Congress

Trump advisers, Congress discuss tariff legislation

Published

2 years ago

November 11, 2024

Advisers close to President-elect Donald Trump have been in discussions with House Ways and Means Chair Jason Smith (R-Mo.) on a broad tax package that is partially paid for by tariffs approved by Congress, according to two people familiar with the conversations who were granted anonymity to describe the internal discussions.

As part of those conversations, staffers and advisers close to the Trump team have also investigated whether House rules need to be changed to use tariffs as offsets for tax cuts, those people say.

A Ways and Means Committee spokesperson declined to comment.

The discussions come as Republicans are gearing up to pass a massive tax bill, which would include $4.6 trillion of expiring Trump tax cuts and potentially several other tax proposals floated by Trump on the campaign trail. They include Trump’s ideas to remove “tax on tips” and eliminate taxes on Social Security, among many others.

Trump repeatedly pledged on the campaign trail to use tariffs to help pay for those tax cuts, and the conversations signal that congressional Republicans could be open to imposing tariffs on Trump’s behalf via legislation.

However, Congress has not raised tariffs through legislation in almost 100 years — through the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 — and that has led to some confusion over how lawmakers should handle the issue as part of a broader tax package, the people said.

“We’re likely to see in a reconciliation bill … that’s raising revenue through tariffs on imports and taking that savings and using it to cut taxes and create incentives for domestic production,” said a person directly familiar with conversations between Trump’s advisers and Congress.

Reconciliation — a budget procedure possible only if Republicans sweep Congress — would allow Republicans to pass the tax cuts and tariffs without Democratic support and with only simple majorities in both chambers. But those rules and other House rules around bills that lose revenue can be exceedingly complex.

It’s very unlikely that tariffs could help pay for a significant portion of any tax cuts, though — despite Trump’s flirtation with the idea of using tariffs to completely eliminate the income tax. In fiscal year 2020, U.S. Customs collected $74.4 billion in tariffs, accounting for only roughly 2.2 percent of total federal revenue, according to the Congressional Research Service.

According to estimates by the Tax Foundation, the U.S. would need to implement an across-the-board tariff hike of 69.9 percent to completely replace income taxes.

Congress

Judge finds Lander not guilty in 26 Federal Plaza obstruction case

Published

6 minutes ago

June 11, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

NEW YORK — A federal judge ruled Thursday that former New York City Comptroller Brad Lander is not guilty of misdemeanor obstruction for blocking an elevator while protesting outside an immigrant holding area.

Lander was hit with the obstruction charge last September while demonstrating in support of detained immigrants at 26 Federal Plaza in lower Manhattan. He was offered a deal to drop the charge but opted instead for a trial to bring attention to the federal government’s immigration policies.

Lander said he was there with state legislators to view the facility’s conditions, not to purposefully block an elevator — and that he would have moved if asked. In reading his findings, Judge Henry Ricardo described Lander’s testimony as consistent with video evidence, noting that his movements didn’t suggest he was purposefully trying to block the elevator and that Lander appeared “tired and a bit resigned.”

“No offense to Mr. Lander,” the judge said.

Lander — who entered the courtroom in good spirits and holding a Knicks hat — told reporters after the verdict: “I didn’t feel tired.”

“I felt an urgency to show up that day and try to fight what ICE is doing,” he said.

After a month’s delay, Lander finally had his first day in court Wednesday — less than two weeks before the primary election — bringing immigration even more to the forefront in the waning days of his campaign against Democratic Rep. Dan Goldman.

During the six-hour trial, Assistant U.S. Attorney Ariel Cohen framed it as a straightforward case — that it was well-documented Lander was sitting in front of an elevator and didn’t move after being told to do so multiple times.

Cohen pointed to Lander singing “We Shall Not Be Moved,” a well-known protest song popularized during the Civil Rights movement, while sitting in front of the elevator. But Ricardo was not swayed by that argument, reasoning that it was a chaotic moment and Lander was, in fact, moved, despite the song he was singing.

“Actions speak louder than words,” he said.

Ricardo said the government failed to prove Lander purposefully obstructed an elevator. He also said he didn’t weigh what was being protested or whether the protest was just — a stated goal for Lander in deciding to take the case to trial. Instead, Wednesday’s proceedings focused largely on elevator logistics and signage at 26 Federal Plaza, not the Trump administration’s immigration efforts.

“Do I wish that they had granted our discovery motions, sought harder to prove the case and given us the ability to hold ICE accountable? Yes, I wish that,” Lander said after the verdict.

Immigration policy has emerged as a flashpoint between Lander and Goldman, who is seeking a third term, especially as the Trump administration threatens to ramp up enforcement in the state.

Goldman, who often highlights his oversight visits at immigrant detention centers and his “triage center” to support detainees near 26 Federal Plaza, has repeatedly criticized Lander for his approach to immigration. On Wednesday, he referred to Lander’s case as “performative” and “self-promoting.” At a debate last week, Goldman chided him for the rhetorical refrain that he puts his “body on the line” for immigrants and for fundraising off of it.

“While Brad never did get the information he sought from ICE, I have all of that information from my weekly oversight visits and would be happy to brief him,” Goldman said in a statement.

Lander, who frequently conducts court watching shifts, was also arrested at 26 Federal Plaza while escorting migrants from immigration hearings last June, ahead of the mayoral primary. No charges were filed then. Lander on Thursday said he thinks the arrests are an effort “to intimidate people into not participating as part of that court watching, ICE watching movement.”

In response to a question about Goldman’s suggestion his actions are political theater, Lander claimed he wasn’t running for anything in September when he was arrested: “We were there to show up for our neighbors and the rule of law. This is much bigger than we are.”

When asked if the legal proceedings have been a distraction from his campaign, he said some of the most “meaningful work of the last year” has been “being part of a movement of Americans who are fighting back against the fascist White House and rogue ICE agents.”

Congress

Spy law on track to lapse after House rejects extension

Published

2 hours ago

June 11, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The House failed to extend a key surveillance law Thursday, effectively ensuring it will expire Friday night over warnings from Republican lawmakers and national security officials.

The proposal, rejected on a 218-198 vote, would have extended Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act through July 2. It would have been the latest in a series of punts Congress has passed in recent months.

But a Democratic uproar over President Donald Trump’s decision to tap political ally Bill Pulte as acting director of national intelligence tanked any chances for passage. The extension — put on the floor under a fast-track method that required a two-thirds-majority vote — failed to garner even a simple majority, winning the support of only seven Democrats.

Nineteen Republicans also voted to reject a punt of Section 702, which allows U.S. intelligence agencies to spy on targets abroad without a warrant. Surveillance under the program also sometimes captures communications with Americans, and some lawmakers in both parties want to put safeguards on how that material is searched.

The House is not expected to vote again until June 23, effectively ensuring Section 702 will expire for the first time since it was enacted in 2008.

Many Hill Republicans believe, despite the congressional failure, the Trump administration can and will continue to operate the program, possibly under a forthcoming executive order. But tech providers could mount legal challenges to the program if it expires, and national security officials fear that could temporarily limit visibility into surveillance targets under the law.

Asked if an executive order would be enough to keep Americans safe in the interim, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise said in an interview, “Hopefully it is.”

“Anybody who votes ‘no’ is casting a dangerous vote to put American lives at risk,” Scalise said, adding that Trump and his national security deputies are “going to do what they have to do to keep the country safe.”

Scalise said the burden for finding a solution lies with the Senate “to figure out some kind of path.” A procedural vote in the other chamber that would have set up passage of an extension failed last week.

Negotiators there had been circling on a deal allowing for a three-year extension of Section 702 authorities, but those talks collapsed after Trump announced his intention to appoint Pulte, a housing official with no national security experience.

House Democratic leaders encouraged members to vote against the reauthorization Thursday, arguing “meaningful reforms” are necessary.

“Section 702 is a critical foreign intelligence authority, but we cannot in good conscience vote for reauthorization without significant reforms to protect both national security and the constitutional privacy rights of Americans,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and other leaders said in a joint statement.

Congress

House Republicans huddle with Hegseth after Trump’s reconciliation demands

Published

2 hours ago

June 11, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

A group of senior House Republicans gathered at the Pentagon Thursday morning to discuss the military funding portion of another party-line reconciliation bill with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, according to four people granted anonymity to discuss the private meeting.

House Budget Chair Jodey Arrington, Republican Study Committee Chair August Pfluger and others also attended the meeting.

It’s a sign conversations around “Reconciliation 3.0” are heating up after President Donald Trump signed the GOP-only immigration enforcement funding measure earlier this week.

It also comes after Trump Wednesday night called for the GOP to approve $350 billion in Pentagon spending alongside a partisan election bill known as the SAVE American Act — which has been stalled in the Senate for weeks.

But Senate Majority Leader John Thune, in response to Trump’s latest demands, noted that even some of the election measure’s most vocal Senate GOP advocates have said it can’t fit within the strict contours governing the filibuster-skirting, budget reconciliation process. And he didn’t commit to ultimately pursuing a third partisan package, either.

“We’re, as I’ve said before, open to using reconciliation if we make the calculation that we can achieve an outcome that [it’s] something we can get 50 votes for and 218 for,” Thune said, adding, “I’ve said before, at the moment I’m not sure what that is.”