INTERNACIONAL
Supreme Court lets Trump’s ‘wrecking ball’ federal job cuts proceed while legal fight continues
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
The Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed the Trump administration to move forward, at least for now, with plans to implement large-scale cuts to the federal workforce, issuing a stay that lifts a lower court’s injunction against the administration’s executive order.
In a 6–3 decision, the justices granted the emergency request filed by the White House last week, clearing the way for Executive Order No. 14210 to take effect while legal challenges play out in the Ninth Circuit and potentially the high court.
The order directs federal agencies to carry out sweeping reductions in force (RIFs) and agency reorganizations.
It has been described by administration officials as a lawful effort to «streamline government and eliminate waste.» Critics, including labor unions, local governments and nonprofit organizations, argue the president is unlawfully bypassing Congress to dismantle major parts of the federal government.
FEDERAL APPEALS COURT THROWS ROADBLOCK AT TRUMP’S EDUCATION REFORM AGENDA
U.S. President Donald Trump answers questions during a press conference on recent Supreme Court rulings in the briefing room at the White House on June 27, 2025 in Washington, D.C. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)
A majority on the Court stressed that it was not ruling on the legality of specific agency cuts, only the executive order itself.
«Because the Government is likely to succeed on its argument that the Executive Order and Memorandum are lawful—and because the other factors bearing on whether to grant a stay are satisfied—we grant the application,» the Court wrote. «We express no view on the legality of any Agency RIF and Reorganization Plan produced or approved pursuant to the Executive Order and Memorandum. The District Court enjoined further implementation or approval of the plans based on its view about the illegality of the Executive Order and Memorandum, not on any assessment of the plans themselves. Those plans are not before this Court.»
The district court in California had blocked the order in May, calling it an overreach. But the Supreme Court’s unsigned decision on Tuesday set aside that injunction, pending appeal. The majority said the government is «likely to succeed» in defending the legality of the order.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented forcefully, writing that «this Court sees fit to step in now and release the President’s wrecking ball at the outset of this litigation.» She warned that the executive action represents a «structural overhaul that usurps Congress’s policymaking prerogatives» and accused the majority of acting prematurely in an emergency posture without fully understanding the facts.
TRUMP ADMIN ASKS SCOTUS TO ALLOW IT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH PLANS TO SLASH FEDERAL WORKFORCE
A majority on the Court stressed that it was not ruling on the legality of specific agency cuts, only the executive order itself. (Nicolas Economou/NurPhoto via Getty Images)
«This unilateral decision to ‘transform’ the Federal Government was quickly challenged in federal court,» she wrote. «The District Judge thoroughly examined the evidence, considered applicable law, and made a reasoned determination that Executive Branch officials should be enjoined from implementing the mandated restructuring… But that temporary, practical, harm-reducing preservation of the status quo was no match for this Court’s demonstrated enthusiasm for greenlighting this President’s legally dubious actions in an emergency posture.»
The executive order, issued in February, instructed agencies to prepare immediate plans for reorganizations and workforce reductions, including eliminating roles deemed «non-critical» or «not statutorily mandated.» The administration says it is a necessary response to bloated government and outdated structures, claiming the injunction was forcing agencies to retain «thousands of employees whose continuance in federal service… is not in the government and public interest.»
Labor unions and state officials opposing the plan say it goes beyond normal workforce management and could gut services across multiple agencies. They point to proposed cuts of over 50% at the Department of Energy, and nearly 90% at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
Justices of the US Supreme Court pose for their official photo at the Supreme Court in Washington, DC on October 7, 2022 (OLIVIER DOULIERY/AFP via Getty Images)
The court’s ruling is not a final judgment on the legality of the executive order. It only determines that implementation may proceed temporarily while appeals continue. If the Ninth Circuit upholds the injunction or the Supreme Court declines to take up the case later, the order could again be paused.
The American Federal Government Employees Union had a forceful response: «Today’s decision has dealt a serious blow to our democracy and puts services that the American people rely on in grave jeopardy. This decision does not change the simple and clear fact that reorganizing government functions and laying off federal workers en masse haphazardly without any congressional approval is not allowed by our Constitution. While we are disappointed in this decision, we will continue to fight on behalf of the communities we represent and argue this case to protect critical public services that we rely on to stay safe and healthy.»
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
The case is Trump v. American Federation of Government Employees.
«Today’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling is another definitive victory for the President and his administration,» wrote White House principal deputy press secretary Harrison Fields in an email to Fox News Digital. «It clearly rebukes the continued assaults on the President’s constitutionally authorized executive powers by leftist judges who are trying to prevent the President from achieving government efficiency across the federal government.»
INTERNACIONAL
Nancy Pelosi says sex changes for trans kids is something she’s working for ‘at the national level’
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday that sex changes for transgender children is something she’s working for «at the national level.»
Earlier in the day, Pelosi toured the San Francisco VA Medical Center to review health-system upgrades, research initiatives and—according to a press release from her staff—the threat that House Republicans might slash core veterans’ services.
While speaking with reporters, she was asked how her office was responding to pauses to «gender-affirming care» in California.
«That is something I’m working for at the national level, and we are hoping we can have gender-affirming care for our trans kids,» Pelosi said. «It’s a sad thing for us… I don’t know what effect we can have nationally with what we have going on in the White House and in Congress.»
DEMOCRATIC STATES SUE TRUMP ADMIN OVER ENDING SEX CHANGE SURGERIES FOR MINORS
Former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi told a reporter on Aug. 7, 2025, that she was working at the national level to get sex changes for transgender children. (John Lamparski/Getty Images)
She called the situation «really sad, adding that a transgender-pride flag—five horizontal stripes of light blue, pink and white—hangs outside her office. Pelosi also said several colleagues display the same flag.
She acknowledged that many Republicans on Capitol Hill oppose medical transition for transgender youth.
Still, she is not alone in her stance on sex changes for kids.
CHILDREN’S NATIONAL HOSPITAL IN DC TO END GENDER TRANSITION MEDICAL INTERVENTIONS
FILE – Protesters for and against sex changes for transgender minors demonstrate outside the Supreme Court on Dec. 4, 2024, in Washington. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana, File)
Earlier this month, over a dozen officials from Democratic-led states filed a lawsuit to stop the Trump administration from blocking access to sex change procedures and treatments for people under the age of 19.
The complaint, which was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, argues that the Trump administration wants to impose a nationwide ban on sex change procedures by threatening providers with «baseless criminal charges» and investigations.
The lawsuit names President Donald Trump, Attorney General Pam Bondi and the Justice Department as defendants. It challenges Trump’s Jan. 28 executive order barring government support for sex change operations and treatments and two memos by Bondi and Assistant Attorney General Brett Shumate.
Pelosi’s office told Fox News Digital the Democrat was referring to this lawsuit when she spoke about supporting sex changes for children.
TRUMP’S JUSTICE DEPARTMENT TARGETS DOCTORS, CLINICS WHO PROVIDE SEX CHANGE PROCEDURES TO MINORS
A protester waves a transgender pride flag outside of the U.S. Supreme Court Building on June 18, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)
Bondi’s memo directs the Department of Justice (DOJ) to investigate and prosecute those who offer sex-change treatments to minors. Shumate’s memo directs prosecutors to prioritize investigations against doctors, hospitals and pharmaceutical companies that perform such procedures.
In July, Kaiser Permanente announced that it would pause sex change surgeries for patients under 19 beginning Aug. 29 in response to the Trump administration’s efforts on the matter. The same month, Children’s Hospital Los Angeles shuttered its Center for Trans Youth Health and Development, one of the nation’s largest clinics for transgender young people.
The Children’s National Hospital in Washington, D.C., also announced that it will no longer provide gender transition-related medical interventions.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Many states have laws restricting or banning sex change surgeries for children. The states named in the lawsuit – California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Washington D.C., and Wisconsin. – allow such procedures.
Fox News Digital’s Louis Casiano contributed to this report.
nancy pelosi,legislation,washington dc,republicans
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Israel’s Security Cabinet early Friday approved a plan to occupy Gaza City, marking an escalation in Israel’s ongoing war against Hamas.
The announcement comes after an all-night meeting of the security cabinet, following Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s announcement that Israel planned to retake control over the entire territory and eventually hand it off to friendly Arab forces opposed to Hamas.
Israel’s Security Cabinet early Friday approved a plan to occupy Gaza City, marking an escalation in the nearly two-year war between Israel and Hamas. (Ali Jadallah/Anadolu via Getty Images)
Israel has bombarded Gaza City repeatedly since Oct. 7, 2023 in addition to carrying out numerous raids. Today, it is one of the few areas of Gaza that hasn’t been turned into an Israeli buffer zone or placed under evacuation orders.
This is a developing story. Check back for updates.
israel,middle east,world,conflicts
INTERNACIONAL
Fuertes críticas y abucheos al presidente Arce y su vice en el Congreso en el acto por el Bicentenario en Bolivia
A poco más de una semana para las elecciones nacionales con dos candidatos de derecha como favoritos, los legisladores bolivianos abuchearon al vicepresidente y criticaron a los gritos la política económica del presidente Luis Arce, quien en los actos por el Bicentenario hizo un discurso de autoelogio y sin autocríticas en medio de una crisis nacional que paraliza a Bolivia.
El vicepresidente de Bolivia, David Choquehuanca, desató una nueva polémica en medio del clima electoral rumbo a los comicios del 17 de agosto, tras afirmar en su mensaje por los 200 años de la fundación política del país que en el Altiplano “persiste el caudillismo”, lo que alimenta el autoritarismo de los líderes partidarios y el fanatismo de sus seguidores.
“¡Ya se van, ya se van!”, le gritaron en su réplica a Choquehuanca desde los palcos en medio de su discurso en el que también habló de manipulación electoral.
Las elecciones se presentan muy desfavorables para el oficialismo ya que ninguno de los tres candidatos cercanos a sus filas figuran con posibilidades de pasar a la segunda vuelta. Al contrario, el empresario de derecha Samuel Doria Median lidera todos los sondeos (entre 20 y 22% de votos) seguido de cerca por el ex presidente conservador, Jorge Tuto Quiroga. Los otros postulantes se hallan muy lejos por debajo del 10%.
Durante la sesión de honor de la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional en la Casa de la Libertad de Sucre, Choquehuanca —que concluirá su mandato el 8 de noviembre junto al presidente s Arce— sostuvo que el Estado Plurinacional representa un sistema nuevo de autogobierno, pero reconoció que aún enfrenta serias limitaciones en un escenario político complejo y polarizado.
“Estamos en un escenario preelectoral donde se fabrican encuestas y se manipulan datos de la realidad, mientras el pueblo queda fracturado sin haber elegido”, denunció. Choquehuanca insistió en que el país necesita unidad, acuerdos y comprensión de los errores. “Para unos, la solución será seguir peleando; otros elegirán la fuga ante promesas incumplidas”, reflexionó, en lo que varios analistas interpretan como una crítica velada a las fracturas internas del Movimiento Al Socialismo (MAS), partido al que pertenece y que está en el poder desde hace 20 años.
El discurso de Choquehuanca se suma a la controversia generada por la intervención del presidente Arce, quien también fue cuestionado por evitar la autocrítica y centrarse solo en la defensa del llamado “proceso de cambio” y sus 20 años de reformas, como la nacionalización de los hidrocarburos o la industrialización con sustitución de importaciones. Sin embargo, para los economistas Gonzalo Chávez y Armando Ortuño, el mandatario desaprovechó una ocasión histórica para hablarle al país con visión de futuro, reconocer la crisis y llamar a la unidad nacional.
“Fue un discurso para la autocomplacencia. Un narcisismo macroeconómico que no abordó lo más grave: filas por pan, gasolina, dólares y empleos. No fue el discurso de los 200 años, fue el de los 20 años del populismo”, opinó Chávez durante un análisis televisivo posterior al mensaje.
Ambos economistas cuestionaron duramente la falta de autocrítica del presidente y su insistencia en atribuir los problemas económicos a factores externos. “El presidente vive en una burbuja ideológica. No reconoce el colapso del sector hidrocarburos, la caída en educación, ni el déficit fiscal crónico. Bolivia dejó de ser una potencia gasífera y ahora importa energía. Esa realidad quedó ausente”, añadió el economista paceño.
Por su parte, Ortuño lamentó la ausencia de un mensaje que inspire unidad y rescate los logros colectivos del país en dos siglos de historia. “Era una oportunidad para mirar al país como un proyecto común, hablar de nuestras potencialidades, no solo de las fracturas. No se trataba de defender un modelo, sino de construir un relato que incluya a todos”, reflexionó.
Ambos coincidieron en que, frente a una economía con serios desequilibrios fiscales, cambiarios y de abastecimiento, el presidente optó por minimizar los problemas. “Dijo que la escasez de combustibles es coyuntural, cuando en realidad refleja problemas estructurales acumulados. El próximo gobierno, sea cual sea, tendrá que enfrentarlos”, advirtió Ortuño.
Finalmente, los dos economistas lamentaron que en un momento simbólico como los 200 años de la independencia, el mensaje presidencial haya priorizado una visión polarizante de la historia construida sobre confrontaciones y no sobre acuerdos.
Bolivia,Luis Arce
Nancy Pelosi says sex changes for trans kids is something she’s working for ‘at the national level’
Israel Security Cabinet approves plan to occupy Gaza City
El mensaje de Mauricio Macri tras la confirmación de una alianza con LLA: “Pro cerró un acuerdo para acompañar el cambio”
Con diferencias, Provincias Unidas se consolida como fuerza de centro y tendrá candidatos en PBA y CABA
Juan Darthés podría pedir la nulidad del juicio y condena en su contra
Qué se le reza a San Cayetano, el patrón del pan y el trabajo
La desgarradora despedida de la familia de Mila Yankelevich luego de su trágica muerte: «Fue una ceremonia íntima»
Malas noticias para Wanda Nara: por qué la bajaron misteriosamente de MasterChef: «No va a salir este año»
Karina Milei impone condiciones y deja afuera a Jorge Macri de la negociación porteña
Javier Milei en Neura con Fantino: firmó un decreto en vivo, usó una marioneta y habló de su reelección y de Villarruel
Axel Kicillof reclamó ante la Corte Suprema $12 billones que le adeuda Nación
Sebastián Pareja justificó el armado de listas de LLA en la Provincia: “El desafío era dar una opción diferencial”
LLA vs. PJ: el cierre de las alianzas perfila una pelea de dos grandes frentes en las elecciones de octubre
>>Política 7 de agosto de 2025 23:07 14 minutos de lectura‘ El cierre del plazo para inscribir las alianzas de...
La insólita historia de los últimos ’10’ del Nápoles
Retirar un dorsal en el mundo del deporte es una cita con la eternidad. Pasarán los años y cuando alguien...
Rakitic, obligado a pedir disculpas tras felicitar a Modric por su fichaje
Ivan Rakitić, centrocampista croata recientemente retirado, no estuvo acertado en su felicitación a Luka Modrić por su fichaje con el...
CHIMENTOS2 días agoMalas noticias para Wanda Nara: por qué la bajaron misteriosamente de MasterChef: «No va a salir este año»
- POLITICA2 días ago
Axel Kicillof reclamó ante la Corte Suprema $12 billones que le adeuda Nación
- POLITICA2 días ago
Sebastián Pareja justificó el armado de listas de LLA en la Provincia: “El desafío era dar una opción diferencial”
