WASHINGTON (AP) — Up all night, House Republicans voted pre-dawn Thursday to advance President Donald Trump’s tax and spending cuts package, recouping after GOP leaders worked almost around the clock trying to persuade skeptical holdouts as they race to send the bill to his desk by the Fourth of July deadline.

A roll call that started late Wednesday finally closed almost six hours later, a highly unusual stall on a procedural step. Trump, who had hosted lawmakers at the White House earlier, lashed out at the delay. Once the gavel struck, 219-213, the bill advanced to a last round of debates toward a final vote, which is expected later Thursday morning.

“Our way is to plow through and get it done,” House Speaker Mike Johnson said, emerging in the middle of the night from a series of closed-door meetings. “We will meet our July 4th deadline.”

The idea of quickly convening to for a vote on the more than 800-page bill after it passed the day before in the Senate was a risky gambit, one designed to meet Trump’s demand for a holiday finish. Republicans have struggled mightily with the bill nearly every step of the way, often succeeding by the narrowest of margins — just one vote. Their slim 220-212 majority leaves little room for defections.

Several Republicans are balking at being asked to rubber-stamp the Senate version less than 24 hours after passage. A number of moderate Republicans from competitive districts have objected to the Senate bill’s cuts to Medicaid, while conservatives have lambasted the legislation as straying from their fiscal goals.

“What are the Republicans waiting for??? What are you trying to prove???” Trump railed in a post-midnight vote. He also warned starkly of political fallout from the delay “COSTING YOU VOTES!!!”

It fell to Johnson and his team to convince them that the time for negotiations is over. They needed assistance from Trump to close the deal, and lawmakers headed to the White House for a two-hour session Wednesday to talk to the president about their concerns. Trump also worked the phones.

“The president’s message was, ‘We’re on a roll,’” said Rep. Ralph Norman, R-S.C. “He wants to see this.”

Republicans are relying on their majority hold of Congress to push the package over a wall of unified Democratic opposition. No Democrats voted for bill in the Senate and none were expected to do so in the House.

“Hell no!” said House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, flanked by fellow Democrats outside the Capitol.

In an early warning sign of Republican resistance, during a first procedural vote that also stalled out as GOP leadership waited for lawmakers who were delayed coming back to Washington and conducted closed-door negotiations with holdouts.

By nightfall, as pizzas and other dinners were arriving at the Capitol, the next steps were uncertain.

Trump pushes Republicans to do ‘the right thing’

The bill would extend and make permanent various individual and business tax breaks from Trump’s first term, plus temporarily add new ones he promised during the 2024 campaign. This includes allowing workers to deduct tips and overtime pay, and a $6,000 deduction for most older adults earning less than $75,000 a year. In all, the legislation contains about $4.5 trillion in tax cuts over 10 years.

The bill also provides about $350 billion for defense and Trump’s immigration crackdown. Republicans partially pay for it all through less spending on Medicaid and food assistance. The Congressional Budget Office projects the bill will add about $3.3 trillion to the federal debt over the coming decade.

The House passed its version of the bill in May by a single vote, despite worries about spending cuts and the overall price tag. Now it’s being asked to give final passage to a version that, in many respects, exacerbates those concerns. The Senate bill’s projected impact on the nation’s debt, for example, is significantly higher.

“Lets go Republicans and everyone else,” Trump said in a late evening post.

The high price of opposing Trump’s bill

Johnson is intent on meeting Trump’s timeline and betting that hesitant Republicans won’t cross the president because of the heavy political price they would have to pay.

They need only look to Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., who announced his intention to vote against the legislation over the weekend. Soon, the president was calling for a primary challenger to the senator and criticizing him on social media. Tillis quickly announced he would not seek a third term.

One House Republican who has staked out opposition to the bill, Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, is being targeted by Trump’s well-funded political operation.

Democrats

target vulnerable Republicans to join them in opposition

Flanked by nearly every member of his caucus, Democratic Leader Jeffries of New York delivered a pointed message: With all Democrats voting “no,” they only need to flip four Republicans to prevent the bill from passing.

Jeffries invoked the “courage” of the late Sen. John McCain giving a thumbs-down to the GOP effort to “repeal and replace” the Affordable Care Act, and singled out Republicans from districts expected to be highly competitive in 2026, including two from Pennsylvania.

“Why would Rob Bresnahan vote for this bill? Why would Scott Perry vote for this bill?” Jeffries asked.

Democrats have described the bill in dire terms, warning that Medicaid cuts would result in lives lost and food stamp cuts would be “literally ripping the food out of the mouths of children, veterans and seniors,” Jeffries said Monday.

Republicans say they are trying to right-size the safety net programs for the population they were initially designed to serve, mainly pregnant women, the disabled and children, and root out what they describe as waste, fraud and abuse.

The package includes new 80-hour-a-month work requirements for many adults receiving Medicaid and applies existing work requirements in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, to more beneficiaries. States will also pick up more of the cost for food benefits.

The driving force behind the bill, however, is the tax cuts. Many expire at the end of this year if Congress doesn’t act.

The Tax Policy Center, which provides nonpartisan analysis of tax and budget policy, projected the bill would result next year in a $150 tax break for the lowest quintile of Americans, a $1,750 tax cut for the middle quintile and a $10,950 tax cut for the top quintile. That’s compared with what they would face if the 2017 tax cuts expired.

___

Associated Press writers Mary Clare Jalonick and Matt Brown contributed.

Kevin Freking, Lisa Mascaro And Joey Cappelletti, The Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump campaigned on a promise to deliver a “spectacular” yearlong birthday party to mark 250 years of American independence. On Thursday, he will be in the U.S. heartland to kick off the patriotic festivities leading up to next year’s anniversary.

The event at the Iowa State Fairgrounds in Des Moines will feature “dazzling” displays of Americana and American history, musical performances and a fireworks show to cap the night, said U.S. Ambassador Monica Crowley, Trump’s liaison to the organizing group, America250.

Organizers see the coming year of festivities as a way to help unite a polarized nation and bridge partisanship — a monumental task given the country’s divides. Thursday’s event comes as the Republican-controlled Congress pushed for final passage of a sweeping tax cuts and spending package that’s at the heart of Trump’s legislative agenda but has united all Democrats against it. More U.S. adults also disapprove than approve of how the Republican president is doing his job.

Iowa was a “logical choice” for the kickoff, Crowley said, because of its central location and Trump’s affinity for the state, which supported him in each of the last three general elections. She also said Iowa’s middle-of-the-country geography is symbolic of the desire to use the coming celebrations to help bring people together.

“We’ve had so much division and so much polarization over the last many decades, but certainly over the last few years, that to be able to bring the country together to celebrate America’s 250th birthday through patriotism, shared values and a renewed sense of civic pride, to be able to do that in the center of the country, is incredibly important,” she said.

A recent Gallup poll showed the widest partisan split in patriotism in over two decades, with only about a third of Democrats saying they are proud to be American compared with about 9 in 10 Republicans.

About 4 in 10 U.S. adults approve of Trump’s performance as president, according to a June AP-NORC poll, while about 6 in 10 disapprove. That poll also showed a majority of Americans said the June military parade that Trump greenlit in Washington for the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army — an event that fell on his 79th birthday — was “not a good use” of government money.

Crowley spoke to the political and ideological schisms that left the country “torn apart” ahead of its last big birthday celebration, noting that 1976 closely followed the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal that led Richard Nixon to resign from the presidency.

“That moment was critical to uniting the country and moving forward, and I am very optimistic and hopeful that the yearlong celebration that we’re about to launch will do the same thing in this present moment,” she said in an interview.

America’s 250th birthday “is something that I think that all Americans can come together to celebrate and honor our history as well as our present and our future,” Crowley said.

On July 4, 1776, the Continental Congress adopted the Declaration of Independence, officially marking the 13 colonies’ split from Great Britain.

“We’re gonna have a big, big celebration, as you know, 250 years,” Trump said about the birthday during his Memorial Day address to a solemn audience at Arlington National Cemetery. “In some ways, I’m glad I missed that second term where it was because I wouldn’t be your president for that.”

Video of then-candidate Trump proposing a “Great American State Fair” in Iowa in May 2023 began to recirculate after his reelection last November. Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds, a Republican, told the White House earlier this year that Iowa stood “ready” to host the event and that Trump had the state’s full support, according to a draft of Reynolds’ letter obtained by The Associated Press.

The culminating fair instead will be held next year on the National Mall in Washington, according to a White House official who was not authorized to share details publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity. But Trump honored his initial proposal with a kickoff in the first-in-the-nation caucus state.

The lineup Thursday night will include Lee Greenwood, according to social media posts advertising the event, whose song, “God Bless the USA,” is a regular feature at Trump rallies and official events. Also attending will be Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins.

___

Fingerhut reported from Des Moines, Iowa. AP Polling Editor Amelia Thomson DeVeaux in Washington contributed to this report.

Darlene Superville And Hannah Fingerhut, The Associated Press

ST. PAUL, Minn. (AP) — The man charged with killing former Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband, and wounding a state senator and his wife, is due back in federal court Thursday for a hearing that was put on hold after his lawyer said his client had been unable to sleep while on suicide watch.

The hearing is expected to address whether Vance Boelter should remain in custody without bail and affirm that there is probable cause to proceed with the case. He’s not expected to enter a plea. Prosecutors need to secure a grand jury indictment first, before his arraignment, which is when a plea is normally entered.

An unshaven Boelter, 57, of Green Isle, was wearing a green padded suicide prevention suit and orange slippers when he was brought into court last Friday. Federal defender Manny Atwal then asked Magistrate Judge Douglas Micko to continue the hearing. She said Boelter had been sleep deprived due to harsh conditions in the Sherburne County Jail, making it difficult for them to communicate.

“Your honor, I haven’t really slept in about 12 to 14 days,” Boelter told the judge then. And he denied being suicidal. “I’ve never been suicidal and I am not suicidal now.”

Sherburne County Sheriff Joel Brott, whose jail houses both county and federal prisoners, rejected Boelter’s claims of poor conditions as absurd. “He is not in a hotel. He’s in jail, where a person belongs when they commit the heinous crimes he is accused of committing,” Brott said in a statement Friday.

Boelter faces separate cases in federal and state court on charges of murder and attempted murder for what the state’s chief federal prosecutor, Acting U.S. Attorney Joe Thompson, has called “a political assassination” and “a chilling attack on our democracy.” The feds are going first.

Authorities say Hortman and her husband, Mark, were shot to death in their home in the Minneapolis suburb of Brooklyn Park in the early hours of June 14 by a man disguised as a police officer who was driving a fake squad car.

Boelter also allegedly shot and seriously wounded state Sen. John Hoffman, and his wife, Yvette, earlier that morning at their home in nearby Champlin. The Hoffmans are recovering, but Hortman’s golden retriever, Gilbert, was seriously injured and had to be euthanized.

Boelter surrendered near his home the night of June 15 after what authorities called the largest search in Minnesota history, a hunt of around 40 hours.

Atwal told the court last week that Boelter had been kept in what’s known as a “Gumby suit,” without undergarments, ever since his first court appearance June 16. She said the lights were on in his area 24 hours a day, doors slammed frequently, the inmate in the next cell would spread feces on the walls, and the smell would drift to Boelter’s cell.

The attorney said transferring him to segregation instead, and giving him a normal jail uniform, would let him get some sleep, restore some dignity, and let him communicate better. The judge granted the delay.

Boelter’s lawyers have declined to comment on the charges themselves, which could carry the federal death penalty. Thompson has said no decision has been made whether to seek it. Minnesota abolished its death penalty in 1911. But Attorney General Pam Bondi has said from the start that the Trump administration will be more aggressive in seeking capital punishment.

Prosecutors allege Boelter also stopped at the homes of two other Democratic lawmakers. They also say he listed dozens of other Democrats as potential targets, including officials in other states. Friends described Boelter as an evangelical Christian with politically conservative views. But prosecutors have declined so far to speculate on a motive.

Former President Joe Biden and former Vice President Kamala Harris joined the mourners at the Hortmans’ funeral last Saturday. Gov. Tim Walz, Harris’s running mate on the 2024 Democratic presidential ticket, eulogized Hortman as “the most consequential speaker in Minnesota history.”

Hortman served as speaker from 2019 until January. She then yielded the post to a Republican in a power-sharing deal after the House became tied in the 2024 elections, and became speaker emerita.

Steve Karnowski, The Associated Press

NEW YORK (AP) — A controversial bid to deter states from regulating artificial intelligence for a decade seemed on its way to passing as the Republican tax cut and spending bill championed by President Donald Trump worked its way through the U.S. Senate.

But as the bill neared a final vote, a relentless campaign against it by a constellation of conservatives — including Republican governors, lawmakers, think tanks and social groups — had been eroding support. One, conservative activist Mike Davis, appeared on the show of right-wing podcaster Steve Bannon, urging viewers to call their senators to reject this “AI amnesty” for “trillion-dollar Big Tech monopolists.”

He said he also texted with Trump directly, advising the president to stay neutral on the issue despite what Davis characterized as significant pressure from White House AI czar David Sacks, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and others.

Conservatives passionate about getting rid of the provision had spent weeks fighting others in the party who favored the legislative moratorium because they saw it as essential for the country to compete against China in the race for AI dominance. The schism marked the latest and perhaps most noticeable split within the GOP about whether to let states continue to put guardrails on emerging technologies or minimize such interference.

In the end, the advocates for guardrails won, revealing the enormous influence of a segment of the Republican Party that has come to distrust Big Tech. They believe states must remain free to protect their citizens against potential harms of the industry, whether from AI, social media or emerging technologies.

“Tension in the conservative movement is palpable,” said Adam Thierer of the R Street Institute, a conservative-leaning think tank. Thierer first proposed the idea of the AI moratorium last year. He noted “the animus surrounding Big Tech” among many Republicans.

“That was the differentiating factor.”

Conservative v. conservative in a last-minute fight

The Heritage Foundation, children’s safety groups and Republican state lawmakers, governors and attorneys general all weighed in against the AI moratorium. Democrats, tech watchdogs and some tech companies opposed it, too.

Sensing the moment was right on Monday night, Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, who opposed the AI provision and had attempted to water it down, teamed up with Democratic Sen. Maria Cantwell of Washington to suggest striking the entire proposal. By morning, the provision was removed in a 99-1 vote.

The whirlwind demise of a provision that initially had the backing of House and Senate leadership and the White House disappointed other conservatives who felt it gave China, a main AI competitor, an advantage.

Ryan Fournier, chairman of Students for Trump and chief marketing officer of the startup Uncensored AI, had supported the moratorium, writing on X that it “stops blue states like California and New York from handing our future to Communist China.”

“Republicans are that way … I get it,” he said in an interview, but added there needs to be “one set of rules, not 50” for AI innovation to be successful.

AI advocates fear a patchwork of state rules

Tech companies, tech trade groups, venture capitalists and multiple Trump administration figures had voiced their support for the provision that would have blocked states from passing their own AI regulations for years. They argued that in the absence of federal standards, letting the states take the lead would leave tech innovators mired in a confusing patchwork of rules.

Lutnick, the commerce secretary, posted that the provision “makes sure American companies can develop cutting-edge tech for our military, infrastructure, and critical industries — without interference from anti-innovation politicians.” AI czar Sacks had also publicly supported the measure.

After the Senate passed the bill without the AI provision, the White House responded to an inquiry for Sacks with the president’s position, saying Trump “is fully supportive of the Senate-passed version of the One, Big, Beautiful Bill.”

Acknowledging defeat of his provision on the Senate floor, Cruz noted how pleased China, liberal politicians and “radical left-wing groups” would be to hear the news.

But Blackburn pointed out that the federal government has failed to pass laws that address major concerns about AI, such as keeping children safe and securing copyright protections.

“But you know who has passed it?” she said. “The states.”

Conservatives want to win the AI race, but disagree on how

Conservatives distrusting Big Tech for what they see as social media companies stifling speech during the COVID-19 pandemic and surrounding elections said that tech companies shouldn’t get a free pass, especially on something that carries as much risk as AI.

Many who opposed the moratorium also brought up preserving states’ rights, though proponents countered that AI issues transcend state borders and Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce.

Eric Lucero, a Republican state lawmaker in Minnesota, noted that many other industries already navigate different regulations established by both state and local jurisdictions.

“I think everyone in the conservative movement agrees we need to beat China,” said Daniel Cochrane from the Heritage Foundation. “I just think we have different prescriptions for doing so.”

Many argued that in the absence of federal legislation, states were best positioned to protect citizens from the potential harms of AI technology.

“We have no idea what AI will be capable of in the next 10 years and giving it free rein and tying states hands is potentially dangerous,” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene wrote on X.

A call for federal rules

Another Republican, Texas state Sen. Angela Paxton, wrote to Cruz and his counterpart, Sen. John Cornyn, urging them to remove the moratorium.

She and other conservatives said some sort of federal standard could help clarify the landscape around AI and resolve some of the party’s disagreements.

But with the moratorium dead and Republicans holding only narrow majorities in both chambers of Congress, it’s unclear whether they will be able to agree on a set of standards to guide the development of the burgeoning technology.

In an email to The Associated Press, Paxton said she wants to see limited federal AI legislation “that sets some clear guardrails” around national security and interstate commerce, while leaving states free to address issues that affect their residents.

“When it comes to technology as powerful and potentially dangerous as AI, we should be cautious about silencing state-level efforts to protect consumers and children,” she said.

___

Associated Press writer Matt Brown in Washington contributed to this report.

Ali Swenson, The Associated Press

BOSTON (AP) — In the state that served as the model for Obamacare, advocates and health care workers fear the Trump administration is trying to dismantle piece-by-piece a popular program that has provided insurance, preventive care and life-saving medication to hundreds of thousands of people.

Provisions contained in both the Senate and House versions of the massive tax and spending cuts bill advancing in Congress — a centerpiece of President Donald Trump’s agenda — could strip health insurance from up to a quarter of the roughly 400,000 people enrolled in the Massachusetts Health Connector, according to state estimates.

The changes would create anew the coverage gaps state leaders were working to close when Massachusetts in 2006 became the first U.S. state to enact a law requiring nearly every resident to have health insurance, state officials say. Beyond the effect on residents’ health, losing care could have broader repercussions — both for the program’s finances and residents’ ability to make a living.

“The idea of needing to unwind that now and pull back on that promise and commitment is really frustrating and heartbreaking and cruel and counterproductive,” said Audrey Morse Gasteier, executive director of Massachusetts’ health insurance marketplace.

Trump and Republican supporters in Congress say the changes, which include new documentation requirements and limitations on who can apply for tax credits to help pay for insurance, are necessary to root out what they call fraud, waste and abuse. The Affordable Care Act changes proposed in both versions of the bill, along with massive cuts to Medicaid and other programs, would eliminate roughly $1.1 trillion in health care spending over the next decade, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

In Lawrence, a mill community of around 90,000 people on the Merrimack River, where more than 80% of the population is Hispanic or Latino, Kesia Moreta said she’s already seeing people slip out of the state’s health care network because of the Trump administration’s aggressive effort to crack down on illegal immigration.

Moreta, who manages a program created under the ACA that helps people sign up for coverage, said clients have been missing meetings out of fear that being enrolled for health insurance will harm their effort to stay in the U.S. legally.

Recently, a father of a U.S.-born teenage son with epilepsy deleted every email related to his health plan and stopped answering calls from the Connector after watching reports about deportations on social media. When his son’s medication ran out, Moreta said the father finally reached out, whispering over the phone, “Is this going to get me deported?”

“That breaks our hearts,” Moreta said.

Proposed changes

More than 98% of Massachusetts residents have health insurance, the lowest rate of uninsurance in the country, according to the Massachusetts Health Insurance Survey.

Vicky Pulos, an attorney for the Mass Law Reform Institute who helps low-income people gain access to health care, said Republicans who tried and failed to repeal the Affordable Care Act during the first Trump administration have decided to take it apart incrementally despite its growing popularity.

“It really seems like this is just a less transparent way of effectively dismantling the accomplishments of the Affordable Care Act in both Medicaid and the marketplace,” Pulos said.

The changes, she added, “will massively drive up the number of uninsured but without openly repealing the ACA.”

Another provision included in both the House and Senate bills would require people applying for or renewing coverage to provide more documentation of their income, household size and immigration status to be eligible for premium tax credits when the state marketplace already has that information, which Morse Gasteier said would cause “friction, red tape and delays.”

The Trump administration has said the proposals will “put a stop” to immigrants “stealing taxpayer-funded health care benefits meant for American citizens.”

No states use federal money to provide health insurance to people who are in the U.S. illegally. Some, like Massachusetts, use state tax dollars to do so to provide basic primary care services for a small population of vulnerable residents, like children.

No undocumented immigrants receive insurance through the state marketplace.

Of the 400,000 enrolled in the state marketplace, around 60,000 are noncitizens who are in the U.S. legally and would lose access to federal premium tax credits if either chamber’s version of the bill becomes law. The number includes domestic violence and human trafficking victims, refugees, people granted asylum or humanitarian parole, temporary protected status and other work-authorized immigrants.

Without the credits, premiums will cost upwards of $500 or $600 — an increase many people can’t afford, Morse Gasteier said. Around half are green-card holders with an annual income of $15,000 a year or less.

The remaining 40,000 people expected to lose coverage are U.S. citizens Morse Gasteier said could be stymied in applying or recertifying coverage by provisions like the increased documentation requirements.

Fears of trust l

ost

Morse Gasteier said Massachusetts’ marketplace worked “tirelessly” to enroll vulnerable and hard-to-reach populations after the state program — formed under the leadership of then-Gov. Mitt Romney and known as “Romneycare” — was created.

She worries that if people hear help is no longer available, “entire populations will just sort of give up on health insurance.”

In addition to affecting residents’ health, that could have an economic impact in the state.

Immigrants with legal status enrolled in the state marketplace tend to be younger than the rest of the population, Morse Gasteier said. Their presence brings premiums down for others because they tend to be healthier.

In Lawrence, advocates who help people obtain insurance coverage though the ACA marketplace say the burden would fall disproportionately on people with chronic health issues like diabetes and chronic heart disease.

The Greater Lawrence Community Action Council assists around 10,000 people a year with either signing up for or renewing health insurance.

“If you’re not healthy, let me tell you, you can’t work. If you can’t work, you can’t pay your bills. It’s just as simple as that,” said GLCAC CEO Vilma Martinez-Dominguez.

Moreta said one man who called her from the emergency room recently said he discovered his health insurance had lapsed. Moreta said she could help him renew it, and urged him to wait at the hospital.

He told her not to do anything. He was leaving the hospital. She has no idea what became of him.

Leah Willingham, The Associated Press

NEW YORK (AP) — President Donald Trump has a new political foil: New York’s Democratic nominee for mayor, Zohran Mamdani.

The president, who has a history of spewing sometimes vile insults at rivals, has in recent days escalated his attacks against the 33-year-old self-described democratic socialist. Trump has threatened to arrest Mamdani, to deport him and even to take over the country’s largest city if he wins the general election in November.

“As President of the United States, I’m not going to let this Communist Lunatic destroy New York. Rest assured, I hold all the levers, and have all the cards,” Trump wrote in an ominous message on his Truth Social site Wednesday morning. “I’ll save New York City, and make it ′Hot′ and ′Great′ again, just like I did with the Good Ol’ USA!”

Mamdani’s surprise victory over former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo has given Republicans a new target as they seek to paint the entire Democratic Party as extreme and out of touch with voters heading into elections this fall in New Jersey and Virginia and next year’s high-stakes midterm elections. Since Mamdani’s win, they have repeatedly highlighted his most controversial past comments and positions, casting him as dangerous, a communist, and an antisemite, and trying to tie him to all other Democratic officials.

That has included intense criticism of his platform, as well as blatantly xenophobic and Islamophobic attacks.

If Mamdani wins, he would become the city’s furthest-left mayor in modern history. He ran on a platform that included opening city-run grocery stores, making buses free, freezing rent on rent-stabilized apartments, and raising property taxes on “ richer and whiter neighborhoods.”

Though he softened his stance as he campaigned, he called the New York Police Department “racist, anti-queer and a major threat to public safety” in a 2020 social media post, and in others, called for abolishing the entire prison system.

He has also drawn intense criticism from members of both parties over his pro-Palestinian advocacy. That has included describing Israel’s war in Gaza as “genocide,” his refusal to disavow use of the phrase “globalize the intifada,” which is seen as a call to violence for many Jews. Also, for his refusal to support the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state.

His rise has sparked infighting and highlighted divisions among national Democratic officials, donors and political operatives. While many progressives have celebrated, seeing him as the future of a party aligned with leaders like Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, moderates have bemoaned the election’s outcome as a setback in their quest to broaden Democrats’ appeal and move past the more controversial policies that appears to have alienated some voters in recent elections.

Trump threatens Mamdani’s citizenship

Trump unleashed some of his sharpest threats against Mamdani Tuesday, during a visit to a new migrant detention center in the Florida Everglades.

If Mamdani blocks ICE agents from making arrests in the city, “Well, then we’ll have to arrest him,” he said. “Look, we don’t need a communist in this country. But if we have one, I’m going to be watching over him very carefully on behalf of the nation.”

Trump also amplified a false allegation that Mamdani, who was born in Uganda to Indian parents and came to New York when he was 7, is in the country illegally.

“A lot of people are saying he’s here illegally. We’re going to look at everything,” he said.

Mamdani, who is Muslim, became a naturalized American citizen a few years after he graduated from college. If elected, he would be the city’s first Muslim and Indian American mayor.

Mamdani addressed the criticism during an appearance Wednesday, telling reporters that Trump is focusing on him to distract the public from the Republican mega tax and spending cuts bill that is moving through Congress.

“Donald Trump said that I should be arrested. He said that I should be deported. He said that I should be denaturalized. And he said those things about me … because he wants to distract from what I fight for,” he said. “I fight for the same people that he said he was fighting for. This is the same president who ran on a campaign of cheaper groceries, who ran on a campaign about easing the suffocating cost of living crisis. And ultimately, it is easier for him to fan the flames of division than to acknowledge the ways in which he has betrayed those working-class Americans.”

Conservatives have turned their focus on Mamdani

Until Mamdani’s win, Trump and other Republicans had struggled to find a compelling foil. He frequently invokes his predecessor, Joe Biden. But with Democrats out of power and without a clear party leader, Trump has bounced from one official to the next, recently focusing his ire on Texas progressive Rep. Jasmine Crockett.

Since Mamdani’s national rise and toppling of Cuomo, conservative politicians and commentators have turned their focus on him.

That effort was on display Wednesday, when Republicans blasted House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries for defending Mamdani.

“Leader’ Jeffries Just Bent the Knee to Commie Mamdani,” the National Republican Congressional Committee wrote in an email blast, adding: “This radical platform is the future of the Democrat Party, and voters should be terrified.”

The attacks have been brewing.

Weeks before the primary, Vickie Paladino, a Republican member of the New York City Council, called for Mamdani to be deported. After Mamdani declared victory over Cuomo last week, Rep. Randy Fine, a Florida Republican, wrote on X that “If Mamdani has his way, NYC classrooms won’t be teaching the Constitution in civics class. They’ll be teaching Sharia Law.”

Another Republican congressman, Rep. Brandon Gill of Texas, circulated a video of Mamdani eating a rice dish with his hands on X and wrote, “Civilized people in America don’t eat like this. If you refuse to adopt Western customs, go back to the Third World.”

Republican Rep. Andy Ogles, of Tennessee, has referred to Mamdani as “little muhammad” and late last month wrote a letter to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi calling for the Justice Department to investigate whether Mamdani should be denaturalized as a citizen.

___

Jill Colvin And Anthony Izaguirre, The Associated Press

The Trump administration has accused states and schools of using federal education grants earmarked for immigrants’ children and low-income students to help fund “a radical leftwing agenda.”

The administration this week withheld more than $6 billion intended for after-school and summer programs, English language instruction, adult literacy and more, saying it would review the grants to ensure they align with President Donald Trump’s priorities. The freeze sent schools and summer camp providers scrambling to determine whether they can still provide programs like day camps this summer or after-hours child care this fall.

On Wednesday, the Office of Management and Budget said an initial review showed schools used some of the money to support immigrants in the country illegally or promote LGBTQ+ inclusion. The administration said it hadn’t made any final decisions about whether to withhold or release individual grants.

“Many of these grant programs have been grossly misused to subsidize a radical leftwing agenda,” the Office of Management and Budget said in a statement.

It said New York schools had used money for English language instruction to promote organizations that advocate for immigrants in the country illegally. Washington state used the money to direct immigrants without legal status toward scholarships the Trump administration says were “intended for American students.” Grant funds also were used for a seminar on “queer resistance in the arts,” the office said.

Officials from New York and Washington state didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.

Advocates for low-income and immigrant children connected the grant freeze to the Trump administration’s larger crackdown on immigrants. Two of the five federal programs put on hold were appropriated by Congress to help support English proficiency of students still learning the language and migrant children who move with their parents to follow agricultural and other jobs.

School districts use the $890 million earmarked for English learners in a wide range of purposes, from training teachers’ aides who work with English learners, to running summer schools designed for them, to hiring family liaisons who speak the parents’ native languages. The $375 million appropriated for migrant education is often used to hire dedicated teachers to travel close to where students live.

By “cherrypicking extreme examples,” the administration is seeking to conflate all students learning English with people who are in the country illegally, said Amaya Garcia, who directs education research at New America, a left-leaning think tank in Washington, D.C.

In reality, the majority of English learners in public schools were born in the United States, according to data from the Migration Policy Institute.

“The way they’re framing it is that we’re using this money for undocumented students and families,” said Margarita Machado-Casas, president of the National Association of Bilingual Educators. “It’s a distraction. A distraction from what’s actually happening: that 5.3 million English learners who speak lots of different languages, not just Spanish, will suffer.”

Even if the students lack legal status, states may not deny public education to children in the country illegally under a 1982 Supreme Court decision known as Plyler v. Doe. Conservative politicians in states such as Oklahoma, Texas and Tennessee have pursued policies that question whether immigrants without legal residency should have the right to a public education, raising the possibility of challenges to that landmark ruling.

Meanwhile, states and school districts are still trying to understand what it will mean for their students and their staff if these funds never arrive.

In Oregon, eliminating grants for English learners and migrant students would “undermine the state’s efforts to increase academic outcomes for multilingual students, promote multilingualism, close opportunity gaps and provide targeted support to mobile and vulnerable student groups,” said Liz Merah, spokeswoman for the state’s Department of Education.

____

Associated Press writer Collin Binkley contributed from Washington.

_____

The Associated Press’ education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

Bianca Vázquez Toness, The Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Pentagon is pausing shipments of weapons to Ukraine again after more than three years of deliveries meant to bolster the country’s defenses against invading Russian forces.

The Trump administration’s decision comes as Ukraine is facing intensified attacks by Russia against its civilians, and withholding that assistance could reduce Kyiv’s ability to counter deadly incoming ballistic missile attacks.

Officials said the decision was prompted by concerns that U.S. stockpiles were getting too low.

Here’s a look at what the U.S. has provided Ukraine to date and why it’s concerned about pressure on its own arsenal:

What weapons has the U.S. provided to Ukraine to date?

Since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the U.S. has provided more than $67 billion in weapons and security assistance to Kyiv.

That ranges from more than 500 million bullets and grenades to 31 Abrams tanks, more than 3 million 155mm artillery rounds and more than 5,000 Humvees. It’s also provided scores of critical drones and drone defense systems.

But Ukraine’s constant need has been for air defense — from taking out Russian aircraft in the early days of the conflict to having to defend itself against long-range missiles now.

In response, the U.S. has provided Patriot air defense batteries, National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems and HAWK air defense systems — and still more is sought.

But those demands are butting up against demands for similar air defenses in the Middle East and the reality that the U.S. military does not have enough munitions on hand to sustain a high rate of deliveries, while providing troops with equipment to train on and build up a stockpile for a potential future conflict. That’s especially true if it’s put in a position where the U.S. has to defend Taiwan against China.

How will the new weapons pause affect Ukraine?

This is the second time the Trump administration has paused weapons shipments to Ukraine, but for different reasons.

After an explosive Oval Office meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in March, President Donald Trump paused weapons that were funded under the Biden administration and still flowing into Ukraine. That pause was short-lived after Republican lawmakers pressed for Ukraine aid to resume.

The new pause affects high-demand munitions the U.S. has sent to Ukraine, including Patriot missiles, the AIM-7 Sparrow air-to-air missile and shorter-range Stinger missiles.

Ukraine has relied on the AIM-7 Sparrow to counter incoming missiles and shorter-range Stinger missiles to knock down Russian aircraft or counter drone attacks. The Patriot missiles are used against Russia’s frequent ballistic missile attacks.

The pause could have deadly consequences for Ukraine, said Brad Bowman, senior director of the Center on Military and Political Power at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

“If we deprive Kyiv of PAC-3 (Patriot) interceptors it means more Russian missiles getting through and more dead Ukrainians,” Bowman said.

Rather than cutting off Ukraine, Bowman said the administration needs to look at “whether we are taking all the steps we can to procure the max quantity that industry can produce.”

Does the U.S. face stress on its weapons stockpile?

The Trump administration’s pause is part of a global review by the Pentagon on what munitions it is providing and where it is sending them, and the impact on its own stockpiles.

“We can’t give weapons to everybody all around the world,” Pentagon chief spokesman Sean Parnell said in a briefing Wednesday. “We have to look out for Americans and defending our homeland and our troops around the world.”

Adm. Samuel Paparo, head of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, has previously warned that the conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East were putting pressure on his stockpile levels.

As Iran launched a retaliatory ballistic missile attack last month, troops defended Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar with scores of Patriot air defense missiles — a high-demand munition the U.S. only has in limited supply.

The Navy also has defended ships in the Red Sea by striking Houthi weapons and launch sites in Yemen with Tomahawk missiles. In one day in January 2024, it fired more Tomahawks than the Navy had purchased the prior year, said Mackenzie Eaglen, a senior defense fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.

“Everybody’s worried — and the thing is, they have a reason to be worried,” Eaglen said. “Air defense is a key capability of the most concern.”

Is the U.S. producing enough weapons?

A $60 billion Ukraine aid bill passed by Congress last year contained billions for U.S. weapons manufacturers to expand their production capacity.

Despite the billions spent on defense contracts each year, the number of weapons in the U.S. can quickly dwindle — particularly for some of the complex air defense munitions — if a major conflict breaks out. That’s because of the time it takes to build each missile.

For example, despite an influx of investment since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the rate of production for Patriot missiles — one of the military’s most important air defenses for its bases overseas — has increased to just 48 per month. That is compared to 21 per month prior to the invasion.

While the total number of Patriot munitions the U.S. has is unknown, the number of entire Patriot missile defense systems is in such limited supply that providing one to a new location often means taking it from somewhere else. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said he needs the systems to help defend his country’s electrical grid and cities from the thousands of missile and drone attacks it faces daily.

And defending a large overseas base like Al Udeid can also require firing scores of the missiles, which cost $4 million a piece. For other munitions that have been critical to Ukraine’s defenses — like the High Mobility Artillery Rocket System, or HIMARS — production has increased from just 5 per month pre-invasion to 8 per month now, according to a Defense Department fact sheet.

Elbridge Colby, Defense Department undersecretary for policy, said Pentagon officials have aimed to provide Trump “with robust options to continue military aid to Ukraine” but also are “rigorously examining” that approach while “preserving U.S. forces’ readiness for administration defense priorities.”

___

Tara Copp, The Associated Press