be named shortly."
BREAKING: Trump terminated Director of the National Portrait Gallery, Kim Sajet
“She is a highly partisan person and a strong supporter of DEI” pic.twitter.com/rRLGvFxzii
— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) May 30, 2025
The Hill noted:
The Federal Elections Commission reported that she financially supported Democratic nominees including former President Biden, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, (D-N.Y.), former Democratic National Committee Chair Jaime Harrison (D-S.C.) and others through ActBlue.
Sajet's firing was the latest in the Trump administration's mission to quash any remaining DEI elements in government, following the firing of Librarian of Congress, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the U.S. Coast Guard Commandant for similar reasons, the Hill noted.
Users across social media applauded the president for making the call to get rid of Sajet.
"They are probably in a court room right now getting a judge to say he can’t do this it violates her rights to free speech or something like that…" one X user wrote.
Another X user wrote, "Congratulations on cleaning up the trash."
Sajet may be the latest to get her walking papers, but she probably won't be the last.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Once again, Indian media have set their sights on an American citizen, this time a veteran who's been directly harmed by the broken H-1B system, for nothing more than exercising his First Amendment rights. The article published by M9 News, "Legal H1B Tweaks Could Shake Indian Economy,", isn't journalism; it's foreign gaslighting. The piece mocks the voice of an American patriot, Virgil Bierschwale, for daring to say what millions of displaced Americans know to be true: our immigration system is broken, rigged and ruthlessly exploited.
Nowhere in the article is there any acknowledgment of Bierschwale's service to this country, his sacrifice, or his relentless efforts to inform and empower Americans through his work and his website Guest Worker Visas, Instead, the authors trivialize his candidacy for U.S. Senate, paint him as irrelevant and attempt to silence his warnings simply because he is not a sitting politician. This is not a minor oversight. It's a deliberate omission, a calculated attempt to erase the voice of a veteran who continues to fight for his fellow citizens long after his military service.
Rather than engage with the substance of his arguments or confront the economic devastation wrought by the H-1B visa pipeline, the article reduces Bierschwale to a failed candidate, as if only the politically connected or corporate elites have the right to speak on behalf of Americans. The Indian media's message is clear: Americans should be ashamed to defend their own jobs, while foreign interests are free to demand whatever serves them, no matter the cost to the people who built this nation.
This article says more about India than it does about Virgil
"For many Indian professionals, the American dream wasn't meant to be stalled at every turn…caught in a system that seems more focused on paperwork than on people."
The ongoing narrative that the American dream is somehow being "stalled" for Indian professionals by paperwork and procedural requirements is a glaring misdirection, one that conveniently ignores the devastation the H-1B system and offshoring have inflicted on millions of Americans. The real imbalance isn't bureaucratic red tape; it's the decades-long displacement of American workers, the shuttering of careers and the hollowing out of entire industries as jobs are systematically funneled overseas or handed to foreign visa holders.
What these complaints about "paperwork" truly reveal is a frustration that America is finally, albeit slowly, demanding basic protections for its own citizens. These regulations exist for a reason: to protect American workers from exploitation, discrimination and the relentless march of corporate interests willing to replace them at the lowest cost. When Indian media and their advocates bemoan paperwork as an obstacle, what they are really lamenting is that it is becoming harder to game the system and bypass the very safeguards designed to keep America's workforce strong.
Indian professionals, or any foreign nationals for that matter, are not entitled to American jobs and they are not entitled to a shortcut around the laws and procedures established by this country. Every form, every process, every layer of oversight is there because of the very real harm inflicted on American families, harm that never seems to warrant a single sentence in these foreign editorials.
For the millions of Americans who have been laid off, sidelined, or forced to train their own foreign replacements, paperwork is the last line of defense. Their livelihoods, not the minor inconveniences of well-paid guest workers, should be the priority in every immigration and employment debate. If the system is finally asking tougher questions and demanding more scrutiny, it's a sign that America is waking up and that is exactly what those who have profited from our complacency now fear most.
America's policies should serve its own people first. The sense of "disconnection" that foreign media laments is not the result of unfair paperwork, but the long-overdue insistence that American jobs are for American workers and no amount of foreign lobbying or manufactured outrage will ever change that fundamental right.
"The issue at hand goes beyond just visas. It's about who gets to shape the narrative around talent, opportunity and economic exchange. When voices like his start to take the lead, it becomes more than just policy—it becomes personal."
It's telling that Indian media insists the H-1B debate is about "who gets to shape the narrative around talent, opportunity and economic exchange" as if Americans, in their own country, are somehow out of line for demanding a say in their own future. The reality is, for years, only one side has shaped this narrative: foreign governments, offshore lobbyists and global corporations eager to profit from cheap labor, all while sidelining the voices of displaced American workers.
When an American like Virgil Bierschwale, who has actually felt the pain of these policies, dares to speak up, suddenly the discussion is "personal" and the foreign media establishment scrambles to silence him. The hypocrisy is staggering. Indian officials and business leaders have had a megaphone in Washington for decades, openly lobbying for more access to U.S. jobs and more favorable policies, never once apologizing for putting their own interests first. But when an American patriot does the same for his own people, that's portrayed as out of bounds.
Let's be clear: Americans not only have the right, but the obligation, to shape the policies and the narrative that affect their country's future. If that makes things "personal," it's because the economic survival of millions of American families is personal. The real injustice is that it ever took this long for their voices to finally lead the conversation.
America belongs to Americans. No amount of foreign lobbying, media spin, or elite hand-wringing will ever change that. If Indian officials and their media surrogates insist on shaping U.S. policy, they should at least admit that Americans have every right and every reason to demand that their government put its people first.
As Virgil himself told me after reading the article: "Never once did they mention I wrote that tweet because Americans are being discriminated against in America by Indians living in America and managing American businesses."
That is the real story here and it's one Americans will never be ashamed for telling.
The White House is calling on Jill Biden to come clean to Congress about her husband's cognitive decline, as a delayed public reckoning with Joe Biden's shadow presidency continues.
“Frankly, the former first lady should certainly speak up about what she saw in regards to her husband and when she saw it, and what she knew,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said.
The former first lady is falling under fresh scrutiny after the publication of a new book on the cover-up of the former president's health decline, Original Sin by Alex Thompson and Jake Tapper.
Jill was defiant in a recent interview on The View, where, joined by her husband, she dismissed the recent glut of reporting about a cover-up as mere gossip.
"The people who wrote those books were not in the White House with us. And they didn’t see how hard Joe worked every single day,” she said.
But Jill can't escape the truth, Leavitt said, pointing out that Jill is on video "shielding" her husband from view.
“Jill Biden was certainly complicit in that cover-up. There are documentation, video evidence of her clearly shielding her husband away from the camera,” Leavitt said.
“They were just on ‘The View’ [May 8]. She was saying everything is fine. She’s still lying to the American people," the press secretary added.
The former first lady encouraged her husband to stick with his doomed 2024 re-election campaign even as Democrats and liberal media stopped supporting him following a disastrous debate performance against Donald Trump that led to the unraveling of the Biden presidency. Jill memorably praised her husband for having "answered every question."
Months later, Jill is still in denial.
“I did not create a cocoon around him," she told The View recently. "I mean, you saw him in the Oval Office, you saw him making speeches. He wasn’t hiding somewhere, I didn’t have him sequestered in some place. I mean that’s ridiculous!”
The Biden family only raised new questions after disclosing that the former president has advanced prostate cancer, despite no signs of the illness showing up in his White House medical checkups. House Republicans, led by Oversight Committee chair James Comer (R-KY), have sent interview requests to Biden's former doctor, who certified last year that the then-president was fit for duty, as well as former top aides.
Comer has even suggested he might force Biden and his wife to appear on Capitol Hill.
The cover-up certainly ranks as among the greatest scandals in U.S. history, and the American people are entitled to transparency.
As Elon Musk exits the White House, observers are weighing the impact of his radical shakeup of the federal government.
While it remains to be seen whether billions of dollars in spending cuts will stick, Musk has already "made a difference" with DOGE, an MSNBC guest said.
Former Republican Rep. Carlos Curbelo of Florida credited Musk with highlighting waste across the federal government.
“Look, I think that he did make a difference,” Curbelo said. "Obviously, he put a spotlight on government efficiency and on ways that, you know, the federal government could be improved. The way he did it was unpopular and controversial.”
As the public face of DOGE, Musk was constantly under attack during President Donald Trump's revolutionary first 100 days. DOGE's fast, aggressive, and sweeping approach to gutting the federal bureaucracy won praise from the right after years of unchecked government growth, while critics labeled the efforts as chaotic.
DOGE faced some of its most intense backlash over cuts to foreign aid. The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) was almost totally dismantled as Trump and Musk blasted the agency as a slush fund for questionable ideologically driven projects.
Trump bid farewell to Musk at the Oval Office on Friday, praising him for the "most sweeping and consequential government reform effort in generations."
DOGE did away with "$45 million for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion scholarships in Burma. In Burma," Trump said. "Does anyone know about Burma?"
"$42 million for social and behavioral change in Uganda," Trump continued.
While Musk has undoubtedly left an impact, initial conservative enthusiasm over DOGE's efforts has dissipated somewhat, with questions remaining about the permanence of the group's work. Musk himself recently directed rare public criticism at Trump over his "Big, Beautiful Bill," which the mogul suggested would raise deficits.
The White House this week asked Congress to codify $9 billion in DOGE recommendations, and Trump promised Friday to secure the remaining cuts, which currently total $157 billion.
“We’re totally committed to making the DOGE cuts permanent,” Trump said, adding the rest will "come later."
While some have speculated that DOGE will lose momentum without Musk in charge, both Musk and Trump have signaled that the work of downsizing government will continue apace, with Musk predicting savings of over $1 trillion down the line.
"I think the DOGE team is doing an incredible job," Musk said. "They're going to continue to be doing an incredible job."
President Donald Trump has decided to pause the Job Corps, the Great Society work training program that costs taxpayers $1.7 billion a year with little to show for it.
The move -- which was first reported by Fox News -- is sure to come as a shock in Washington D.C., where the Job Corps has long enjoyed broad support in Congress despite its flaws.
The Job Corps was established half a century ago as part of President Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty. Meant to lift poor young people into stable careers, the program has been failing its students for years -- and even putting them in harm's way.
A new analysis from the Labor Department found the average graduation rate is a meager 38%, and most of those who do complete their training are not moving up in life, with an average salary of $16,695 after graduation. Meanwhile, the average cost of training a Job Corps graduate is a steep $155,600.
There have also been issues with crime and drugs at the Job Corps centers, where many students live while they train.
There were 14,913 "serious incidents" in 2023 alone, including 372 sexual incidents, 1,764 violent acts, 1,167 breaches of safety of security, 2,702 instances of drug use, and 1,808 hospital visits. For context, the Job Corps enrolls 25,000 students.
Past investigations into the Job Corps have also found evidence of fraudulent reporting designed to inflate the success of its students. A CBS report from 2014 found that many job placements -- up to 85% -- were fake, and officials often failed to report criminal activity.
The program has also been on shaky financial footing for years, leading to "constant uncertainty for participants and administrators," a Department of Labor official told Fox News Digital.
The Trump administration's pause will take effect by June 30 at the 99 Job Corps centers operated by private contractors. The other 24 centers are managed by the Department of Agriculture.
"Job Corps was created to help young adults build a pathway to a better life through education, training, and community," Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer told Fox News Digital. "However, a startling number of serious incident reports and our in-depth fiscal analysis reveal the program is no longer achieving the intended outcomes that students deserve."
"We remain committed to ensuring all participants are supported through this transition and connected with the resources they need to succeed as we evaluate the program’s possibilities," she added.
There will be "an orderly transition" and current students will be connected with employment and training opportunities through state and local workforce partners, the administration said.
Trump cannot dissolve the Job Corps, which was established by law, without an act of Congress. Despite its financial, safety, and performance issues, the Job Corps has defenders in both parties who say it remains a lifeline of opportunity for disadvantaged young people.
Senate Appropriations chair Susan Collins, a Republican representing the largely rural state of Maine, said the two Job Corps centers in her state "have become important pillars of support for some of our most disadvantaged young adults."
Collins added, “That’s why at an Appropriations hearing just last week, I urged Secretary Chavez-DeRemer to resume enrollment at Maine’s two Job Corps centers and to reverse the Department’s proposed elimination of the Job Corps program."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Under U.S. law, student visas are meant for education, not employment. The F-1 visa allows international students to study full-time at accredited U.S. institutions. It was never meant to be a job program. But over the years, loopholes and quiet policy changes have transformed this visa into one of the biggest threats to American workers.
To receive an F-1 student visa, a foreign national must swear under oath that their sole intent is to come to the United States temporarily for full-time academic study, not to work or remain permanently. They must prove they have sufficient funds to cover tuition and living expenses without needing a job, and they must show strong ties to their home country that will compel them to return after completing their education.
These are not suggestions, they are legal requirements under the Immigration and Nationality Act. Yet companies like Miles Education have built entire business models around violating the spirit, and often the letter, of these conditions, turning what should be a temporary academic pathway into a long-term foreign labor pipeline.
The training program was intended to allow an international student after graduation the opportunity to apply for a short-term work benefit called Optional Practical Training (OPT). It was designed to let students gain experience in their field for up to 12 months. In 2008, this was expanded to 36 months for STEM (science, tech, engineering, math) grads, but only for degrees that truly qualify as STEM and only for training, not full-time careers.
Now here's what Miles Education did instead.
Miles turned this simple student benefit into a full-blown labor funnel. They packaged everything, college admissions, visa support, orchestrated STEM coursework, and job placement into one commercial service.
They charged students as much as $40,000-$50,000 for guaranteed admission to U.S. universities, OPT work approval, and job placements in American companies, supported by numerous testimonials from models and alumni promising substantial returns on investment for the Miles US Pathway program aimed at Indian nationals. Consequently, the emphasis shifted away from genuine education; the primary objective became clear: to enter the U.S., secure employment, and remain for as long as possible to pursue the American Dream that was purchased not earned.
Federal law states that OPT is not a work visa and is not intended to substitute for American jobs. However, Miles and its university partners have rebranded accounting programs, which do not qualify as STEM, as "STEM degrees" by incorporating terms like analytics and tech tools.
This allows their international students to work in the U.S. for up to three years without oversight, effectively circumventing U.S. workers. They heavily promote this "innovative" three-year work opportunity.
The law mandates that employers must safeguard the U.S. labor market; however, under the Optional Practical Training (OPT) program, there is no obligation for employers to demonstrate that there are no qualified U.S. workers available for the positions being filled by OPT participants. Additionally, the program lacks wage protection regulations, tax obligations, and does not impose any numerical caps on the number of positions that can be filled by OPT workers. Employers utilizing OPT workers are not required to contribute to Social Security or Medicare taxes, resulting in savings of approximately 8% per hire. This absence of regulation is why large corporations find the program advantageous. Critics argue that this situation constitutes legal exploitation, and organizations like Miles facilitate access to such programs more than ever.
And when those three years are up? Miles just offshores the job. Through its Miles Talent Hub, or one of their other subsidiaries, the same workers are rehired back in India at half the wage, still doing U.S. work from overseas. Miles calls this the "Build-Operate-Transfer" model. It should be called the final nail in the coffin for American graduates.
Everything about this breaks the spirit, and arguably the letter, of immigration law. U.S. regulations say F-1 visa holders must be full-time students and leave the country after their program. They are not supposed to turn into long-term workers or be part of a permanent pipeline for outsourcing. But Miles created a business that does exactly that and U.S. universities, employers, and the government let it happen.
This is the Immigration Industrial Complex in action, foreign companies using our schools, our visas, and our labor laws to displace us in our own country, and profiting from every step of the process.
Read the full exclusive investigation: "Imported degrees, exported jobs: How America's student visa system became a foreign labor pipeline."
President Donald Trump's administration has rescinded Moderna's $766 million bird flu vaccine grant over concerns about safety and efficacy, the UK Daily Mail reported. This comes as Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. no longer recommends the COVID-19 vaccine for pregnant women and children.
In July 2024, Moderna received the first $176 million for the vaccine, with the remainder due in January, before Biden's departure from office. However, the HHS has withdrawn the funding as Kennedy explores longstanding concerns about the novel vaccine technology.
The grant was awarded under the administration of then-President Joe Biden. The government promised to fund its development and eventual purchase of the jab for the H5N1 bird flu, which has so far sickened 70 people and killed one.
Some experts see this virus as a new pandemic threat "unfolding in slow motion." Despite its name, the virus has been found in cattle and pigs and could become an increasing threat to humans.
Just this week, Moderna touted its findings in an initial study of the bird flu vaccine, involving around 300 people aged 18 and above in good health, The Washington Post reported. The company has pledged to continue developing the vaccine even with the shortfall.
"These clinical data in pandemic influenza underscore the critical role mRNA technology has played as a countermeasure to emerging health threats," Moderna CEO Stéphane Bancel said in a statement. HHS spokesman Andrew Nixon disagreed after a "rigorous review" of the vaccine.
This more cautious approach tracks with RFK Jr.'s renewed scrutiny of the technology and is a positive development for his supporters. "This is great news. RFK Jr. Cancelled $766 million award for Moderna mRNA vaccines. This is what I voted for," a user posted to X, formerly Twitter, on Thursday.
This is great news. RFK Jr. Cancelled $766 million award for Moderna mRNA vaccines.
This is what I voted for. pic.twitter.com/jwFKUr1cFV
— Sally (@TalkWithSally) May 29, 2025
According to Fox News, Kennedy announced Tuesday that the HHS would no longer recommend the coronavirus jabs for pregnant women and children. "Last year, the Biden administration urged healthy children to get yet another COVID shot, despite the lack of any clinical data to support the repeat booster strategy in children," Kennedy said in a video.
"That ends today — it's common sense and it's good science," said NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya, who appeared in the video along with FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary and Kennedy. Makary added that other countries have stopped recommending it for healthy children, as there's no evidence that it's even necessary.
"We're now one step closer to realizing President Trump's promise to make America healthy again," Kennedy said. This admission serves as vindication to Americans who voted for Trump because of this issue and Kennedy's promise.
It makes sense that the bird flu jab would face similar scrutiny, given Kennedy's role at HHS, especially considering the narrative being pushed for it. Just as the claims about COVID-19 were arguably overblown, the same may be true for this newest panic.
Kennedy's vaccine hesitancy was once a highly controversial position. Now with the Make America Healthy Again movement, Kennedy is addressing growing concerns over the new mRNA technology.
A new watchdog report found that then-President Joe Biden may have been unaware of the details of at least eight environmental executive orders signed by autopen, Breitbart reported. This is significant given recent revelations about Biden's apparent cognitive impairment while in office.
The nonprofit Power the Future found "no evidence" that Biden was aware of the details of what was signed. Daniel Turner, the organization's founder and energy expert, said it was "troubling," considering most of Biden's actions were signed using an autopen.
Biden used this device to sign many of his documents in the waning days of his administration, a process which could presumably used by anyone. Turner believes this is a potential scandal, given the types of documents signed in this manner.
"These are not obscure bureaucratic memos; these were foundational shifts in American energy policy, yet not once did Joe Biden speak about them publicly," Turner noted. Because of the findings in the report, Turner sent a letter to the House and Senate Oversight Committees and several pertinent agencies.
Letters were sent to the Department of Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Justice, and others demanding an investigation. The letter to Republican House Oversight Chair James Comer makes the case that Congress needs to get involved.
The letter asserts there is "growing evidence that actions purportedly taken by the former president may not have been approved or signed by him," Power the Future said. Rather, it's possible they were signed by a "small coterie of advisers in his name without his knowledge or over his signature using an ‘autopen,'" the letter said.
"Congress deserves to know how or whether these executive actions were authorized, and whether the former President was aware of such orders before they were implemented by the federal bureaucracy. Were these actions taken on behalf of the president and purporting to execute his authority undertaken with the president’s knowledge and approval?" the letter continues.
"It appears incumbent upon Congress to inquire about all parties involved in these actions, who instructed them to do what, when," the letter urged. A review from the Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project found a similar troubling result.
The conservative organization concluded that "every document we could find with Biden’s signature over the course of his presidency" used an autopen signature, except his announcement that he was withdrawing from his reelection bid. "Whoever controlled the autopen controlled the presidency," the Oversight Project said.
Power the Future's review noted that the eight executive actions "that fundamentally reshaped American energy policy" came with "no evidence" that Biden ever spoke publicly about them. "Not in a press conference. Not in a speech. Not even a video statement," it said.
The policies included the 2022 Defense Production Act Invocation, which pushed for the use of solar panels and heat pumps, utilizing Cold War-era emergency powers. There were others in 2021, including a sweeping edict to eliminate carbon-producing electricity by 2030 and to switch the federal government over to net-zero emissions by 2050.
Despite the significant impact these and other orders would have, Biden didn't speak of them. This has profound implications considering revelations in Jake Tapper's book Original Sin: President Biden’s Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again.
According to Fox News, Tapper admits that the cover-up of Biden's significant cognitive decline was "even worse than Watergate." If Biden was impaired and these orders were signed with an autopen, it calls into question the legality of all of it.
It was obvious that Biden was struggling mentally while Democrats and their media accomplices allegedly coordinated to hide that fact as the autopen continued to make law in the U.S. This is indeed an outrageous scandal for the ages if it's true.
It appears that some cabinet officials are forced to step in to make sure that President Donald Trump's orders are carried out, particularly in the area of international trade.
On Wednesday, a federal trade court prevented President Trump from using emergency powers legislation to impose massive tariffs on imports, as Breitbart News reported.
A three-judge panel at the Court of International Trade in New York issued the verdict following many complaints that claimed Trump had overstepped his bounds, made U.S. trade policy subject to his caprices, and caused economic anarchy.
“The Worldwide and Retaliatory Tariff Orders exceed any authority granted to the President by IEEPA to regulate importation by means of tariffs,” the court wrote, referring to the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act.
While the White House didn't immediately offer word to journalists about the next steps, it's expected that the Trump administration will appeal
The taxes, which are central to Trump's trade policies, are the subject of at least seven lawsuits that contest them.
There is some involvement by Congress for tariffs, but Trump claims he can take action due to a national emergency with the nation's trade deficits. The markets were sent into a tailspin when he levied tariffs on the majority of nations with which the United States trades.
The plaintiffs contended that tariffs cannot be authorized by the emergency powers law and that, even if they could, the trade deficit does not constitute a "unusual and extraordinary threat" that would trigger the emergency.
For the past half-century, the United States has maintained a trade deficit relative to its global trading partners.
In an attempt to address the United States' large and persistent trade deficits, Trump levied tariffs on the majority of the world's countries.
To counter the influx of illegal immigration and synthetic narcotics into the United States, he had previously imposed tariffs on goods from Mexico, Canada, and China.
His government maintains that the courts upheld Nixon's emergency tariff usage in 1971 and that Congress, and not the courts, has the authority to decide on the "political" matter of whether or not the president's justification for announcing an emergency is lawful.
Trump imposed tariffs that rattled international financial markets and caused analysts to make dire predictions for economic growth in the United States. But thus far, it seems the biggest economy in the world seems unaffected by the tariffs thus far.
V.O.S. Selections, a wine importer whose owner has was vocal about concern that his company might not make it through the tariffs, is one of several small businesses that have joined forces to launch the complaint.
Oregon was the leading state among the twelve that brought suit. "This ruling reaffirms that our laws matter, and that trade decisions can't be made on the president's whim," Assistant Attorney General Dan Rayfield said.