A sign is seen outside the FEMA Disaster Recovery Center at Weaverville Town Hall on March 29, 2025 in Weaverville, North Carolina. (Photo by Allison Joyce/Getty Images)
WASHINGTON — The review council that President Donald Trump tasked with overhauling the Federal Emergency Management Agency was supposed to release its recommendations before Monday but missed the deadline.
A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security declined to say when the report would be published, but wrote in a statement that it would “inform this Administration’s ongoing efforts to fundamentally restructure FEMA, transforming it from its current form into a streamlined, mission-focused disaster-response force.”
A congressional staffer, not authorized to speak publicly, said the report could be published as soon as mid-December. A spokesperson for Virginia Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin, a council member, said the review council will vote to finalize the report at an upcoming public meeting.
Trump established the 12-person council through an executive order he signed back in January and tasked the group with releasing the report within 180 days of its first meeting, which it held on May 20.
That should have meant a release this past weekend, though it’s possible staff writing the report were furloughed or tasked with other work during the 43-day government shutdown.
Hegseth, Noem are co-chairs
The council, co-chaired by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, held three public meetings earlier this year, where members spoke about possible ways to restructure FEMA but didn’t preview what recommendations they would actually put in the report.
Trump said in June “the FEMA thing has not been a very successful experiment” and that he would like states to shoulder more of the responsibility for natural disaster response and recovery.
“When you have a tornado or a hurricane, or you have a problem of any kind in a state, that’s what you have governors for,” Trump said. “They’re supposed to fix those problems. And it’s much more local. And they’ll develop a system. And I think it will be a great system.”
The FEMA Review Council’s report is supposed to include an
“assessment of the adequacy of FEMA’s response to disasters during the previous 4 years,”
“comparison of the FEMA responses with State, local, and private sector responses” and
“analysis of the principal arguments in the public debate for and against FEMA reform, including an appraisal of the merits and legality of particular reform proposals,” among several other elements.
FEMA action underway in Congress
Any major changes to FEMA would likely need to move through Congress before they could take effect. But a bipartisan group of lawmakers hasn’t waited for the review council’s suggestions to get started.
The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee voted 57-3 in September to send a bill to the floor that would make significant changes to FEMA, including making it a Cabinet-level agency.
House GOP leaders have yet to schedule the legislation for a vote. If passed, it would need Senate approval and Trump’s signature to become law.
Sen. Adam Schiff of California, left, and Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia, both Democrats, talk to reporters at the U.S. Capitol on Nov. 6, 2025. (Photo by Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)
WASHINGTON — A vote to stop President Donald Trump’s deadly strikes on alleged drug-running boats off the coast of Venezuela failed Thursday in the U.S. Senate, nearly mirroring the outcome of a similar war powers vote last month.
Senate Republicans Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Rand Paul of Kentucky again joined Democrats in a 49-51 vote, just shy of the simple majority needed to advance legislation aimed at halting Trump’s escalating campaign on what his administration describes as “narco-terrorists.”
The joint resolution, brought to the floor by Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., directs the “removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities within or against Venezuela that have not been authorized by Congress.”
Paul and Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., initially cosponsored the bill, and a dozen more Democratic senators and one independent signed on.
Schiff’s similar measure failed 48-51 in early October.
Kaine forced Thursday’s vote under the War Powers Resolution, a Vietnam War-era statute that gives Congress a check on the president’s use of the military abroad.
The death toll from U.S. military strikes has risen to 67 since September, according to CNN. Notably, the Trump administration is relocating the country’s most advanced aircraft carrier from the Mediterranean to the Caribbean, joining other Navy resources currently amassed there.
On Oct. 16, Trump publicly confirmed a New York Times report that he had authorized covert CIA operations in Venezuela and told reporters he was “looking at land” for possible further strikes.
Kaine, Schiff push for war powers vote
“All of this together with the increased pace of strikes in the Caribbean and the Pacific suggest that we are on the verge of something that should not happen without a debate and vote in Congress before the American people,” Kaine said on the floor before the vote.
Kaine and Schiff told reporters Thursday they viewed the White House Office of Legal Counsel opinion authorizing the fatal strike in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean near Venezuela.
The document, which senators are allowed to read in a classified setting, “makes no effort to claim that there’s a legal rationale for invading a sovereign nation, no effort to claim that it’s about Venezuela, or could be used with respect to Venezuela or any country,” Kaine said.
Schiff characterized the opinion as “broad enough to authorize just about anything.”
Kaine urged Senate Republicans, who received a brief and review of the document earlier this week, to introduce and debate legislation authorizing the administration to continue its military force in the region.
“Anybody in Congress who thinks we ought to be bombing ships in the Caribbean and Pacific, introduce an AUMF (Authorization for Use of Military Force) and have a debate and vote on it,” Kaine said, adding “but don’t just abdicate this power.”
Hegseth posts video
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth posted a grainy video online Tuesday of a vessel in flames after a strike, and said the United States targeted the boat in the Eastern Pacific that had been operated by “a Designated Terrorist Organization.”
“Intelligence confirmed that the vessel was involved in illicit narcotics smuggling, transiting along a known narco-trafficking route, and carrying narcotics. The strike was conducted in international waters in the Eastern Pacific.”
“No U.S. forces were harmed in the strike, and two male narco-terrorists — who were aboard the vessel — were killed,” Hegseth wrote on social media.
It’s unlawful for the U.S. military to intentionally kill civilians who are not actively taking part in hostilities against the U.S.
Ahead of Thursday’s vote, Sen. James Risch, R-Idaho, defended the administration’s “decisive actions to protect thousands of Americans from lethal narcotics.”
“Some Democrat members and members of the media claim that President Trump does not have authority to conduct these strikes. I’ll tell you right now, that is plain wrong,” said Risch, chair of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.
Risch said he and fellow Senate Republicans have sat through “hours of briefings and analysis by government legal departments and attorneys” regarding the strikes.
Schiff and Kaine told reporters their access to information and briefings has been more limited.
Paul criticizes Trump moves
On the Senate floor ahead of the vote, Paul compared the strikes and buildup in the Caribbean to the U.S. military’s “misguided” intervention in the Middle East.
“We owe it to our service members to only send them into harm’s way when vital American interests are at stake. Who is in charge of Venezuela does not constitute such an interest,” Paul said, alleging the strikes are about regime change in the South American nation ruled by dictator Nicolás Maduro.
“We overthrew Sadam Hussein thinking Iraq would be transformed into this great Jeffersonian democracy. Instead what occurred was an insurgency that led to some of the most brutal sectarian violence in living memory,” Paul said.
An F-15E Strike Eagle aircraft assigned to the 366th Fighter Wing sits on the flightline at Mountain Home Air Force Base in Idaho on March 5, 2025. (Photo courtesy of Senior Airman Trevor Bell/U.S. Air Force)
Saying they were given no advance notice of the announcement, Idaho’s governor and members of Congress have requested a briefing from Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth regarding his recent announcement about training Qatari Air Force personnel at Idaho’s Mountain Home Air Force Base.
In televised remarks made Oct. 10, Hegseth said, “Today we are announcing that we are signing a letter of acceptance to build a Qatari Emiri Air Force Facility at the Mountain Home Air Base in Idaho.”
Later that same day, Hegseth posted on the social media site X, formerly known as Twitter, a clarification writing, “Qatar will not have their own base in the United States – nor anything like a base.”
Records obtained under the Idaho Public Records Act by the Idaho Capital Sun show that several elected state and federal leaders in Idaho, including Republican U.S. Sen. Jim Risch, who serves as chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Gov. Brad Little were caught completely off guard by Hegseth’s announcement and had no idea it was coming.
Then on Thursday, Risch, U.S. Sen. Mike Crapo, U.S. Rep. Mike Simpson and Little, all R-Idaho, wrote a joint letter to Hegseth asking for a briefing on the announcement and answers to several questions.
“Like many foreign military sale agreements to allies, the plans to sell F-15QAs to Qatar have been in the process for years,” Crapo, Little, Risch and Simpson wrote in the letter. “However, we were given no advance notice that this agreement had been finalized or that it was going to be formally announced. While Qatar, as a long-time U.S. ally, provides substantial support to the U.S. military in the Middle East, such as allowing a U.S. base hosting thousands of U.S.-ready-to-fight-warriors, it is understandable that Qatar’s history of funding Iran-backed terrorist groups like Hamas and the extremism espoused by Qatari-based Al Jazeera has raised concerns among Idahoans.”
Idaho elected officials raise several questions in letter to Hegseth
The Idaho Republican leaders identified several questions for Hegseth about cost and security concerns, including:
Given the technological capabilities of the Mountain Home AFB range complex, what measures will be implemented to safeguard against any compromise to our national security?
What screening, intelligence, or vetting processes are in place to ensure no trainees have ties to hostile or extremist organizations?
Are there any specific security concerns for the surrounding communities and for U.S. military personnel stationed at Mountain Home AFB?
Is there a long-term plan to convert Mountain Home AFB into a multi-national training facility for foreign allies?
How many Qatari personnel will be involved in the training mission?
How long will they be deployed to Idaho?
Will families be allowed to accompany Qatari personnel, and what restrictions, if any, will be placed on their travel?
Is there a cost to American taxpayers to house, train, and feed the foreign military personnel covered by this agreement?
“In the interest of informing our constituents, maintaining open lines of communication, and fostering closer federal and state collaboration regarding this training squadron, we would like the department to provide more information about the plans and intentions of this mission now that it appears to be finalized,” Crapo, Little, Risch and Simpson wrote to Hegseth. “We request that you provide a briefing to the Idaho Congressional Delegation, as well as for the governor of Idaho and state legislators potentially impacted by the agreement, in Boise on the details of this agreement.”
Idaho’s fourth member of Congress, U.S. Rep. Russ Fulcher, R-Idaho, did not sign the letter to Hegseth, but also requested a briefing on the announcement. In a letter to a group of Idaho legislators who call themselves the Gang of Eight, Fulcher wrote that he also requested a briefing from Hegseth, and that Hegseth’s office promised a response.
“Since the Oct. 10 announcement by Sec. Hegseth, I have been in touch with various federal sources to learn as much detail as possible,” Fulcher wrote in the letter to Idaho legislators. “In addition, I have reached out directly to (Hegseth), expressing my disappointment with the lack of communication and to request a briefing. The secretary’s office has acknowledged receipt and pledged a response.”
Risch issued a press release announcing the joint letter to Hegseth and released the text of their letter to Hegseth.
Trump has announced that he is changing the title of the Department of Defense to the Department of War and changing Hegseth’s title to Secretary of War, but the name change requires Congressional approval to become permanent.
Hegseth worked as a host on Fox News prior to being appointed by President Donald Trump to serve as secretary of defense.
This story was originally produced by Idaho Capital Sun, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Wisconsin Examiner, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.
The Dirksen Federal Courthouse is pictured in Chicago. (Capitol News Illinois photo by Hannah Meisel)
CHICAGO — Illinois and Chicago filed a federal lawsuit Monday to block the Trump administration’s planned deployment of National Guard troops to the state — a move Gov. JB Pritzker called an “invasion.”
Trump pushed forward with the plan to activate hundreds of National Guard soldiers, including some from Texas, despite monthslong opposition from state and local leaders, as well as objections from civic and business groups in the city.
“We must now start calling this what it is: Trump’s Invasion,” Pritzker said in a statement Sunday night. “It started with federal agents, it will soon include deploying federalized members of the Illinois National Guard against our wishes, and it will now involve sending in another state’s military troops.”
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem asked President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to deploy troops to Illinois to protect federal immigration officers and facilities. The Immigration and Customs Enforcement processing center in Broadview, a near-west suburb of Chicago, has been the site of several clashes between ICE agents and demonstrators in recent weeks.
But Pritzker, who said Saturday that he refused the Trump administration’s “ultimatum” to activate the National Guard himself, has insisted there is no emergency necessitating guardsmen on the ground. He also warned that White House officials would use any conflict between immigration agents and civilians as a “pretext” for military occupation.
“It will cause only more unrest, including harming social fabric and community relations and increasing the mistrust of police,” the lawsuit said.
The suit, filed in the Northern District of Illinois, names Trump, Noem and Hegseth as defendants.
Texas National Guard also activated
Illinois filed its lawsuit hours after Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott announced he will send 400 guardsmen to cities around the country, including Chicago, and after a federal judge in Oregon blocked National Guard deployments to Portland.
The order is “effective immediately for an initial period of 60 days” and subject to extension, according to the memo, signed by Hegseth. It comes a day after Pritzker confirmed Trump’s intention to federalize 300 members of the Illinois National Guard.
“The American people, regardless of where they reside, should not live under the threat of occupation by the United States military, particularly not simply because their city or state leadership has fallen out of a president’s favor,” the lawsuit reads. “To guard against this, foundational principles of American law limit the president’s authority to involve the military in domestic affairs. Those bedrock principles are in peril.”
The opening paragraph of Illinois’ lawsuit against the federal government argues that the “foundational principles of American law” that limit the president’s powers to involve the military in domestic affairs are at risk. (Capitol News Illinois illustration with highlight added)
The promised deployment comes as ICE has ramped up activity in Chicago and its suburbs as part of “Operation Midway Blitz,” which has so far resulted in more than 800 arrests according to the Department of Homeland Security.
There have also been two shootings since the clashes began. On Saturday, the governor called the administration’s National Guard activation a “manufactured performance” and not about protecting public safety.
Though the Trump administration insists ICE is targeting undocumented immigrants who have criminal backgrounds, reports have mounted of agents arresting those with no history of illegal activity, detaining children along with their parents and even handcuffing U.S. citizens and children with zip ties. Immigrant and civil rights groups have alleged ICE is arresting people without warrants in violation of a federal consent decree.
The lawsuit also alleges ICE activity in Chicago and its suburbs has already subjected Illinois “to serious and irreparable harm.”
“It also creates economic harm, depressing business activities and tourism that not only hurt Illinoisians but also hurt Illinois’s tax revenue,” the complaint said.
That argument echoes one made by a group of Chicago business and civic groups over the weekend.
“National Guard troops on our streets, like those reportedly being ordered here by the federal government, have the potential to sow fear and chaos, threatening our businesses’ bottom lines and our reputation,” the Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce, Civic Committee of the Commercial Club of Chicago and the Civic Federation said in a joint statement Saturday.
Attorney General Kwame Raoul argues the troop deployment violates Illinois’ rights as sovereign state to carry about its own law enforcement, as well as 1878 Posee Comitatus Act that bans the military from participating in domestic law enforcement.
The lawsuit also claims the Trump administration failed to meet any criteria that could allow the president to federalize the National Guard. The president can federalize the National Guard to stop a foreign invasion, when the president can’t execute the laws of the country or to stop a rebellion.
Raoul and state leaders have argued for weeks that Trump would use protests in Broadview as a “flimsy pretext” to claim a rebellion.
Several protestors have been arrested near the facility in recent weeks on charges of assaulting officers. Federal agents have sprayed tear gas and fired nonlethal ammunition into crowds that have gathered there.
Over the weekend, a U.S. Border Patrol agent shot a woman on the city’s Southwest Side in a confrontation with protesters. Prosecutors eventually charged the woman and another protestor with attempting to “assault, impede, and interfere with the work of federal agents in Chicago.” According to the Chicago Sun-Times, agents fired “defensive shots” when they saw the woman was allegedly “armed with a semi-automatic weapon,” and she was taken to a nearby hospital for treatment before she was charged.
Further, the lawsuit argues the Trump administration has entirely manufactured any public safety crisis in Illinois that would require military intervention. It cites a 2013 social media post by Trump, two years before he announced his candidacy for president, that suggested the military should be deployed to Chicago. It lists several other derogatory comments Trump made about the city, state and their leaders over the years, including as president.
Illinois’ lawsuit against the federal government includes several posts that President Donald Trump has made about the city over a period of at least 12 years. (Screenshots from Illinois’ lawsuit against the federal government)
The lawsuit argues that animosity culminated last week with Trump claiming during a speech to military generals that there was an “invasion from within” and suggesting cities like Chicago should be used as “training grounds” for the military.
How soldiers will be deployed
The lawsuit includes new details about how federal officials communicated with state leaders and gave Pritzker an ultimatum.
DHS sent a memo to the Illinois National Guard on Sept. 28 stating troops “would integrate with federal law enforcement operations, serving in direct support of federal facility protection, access control, and crowd control.”
On Saturday morning, Illinois National Guard Adjutant General Rodney Boyd received a formal email from the Defense Department National Guard Bureau saying Trump asked for at least 300 soldiers, and if Boyd did not activate them within two hours, Hegseth would federalize them. Boyd responded that Pritzker declined to activate the guard. Defense officials sent a new memo late Saturday saying the guard was federalized.
Illinois National Guard leaders received another memo on Sunday informing them soldiers from Texas would be sent to Chicago beginning Monday.
Abbott, a Republican and ardent Trump supporter, has been a frequent foil of Pritzker, bussing thousands of asylum-seeking migrants from the border to Chicago in 2023 and 2024 and criticizing the Illinois governor for welcoming Texas Democratic legislators who fled their state this summer amid a partisan redistricting fight. He said in a social media post that Pritzker “can either fully enforce protection for federal employees or get out of the way and let the Texas Guard do it.”
Prior to this year, the last time a president federalized a state’s National Guard without a request from a state’s governor was in 1965, when President Lyndon B. Johnson sent federal troops to protect civil rights protesters in Alabama without the cooperation of segregationist Gov. George Wallace.
Capitol News Illinois is a nonprofit, nonpartisan news service that distributes state government coverage to hundreds of news outlets statewide. It is funded primarily by the Illinois Press Foundation and the Robert R. McCormick Foundation.
Federal police push towards a crowd of demonstrators at an ICE processing facility south of downtown Portland on Sat., Oct. 4, 2025. (Photo by Alex Baumhardt/Oregon Capital Chronicle)
California on Sunday joined Oregon and the city of Portland in suing over the Trump administration’s latest attempt to deploy federal troops to an American city.
More than 100 members of the California National Guard, on orders from President Donald Trump, flew to Oregon overnight against the wishes of elected leaders in both states, and without those leaders’ knowledge. More are expected.
“At the direction of the President, approximately 200 federalized members of the California National Guard are being reassigned from duty in the greater Los Angeles area to Portland, Oregon to support U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other federal personnel performing official duties, including the enforcement of federal law, and to protect federal property,” said Sean Parnell, a Pentagon spokesperson.
The move came just hours after Oregon and Portland won a temporary restraining order against Trump’s attempt to deploy 200 Oregon Guard members to Portland. Federal Judge Karin Immergut — a Trump appointee — said on Saturday that the federal government was violating the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which effectively guarantees that states retain police power within their borders.
Immergut scheduled an emergency hearing at 7 p.m. Pacific time Sunday on a second restraining order, but a public access line for the hearing still wasn’t live by 7:30. Shortly before the hearing was scheduled to begin, plaintiffs filed with the court a Sunday memo from U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordering 400 Texas National Guard troops to mobilize to Oregon, Illinois and other locations.
Kotek and Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker both said they received no explanation from the federal government about that order. It’s unclear how many Texas soldiers would be sent to each location and what mission they would carry out, Kotek added.
“This is a continuation and escalation of the president’s dangerous, un-American misuse of states’ National Guard members and hard-earned taxpayer dollars,” Kotek said.
In her Saturday opinion, Immergut also found that protests at an ICE processing facility in Portland were not by any definition a “rebellion” nor do they pose the “danger of a rebellion.”
“This is a nation of Constitutional law, not martial law,” Immergut wrote in her opinion. “Defendants have made a range of arguments that, if accepted, risk blurring the line between civil and military federal power — to the detriment of this nation.”
Late Saturday, attorneys for the federal government filed a notice that they would ask the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to put a halt on her order. On Sunday Oregon’s Attorney General Dan Rayfield in turn filed a motion opposing the federal request, saying the issue could be decided by Immergut as early as Monday.
“What was unlawful yesterday is unlawful today. What was unlawful with the Oregon National Guard is unlawful with the California National Guard. The judge’s order was not some minor procedural point for the president to work around like my 14-year old does when he doesn’t like my answers,” Rayfield said at a news conference late Sunday afternoon. He was joined by Gov. Tina Kotek and Portland Mayor Keith Wilson.
If the stay is denied, Oregon troops will be sent home from Camp Rilea in Warrenton, where they’ve been waiting for about a week under orders from Trump and U.S. Northern Command, a joint federal military command based in Colorado.
“They are pawns in this situation, political pawns in this situation. And I would like to send our troops home to their families, to their jobs,” Kotek said.
The newly arrived California Guard troops are currently waiting at Camp Withycombe in Happy Valley, Kotek said, and she expects 99 more will come to the camp Sunday about 20 miles from the ICE processing facility where mostly small and peaceful protests have gone on for months. If they are ordered to the ICE facility Sunday night where protests are ongoing, Kotek said, she cannot do anything to stop it absent a court order. Oregon, California and Portland also asked the federal district court on Sunday for a Temporary Restraining Order barring those troops from being activated, which could take several days to be decided by Immergut.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom said in a statement early Sunday that up to 300 soldiers were being sent to Oregon on Trump’s orders. Those troops are also under the orders of U.S. Northern Command. Kotek said she does not know what their mission is, and Trump and his administration have not communicated with her at all about the deployment.
“This afternoon, I sent a message to Northern Command, directing them to obey the Oct. 4 court ruling from yesterday and take no further action regarding Oregon,” Kotek said. “I also directed that those troops that will be at Camp Withycombe should be restricted to that facility and that the California National Guard troops should be sent home as soon as possible.”
Protests have continued outside the ICE facility in Portland, with about 100 people on the streets Saturday night.
At one point during the evening, federal agents used chemical irritants to push protesters a block away from the facility onto city street, far from the federal property where the officers’ enforcement authority is limited.
Unknown individuals were also allowed onto the property by federal officials to film cell phone videos from the ICE building’s roof, as protestors were sprayed with chemical gases indiscriminately.
A Portland Police spokesperson said local law enforcement were not aware of or assisting with the federal agents’ actions.
The ramping up of federal pressure on Portland has coincided with a similar display of force in Chicago over the past few days. During a speech to military officials last week, Trump said he wanted to use Democratic cities as “training grounds” for the military.
Wilson, Portland’s mayor, said the actions by federal troops at the ICE facility Saturday evening were “beyond the pale.”
“We saw unjustified uses of force; We saw the shoving of peaceful veterans and elderly people to the ground; Indiscriminate use of impact munitions to disperse an otherwise peaceful crowd; Indiscriminately discharging pepper spray. We saw a sniper on the roof of the ICE facility,” he said at the news conference. He said the city would file a complaint with the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Department.
“I’m so disappointed that we’ve had to spend our valuable time on this matter. We have so many hard and important challenges in Portland and in Oregon and the United States, and this is a situation that we didn’t ask for,” Wilson said. “It certainly wasn’t invited.”
Editor-in-Chief Julia Shumway contributed to this report.
This story was originally produced by Oregon Capital Chronicle, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Wisconsin Examiner, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.
Login
