U.S. Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, D-Ill., points to text messages by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth during an annual worldwide threats assessment hearing at the Longworth House Office Building on March 26, 2025 in Washington, DC. The hearing held by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence addressed top aides inadvertently including Jeffrey Goldberg, the editor-in-chief for The Atlantic magazine, on a high level Trump administration Signal group chat discussing plans to bomb Houthi targets in Yemen. (Photo by Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth violated official policy when he used the publicly available Signal app to message about military plans from his personal cell phone, including imminent bombings in Yemen, according to a report released Thursday by the Pentagon’s own watchdog. 

The Defense Department Inspector General’s 84-page report concluded Hegseth sent information about the “strike times of manned U.S. aircraft over hostile territory over an unapproved, unsecure network approximately 2 to 4 hours before the execution of those strikes.” 

“Although the Secretary wrote in his July 25 statement to the DoD OIG that ‘there were no details that would endanger our troops or the mission,’ if this information had fallen into the hands of U.S. adversaries, Houthi forces might have been able to counter U.S. forces or reposition personnel and assets to avoid planned U.S. strikes,” the report states. “Even though these events did not ultimately occur, the Secretary’s actions created a risk to operational security that could have resulted in failed U.S. mission objectives and potential harm to U.S. pilots.”

Members of Congress from both political parties requested the Defense Department Inspector General look into Hegseth’s use of Signal after a journalist at The Atlantic was inadvertently added to a group chat of national security officials planning the bombing in Yemen. Editor-in-Chief Jeffrey Goldberg later published a series of stories detailing the messages. 

Acting Defense Department Inspector General Steven A. Stebbins released a memo in April announcing he had opened an investigation into the matter. 

GOP wants more Pentagon tech, Dems want Hegseth gone

Members of Congress’ reaction to the report was mixed, with Republicans suggesting more technology is needed for the Pentagon, while Democrats called for Hegseth to resign. 

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker, R-Miss., issued a statement saying the report shows Hegseth “acted within his authority to communicate the information in question to other cabinet level officials.” 

“It is also clear to me that our senior leaders need more tools available to them to communicate classified information in real time and a variety of environments,” Wicker added. “I think we have some work to do in providing those tools to our national security leaders.”

Senate Armed Services Committee ranking member Jack Reed, D-R.I., said in a statement the report confirms “that Secretary Hegseth violated military regulations and continues to show reckless disregard for the safety of American servicemembers.”

“For months, Secretary Hegseth has attempted to mislead Congress and the American people, claiming repeatedly that no classified information was involved,” Reed said. “The Inspector General has now definitively cast doubt on those false assurances.”

Reed added that Hegseth should “explain himself to Congress, the public, and the servicemembers he leads. The men and women of our armed forces deserve leadership they can trust with their lives.”

Hegseth refuses to give cell phone to investigators

The Inspector General report said Hegseth declined to sit for an interview with the Defense Department’s oversight agency, that he refused to hand over his personal cell phone to investigators and that he didn’t retain some of the messages in accordance with federal recordkeeping requirements. 

Officials working for Hegseth shared copies of the Signal chat with the inspector general, but those were incomplete since the app’s auto-delete feature was on at the time. Signal users can adjust that for different lengths of time or turn it off completely.

Hegseth was in the Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility, or SCIF, in his home the morning and early afternoon of March 15 to monitor “the operation against the Houthis,” according to the report. 

Two aides who were with Hegseth at the time told investigators he used “secure, classified” systems to communicate with United States Central Command officials “during the planning and execution of the strikes against Houthi targets that day and reviewed information related to the strikes.” 

“In the SCIF, the Secretary had access to multiple means of secure communication that allowed him to provide the necessary operational details and updates to non-DoD government officials on the Signal group chat,” the report states. 

The group chat about the Yemen bombing that accidentally included a journalist wasn’t the only one Hegseth used to communicate about official Pentagon business from his personal phone. 

Eight officials within the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Office of the Chief Information Officer told investigators that Hegseth created “multiple Signal group chats in which the Secretary and others allegedly discussed official DoD business and nonpublic information.” 

“One of the officials we spoke with stated that the Secretary posted the same sensitive operational information concerning the Houthi attack plans on the ‘Defense Team Huddle’ group chat,” the report states, later adding Hegseth declined to provide any information about that chat. 

The Inspector General opted not to make any recommendations about the use of Signal in the report, since “records management issues arising from the use of Signal and other commercially available messaging applications are a DoD-wide issue.”

A previous inspector general report also called on the department to “improve training for DoD senior officials on compliance with records retention laws and policies.”

Alabama’s Rogers says mission not compromised

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mike Rogers, R-Ala., wrote in a statement that it is “important to remember that this was a successful operation that took out a dangerous target with no harm to U.S. troops. It’s clear that the discussion on Signal didn’t compromise the mission.”

“During the past few administrations, the use of Signal for communication between government officials has grown, so I appreciate the comprehensive work by the IG to develop recommendations on how to improve and secure communications,” Rogers said. “I encourage the Administration to follow these recommendations, and I look forward to discussions with the Pentagon on how to implement them.”

House Armed Services Committee ranking member Adam Smith, D-Wash., called the report “a damning review of an incompetent secretary of defense who is profoundly incapable of the job and clearly has no respect for or comprehension of what is required to safeguard our service members.”

“It confirms staggering violations of policy – namely that unsecured platforms were used by the secretary to boast about sensitive operational details that could have jeopardized both the mission and, more importantly, the lives of American service members tasked with carrying out Operation Rough Rider,” Smith said.

‘A fireable offense for anyone else in the Department of Defense’

Senate Defense Appropriations subcommittee ranking member Chris Coons, D-Del., said in a statement the report “concluded that Secretary Hegseth violated DOD procedure and put service members’ lives at risk with his reckless mishandling of sensitive information.” 

“In March, I led a group of senators in pressing the Trump administration to investigate this blatant misconduct. Any service member who acted with such disregard for our national security would be dismissed, at the very least,” Coons said. “Our nation’s highest ranking defense official should not be held to a lower standard than the men and women he oversees. For the good of our nation, I once again call on Secretary Hegseth to resign.”

House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence ranking member Jim Himes, D-Conn., said in a statement the report “confirms what I feared when this Signal thread became public: We are fortunate that the mission was not compromised and that servicemembers were not put at needless risk thanks to Secretary Hegseth’s reckless treatment of classified information.”

“Pete Hegseth’s behavior and lack of judgment would be a fireable offense for anyone else in the Department of Defense,” Himes said. “What’s more, his refusal to sit for an interview with the Inspector General or submit his device for examination is yet another example of his failure to take responsibility for his actions.”

U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, right, looks on as U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during a meeting of his Cabinet in the Cabinet Room of the White House on Dec. 2, 2025 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said Tuesday he did not witness a controversial — and potentially illegal — second strike in early September that killed two survivors clinging to a burning alleged drug-running boat off the Venezuelan coast.

The secretary’s exact order in the Sept. 2 strike has been under scrutiny after The Washington Post reported Friday that Hegseth gave a verbal directive to “kill everybody” that in turn led the commanding admiral to order a follow-on strike to kill two alleged drug smugglers who survived an initial attack.

Hegseth’s comments responded to a reporter’s question at the end of President Donald Trump’s livestreamed two-hour Cabinet meeting. 

“I watched that first strike live. As you can imagine, at the Department of War we got a lot of things to do, so … I moved on to my next meeting,” Hegseth told reporters. 

The secretary said he learned a “couple of hours later” that Adm. Frank M. “Mitch” Bradley “made the correct decision to ultimately sink the boat and eliminate the threat.”

When pressed by the reporter if he saw any survivors after the initial strike, Hegseth said “I did not personally see survivors … the thing was on fire.”

“This is called the fog of war. This is what you in the press don’t understand,” he replied.

Hegseth said he didn’t know the exact amount of time between the first and second strikes. He declined to answer follow-up questions.

Bipartisan lawmakers on the Senate and House Armed Services committees announced probes over the weekend into the follow-on strike that killed the survivors. Numerous military law experts argue killing survivors of a shipwreck is in clear violation of the Pentagon’s laws of war.

Hegseth authorized strike

Hegseth initially called The Washington Post investigative report “fabricated, inflammatory, and derogatory,” in a post on social media Friday.

On Monday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters during the daily briefing that Hegseth had “authorized Admiral Bradley to conduct these kinetic strikes.”

“Admiral Bradley worked well within his authority and the law directing the engagement to ensure the boat was destroyed and the threat to the United States of America was eliminated,” Leavitt said at the briefing.

On social media Monday night, Hegseth wrote: “Admiral Mitch Bradley is an American hero, a true professional, and has my 100% support. I stand by him and the combat decisions he has made — on the September 2 mission and all others since.”

A New York Times article Monday, citing five U.S. officials who spoke separately on the condition of anonymity, reported that Hegseth gave an initial written order for an operation to kill the alleged drug smugglers on the boat and destroy the entire vessel. 

The officials said Hegseth did not address additional steps if the first missile did not accomplish both goals, and that he did not give Bradley additional orders in response to video surveillance of the boat, according to the Times, which wrote that Bradley ordered “several” follow-on shots.

The strike in question was the first of nearly two dozen U.S. attacks on boats in the Caribbean Sea, which the administration alleges are smuggling narcotics. The operations, over several months, have killed 83 individuals, according to a CNN timeline.

‘I rely on Pete’

Trump defended Hegseth at Tuesday’s Cabinet meeting, saying “Pete’s done an amazing job.”

Regarding the attack, Trump downplayed the importance of a follow-on strike.

“I still haven’t gotten a lot of information, because I rely on Pete, but to me, it was an attack. It wasn’t one strike, two strikes, three strikes,” he said.

“Pete didn’t know about a second attack having to do with two people. And I guess Pete would have to speak to it. I can say this, I want those boats taken out, and if we have to, we’ll attack on land also, just like we attack on sea,” Trump said.

Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One on Sunday that he “wouldn’t have wanted that,” referring to the killing of two men clinging to the wreckage. 

“Pete said he did not order the death of those two men,” Trump continued.

Trump posted Sept. 2 on his Truth Social platform a 29-second edited video of the attack.

On Sept. 3, Fox News’ “Fox & Friends” played the video from Trump’s post on repeat while interviewing Hegseth, who told the hosts that 11 alleged “narco-terrorists” were killed in the attack.

“I watched it live. We knew exactly what they were doing and we knew exactly who they represented,” Hegseth said on the network’s talk show, which he hosted on weekends prior to being appointed and confirmed as secretary of Defense.

The Intercept first reported on Sept. 10 that survivors of the initial Sept. 2 strike were killed in follow-up blasts.

Congressional inquiries

Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle are now inquiring to learn if what happened on Sept. 2 amounts to a war crime. 

U.S. Sen. Elissa Slotkin, D-Mich., issued a statement Tuesday, criticizing Hegseth and calling on Trump to fire him if he violated the laws of war.

“At the Pentagon, the buck stops with the Secretary of Defense, period,” Slotkin said.

The first-term Democrat and former CIA official recently participated in a video, now targeted by a Pentagon investigation, reminding service members that they have a right to refuse “illegal orders.”  

“True leaders own the calls they make and take responsibility for their actions. Secretary Hegseth should release the full video of the strike and lay out publicly what happened, without throwing the uniformed military under the bus,” Slotkin said.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune defended the administration Tuesday when asked by reporters about the Sept. 2 event and Hegseth’s other controversies, including discussing real-time bombing of targets in Yemen in March on the publicly available app Signal.

“I think the Trump administration and the peace-through-strength policies that they are employing around the world are making our country safer, and so Secretary Hegseth is a part of that,” the South Dakota Republican said.

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth testifies before the House Appropriations Committee's Defense Subcommittee on June 10, 2025.  (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate and House Armed Services committees will open bipartisan inquiries into U.S. military strikes on suspected drug-running boats in the Caribbean Sea, with a focus on an alleged follow-on attack that The Washington Post reported killed two survivors of the initial operation.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Roger Wicker, R-Miss., and ranking member Jack Reed, D-R.I., issued a joint statement Friday promising “vigorous oversight” of the killings.

“The Committee is aware of recent news reports — and the Department of Defense’s initial response — regarding alleged follow-on strikes on suspected narcotics vessels in the SOUTHCOM (Southern Command) area of responsibility. The Committee has directed inquiries to the Department, and we will be conducting vigorous oversight to determine the facts related to these circumstances,” Wicker and Reed said.

Similarly, House Armed Services Committee Chair Mike Rogers, R-Ala., and ranking member Adam Smith, D-Wash., said in a joint statement Saturday that the panel “is committed to providing rigorous oversight of the Department of Defense’s military operations in the Caribbean.”

“We take seriously the reports of follow-on strikes on boats alleged to be ferrying narcotics in the SOUTHCOM region and are taking bipartisan action to gather a full accounting of the operation in question,” according to the statement.

The inquiries mark a rare bipartisan check on President Donald Trump’s administration since his second term began in January. With the exception of voting to release the federal case files on convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, which Trump eventually endorsed, Republicans have largely left Trump’s decisions and policies unchallenged.

Follow-on attack reported

Lawmakers’ attention was retrained on the already legally questionable U.S. operations targeting alleged narcotics boats after an investigative report published Friday by The Washington Post revealed Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth gave verbal orders to kill everyone during a Sept. 2 operation —  the first of several U.S. boat strikes in the Caribbean Sea that have killed roughly 80.

According to the report, two survivors clung to burning wreckage after an initial hit. Adm. Frank M. “Mitch” Bradley, who was commanding the attack from Fort Bragg in North Carolina, ordered a second, or follow-on, strike to fulfill Hegseth’s order and kill the remaining survivors. States Newsroom has not independently confirmed the details.

Hegseth called the report “fabricated, inflammatory, and derogatory,” in a post on social media Friday.

Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., told CBS News’ “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on Sunday the follow-on strike could rise “to the level of a war crime if it’s true.”

“If that reporting is true, it’s a clear violation of the DoD’s own laws of war, as well as international laws about the way you treat people who are in that circumstance,” Kaine said.

A working group of former military lawyers issued a statement Friday urging Congress to investigate the Sept. 2 strike.

“Since orders to kill survivors of an attack at sea are ‘patently illegal,’ anyone who issues or follows such orders can and should be prosecuted for war crimes, murder, or both,” according to the statement published by Just Security, a journal focused on national security published by the New York University School of Law Reiss Center on Law and Security.

A bipartisan effort, led by Kaine, to stop Trump’s deadly strikes in the Caribbean narrowly failed in the Senate in early November.

White House confirms second strike

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt was met with numerous questions about the Post report at Monday’s press briefing.

A reporter asked Leavitt, “Does the administration deny that that second strike happened, or did it happen and the administration denies that Secretary Hegseth gave the order?”

“The latter is true, and I have a statement to read for you here,” Leavitt said, adding that Trump and Hegseth have authority to conduct lethal attacks on designated narco-terrorist groups.

“With respect to the strikes in question on Sept. 2, Secretary Hegseth authorized Admiral Bradley to conduct these kinetic strikes,” she said. “Admiral Bradley worked well within his authority and the law directing the engagement to ensure the boat was destroyed and the threat to the United States of America was eliminated.”

Leavitt’s statement was not entirely consistent with Hegseth’s denial on Friday, in which he called the reporting “fabricated.”

Trump echoes Hegseth denial

Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One on Sunday he “wouldn’t have wanted that” when asked about the alleged follow-on strike that killed the two survivors.

“The first strike was very lethal. It was fine, and if there were two people around — but Pete (Hegseth) said that didn’t happen,” Trump told reporters. 

“Pete said he did not order the death of those two men,” Trump continued in a back-and-forth with the press.

Trump also said Saturday he was closing the airspace above Venezuela, but told a reporter who asked Sunday if the move previewed a U.S. airstrike of the country not to “read anything into it.”

“To all Airlines, Pilots, Drug Dealers, and Human Traffickers, please consider THE AIRSPACE ABOVE AND SURROUNDING VENEZUELA TO BE CLOSED IN ITS ENTIRETY,” he wrote on his own social media platform just before 8 a.m. Eastern Saturday.

Trump confirmed reports he spoke to Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro late last month but would not reveal details of the conversation.

The U.S. has been amassing Navy vessels and troops off the coast of Venezuela for months, including the recent addition in mid-November of the Navy’s most advanced aircraft carrier, the USS Gerald Ford.

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.

Congress passed the War Powers Resolution in 1973 after the Nixon administration secretly bombed Vietnam and Cambodia, killing hundreds of thousands of people. 

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 show Idaho Gov. Little, Sen. Risch weren’t aware Qatar facility announcement was coming

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.

Idaho Delegation letter to Sec. Hegseth

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.”

Read more: Over Pritzker’s objections, Trump sending 300 National Guardsmen to Chicago, governor says

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 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.”

Read more: ‘We are not backing down’: Feds ramp up immigration raids in Chicago area | DHS Secretary Noem defends ICE tactics in second Illinois visit

“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.

Read the lawsuit here.

Order violates states’ rights

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.

Read more: Pritzker says feds seeking Chicago troop deployment. ‘What I have been warning of is now being realized’

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.

---

---

Read more: As Trump declares ‘we’re going in,’ Pritzker says ‘terror and cruelty is the point’

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.

Read more: As Illinois congressional delegation seeks answers, ICE cancels meeting

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.

This article first appeared on Capitol News Illinois and is republished here under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

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.