The Trump administration threatened Thursday to withhold nearly $75 million in funding if Pennsylvania does not immediately revoke what the administration claims are illegally issued commercial driver’s licenses to immigrants.
The move by U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy to target Pennsylvania follows similar action against California. Both states are run by Democratic governors who have criticized President Donald Trump’s administration and who are viewed as potential top-shelf contenders to be the party’s 2028 presidential nominee.
Duffy has made it a priority to scrutinize how the licenses are issued since August, when a tractor-trailer driver not authorized to be in the U.S. made an illegal U-turn and caused a crash in Florida that killed three people. That incident thrust the issue into the public’s consciousness.
In a statement Thursday, DOT spokesperson Danna Almeida said all states were being reviewed.
It’s unclear how many people would be affected in Pennsylvania. In any case, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro ‘s administration said the federal government didn’t identify a single commercial driver’s license issued to someone who wasn’t eligible.
Still, a letter Thursday from the Republican administration to Shapiro cited an audit that found two out of 150 people whose licenses exceeded their lawful presence in the country.
In four cases it had reviewed, the federal government said Pennsylvania provided no evidence that it had required noncitizens to provide legitimate proof that they were legally in the country at the time they got the license.
The Trump administration called on Pennsylvania to stop issuing new, renewed and transferred commercial driver’s licenses and permits, as well as conduct an audit to identify those licenses whose expirations exceed the driver’s lawful stay in the U.S.
It is also asking the state to void noncompliant licenses and remove those drivers from the road. The administration said approximately 12,400 noncitizen drivers hold an unexpired commercial learner’s permit or commercial driver’s license issued by Pennsylvania.
The governors of California and Pennsylvania — Gavin Newsom and Shapiro — are tough critics of Trump, and both have been repeated targets of Trump’s administration.
Shapiro’s administration said the state transportation department ceased issuing commercial driver’s licenses to noncitizens after the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration published a regulation in late September that would severely limit which immigrants can get one.
A federal court has put the rule on hold for now, but Shapiro’s administration said its transportation department still hasn’t resumed issuing what are called “non-domiciled CDLs.”
Pennsylvania’s transportation department said Thursday that it follows federal rules for verifying an immigrant applicant’s lawful presence in the country by checking the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s database.
But Shapiro this week suggested that DHS was falling short by failing to properly maintain that database, which states use to check an immigrant’s legal status before issuing a driver’s license to a noncitizen.
His comments came after DHS said it had arrested an Uzbek national with a commercial driver’s license issued by Pennsylvania. The man, who had a work authorization granted in 2024, was wanted in his home country for belonging to a terrorist organization, the department said.
But Shapiro said the state transportation department checked the federal database over the summer before issuing a CDL to the man, and he was authorized to get one. The state rechecked the database this week, and it still listed him as qualified to get a CDL, Shapiro said.
“They clearly are not minding the shop, and they’ve gotta get better, because every single state in the country relies on this database when making a determination as to who qualifies for a CDL. We relied on the feds before issuing this one,” Shapiro said.
California, which said it would revoke 17,000 licenses, is the only state the administration has acted against because it was the first one where an audit was completed. The government shutdown delayed reviews in other states, but the Transportation Department is urging all of them to tighten their standards. ___ Catalini reported from Trenton, New Jersey, and Levy from Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. Associated Press writer Josh Funk contributed.
WASHINGTON — They gathered at the Washington National Cathedral on Thursday — former presidents, vice presidents, sworn political foes and newfound friends — in a show of respect and remembrance for Dick Cheney, the consequential and polarizing vice president who became an acidic scold of President Donald Trump.
Trump, who has been publicly silent about Cheney’s death Nov. 3, was not invited to the memorial service.
Two ex-presidents came: Republican George W. Bush, who eulogized the man who served him as vice president, and Democrat Joe Biden, who once called Cheney “the most dangerous vice president we’ve had probably in American history” but now honors his commitment to his family and to his values.
“Solid and rare and reliable,” Bush said at the service of his vice president, praising a man whose “talent and restraint” exceeded his ego. “Smart and polished, without airs.”
Former President George W. Bush, speaks a tribute during the funeral service for former Vice President Dick Cheney at the Washington National Cathedral on Thursday.
Bush and others noted the understated demeanor of a man who nevertheless wielded great influence in government. “Above all,” Bush said, “I wanted someone with the ability to step into the presidency without getting distracted by the ambition to seek it.”
Among the eulogists, Liz Cheney, the eldest daughter, only obliquely addressed what amounted to a father-daughter feud with the president — a man her dad had called a “coward” for trying to overturn his loss in the 2020 election.
She spoke of her father’s conviction that when confronted with a choice between defending the country and a political party, the country must come first. “Bonds of party must always yield to the single bond we share as Americans,” she said.
Liz Cheney is a former high-ranking House member whose Republican political career was shredded by a MAGA movement angered by her investigation of the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the Capitol. Thursday, she chose not to speak directly of Trump.
She spoke of seeing clouds in the shape of angels just before her father died.
A Who’s Who of Washington, minus you know who
Moments before the service began, figures of recent but now receded power mingled: Bush and Biden and their wives sitting in a row together, former Vice Presidents Kamala Harris and Mike Pence chatting side by side in their pew with Al Gore and Dan Quayle together behind them.
Biden greeted Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell, the former longtime Senate leader, and his wife, former labor and transportation secretary Elaine Chao. Behind them sat Democratic Rep. Nancy Pelosi, who spent time talking with another former House speaker, Republican John Boehner. All gathered among the soaring interior columns of the grand cathedral known as “a spiritual home for the nation.”
Others delivering tributes at Thursday’s funeral were Cheney’s longtime cardiologist, Dr. Jonathan Reiner; former NBC News correspondent Pete Williams, who was Cheney’s spokesman at the Pentagon; and several of the former vice president’s grandchildren.
“I’m happy to report that I haven’t given many eulogies,” Reiner said in his remarks. “Nobody wants a doctor who is great at funerals.”
Reiner recalled doctors telling Cheney decades ago, after the first of multiple heart attacks, that he should abandon his political ambitions then. Yet he kept winning elections as a Wyoming congressman for years after that.
Cheney, he said, was always the “calmest person in the room.”
President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney meet in Washington, D.C., on Sept. 12, 2001, with members of the president’s national security team in the Cabinet room.
Cheney had lived with heart disease for decades and, after the Bush administration, with a heart transplant. He died at age 84 from complications of pneumonia and cardiac and vascular disease, his family said.
Trump’s vice president, JD Vance, on stage at another event in the morning, was asked about Cheney and said: “Obviously there’s some political disagreements there but he was a guy who served his country. We certainly wish his family all the best in this moment of grieving.”
Vance was also not invited to the funeral, according to a person familiar with the details who was not authorized to speak publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.
The White House lowered its flags to half-staff after Cheney’s death, as it said the law calls for, but Trump did not issue the presidential proclamation that often accompanies the death of notable figures, nor has he commented publicly on his passing.
The deeply conservative Cheney’s influence in the Bush administration was legendary and, to his critics, tragic.
He advocated for the U.S. invasion of Iraq on the basis of what proved to be faulty intelligence and consistently defended the extraordinary tools of surveillance, detention and inquisition employed in response to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Bush credited him with helping to keep the country safe and stable in a perilous time.
Bad blood between the Cheneys and Trump
After the 2020 election won by Biden, Liz Cheney served as vice chair of the Democratic-led special House committee that investigated the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. She accused Trump of summoning the violent mob and plunging the nation into “a moment of maximum danger.”
For that, she was stripped of her Republican leadership position and ultimately defeated in a 2022 Republican primary in Wyoming. In a campaign TV ad made for his daughter, Dick Cheney branded Trump a “coward” who “tried to steal the last election using lies and violence to keep himself in power after the voters had rejected him.”
Last year, it did not sit well with Trump when Cheney said he would vote for the Democrat, Harris, in the presidential election.
Trump told Arab and Muslim voters that Dick Cheney’s support for Harris should give them pause, because he “killed more Arabs than any human being on Earth. He pushed Bush, and they went into the Middle East.”
WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump has signed a bill to compel the Justice Department to make public its case files on the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, a potentially far-reaching development in a yearslong push by survivors of Epstein’s abuse for a public reckoning.
Both the House and Senate passed the bill this week with overwhelming margins after Trump reversed course on his monthslong opposition to the bill and indicated he would sign it. Now that the bill has been signed by the president, there’s a 30-day countdown for the Justice Department to produce what’s commonly known as the Epstein files.
“This bill is a command for the president to be fully transparent, to come fully clean, and to provide full honesty to the American people,” Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said Wednesday.
Schumer added that Democrats were ready to push back if they perceive that the president is doing anything but adhering to “full transparency.”
In a social media post Wednesday as he announced he had signed the bill, Trump wrote, “Democrats have used the ‘Epstein’ issue, which affects them far more than the Republican Party, in order to try and distract from our AMAZING Victories.”
The swift, bipartisan work in Congress this week was a response to the growing public demand that the Epstein files be released, especially as attention focuses on his connections to global leaders including Trump, former President Bill Clinton, Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, who has already been stripped of his royal title as Prince Andrew over the matter, and many others.
There is plenty of public anticipation about what more the files could reveal. Yet the bill will most likely trigger a rarely seen baring of a sprawling federal investigation, also creating the potential for unintended consequences.
The bill compels Attorney General Pam Bondi to release essentially everything the Justice Department has collected over multiple federal investigations into Epstein, as well as his longtime confidante and girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year prison sentence for luring teenage girls for the disgraced financier. Those records total around 100,000 pages, according to a federal judge who has reviewed the case.
It will also compel the Justice Department to produce all its internal communications on Epstein and his associates and his 2019 death in a Manhattan jail cell as he awaited charges for sexually abusing and trafficking dozens of teenage girls.
The legislation, however, exempts some parts of the case files. The bill’s authors made sure to include that the Justice Department could withhold personally identifiable information of victims, child sexual abuse materials and information deemed by the administration to be classified for national defense or foreign policy.
“We will continue to follow the law with maximum transparency while protecting victims,” Bondi told a news conference Wednesday when asked about releasing the files.
The bill also allows the Justice Department to withhold information that would jeopardize active investigations or prosecutions. That’s created some worry among the bill’s proponents that the department would open active investigations into people named in the Epstein files in order to shield that material from public view.
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a longtime Trump loyalist who has had a prominent split with Trump over the bill, said Tuesday that she saw the administration’s compliance with the bill as its “real test.”
“Will the Department of Justice release the files, or will it all remain tied up in investigations?” she asked.
In July, the FBI said in a memo regarding the Epstein investigation that, “we did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties.” But Bondi last week complied with Trump’s demands and ordered a federal prosecutor to investigate Epstein’s ties to the president’s political foes, including Clinton.
Still, Rep. Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican who sponsored the bill, said “there’s no way they can have enough investigations to cover” all of the people he believes are implicated in Epstein’s abuse.
“And if they do, then good,” he added.
The bill also requires the Justice Department to produce reports on what materials it withheld, as well as redactions made, within 15 days of the release of the files. It stipulates that officials can’t withhold or redact anything “on the basis of embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary.”
Who could be named?
There’s a widely held expectation that many people could be named in case files for investigations that spanned over a decade — and some concern that just because someone is named, that person would be assumed guilty or complicit.
Epstein was a luminary who kept company with heads of state, influential political figures, academics and billionaires. The release of his emails and messages by a House Oversight Committee investigation last week has already shown his connections with — and private conversations about — Trump and many other high-powered figures.
Yet federal prosecutors follow carefully constructed guidelines about what information they produce publicly and at trial, both to protect victims and to uphold the fairness of the legal system. House Speaker Mike Johnson raised objections to the bill on those grounds this week, arguing that it could reveal unwanted information on victims as well as others who were in contact with investigators.
Still, Johnson did not actually try to make changes to the bill and voted for it on the House floor.
For the bill’s proponents, a public reckoning over the investigation is precisely the point. Some of the survivors of trafficking from Epstein and Maxwell have sought ways to name people they accuse of being complicit or involved, but fear they will face lawsuits from the men they accuse.
Massie said that he wants the FBI to release the reports from its interviews with the victims.
Those reports typically contain unvetted information, but Massie said he is determined to name those who are accused. He and Greene have offered to read the names of those accused on the House floor, which would shield their speech from legal consequences.
The longest ever federal government shutdown is now in the rearview mirror, but not for federal workers.
With their jobs back to normal, some local federal employees said worries created by the shutdown remain — one said their credit score suffered, others noted their Thanksgiving tables will be less festive. And for many, another shutdown in a matter of weeks is a real concern.
Federal employees — whether furloughed or required to work during the shutdown — missed paychecks during the 43-day lapse in federal appropriations, the longest ever in United States history. Workers sought out food pantries, delayed payments on bills, and tried to make ends meet for their families ahead of the holidays.
“I will be paycheck to paycheck for the next couple of months maybe, before I can start accumulating my savings again,” said a Philadelphia Veterans Benefits Administration employee, who was working without a paycheck during the shutdown.
The Inquirer agreed to withhold the names of federal employees interviewed due to their fear of retaliation for speaking out. Despite workers beginning to receive retroactive paychecks from the shutdown, they spoke of lingering financial damage and worries that yet another lapse in funding could happen in just a couple of months.
The bill to end the shutdown, signed into law by President Donald Trump on Nov. 12, funds the government through Jan. 30. It includes protections for federal employees such as reversing layoffs that took place during the shutdown, and ensures back pay for all government workers throughout that time, which had been put into question by the Trump administration. And certain government agencies, such as Veterans Affairs, the Department of Agriculture, and the Food and Drug Administration, have been allocated a year’s worth of funding.
But after Jan. 30, if lawmakers once again fail to agree on keeping the government open, some federal workers could once again face a lapse in their pay.
“We’re bracing for Jan. 30,” said Philip Glover, national vice president of the American Federation of Government Employees District 3, the union that represents federal employees in Pennsylvania.
Philip Glover, AFGE District 3 national vice president, speaks at a news conference focused on federal workers amid the government shutdown, near the Liberty Bell on Oct. 7.
Federal workers have been “dealing with a layer cake of trauma,” said Max Stier, founding president and CEO of the Partnership for Public Service, a federal government management organization.
“This is not simply one incident, but it’s one on top of a bunch of them that this administration has put in their way,” Stier said.
The financial strain
At the Social Security Administration in Philadelphia a benefit authorizer said Monday that she and her coworkers had started getting their back pay, but she had already felt the impact of missing checks.
“We assumed we could just call and everybody would place everything on hold, and that was not the case,” said the Social Security employee.
The benefit authorizer had put her mortgage and car payments on hold, but some banks and utility companies weren’t as accommodating, and she accumulated overdraft fees from a credit union.
Her role required her to work through the shutdown without pay. (In Pennsylvania, furloughed workers may apply for unemployment benefits, but those who continue to work, even without pay, may not.) The benefit authorizer looked for additional work, unsure how long the shutdown would last. Some of her colleagues in Philadelphia picked up gigs with Uber, DoorDash, and Instacart, she said.
Union officials from AFGE gathered on Oct. 7 in front of Independence Hall to protest the government shutdown.
Another Philadelphia Social Security employee, who has been with the agency for 15 years, noted that some colleagues picked up night shifts at Amazon or work in home healthcare.
“People living paycheck to paycheck, they needed something to pay those bills that were absolutely essential that they had to pay,” the 15-year Social Security employee said.
For one federal employee from Central Jersey, 2025 already came with an unexpected career turn when they lost their job at U.S. Housing and Urban Development, as part of a mass layoff of probationary employees. They found a job at the U.S. Department of Commerce, in Virginia, which allowed them to support their mother and three kids back in New Jersey.
Wary of permanently moving to Virginia during such a volatile time in the federal workforce, the Commerce employee commutes eight hours by Amtrak twice a week and stays in a $200 per night hotel on workdays.
During the federal shutdown, the Commerce employee had to work without a paycheck. They used up their savings paying for the commute, hotel, and other expenses. Ultimately, they took out a bank loan to cover their expenses.
The government shutdown exemplifies a lack of stability in the workforce, the Commerce employee said. “To be honest, you feel unsafe all the time, and you feel like you’re not deserving that.”
National Park Service ranger Christopher Acosta talks with tourists outside the Liberty Bell Center on Nov. 13 after returning to work from the shutdown.
Worries remain ahead of the holiday season
The Philadelphia VBA employee, who worked without pay during the shutdown, received their back pay Monday. The single parent said they were one more missed paycheck away from turning to food pantries and living off credit cards.
“Usually I’m the one donating around this time,” the employee said last week. “I usually adopt a family and provide them with the meal and then their gifts and stuff from our local community churches and outreach programs.”
Thanksgiving is the time they “splurge,” but now the shutdown has made them contemplate their finances. “I haven’t even thought about the process of even having a Thanksgiving dinner on the table because I didn’t want to spend the money,” the VBA employee said. By Christmas, they hope to be caught up on payments.
It’s a similar story for one Philadelphia VA Medical Center employee who worked without pay through the shutdown. Speaking days before the shutdown’s end, the employee said their credit score had taken a hit. They reached out to creditors and got some of their payments deferred, but relief won’t set in until the employee can catch up on their water, electric, gas, mortgage, and car bills.
A “big feast” for Thanksgiving is off the table. “You can’t do that now because you don’t have the funds,” they said.
The Corporal Michael J. Crescenz Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Philadelphia.
‘Fear of what’s to come’
Throughout the funding impasse, Philadelphia’s federal workers turned to each other for assistance.
At the VBA, supervisors set up a small food pantry several weeks into the shutdown. The VBA employee said that didn’t feel especially helpful. “That was our second paycheck missed, and that was the best that they could come up with,” the employee said.
“It’s business as usual in the eyes of the VA, and they expect us to work like nothing’s going on in our real lives.”
At the Social Security Administration, workers banded together to start an impromptu food pantry, the Philadelphia benefit authorizer said.
“Everything was taken. People needed it. People were really pinching pennies,” she said.
The national office of AFGE, the largest federal workers’ union, backed the deal to end the government shutdown. “Government shutdowns not only harm federal employees and their families, they also waste taxpayers’ dollars and severely diminish services depended on by the American people,” AFGE national president Everett Kelley said in a statement on Nov. 10.
But some thought it should have ended differently.
In the days leading up to the deal, dozens of AFGE Local 3631 members, who are employed at the Environmental Protection Agency, said in a local union survey that they did not want their local to support budget legislation such as what passed. Their concerns were with an expected rise in healthcare expenses across the country.
The union local had polled members at the end of October, according to local union officer Hannah Sanders. The survey got more than 100 responses, and over85% said the local should only support a deal if it preserved subsidies for Affordable Care Act healthcare plans and avoided cuts to Medicaid.
EPA workers and supporters gathered outside their office for a solidarity march around Philadelphia’s City Hall in March.
Sanders said there are few changes between the recently passed deal and the bill that could have averted the shutdown back in September. “We would have not had this shutdown, and people wouldn’t have, you know, gone without pay or gone without SNAP benefits and all these things. So it’s super frustrating to see that this is how it all resolved,” said Sanders.
Now, the benefit authorizer at the Social Security Administration says, people are concerned that another shutdown could be on the horizon come Jan. 30.
“We are in complete fear of what’s to come,” she said.
WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump signed legislation Wednesday that compels his administration to release files on convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, bowing to political pressure from his own party after initially resisting those efforts.
Trump could have chosen to release many of the files on his own months ago.
“Democrats have used the ‘Epstein’ issue, which affects them far more than the Republican Party, in order to try and distract from our AMAZING Victories,” Trump said in a social media post as he announced he had signed the bill.
Now, the bill requires the Justice Department to release all files and communications related to Epstein, as well as any information about the investigation into his death in a federal prison in 2019, within 30 days. It allows for redactions about Epstein’s victims for ongoing federal investigations, but DOJ cannot withhold information due to “embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity.”
It was a remarkable turn of events for what was once a farfetched effort to force the disclosure of case files from an odd congressional coalition of Democrats, one GOP antagonist of the president, and a handful of erstwhile Trump loyalists. As recently as last week, the Trump administration even summoned one Republican proponent of releasing the files, Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado, to the Situation Room to discuss the matter, although she did not change her mind.
But over the weekend, Trump did a sharp U-turn on the files once it became clear that congressional action was inevitable. He insisted the Epstein matter had become a distraction to the GOP agenda and indicated he wanted to move on.
“I just don’t want Republicans to take their eyes off all of the Victories that we’ve had,” Trump said in a social media post Tuesday afternoon, explaining the rationale for his abrupt about-face.
The House passed the legislation on a 427-1 vote, with Rep. Clay Higgins, R-La., being the sole dissenter. He argued that the bill’s language could lead to the release of information on innocent people mentioned in the federal investigation. The Senate later approved it unanimously, skipping a formal vote.
It’s long been established that Trump had been friends with Epstein, the disgraced financier who was close to the world’s elite. But the president has consistently said he did not know of Epstein’s crimes and had cut ties with him long ago.
Before Trump returned to the White House for a second term, some of his closest political allies helped fuel conspiracy theories about the government’s handling of the Epstein case, asserting a cover-up of potentially incriminating information in those files.
It doesn’t look like the Trump administration will begin holding undocumented immigrants at a South Jersey military base anytime soon.
Democratic elected officials said Wednesday that they received a letter from the administration saying there is currently no approved construction plan, nor a timeline, for confining people at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst.
Estimates are that the base, which spans parts of Burlington and Ocean Counties, could hold 1,000 to 3,000 detainees. Specifics surrounding the when, where, and how of that undertaking remain unknown.
New Jersey U.S. Reps. Donald Norcross and Herb Conaway, Democratic members of the House Armed Services Committee, announced that they received a response earlier this week from the Department of Homeland Security after requesting more information about the administration’s plans.
“The Trump Administration’s ongoing disregard for due process and humane treatment of undocumented immigrants has required us to press repeatedly for answers and fulfill our congressional oversight responsibilities,” the lawmakers said in a joint statement. “While we acknowledge that the Department of Homeland Security has finally responded to our questions, we will continue to monitor for any further developments.”
Their priority, the lawmakers said, is to uphold standards of human rights to ensure that plans to detain immigrants do not interfere with military readiness.
The administration’s response said the government’s need for more detention space “reflects the Trump administration’s commitment to restoring the rule of law and ending the catch-and-release policies of prior years that jeopardized American communities.”
Trump administration officials earlier named the base as one of two sites in the country now certified to assist in the president’s plan to remove millions of immigrants. The other is Camp Atterbury in Indiana.
When a small, bipartisan group of House lawmakers introduced a petition in July to maneuver around Speaker Mike Johnson’s control of the House floor, it appeared a longshot effort — especially as Trump urged his supporters to dismiss the matter as a “hoax.”
But both Trump and Johnson failed to prevent the vote. The president in recent days bowed to political reality, saying he would sign the bill. And just hours after the House vote, senators agreed to approve it unanimously, skipping a formal roll call.
The decisive, bipartisan work in Congress Tuesday further showed the pressure mounting on lawmakers and the Trump administration to meet long-held demands that the Justice Department release its case files on Epstein, a well-connected financier who killed himself in a Manhattan jail while awaiting trial in 2019 on charges he sexually abused and trafficked underage girls.
For survivors of Epstein’s abuse, passage of the bill was a watershed moment in a years-long quest for accountability.
“These women have fought the most horrific fight that no woman should have to fight. And they did it by banding together and never giving up,” said Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene as she stood with some of the abuse survivors outside the Capitol Tuesday morning.
“That’s what we did by fighting so hard against the most powerful people in the world, even the president of the United States, in order to make this vote happen today,” added Greene, a Georgia Republican.
In the end, only one lawmaker in Congress opposed the bill. Rep. Clay Higgins, a Louisiana Republican who is a fervent supporter of Trump, was the only “nay” vote in the House’s 427-1 tally. He said he worried the legislation could lead to the release of information on innocent people mentioned in the federal investigation.
The bill forces the release within 30 days of all files and communications related to Epstein, as well as any information about the investigation into his death in federal prison. It would allow the Justice Department to redact information about Epstein’s victims or continuing federal investigations, but not information due to “embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity.”
Even before the bill’s passage Tuesday, thousands of pages of emails and other documents from Epstein’s estate have been released from an investigation by the House Oversight Committee.
Those documents show Epstein’s connections to global leaders, Wall Street powerbrokers, influential political figures and Trump himself. In the United Kingdom, King Charles III stripped his disgraced brother Prince Andrew of his remaining titles and evicted him from his royal residence after pressure to act over his relationship with Epstein.
Still, many in the Republican base continued to demand the release of the files. Adding to that pressure, survivors of Epstein’s abuse rallied outside the Capitol Tuesday morning. Bundled in jackets against the November chill and holding photos of themselves as teenagers, they recounted their stories of abuse.
“We are exhausted from surviving the trauma and then surviving the politics that swirl around it,” said one of the survivors.
Another, Jena-Lisa Jones, said she had voted for Trump and had a message for the president: “I beg you Donald Trump, please stop making this political.”
That’s because Johnson kept the House closed for legislative business for nearly two months and refused to swear-in Democratic Rep. Adelita Grijalva of Arizona during the government shutdown. After winning a special election on Sept. 23, Grijalva had pledged to provide the crucial 218th vote to the petition for the Epstein files bill. But only after she was sworn into office last week could she sign her name to the discharge petition to give it majority support in the 435-member House.
It quickly became obvious the bill would pass, and both Johnson and Trump began to fold. Trump on Sunday said Republicans should vote for the bill.
Yet Greene told reporters that Trump’s decision to fight the bill had betrayed his Make America Great Again political movement.
“Watching this turn into a fight has ripped MAGA apart,” she said.
Rather than waiting until next week for the discharge position to officially take effect, Johnson held the vote under a procedure that requires a two-thirds majority.
But Johnson also spent a morning news conference listing off problems that he sees with the legislation. He argued that the bill could have unintended consequences by disclosing parts of federal investigations that are usually kept private, including information on victims.
“This is a raw and obvious political exercise,” Johnson said.
Still, he voted for the bill. “None of us want to go on record and in any way be accused of not being for maximum transparency,” he explained.
Meanwhile, the bipartisan pair who sponsored the bill, Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Ro Khanna, D-Calif., warned senators against doing anything that would “muck it up,” saying they would face the same public uproar that forced both Trump and Johnson to back down.
“We’ve needlessly dragged this out for four months,” Massie said, adding that those raising problems with the bill “are afraid that people will be embarrassed. Well, that’s the whole point here.”
Senate acts quickly
Even as the bill cleared his chamber, Johnson pressed for the Senate to amend it to protect the information of “victims and whistleblowers.” But Senate Majority Leader John Thune quickly shut down that notion.
As senators gathered in the chamber Tuesday evening for the first votes of the week, it became clear no one would object to passing the bill as written.
Just before Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer called to pass the bill by unanimous consent, Oklahoma Sen. Markwayne Mullin, a Republican who is close to Trump, walked in the chamber and gave Schumer a thumbs-up. He then walked over to Schumer and shook his hand.
“This is about giving the American people the transparency they’ve been crying for,” said Schumer, D-N.Y. “This is about holding accountable all the people in Jeffrey Epstein’s circle who raped, groom, targeted and enabled the abuse of hundreds of girls for years and years.”
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is suing the University of Pennsylvania for failing to release information related to an investigation it began in 2023over the school’s treatment of Jewish faculty and other employees regarding antisemitism complaints.
Penn, according to the complaint filed in federal court Tuesday, has not complied with a subpoena for information, including the identification of employees who could have been exposed to alleged harassment and the names of all employees who complained about the behavior.
In its quest to find people potentially affected, the EEOC demanded a list of employees in Penn’s Jewish Studies Program, a list of all clubs, groups, organizations and recreation groups related to the Jewish religion — including points of contact and a roster of members — and names of employees who lodged antisemitism complaints.
Penn usually does not comment on litigation, but in this case, the school ardently objected to the EEOC’s characterization of its cooperation and the personal nature of the material it was still seeking.
The school said in a statement it has cooperated extensively with the EEOC, including providing more than 100 documents and over 900 pages.
But the private university said it will not disclose personal information, specifically “lists of Jewish employees, Jewish student employees and those associated with Jewish organizations, or their personal contact information” to the government.
“Violating their privacy and trust is antithetical to ensuring Penn’s Jewish community feels protected and safe,” the university said Tuesday.
Penn also provided information on employees who complained and agreed that it could be shared, the school said, but the school would not provide information on those who objected.
“Penn also offered to help the EEOC reach employees who are willing to speak with the agency by informing all employees of the investigation and how they could reach out to the agency,” the university said. “The EEOC rejected that offer.”
The original complaint was launched by EEOC Commissioner Andrea Lucas, now chair of the body, on Dec. 8, 2023, two months after Hamas’ attack on Israel that led to unrest on college campuses, including Penn, and charges of antisemitism. It was also just three days after former Penn President Liz Magill had testified before a Republican-led congressional committee on the school’s handling of antisemitism complaints; the testimony drew a bipartisan backlash and led to Magill’s resignation days later.
Lucas, who was appointed chair this year by President Donald Trump, also brought similar antisemitism charges against Columbia University that earlier this year resulted in the school paying $21 million for “a class settlement fund.”
EEOC complaints typically come from those who allege they were aggrieved. Lucas, according to the complaint, made the charge in Penn’s case because of the “probable reluctance of Jewish faculty and staff to complain of harassing environment due to fear of hostility and potential violence directed against them.“
The EEOC’s investigation ensued after Lucas’ complaint to the EEOC’s Philadelphia office that alleged Penn was subjecting Jewish faculty, staff, and other employees including students “to an unlawful hostile work environment based on national origin, religion, and/or race.”
The allegation, the complaint said, is based on news reports, public statements made by the university and its leadership, letters from university donors, board members, alumni and others. It also cited complaints filed against Penn in federal court and with the U.S. Department of Education over antisemitism allegations and testimony before a congressional committee.
The EEOC complaint pointed to public comments by Magill, addressing antisemitism while she led Penn.
“I am appalled by incidents on our own campus, and I’ve heard too many heartbreaking stories from those who are fearful for their safety right here at Penn,” Magill said in 2023. “This is completely unacceptable.”
Magill also in a message had addressed “a small number of Penn staff members” who “received vile, disturbing antisemitic emails that threatened violence against members of our Jewish community,” in November 2023.
The complaint cited incidents of antisemitic obscenities being shouted on the campus, destruction of property in Penn’s Hillel, a swastika painted in an academic building, graffiti outside a fraternity and a pro-Palestinian encampment on the campus in 2024 that eventually was dismantled by police.
“Throughout its investigation, the EEOC has endeavored to locate employees exposed to this harassment and to identify other harassing events not noted by respondent in its communications, but respondent has refused to furnish this information, thereby hampering the EEOC’s investigation,” the complaint said.
Penn said it had received three antisemitism complaints, according to the federal complaint, but the EEOC questioned that number given the university’s workforce of more than 20,000. It demanded that the school provide names of all people who attended listening sessions as part of the school’s task force on antisemitism and all faculty and staff members who took the task force’s survey.
Penn objected to the subpoena and the commission partially modified it in September, ordering the school to comply within 21 days, the complaint said.
A federal court has blocked Texas from using its new congressional map for the 2026 midterm elections, directing the state to revert to its previous districts.
The majority opinion said the coalition of voting and civil rights groups who sued was likely to prove at trial that Texas officials had “racially gerrymandered” a new map that “unconstitutionally sorts voters on the basis of race,” depriving the plaintiffs of “their right to participate in a free and fair election.”
The judges were under a tight deadline to make a ruling since the candidate filing period for the 2026 midterm elections began on Nov. 8 and ends on Dec. 8.
Republican Gov. Greg Abbott, a key proponent of the electoral changes, said he would appeal the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court.
“Any claim that these maps are discriminatory is absurd and unsupported by the testimony offered during ten days of hearings,” Abbott said. “This ruling is clearly erroneous and undermines the authority the U.S. Constitution assigns to the Texas Legislature by imposing a different map by judicial edict.”
The decision marks a significant setback for the state and Republicans, which began with a contentious battle in its state legislature last summer, led to a vote to revise state maps for voting districts, and ultimately spurred other states to buck tradition and pursue mid-decade redistricting.
Two judges, in a three-judge District Court panel, ruled on Nov. 18 that the injunction was necessary because “the racial minorities the Plaintiff Groups represent will be forced to be represented in Congress based on likely unconstitutional racial classifications for at least two years.”
The majority opinion, written by U.S. District Judge Jeffrey V. Brown, a Donald Trump appointee, who sits in Galveston, Texas, was joined by Senior U.S. District Judge David C. Guaderrama, a Barack Obama appointee, in El Paso.
U.S. Circuit Judge Jerry E. Smith, who was appointed to the bench by President Ronald Reagan, is expected to file a dissenting opinion.
A Republican majority in the Texas legislature in August 2025 passed the new state congressional map after a weeks-long standoff with state Democrats. Their new law, at the urging of President Donald Trump, heavily advantaged the GOP in 2026 elections. If used, it could have potentially flipped as many as five Democratic-held seats to Republican control − a significant edge as the party maintains a slim majority in Congress.
In his statement, Abbott said the Texas legislature passed the new maps to “better reflect Texans’ conservative voting preferences – and for no other reason.”
The court ruling and any decision by the U.S. Supreme Court could push back the filing deadlines for the Texas primaries for 2026. The midterm general election includes the seat of U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, D-Texas, all the Texas House of Representatives and Senate seats, and the governor, lieutenant governor and attorney general.
Republicans said redistricting targeted Democrats
The ruling came more than a month after 10 days of testimony and arguments over the legality of the new redistricting map at the federal courthouse in El Paso. The key testimony during the hearing came from Adam Kincaid, executive director of the National Republican Redistricting Trust, who created the maps.Kincaid testified that he looked at no racial data when building the map, solely relying on targeting districts that historically voted for Democrats.
He said he combined Democrat-leaning districts into one district. He took Republican portions of those districts to create their own districts. The outcome gave Democrats one less representative, adding more representation for Republican voters.
Kincaid and Republican leaders said the redistricting was done “race blind.” He testified he targeted Democrats, not minorities, which is allowed under the U.S. Constitution.
Voting rights groups say redistricting targets minorities
Democratic leaders and voting rights representatives argued during the hearing that the only districts targeted and impacted were Hispanic and Black majority districts. Hispanic and Black voters historically vote for Democrats.
In Texas, voters are not required to register by political party. They are free to vote in the primary of their choosing.
The redistricting map suppresses the voice of Texas minorities, including Hispanics, who make up the largest minority population in the state, Democratic state leaders testified in the trial.“They are not built to give Hispanics or African Americans a candidate of their choice,” Rep. Joe Moody, D-El Paso, testified about the new maps.
Democrats and voting rights advocates questioned why Trump focused on four districts and why they were the only districts that were dramatically altered. They said Republicans had already created the map before discussions were held in the Texas Legislature and the public had an opportunity to comment on it.
“That’s not Texas,” testified Rep. Ramon Romero, D-Fort Worth. “That’s not how we do things here.”
The redistricting vote that sparked a chain reaction
The Texas legislators’ efforts earlier this year sparked a national redistricting war across several states, as Democratic and Republican governors responded with their own efforts to redraw maps. Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom recently landed a victory in a voter-approved measure to implement new districts likely to add more Democratic representatives.
But that matter is also entangled in a court challenge, after the administration on Nov. 13 joined the California Republican Party to accuse the state of violating the Constitution by gerrymandering using race as a factor to favor Hispanic voters in the new map.
President Donald Trump is drawing widespread criticism after lashing out at a female reporter who was pressing for information about files related to Jeffrey Epstein.
As Trump was speaking to reporters Friday on Air Force One, Bloomberg White House correspondent and former Philadelphia Daily News reporter Catherine Lucey attempted to ask him about the release of the so-called Epstein files, which the Trump administration has refused to make public.
“If there is nothing incriminating in the files —” Lucey said before being cut off.
“Quiet, quiet, piggy,” an angry Trump shot back while pointing at Lucey.
Neither Lucey nor Bloomberg has responded to The Inquirer’s requests for comment.
“Our White House journalists perform a vital public service, asking questions without fear or favor,” Bloomberg said in a statement to the Guardian. “We remain focused on reporting issues of public interest fairly and accurately.”
Lucey, who has not spoken publicly about the matter, was first identified by the Guardian and can be seen in photographs of the interaction with Trump on Air Force One.
Trump’s remarks drew criticism from across the media world. CNN anchor Jake Tapper called the president’s remarks “disgusting and completely unacceptable.” Former Fox News anchor Gretchen Carlson called the president’s comments “degrading.”
“The president continues to behave in ways that not a single parent I know would tolerate from their elementary-school-aged kids,” wrote the Atlantic’s McKay Coppins.
A White House official defended the remark in a statement to MS NOW’s Vaughn Hillyard, claiming without evidence Lucey “behaved in an inappropriate and unprofessional way towards her colleagues on the plane.” The official did not elaborate.
Though the exchange took place days ago, video footage began circulating Tuesday ahead of a House vote on the Epstein files. It has since gone viral among the masses, drawing ire from critics and being reposted by outlets like Pop Crave.
Trump has a history of making sexist comments toward female journalists. He has called women in the press corps “nasty,” “crazy,” and “losers” over the years. He also has used derogatory language about women, comparing them to pigs, dogs, and other animals.
Before her time in D.C., Lucey was a respected reporter in Philadelphia, spending 12 years at the Philadelphia Daily News covering everything from police corruption to local news — but her sweet spot was politics. Her portfolio included coverage of then-Mayor Michael Nutter’s administration and the city’s changing power dynamics.
Lucey left in 2012 to work for the Associated Press, focusing on Iowa state politics and presidential races for four years. From there, she headed to the Wall Street Journal, where she covered the Trump and Biden administrations. She joined Bloomberg in March, according to a news release.
ABC News reporter Mary Bruce asks a question in the Oval Office Tuesday.
Trump also drew criticism Tuesday afternoon after lashing out at ABC News reporter Mary Bruce, who also asked about the Epstein files during an Oval Office meeting between the president and Saudi Arabia Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
“Why wait for Congress to release the Epstein files?” Bruce asked. “Why not just do it now?”
“It’s not the question that I mind, it’s your attitude,” Trump shot back. “You’re a terrible person and a terrible reporter.”
Until recently, Trump had strongly opposed efforts to release the Epstein files. Last week, he called the House’s efforts to press the Department of Justice to make the files available a “Democrat hoax.”
Trump’s social connections to Epstein have been known for decades. Reports show Trump was mentioned in Epstein’s emails more than 1,000 times, making him the most-cited person in the documents released last week by the House Oversight Committee.
But Trump has been reversing his stance on releasing the files, saying on Air Force One, “we have nothing to hide.”
On Tuesday, the House of Representatives passed the Epstein Files Transparency Act in a 427-1 vote, demanding the Justice Department release the unclassified documents on Epstein and his associate Ghislaine Maxwell, who was convicted of sex trafficking.
The Republican-controlled Senate moved quickly Tuesday evening, agreeing to pass the Epstein bill by unanimous consent once it arrived from the House.
The bill would then head to Trump’s desk, who said in recent days he would sign it into law.
