INTERNACIONAL
Trump-backed military right to repair plan stripped from Congress’ final defense bill
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
The final legislation governing Pentagon spending dropped a bipartisan provision that would have guaranteed the military the right to repair its own equipment, prompting immediate criticism from its authors, Sens. Elizabeth Warren, D-MA, and Tim Sheehy, R-MT, who accused Congress of siding with defense contractors over service members.
Both chambers had passed versions of the reform, and the White House publicly supported the measure, which would have required contractors to provide the Pentagon with the technical data needed to perform repairs in-house — rather than flying out manufacturer technicians at added cost. The final National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) omits that mandate, a move Warren and Sheehy say will leave troops facing the same barriers to fixing equipment whenever contractors assert proprietary rights.
«For decades, the Pentagon has relied on a broken acquisition system that is routinely defended by career bureaucrats and corporate interests. Military right to repair reforms are supported by the Trump White House, the Secretary of War, the Secretary of the Army, the Secretary of the Navy, entrepreneurs, small businesses, and our brave servicemembers,» Warren and Sheehy said after the text of the legislation was released. «The only ones against this common-sense reform are those taking advantage of a broken status quo at the expense of our warfighters and taxpayers.»
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) repeatedly has warned that the Pentagon’s lack of access to technical data is one of the biggest drivers of soaring sustainment costs, estimating that broader repair rights could save the department «billions» of dollars over the life cycles of major weapons systems.
Lawmakers voiced criticism after the National Defense Authorization Act left out provisions allowing soldiers to repair their own equipment. (Paul Bersebach/MediaNews Group/Orange County Register via Getty Images)
SEN ROGER WICKER: THE PENTAGON NEEDS MAJOR REFORM. NOW IS OUR CHANCE
GAO reviews of aircraft, ships and ground vehicles have found that when contractors retain exclusive control over repair information, the military is forced into long-term vendor support arrangements that are far more expensive than in-house maintenance. In several cases, GAO concluded that obtaining necessary data earlier in the acquisition process would have given the Pentagon more flexibility, reduced downtime, and lowered costs for everything from software fixes to depot-level repairs.
Sources familiar with the NDAA negotiations claimed that, behind closed doors, lobbyists had persuaded leaders on the House and Senate Armed Services Committee to drop the more aggressive right to repair language.
«This is a textbook case of the swamp prevailing at the expense of our warfighters and government efficiency,» one source said. «Does (War Secretary Pete) Hegseth realize that Boeing just knocked the legs out from our warriors?»
A spokesperson for the House Armed Services Committee said: «The Committee is committed to addressing the right to repair issue in a manner that ensures our warfighters have the data they need to effectuate repairs while preserving the intellectual property of private industry.»
«The FY26 NDAA requires the Department to audit its contracts to determine where they are missing data rights they need and determine whether any missing data rights is the result of a defective law or a defective contract. If the law is defective, the department needs to make recommendations to Congress on how to fix it.»
Watchdogs also questioned the weaker compromise.
«The provisions are nowhere near strong enough,» said Greg Williams of the Project on Government Oversight. «They help catalog the problem, but they don’t really do anything to solve it.» Williams added that the original proposals «acknowledged the cost and committed to paying fair, reasonable prices to vendors for that intellectual property,» countering industry arguments that the bill would have seized or devalued contractors’ data.
CONGRESS UNVEILS $900B DEFENSE BILL TARGETING CHINA WITH TECH BANS, INVESTMENT CRACKDOWN, US TROOP PAY RAISE
Industry groups defended their opposition.
«This debate is not about ensuring equipment and technology can be repaired in contested environments; commanders already have broad authority to keep mission-critical systems operational,» said Marta Hernandez, spokesperson for the Aerospace Industries Association. «Our concern with the Senate proposal is its sweeping mandate for government takeover of IP — without regard to necessity or cost. ‘One size fits all’ doesn’t work for our troops or for the industry that equips them.»
But military officials and watchdogs say that while commanders can authorize emergency fixes, that authority does not give units the technical data, software access, or parts needed to actually perform repairs. They argue that crews remain dependent on contractors even when they have the skills to fix the equipment themselves.
Instead of requiring contractors to provide repair data, the final NDAA directs the Pentagon to create a database cataloging what technical information it currently has and to «request options» from contractors when data is missing. Critics say the language has no enforcement mechanism and leaves manufacturers free to refuse, preserving the contractor-controlled repair model the reform sought to change.
GAO reviews of aircraft, ships and ground vehicles have found that when contractors retain exclusive control over repair information, the military is forced into long-term vendor support arrangements that are far more expensive than in-house maintenance. (Armin Weigel/picture alliance via Getty Images)
The Trump administration had backed the reform, with Statements of Administration Policy supporting both the House and Senate versions earlier in the fall. Service secretaries also endorsed the effort, and War Secretary Pete Hegseth issued new acquisition guidance in November instructing the military to plan for «organic depot-level maintenance and repair» in major systems.
US COULD LOSE NEXT MAJOR WAR DUE TO PENTAGON’S ‘BROKEN’ ACQUISITION SYSTEM
In May 2025, Army Secretary Daniel Driscoll publicly pledged that the Army would ensure right-to-repair provisions were included in future Army contracts — aligning the service with the broader congressional push for greater access to technical data. But advocates said a service-by-service approach wasn’t enough and pushed to codify and expand right to repair across all branches to prevent contractors from controlling critical maintenance information.
The F-35 program offers one of the clearest examples of how restricted repair rights drive up costs.
GAO has found that the Pentagon still lacks key technical data needed to perform many F-35 repairs organically, forcing the services to rely on Lockheed Martin and its subcontractors for everything from software maintenance to component overhauls. That dependence has helped push sustainment costs so high that the Pentagon warns it cannot afford to operate the planned fleet without major changes.
GAO reported that greater access to repair data could save the department billions over the jet’s projected life cycle, reduce turnaround times for broken parts, and allow military depots to take on work that is currently outsourced back to the contractor.
The F-35 program offers one of the clearest examples of how restricted repair rights drive up costs. (Samuel King Jr./U.S. Air Force)
The consequences of contractor restrictions are already visible across the force. A mechanic deployed for an exercise in Korea «was prohibited from conducting maintenance on a generator because the warranty would be voided,» leaving the unit with the choice of voiding the warranty or losing equipment needed for training, according to a comment filed on Regulations.gov.
Marines stationed in Japan were forced to «pack() up and ship() back (engines) to contractors in the (U.S.) for repairs,» leaving the engines offline for months, former Marine Corps logistics officer Elle Ekman wrote in The New York Times.
Even basic shipboard systems have been affected. Navy Secretary John Phelan told lawmakers that during a visit to the USS Gerald R. Ford, six of the ship’s eight ovens — responsible for preparing more than 15,000 meals a day — were broken. Sailors said they knew how to fix the ovens but were not allowed to and had to wait for contractors instead, according to a War Department readout. When shipboard elevators stopped working, the crew similarly had to call in the manufacturer.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Advocates say these examples illustrate why Congress sought to codify military right to repair in the first place — and why they argue the issue is far from resolved. Warren and Sheehy have already vowed to push another legislative fix in 2026, while watchdog groups say they will press the Pentagon to use its existing authority to demand greater data access in new contracts.
pentagon,congress,us navy,us army,military tech
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
It goes against the very instincts of some of the most powerful officials in the U.S.: get all dressed up, appear before a national TV audience, but sit there like statues without betraying any words or emotion.
For members of the Supreme Court, enduring the annual State of the Union address is a civic exercise in poker-faced discretion. As recent history has shown, that has not always been easy.
Tuesday’s speech by President Donald Trump will be watched closely not only for what is said, but also for who will be there in person to hear it — especially an undetermined number of justices with front-row seats.
This year’s appearances are especially of interest, coming four days after a 6-3 majority of the court struck down the president’s sweeping tariffs, in a sweeping setback to his economic agenda.
Chief Justice John Roberts, Justices Elena Kagan, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett and retired Justice Anthony Kennedy attend President Donald Trump’s address to a joint session of Congress at the U.S. Capitol on March 4, 2025. (Win McNamee/Pool via Reuters)
Trump lashed out sharply at the court, especially the six members who voted against him, including two he appointed to the bench — Justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett.
The president said he was «ashamed of certain members of the court, absolutely ashamed for not having the courage to do what’s right for the country.»
At least one member of the bench, Justice Samuel Alito, has previously stated he will likely no longer go — after lingering, dramatic criticism leveled at a court ruling by Obama in his 2010 address.
But one or more justices have almost always attended the annual speech to Congress and the nation in recent decades. Court members are not required by law to be there, but custom has dictated their appearance, mostly for show. They are a key, if low-key, part of the pageantry, and are compelled to sit politely and stoically, amid the often high-spirited partisan rhetoric and response of the event.
There is no word yet from the high court on who will appear. Invitations are sent to each chamber, and the justices have individual discretion over whether to go.
Those who do traditionally wear their judicial robes, are escorted into the House as a group, and take prominent seats up front.
Retired justices usually get asked as well, minus the robes. They are joined by other officers of the court, such as the marshal and clerk.
WATCH: TOP 5 MOST MEMORABLE MOMENTS IN AMERICAN STATE OF THE UNION HISTORY
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Elana Kagan, along with former Justices Stephen Breyer and Anthony Kennedy, have been regular attendees over the years.
Chief Justice John Roberts, Justices Elena Kagan, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett and retired Justice Anthony Kennedy attend President Donald Trump’s speech to a joint session of Congress, March 4, 2025. (Reuters/Evelyn Hockstein)
But the ceremony put the justices in a highly uncomfortable position in 2010.
Democrats cheered President Barack Obama when he dressed down high court conservatives for its ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, issued a week earlier, which removed legal barriers preventing corporations and unions from spending unlimited sums on federal elections.
«With all due deference to the separation of powers,» Obama said, «the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our elections.»
Alito, sitting just feet away in the audience, shook his head and mouthed words interpreted as «not true,» referring to the line about «foreign corporations,» court sources later confirmed.
Alito’s five fellow justices in attendance showed no emotion.
He had been a regular at previous addresses, but months after the incident, Alito told an audience in New York that he felt «like the proverbial potted plant» and would not be attending in the near future. In fact, the year after the presidential dress-down, Alito was in Hawaii at a law school symposium.
Justices pose for an official group portrait at the Supreme Court building on Capitol Hill on Oct. 7, 2022, following the addition of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images)
REPORTER’S NOTEBOOK: TRUMP’S STATE OF THE UNION BECOMES POLITICAL BOXING MATCH AS DEMOCRATS BOYCOTT
The now 75-year-old justice also, with a smile, noted that his colleagues «who are more disciplined, refrain from manifesting any emotion or opinion whatsoever.»
Roberts labeled the political atmosphere at the 2010 address «very troubling.»
The head of the federal judiciary has said partisan rhetoric and gestures aimed at the court left him questioning whether his colleagues should continue to attend.
During that 2010 address, members of Congress sat just behind the justices, many applauding loudly when Obama made his remarks about the court’s election spending case, especially Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y.
«It does cause me to think whether or not it makes sense for us to be there» Roberts said weeks after the controversy. «To the extent the State of the Union has degenerated into a political pep rally, I’m not sure why we’re there.»
Then-White House press secretary Robert Gibbs responded quickly at the time with an indirect attack on Roberts, saying «the only thing troubling» was the Citizens United ruling itself.
Regardless, Roberts has never missed a State of the Union as chief justice.
THOMAS RIPS SUPREME COURT TARIFFS RULING, SAYS MAJORITY ‘ERRS’ ON CONSTITUTION
That included 2021 with President Joe Biden’s address to a joint session of Congress that was limited in attendance because of the pandemic. The sparse, widely-separated crowd included Roberts, a few Cabinet officers and a smattering of congressional members, all wearing masks.
Some justices were regular no-shows at the State of the Union, including John Paul Stevens, who stepped down from the court months after the 2010 State of the Union.
Roberts’ predecessor, Chief Justice William Rehnquist, also rarely appeared in person, once because he considered a painting class more preferable.
Justice Clarence Thomas called it «very uncomfortable for a judge to sit there.» He went to Obama’s first annual address in 2009, but has not been back since.
«There’s a lot that you don’t hear on TV,» he once said, «the catcalls, the whooping, hollering and under-the breath comments.»
Another more vocal no-go was the late Justice Antonin Scalia, who compared the televised State of the Union to «cheerleading sessions.»
President Donald Trump talks to Chief Justice John Roberts on the day of his speech to a joint session of Congress, at the U.S. Capitol, March 4, 2025. (Reuters/Kevin Lamarque)
«I don’t know at what point that happened, but it has happened, and now you go and sit there like bumps on a log while applause lines cause one half of the Congress to leap up while [another line] causes the other half to leap up,» he once said. «It is a juvenile spectacle. And I resent being called upon to give it dignity.»
TRUMP REVEALS HIS ‘NEW HERO’ SUPREME COURT JUSTICE AFTER TARIFFS RULING
He last attended the event in 1997, but did attend a special joint session of Congress after the 9/11 terror attacks in 2001, with four other justices.
Scalia, a generally verbose and animated jurist, said bluntly: «You just sit there, looking stupid.»
Even remarks touching on supposedly nonpartisan topics like patriotism, war veterans and puppy dogs leave the justices in a quandary: should they applaud, should they stand and applaud or do neither? The protocols are never clear, and the public might view the court members as aloof or uncaring if they offer no reaction during, say, a salute to Martin Luther King Jr.’s memory, when everyone else is shown engaging in bipartisan applause in the chamber.
One «extra-court-ricular» event that is a must-attend for the Supreme Court is the presidential inauguration. All nine members were at last year’s public swearing-in for Trump to a second four-year term. Roberts and Kavanaugh had official duties to administer the oaths of office to the president and vice president, respectively, but the other seven justices only had to sit there, again quietly, in the Capitol Rotunda.
Breyer is the one justice who might be called a «regular» at the State of the Union, going to nearly all of them since joining the court in 1994, including one in his retirement.
He missed President Bill Clinton’s last annual address in 2000 because of the flu. That year, no justices were in attendance.
Many believe the justices have to go to such events, that it is just another unwanted chore of office. Not so, Breyer told us in 2005. «People attend if they wish to attend. I do wish to attend, so I go.»
KAVANAUGH RIPS SUPREME COURT MAJORITY’S ‘ILLOGICAL’ LINE ON TARIFFS
President Donald Trump is set to deliver his fourth State of the Union address of his presidency on Feb. 24, 2026. (Win McNamee/Getty Images)
Here’s a list of Supreme Court members attending recent State of the Union or equivalent Joint Session of Congress addresses in recent years, based on Fox News research and congressional records. Names are listed by seniority:
– 2025: John Roberts, Elena Kagan, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, Anthony Kennedy (retired)
– 2024: Roberts, Sonia Sotomayor, Kagan, Neil Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Kennedy (retired)
– 2023: Roberts, Kagan, Kavanaugh, Barrett, Jackson, Kennedy, Stephen Breyer (retired)
– 2022: Roberts, Breyer, Kagan, Kavanaugh, Barrett
– 2021: Roberts (limited speech attendance because of pandemic)
– 2020: Roberts, Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh
– 2019: Roberts, Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh
– 2018: Roberts, Breyer, Kagan, Gorsuch
– 2017: Roberts, Kennedy, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan
– 2016: Roberts, Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan
– 2015: Roberts, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan
– 2014: Roberts, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan
– 2013: Roberts, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan
– 2012: Roberts, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan
– 2011: Roberts, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan
– 2010: Roberts, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Samuel Alito, Sotomayor
– 2009: Roberts, Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, Alito
– 2008: Roberts, Kennedy, Breyer, Alito
– 2007: Roberts, Kennedy, Breyer, Alito
– 2006: Roberts, Thomas, Breyer, Alito
– 2005: Breyer
– 2004: Breyer
– 2003: Breyer
– 2002: Kennedy, Breyer
– 2001: Breyer
– 2000: None
– 1999: Sandra Day O’Connor, Kennedy, David Souter, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer
– 1998: William Rehnquist, O’Connor, Souter, Thomas, Breyer
– 1997: Antonin Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, Byron White (retired)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
– 1996: Rehnquist, O’Connor, Kennedy, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer
– 1995: Rehnquist, O’Connor, Scalia, Ginsburg, Breyer, Harry Blackmun (retired)
Related Article
supreme court,state of the union,donald trump
INTERNACIONAL
España: ¿Cuál es el verdadero alcance de los documentos que el gobierno de Pedro Sánchez va a desclasificar sobre el intento de golpe del 23F?
INTERNACIONAL
Iran nears China anti-ship supersonic missile deal as US carriers mass in region: report
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Iran is nearing a deal with China to acquire supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles, a move that could significantly raise the stakes in the Middle East as U.S. carrier strike groups assemble within striking distance of the Islamic Republic.
Reuters reported Tuesday that Tehran is close to finalizing an agreement for Chinese-made CM-302 missiles, citing six people with knowledge of the negotiations.
The supersonic weapons, which can travel roughly 180 miles and fly low to evade ship defenses, would enhance Iran’s ability to target U.S. naval forces operating in the region.
The deal is near completion, though no delivery date has been agreed, the people said. It is unclear how many missiles are involved, how much Iran has agreed to pay, or whether China will ultimately proceed given heightened regional tensions.
The CM-302 supersonic anti-ship missile weapon system is shown during the Zhuhai Airshow in Zhuhai, China, Nov. 2, 2016. (Dickson Lee/South China Morning Post via Getty Images)
Reuters reported that negotiations accelerated after last year’s 12-day war between Israel and Iran, which left Tehran’s military infrastructure strained and heightened regional tensions.
The reported deal comes as President Donald Trump warns Tehran of consequences if it fails to curb its nuclear program, while the Pentagon has deployed multiple carrier strike groups to the region, including the USS Abraham Lincoln and the USS Gerald R. Ford. The buildup marks one of the largest U.S. naval deployments in the region in recent years.
Trump said on Feb. 19 he was giving Iran 10 days to reach an agreement over its nuclear program or face potential military action.
WITKOFF WARNS IRAN IS ‘A WEEK AWAY’ FROM ‘BOMB-MAKING MATERIAL’ AS TRUMP WEIGHS ACTION
The aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln docks at Souda Bay on the Greek Mediterranean island of Crete, Feb. 24, 2026, following orders by U.S. President Donald Trump to increase the American naval presence in the region. (Costas Metaxakis/AFP via Getty Images)
A White House official told Fox News Digital that the president remains firm that Iran cannot develop nuclear weapons or enrich uranium.
«The President would like to see a deal negotiated, but he has been clear that ‘either we will make a deal or we will have to do something very tough like last time,’» the official said when asked for comment on the reported approaching Iran-China deal.
Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei last week appeared to threaten U.S. warships directly.
«More dangerous than that warship is the weapon that can send that warship to the bottom of the sea,» Khamenei wrote on Feb. 17 on X.
Military analysts say a Chinese transfer of supersonic anti-ship missiles could complicate U.S. naval operations in the Persian Gulf and surrounding waters.
«It’s a complete game-changer if Iran has supersonic capability to attack ships in the area,» Danny Citrinowicz, a former Israeli intelligence officer and senior Iran researcher at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies, told Reuters. «These missiles are very difficult to intercept.»
IRAN ANNOUNCES TEST OF NEW NAVAL AIR DEFENSE MISSILE IN STRAIT OF HORMUZ AS US MILITARY BUILDUP CONTINUES
The reported deal comes as President Donald Trump, left, warns Tehran of consequences if it fails to curb its nuclear program. Iranian Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is pictured right. (Chip Somodevilla; Iranian Leader Press Office/Anadolu)
Still, U.S. forces maintain layered defenses against Iranian threats, including Patriot missile batteries, Navy destroyers equipped with Standard Missile interceptors and F-35 stealth fighters, Fox News Digital reported.
Last year, Navy destroyers in the eastern Mediterranean intercepted Iranian ballistic missiles using SM-3 interceptors, while Marine Corps F-35Cs operating from the USS Abraham Lincoln shot down Iranian drones that approached U.S. assets, according to U.S. Central Command.
Iran has also relied on swarming fast boats, ballistic missiles and drones in past confrontations with U.S. forces.
The White House did not directly address the reported missile negotiations when asked by Reuters. China’s foreign ministry told the outlet it was not aware of the talks.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The potential transfer would mark one of the most advanced Chinese weapons systems supplied to Iran in decades and could test U.S. sanctions authorities if finalized.
As U.S. forces fan out across the region, defense officials have stressed that the buildup is designed to deter Iranian aggression — but warned they are prepared for combat if diplomacy fails.
Reuters contributed to this report.
Related Article
iran,china,world,israel,wars,middle east
Milei cambia el temario del Senado y quiere ser el primer presidente en aprobar el acuerdo con la Unión Europea
Otra provincia se suma al boom de emisiones de deuda: se colocaron u$s7.800 millones desde octubre
La nota de Messi con un ex compañero de Argentina: su mayor arrepentimiento, el pedido de casamiento a Antonela y su miedo en Qatar
Eduardo Carrera, el escandaloso participante de Gran Hermano 2003 que busca revancha en Generación Dorada
Dura crítica de Patricia Bullrich a «Chiqui» Tapia: «Es ridículo que paren el futbol»
To go or not to go? Supreme Court at the State of the Union
Villarruel cuestionó la apertura de importaciones: «Sin industria, se pasa a depender de China»
“Ahora es la hora de jugarse”: el mensaje de Patricia Bullrich a los empresarios tras aprobarse la reforma laboral
Según un especialista, el precio de la carne se mantendrá alto “entre dos y tres años”
Cómo será el tratamiento de la reforma laboral en el Senado, luego de haber obtenido la media sanción en Diputados
ECONOMIA3 días agoSegún un especialista, el precio de la carne se mantendrá alto “entre dos y tres años”
- POLITICA3 días ago
Cómo será el tratamiento de la reforma laboral en el Senado, luego de haber obtenido la media sanción en Diputados
- ECONOMIA3 días ago
¿Me pueden pagar el sueldo con botellas de vino o Bitcoin?: la letra chica de la reforma laboral
