Tag

Featured

Browsing

Rep. Mike Quigley lost his plum committee post earlier this year, and the Illinois Democrat hasn’t forgotten.

Speaking in an episode of the Pro Politics podcast published Monday, Quigley issued a sidelong rebuke to a pair of former top House Democratic leaders who claimed committee leadership roles after leaving Democratic leadership in 2022.

It’s personal for Quigley: He served as the ranking member on the House Appropriations subcommittee on Transportation-HUD until 84-year-old Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.) gave up his leadership position earlier this year and bumped Quigley off of the panel.

It also comes amid an increasingly open debate over age and leadership inside the Democratic Party; Quigley, who is 66, was among the first House Democrats to call on President Joe Biden to step aside as presidential nominee in 2024.

”If you’ve been one of the top three leadership spots, you should hesitate wanting to come back and say, ‘I want to be a ranker or chair,” Quigley, a nine-term veteran, told Democratic pollster and podcast host Zac McCrary. “At some point you’ve had your moment, and it’s time to let someone come in and have an opportunity to be on one of those select committees and being a ranker or chair.”

Another senior appropriator who later joined leadership, Rep. Steny Hoyer of Maryland, assumed the ranking member role on the Financial Services subcommittee in 2023 after exiting as majority leader at age 83, bumping Rep. Mark Pocan of Wisconsin, who is 25 years younger. Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has not claimed any committee assignments since returning to the rank-and-file that same year.

Virginians are set to vote for the late Rep. Gerry Connolly’s successor in a special election on Sept. 9.

Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin on Tuesday called for a special election to fill the northern Virginia seat left vacant after the longtime lawmaker’s passing on May 21.

Virginia’s 11th district is deep blue and will almost assuredly elect another Democrat.

The special election will be the third this fall to fill vacancies left by the passing of Democratic lawmakers. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, set a Nov. 4 special election to replace Rep. Sylvester Turner in April, following consternation among statewide Democrats, who threatened to sue the governor over the monthlong delay in setting the date.

Arizona voters will also wait to find a successor for Rep. Raúl Grijalva, with Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs, a Democrat, setting a Sept. 23 special election date after Grijalva’s March 13 passing. Arizona state law generally requires a longer timeline for a special election than many other states.

Connolly, who had battled with esophageal cancer, had announced on April 28 that he would not seek reelection to represent the heavily Democratic D.C. suburb in 2026. In early May, the Virginian endorsed his former aide, James Walkinshaw, for the job. But the field is already getting crowded, with five other Democrats and two Republicans also tossing their hats in the ring.

Senate committees will start rolling out their portions of the GOP megabill as soon as Tuesday, providing a first look at how Republicans in the chamber plan to address some of the House’s most controversial proposals.

Here’s the draft-text timeline POLITICO reported Monday night, though it could change:

— Armed Services plans to release its text Tuesday

— Environment and Public Works is pushing for Wednesday

— Commerce is aiming for Thursday

— Banking is expected Friday

The scheduling logic: Just as the House sequenced its megabill markups from least-to-most controversial to buy lawmakers more time to resolve their stickier policy debates, the Senate will have committees release their least-contentious draft bills first. Finance, which has jurisdiction over tax cuts and changes to Medicaid, is widely expected to be among the final Senate panels to release text, if not the last.

The massive tax-and-spending package will “most likely” hit the Senate floor the last full week of June, ahead of the July 4 recess, per Senate Majority Leader John Thune.

It could come even sooner — but that depends on how conversations go with the Senate parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough. Committee staffers started vetting the megabill with MacDonough last week and will continue their talks this week and next. MacDonough’s job is to recommend which House-passed provisions and policy priorities must be dropped to comply with the strict rules governing the filibuster-skirting budget reconciliation process.

Thune signaled Monday that Republicans won’t seek to override their referee if they don’t like her rulings but said he hoped MacDonough could be convinced to green-light inclusion of the so-called REINS Act “in some fashion.” The longstanding conservative proposal would give Congress more authority to approve agency regulations.

The chamber’s lightning-fast turnaround nods to the weeks of behind-the-scenes work by GOP senators and their aides to prepare for the domestic policy bill’s arrival from across the Capitol. It also shows the immense pressure they’re under from the White House to get moving on advancing President Donald Trump’s sweeping legislative agenda.

The president is starting to play his own hand. Trump met separately Monday at the White House with both Thune and Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), who wants deeper spending cuts but told POLITICO “we all want to get a bill done.” Trump also spoke by phone with Sens. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), who’s pushing a return to pre-pandemic spending levels, and Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), who’s opposed to some of the Medicaid changes endorsed by the Republican House. And the president will likely meet with Thune and Finance Chair Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) either this week or next to talk through the details of the tax portion of the bill.

One key fight to watch this week: Look to see if the Senate backs away from the House’s plan to re-up government auctions of federally controlled spectrum. Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) has drawn a red line on it, saying Monday that “we’ll have to take out the spectrum language that’s in the bill right now. That simply is a non-starter for me.”

What else we’re watching:

— Rescissions incoming: The White House plans to send up a package Tuesday outlining $9.4 billion in spending cuts, asking Congress to nix current funding for NPR, PBS and foreign aid. House Republican leaders helped shape the so-called rescissions request over the last few weeks in a back-and-forth with the White House. But Senate Republicans are exploring options for amending the package.

— Billy Long is back: Senate Finance members will vote Tuesday to advance the nomination of Billy Long, Trump’s pick to lead the IRS, six months after the president announced the selection. In his confirmation hearing last month, Long sought to distance himself from his promotion of certain tribal tax credits that turned out to be nonexistent.

Jordain Carney, Benjamin Guggenheim and Jennifer Scholtes contributed to this report.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune signaled on Monday that Republicans won’t move to overrule the chamber’s parliamentarian during an upcoming debate on President Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful bill.”

“We’re not going there,” Thune said when asked by reporters about overruling Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough, who will play a special role in vetting the bill for compliance with the strict Senate rules allowing Republicans to bypass a Democratic filibuster.

Senate staffers met with MacDonough during last week’s recess to vet the House-passed megabill and talk through their own ideas, conversations first reported by POLITICO. Thune said that committee staffers tasked with drafting the legislation will continue conferring with her this week and next week. At the end of the process, MacDonough will make rulings on whether various policies comply with the chamber’s rules.

The question about the fate of the parliamentarian comes after Senate Republicans sidestepped her in a recent fight to nix waivers allowing California to set its own emissions standards.

At least one of Thune’s members is already publicly floating that his party should be willing to directly overrule MacDonough on the megabill. In a tweet last month, Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) wrote on X that “disagreeing with the Senate parliamentarian may be warranted if the parliamentarian gives bad advice, and it’s wrong to suggest otherwise.”

Several significant pieces of the House-approved bill are at risk of falling out of the legislation as it moves through the Senate.

Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Monday that Democrats will challenge one House provision that places limits on the ability of federal judges to enforce contempt citations. He predicted it will get booted from the bill.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, added that Democrats are looking at challenging some immigration provisions, as well. He added that it was his understanding that conversations with MacDonough were just getting started.

The U.S. Capitol Police will be led by Assistant Chief Sean Gallagher on acting basis while a search continues for a new permanent leader, the department confirmed Monday.

Gallagher’s appointment by the Capitol Police Board comes after Chief Thomas Manger retired last month after about four years on the job. Gallagher is seen by some in the department as a strong contender for the permanent position after having held a variety of roles within the department over the past two decades.

Gallagher, who oversees uniformed operations as one of three assistant chiefs, has been with the department since 2001. He has previously served as the assistant commander of the Investigations Division and as the assistant commander of the Dignitary Protection Division and the Capitol Division.

Capitol Police employees and even some on Capitol Hill with oversight responsibilities over the department were unclear Monday morning who Manger’s temporary successor was, stoking some confusion about who was at the helm of the department. Two people granted anonymity described the decision to POLITICO before the department confirmed the appointment.

The job of choosing Manger’s long term replacement will fall to the Capitol Police Board, composed of House Sergeant-at-Arms William McFarland, Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Jennifer Hemingway and Architect of the Capitol Thomas Austin. All three came to their positions during Manger’s tenure, and this will be their first time working together in a search for the top Capitol Police official. Top congressional leaders choose the board members and are expected to have some influence in the pick.

“If they pick someone from the inside, they’re going to know what our mission is,” Manger said in a recent interview before leaving the department. “They’ll have that — that’s good. If they pick somebody from the outside, they’re going to have to learn about our mission, the uniqueness of it, but the structure of oversight as well, and there is a learning curve there.”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune’s pledge to return the Senate to “regular order” is about to face a major test, with one of President Donald Trump’s top financial policy priorities on the line.

After months of chaotic negotiations in the Senate, landmark cryptocurrency legislation that would create a regulatory framework for stablecoins finally appears to have the votes to clear the chamber. But a contentious battle over credit card swipe fees — what processors like Visa, Mastercard and American Express charge merchants for the ability to use their payment networks — is now threatening to blow the effort up.

Thune’s promise to allow an open amendment process has raised the possibility of an amendment vote on divisive legislation that seeks to force payment networks to compete on swipe fees.

The credit card measure, long championed by Sens. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Roger Marshall (R-Kan.), is a fraught policy battle that pits two powerful lobbying forces — the financial sector and major retailers — against one another.

Crypto supporters, who are within spitting distance of their biggest win ever in the Senate, are scrambling to prevent the credit card provision from derailing their stablecoin bill. It is unclear how a vote on the Durbin-Marshall provision would go: Most senators haven’t taken a position on the matter.

But the fear for pro-crypto lawmakers is that it could garner enough support to be adopted as an amendment with backing from most Democrats and some Republicans — and then tank the underlying stablecoin bill by peeling off GOP senators who oppose the credit card amendment.

“It’s a deal-killer,” said Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), who supports the stablecoin legislation but said he will try to “kill the bill” if the credit card legislation is attached. “If it goes in it, the value out of the stablecoin components would not outweigh the damage done by [Durbin-Marshall].”

It is uncertain if the swipe fee crackdown will ultimately get a vote. The issue is likely to come to a head this week as GOP leaders look to move the bill toward final passage. Further procedural votes could come this week, but the timing of a vote on final passage will depend on whether they can get a deal on amendments.

“I’m hoping that we can finish up this legislation in the very near future,” Thune said Monday.

The credit card provision is the biggest outstanding question. Durbin and Marshall have been pushing for years to force a vote or attach it to must-pass legislation, and they have failed every time.

Marshall has filed his bill as an amendment to the stablecoin legislation. But asked prior to Congress’ Memorial Day recess whether he will seek to force a vote on the measure, he said he has “not decided what to do.”

It’s megabill crunch time in the Senate.

Arm-twisting over what to change in the House-passed version of the “big, beautiful” bill will largely play out behind closed doors the next few days. Strategy huddles include Senate Finance’s meeting tonight and Wednesday’s “Big Six” confab between Senate Majority Leader John Thune, Speaker Mike Johnson, their tax committee chairs and lead administration officials.

One of Thune’s biggest challenges to pass the bill by July 4 will be winning over the “Medicaid moderates” — an ideological cross-section of members who are aligned against the cuts passed by the House and have the numbers to force changes. Among them: Sens. Josh Hawley of Missouri, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine. Thune can lose only three GOP senators to pass the megabill.

Thune and Senate Finance Chair Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), who is juggling Medicaid and tax conflicts in the bill, are talking to key members in anticipation of difficult negotiations. Crapo told Jordain he personally supports the House’s Medicaid work requirements, which some GOP senators wary of benefit cuts say they could also support. But beyond that, they’re steering clear of public commitments.

One potentially major sticking point: The House-passed freeze on provider taxes, which most states use to help finance their share of Medicaid costs. Sen. Jim Justice, the former West Virginia governor, called it a “real issue,” and Hawley has also raised concerns. But other GOP senators, including Kevin Cramer (N.D.), want to go even further in reducing, not just freezing, the provider tax.

Republicans got a glimpse of the political minefield surrounding Medicaid while back home last week. Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst’s (R-Iowa) “we’re all going to die” response to town hall pushback about the cuts — and her decision to double down on the comments — generated days of negative headlines and ad fodder for Democrats.

Mehmet Oz, the head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, told POLITICO’s Dasha Burns in the debut episode of her podcast “The Conversation” that the Medicaid work requirements in the bill would “future proof” the program.

Then there are the deficit hawks. President Donald Trump over the weekend warned Sen. Rand Paul (Ky.) to get behind the megabill, with Paul vowing to vote against it over an included debt-limit hike.

But it’s not just Paul making noise. Sen. Ron Johnson (Wis.) is calling for a line-by-line budget review to find places to slash more spending, and Sens. Mike Lee (Utah) and Rick Scott (Fla.) are also pushing for more cuts.

Paul hinted at hard-liners’ leverage Sunday on CBS’ “Face the Nation,” saying: “I would be very surprised if the bill at least is not modified in a good direction.”

What else we’re watching:

— Senate Dems make a move: Senate Democrats are preparing to challenge parts of the GOP megabill with the parliamentarian, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer wrote in a “Dear Colleague” letter Sunday. He highlighted a specific House provision that critics say would weaken judges’ power to enforce contempt orders.

— Trump’s budget request faces first tests: The House Appropriations Committee will begin marking up the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs and Agriculture portion of Trump’s fiscal 2026 budget request this Thursday. Trump’s request includes 22 percent cuts in non-defense spending and sweeping cuts that Democrats don’t appear interested in supporting (and their votes will be critical in September to avoid a government shutdown).

— Hitting the Hill: Trump administration officials will testify this week in defense of the president’s fiscal 2026 budget. That includes Education Secretary Linda McMahon on Tuesday, Acting FAA Administrator Chris Rocheleau on Wednesday and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick on Wednesday and Thursday.

Jordain Carney and Jennifer Scholtes contributed to this report.

The Senate’s deficit hawks might be raising the loudest hue and cry over the GOP’s “big, beautiful bill.” But another group of Republicans is poised to have a bigger impact on the final legislative product.

Call them the “Medicaid moderates.”

They’re actually an ideologically diverse bunch — ranging from conservative Josh Hawley of Missouri to centrist Susan Collins of Maine. Yet they have found rare alignment over concerns about what the House-passed version of the GOP domestic-policy megabill does to the national safety-net health program, and they have the leverage to force significant changes in the Senate.

“I would hope that we would elect not to do anything that would endanger Medicaid benefits as a conference,” Hawley said in an interview. “I’ve made that clear to my leadership. I think others share that perspective.”

Besides Hawley and Collins, other GOP senators including Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Jerry Moran of Kansas and Jim Justice of West Virginia have also drawn public red lines over health care — and they have some rhetorical backing from President Donald Trump, who has urged congressional Republicans to spare the program as much as possible.

Based on early estimates from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, 10.3 million people would lose coverage under Medicaid if the House-passed bill were to become law — many, if not most, in red states. That could spell trouble for Majority Leader John Thune’s whip count: He can only lose three GOP senators on the expected party-line vote and still have Vice President JD Vance break a tie.

Republicans already have one all-but-guaranteed opponent in Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky so long as they stick to their plan to raise the debt limit as part of the bill. They also view Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson as increasingly likely to oppose the package after spending weeks blasting the bill on fiscal grounds.

Meeting either senator’s demands could be enormously difficult given the tight fiscal parameters through which House leaders have to squeeze the bill to advance it in their own chamber. That in turn is empowering the senators elsewhere in the GOP conference to make changes — and the Medicaid group is emerging as the key bloc to watch because of its size and its overlapping, relatively workable demands.

Heeding those asks won’t be easy. Republicans are counting on savings from Medicaid changes to offset hundreds of billions of dollars in tax cuts, and rolling that back is likely to create political pain elsewhere for Thune & Co., who already want to cut more than the House to assuage a sizable group of spending hawks. At the same time, Speaker Mike Johnson is insisting the Senate make only minor changes to the bill so as to maintain the delicate balance in his own narrowly divided chamber.

Thune and Finance Committee Chair Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) have already acknowledged that Medicaid, covering nearly 80 million low-income Americans, will be one of the biggest sticking points as they embark this month on a rewrite of the megabill. They are talking with key members in anticipation of difficult negotiations and being careful not to draw red lines publicly.

“We want to do things that are meaningful in terms of reforming programs, strengthening programs, without affecting beneficiaries,” Thune said, echoing language used by some of the concerned senators.

Crapo voiced support in an interview for one pillar of the House bill — broad new work requirements for Medicaid beneficiaries — but rushed to add that he’s “still working with a 53-member caucus to get answers” to how the program can be overhauled: “I can only speak for myself.”

Complicating their task is the fact that some in the group — namely Collins and Murkowski — have a proven history of bucking their party even amid intense public pressure. The pair, in fact, helped tank the GOP’s last party-line effort on health care, in 2017.

Leaders view them as unlikely to be moved by the type of arm-twisting Republicans are planning to deploy to bring enough of the fiscal hawks on board. And then there’s Hawley, who is playing up Trump’s own warnings to congressional Republicans about keeping their hands off Medicaid.

Hawley and Trump spoke shortly before the House passed its bill, with the senator recounting that the president said “absolutely categorically, ‘Do not touch Medicaid. No Medicaid benefit cuts, none.’”

Hawley, like Crapo, has indicated he is comfortable with work requirements, but he is pushing for two major tweaks to the House language: undoing a freeze on provider taxes, which most states use to help finance their share of Medicaid costs, and new co-payment requirements for some beneficiaries that he has been calling a “sick tax.”

The provider tax changes would present an issue with multiple senators, who fear it would exacerbate the bill’s impact on state budgets and slash funding that helps keep rural hospitals afloat. Justice, a former governor, called it a “real issue.”

“They haven’t done anything to really cut into the bone except that one thing,” Justice added. ”That’s gonna put a big burden on the states.”

Moran grabbed the attention of his colleagues when he warned in a pointed April floor speech that making changes to Medicaid would hurt rural hospitals. A “significant portion” of his focus, he said, “is to make sure the hospitals have the capability and the revenues necessary to provide the services the community needs — Medicaid is a component of that.”

Collins, who is up for reelection in 2026, has also left the door open to supporting work requirements, depending on how they are crafted. She has also raised concerns about the provider tax provision, noting that “rural hospitals in my state and across the country are really teetering.”

Murkowski, meanwhile, isn’t as concerned about the provider tax, because Alaska is the only state that doesn’t use it to help cover its share of Medicaid spending. But she has expressed alarm over the House’s approach to work requirements, including a decision to speed up the implementation deadline to appease House hard-liners. She said it would be “very challenging if not impossible” for her state to implement.

As it is, any effort to water down the House’s Medicaid language will face steep resistance in other corners of the GOP-controlled Senate, where lawmakers are pushing to amp up spending cuts, not scale them back. Some senators, in fact, want to further tighten the House’s work requirements or reduce, not just freeze, the provider tax.

“I’d be damned disappointed if a Republican majority with a Republican president didn’t make some reforms,” said Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.). “The provider tax is a money laundering machine. … If we don’t go after that, we’re not doing our jobs.”

Ron Johnson and a few others are continuing to push to change the cost split for those Medicaid beneficiaries made eligible under the Affordable Care Act. The federal government now picks up 90 percent of the cost, and House centrists nixed an effort by conservatives to reduce it.

One idea under discussion by conservatives is to phase in the change to appease skittish colleagues and state governments, but that is still likely to be a nonstarter for 50 GOP senators. Hawley warned that “there will be no Senate bill if that is on the table.”

Adam Cancryn contributed to this report.

Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst is the latest Republican to face an angry crowd of constituents, sparring with town hall attendees over President Donald Trump’s signature piece of legislation.

Constituents on Friday gathered in Butler County, Iowa, to hear Ernst defend the Trump administration’s work, including efforts by the Department of Government Efficiency and Republicans’ congressional priorities.

But when a constituent questioned Ernst about the reconciliation bill, things became heated. The woman, who said she had previously emailed Ernst’s office with her concerns, argued the bill’s proposed cuts seemed neither “compassionate” nor “fiscally responsible.” She accused Ernst of supporting a “tax shelter” for the wealthy.

As the audience applauded the woman, she continued, expressing concerns about the bill’s proposed cuts to SNAP benefits and Medicaid spending. Ernst said those who would lose Medicaid were not currently eligible for Medicaid.

“You are arguing — when you’re arguing about illegals that are receiving Medicaid benefits, 1.4 million, 1.4 million they’re not — they are not eligible so they will be coming off,” Ernst said. One audience member could then be heard shouting, “People are going to die.”

“Well, we all are going to die,” Ernst responded.

Audience members gasped and booed the senator, but Ernst seemed unbothered.

“Listen to me when I say that we are going to focus on those that are most vulnerable,” Ernst said as constituents continued to shout at her.

House Republicans passed the reconciliation bill — which Trump dubbed the “big beautiful bill” — after weeks of internal debate. Only two Republicans sided with Democrats in voting against the bill. But the bill faces another battle in the Senate, where Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) previously compared it to the Titanic and said he’s going to make sure it sinks in the upper chamber.

Initial estimates from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has found that the bill could lead to 7.6 million people going uninsured.

“If you don’t want to listen, that’s fine but what I’m doing is going through and telling you that those that are not eligible, those that are working and have benefits elsewhere, then they should receive those benefits elsewhere. Leave those dollars for those that are eligible for Medicaid,” Ernst continued.

Republicans from around the nation have faced hostile crowds of constituents in the months following Trump’s election.

Some GOP leaders — including Trump and House Speaker Mike Johnson — have offered unsubstantiated claims that people at the town halls are paid protesters. “The videos you saw of the town halls were for paid protesters in many of those places,” Johnson told CNN’s Kaitlin Collins earlier this year. “This is an old playbook that they pulled out and ran, and it made it look like that what is happening in Washington is unpopular.”

House Republicans’ campaign arm also advised members in March to not hold in-person town halls.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) denounced the Trump administration’s decision to axe temporary protected status for Afghan immigrants — the latest break by the centrist Republican from President Donald Trump’s administration.

In a joint letter with Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) to Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, the senator urged the administration to reconsider the cancellation of the temporary protection, which affords Afghans a work permit and legal status in the U.S.

“This decision endangers thousands of lives, including Afghans who stood by the United States,” Murkowski and Shaheen — the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee — wrote. “This decision represents a historic betrayal of promises made and undermines the values we fought for far more than 20 years in Afghanistan.”

The letter — which was sent May 23 and released Friday — comes amid reports that the State Department is shuttering the office that coordinated Afghan resettlement for those who helped with the war effort, part of an agency-wide reorganization aligning with the Trump administration’s moves to reduce foreign aid and assistance and refocus on “America First” priorities.

Murkowski has not been shy about criticizing her own party, while encouraging her fellow GOP senators to do the same. The Republican has rebuked President Donald Trump for his close relationship to Russian President Vladimir Putin, accusing the U.S. of “walking away from our allies.” But she also acknowledged a reticence within Republican circles of defying Trump — saying “we are all afraid” of Trump’s retaliation.

She’s also not the only Republican to raise red flags about the cancellation of TPS protections for some immigrants, with Miami’s members of Congress also urging the Trump administration to continue the protections for Venezuelans and Haitians.

The Alaska Republican first criticized the decision on TPS shortly after it was announced by the Department of Homeland Security, calling it “concerning” in light of promises from Noem to address a backlog of asylum applications — which could dramatically increase as former TPS holders look for avenues to stay in the U.S.

But eliminating TPS has been one of Trump’s key campaign promises from the start, after calling the program corrupt and saying the legal status had been extended for too long.

The battle over TPS has made its way to the courts. Earlier this month, the Supreme Court cleared the way for the Trump administration to revoke TPS protections for roughly 350,000 Venezuelans.

Murkowski has previously called out the withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan, which happened under the Biden administration, saying the “botched” operation endangered many who then came to the U.S. — and that ending protections would only exacerbate the problem.

“This administration should not compound that misstep by forcing them to return to the Taliban’s brutal regime,” Murkowski wrote on X earlier this month.