In a recent development that has stirred controversy, President Donald Trump has issued an executive order targeting the National Museum of African American History and Culture (NMAAHC) and other Smithsonian establishments in an effort to eliminate perceived bias in historical narratives.
The executive order, titled "Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History," aims to remove what the president describes as "improper ideology" from Smithsonian museums, including one with strong ties to former President Barack Obama, sparking concern for the preservation of African American history, as Newsmax reports.
The NMAAHC, a notable feature on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., opened its doors under the administration of then-President Obama in 2016. It houses a vast collection of over 40,000 pieces reflecting African American history. However, the recent executive order from Trump highlights a concern that these institutions are promoting narratives that are divisive.
Trump's action has ignited a flurry of criticism online. Numerous social media users and museum volunteers have expressed their outrage, interpreting the move as an attempt to erase the rich and complex history of African Americans in the United States. Critics argue that the decision undermines decades of work by historians and cultural advocates committed to acknowledging and preserving multiple perspectives within the nation's historical discourse.
President Trump's executive order is part of a broader series of changes aimed at American cultural institutions since his return to office in January. The order also includes plans for restoring federal properties, such as parks, monuments, and the iconic Independence Hall, with a completion target of 2026.
In a statement, Trump said, "Over the past decade, Americans have witnessed a concerted and widespread effort to rewrite our Nation's history, replacing objective facts with a distorted narrative driven by ideology rather than truth." His administration claims that museums should serve as platforms for education rather than indoctrination and that they're seeking to realign the Smithsonian Institution with this philosophy.
Henry M. Rosenberg, a volunteer at the Family History Center within the NMAAHC, voiced a strong reaction on social media. "I volunteer...where we help people trace their genealogy back to slavery," he tweeted, showcasing the museum’s critical role in connecting African Americans with their heritage. He, along with others, fears the implications of this executive order on the museum’s mission to present a comprehensive view of history.
Another former Smithsonian employee and frequent visitor commented on the importance of ensuring difficult historical truths remain visible. The commenter highlighted the necessity of understanding this painful history to prevent its recurrence, stressing that acknowledging such truths is not, as some suggest, unpatriotic. These sentiments reflect a prevailing concern that altering the NMAAHC's approach may diminish the public's understanding of African American contributions and struggles.
Furthermore, the museum itself states in its mission statement, "[The museum] shares the unvarnished truth of African American history and culture. We forge new and compelling avenues for audiences to experience the arc of living history," emphasizing its commitment to factual and thorough representation.
The irony, some argue, is that the executive order titled "Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History" may do the opposite of its intentions. By focusing its efforts on the Smithsonian and particularly the NMAAHC, the order could inadvertently stoke greater interest in the museum’s narratives, drawing attention to its archives rather than stifling them.
The critique of the museum as promoting “divisive narratives” raises questions about what constitutes improper ideology. Observers have noted this as a recurrent theme in President Trump's cultural policy revisions, which have included various other symbols of American heritage. The emphasis seems directed toward specific narratives that, according to the administration, have been skewed by ideological influences.
Given these attempts by Trump's administration to steer cultural institutions away from such perspectives, there is ongoing debate about the implications for freedom of expression and historical integrity within national museums. As preparations continue for project completions by 2026, the coming years may reveal further developments in this area.
The NMAAHC remains a focal point for discussions on American history, serving as a symbol of efforts to embrace a multifaceted past. As the dialogue continues, the challenge remains balancing historical truth with national unity, a contest that is unlikely to reach resolution any time soon.
A surprise announcement on TruthSocial reveals a significant shift in President Donald Trump's diplomatic appointments.
According to The Daily Caller, Trump has withdrawn New York Representative Elise Stefanik's nomination for United Nations Ambassador to maintain the Republican Party's slim majority in Congress.
The decision comes amid growing concerns about the potential impact of Stefanik's departure on the House's delicate power balance. Republicans currently hold a narrow majority with 218 seats compared to Democrats' 213, making every seat crucial for maintaining control of the chamber.
Trump emphasized the importance of preserving Republican representation in Congress through his TruthSocial announcement. The president's decision reflects a calculated move to protect the party's legislative influence.
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chair James E. Risch confirmed receiving immediate notification from the White House regarding the withdrawal. The timing of the announcement caught many by surprise, including Risch himself.
Democratic New York Governor Kathy Hochul's reported intention to delay a special election to replace Stefanik likely influenced the decision. Sources familiar with the situation revealed Hochul's strategy to potentially impact the Republican majority.
Trump shared his rationale for the withdrawal through a detailed TruthSocial post:
With a very tight Majority, I don't want to take a chance on anyone else running for Elise's seat. The people love Elise and, with her, we have nothing to worry about come Election Day. There are others that can do a good job at the United Nations. Therefore, Elise will stay in Congress, rejoin the House Leadership Team, and continue to fight for our amazing American People. Speaker Johnson is thrilled! I look forward to the day when Elise is able to join my Administration in the future. She is absolutely FANTASTIC. Thank you Elise!
The announcement came before Stefanik had formally resigned from Congress. Republican strategists had previously discussed postponing the nomination vote until after the April 1 Florida special election, where two GOP seats are at stake.
Trump has not yet announced a replacement nominee for the UN Ambassador position. The withdrawal opens opportunities for other potential candidates while ensuring continued Republican influence in Congress.
The president outlined his expectations for Stefanik's continued role in advancing his political agenda. He emphasized her importance in achieving various policy goals, including tax reforms and economic growth.
Congressional Republicans, including Speaker Johnson, have expressed support for the decision. The move aligns with broader party strategies to maintain legislative control.
President Trump withdrew Representative Elise Stefanik's nomination for UN Ambassador, prioritizing the preservation of Republican control in the House of Representatives. The decision emerged from concerns about maintaining the party's slim 218-213 majority and potential complications from Democratic Governor Hochul's reported plans to delay a special election.
The withdrawal reflects Trump's strategic focus on domestic political stability, keeping Stefanik in her congressional role where she will continue supporting his legislative agenda. While the UN Ambassador position remains unfilled, Trump has indicated his intention to consider Stefanik for future administration roles.
President Donald Trump's immigration policies continue to shape national discourse as Americans weigh in on the complex issue of illegal immigration enforcement.
According to a Breitbart News report, a recent Pew Research Center survey indicates that 83 percent of American adults support some form of deportation for individuals residing illegally in the United States, with 32 percent advocating for the removal of all unauthorized immigrants.
The poll showcases a stark divide in public opinion regarding immigration enforcement measures, with Republicans showing stronger support for comprehensive deportation policies compared to their Democratic counterparts. The survey reveals that 54 percent of Republicans favor deporting all illegal immigrants, while only 10 percent of Democrats share this view.
Among those who support partial deportation measures, an overwhelming majority emphasizes the removal of individuals with criminal records. The survey indicates that 97 percent of respondents who support selective deportation believe that illegal immigrants charged or convicted of violent crimes should be deported.
The data also shows that 52 percent of these respondents support the deportation of those charged with nonviolent offenses. Additionally, 44 percent advocate for the removal of unauthorized immigrants who entered the country during the Biden administration.
Public sentiment strongly favors active enforcement operations, with 54 percent supporting workplace raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The numbers increase for residential enforcement and protest-related arrests, at 63 and 66 percent, respectively.
The survey highlights significant differences between Democratic and Republican views on local law enforcement's role in immigration matters. While 81 percent of Republicans believe local authorities should have the power to inquire about immigration status, only 33 percent of Democrats agree.
Three-quarters of Democratic respondents express concern that the Trump administration's deportation efforts are excessive. In contrast, a mere 13 percent of Republicans share this sentiment.
Border Czar Tom Homan and his team have already demonstrated significant progress in implementing these policies. As of March 10, their efforts have resulted in the apprehension of 33,000 illegal immigrants, including more than 1,000 gang members and 39 suspected terrorists.
The administration's focus on removing criminal elements from the immigrant population aligns with the survey's findings about public priorities. ICE continues to target individuals with criminal records while expanding their operational scope.
Recent enforcement actions demonstrate the administration's commitment to addressing both violent and nonviolent offenders. The strategy appears to resonate with the majority of Americans who support some form of deportation.
The Pew Research Center survey provides crucial insights into the American public's stance on immigration enforcement and deportation policies. The results demonstrate broad support for targeted deportation measures, particularly concerning individuals with criminal records, while revealing deep partisan divisions on the scope and implementation of these policies.
The Trump administration's current deportation agenda, backed by significant public support, focuses on removing criminal elements from the unauthorized immigrant population while maintaining broader enforcement capabilities. As federal agencies continue their enforcement efforts, the data suggests they are operating with a clear mandate from the American public, though political disagreements persist over the extent and methods of implementation.
President Donald Trump announces a significant change in leadership for America's premier public health agency during a critical period of healthcare reform.
According to Daily Wire, Dr. Susan Monarez, the current acting director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), has been nominated by Trump to permanently lead the agency after his previous nominee withdrew from consideration.
The nomination follows the withdrawal of Dr. Dave Weldon, a former Republican congressman from Florida, whose nomination was pulled on March 13th due to insufficient Republican support in the confirmation process. This development marks a significant shift in the administration's strategy for CDC leadership, emphasizing scientific expertise over political experience.
Dr. Monarez's nomination showcases her impressive academic background, which includes a Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin and postdoctoral training in Microbiology and Immunology at Stanford University School of Medicine. Her extensive experience in public health and scientific research positions her as a technically qualified candidate for the role.
Trump specifically highlighted Monarez's role as a mother and public servant, emphasizing how these qualities contribute to her understanding of public health priorities. The President expressed confidence in her ability to address what he perceives as declining public trust in the CDC.
The nomination indicates a strategic pivot from the previous choice of Weldon, whose background was primarily in politics rather than public health administration. This change suggests a renewed focus on scientific expertise in leadership selection.
Dr. Weldon's withdrawal from consideration revealed underlying tensions between pharmaceutical industry interests and CDC leadership selection. The former congressman issued a detailed statement attributing his nomination's failure to negative perception from the pharmaceutical sector.
In his statement, Weldon defended his medical practice, noting his regular use of pharmaceutical products in patient care. The situation highlights the complex relationship between the pharmaceutical industry and public health leadership.
These developments occurred just hours before Weldon's scheduled Senate confirmation hearing, demonstrating the volatile nature of high-level healthcare appointments in the current political climate.
Trump expressed that Monarez will work closely with Health and Human Services Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr. to implement new agency priorities. Their collaborative approach aims to address chronic disease prevention and restore public confidence in the CDC.
President Trump outlined key focus areas for the new leadership, including innovation, transparency, and strengthening public health systems. The administration emphasized accountability and high standards as crucial elements of their strategy.
Trump took to social media to deliver his message about these objectives, stating that the partnership between Monarez and Kennedy would be instrumental in making America "healthy again."
Dr. Susan Monarez's nomination represents a strategic shift in CDC leadership, combining scientific expertise with public health administration experience. The nomination follows the withdrawal of former congressman Dave Weldon, whose candidacy faced opposition from pharmaceutical industry stakeholders and insufficient Republican support. The new nominee will need to navigate Senate confirmation processes while preparing to address multiple public health challenges. Working alongside HHS Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr., Monarez is expected to focus on rebuilding public trust in the CDC through enhanced transparency and innovation in public health systems.
President Donald Trump's longtime legal defender steps into a new role in the Justice Department, marking a significant shift in her career trajectory.
According to the New York Post, President Trump appointed Alina Habba, his former defense lawyer and current presidential counselor, as the interim US attorney for New Jersey, replacing John Giordano, who has been nominated as ambassador to Namibia.
The 40-year-old attorney, who gained prominence while representing Trump in the E. Jean Carroll defamation case, has held the position of presidential counselor since January 2025. Her appointment signals a new chapter in New Jersey's federal law enforcement leadership, as she pledges to address what she describes as widespread corruption and crime in the state.
Speaking to reporters outside the White House, Habba directly challenged New Jersey's Democratic leadership. She specifically targeted Senator Cory Booker and Governor Phil Murphy, arguing that their administration has failed to address critical issues facing the state's major cities.
Trump shared the announcement on Truth Social, expressing confidence in Habba's capabilities. He emphasized her previous work experience and commitment to establishing a fair legal system for New Jersey residents.
The newly appointed interim US attorney didn't shy away from criticizing the current state of affairs in New Jersey's urban areas. Speaking about Newark and Camden, Habba said:
There is corruption, there is injustice, and there is a heavy amount of crime right in Cory Booker's backyard and right under Governor Murphy. And that will stop.
The appointment comes at a crucial time for both Trump's administration and New Jersey's justice system. Habba's dual role as a former Trump defender and new federal prosecutor has sparked discussions about the intersection of personal loyalty and public service.
When questioned about potential political aspirations in New Jersey, Habba maintained focus on her immediate responsibilities. She emphasized her commitment to working alongside Attorney General Pam Bondi and the Department of Justice.
Trump expressed his support for Habba through his social media platform, stating:
Alina will lead with the same diligence and conviction that has defined her career, and she will fight tirelessly to secure a Legal System that is both 'Fair and Just' for the wonderful people of New Jersey.
The transition in leadership presents significant implications for ongoing and future federal cases in New Jersey. Habba's appointment suggests a potential shift in prosecutorial priorities and approach to law enforcement in the state.
Her background as Trump's defense attorney and current role as presidential counselor brings unique perspective to the position. This experience could influence how the US attorney's office handles various cases and investigations.
The appointment also reflects broader changes within the Justice Department under Trump's second term. It demonstrates the administration's strategy in placing trusted allies in key legal positions across the country.
Alina Habba, President Trump's former defense attorney and current presidential counselor, has assumed the role of interim US attorney for New Jersey, succeeding John Giordano. Her appointment represents a significant shift in the state's federal prosecution leadership, with explicit promises to address corruption and crime in major urban centers. The 40-year-old attorney's transition from Trump's legal defender to federal prosecutor marks a new phase in New Jersey's justice system. Her strong criticism of current state leadership and commitment to implementing the president's agenda suggest potential changes in how federal cases will be handled in the Garden State.
President Donald Trump's latest executive action targets his predecessor Joe Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, and several other high-profile political figures.
According to Breitbart, Trump has officially revoked security clearances and access to classified information from former President Joe Biden, former Vice President Kamala Harris, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and numerous other individuals previously involved in government operations.
The sweeping directive affects a broad spectrum of former government officials and political figures. Trump's announcement specifically named former Secretary of State Antony Blinken, former Representative Liz Cheney, and extended to include all members of the Biden family. The order also restricts these individuals from having unescorted access to secure United States Government facilities.
The presidential directive encompasses more than a dozen prominent figures in American politics. The list includes current and former law enforcement officials such as Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg and New York Attorney General Letitia James. National security officials like Jacob Sullivan and Lisa Monaco are also affected by this decision.
Trump's directive instructs all executive departments and agency heads to take immediate action in implementing these restrictions.
The order requires a comprehensive review of existing clearances and immediate revocation where applicable. Department heads must ensure compliance with existing laws while executing these directives.
In February, Trump had already signaled his intention to revoke Biden's security clearances. He expressed his position that there was no justification for Biden's continued access to classified information. This latest announcement expands upon his previous statements and formalizes the action.
The president's authority to revoke security clearances extends to both current and former government officials.
This power stems from his role as the chief executive and ultimate authority on classified information. The decision affects individuals who traditionally retained their clearances after leaving office.
Trump cited national interest as the primary motivation behind his decision. The move represents a significant departure from historical precedent, where former presidents typically retained their security clearances to provide counsel if needed. This break from tradition has sparked discussions about the long-term implications for government continuity.
The revocation of clearances affects access to classified information and physical access to secure facilities. This comprehensive approach ensures that affected individuals cannot circumvent the restrictions through alternative means of access.
Trump's unprecedented action has fundamentally altered the relationship between current and former government officials. The revocation of security clearances from a former president, vice president, and numerous high-ranking officials marks a significant shift in post-service privileges.
The directive aims to immediately restrict access to classified information and secure facilities for all named individuals. This sweeping action affects Democratic and Republican figures, including those who have been critical of Trump's administration. The implementation process will require coordination across multiple government agencies and departments.
President Donald Trump has openly endorsed Brad Schimel, a conservative candidate, in the forthcoming election for the Wisconsin Supreme Court, and this development takes center stage as the campaign becomes the most financially intensive judicial race in U.S. history, heavily influenced by prominent political figures and significant financial contributions.
As the high court election looms, implications for key issues such as redistricting and abortion become pivotal in this deeply divided state, as the New York Post reports, likely explaining Trump's interest in the outcome.
The electoral contest is more than just a choice between candidates; it symbolizes a broader clash of ideologies within Wisconsin's political sphere. Scheduled for April 1, this contest is pivotal in determining the direction of a state Supreme Court that currently holds a liberal majority.
The financial scale of this contest has reached unprecedented heights, with total expenditures surpassing $76 million. A staggering $14.6 million of this comes from political organizations linked to billionaire Elon Musk, marking a significant backing for Schimel. In contrast, George Soros has contributed more than $1 million to the Wisconsin state Democratic Party. These contributions highlight the national and international interest in the outcome of this state-specific election.
The judicial contest has deep implications for the state's judiciary stance on key legislative issues, notably voter redistricting. Wisconsin's Supreme Court, currently leaning left, has a significant role in reviewing state legislative boundaries, a subject of contentious debate across party lines.
The verbal battle between the candidates and their supporters has intensified. President Trump ramped up his criticism of Schimel's opponent, Susan Crawford, labeling her as a "soft" enforcer of justice and influencing voters on Truth Social. "Brad Schimel is running against Radical Left Liberal Susan Crawford," Trump stated, criticizing her approach to criminal sentences. He also accused her of being aligned with leftist ideology, suggesting her victory could have detrimental effects on his political agenda.
Crawford, however, did not hold back. She turned to X to criticize Schimel's alliance with conservative interests. "Schimel has spent his entire career on bent knee to right-wing special interests," she wrote, as she questioned his alignment with Trump.
Wisconsin's political landscape remains sharply divided, with Democrats controlling the governorship and attorney general's office, while Republicans dominate the state legislature. The court's current composition reflects a shift following Justice Janet Protasiewicz's 2023 victory, which tipped the ideological balance to the left after 15 years of conservative dominance.
As voters prepare to make their decision, recent surveys indicate an extremely tight race. Polling from Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce has revealed a tie, with both Schimel and Crawford receiving 47% support. Wisconsin's recent political history and the controversial nature of the issues at stake make this Supreme Court election arguably one of the most consequential in the state's recent history.
The state Supreme Court's role extends beyond redistricting, with decisions about abortion also weighing heavily on voters' minds. The reversal of Roe v. Wade by the U.S. Supreme Court has escalated the significance of such state-level judicial elections, as they could shape abortion rights for years to come. Wisconsin's upcoming Supreme Court race has drawn attention not only for its high stakes locally but for its potential repercussions on a national scale. Key figures in American politics are watching closely, aware that the result could resonate far beyond state lines.
As early voting commenced last Tuesday, all eyes are firmly on April 1. Voters must navigate this complex political terrain while weighing the profound implications for Wisconsin's judicial and legislative landscape.
This election showcases how a state-level decision can evoke widespread interest and carry national significance. The involvement of high-profile figures like Elon Musk and George Soros highlights the stakes and influence vested in the outcome. The intersection of global financial power and local political dynamics creates a fertile ground for debate. As billionaire-backed candidates vie for attention and votes, Wisconsin's electors find themselves at the confluence of local, national, and international interests.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court race exemplifies the intertwined nature of state and national politics in an era where judicial influence often extends far beyond the courtroom. As voters engage with the widely-discussed issues at stake, the balance of power within the state's highest court hangs in the balance.
Kat Timpf, known for her role as a Fox News contributor, has faced an extraordinary set of circumstances recently, in that just hours before delivering her son, she was informed of a Stage 0 breast cancer diagnosis, leading her to undergo a double mastectomy shortly thereafter.
Receiving this diagnosis so soon before childbirth presented Timpf with both a challenge and an opportunity for gratitude, having discovered her cancer and managing its surgical treatment at such an early stage, as People reports.
The timeline of events began on Feb. 25, when Timpf gave birth to her first child. It was only around fifteen hours prior to this wonderful occasion that doctors identified the early stages of cancer. Stage 0 cancer is considered highly treatable, largely due to its early detection.
In response to her diagnosis, medical professionals recommended, and Timpf quickly agreed, to a double mastectomy. This surgery was scheduled and subsequently performed on March 20 at the renowned Memorial Sloan Kettering Josie Robertson Surgery Center located in New York City.
Timpf kept her followers updated throughout this challenging period. She shared images and sentiments on social media, maintaining a sense of humor amidst the severity of her circumstances. On March 14, she posted a casual picture outside the surgery center, marking the lead-up to her surgery.
Following the operation, Timpf continued to engage with her audience. She posted a photograph from her hospital bed, which humorously noted how her post-surgery appearance hadn’t drastically changed in size from before her pregnancy. Her Fox News colleague, Jessica Tarlov, showed support by gifting a cake. Emblazoned with the words "Titty free and fabulous!" the gesture was a light-hearted acknowledgment of the journey Timpf was navigating.
Timpf, married to Cameron Friscia since 2021, expressed overwhelming gratitude for the chain of events that led to her early diagnosis. In sharing her story, she highlighted both her admiration for her newborn son and her thankfulness for discovering the cancer when she did.
In her reflections, Timpf emphasized the mix of emotions she felt during this trying time, particularly with regard to her newborn son. "I mean, I know I’m biased, but the little dude absolutely rules," she remarked, acknowledging the role her son played in what could be deemed as saving her life by bringing attention to her health.
Amid her personal trials, Timpf remained optimistic. As she prepared to take a maternity leave, which would also function as a recuperation period from her surgery, she stated her determination to tackle the next phases with vigor and resilience.
Support from her colleagues added an additional layer of comfort and camaraderie. Greg Gutfeld and Dagen McDowell were among those who communicated their warm wishes and anticipation for her return to work. Their messages were both supportive and caring in nature, underscoring the collective empathy felt for her situation.
Timpf humorously outlined her path to recovery, which involved healing from childbirth and the surgery, undergoing breast reconstruction, and ultimately returning to the gym. Her light-hearted outlook even amidst adversity resonated with many followers and supporters.
"As I navigate new motherhood," she shared, "I’m learning to celebrate everything I can." This sentiment captures the dual challenge and joy she is experiencing during this significant life chapter. Throughout her public communications, Timpf highlighted the importance of humor, hope, and resilience. “Here’s to resilience, to miracles in the midst of chaos," she declared, imparting a message of strength beyond her personal circumstances.
As Timpf continues on this journey, the public remains tuned into her progress. Her ability to maintain wit and positivity has been an inspiration for many following her story. Faced with the dual complexities of motherhood and cancer recovery, she demonstrates an admirable spirit, open to sharing her experiences with an authenticity that is both grounding and uplifting.
President Donald Trump prepares for a significant restructuring of federal education oversight as he readies to fulfill one of his key campaign promises.
According to Breitbart News, Trump will sign an executive order on Thursday to shut down the Department of Education, marking the first closure of a cabinet-level agency during his presidency.
The move comes after weeks of preparation and substantial workforce reductions at the department. Education Secretary Linda McMahon has already begun implementing major changes, including cutting the department's staff by half and reducing funding for several key offices, such as the Office for Civil Rights and the Institute of Education Sciences.
The executive order instructs Secretary McMahon to initiate the complete dissolution of the education department. The directive emphasizes returning educational authority to individual states while maintaining essential services and programs during the transition period.
The administration's decision follows Trump's consistent criticism of the department. During his 2024 campaign, the president expressed strong views about the agency's effectiveness and its impact on taxpayers.
According to Trump, as referenced in his campaign platform:
The department is a big con job that needs to be closed and sent back to the states, where it belongs.
The restructuring plan involves redistributing the department's responsibilities among state governments, which already determine their own curricula. Various federal agencies will absorb the remaining necessary functions.
Democratic opponents have voiced strong opposition to the closure. Protests have erupted, with some demonstrators attempting to prevent the department's shutdown through direct action.
The timing of the announcement aligns with Secretary McMahon's recent Senate confirmation, allowing the administration to proceed with its planned reforms.
The White House has been systematically reducing the department's operations since early February. These changes affect various educational programs and data collection initiatives.
The Institute of Education Sciences, responsible for tracking national academic progress, faces significant cuts. This development has raised concerns among education policy experts about maintaining consistent standards across states.
Reuters reports indicate the transition will prioritize maintaining crucial services while transferring authority to state-level education departments.
The closure of the U.S. Department of Education represents a major shift in federal education policy under Trump's leadership. The president's executive order will eliminate a cabinet-level agency that has overseen national education initiatives since its establishment. Secretary McMahon leads the complex process of dismantling the department while ensuring educational services continue uninterrupted. The transition involves coordinating with state governments to assume greater control over education policy and implementation.
Pete Marocco's tenure at the United States Agency for International Development comes to an abrupt end following a controversial restructuring effort.
According to ABC News, Marocco, who spearheaded the widespread dismantling of USAID, announced his departure on Tuesday night through an email to State Department staff, declaring his return to his previous position as Director of Foreign Assistance.
The move follows a court ruling that deemed the administration's efforts to dismantle USAID unconstitutional, dealing a significant blow to the Trump administration's plans to drastically reduce the agency's operations and influence.
Under Secretary of State Marco Rubio's direction, Marocco assumed the role of USAID deputy administrator in early February. Working alongside Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency, he initiated sweeping changes that included massive employee layoffs and the termination of funding for more than 80% of the agency's programs.
The transformation also involved abandoning the agency's Washington, D.C. headquarters, signaling a dramatic shift in USAID's operational capacity. These actions prompted immediate legal challenges from various stakeholders concerned about the impact on global humanitarian efforts.
Critics argue that the dismantling efforts would severely diminish American influence abroad and negatively affect vulnerable populations who depend on U.S. aid for basic necessities like healthcare and food security.
Following Marocco's departure, the State Department confirmed that two political appointees would take over the deputy administrator responsibilities. Jeremy Lewin, 28, will serve as USAID COO and Deputy Administrator for Policy and Programs, while Ken Jackson will assume the role of USAID CFO and Deputy Administrator for Management and Resources.
Lewin's appointment has raised eyebrows due to his limited government experience. Despite graduating from Harvard Law School in 2022 and co-authoring opinion pieces with constitutional law expert Laurence Tribe, his primary professional experience comes from a brief stint at a Los Angeles law firm.
His law firm biography claimed extensive experience advising high-level global policymakers, including the U.S. President, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and senior members of the G7 and UN. However, these claims remain unverified.
In his farewell message to staff, Marocco defended his actions at USAID, stating:
It's been my honor to assist Secretary Rubio in his leadership of USAID through some difficult stages to pivot this enterprise away from its abuses of the past. Now that USAID is under control, accountable and stable, I am going to return to my post as the Director of Foreign Assistance to bring value back to the American people.
Later, in an official statement released through the State Department, he added:
The crisis-level issues that had plagued USAID were far worse than we anticipated. It has been an honor and a privilege to help restore accountability and transparency at USAID.
Pete Marocco's exit from USAID marks a significant moment in the agency's ongoing transformation under the Trump administration. His departure as deputy administrator comes amid legal challenges to the agency's dismantling, with a judge recently declaring the restructuring efforts unconstitutional.
The leadership transition to Jeremy Lewin and Ken Jackson, along with Marocco's return to his previous role as Director of Foreign Assistance, raises questions about the future direction of American foreign aid and its impact on global humanitarian assistance.