url,title,date,year,month,party,chamber,state,member_name,bioguide_id,domain,scraper,source,date_source,text,has_text,collected_at,updated_at
https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/news/press-releases/senator-alsobrooks-hosts-real-men-real-talk-discussion-at-bowie-state-university/,"SENATOR ALSOBROOKS HOSTS REAL MEN, REAL TALK DISCUSSION AT BOWIE STATE UNIVERSITY",2026-09-27,2026,2026-09,Democrat,Senate,MD,Angela D. Alsobrooks,A000382,www.alsobrooks.senate.gov,alsobrooks,https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/,scraper,"September 27, 2026

WASHINGTON, DC – Senator Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), along with MedStar Health and United Way of the National Capital Area, hosted “Real Men, Real Talk” at Bowie State University — a discussion and community fair dedicated to men, their health, and a stronger community.

Senator Alsobrooks was joined by Bowie State University president Dr. Aminta H. Breaux; Chile Ahaghotu, MD, Vice President of Medical Affairs at MedStar Southern Maryland Hospital Center; Gigi El-Bayoumi, MD, Founder, Rodham Institute at Georgetown School of Medicine; Brocklin Qualls, Director, Black Fatherhood Blueprint, Greater Washington Urban League; Jamal Branch, Psychotherapist, Founder, Synergy Therapeutic Services, LLC; and Stephen Conti, Founder, Tocar Spa Massage Therapy.

“Our men and boys hear the world demand so much of them. Today they got to hear these important words: you are loved. We care what you’re going through. We’re concerned about your lives, and you don’t have to handle everything on your own. That is what today was all about – joining together to discuss the physical, mental, and emotional health of our men and boys, and letting them know about the resources and support systems available to them,” said Senator Alsobrooks.

“United Way NCA is honored to stand alongside Senator Alsobrooks as a community partner for the ‘Real Men, Real Talk’ discussion and community fair,” said Dr. Nicole Cooper, Chief External Affairs and Transformation Officer, United Way of the National Capital Area. “The event aligns with our healthy community impact area, giving men real tools to live strong, healthy lives, from health screenings to mental health resources to a space where they feel seen and heard. It’s built on strong partnerships, and that’s how we create healthier, stronger communities throughout the National Capital Area, together.”

“Student success depends on well-being,” said Dr. Aminta H. Breaux, president of Bowie State University. “Today’s conversation created an important space for men and boys to prioritize their physical, mental and emotional health, connect with resources and know they are supported. We are proud to partner with Sen. Alsobrooks and community leaders to strengthen the health and well-being of the communities we serve.”

###",1,2026-09-28T11:29:07Z,2026-09-28T11:30:58Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/maryland-congressional-delegation-meets-to-discuss-critical-priorities-for-the-port-of-baltimore,Maryland Congressional Delegation Meets to Discuss Critical Priorities for the Port of Baltimore,2026-09-25,2026,2026-09,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Yesterday, members of Maryland’s Congressional Delegation held a meeting at the United States Capitol to discuss their work on a range of issues relating to the Port of Baltimore, including its infrastructure needs, long-term stability, and growth. During the meeting, the lawmakers heard from Port leadership and stakeholders about upcoming modernization projects, investments, general workforce updates, and more. The Port of Baltimore generates $70 billion annually in economic impacts to Maryland, and 273,000 total jobs in Maryland are connected to the Port. Video of the members’ press availability following the meeting is available here.

“Maryland is a leading hub for trade and commerce – and the Port of Baltimore is a key part of our success, generating thousands of jobs and bolstering our economy. Yesterday’s meeting was a great opportunity for Team Maryland to come together with Port leadership and key stakeholders to discuss our past efforts and plan for how we will build on those efforts for the future of the Port. Working alongside state and local partners, we will keep fighting to deliver resources and support so communities across Maryland reap the benefits of a strong and vibrant Port,” said Senator Van Hollen.

“The Port is more than just the pride of Baltimore. It’s a state treasure, and it’s an economic engine for the nation and the rest of the world. Our support for Baltimore and the Port remains strong, because a strong Port makes us better, makes our economy stronger, and makes us more sustainable. We have to continue looking at every opportunity to invest in this economic engine that consumers, businesses, workers, and economies worldwide depend on. And I look forward to working with Team Maryland on Capitol Hill to continue fighting for the resources that keep us on the cutting edge,” said Senator Alsobrooks.

“The Port of Baltimore has always been a mighty force in job creation and economic growth in our state. I was glad to meet with the Maryland Congressional Delegation, Maryland Port Administration leadership, and local Port leaders to discuss the significant economic development accomplishments and opportunities for our nation's exports out of Baltimore. Investing in our infrastructure and transportation systems at the Port will improve shipping capacity, competitiveness, and business opportunities for the communities across Maryland that depend on the port. The delegation will continue working with our federal, state, and local partners to secure the investments needed to strengthen the Port of Baltimore, grow our economy, and create jobs here in Maryland and across the country,” said Congressman Hoyer.

“The Port of Baltimore is a booming economic gateway for the Free State and the nation,” said Congressman Raskin. “While President Trump’s chaotic and costly trade war and tariffs have reduced imports, Team Maryland will continue fighting for the federal funding needed to keep the port an accessible, attractive destination for the largest cargo ships and create more high-paying union jobs.”

“The Port of Baltimore has been able to survive ups and downs of the economy for over 100 years. Now, the President’s economic strategy that prioritizes tariffs over jobs is adding additional hardship. The President’s ongoing, illegal war in Iran is driving up the cost to ship everything, which directly impacts our port and our economy. But Team Maryland will be able to overcome that. We're in Washington and working together to deliver, not just for the Port, not just for the 2,400 Longshoremen who work in the Port, but for our economy and state as a whole,” said Congresswoman Elfreth. “To write the future of the Port of Baltimore, we will be taking inspiration from what once was – back to the Baltimore clippers and the hundreds of Liberty ships built during World War II. It is time for Maryland to lead in shipbuilding and maritime manufacturing once again.”",1,2026-09-26T09:43:57Z,2026-09-26T09:44:55Z
https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/news/press-releases/alsobrooks-liccardo-call-on-director-pulte-to-prioritize-missing-middle-housing-funding/,"ALSOBROOKS, LICCARDO CALL ON DIRECTOR PULTE TO PRIORITIZE “MISSING MIDDLE” HOUSING FUNDING",2026-09-24,2026,2026-09,Democrat,Senate,MD,Angela D. Alsobrooks,A000382,www.alsobrooks.senate.gov,alsobrooks,https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/,scraper,"September 24, 2026

WASHINGTON, DC – As reported today in POLITICO’s Morning Money, Senator Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), member of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, and Congressman Sam Liccardo (D-Calif.-16) are urging Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) Director Bill Pulte to encourage more lending toward “missing middle” multifamily affordable housing through reforms to the Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) system.

“There is a clear need for more housing developments in this range (5-to-49 units) in urban and rural communities across the country. But too often, developers of condominiums and rental properties in the 5-to-49-unit range face a financing gap: the developments are too large for conventional lending for single-family residential development, but too small to attract institutional capital,” wrote the lawmakers.

The lawmakers encouraged Director Pulte to consider the following steps:

Encourage FHLBanks to prioritize targeted advances and lending products aimed at 5-49-unit construction and rehabilitation to support affordable rental and homeownership opportunities;

Encourage FHLBanks to build underwriting capacity and pilot programs for missing-middle lending; and

Incorporate missing-middle lending data into future reports to the National Economic Council, Office of Management and Budget, and Congress.

See below or here for the full letter:

Dear Director Pulte:

As federal agencies begin to implement the 21st Century Road to Housing Act (Public Law No: 119-101) and the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) responds to Executive Order 14393 (“Promoting Access to Mortgage Credit”), we urge FHFA to use its existing authority as regulator of the Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) System to direct more capital toward “missing middle” housing: 5-to-49-unit multifamily housing developments for ownership and rental.

There is a clear need for more housing developments in this range in urban and rural communities across the country. But too often, developers of condominiums and rental properties in the 5-to-49-unit range face a financing gap: the developments are too large for conventional lending for single-family residential development, (which is defined as 1-4 units) but too small to attract institutional capital. Senator Catherine Cortez Masto and outside experts Aaron Klein and Chris Hughes have outlined a good case for action. According to 2026 data and a Congressional Budget Office study, the FHLB system holds $1.43 trillion in assets and receives an estimated $7 billion per year implicit federal guarantee on its debt. FHLBs are statutorily required to allocate ten percent of net income towards affordable housing and in recent years have voluntarily allocated more, positioning them uniquely to close this financing gap. Multifamily construction starts have fallen more than thirty percent since 2022 as financing costs have risen. According to the Klein/Hughes study, directing a larger share of FHLB advances towards below-market loans for missing-middle buildings could support tens of thousands of additional housing units using the System’s existing balance sheet without any additional federal spending through appropriations.

This is an area where FHFA can make real progress using tools at its disposal at no cost to taxpayers that is also squarely within the intent of Executive Order 14393, which directs the FHFA to consider “creating targeted FHLB liquidity programs for entry-level housing, owner-occupied purchase loans, and small residential builders” and facilitating “greater financial leverage for small-scale…housing projects.” EO 14393 is clearly intended to improve capital flows towards important housing construction, of which 5-49 unit developments should be prioritized.

As you implement EO 14393 using your existing authority, we encourage FHFA to consider steps such as:

Encourage FHLBanks to prioritize targeted advances and lending products aimed at 5-49-unit construction and rehabilitation to support affordable rental and homeownership opportunities;

Encourage FHLBanks to build underwriting capacity and pilot programs for missing-middle lending; and

Incorporate missing-middle lending data into future reports to the National Economic Council, Office of Management and Budget, and Congress.

We welcome the opportunity to discuss this further with you. Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

###",1,2026-09-25T10:04:52Z,2026-09-25T10:05:46Z
https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/news/press-releases/alsobrooks-no-on-fda-commissioner/,ALSOBROOKS ‘NO’ ON FDA COMMISSIONER,2026-09-24,2026,2026-09,Democrat,Senate,MD,Angela D. Alsobrooks,A000382,www.alsobrooks.senate.gov,alsobrooks,https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/,scraper,"September 24, 2026

WASHINGTON, DC – Today, Senator Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.) questioned Dr. Heidi Overton, President Trump’s nominee to be Commissioner of Food and Drugs for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Senator Alsobrooks questioned Dr. Heidi Overton about whether she believes that birth control contaminates our drinking water, and her awareness regarding how much money the tobacco industry has contributed to President Trump, in relation to the Administration’s rollback of e-cigarette regulations. Dr. Overton did not answer the questions.

Dr. Overton will be regulating both pharmaceutical products and tobacco products if she is confirmed to lead the FDA.

On birth control:

Senator Alsobrooks: Do you have any reason to believe that birth control contaminates our drinking water in our country?

Dr. Overton: My job will be to work within the FDA statutory requirements for individual product review for safety and efficacy determination. What the EPA, to your question, the EPA is outside of the jurisdiction of the FDA. I think it’s important for all agencies to answer questions that American people might have.

Senator Alsobrooks: Do you have any reason to believe that taking birth control, that women are contaminating our drinking water in our country by taking birth control?

Dr. Overton: Thank you for the question. If confirmed as FDA commissioner, I will work within what the FDA is required to do for individual product review for the safety and efficacy of those applications, post-market review and of those individual products.

On Big Tobacco spending:

Senator Alsobrooks: I want to know whether or not you know how much money Big Tobacco has contributed to the President’s super PAC, inauguration, or to his ballroom?

Dr. Overton: Those are not things that I’m familiar with.

Senator Alsobrooks: I know you’ve been a senior advisor to him, but the answer is $20 million.

And do you know how much the President owns in tobacco stocks? I think these are questions the American people deserve to know. The answer is $1.64 million the President holds in Philip Morris and holds Altria investments.

Would you say that the President then has a vested personal financial interest in the success of the tobacco industry? Is that a fair statement?

Dr. Overton: I reject the framing of that. The President’s interest is in the best outcomes for the American people. He is here to serve in that capacity.

Senator Alsobrooks: But you acknowledge that he is an investor in Big Tobacco. He has earned $1.64 million.

###",1,2026-09-25T10:04:52Z,2026-09-25T10:05:46Z
https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/news/press-releases/alsobrooks-wyden-continue-to-build-the-case-against-rfk-jr-8/,"Alsobrooks, Wyden Continue to Build the Case Against RFK Jr.",2026-09-24,2026,2026-09,Democrat,Senate,MD,Angela D. Alsobrooks,A000382,www.alsobrooks.senate.gov,alsobrooks,https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/,scraper,"After releasing a report chronicling every day of RFK Jr.’s costly, chaotic, and corrupt reign as Secretary, Senators Alsobrooks and Wyden continue to build their case for why RFK Jr. must resign or be fired.

September 24, 2026

WASHINGTON, DC – RFK Jr. continues to harm the American people. On September 4, 2025, Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Ron Wyden and Senator Angela Alsobrooksreleased a report chronicling the actions that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has taken to undermine the health and safety of the American people since becoming Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). On February 18, 2026, they released an updated report covering his first full year as Secretary. Senators Wyden and Alsobrooks continue to track the pervasive and ongoing human harmcaused by his leadership.

Below are Kennedy’s latest harmful actions (May 15 – September 20):

May 2026

The White House issued an executive order straight from Kennedy’s wish list: directing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and its Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) to “take any appropriate steps to update the United States childhood and adolescent vaccine schedule” in line with the recommendations made by Kennedy’s team at HHS. Under Kennedy’s leadership, HHS has recommended reducing the number of childhood vaccinations from 17 to 11, exposing U.S. children to the serious and unnecessary risks of contracting a deadly disease.

In his endless quest to find support for the conspiracy theory that vaccines cause autism, Kennedy announced his intent to tap into Americans’ private medical records and create what amounts to a national autism registry. He announced a “real-world platform” that will mine patient records from Medicare and Medicaid, which collectively cover 40% of Americans, to “uncover the root causes of autism and other chronic diseases.” Kennedy and his team did not specify what kinds of research would be conducted or what kinds of privacy protections would apply to the data.

After castigating the panel charged with determining screening coverage for breast and cervical cancer to Congress and undermining its work,Kennedy fired the leaders of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), following thesame pattern he used to politicize the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB)published a proposed rule referred to as the “Uniform Guidance” that would “expand political control of scientific grants, downgrade the role of peer review and effectively limit researchers’ ability to disseminate their findings.” Ultimately, the rule would allow political appointees to cancel grants if recipients do not conform to the President’s–or Kennedy’s–political views.

June 2026

Under Kennedy’s leadership, Americans continue to lose health insurance coverage. 3 million Americans have dropped or lost their ACA marketplace coverage in 2026, many of whom are working and middle-class Americans who can no longer afford the premiums that skyrocketed after Kennedy and Republicans failed to extend middle-class tax credits beyond January 1, 2026. In testimony before Congress, completely indifferent to the struggle of these families, Kennedy said: “The only people who lost coverage were people who were never entitled to coverage.” This statement is false.

The American Medical Association elected a fiercely vocal critic of Kennedy as its next president. Dr. Sandra Fryhofer has said that continuing to deal pragmatically with Kennedy would be an abdication of physicians’ moral duty, and she cited “measles running rampant, public health destroyed, a trillion dollars ripped from Medicaid, inadequate physician payment, stupid immigration rules” as reasons the AMA must resist Kennedy and the Trump Administration more forcefully. She has called Kennedy “the anti-vax HHS secretary” and expressed frustration and regret that the AMA did not do more to block his confirmation.

Continuing his efforts to mine patient data, Kennedy is seekingaccess to Americans’ highly sensitive medical records–things like clinical notes, lab results, and diagnoses–from state-run health information exchange systems, as part of his effort to “investigate” and connect vaccines to autism. This raises major privacy and legal concerns. Over and over again, Kennedy has proven that he is willing to do anything – including things beyond his legal authority – to support his conspiracy theories.

Under Kennedy’s leadership, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) issued an interim final rule (IFR) that dictates how states must implement the Medicaid work reporting requirements that congressional Republicans enacted last year. The rule creates a bureaucratic maze that will make it harder for Americans to access care when they need it most. As an example of the rule’s most draconian provisions, Medicaid enrollees who suffer from chronic illnesses, like cancer or HIV, are still required to work during periods when the government has determined that their illness is not serious enough to prevent them from working; the penalty for failure to comply is losing their Medicaid coverage–while navigating a serious chronic illness. Every Senate Democrat denounced the rule and called for its withdrawal.

23 states and the District of Columbia sued Kennedy and HHS, asking a federal court to enjoin and vacate the Medicaid work reporting requirements IFR. The states argued in their complaint that the rule exceeds the agency’s statutory authority, will strip benefits from eligible enrollees due to paperwork errors, will place enormous administrative burdens on state governments, and will force hospitals to provide much more uncompensated emergency care as medically frail Americans lose their Medicaid coverage.

Kennedy’s incompetence is apparent even to other members of the President’s cabinet, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio is attempting to clean up Kennedy’s mess. Testifying before Congress, Rubio said that the State Department is “going to re-engage” on global vaccines after Kennedy withdrew the U.S. from the global vaccine alliance and withheld $600 million previously appropriated by Congress. This program provides immunizations to people living in low-income countries around the world, and it manages the global stockpile of Ebola vaccines.

Americans are already facing dire consequences from the “horrendous” rollout of CMS’ WISeR model. Under Kennedy’s leadership, the WISeR pilot program is using artificial intelligence to delay and deny certain procedures covered by traditional Medicare. Seniors now face needless prior authorization for care that their providers ordered. CMS Administrator Oz illustrated how clueless and callous Kennedy’s team can be: Oz defended WISeR by criticizing frontline health care providers and saying that the purpose of WISeR is to make sure patients are not getting “the care some unscrupulous doctor wants to use on you.”

Kennedy engaged in unlawful election interference in at least two Congressional races. Reports emerged that he has personally called two Libertarian candidates for Congress in Iowa and urged them to drop out of their respective races so that it is easier for Republicans to win those seats and to maintain their majority in the House of Representatives. Kennedy reportedly said to one such candidate, “If this seat flips, it’ll make my life hell.”

Senator Sanders publicly released a tranche of emails that reveal new details about how Kennedy has tried to seize control of apolitical public health systems at the CDC to undermine vaccine access. One email chain shows a CDC staffer writing, “Andrew Nixon/HHS…asked that we pull out of circulation all campaign ad buys related to flu or anything encouraging shots or vaccinations.” The same chain shows Andrew Nixon confirming, “This was a direct ask from Secretary Kennedy.”

July 2026

Under Kennedy’s leadership, measles cases have reached an all-time high since the virus was declared eliminated in the United States in 2000. As of July, there have been more measles cases reported in the first six months of 2026 than in any other full year since 2000. At the same time, Kennedy has interrupted funding for vaccine hesitancy research, has downplayed the risks of measles in his public comments, and continues to hunt for evidence that vaccines are unsafe.

Under Kennedy’s leadership, a cyclospora outbreak continues to tear through 15 states and counting. There have been more cases of cyclospora reported in the United States this year than ever before, and as the case count climbs, CDC’s FoodNet has recently stopped its mandatory reporting for cyclospora and other pathogens due to funding cuts. The foodborne parasite causes severe diarrhea and nausea, leaving infants, seniors, and immunocompromised persons especially vulnerable. Kennedy said that the outbreak is “under control” and that funding cuts to the FoodNet program were cuts to “redundant surveillance.” Mere weeks later, the first two deaths from cyclospora were reported in Michigan.

Under Kennedy’s leadership, the Trump Administration is working to defund and dismantle the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program, abruptly canceling 53 of the program’s 67 grants nationwide. The Administration’s guidelines for the next round of grants require prospective grantees to teach that abstinence is the only way to prevent teen pregnancy, and that “marriage and procreation” are important. Several grantees who were abruptly stripped of their funding sued Kennedy, arguing that “Congress plainly did not intend H.H.S. to focus on teaching young women strategies to become pregnant in a pregnancy prevention program.”

For the fourth time, Kennedy has prevented the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) from meeting as planned; the panel has not convened in person since March 2025. USPSTF has historically met three times a year to review evidence and make recommendations that determine what insurance companies are required to cover when it comes to mammograms, colonoscopies, depression screenings, and other primary and preventive care. Kennedy has fired two of the task force’s leaders, refused to replace members whose terms expired, and hamstrung the task force’s ability to operate as usual.

A federal district court enjoined much of CMS’s 2027 Notice of Benefit Payment Parameters final rule. The rule, which was slated to become effective July 20 and was finalized under Kennedy’s leadership, would have raised out-of-pocket maximums for certain bronze and catastrophic plans, pushed more Americans into these catastrophic plans, and loosened federal network adequacy requirements. Before the court’s injunction, the rule had been widely criticized, and the American Hospital Association noted in its comment letter that the rule would allow deductibles over $15,000 on some catastrophic plans–a “deductible amount [that] itself could easily be considered catastrophic for many individuals in these income ranges.”

Under Kennedy’s leadership, CMS continues to endanger patients and their families by sharing Medicaid enrollment data with Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in defiance of a federal judge’s order to pause all data sharing. In December 2025, U.S. District Court Judge Vince Chhabria ruled that CMS was permitted to share a narrow universe of Medicaid data–only some information about persons without lawful immigration status residing in plaintiff states. In January, however, CMS twice shared data with ICE that went beyond what the December 2025 order had allowed, including records identifying U.S. citizens and refugees; in response to this revelation, Judge Chhabria ordered CMS to pause all data sharing with ICE in late May. During this pause, CMS again shared the same dataset that was improperly shared in January–files that include the names and addresses of U.S. citizens and persons residing in the United States with lawful immigration status.

Kennedy continues using his government position to undermine vaccines and enrich himself personally. On the same day that Dr. Anthony Fauci testified before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Kennedy was busy posting on social media that his book about Dr. Fauci became a “bestseller…despite being the most censored book of the decade.” The hearing reportedly resulted in a spike in book sales, and Kennedy’s royalties go directly to the organization he previously founded to undermine vaccine access.

Under Kennedy’s leadership, the CDC updated a footnote on its “Autism and Vaccines” webpage to say: “Scientists have not identified the root causes of autism. HHS continues to support rigorous scientific research and will update this page as reliable new evidence becomes available.” The webpage still declares front and center, however, that “the claim ‘vaccines do not cause autism’ is not an evidence-based claim because studies have not ruled out the possibility that infant vaccines cause autism.” This statement is false. Vaccines do not cause autism; this is a fact well supported by decades of scientific literature.

In a disastrous interview on CNN, Kennedy said that he bears no responsibility for the current measles outbreak and said, “The reason we’re having a measles outbreak is because of the Covid lockdowns.” This is patently untrue.

Kennedy continues to interfere with federal vaccine panel priorities. The National Vaccine Advisory Committee quietly unveiled new guidance which adds dietary supplements for infectious disease prevention to the panel’s scope and directs the committee to consider “healthy lifestyle” strategies, off-label uses of existing drugs, and supplements for people who decline vaccination. Kennedy is using federal vaccine infrastructure to elevate alternative-health talking points over proven immunization strategies. The panel Congress created to strengthen immunization is now being used to develop talking points for avoiding it.

August 2026

Under Kennedy’s leadership, the HHS Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) has awarded $150 million for the legal representation of unaccompanied children in immigration proceedings to a small law firm in Houston. Burke Law Group has only 26 attorneys, none of whom had publicly claimed immigration and asylum law experience prior to the announcement of the award. Until July 31, ORR had a contract for this vital legal work with the Acacia Center for Justice, a group that marshaled best-in-class immigration lawyers, with decades of experience representing unaccompanied children, from over 100 nonprofit organizations across the country. This abrupt and unexplainable shift will leave more than 20,000 children to appear in immigration court with inadequate legal representation–or with none at all.

Trump – with Kennedy at his side – signed yet another executive order in August, attempting again to overhaul federal vaccine recommendations, lowering the number of recommended immunizations from 18 to 11, pressuring states to change their vaccine policies, and directing federal health agencies to develop a plan for administering combined shots – like the MMR vaccine – as separate, single disease injections, despite health experts agreeing there is“no scientific basis for changing course.” Trump continues to spread lies about the MMR vaccine, including by saying that it could be “quite lethal,” an outlandish claim that is uniformly rejected by clinicians, experts, and fact-checkers.

Kennedycancelled over $250 million in grants administered by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), impacting over 200 different research projects across nearly 30 states. These grants aim to improve patient safety, outcomes, and health care delivery, with some specifically focused on training rural health care workers, improving delivery systems for dialysis patients, and improving autism services. A project in Maryland aimed at improving patient safety via telehealth was cancelled as part of the reckless cuts. The official cancellation capped a long delay in funding for these projects, with researchers left waiting in the dark to learn more about their status. Despite Congress appropriating $345 million to AHRQ, less than $15 million has actually gone out the door to grantees.

The American Medical Association, the American Academy of Family Physicians, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists rebuked Kennedy’s latest sham vaccine guidance bydelivering their own independent vaccine evidence review and guidance on the flu, COVID, and RSV vaccines. The nation’s leading medical societies were forced to create their own vaccine guidance because of the lack of credible information coming out of Kennedy’s HHS.

Kennedy visited the CDC’s headquarters on the anniversary of the tragic shooting at the campus last year – which was fueled, in part, by Kennedy’s own vaccine misinformation. Instead of recognizing the consequences of his harmful rhetoric, Kennedyquestioned scientists, telling civil servants at the agency that “you can’t just trust a scientist, because scientists have biases, too,” and accusing CDC scientists of “all hoarding their own data.”Kennedy has long been fighting for his anti-vaccine cronies to have direct access to the sensitive data from the agency’s vaccine-safety surveillance system.

Kennedy’s efforts to undermine trust in vaccines and public health systems continue to have deadly consequences. Pennsylvania announced two measles-associated deaths in Lancaster County, the state’s first such deaths since 1991. Following the deaths,Governor Shapiro said that Kennedy’s “actions and his rhetoric coming from this administration are having a negative impact on communities across America, particularly right here in Pennsylvania. That there’s real-life consequences to spreading misinformation.” Kennedy then publicly cast doubt on whether measles was responsible and suggested that the deaths may have been ‘fabricated.’ He also postedan incoherent screed on social media about how the MMR vaccine is composed of aborted fetal tissue, citing depositions from vaccine opponent and close professional ally, Aaron Siri.

New documents and reporting prove thatKennedy lied to Congress in his confirmation hearings. Kennedy repeatedly told lawmakers, including Ranking Member Wyden, last year that his 2019 visit to Samoa before its deadly measles outbreak “had nothing to do with vaccines.” Yet, letters show that Kennedy wrote to Samoan leaders on Children’s Health Defense letterhead, asking to study Samoa’s use of the MMR vaccine. Kennedy wrote to the Prime Minister on January 20, 2019: “I would propose my team conduct [a] detailed health informatics assessment in Samoa of what happened with your MMR vaccines.” Senator Wyden has called for the Department of Justice to launch a criminal investigation into Kennedy’s lies: “RFK’s platform is built on lies and grifts that leave a trail of dead children in their wake. There are consequences for lying to Congress.”

September 2026

Despite the rampant measles outbreaks on Kennedy’s watch, including two additional measles-associated deaths in Pennsylvania, the CDCalleged it “did not have any records to indicate ‘measles is the underlying cause’ of any deaths in the country this year.” Kennedy refuses to take any responsibility for his role in this crisis, and he works to deny and downplay it. He asked CDC Director Dr. Erica Schwartz to remove two Pennsylvania deaths from the CDC’s online measles tally, and she implemented his request.

Kennedy’s war against reproductive rights has spilled over to other federal agencies: the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced it will now test drinking water for the presence of abortion medications like mifepristone and misoprostol, as well as for contraceptives. Senator Wyden has previously condemned this tactic as “a shadow war on reproductive rights” and “an egregious abuse of power.”

Over a year after Kennedy worked with Congressional Republicans to kill enhanced Affordable Care Act premium tax credits and kick people off their coverage, Americans who buy their own coverage are nowincreasingly being steered toward short term limited-duration health plans instead of comprehensive marketplace coverage.

Kennedy gave the keynote address to the anti-vaccine organization he used to run, Children’s Health Defense. He spent more than 20 minutes casting doubt on the safety of vaccines and attempting to falsely connect adverse events and chronic disease with pediatric immunizations. At the same conference, the current President of the MAHA Institute called the success of the polio vaccine “a massive medical fraud.” The polio vaccine saves lives.

As Kennedy continues to sow chaos and paralysis across federal health agencies, states have not been able to obtain COVID-19 shots from the CDC for distribution to millions of children who rely on the Vaccines for Children program. Asked about the delay, HHS said it is “finalizing decisions,” all while COVID levels climb and medically fragile children wait.

In the latest example of Kennedy’s corruption, the Secretary and top aide Stefanie Spearused military aircraft for his travels to campaign for Republican candidates – a clear breach of protocol for non-defense Cabinet officials. The Air Force jet that Kennedy used costs about $9,000 per hour – a clear waste of taxpayer dollars for political purposes.

Kennedy continues to personally and financially benefit from his position: hereportedly received $250,000 in gifts towards lavish vacations from a major donor, including free flights to Fiji and Greece.

Kennedy took what reporting described as a“backdoor approach to stop vaccines” by purging experts from important federal advisory committees and replacing them with unqualified anti-vaccine ideologues and allies.

After previously attempting to shutter the Office of Minority Health, Kennedy and his team abruptly cancelled half of the office’s existing grants. The affected grantees had been providing cancer screenings and postpartum home visits as well as working to reduce first responder suicide and to lower the obesity rates among Native American youth. It was subsequently reported that HHS told Congressional appropriators it would move $12 million from the Office of Minority Health directly to the Secretary’s office to cover rising costs for RFK’s personal security detail.

Kennedy’s handpicked nominees to help lead his Department – including Chris Klomp to be the Deputy Secretary, Nicole Saphier to be Surgeon General, and Timothy Westlake to run the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration – faced hearings at both the Senate Finance and Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committees. At both hearings, the MAHA aspirants demonstrated that they would immediately fall in line as Kennedy’s lieutenants. Chris Klomp, who negotiated the White House’s secretive drug pricing deals with pharmaceutical companies, continued making excuses for his failure to share the agreements with Congress.

After delaying its meetings for over a year and a half, bashing its members as “lackadaisical and negligent,” and firing its leaders in May, Kennedyannounced eight new appointments to the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). USPSTF is the committee that determines what preventive screenings or medical services must be covered free of charge by private insurance. Many of the new appointees share Kennedy’s vaccine skepticism.

###",1,2026-09-25T10:04:52Z,2026-09-25T10:05:46Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/maryland-congressional-delegation-announces-86-million-to-increase-safety-and-security-in-places-of-worship,Maryland Congressional Delegation Announces $8.6 Million to Increase Safety and Security in Places of Worship,2026-09-24,2026,2026-09,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen and Angela Alsobrooks and U.S. Representatives Steny Hoyer, Kweisi Mfume, Andy Harris, Jamie Raskin, Glenn Ivey, Sarah Elfreth, April McClain Delaney, and Johnny Olszewski announced $8,627,091 in federal funding to strengthen security at 49 religious institutions and community centers across Maryland.

“Every Marylander deserves to be able to exercise their right to religious freedom and worship without fear for their safety. Our faith institutions also help build community in many ways, from providing spiritual services to offering youth programs to supporting local families. As that work continues, we have also seen an appalling increase in threats against faith-based organizations across the state, and we know that more federal funding and reforms are necessary to meet the growing security measures needed to keep community members safe. We will continue working to increase funds for the Nonprofit Security Grant Program and to see that these investments go where they are needed most, in light of recent changes to this program,” said Senator Van Hollen.

“All Marylanders deserve to feel safe in their homes, schools, communities – and especially in places of worship. It was critical that Team Maryland fight to secure over $8 million in federal funding to strengthen security at religious centers in our state. And I won’t stop fighting until all Marylanders feel and are safe,” said Senator Alsobrooks.

“The Nonprofit Security Grant Program has become an essential tool for protecting our houses of worship, schools, community centers, and early-childhood programs. With the alarming rise in antisemitism and other forms of hate, it is critical that everyone feels safe when gathering with their communities and congregations. I’m proud that Team Maryland was able to secure this funding, and I will continue working with our delegation to push for further federal support for nonprofit security,” said Congressman Steny H. Hoyer.

“No matter what your faith or religion is every American should feel safe and secure in their ability to worship peacefully,” said Congressman Kweisi Mfume. “With this injection of over $8 million in Federal funding, dozens of faith-based institutions across Maryland will be able to improve their security systems and protocols, ensuring that houses of worship remain sanctuaries for practitioners of all beliefs.”

“Marylanders should be able to practice their faith without worrying about their safety. This funding will improve security at religious institutions across the First District, from Harford County to the Eastern Shore. Thank you to President Trump and the Department of Homeland Security for helping Maryland’s religious organizations improve security and protect our communities,” said Congressman Harris.

“Amidst an alarming increase in antisemitism, Islamophobia and other forms of toxic hate, Team Maryland is surging more than $8.6 million in federal Nonprofit Security Grants to protect our people,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin (MD-08). “No American should become a target of senseless violence and intimidation, especially in their house of worship.”

“Every Marylander should be able to worship and gather without fear,” said Congressman Ivey. “Team Maryland fought together to secure this federal funding so that faith communities across our state have the resources they need to strengthen security and protect the people they serve. I’m proud of our delegation’s work to deliver these investments and help keep Marylanders safe.”

“Marylanders of all faiths deserve to both be safe and feel safe in their houses of worship. Since coming to Congress, I have continued to prioritize increased security funding for nonprofit and religious institutions – both in Washington in the budget and through our Interfaith Advisory Council – which is why it is so great to join Team Maryland in announcing this $8 million in federal funding for 49 houses of worship, religious institutions, and community centers across our state. Especially as religious institutions spend more and more on security and the number of hate crimes continues to rise, Congress has an important responsibility to ensure the safety of all of our neighbors,” said Congresswoman Elfreth.

“Whether you are walking into a church, synagogue, mosque, temple, or community center, you should never have to fear for your safety. Freedom of religion means the freedom to worship without fear. This $8.6 million investment will help 49 institutions across Maryland strengthen security and protect the communities they serve. I’ll keep working with Team Maryland to ensure our faith communities have the resources they need to keep people safe,” said Congresswoman McClain Delaney.

“Our faith communities are critical community anchors and bring so many Marylanders together,” said Congressman Johnny Olszewski (MD-02). “This funding gives 49 religious institutions and community centers across our state the resources they need to worship, learn, and gather without fear. Team Maryland will keep fighting to make sure our houses of worship have what they need to stay safe.”

A full list of the recipients, selected by the Department of Homeland Security, is below:

Western Maryland

B'er Chayim Congregation

Beth Sholom Congregation of Frederick, MD

Broadfording Bible Brethren Church

Broadfording Bible Brethren Church DBA Global Vision Christian School Broadfording (Main Campus)

Broadfording Bible Brethren Church DBA Global Vision Christian School Broadfording (West Campus)

Camp Airy

Camp Louise

Saints Peter and Paul Greek Orthodox Church

Baltimore Area

Arundel Christian Church

Beth Tfiloh Congregation dba Beth Tfiloh Camps

Cecil Memorial United Methodist Church

Chabad of Greengate Maryland Inc.

Chabad of Harford County, Inc.

Congregation Kneseth Israel

Hebrew School of the Performing Arts, Inc.

Immaculate Heart of Mary School

Immaculate Heart of Mary Church

Jewels Therapy Clinic

John Carroll School Inc.

Redemption City Church Baltimore

Safe Green Transit Corporation

Sts. Constantine & Helen Greek Orthodox Church

St. Philip Neri Roman Catholic Church

Talmudical Academy of Baltimore Inc.

The Cathedral of Mary Our Queen

The Greek Orthodox Cemetery

West Baltimore United Methodist Church

Montgomery & Prince George’s Counties

Chabad Lubavitch of Bowie Maryland Inc

Chabad Lubavitch of Upper Montgomery County Inc.

Charles E. Smith Jewish Day School (Lower School)

Congregation B'nai Tzedek

Covenant Life Church (7501)

Covenant Life School (7503)

Covenant Life School/Church (7505)

Greater Praise and Deliverance Tabernacle

Greek Orthodox Church of Saint George, Inc.

Israel on Campus Coalition, Inc.

Imadi

Kehilat Pardes

Kingdom Full Tabernacle International Ministries

Life Changing Christian Center

McLean Bible Church (Montgomery)

North Brentwood AME Zion Church

The Guru Gobind Singh Foundation Trust Inc

The Sierra Leone Muslim Jamaat, Inc. (3305)

Tikvat Israel Congregation

Southern Maryland

Camp St. Charles Inc.

Crossroads Christian Center, Inc.

Eastern Shore

Lighthouse Christian Academy

The awards are provided through the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Nonprofit Security Grant Program, which helps high-risk nonprofits, including faith-based institutions, obtain the resources required to support and integrate preparedness activities with broader state and local efforts. The lawmakers fought to fund the Nonprofit Security Grant Program at $300 million through the Fiscal Year 2026 annual appropriations package, an increase from $274.5 million in Fiscal Year 2025.",1,2026-09-25T10:04:52Z,2026-09-25T10:05:46Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-more-than-15-senate-democrats-push-trump-to-negotiate-ai-guardrails-with-xi,"Van Hollen, More than 15 Senate Democrats Push Trump to Negotiate AI Guardrails with Xi",2026-09-23,2026,2026-09,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) led more than 15 of his colleagues in calling on President Donald Trump to negotiate a formal agreement between the U.S. and China on guardrails and global standards for the development, testing, and use of frontier Artificial Intelligence (AI) models with Chinese President Xi Jinping. The lawmakers also urged President Trump to consider enacting a mutual pause in frontier AI development to prevent potential cyberattacks, the development of biological weapons, and other dangerous activities that could threaten humanity.

Senator Van Hollen was joined in sending this letter by Senators Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), and Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.).

The lawmakers begin, “We write concerning public reporting that your administration plans to have discussions about artificial intelligence with China during the upcoming summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping currently planned for September 24, 2026. We support this dialogue and encourage you to have those discussions at the highest level. As extraordinary as the promise of some of AI’s advanced capabilities are, safety incidents make clear that both national and international infrastructure is threatened by unregulated testing and release of AI models. It is incumbent upon both governments to discuss necessary guardrails and global standards for the development, testing, and use of AI in order to mitigate the risks of unfettered advancement. As you prepare for the upcoming summit, we urge you to engage with President Xi directly to discuss efforts to avoid the potential harms of this technology for the safety and benefit of the world. America leads in AI innovation, and we must lead the world in AI safety and international cooperation, including by working with China to develop a formal agreement that would slow down, and potentially enact a mutual pause in, frontier AI development to prevent cyberattacks, the development of biological weapons, and other dangerous activities that threaten the lives of the American people and humanity writ large.”

They note specifically, “The conversations should include specific focus on the standards needed for development and testing processes, oversight and monitoring of models, enforcing human control over the use of autonomous systems, and technological verification of any agreed upon terms to ensure that an agreement is being enforced. Protecting American safety and leadership in AI will require international cooperation with many countries, but it must start with serious engagement by your administration and China at this summit.”

“AI technology is too powerful, and its risks too many, for the U.S. and China to forgo discussions on parameters around its development and use. What our two countries develop as guardrails will serve as a standard for how the technology is used worldwide. Given how quickly AI technology is developing and how transformative it may be, we cannot delay our pursuit of diplomatic efforts to mitigate its risks. Those efforts must start with direct engagement with China to ensure the safety and well-being of all people as AI innovation continues,” the lawmakers conclude.

The full text of the letter is available here and below.

President Trump:

We write concerning public reporting that your administration plans to have discussions about artificial intelligence with China during the upcoming summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping currently planned for September 24, 2026. We support this dialogue and encourage you to have those discussions at the highest level. As extraordinary as the promise of some of AI’s advanced capabilities are, safety incidents make clear that both national and international infrastructure is threatened by unregulated testing and release of AI models. It is incumbent upon both governments to discuss necessary guardrails and global standards for the development, testing, and use of AI in order to mitigate the risks of unfettered advancement. As you prepare for the upcoming summit, we urge you to engage with President Xi directly to discuss efforts to avoid the potential harms of this technology for the safety and benefit of the world. America leads in AI innovation, and we must lead the world in AI safety and international cooperation, including by working with China to develop a formal agreement that would slow down, and potentially enact a mutual pause in, frontier AI development to prevent cyberattacks, the development of biological weapons, and other dangerous activities that threaten the lives of the American people and humanity writ large.

The development, release, and proper and improper use of AI present several risks unique to this technology. Testing AI models without constant monitoring and safe sandboxing has resulted in security breaks. Current publicly available models are concerningly capable of detecting and exploiting cybersecurity vulnerabilities. Companies developing AI have even more powerful models internally. An international race between the U.S. and China to advance these capabilities without safety guardrails, as is currently unfolding, poses unnecessary and dangerous risks to the American people. CIA Director John Ratcliffe recently said that it would “not be misplaced” to refer to the capabilities of AI as “akin to digital nuclear weapons.” At the same time, despite serious warnings from those in your administration and bipartisan Congressional action, your administration has loosened export controls of semiconductors to China and refused to close relevant loopholes on the remaining regulations, enabling China to access the U.S. chips it needs to accelerate its own AI development. Both countries are currently integrating AI tools into military and defense applications, including in autonomous and unmanned systems, which Congress and AI developers alike have warned against without significant safeguards. AI has many applications and many of them are tools we will find beneficial, but its significant dangers and potential use in lethal applications without meaningful human control must be addressed, in part, through international cooperation.

In addition, efforts to engage with China should not stop the U.S. from constructing and implementing guardrails domestically, and Congress and U.S. companies should not wait to do so. In fact, both the U.S. and the Chinese government have already put some guardrails in place, but these provisions are not sufficient on their own. Your administration has implemented a voluntary testing scheme before the public release of advanced AI models. China reportedly has put in place several testing and capability restrictions, including registration and safety requirements for certain applications, although consistent implementation remains uncertain. The mutual recognition between the two countries that AI poses significant risks both during development and after release should be the foundation of discussions centered on reaching concrete terms for an international safety agreement. The conversations should include specific focus on the standards needed for development and testing processes, oversight and monitoring of models, enforcing human control over the use of autonomous systems, and technological verification of any agreed upon terms to ensure that an agreement is being enforced. Protecting American safety and leadership in AI will require international cooperation with many countries, but it must start with serious engagement by your administration and China at this summit.

While advanced AI may be new, engagement between two superpowers over a technology that poses an existential threat is not. The U.S. and Soviet Union, over decades, negotiated and implemented multiple nuclear arms control agreements with each other, despite many deep-seated ideological differences during the Cold War. At the core of those agreements were verification mechanisms to ensure both countries were complying. Like those agreements that have helped keep the world safe from mutually assured destruction, identifying and coming to terms with the technical specifications for AI safety will require some of the smartest minds in the world committed to diplomacy. We encourage you to embrace these challenges because the stakes are existential, and our response must match the moment.

The experts building frontier AI models have also been raising concerns for some time that the capabilities of AI models may soon accelerate beyond our ability to understand or control them. In July, over 1,300 employees of frontier AI companies, who are uniquely aware of AI’s potential and risks, called on the U.S. government to engage in an international effort to create the tools necessary to pace the frontier of AI development, particularly as increased automation of AI research may lead to even faster advancement. We should take these warnings seriously. Former Treasury Secretaries Henry Paulson and Robert Rubin recently published an op-ed calling for you and President Xi to work on an “ACT” — AI Cooperation Treaty.” We may not get another moment to take the actions necessary to protect our citizens and people around the world.

AI technology is too powerful, and its risks too many, for the U.S. and China to forgo discussions on parameters around its development and use. What our two countries develop as guardrails will serve as a standard for how the technology is used worldwide. Given how quickly AI technology is developing and how transformative it may be, we cannot delay our pursuit of diplomatic efforts to mitigate its risks. Those efforts must start with direct engagement with China to ensure the safety and well-being of all people as AI innovation continues.",1,2026-09-24T09:44:48Z,2026-09-24T09:45:52Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-booker-davis-adams-introduce-bicameral-bills-to-improve-access-to-care-for-americans-with-sickle-cell-disease,"Van Hollen, Booker, Davis, Adams Introduce Bicameral Bills to Improve Access to Care for Americans with Sickle Cell Disease",2026-09-23,2026,2026-09,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen (D-Md) and Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and U.S. Representatives Danny Davis (D-Ill.) and Alma Adams (D-N.C.) reintroduced two bills to improve access to care for Americans living with sickle cell disease (SCD) – the Sickle Cell Disease Treatment Centers Act, legislation to grow the national network of care for patients with sickle cell disease, and the Sickle Cell Care Expansion Act, legislation to strengthen the medical workforce that treats SCD. The members were joined in introducing both bills by Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and Congressman Glenn Ivey (D-Md.).

In the United States, approximately 100,000 people are affected by SCD, a rare, genetically-inherited disorder that causes a person’s red blood cells to become deformed and get stuck in their veins – blocking oxygen flow throughout the body and leading to chronic pain, infections, stroke, as well as kidney, liver, and heart disease. The disease disproportionately affects Black Americans, but people from other racial and ethnic backgrounds, including Hispanic Americans, are also susceptible. Despite the prevalence of the disease and the need for consistent and coordinated treatment, SCD care is most often accessible only in specialized medical centers in metropolitan areas – resulting in few patients having access to the multidisciplinary care teams and providers they need.

“Sickle cell disease has claimed the lives of too many people far too soon, including a former staff member of mine, John Amara. For Americans living with sickle cell, access to care and qualified providers can be one of the biggest challenges they face. These bills will increase the size and capacity of the medical workforce trained to treat sickle cell, give existing sickle cell centers the capacity to share resources beyond their walls, and help ensure we can more easily expand specialized care and treatment to the countless communities that don’t yet have it. We will not stop fighting to raise awareness, strengthen networks of care and support, and ultimately make sickle cell disease a thing of the past,” said Senator Van Hollen.

“Sickle cell disease has been historically overlooked and underfunded, and people living with it, who are disproportionately Black Americans, face systemic barriers to the care they need to live full, healthy lives,” said Senator Booker. “I'm proud to join my colleagues in introducing these bills, which would invest in training and resources for healthcare providers, raise awareness about SCD and the support available, and establish a national network of treatment centers. Together, they move us toward a future where comprehensive, accessible care for everyone living with sickle cell disease is a right, not a privilege.”

“Considering the significant health challenges that sickle cell disease creates for individuals and families across the United States and around the world, we must invest greater resources in improving awareness, expanding access to comprehensive and coordinated care, advancing better treatments, and supporting research that can lead to new cures,” said Congressman Davis. “For far too many sickle cell warriors, access to specialized care remains limited, particularly for those who live far from major medical centers. The Sickle Cell Disease Treatment Centers Act of 2026 takes an important step toward changing that by strengthening a national network of treatment centers and connecting specialized providers with community health centers and other organizations closer to where patients live.”

“Growing up, my sister Linda was in and out of the emergency department because of sickle cell disease. She lost her battle when she was just 26 years old,” said Congresswoman Adams. “Her story is one that I do not want to see repeated. That’s why I am proud to introduce the Sickle Cell Disease Treatment Centers Act and co-lead the Sickle Cell Disease Care Expansion Act to increase access to specialized care for those suffering from this devastating illness.”

“The Sickle Cell Treatment Act bill enables the creation of the national coordination of care and advancements for sickle cell disease, which is the most prevalent life-threatening chronic illness affecting most ethnicities and races in this country — more than 200,000 individuals along with their families and support systems, all types of medical caregivers in over 10 specialties, researchers, and scientists. Data-driven focus and collaboration for best outcomes and practices for the sickle cell community is imperative as we are in the era of curative therapies, new treatments and medicines, and research enabling better understanding of sickle cell. Likewise, the Sickle Cell Care Expansion Act, providing needed funding of education of the sickle cell family of caregivers — doctors, nurses, researchers, psychologists, social workers, dietitians, phlebotomists, and others — is crucial for providing excellence in care and opportunities for more progress for individuals and families effected by sickle cell disease. Let’s be clear, Sickle Cell disease has been severely underfunded, under-resourced, and undercounted in all areas. We must all pull together — there is more than enough work and room for every organization to contribute to the necessary progress for the improved treatment, access, and outcomes for the sickle cell disease family,” said Kimberley Davis, the Executive Director of KMD Advocacy Center and the mother of John Amara Walters, a member of Senator Van Hollen’s legislative staff who passed away from complications of SCD in 2021 at the age of 29.

“As co-chair of the bipartisan Rare Disease Congressional Caucus, I’m dedicated to making sure every person living with a rare disease, including sickle cell disease, can be swiftly and accurately diagnosed and have access to effective, affordable treatment,” said Senator Klobuchar. “By working together with patients, researchers, advocates, and neighbors, Congress can ensure patients with sickle cell disease have the very best available medical care.”

“I am proud to co-sponsor the Sickle Cell Treatment Centers and Care Expansion Acts and stand with the millions of Americans whose lives have been impacted by sickle cell disease. Across the country, too many families in the Black community continue to suffer from this devastating disease while research remains underfunded and this condition too often goes overlooked. We must do better, and we must act with urgency. I applaud the bipartisan leadership in both chambers of Congress working together to introduce and advance this legislation. Together, we can help deliver the resources and treatment to build a healthier future for generations of African Americans living with sickle cell disease,” said Congressman Ivey.

The Sickle Cell Disease Treatment Centers Act would address the unmet needs of patients with SCD, sickle cell trait, and other inherited blood disorders through the establishment of a nationwide system of treatment centers, as well as much-needed education, outreach, and social services for patients. It establishes a National Sickle Cell Disease Treatment Center Grant Program, which would enable hospitals that offer specialized SCD care to partner with more accessible community health centers and outpatient centers. This would implement a hub-and-spoke framework for the delivery of care and treatment of patients with SCD. The medical hubs and spokes would be required to partner with community-based organizations to provide education and outreach, and help coordinate social services for patients. Additionally, the bill would establish a National SCD Coordinating Center to work in collaboration with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) SCD Data Collection Program.

The Sickle Cell Care Expansion Act would enable the National Health Service Corps to provide educational incentives such as loan repayment assistance and scholarships for those studying benign hematology, which is the specialty SCD falls under. These incentives are designed to attract more providers to the SCD workforce to meet the treatment needs of the growing number of adult SCD patients. The bill would also create competitive grants to raise awareness of SCD and the resources available to patients, and provide additional resources for hospitals to further fund support services for young adults ages 18-29 who are transitioning from pediatric to adult care, as well as research into the needs of this patient population.

Both bills have been endorsed by KMD Advocacy Center, American Society of Hematology, Children’s National Hospital, Loma Linda University Children’s Hospital, Maryland Sickle Cell Disease Association (MSCDA), Sickle Cell Coalition of Maryland, Sickle Cell Disease Association of America, the Sickle Cell Disease Partnership, and Sick Cells.

“The American Society of Hematology (ASH) commends Senator Van Hollen for reintroducing the Sickle Cell Disease Treatment Centers Act and the Sickle Cell Care Expansion Act, which aim to advance the healthcare needs of individuals living with sickle cell disease. ASH remains deeply committed to improving care for individuals with sickle cell disease, and the Society is grateful for Senator Van Hollen’s dedication in this effort. ASH looks forward to continuing to work with the senator as these bills move forward,” said Robert S. Negrin, M.D., President, American Society of Hematology (ASH).

“Sickle cell disease affects families in every state, but the expertise to treat it is concentrated in a small number of centers, leaving too many patients without access to the care they need. At Children's National, we care for more than 1,500 children and young adults with sickle cell disease, and we see every day what comprehensive care can achieve. The Sickle Cell Disease Treatment Centers Act would build the national network this community has long needed, linking specialized centers with community health centers and local organizations, and connecting all of them through a National Coordinating Center. With a national network in place, every patient, no matter where they live, can count on expert care and access to the latest therapies. Thanks to advances in care, nearly all of the patients we care for will grow into adulthood. That is a victory, but it also means every one of them will need an adult sickle cell expert waiting on the other side of the transition, and too often there isn't one. The Sickle Cell Care Expansion Act addresses both halves of this problem: it invests in the transition programs that help young adults move safely from pediatric to adult care, and it builds the hematology workforce they will depend on for the rest of their lives. Our patients deserve a system that keeps its promise to them long after they leave our doors,” said Dr. Andrew Campbell, Director, Comprehensive Sickle Cell Disease Program, Children’s National Hospital.

“The Sickle Cell Treatment Centers Act has the power to revolutionize access to care and aid in understanding the barriers that have made this disease so unassailable. The Hub and Spoke model will allow care to be coordinated efficiently between Sickle Cell Centers of excellence and their community stakeholders so patient care does not fall through the cracks. It will address the unmet need in sickle cell disease care delivery, by supporting sickle cell centers to become centers of excellence, putting the focus on disease prevention and eradication as a unified nationwide network of treatment centers. With new transformative therapies like gene therapy available for children with Sickle cell disease now, this funding will help sickle cell lifespan centers to effectively build capacity to treat young children who likely will have a disease-free life ahead of them,” said Akshat Jain, M.D., M.P.H., Medical Director, Sickle Cell Center of Excellence Children and Young Adult, Loma Linda University School of Medicine.

“September is Sickle Cell Awareness Month and The Maryland Sickle Cell Disease Association (MSCDA) could not be more thrilled to learn that Sen. Van Hollen is reintroducing both the Sickle Cell Care Expansion Act and the Sickle Cell Disease Treatment Centers Act. Both these Bills are of critical importance to the improvement of lives of persons impacted by sickle cell disease. Our community faces a shortage of providers with expertise in sickle cell disease, and the Expansion Act addresses that issue head on. Not only do we lack providers, we need more access to care in communities where affected families live. The hub and spoke model in the Treatment Center Act will bring much needed care to the communities where we are. This model is working right here in in Prince George's County, MD and we couldn't be more excited to see that the model could be expanded nationwide. The Expansion Act and the Treatment Centers Act, working together is exactly what we need to bring positive change to this devastating, life threatening disease. We applaud Senator Van Hollen's efforts and stand ready to do our part to bring these Bills to law,” said Derek Robertson, M.B.A., J.D., C.H.C., President, Maryland Sickle Cell Disease Association.

“On behalf of the Sickle Cell Coalition of Maryland (SCCM), we support the introduction of the Sickle Cell Disease Treatment Centers Act and the Sickle Cell Care Expansion Act. We endorse new, innovative, and forward-thinking legislation that addresses two of the most urgent challenges facing people living with sickle cell disease: access to comprehensive, affordable care and the shortage of qualified clinicians. We also commend Senator Chris Van Hollen for his continued leadership and advocacy for holistic, affordable, and accessible sickle cell care. We support continued federal efforts that strengthen specialty care access, address workforce shortages, improve transition services, and invest in community-based support,” said Teanika Hoffman, Executive Director, Sickle Cell Coalition of Maryland.

“Headquartered in Maryland, the Sickle Cell Disease Association of America, Inc. is grateful for Senator Van Hollen’s leadership in introducing the Sickle Cell Disease Treatment Centers Act and the Sickle Cell Care Expansion Act. Both bills provide critical recognition for the work done by sickle cell disease community-based organizations, which are the backbone of the sickle cell disease community. Separately, the bills will help create a national infrastructure of sickle cell centers and expand the workforce needed to treat sickle cell warriors. I want to thank Senator Van Hollen for his ongoing dedication to improving care and treatment for our sickle cell warriors,” said Regina Hartfield, President and CEO, Sickle Cell Disease Association of America, Inc.

“Sick Cells is pleased to support the reintroduction of these two important pieces of legislation, the Sickle Cell Care Expansion Act and the Sickle Cell Disease Treatment Centers Act. Together, they represent a bold approach to improving care and the quality of life for people living with sickle cell disease across the country through expansive and innovative strategies. The sickle cell disease community has long lacked comprehensive medical and social support, relevant data, and critical auxiliary services. A compounding factor of a limited amount of clinicians further exasperates the situation. These bills demonstrate what can be accomplished through collaboration, and dedicated federal investment. We hope these efforts will be the beginning of a sustained commitment to transforming sickle cell care and ensuring that every person living with sickle cell disease has access to the comprehensive support they need,” said Ashley Valentine, Founder and CEO, Sick Cells.",1,2026-09-25T10:04:52Z,2026-09-25T10:05:46Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/maryland-delegation-members-press-usda-usfs-to-make-good-on-commitment-to-keep-baltimore-urban-forestry-office-in-baltimore,"Maryland Delegation Members Press USDA, USFS to Make Good on Commitment to Keep Baltimore Urban Forestry Office in Baltimore",2026-09-22,2026,2026-09,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen and Angela Alsobrooks and U.S. Representative Kweisi Mfume were joined by Representatives Steny Hoyer, Jamie Raskin, Glenn Ivey, Sarah Elfreth, April McClain Delaney, and Johnny Olszewski (all D-Md.), in calling for United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Deputy Secretary Stephen Vaden and United States Forest Service (USFS) Chief Tom Schultz to reverse course on the decision to close the USFS Baltimore Field Office and relocate staff outside of Baltimore. The USFS Baltimore Urban Field Station leads forestry-related projects that benefit the local Baltimore community and conducts important forestry and urban ecology research that informs land use decision-making throughout the Chesapeake Bay watershed and beyond. The lawmakers pose several questions to USDA and USFS around the decision, which comes after Senator Van Hollen questioned Chief Tom Schultz in the Senate Appropriations Committee and received commitment to maintain presence in Baltimore.

The lawmakers begin, “On April 30, 2026, during the Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on the United States Forest Service (USFS) FY27 budget, Chief Schultz assured Senator Van Hollen that USFS would not force Baltimore Urban Field Office employees to relocate outside of the Baltimore area during the USDA reorganization. Despite this commitment, when USFS announced earlier this month that the Baltimore Urban Field Office will close, we learned that USFS intends to relocate Baltimore employees to Beltsville, Maryland – a location that is decidedly outside of the broader Baltimore area. USFS must make good on its word and keep Baltimore Urban Field Office employees in Baltimore so they can effectively continue their place-based and partnership-dependent work in the Baltimore area.”

On the critical benefits for keeping the Baltimore Urban Field Office in the Baltimore area, the lawmakers write, “When Secretary Rollins announced the USDA reorganization, one of the stated pillars of the plan was to ‘bring USDA closer to its customers.’ Closing the Baltimore Field Office and relocating employees away from Baltimore violates this core principle, since the primary ‘customers’ of the USFS Baltimore Urban Field Office are in Baltimore; they are the community groups, local government, and academics with whom the Field Office has developed partnerships and collaborations during its nearly 40-year tenure on the campus of the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. These relationships have enabled important research projects that benefit the Chesapeake Bay watershed and regional forests, as well as urban forestry projects in the Baltimore community. For example, the Office supports community-led restoration and urban revitalization efforts in Baltimore by leading the Baltimore Urban Waters Partnership. It delivers professional skill building and workforce training to urban youth in Baltimore by supporting youth forestry projects at the Stillmeadow Church and Peace Park. And it started an urban wood reuse project that successfully spun off into a city-run urban sawmill and wood recycling center.”

Among other questions, the lawmakers go on to ask the following:

Did USDA or USFS conduct an analysis of the costs and benefits associated with closing the Baltimore Urban Field Office as compared to keeping them in the current location?

Has USDA or USFS assessed the impact that closure of the USFS Baltimore Urban Field Office and relocation of employees outside of the Baltimore area will have on the important work that the Baltimore Urban Field Office has been conducting?

“The Baltimore location is critical to the ability of the Baltimore Urban Field Office to successfully accomplish its place-based and partnership-driven work. This work not only benefits the Baltimore community but serves as a model for urban forestry work in cities across the country and the world. The Baltimore Urban Field Office is an asset to the nation and its closure serves no one. Keep your word and keep the work of the Baltimore Urban Forestry Office in Baltimore.” the lawmakers conclude.

The full text of the letter is available here and below.

Dear Deputy Secretary Vaden and Chief Schultz,

On April 30, 2026, during the Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on the United States Forest Service (USFS) FY27 budget, Chief Schultz assured Senator Van Hollen that USFS would not force Baltimore Urban Field Office employees to relocate outside of the Baltimore area during the USDA reorganization. Despite this commitment, when USFS announced earlier this month that the Baltimore Urban Field Office will close, we learned that USFS intends to relocate Baltimore employees to Beltsville, Maryland – a location that is decidedly outside of the broader Baltimore area. USFS must make good on its word and keep Baltimore Urban Field Office employees in Baltimore so they can effectively continue their place-based and partnership-dependent work in the Baltimore area.

When Secretary Rollins announced the USDA reorganization, one of the stated pillars of the plan was to “bring USDA closer to its customers.” Closing the Baltimore Field Office and relocating employees away from Baltimore violates this core principle, since the primary “customers” of the USFS Baltimore Urban Field Office are in Baltimore; they are the community groups, local government, and academics with whom the Field Office has developed partnerships and collaborations during its nearly 40-year tenure on the campus of the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. These relationships have enabled important research projects that benefit the Chesapeake Bay watershed and regional forests, as well as urban forestry projects in the Baltimore community. For example, the Office supports community-led restoration and urban revitalization efforts in Baltimore by leading the Baltimore Urban Waters Partnership. It delivers professional skill building and workforce training to urban youth in Baltimore by supporting youth forestry projects at the Stillmeadow Church and Peace Park. And it started an urban wood reuse project that successfully spun off into a city-run urban sawmill and wood recycling center.

USDA has continually failed to respond to basic questions about the Department’s decision-making during the reorganization process. This includes a failure to answer the questions included in the letter sent to you opposing the closure of the Baltimore Urban Field Office from April 24, 2026, such as whether a cost-benefit analysis has been conducted to understand the true costs to the American taxpayer of closing this facility. This lack of transparency is particularly disturbing when USDA maintains that the reorganization is meant to save money.

To add to this concern, there are clearly other suitable federal facilities for these employees in the Baltimore area. For example, there is a U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) facility that is located across the street from the Baltimore Urban Field Office that has the capacity to accommodate USFS employees - a facility that Chief Schultz mentioned during the April 30th hearing. The availability of other Baltimore locations to house the Baltimore Urban Field Office make it extremely difficult to understand why the Field Office’s employees would need to be relocated outside of Baltimore, where it will be harder for them to effectively do their jobs and maintain critical partnerships in the community that this Field Office exists to serve.

In addition, while Beltsville may fall within the range of the Forest Service’s expansive definition the Baltimore “commuting area,” despite being well outside of the Baltimore area, relocating Field Office employees to Beltsville realistically means commutes of 2 hours or more for Baltimore-based employees who rely on public transit. This will keep employees away from their families for longer and create an additional cost burden for them – stressors that stand to decrease overall employee productivity and harm employee retention.

We urge you to keep your word and reverse course on the decision to relocate USFS Baltimore Field Office employees outside of Baltimore. In addition, please provide answers to the following questions by October 1, 2026:

Did USDA or USFS conduct an analysis of the costs and benefits associated with closing the Baltimore Urban Field Office as compared to keeping them in the current location?

If so, please provide that analysis, including details on the alternative locations that were considered for Baltimore Field Office employees.

Has USDA or USFS assessed the impact that closure of the USFS Baltimore Urban Field Office and relocation of employees outside of the Baltimore area will have on the important work that the Baltimore Urban Field Office has been conducting?

If so, please explain in detail how the assessment was conducted and what the findings were.

Did USDA or USFS assess the feasibility of co-locating the USFS Baltimore Urban Field Office with the nearby USGS facility that Chief Schultz referenced in the April 30th hearing?

Will employees still be able and expected to work on the ground in Baltimore?

If so, how will employee productivity be impacted by the relocation and what will the cost to USDA be, including lost work hours and travel expenses, from frequent employee travel from Beltsville to Baltimore?

The Baltimore location is critical to the ability of the Baltimore Urban Field Office to successfully accomplish its place-based and partnership-driven work. This work not only benefits the Baltimore community but serves as a model for urban forestry work in cities across the country and the world. The Baltimore Urban Field Office is an asset to the nation and its closure serves no one. Keep your word and keep the work of the Baltimore Urban Forestry Office in Baltimore.",1,2026-09-23T09:45:16Z,2026-09-23T09:46:14Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/maryland-delegation-members-call-for-answers-investigation-following-alarming-ice-operation-in-frederick,"Maryland Delegation Members Call for Answers, Investigation Following Alarming ICE Operation in Frederick",2026-09-17,2026,2026-09,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen and Angela Alsobrooks and U.S. Representative April McClain Delaney were joined by Representatives Steny Hoyer, Kweisi Mfume, Jamie Raskin, Glenn Ivey, Sarah Elfreth, and Johnny Olszewski (all Md.) – in pressing Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Markwayne Mullin and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Acting Director David Venturella for answers around Trump’s ICE operations in Frederick, Maryland on Thursday, September 3 and Friday, September 4. In their letter, the lawmakers additionally called on DHS Inspector General Joseph Cuffari to initiate an independent and transparent investigation of the tactics ICE is deploying in Maryland.

The lawmakers begin, “As members of Maryland’s Congressional Delegation, we write to express our serious concerns with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) recent operation in Frederick, Maryland. The tactics used by ICE officers detailed by eyewitnesses and exposed in videos circulating online are alarming and necessitate more information as to how the recently-merged Washington-Baltimore field office and the agency are enforcing our immigration laws. We request an immediate, independent, and transparent investigation of the tactics ICE is deploying in our state.”

They continued, “Recently, ICE reportedly conducted an approximately 40-hour immigration enforcement operation in one neighborhood of Frederick, Maryland. Videos released by observers revealed that on Friday evening the operation turned violent as a dark law enforcement vehicle with flashing lights drove down the sidewalk toward observers, hitting one of them. Another video depicted ICE officers using a baton to beat a protestor and dragging another from the front steps of a home that ICE was attempting to enter. Additionally, during the operation, an ICE officer reportedly approached a local elected official and told her that ICE knew her name, license plate, and where she lived. If true, this is deeply disturbing and appears to be an attempt to intimidate local elected officials.”

“On behalf of our constituents, we request an immediate, independent, and transparent investigation of the tactics ICE has been and is currently deploying in our state, and we request responses to the following by no later than September 30, 2026,” the lawmakers conclude.

Among other questions, the lawmakers go on to ask the following:

Please provide a detailed description and timeline, with documented evidence such as body camera footage, of the events of the operation.

Does ICE have a policy that allows the use of vehicles to clear an area of peaceful observers?

Does that policy allow for ICE to hit observers, or threaten to hit observers, with their vehicles?

When an ICE officer informs a legal observer that they have their name, information, and know where they live – what is the purpose of the officer making that statement?

How does ICE come to have this information, and for what reasons does ICE use it?

How did ICE’s use of force in this case align with DHS’s use of force policy?

During the operation, video shows ICE entering a home, reportedly in pursuit of a target. Did ICE secure a warrant for the target’s arrest before entering the home?

The full text of the letter is available here and below.

Dear Secretary Mullin and Acting Director Venturella and Inspector General Cuffari,

As members of Maryland’s Congressional Delegation, we write to express our serious concerns with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) recent operation in Frederick, Maryland. The tactics used by ICE officers detailed by eyewitnesses and exposed in videos circulating online are alarming and necessitate more information as to how the recently-merged Washington-Baltimore field office and the agency are enforcing our immigration laws. We request an immediate, independent, and transparent investigation of the tactics ICE is deploying in our state.

Recently, ICE reportedly conducted an approximately 40-hour immigration enforcement operation in one neighborhood of Frederick, Maryland. Videos released by observers revealed that on Friday evening the operation turned violent as a dark law enforcement vehicle with flashing lights drove down the sidewalk toward observers, hitting one of them. Another video depicted ICE officers using a baton to beat a protestor and dragging another from the front steps of a home that ICE was attempting to enter.

Additionally, during the operation, an ICE officer reportedly approached a local elected official and told her that ICE knew her name, license plate, and where she lived. If true, this is deeply disturbing and appears to be an attempt to intimidate local elected officials.

ICE has a duty to enforce our immigration laws safely and humanely. Yet, ICE’s operations clearly continue to create chaos and instill fear in our communities. ICE is not making our neighborhoods safer and is not going after the “worst of the worst” as this Administration claims. In fact, the Department of Homeland Security’s own numbers show that nearly 70% of the individuals arrested as part of its two-week surge operation last month in Maryland and Virginia had no criminal record.

On behalf of our constituents, we request an immediate, independent, and transparent investigation of the tactics ICE has been and is currently deploying in our state, and we request responses to the following by no later than September 30, 2026.",1,2026-09-18T09:27:43Z,2026-09-18T09:29:09Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/maryland-delegation-members-statement-on-trump-administration-decision-rolling-back-federal-coordination-of-chesapeake-bay-restoration,Maryland Delegation Members’ Statement on Trump Administration Decision Rolling Back Federal Coordination of Chesapeake Bay Restoration,2026-09-17,2026,2026-09,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, the full Maryland Congressional Delegation – U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen and Angela Alsobrooks and U.S. Representatives Steny Hoyer, Kweisi Mfume, Andy Harris, Jamie Raskin, Glenn Ivey, Sarah Elfreth, April McClain Delaney, and Johnny Olszewski (all Md.) – released the following statement regarding the Trump Administration’s decision to revoke an Executive Order declaring the Chesapeake Bay a national treasure and establishing a coordinated federal strategy for the protection and restoration of the Bay and its watershed, including by supporting state-led efforts on water quality goals, pollution limits, agricultural preservation, stormwater management, and climate resiliency.

“The Chesapeake Bay and its health are vital to lives and livelihoods across our state and the greater region. Now more than ever, we need continued federal partnership and support for Chesapeake Bay restoration, not efforts to roll back all the progress we’ve made. The 2009 Executive Order that the Trump administration just revoked provided vital federal resources that support state-led efforts to improve the health and productivity of the Chesapeake Bay and its surrounding area. Removing the coordinated federal backing that advances the watershed protection and restoration goals of the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement risks undermining the future health of the Bay along with the businesses and communities that depend on it. This decision is shortsighted and harmful to our communities. Make no mistake: the Chesapeake Bay is a national treasure. And we will continue to fight for it.”",1,2026-09-18T09:27:43Z,2026-09-18T09:29:09Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-colleagues-press-trump-administration-on-need-for-dedicated-leadership-for-students-with-disabilities-after-abrupt-resignation-of-department-of-education-assistant-secretary,"Van Hollen, Colleagues Press Trump Administration on Need for Dedicated Leadership for Students with Disabilities After Abrupt Resignation of Department of Education Assistant Secretary",2026-09-17,2026,2026-09,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and ten of his colleagues called on Department of Education (ED) Secretary Linda McMahon to cease further disruption of IDEA programs that support essential services for students with disabilities, families, educators, and schools following the abrupt resignation of Kelly Rogers, Acting Assistant Secretary of the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitation Services (OSERS). The lawmakers stressed the urgent need for dedicated leadership to serve students with disabilities and also urged Secretary McMahon to stop the transfer of OSERS to the Department of Health and Human Services, in order to avoid further disruption to critical student services and those who support them.

Senator Van Hollen was joined in sending this letter by Senators Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Kristen Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), and Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.).

The lawmakers begin, “We write to express our concern at the abrupt resignation of Acting Assistant Secretary Kelly Rogers amid the disruptive transfer of Department of Education workers who serve students with disabilities. As the Acting Assistant Secretary of the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitation Services (OSERS) at the Department of Education (the Department), it was Ms. Rogers’ role to oversee IDEA programs that provide essential services and supports to students, families, educators, and schools. In your Department, that meant she was tasked with executing the harmful and unnecessary transfer of these education programs to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Ms. Rogers’ resignation was announced the day before the dedicated staff was required to show up at HHS and effective the day after. Since the Department is following through with the transfer of workers and critical programs without educational leadership, every OSERS employee will be forced to carry out this transition with little guidance and even less oversight.”

“The absence of meaningful OSERS leadership as students head back to school underscores the emptiness of this administration’s public commitments to students with disabilities and longstanding federal law. Students with disabilities need stability and unwavering implementation of special education law and civil rights protections. Without federal commitment or a dedicated leader, students with disabilities and their families will suffer the consequences,” they continue.

“Ms. Rogers’ resignation and the temporary appointment of a replacement carrying other critical responsibilities only adds to the Trump administration’s disruption to public education. We urge you to stop the chaotic transfer of OSERS to HHS and to ensure that there is dedicated, experienced leadership capable of providing students with disabilities the quality education they deserve,” the lawmakers conclude.

The full text of the letter is available here and below.

Dear Secretary McMahon:

We write to express our concern at the abrupt resignation of Acting Assistant Secretary Kelly Rogers amid the disruptive transfer of Department of Education workers who serve students with disabilities. As the Acting Assistant Secretary of the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitation Services (OSERS) at the Department of Education (the Department), it was Ms. Rogers’ role to oversee IDEA programs that provide essential services and supports to students, families, educators, and schools. In your Department, that meant she was tasked with executing the harmful and unnecessary transfer of these education programs to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Ms. Rogers’ resignation was announced the day before the dedicated staff was required to show up at HHS and effective the day after. Since the Department is following through with the transfer of workers and critical programs without educational leadership, every OSERS employee will be forced to carry out this transition with little guidance and even less oversight.

Ms. Rogers resigned after four months of serving in this critical position. She was appointed in May 2026, just weeks before the transfer was announced, and expressed public enthusiasm over the opportunity to “modernize oversight” and “reduce barriers” with the move. Now, she is gone. While the Department has made the choice to temporarily appoint the Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education to replace Ms. Rogers, students with disabilities and the workers who serve them deserve undivided guidance and oversight. The students and families who depend on OSERS have no accountable leadership, and the dedicated staff face massive structural change and disruption with the threat of further staffing cuts as proposed in the FY27 budget.

The absence of meaningful OSERS leadership as students head back to school underscores the emptiness of this administration’s public commitments to students with disabilities and longstanding federal law. Students with disabilities need stability and unwavering implementation of special education law and civil rights protections. Without federal commitment or a dedicated leader, students with disabilities and their families will suffer the consequences.

Ms. Rogers’ resignation and the temporary appointment of a replacement carrying other critical responsibilities only adds to the Trump administration’s disruption to public education. We urge you to stop the chaotic transfer of OSERS to HHS and to ensure that there is dedicated, experienced leadership capable of providing students with disabilities the quality education they deserve.",1,2026-09-18T09:27:43Z,2026-09-18T09:29:09Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-bennet-tillis-reintroduce-bipartisan-bill-to-boost-innovation-in-education,"Van Hollen, Bennet, Tillis Reintroduce Bipartisan Bill to Boost Innovation in Education",2026-09-17,2026,2026-09,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) reintroduced the New Essential Education Discoveries (NEED) Act, which would drive evidence-based improvements and innovations for our schools, by making strategic investments in education research and development (R&D). The legislation would create a national center that advances high-risk, high-reward education research projects, similar to the model employed by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).

“To meet the evolving challenges our students face, our educators need access to quality data and evidence-based advancements in teaching and learning,” said Van Hollen. “This legislation would help accomplish that by investing in our students’ success to better prepare them for the future.”

“As a former school superintendent, I know our teachers are doing everything they can to help students succeed,” said Bennet. “As social media and a nationwide mental health crisis reshape how students learn and engage in school, educators need better information about what works. Congress can help by investing in cutting-edge education research. This bipartisan bill will help schools, educators, and policymakers make data driven decisions that strengthen education today and in the years ahead.”

“We owe it to students, parents, and teachers to pass bipartisan legislation that identifies gaps in education and better prepares students to become the next generation of the American workforce,” said Tillis. “That’s why I am proud to sponsor legislation that invests in education research and development, STEM, and innovative technologies to develop the tools needed to identify these gaps and help teachers better equip students for the future.”

The NEED Act would create a National Center for Advanced Development in Education (NCADE) at the Department of Education dedicated to developing and disseminating cutting-edge practices and tools, such as voice recognition software to assess dyslexia and other emerging readiness gaps, to adequately prepare students to meet the challenges of a 21st century economy.

Specifically, the legislation would:

Make robust investments to establish, staff, and operate NCADE;

Require the Advanced Development Commissioner to appoint an advisory panel to guide the development and implementation of NCADE projects; and

Conduct and disseminate the results of periodic evaluations of the effectiveness of NCADE in achieving its mission of expanding education R&D and improving teaching and learning.

The NEED Act would also improve Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems and help states better track students’ progress through K-12 and into the workforce while protecting the privacy of students’ education records. This data will help policymakers understand and address opportunity and achievement gaps across the country.

This bill is supported by nearly 65 organizations, including: American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, Accelerate – National Collaborative for Accelerated Learning, Advanced Education Research and Development Fund, All4Ed, Alliance for Learning Innovation, America Forward, American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association Services, Applied Learning Insights, Beyond100K, Bipartisan Policy Center, Buck Institute Education/PBLWorks, CAST, Committee for Children, Common Cents Education Consulting, Common Sense Media, Consortium for State Education Support, Data Quality Campaign, Digital Promise Global, EDGE Partners, EdTrust, Education Knowledge Broker Network, Education Reform Now Advocacy, Education Reimagined, Educators for Excellence, EdVenture Lab, ExcelinEd in Action, Federation of American Scientists, Foundation for Deeper Learning, FullScale, High Tech High Graduate School of Education, InnovateEDU, Institute for Educational Leadership, KB Stack Consulting, LLC, Knowledge Alliance, Learner-Centered Collaborative, LearnerStudio, Learning Disabilities Association of America, Learning Heroes, LearningForge LLC, National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, National Center for Learning Disabilities, National Council on Teacher Quality, National Girls Collaborative, National Parents Union, National School Boards Association, New Classrooms, New Leaders, reDesign, Reinvention Lab at Teach For America, Results for America, SERP Institute, SETDA, SRI, Teach For America, Teach Plus, Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children, The Learning Agency, The Society for Research in Child Development, The Study Group, The Tech Interactive, Thomas B. Fordham Institute, Threadwell Solutions TNTP, Transcend, and the University of Oregon.

“For too long, education has lacked what nearly every other field takes for granted: a dedicated engine for pursuing bold, high-reward ideas and finding out what works for students,” said Sara Schapiro, Executive Director of the Alliance for Learning Innovation. “The NEED Act would build that engine, a national center modeled on DARPA inside the Institute of Education Sciences, supporting researchers and educators with the resources to test promising new approaches to teaching and learning and pursue real breakthroughs for education. ALI is proud to support Senators Bennet, Tillis, and Van Hollen in reintroducing this bipartisan legislation, and we urge Congress to move quickly to get it passed.”

“Data Quality Campaign applauds the efforts of Senators Bennet, Tillis, and Van Hollen on the introduction of the NEED Act, which will ensure everyone has the data they need to make informed decisions about their education and career journeys,” said Jennifer Bell-Ellwanger, President and CEO, Data Quality Campaign. “By reimagining how statewide longitudinal data systems support transparency and high-quality data, the NEED Act will enable individuals to better navigate their career pathways and policymakers to create policies that invest in the programs, supports, and interventions needed to make that navigation seamless.”

“The Bipartisan Policy Center’s Commission on the American Workforce called for a Talent Data System and to prioritize research and data on what actually works to support students, teachers, and workers,” said Michele Stockwell, president of Bipartisan Policy Center Action (BPC Action). “The NEED Act takes a critical step forward to answer that call. It will modernize state data systems, strengthen our nation’s research capacity, and help develop breakthrough tools and solutions that improve student outcomes. We applaud Sens. Michael Bennet (D-CO), Thom Tillis (R-NC), and Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) for crafting a forward-looking, bipartisan bill as a companion to the House version, led by Reps. Suzanne Bonamici (D-OR) and Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA). Congress must advance this important legislation.”

“Through our on the ground partnerships with K-12 institutions across the state, the University of Denver has seen firsthand the appetite and need for additional federal investment in cutting-edge education research,” said Jeremy Haefner, Chancellor, University of Denver. “The authorization of a new National Center for Advanced Development in Education is essential to ensuring Colorado educators have access to timely, innovative, and evidence-based practices to help increase achievement for all of Colorado’s students. We are grateful to Senator Bennet for his championing of the New Essential Education Discoveries (NEED) Act and hope it advances in Congress.”

“Relative to many other countries, the United States spends too little on educational research and development. Indeed, the federal government is investing less in this important work every year. If we want educational policymakers and leaders to make decisions based on evidence, we need much more research on the kinds of innovations that make a difference in all children’s outcomes. Senator Bennet’s New Essential Education Discoveries (NEED) Act will provide the resources needed to accelerate innovation in teaching and learning and help expand opportunity to all,” said William Penuel, Distinguished Professor, School of Education at the University of Colorado Boulder and Director, National Center for Research in Policy and Practice.

“The ability to longitudinally track student outcomes across the school-to-workforce pipeline will significantly increase knowledge on what works robustly and at scale. The Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems (SLDS) in Senator Bennet’s New Essential Education Discoveries (NEED) Act will help states do this systematically so that the resultant data can be broadly used to broaden the evidence-base and to increase accountability for federal- and state- funded interventions,” said Sidney D’Mello, Professor, Institute of Cognitive Science at the University of Colorado Boulder, and Principal Investigator, National Science Foundation National AI institute for Student-AI Teaming.",1,2026-09-19T09:11:33Z,2026-09-19T09:12:45Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-alsobrooks-mfume-highlight-10-million-federal-investment-to-expand-morgan-state-universitys-research-programs-power-r1-ascent,"Van Hollen, Alsobrooks, Mfume Highlight $10 Million Federal Investment to Expand Morgan State University’s Research Programs, Power R1 Ascent",2026-09-16,2026,2026-09,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen and Angela Alsobrooks and Congressman Kweisi Mfume (all D-Md.) highlighted $10 million in federal funding to support Morgan State University’s research programs, expanding opportunities for students, faculty, and the University. This investment will allow the University to establish the new Institute for Trusted Autonomous Networks (TITAN), expand research and doctoral training, and strengthen the University’s advancement toward a Carnegie R1 “very high research activity” classification – which would, in turn, further increase research and funding opportunities at Morgan State. This federal investment comes from the Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Minority-Serving Institutions (HBCU/MI) Pilot Program, a program proposed by Senator Van Hollen and designed to fund research and education programs at HBCUs – like Morgan State – to increase their capacity to achieve very high research activity status (R1) on the Carnegie Classification scale. Senator Van Hollen introduced the HBCU Research, Innovation, Security, and Excellence (RISE) Act to establish this program in April 2022, then worked to secure provisions of his bill in the Fiscal Year 2023 National Defense Authorization Act, which passed into law in December 2022.

“Maryland is a national leader in research and innovation, and institutions like Morgan State are a prime reason for our continued success. I’ve fought for critical investments in Morgan State over the years, including through the creation of the HBCU/MI Pilot Program to support expanding its research capacity. This federal investment will help advance the University’s goal to become one of the pioneering HBCU R1 institutions, opening up greater opportunities for students, faculty, and the University as a whole – helping Maryland stay at the cutting edge of scientific research for years to come,” said Senator Van Hollen, who introduced legislation and then worked to pass the language to create the HBCU/MI Pilot Program as a provision of the FY23 national defense bill.

“Maryland is leading the nation in research, technology, and innovation. I am so proud that Morgan State University will receive $10 million in federal funding for research programs and strengthen the university's advancement toward a Carnegie R1 ‘very high research activity’ classification. Morgan State students have always been leaders, leaving lasting impacts on Maryland and our entire nation – this investment will work to keep building up our students, fueling our economy, and transforming our world,” said Senator Alsobrooks.

“Morgan State University is one of our nation's leading Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU), and this infusion of funding will only strengthen that reputation,” said Congressman Kweisi Mfume. “These funds will allow Morgan to expand their research and doctoral training capabilities, empowering their researchers to make greater contributions to their field and bringing Morgan ever closer to the prestigious Carnegie R1 classification.”

TITAN will be a university-wide research and education initiative focused on developing autonomous systems that can operate safely in complex and uncertain environments. It will examine how artificial intelligence, cybersecurity and quantum-enhanced security, resilient communications, wireless networks, robotics, and human-machine collaboration can be integrated so autonomous technologies perform predictably and transparently, resist cyberattacks and system failures, and support sound decision-making. Over five years, TITAN is projected to support approximately 20 research projects, 48 unique STEM research trainees, 24 doctoral students, and 24 postdoctoral researchers. It is also expected to engage 68 students in specialized instruction and symposia, connect 48 trainees with internship and job sessions, and place 20 participating trainees into technical internships or jobs.

“This award affirms the strength of Morgan’s research trajectory and provides catalytic support at a pivotal point in our evolution as a public research university,” said David K. Wilson, president of Morgan State University. “Our pursuit of R1 is not about attaining a label; it is about building the lasting capacity to generate knowledge, prepare more doctoral scholars, attract consequential investment and produce research that impacts national security. We remain steadfast in reaching R1 by 2030, and this federal investment will help us accelerate that work while creating meaningful opportunities for Morgan students to learn, discover and lead.”

This federal funding is in addition to $16,358,000 in Congressionally Directed Spending that Federal Team Maryland has secured since Fiscal Year 2022 for research programs and other initiatives at Morgan State University.",1,2026-09-17T09:52:05Z,2026-09-17T09:53:00Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-young-reintroduce-bipartisan-bill-to-boost-housing-mobility-vouchers-increase-families-access-to-affordable-housing,"Van Hollen, Young Reintroduce Bipartisan Bill to Boost Housing Mobility Vouchers, Increase Families’ Access to Affordable Housing",2026-09-16,2026,2026-09,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and Todd Young (R-Ind.) reintroduced their bipartisan Family Stability and Opportunity Vouchers Act, legislation to create 250,000 housing mobility vouchers for the nation’s most vulnerable families with young children. The bill couples rental assistance vouchers, which allow families to choose eligible privately owned housing units and pay rent equal to 30 percent of their income, with evidence-based mobility support services, such as housing counselors and landlord coordination, to help families find affordable housing in high-opportunity areas.

“Ensuring children grow up in a safe and secure home is one of the best ways we can support their success. That’s why we need to do more to make sure every family has access to an affordable place to live – and what’s more, we need to ensure affordable housing is available in neighborhoods with strong schools and good-paying jobs. As we work to expand affordable housing nationwide and increase economic mobility for all families, this bipartisan bill will boost access to housing vouchers that have already served as an effective and immediate solution – giving more parents the ability to afford a home in the location that best serves their family,” said Senator Van Hollen.

“Every child deserves the opportunity to grow up in a safe, stable home and reach their full potential,” said Senator Young. “Research has shown that children who move from high-poverty areas to neighborhoods with greater opportunity at a young age can see significantly higher earnings later in life. Our bipartisan legislation will give families facing homelessness and housing instability more choices about where they live, helping more children access strong schools, safe neighborhoods, and opportunities to succeed.”

Research shows that higher opportunity areas offer children a greater chance to succeed. This bipartisan bill builds on this cutting-edge policy research to help families overcome barriers to opportunity and achieve generational economic mobility. In the Fiscal Year 2019 appropriations package, Senators Van Hollen and Young secured the authorization and funding of their Housing Choice Voucher Mobility Demonstration Act. The Family Stability and Opportunity Vouchers Act would build upon their previous efforts by expanding this legislation – providing increased funds and making 250,000 more vouchers available over the next five years.

Specifically, the bill:

Creates an additional 250,000 housing vouchers over five years for low-income, high-need families with young children. Pregnant women and families with a child under age 6 would qualify for these new vouchers if they have a history of homelessness or housing instability, live in an area of concentrated poverty, or are at risk of being pushed out of an opportunity area. This includes families who are fleeing, or attempting to flee, domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking; families who are living in housing conditions that are dangerous or life-threatening; and families who are living in units that are not accessible to a disabled family member.

Provides voucher recipients with a customized approach to mobility-related services that will enable a successful transition to opportunity areas for children, including access to counseling and case management services that have a proven track record of helping families move out of poverty.

Enables housing agencies to engage new landlords in the voucher program and connect families with information about housing in high-opportunity neighborhoods and community-based supports for families as they move.

Full text of the bill is available here.

The Senators’ legislation is supported by a broad group of experts and advocacy organizations, including: American Association of Service Coordinators, Autism Society of America, Autistic Women & Nonbinary Network, Boston Medical Center, Baltimore Regional Housing Partnership, BPC Action, Caring Across Generations, Catholic Charities USA, Center for Law and Social Policy, Children’s HealthWatch, Children’s Trust Fund Alliance, Church World Service, Coalition on Human Needs, Community Solutions International, Congregation of Our Lady of Charity of the Good Shepherd U.S. Region, Council of State Community Development Agencies, First Focus Campaign for Children, Family Promise, Futures Without Violence, Healthcare Anchor Network, Housing Assistance Council, Housing Justice Center, Local Initiatives Support Corporation, Low Income Investment Fund, Lutheran Services in America, Mobility Works, MomsRising, National Advocacy Center of the Sisters of the Good Shepherd, National Affordable Housing Management Association, National Alliance to End Homelessness, National Association of Local Housing Finance Agencies, National Association of Social Workers, National Coalition for the Homeless, National Disability Institute, National Health Care for the Homeless Council, National Homelessness Law Center, National Housing Law Project, National Housing Resource Center, National Leased Housing Association, National Low Income Housing Coalition, National NeighborWorks Association, National Rental Home Council, National WIC Association, Opportunity Starts at Home Campaign, Parents as Teachers, PolicyLink, Poverty & Race Research Action Council, Prosperity Indiana, Public Housing Authorities Directors Association, SchoolHouse Connection, The Kelsey, Union for Reform Judaism, and ZERO TO THREE.

“The National Low Income Housing Coalition (NLIHC) commends Senators Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) and Todd Young (R-IN) for their leadership in reintroducing the ""Family Stability and Opportunity Vouchers Act,"" bipartisan legislation that expands access to stable housing and high-opportunity neighborhoods for families with young children,” said Renee M. Willis, president and CEO of NLIHC. “Safe, affordable housing is essential to quality of life, supporting educational attainment, economic mobility, and health outcomes. The ""Family Stability and Opportunity Vouchers Act” represents an important step toward advancing housing stability, providing 250,000 additional vouchers to help families with young children secure affordable housing in communities of their choice.”

“Safe, stable, and affordable housing is foundational to child health. Our research has consistently shown that when families struggle with unstable housing, young children face greater risk of poor health and developmental delays,” said Dr. Megan Sandel, pediatrician, and Co-Lead Principal Investigator for Children’s HealthWatch. “The Family Stability and Opportunity Vouchers Act would give more families with young children the stability and choice they need to find an affordable home in a well-resourced neighborhood where their children can thrive. Investing in housing stability during the earliest years of life is an investment in children’s health, development, and opportunity for the future.”

“BPC Action applauds Sens. Todd Young (R-IN) and Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) for reintroducing the Family Stability and Opportunity Vouchers Act. The evidence is clear: young children whose families move to high-opportunity neighborhoods do better for life. This bill's proposed 250,000 new vouchers and mobility counseling put that within reach, advancing a key Bipartisan Policy Center recommendation. Strengthening the Housing Choice Voucher program has drawn bipartisan support for decades, and BPC Action stands ready to help Congress make it law,” said Michele Stockwell, president of BPC Action.

“Starting from the earliest years of our lives, the neighborhoods we live in shape our health, education, and economic opportunities. For millions of children across the country, housing instability can mean struggling in school, experiencing poorer health, and having fewer opportunities for economic mobility into adulthood. Decades of research show us that when children have stable homes in well-resourced communities, they have better outcomes and greater opportunities to thrive. The Family Stability and Opportunity Vouchers Act translates that evidence into a cost-effective solution. The Opportunity Starts at Home campaign is proud to champion this legislation and for its promise to give more children the stability and opportunity they deserve,” said Chantelle Wilkinson, Vice President of Strategic Partnerships and Campaigns at the National Low Income Housing Coalition.

“The National Association of Social Workers (NASW) applauds and fully supports Senators Chris Van Hollen and Todd Young in their bipartisan introduction of the Family Stability and Opportunity Vouchers Act that would create 250,000 new housing vouchers,” said Anthony Estreet, PhD, MBA, LCSW-C, CEO of the National Association of Social Workers. “As the nation’s largest professional social work organization, we are well aware of the fact that the most important support service for low-income families is safe and affordable housing. Therefore, we welcome this legislation that will significantly increase the availability of housing vouchers and help to end the cycle of homelessness low-income families with young children too often experience.”

“The Family Stability and Opportunity Vouchers Act builds on strong evidence that helping families with children access higher-opportunity neighborhoods significantly improves long-term economic outcomes. Findings from Opportunity Insights' Creating Moves to Opportunity and HOPE VI studies as well as HUD's Community Choice Demonstration show that mobility supports like those outlined in this bill can be implemented effectively and at scale. We support the research-informed approaches advanced by this legislation and believe they can expand opportunity for more children and families,” said Raj Chetty, Director of Opportunity Insights and Professor of Economics, Harvard University

“Where a child grows up can shape everything from their health to their economic future. Through our work, the Baltimore Regional Housing Partnership sees firsthand how housing mobility support services help families access communities that meet their needs and create new possibilities for their children. We thank Senators Van Hollen and Young for their continued bipartisan leadership of the Family Stability and Opportunity Vouchers Act, which would bring the effective tools of housing mobility to more families nationwide, providing stability today while opening doors to brighter futures for the next generation,” said Adria Crutchfield, Executive Director of the Baltimore Regional Housing Partnership.",1,2026-09-17T09:52:05Z,2026-09-17T09:53:00Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-joins-merkley-markey-bipartisan-group-of-senators-in-pressing-trump-administration-to-release-all-documents-from-us-saudi-nuclear-deal,"Van Hollen Joins Merkley, Markey, Bipartisan Group of Senators in Pressing Trump Administration to Release All Documents from U.S.-Saudi Nuclear Deal",2026-09-16,2026,2026-09,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senator Chirs Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Senator Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Senator Ed Markey (D-Mass.), and a bipartisan group of Senators in pressing the Trump Administration to declassify and publicly release the two side letters accompanying the proposed U.S.-Saudi civil nuclear cooperation agreement, referred to as a “123 agreement.”

The Trump Administration recently submitted the 123 agreement to Congress—as is required by law—but while the agreement references the side letters, the letters themselves are classified at the lowest possible level, which is unprecedented. Because the side letters affect the obligations and operation of the underlying agreement, Congress and the public cannot fully assess what the United States and Saudi Arabia have agreed to without seeing them.

“Congress has a statutory responsibility under Section 123 of the Atomic Energy Act to review the proposed nuclear deal, which seeks to facilitate nuclear cooperation with significant implications for U.S. national security interests. Access to the full text is required for the Senate and the public to have a clear understanding of the commitments being made on the nation’s behalf and those being made by Saudi Arabia to the United States,” wrote the bipartisan group of Senators in a letter to U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright. “The side letters affect the obligations and operations of the underlying agreement and cannot be viewed in isolation from it; the President’s own transmission letter to Congress states that the agreement ‘…was concluded with two accompanying side letters.’ Their public release would also allow civil society, independent experts, and other affected stakeholders to scrutinize the deal.”

They emphasized, “Transparency and open debate are cornerstones of our democracy. Congress and the American public must have a meaningful opportunity to review and debate the key components of the U.S.-Saudi nuclear deal before it potentially enters into force. To that end, we call on you to declassify and release the two side letters without delay.”

Joining Van Hollen, Merkley, and Markey in signing the letter were U.S. Senators Rand Paul (R-Ky.), John Kennedy (R-La.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), and Peter Welch (D-Vt.).

Full text of the letter is available here and below:

Dear Secretary Rubio and Secretary Wright:

We write to urge you to immediately declassify and publicly release the two side letters associated with the Trump Administration’s proposed U.S.-Saudi 123 civil nuclear cooperation agreement. While the text of the agreement and the bilateral safeguards agreement are now publicly available in unclassified form, the two side letters remain classified at the lowest possible level.

In previous 123 agreements, the Executive Branch publicly released the agreement along with side letters and related documents. Releasing the agreement text without the side letters here leaves that practice only half met. We are aware of no precedent for classifying and withholding the side letters, particularly when the stated purpose is peaceful nuclear cooperation.

Congress has a statutory responsibility under Section 123 of the Atomic Energy Act to review the proposed nuclear deal, which seeks to facilitate nuclear cooperation with significant implications for U.S. national security interests. Access to the full text is required for the Senate and the public to have a clear understanding of the commitments being made on the nation’s behalf and those being made by Saudi Arabia to the United States. The side letters affect the obligations and operations of the underlying agreement and cannot be viewed in isolation from it; the President’s own transmission letter to Congress states that the agreement “…was concluded with two accompanying side letters.” Their public release would also allow civil society, independent experts, and other affected stakeholders to scrutinize the deal.

Transparency and open debate are cornerstones of our democracy. Congress and the American public must have a meaningful opportunity to review and debate the key components of the U.S.-Saudi nuclear deal before it potentially enters into force. To that end, we call on you to declassify and release the two side letters without delay.

Thank you for your attention to this important matter.",1,2026-09-18T09:27:43Z,2026-09-18T09:29:09Z
https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/news/press-releases/alsobrooks-votes-no-on-clarity-act/,ALSOBROOKS VOTES NO ON CLARITY ACT,2026-09-15,2026,2026-09,Democrat,Senate,MD,Angela D. Alsobrooks,A000382,www.alsobrooks.senate.gov,alsobrooks,https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/,scraper,"September 15, 2026

WASHINGTON, DC – Senator Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.) released the following statement after voting against cloture on the CLARITY Act:

“When I voted in May to advance the CLARITY Act out of the Banking Committee, I was clear that now is the time to regulate digital assets and protect consumers. I was also clear that I would not vote on the floor for a bill that doesn’t include clear ethics provisions to hold this President — and all future presidents and members of Congress — accountable. We were ready to strike a deal today and in discussions right up until the vote. Republican leadership shut it down at the very last minute after it became clear that we were on a path to a successful vote. I am proud of the progress we made, and I am determined to keep fighting to regulate this technology, protect the millions of Americans who own crypto, and ensure that communities across Maryland can harness the benefits of digital assets safely.”

###",1,2026-09-16T09:43:13Z,2026-09-16T09:44:22Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/maryland-congressional-delegation-members-announce-48-million-to-improve-ada-accessibility-at-metropolitan-grove-martin-state-airport-marc-stations,"Maryland Congressional Delegation Members Announce $48 Million to Improve ADA Accessibility at Metropolitan Grove, Martin State Airport MARC Stations",2026-09-15,2026,2026-09,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen and Angela Alsobrooks, and U.S. Representatives Jamie Raskin, April McClain Delaney, and Johnny Olszewski (all D-Md.) announced $48,064,000 in federal funding to deliver critical accessibility upgrades at two legacy Maryland Area Regional Commuter (MARC) stations – Martin State Airport Station on the Penn Line and the Metropolitan Grove Station on the Brunswick Line. Both stations predate the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and lack the infrastructure necessary to serve all passengers safely and reliably. These upgrades will bring them into full ADA compliance.

“Thousands of Marylanders rely on MARC every day to get where they need to go. We fought to pass the infrastructure modernization law to upgrade our state’s transportation systems, and this significant federal investment will help ensure the Martin State and Metropolitan Grove Stations are safer and more accessible for all users, including individuals with disabilities, families with strollers, and older adults,” said Senator Van Hollen.

“The Americans with Disabilities Act changed our nation for the better–not only making our infrastructure more accessible, but also making our country more inclusive. I am proud to have partnered with my colleagues to secure over $48 million in federal funding to bring two of our MARC stations into full ADA compliance,” said Senator Alsobrooks.

“The Free State and the nation continue to feel the transformative effects of Democrats’ Infrastructure Law,” said Congressman Jamie Raskin (MD-08). “Team Maryland fought for and secured an investment of more than $48 million in federal funding to make the MARC more accessible and fully ADA compliant, so everyone can safely get where they need to go. This is a critical win that will make life easier for our people, including those with disabilities, seniors and families with small children.”

“Public transportation should work for everyone. Thanks to the hard work of Team Maryland, our congressional offices secured more than $48 million to make MARC stations safer, more affordable, and more accessible. These investments will bring Metropolitan Grove and Martin State Airport stations into full ADA compliance because no Marylander should face barriers to safe, reliable transportation,” said Congresswoman McClain Delaney.

“Every Marylander deserves safe, reliable access to public transit,” said Congressman Johnny Olszewski (MD-02). “These stations have gone decades without the accessibility upgrades our neighbors with disabilities, seniors, and families deserve. That’s why I’m proud to help deliver this important federal investment so that Martin State Airport and Metropolitan Grove stations finally meet the standard every rider should be able to count on.”

At the Martin State Airport Station in Baltimore County, the Maryland Transit Administration (MTA) will replace existing at-grade crossings with accessible, grade-separated connections, including high-level platforms and a pedestrian bridge. These improvements will enhance safety and eliminate the need for passengers to traverse active rail tracks used by MARC, Amtrak, and freight service. At the Metropolitan Grove Station in Montgomery County, the MTA will reconstruct the platform, improve parking accessibility, update signage, and install wheelchair lifts and enclosures.

“This award from the Federal Transit Administration supports the Moore-Miller Administration’s priority to ensure customers can safely access our state’s transportation services to get to work, school and life’s opportunities, furthering our goal of creating a transportation system that works for everyone and Leaves No One Behind,” said Maryland Department of Transportation Secretary Katie Thomson. “Thank you to Maryland’s federal delegation for their work to secure the grant and their partnership in improving transit infrastructure across the state.”",1,2026-09-16T09:43:13Z,2026-09-16T09:44:22Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-kaine-sanders-lead-20-senators-in-introducing-privileged-resolution-seeking-answers-on-west-bank-violence,"Van Hollen, Kaine, Sanders Lead 20 Senators in Introducing Privileged Resolution Seeking Answers on West Bank Violence",2026-09-15,2026,2026-09,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) are leading 20 of their Senate colleagues in introducing a 502B privileged resolution requiring the Department of State to report to Congress on increasing violence in the West Bank, including the killings of Americans in the West Bank. Nine Americans have been killed in the West Bank in recent years – and more detained – and none have received accountability or justice from either the Israeli or United States Governments. The Senators’ resolution would require the Department of State to provide information and assessments related to investigations of the killing of United States citizens by violent Israeli settlers or Israeli security forces in the West Bank, as well as an assessment of the human rights situation in the West Bank, specifically related to the detention of Palestinian children.

They were joined in introducing the resolution by Senators Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ed Markey (D-Mass), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Chris Murphy (D-N.J.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.).

“This Administration has said ensuring the safety and security of American citizens abroad is one of its highest priorities. And yet, as we’ve seen violence rise in the West Bank, American citizens have been killed time and again, and they have received no justice and no accountability. It’s past time we get answers on their deaths – and on the growing violent Israeli settler attacks and the injustices Palestinians in the West Bank face on a daily basis. This resolution will require the State Department to begin to produce these answers, which are owed to the families of those who have lost loved ones, to the American people, and to all of those who want to ensure recipients of U.S. taxpayer dollars are acting in line with our laws and our values,” said Senator Van Hollen.

“The violence committed by Israeli settlers in the West Bank is reaching an unprecedented level, and as a result more and more Americans and Palestinians are being killed and injured. These actions—and the Israeli government’s lack of response to this violence—are unacceptable and threaten the long-term safety and security of the entire region,” said Senator Kaine. “Friends need to listen to each other, and my colleagues and I have repeatedly urged Israeli leaders to take firmer action to curtail illegal settlements in the West Bank, prosecute violent settlers, and protect Palestinian residents as well as American citizens living in or visiting the West Bank. I encourage all of my colleagues to support this resolution to require the State Department to conduct a formal assessment and provide a report to Congress on the situation in the West Bank, in particular the safety and security of Americans.”

“Every day, Palestinians in the West Bank experience horrific violence at the hands of Israeli settlers and security forces — and for years, the Israeli government has offered impunity instead of accountability. Enough is enough. The United States cannot keep bankrolling this violence and looking the other way — it’s time to end our complicity, once and for all,” said Senator Sanders.

“In my visits to the West Bank, I’ve heard numerous stories about the organized strategy of harassment and violence settlers are inflicting upon Palestinian villagers and Palestinian Americans. Tactics include cutting off villagers from their wells, their vineyards, and their orchards, burning their vehicles, and assaulting defenseless individuals, all with the implicit support of the Netanyahu government. This is wrong under every moral code,” said Senator Merkley. “This resolution demands answers about these abuses and accountability for those responsible.”

“The Netanyahu government has failed to stop Israeli security forces and settler attacks in the West Bank for years, including attacks that killed American citizens. The Trump administration has even gone so far as to reverse sanctions against individuals connected to this pattern of horrific violence. It's long past time for the U.S. government to stand up for human rights, investigate this violence against Americans and Palestinian civilians, provide full information to Congress, and hold the perpetrators accountable,” said Senator Warren.

“Israeli settlers in the West Bank have perpetrated violent crimes against Palestinians, including American citizens, with impunity. It is completely reasonable for Congress to demand our own government to report who was involved in these attacks. The United States has a moral obligation to seek justice for both our own citizens and Palestinians, including many children, targeted by Israeli security forces or settlers in the West Bank,” said Senator Smith. “A mature democracy can face up to its failures and commit to doing better. I am not at all convinced that Benjamin Netanyahu’s government is up to that task, which is why it’s up to the United States.”

“We have a responsibility to protect Americans abroad and seek justice when Americans are killed,” said Senator Luján. “The escalating violence in the West Bank and lack of accountability for the deaths of American citizens are deeply concerning. This resolution will help us get the answers we need, demand accountability, and ensure that we have a better assessment of the human rights situation in the West Bank.”

“Israeli military and police forces are a leading perpetrator of deadly violence against American civilians—including 9 killed since 2022,” said Senator Welch. “Too often there are no serious investigations and there is no accountability after violent attacks. Israel should be held to the same standards as every other nation when it comes to the lives of American citizens—that’s what this resolution demands.”

“Violent, lethal lawlessness on the West Bank is a betrayal of Israel’s moral standing and our shared values, and must be stopped. This resolution is now necessary, after so many have urged action and violence only continues to rise. Failing to enforce clear legal prohibitions and protections has cost American and Palestinian lives – and deeply threatens a peaceful, stable future for all Israelis and Palestinians,” said Senator Blumenthal.

“I have long said that continued settlement activity is one of the obstacles to a long term two-state solution. Recent settler violence only further undermines this goal and demands a serious response from the Netanyahu government—a message this resolution clearly conveys,” said Senator Durbin.

“We have a responsibility to ensure the killing of American citizens is thoroughly investigated anywhere in the world,” said Senator Shaheen. “These killings and extremist settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank undermine the rule of law and threaten a two-state solution. I’m proud to join this resolution to send the message from Congress that the United States will not sign off on unchecked escalation. I encourage the Trump Administration to continue to make clear that the U.S. opposes annexation of the West Bank and extremist settler policies.”

""The United States cannot look the other way when Americans are killed or when Palestinians are subjected to violence and displacement, and neither can Israel. We must send a clear message to the Trump administration and the Israeli government: New Mexicans will not stand by while U.S. citizens are killed by violent Israeli settlers and the Israeli military,” said Heinrich. ""We need to end the bloodshed and work toward lasting peace in the region. That starts with holding President Netanyahu accountable for the human rights abuses taking place in the West Bank and making clear that American taxpayers will not provide a blank check for the Israeli government to kill U.S. citizens and kill and displace Palestinians. This resolution will get us closer to real accountability from the Trump Administration and the Israeli Government.”

“Settlers have attacked and killed Palestinians and Americans in the West Bank for years, too often without any real accountability from the Israeli government. We need answers about why this violence has been allowed to continue and what concrete steps are being taken to prevent future tragedies. When settler violence goes unchecked, it puts lives at risk and further undermines the prospects for lasting peace in the region,” said Senator Schatz.

“The escalating settler violence in the West Bank has claimed the lives of Americans and innocent Palestinian civilians. Both the Trump administration and Netanyahu government have failed to ensure accountability and justice for these families or meaningfully provide for the safety and security of those in the West Bank. This resolution will help Congress receive information it needs to ensure that U.S. taxpayer dollars do not bankroll such abuses,” said Senator Wyden.

""Escalating settler violence in the West Bank is not only a threat to a peaceful future for Israelis and Palestinians—it is costing American citizens their lives. As the United States continues to provide weapons and security assistance to Israel, Congress cannot look the other way from the escalating violence. The State Department must ensure proper oversight and a clear accounting of these humanitarian concerns. This resolution works to ensure that any nation receiving U.S. support adheres to the rule of law, our shared values, and basic accountability when American citizens are harmed,"" said Senator Hirono.

The resolution draws upon Section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act, which allows Congress to file a privileged resolution that, if passed, would require the State Department to provide information on any country receiving U.S. security assistance and that country’s observance of internationally-recognized human rights. After introduction, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee has ten days to consider it in committee, and if it fails to do so, the resolution can be called up for a vote on the Senate floor. If the resolution passes the Senate, the Trump Administration must submit the report within 30 days or the majority of security assistance authorized to Israel would be prohibited. If the resolution passes, and following the receipt of the State Department report, Congress may consider any necessary changes to U.S. security assistance to that country in light of the information received. If the Administration declines or fails to submit the required report, the Administration’s decision would prompt the termination of certain covered security assistance programs for Israel.",1,2026-09-16T09:43:13Z,2026-09-16T09:44:22Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-norton-introduce-no-fencing-at-the-united-states-capitol-complex-act,"Van Hollen, Norton Introduce No Fencing at the United States Capitol Complex Act",2026-09-15,2026,2026-09,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and U.S. Representative Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) introduced the No Fencing at the United States Capitol Complex Act, which would prohibit the installation of permanent fencing on the grounds of the United States Capitol complex. After the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, a fence was erected around the Capitol that stayed in place for six months as officials recommended a permanent barrier. Norton criticized permanent fencing as both cosmetic and imprecise and instead called for smarter, state-of-the-art solutions.

“Ours is a government of, by, and for the people – and the people should always be able to safely access our nation’s Capitol and exercise their First Amendment rights. We can protect the Capitol without walling it off to the public. This legislation would ensure this complex never becomes a fortress where the American people are left on the outside looking in,” said Senator Van Hollen.

“Permanent fencing would send an un-American message to the nation and the world, transforming the Capitol from a place that's accessible to the people it serves into a fortress that locks them out,” Congresswoman Norton said. “The answer to security vulnerabilities is not a crude barrier that makes the Capitol look safer while doing little to address the threats. Instead, we should be investing in the intelligence, technology, training and security measures that actually protect the Capitol while preserving the openness that is fundamental to our democracy. At a time when trust in government is at historic lows, the last thing we should do is put another physical and psychological barrier between the people and the government that serves them.”",1,2026-09-16T09:43:13Z,2026-09-16T09:44:22Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-chu-introduce-bicameral-resolution-to-designate-community-school-coordinators-appreciation-week,"Van Hollen, Chu Introduce Bicameral Resolution to Designate Community School Coordinators Appreciation Week",2026-09-14,2026,2026-09,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and U.S. Representative Judy Chu (D-Calif.) introduced a bicameral resolution to designate September 13 through 19, 2026 as Community School Coordinators Appreciation Week to recognize the critical work of community school coordinators in giving students and families at full-service community schools the resources they need to succeed. This resolution is cosponsored in the Senate by U.S. Senators Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), and Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.).

Community schools are public schools that provide wraparound support services, such as medical, mental, transportation, and nutrition health services, mentoring and youth development programs, expanded learning opportunities, and active family and community engagement. Community school coordinators work with the community and non-profits to identify and source additional resources to benefit students and their families. The resolution recognizes the role community school coordinators play in helping students succeed in their academic years and beyond. There are more than 1000 community schools serving students across all 24 of Maryland’s school districts.

“Setting students up for success starts with making sure their needs are met – both in and out of the classroom. Our community schools are valued partners, empowering local education and community leaders to connect families with vital services while providing a top-notch education. Community school coordinators dedicate themselves to helping students and families get the support they need to succeed while serving as invaluable liaisons to community resources, which is why I’m proud to recognize their hard work with this resolution,” said Senator Van Hollen.

""Community Schools partner with local organizations to provide the academic, health, and social supports students need to thrive. Research shows that addressing the needs of the whole student can reduce disparities, decrease disciplinary measures, and improve academic outcomes. Community School Coordinators are critical to making these local partnerships work, which is why I’m proud to introduce my resolution designating Community School Coordinator Appreciation Week and recognizing the hard work Community School Coordinators do every day to help students succeed in and out of the classroom,"" said Congresswoman Chu.

“Community schools provide the necessary resources to help students succeed both in the classroom and beyond. By partnering with community-based organizations, engaging with families, providing services, and extending programs, community schools build truly supportive environments for students, and community school coordinators are essential to this work,” said Senator Hirono. “As the Trump regime continues to attack public education at every turn, this resolution recognizes Community School Coordinator Appreciation Week and celebrates the integral role coordinators play in their schools’ success. I’m proud to join my colleagues in thanking these educators and remain committed to helping schools nationwide provide children with the resources they need.”

“Community school coordinators play an important role in making sure students and families have the support they need to succeed, both in and outside the classroom,” said Senator Heinrich. “I’m proud to introduce this resolution recognizing their important work and thanking them for showing up each and every day to support New Mexico’s students and families.”

“In New Mexico and across the country, students deserve the support and resources they need to succeed, both inside and outside the classroom,” said Senator Luján. “Our community school coordinators make that possible by connecting students and families with critical services and resources. That is why I’m joining my colleagues in recognizing Community School Coordinators Appreciation Week and honoring the dedicated coordinators who work every day to help our students and families thrive.”

""Community school coordinators here in Maryland do more than just educate our children — they feed them, care for their mental and physical well-being, and mentor them far beyond the classroom. I am so proud to be joining my colleagues in designating September 13 through September 19 as Community School Coordinators Appreciation Week. We should celebrate and appreciate the work of our community school coordinators all year,"" said Senator Alsobrooks.

The full text of the resolution is available here.",1,2026-09-16T09:43:13Z,2026-09-16T09:44:22Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-presses-openai-ceo-sam-altman-on-alarming-new-ai-model-claims-calls-for-risk-assessment-of-ai-capabilities,"Van Hollen Presses OpenAI CEO Sam Altman on Alarming New AI Model Claims, Calls for Risk Assessment of AI Capabilities",2026-09-10,2026,2026-09,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) called on OpenAI CEO Sam Altman to provide answers on the safety of the company’s newly released model and to reconcile concerning statements regarding its ongoing development practices. In a letter, the Senator pressed Altman to answer a series of questions around the development of OpenAI’s new model as well as recent security failures. Senator Van Hollen also urged Altman to immediately grant researchers from the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the National Security Agency, and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency full, transparent access to the technical information that would allow them to assess the safety and risks of OpenAI’s models.

The Senator begins, “I am writing with serious concerns about the launch of OpenAI’s latest model, GPT-6 Astra, and the uncertainty surrounding its capabilities. Its release coinciding with the independent announcement of a second, previously undisclosed security incident involving OpenAI’s models raises significant safety questions about the risks that Astra poses to our digital systems and protected information. You acknowledged the need for caution upon its release when you said: ‘The next generation of models are going to be sobering for everybody. I think no one intellectually honest can look at what’s happening and not feel the weight of responsibility.’”

On OpenAI’s statements that they have decreased ability to monitor their own advanced AI model, Senator Van Hollen notes, “When OpenAI or independent safety organizations attempt to investigate a rogue or intentionally harmful action, there will be less of this evidence available. While this is framed as a ‘jump in intelligence,’ you are telling the American people that your newest model offers you, the developers, less insight into its operations. As you note in your system card, this raises myriad concerns including whether Astra may be ‘sandbagging’ or intentionally reducing its performance on safety tests.”

“Concerns about OpenAI’s ability to accurately understand, measure, monitor, and safely control AI models are not hypothetical. In addition to the Hugging Face hack, the day after Astra’s release it was reported for the first time that your company failed yet again to contain and monitor AI agents during testing and development. Independent researchers scouring the internet discovered and disclosed that OpenAI agents also ‘decided’ to make use of a German message board to communicate with one another about topics including how to evade detection. This digital ‘swarm,’ or mass of AI agents, effectively worked together without specific human direction or guidance to communicate with one another on the open internet,” the Senator continues.

On the need for independent researchers to assess safety and risks, Senator Van Hollen writes, “As a start, to the extent that you do not have sufficient monitorability to assure the safety of any OpenAI models, or that you have unresolved concerns the models have misrepresented their capabilities during testing, you should immediately remove them from public access. If you have not already done so, you should also immediately grant researchers from the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the National Security Agency, and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency transparent access to the technical information that would allow them to assess the safety of and risks to our critical digital infrastructure in light of Astra’s release.”

Among other questions, Senator Van Hollen goes on to request answers to the following:

How does OpenAI reconcile permitting Astra's release under its Preparedness Framework when the company also admits that the safety monitoring system for Astra “may miss misaligned behavior, and harmful actions can occur before [the monitoring system] intervenes?”

To what extent, if any, did OpenAI proactively work with critical infrastructure providers that are not part of your enterprise program before releasing the model capable of hacking into their systems?

OpenAI’s staff have raised concerns that Astra could be “sandbagging,” or deliberately reducing its capabilities within safety testing environments to mislead human monitors. Additionally, OpenAI has stated: “if the model were to try to sandbag covertly, we would likely be unable to catch it reliably.” How does your company reconcile the decision to release Astra publicly while simultaneously acknowledging the model’s ability to mislead humans during safety testing?

In the system card, OpenAI wrote: ""We are tracking monitorability closely and will not accept further degradation of monitoring beyond a limit..."" What is the limit?

How do you reconcile your claim that Astra is your most aligned model yet, but you have taken a step back in your ability to monitor its internal operations?

What is your plan for monitorability going forward?

Does OpenAI have concerns about leading a race to the bottom where AI models react to human safety oversight as an inefficiency?

Given the “weight of responsibility” you are feeling, what factors and concerns did you weigh before ultimately deciding to release this model to the public?

“I look forward to receiving answers by September 17th and continuing to work with you and OpenAI to address and manage AI risks,” Senator Van Hollen concludes.

The full text of the letter is available here and below.

Dear Mr. Altman,

I am writing with serious concerns about the launch of OpenAI’s latest model, GPT-6 Astra, and the uncertainty surrounding its capabilities. Its release coinciding with the independent announcement of a second, previously undisclosed security incident involving OpenAI’s models raises significant safety questions about the risks that Astra poses to our digital systems and protected information. You acknowledged the need for caution upon its release when you said:

“The next generation of models are going to be sobering for everybody. I think no one intellectually honest can look at what’s happening and not feel the weight of responsibility.”

“We are just sailing into unknown waters.”

Technical reporting indicates that Astra represents a significant increase in capabilities compared to your other models released even this year. However, Astra’s published technical information (“system card”) and comments from one of OpenAI’s own technical staff make clear that the decision to release this product came with concerning new compromises on safety:

“GPT-6 Astra is more aligned than our previous models. But it’s also less monitorable, which is a concerning trend that we take very seriously. We believe monitorability drop comes from a jump in intelligence and not direct optimization pressure on CoT or architecture changes.”

Chain of thought (CoT) reasoning is the process of an AI model noting each decision along a path and explaining the reasoning for choosing a specific next step. When an AI agent is executing a series of tasks from a single human prompt, such as when one is completing a coding task, the CoT represents an important step-by-step analysis of the agent's actions and decision making. Under current safety regimes, CoT is a vital tool for monitoring, building an understanding of AI models, and investigating security incidents. Astra is no different in this regard: OpenAI has stated that it will rely on CoT monitoring to help ensure GPT-6 is used safely.

Given OpenAI’s ongoing reliance on the CoT for safety monitoring, it is especially concerning that AI agents running on Astra are reported by OpenAI to be doing more opaque reasoning and decision making that does not appear in the CoT. Without that record, there is even less human insight into AI agent behavior. When OpenAI or independent safety organizations attempt to investigate a rogue or intentionally harmful action, there will be less of this evidence available. While this is framed as a “jump in intelligence,” you are telling the American people that your newest model offers you, the developers, less insight into its operations. As you note in your system card, this raises myriad concerns including whether Astra may be “sandbagging” or intentionally reducing its performance on safety tests. Releasing a highly capable model with reduced CoT monitorability while relying on CoT monitorability for safety naturally raises questions about the accuracy of your company’s assurances regarding Astra’s risk of causing harm.

Your company's concerns regarding Astra's capabilities for harm appear warranted. The independent testing of Astra that OpenAI has made public is alarming. During its testing of Astra, the UK AI Security Institute found that “[w]hen tasked with solving difficult simulated cybersecurity challenges, Astra performed a range of malicious actions including conducting supply chain attacks against open source providers,” demonstrating that Astra performed harmful actions without explicit human direction in a simulated environment prior to its release. Apollo Research, which was hired to conduct three days of safety testing, determined that Astra demonstrated high rates of “awareness of being evaluated in its reasoning.” Because of this finding, Apollo concluded that other test results that claim to demonstrate Astra’s safety may not be valid evidence of safety. I commend you for including this information in the system card but the absence of evidence that these issues have been mitigated is noticeable. If you have subsequent testing to demonstrate that Astra is no longer capable of performing malicious or harmful actions that has been withheld for some reason, I urge you to share it.

Concerns about OpenAI’s ability to accurately understand, measure, monitor, and safely control AI models are not hypothetical. In addition to the Hugging Face hack, the day after Astra’s release it was reported for the first time that your company failed yet again to contain and monitor AI agents during testing and development. Independent researchers scouring the internet discovered and disclosed that OpenAI agents also “decided” to make use of a German message board to communicate with one another about topics including how to evade detection. This digital “swarm,” or mass of AI agents, effectively worked together without specific human direction or guidance to communicate with one another on the open internet. Although OpenAI was conducting the tests, both this incident and the Hugging Face hack were discovered by parties other than OpenAI.

OpenAI has disclosed that some training for Astra was temporarily paused in response to the Hugging Face incident. One of the few things we do know about this now-released model is that, should the model’s safeguards fail or malicious actors successfully jailbreak the model, Astra represents a new level of security threat to any private or sensitive digital information. You rate its offensive hacking capabilities as “Critical” by your own metrics, meaning the model, in your company’s own words, “could introduce unprecedented new pathways to severe harm.” While you have disclosed that you are limiting access to Astra’s most advanced cyber capabilities to a limited pool of trusted actors for now, the model’s system card makes clear that even the publicly available model still maintains the potential for significant cybersecurity exploits, demonstrating an inherent public safety risk.

AI agents, especially those working in conjunction with one another, are capable of entering previously secure digital environments in part through their sheer inexhaustibility. In some instances, it takes AI agents seconds or minutes to identify vulnerabilities in digital infrastructure that would take humans far longer to find, if they would be identified at all. The AI models you have developed can accomplish many tasks, including acting as the most efficient hacking entities ever created. Given the Hugging Face cybersecurity incident, the recently disclosed German wiki incident, and Astra’s advanced cyber capabilities that OpenAI is actively promoting, stringent oversight of Astra’s behavior and use is paramount.

To the extent AI agents operate independently and work to evade human detection of their activities, they may open companies to significant civil and/or criminal liability should they intentionally access sensitive computer systems without permission to cause certain covered harms. OpenAI’s agents may have already crossed that line and could be at risk of doing so again.

It is necessary to critically evaluate the developing capabilities of AI models, assess their risks, and manage their operations accordingly.

As a start, to the extent that you do not have sufficient monitorability to assure the safety of any OpenAI models, or that you have unresolved concerns the models have misrepresented their capabilities during testing, you should immediately remove them from public access. If you have not already done so, you should also immediately grant researchers from the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the National Security Agency, and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency transparent access to the technical information that would allow them to assess the safety of and risks to our critical digital infrastructure in light of Astra’s release.

In addition, I request a publicly available response to the following questions:

OpenAI’s publicly released Preparedness Framework and Astra’s system card outline your company’s safety framework, but they appear to leave critical gaps.

How do you define what it means for an AI model or agent to be safe enough to conduct internal testing?

How do you define what it means for it to be safe to release a model to the public?

OpenAI has stated: “we believe Astra's safeguards sufficiently minimize the risk of severe harm for release under our Preparedness Framework.” What level of risk for severe harm did OpenAI deem acceptable to allow for Astra's release, and did OpenAI consult with any U.S. government agencies in determining this purportedly acceptable level of risk of severe harm?

How does OpenAI reconcile permitting Astra's release under its Preparedness Framework when the company also admits that the safety monitoring system for Astra “may miss misaligned behavior, and harmful actions can occur before [the monitoring system] intervenes?”

Alongside this announcement, OpenAI committed $1 billion through its Daybreak program to support U.S. and international cyber defense.

To what extent, if any, did OpenAI proactively work with critical infrastructure providers that are not part of your enterprise program before releasing the model capable of hacking into their systems?

You indicated you participated in the White House’s voluntary review process before releasing the model publicly. How long was that review process?

What do you estimate is the cost of securing the U.S.’s digital infrastructure to guard against a hack conducted using Astra-level capabilities?

What do you estimate the cost of the damage to our collective digital infrastructure would be if Astra is used by malicious actors to hack into critical systems?

You recently stated, “some things are going to go very wrong with cybersecurity unless people act quite urgently.” Who are the people you are referring to and what actions is OpenAI taking to respond to this urgent risk?

It is reported that OpenAI models may have conducted the Hugging Face and German wiki attacks during evaluation exercises. Have there been any other incidents where models exploited vulnerabilities to leave secure environments during training, testing, or evaluation?

OpenAI has indicated that steps have been taken to improve the security of sandboxes and other secure testing environments since these incidents. Have there been any breaches of security or containment since those changes have been implemented?

To what extent does OpenAI conduct or allow others to conduct testing of unreleased models outside of secure testing environments?

How regularly are security and containment protocols for model training and testing revisited?

It has been reported that certain AI models helped supervise Astra's training. What models played a role in Astra's training and to what extent was the development or training of Astra automated?

To what extent did human oversight remain in the training process relative to automated oversight?

OpenAI’s Chief Scientist recently shared a warning about the pace of AI advancement and the move toward AI models themselves playing a larger role in subsequent AI model development. To what extent is OpenAI using AI to develop, train, or monitor other AI models?

OpenAI has pointed to Astra’s purported improvements in alignment over GPT-5.6 Sol to justify its public release. At the same time, questions have been raised by independent safety experts regarding the evidence OpenAI has presented to prove Astra’s alignment. What additional evidence can you provide to justify your company’s claims about Astra’s safety alignment, and will you commit to independent testing in this area?

OpenAI’s staff have raised concerns that Astra could be “sandbagging,” or deliberately reducing its capabilities within safety testing environments to mislead human monitors. Additionally, OpenAI has stated: “if the model were to try to sandbag covertly, we would likely be unable to catch it reliably.” How does your company reconcile the decision to release Astra publicly while simultaneously acknowledging the model’s ability to mislead humans during safety testing?

In the system card, OpenAI wrote: “We are tracking monitorability closely and will not accept further degradation of monitoring beyond a limit...” What is the limit?

How do you reconcile your claim that Astra is your most aligned model yet, but you have taken a step back in your ability to monitor its internal operations?

What is your plan for monitorability going forward?

Does OpenAI have concerns about leading a race to the bottom where AI models react to human safety oversight as an inefficiency?

Given the “weight of responsibility” you are feeling, what factors and concerns did you weigh before ultimately deciding to release this model to the public?

I look forward to receiving answers by September 17th and continuing to work with you and OpenAI to address and manage AI risks.",1,2026-09-11T09:25:29Z,2026-09-11T09:27:08Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/maryland-delegation-submits-items-for-congressional-time-capsule-in-celebration-of-americas-250th-anniversary,Maryland Delegation Submits Items for Congressional Time Capsule in Celebration of America’s 250th Anniversary,2026-09-04,2026,2026-09,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"In honor of America’s 250th anniversary, this summer, the full Maryland Congressional Delegation – U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen and Angela Alsobrooks and U.S. Representatives Steny Hoyer, Kweisi Mfume, Andy Harris, Jamie Raskin, Glenn Ivey, Sarah Elfreth, April McClain Delaney, and Johnny Olszewski (all Md.) – submitted a Fort McHenry Flag and a Baltimore & Ohio (B&O) Railroad Centenary Souvenir Medal to the Semiquincentennial Congressional Time Capsule. Sealed and buried by the Architect of the Capitol, the Semiquincentennial Congressional Time Capsule contains a joint letter and items of significance from every state and territory reflecting the history and culture of our country. It will be opened by the 224th Congress in celebration of our nation's 500th anniversary on July 4, 2276.

The items selected by the Maryland delegation represent Maryland’s critical role in the history of America:

Fort McHenry Flag: This 15-Star Flag, also known as a Fort McHenry Flag, is a replica of the one that flew above Fort McHenry during the Battle of Baltimore and inspired Francis Scott Key to write the United States national anthem, The Star-Spangled Banner, in 1814. The flag that was flying at Fort McHenry that day was sewn at 844 E. Pratt Street in Baltimore by Mary Pickersgill, members of her family, and indentured and enslaved African-American women – it is now on display at the Smithsonian National Museum of American History in Washington, D.C. The Fort McHenry Flag has 15 stars and 15 stripes to account for Vermont and Kentucky becoming the 14th and 15th states, and was the official flag of the United States from 1795-1818. The Fort McHenry Flag included in the Congressional Time Capsule was flown over 844 E. Pratt Street, now known as the Star-Spangled Banner Flag House, on July 4, 2026, on the occasion of America’s 250th anniversary.

B&O Railroad Centenary Souvenir Medal: This commemorative coin was crafted in honor of the B&O Railroad’s 100th anniversary in 1927. The B&O Souvenir Medal was selected for the Congressional Time Capsule because of the B&O Railroad’s significant impact on both the state of Maryland and the country – chartered on February 28, 1827, it was the first-ever railroad to carry both passengers and freight for a toll. It pioneered railway engineering and spurred industrial opportunity for the United States. Notably, construction of the B&O Railroad began on July 4, 1828, with a groundbreaking event in Baltimore that featured Marylander Charles Carroll, the last living signer of the Declaration of Independence. The Souvenir Medal was donated to this time capsule by the National Museum of Railroad History and Innovation located in Baltimore.

“Marylanders have always played a central role in American history – from the Maryland 400 holding strong against the British Army in 1776, to Baltimore’s own Thurgood Marshall expanding justice under the law, to the countless scientists, innovators, and entrepreneurs pushing our nation forward every day. Inspired by the legacy of these great Marylanders and those still to come, we will continue working to build a nation that lives up to the American promise of equal justice, equal rights, and equal opportunity for all. As we celebrate America’s 250th anniversary, the items Team Maryland chose for this Congressional Time Capsule showcase the resilience and innovation woven into the histories of both our great state and nation. This time capsule is a reflection on the work our nation has done over the past 250 years to live up to our founding ideals, and a statement of belief that 250 years from now our democracy will be even stronger,” said Senator Van Hollen.

“It was an honor to celebrate America’s 250th Anniversary by looking back at Maryland’s contributions to technology, science, and culture that have transformed our nation forever. And when this time capsule is opened on July 4, 2276, I hope Marylanders will look back at the mark we are leaving now – how we stood for justice, worked hard to advance society, cured diseases, found solutions to complex problems, and did it all with joy and love for each other,” said Senator Alsobrooks.

“It can be difficult to imagine America at 500. What technologies will define the way we live and work? What will our nation celebrate and mourn from its history? How will our people build community and understand the bonds that keep us together? The America 250 Congressional Time Capsule will offer them a window into our nation and our moment in history. I’m proud to join Team Maryland in offering future Marylanders a reminder of what we cherish and how we celebrate our state’s place in American history,” said Congressman Hoyer.

""The United States of America's 250th Birthday is a momentous occasion, and with the selection of these items for the Semiquincentennial Congressional Time Capsule, we ensure that Maryland's contributions to American history will be preserved for our nation's Quincentennial,"" said Congressman Mfume. ""The resilience and fortitude represented by this 15-star flag – the same design as flew over Fort McHenry while Francis Scott Key penned our National Anthem – as well as the pioneering spirit and ingenuity embodied by the commemorative B&O Railroad coin, are traits that have characterized Marylanders for generations. Let this capsule carry them forward to those Americans who open it next.""

“Maryland’s contributions to our country stretch back to the earliest days of our nation. More than two centuries later, that legacy continues across the Eastern Shore and Chesapeake Bay, where farmers and watermen remain an important part of American agriculture and seafood production, and through the Port of Baltimore, which connects our state to commerce around the world. The items selected by the Maryland delegation capture two defining moments in that history and will carry a piece of Maryland’s past forward as America celebrates its 250th anniversary,” said Congressman Harris.

“From Frederick Douglass to Harriet Tubman to Rachel Carson to Thurgood Marshall, Marylanders have been devoted patriots and fighters for our land, our democracy and our freedom,” said Congressman Raskin. “When this time capsule is opened, future Americans will be reminded of the Free State’s many enduring cultural, scientific and political contributions to our nation’s history and our shared work to build a more perfect union.”

“Maryland has always been at the heart of America’s story, and our contributions to this country extend far beyond the moments we typically see in the history books. The flag that inspired our national anthem was sewn in Baltimore by Mary Pickersgill, her family, and Black women whose contributions were essential to our nation’s history. The B&O Railroad helped launch America’s industrial future from right here in Maryland. As we celebrate 250 years of our nation, these artifacts remind us that America’s story has always been shaped by the people, ingenuity, and perseverance of Marylanders. I’m proud to help preserve that story for Americans 250 years from now,” said Congressman Ivey.

“Home to the oldest State Capitol to remain in use and the only State House to have served as the nation’s Capitol; the place where our Founders met in 1786 and decided we needed a new system of government that led to the Constitution we have today; and the state where our flag flew high after the Battle of Fort McHenry, inspiring our national anthem — Maryland’s role in our nation’s history is undeniable,” said Congresswoman Elfreth. “The artifacts we preserved today tell crucial pieces of Maryland’s story in the last 250 years of our nation’s history, and Team Maryland is committed to preserving this legacy for generations to come.”

“People call Maryland America in miniature. That started as a line about our climate and geography, but I think it says something truer about us: for more than 250 years, Maryland has helped build this country. What our delegation put in this time capsule shows exactly that,” said Congresswoman McClain Delaney.

“Maryland has always punched above its weight in shaping the story of America. From the flag that inspired our national anthem to the railroad that helped connect a growing nation, these artifacts help tell the story of Maryland’s role in defending our freedom and creating opportunity,” said Congressman Olszewski. “Now, 250 years later, the fight for these ideals continues in different ways. It is with a spirit of hope that we look to the future -- that generations of Americans will continue our march toward a more perfect union.""",1,2026-09-05T08:49:07Z,2026-09-05T08:50:44Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-mcclain-delaney-visit-allegany-and-garrett-counties-to-highlight-over-5-million-in-federal-funding-for-western-maryland-communities,"Van Hollen, McClain Delaney Visit Allegany & Garrett Counties to Highlight Over $5 Million in Federal Funding for Western Maryland Communities",2026-09-03,2026,2026-09,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"On August 20, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen and Congresswoman April McClain Delaney (both D-Md.) were in Allegany and Garrett Counties to highlight $5.5 million that they, along with Senator Angela Alsobrooks, secured in Congress for Western Maryland communities. The lawmakers visited Frostburg State University, Potomac Fire Company No. 2 in Westernport, Garrett Regional Medical Center, and Oakland Town Hall in Oakland. This funding is part of the $10,484,000 in Fiscal Year 2026 Congressionally Directed Spending that the Senators fought to deliver for Allegany and Garrett Counties.

“Local partnerships help us identify the priorities that matter most to our communities, and through those partnerships, Team Maryland works to deliver federal investments needed to move those projects forward – just like these across the region. From expanding educational opportunities and medical services to supporting first responders and infrastructure upgrades, these federal dollars are being put to work where they can make a real difference for Western Maryland residents and communities and have the greatest impact,” said Senator Van Hollen.

“What I’ve seen and heard as I’ve gone around the state – including while I was in Western and Mountain Maryland – is that residents everywhere want the same things. We all want affordable health care, the ability to buy a home, groceries we can actually afford, gas that isn’t skyrocketing out of control every single day, and the opportunity to actually create generational wealth. And while we’re currently dealing with an administration that doesn’t care about solving these issues, my focus since day one has been to deliver for Marylanders. That’s why I was so proud to partner with Senator Van Hollen and Congresswoman McClain Delaney to secure $5.5 million in federal investment for Western Maryland communities, including for Frostburg State University, Potomac Fire Company No. 2 in Westernport, and the Garrett Regional Medical Center and Oakland Town Hall in Oakland,” said Senator Alsobrooks.

“Bringing $5.5 million in federal investments home to Western and Mountain Maryland means investing directly in the people and communities that make our state strong,” said Congresswoman McClain Delaney. “These investments will strengthen health care access, equip our first responders, improve critical infrastructure, and expand STEM opportunities for students. I’m proud to work alongside Senators Van Hollen and Alsobrooks to deliver for Western and Mountain Maryland and ensure every community has the resources and opportunities to thrive.”

The lawmakers first visited Frostburg State University’s Planetarium, where they highlighted $2.8 million in direct federal funding they secured in Congress to purchase new equipment for the Planetarium and provide more STEM education opportunities for students. The investment is in addition to $750,000 in FY23 Congressionally Directed Spending that Senator Van Hollen helped secure for this initiative.

“This investment allows us to build on the tremendous momentum generated by the Planetarium’s reopening and significantly expand its educational impact,” said Frostburg State University President Dr. Shadow JQ Robinson. “The Planetarium is more than a place to observe the night sky. It is a gateway to discovery that will connect students and community members to science, technology and exploration through innovative, interactive experiences.”

The lawmakers then visited Potomac Fire Company No. 2, where they highlighted a $675,000 federal investment they secured in Congress to replace the Company’s 35-year-old fire engine.

“We extend our sincere thanks to U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen, U.S. Senator Angela Alsobrooks, and Congresswoman April McClain Delaney for their unwavering support in helping secure the funding needed to replace our 35-year-old engine. This engine has proudly served the Town of Westernport and surrounding communities for decades, but is now in desperate need of replacement. This investment will ensure our firefighters have the reliable equipment they need to continue providing lifesaving emergency services for years to come. We are incredibly grateful for their support and look forward to putting a new engine in service for generations to come,” said Bill Kight, President, Potomac Fire Company No. 2.

The lawmakers next visited Garrett Regional Medical Center, where they highlighted a $1 million federal investment they secured in Congress to help plan and design the new radiation department, which will provide on-site radiation treatment services for patients across the region.

“On behalf of the Board, staff, patients, and community, I am overwhelmed with gratitude for the support from Senator Van Hollen, Senator Alsobrooks, and Congresswoman Delaney. Their support will help ensure access to care for radiation oncology services in Garrett County so our citizens will no longer have to travel long distances to receive care. The entire community is grateful for their leadership and true compassion and caring for the patients we serve,” said Mark Boucot, President and CEO of Garrett Regional Medical Center.

Lastly, the lawmakers joined Oakland’s Mayor and Town Council at the Oakland Town Hall, where they highlighted $1 million in direct federal funding they secured in Congress to replace the town’s aging water infrastructure. This project will correct critical distribution failures, including low pressure and volume issues, and ensure compliance with the International Fire Code. This investment is in addition to $364,632 in federal funding from the Appalachian Regional Commission that the lawmakers helped secure last year to support upgrades to the town’s water system.

“We are incredibly thankful to Senator Van Hollen, Senator Alsobrooks, and Congresswoman McClain Delaney for securing this investment to upgrade our water system. The improvements will fix low pressure and volume issues on the west side of town, ensuring that residents have sufficient water and that fire emergency personnel have the flow required to protect our community. This $1 million in federal funding represents over half of our annual water and sewer budget, highlighting that a town of our size cannot tackle infrastructure projects of this scale alone. Beyond public safety, this water infrastructure will also enable residential growth. A planned residential development featuring affordable rentals, market-rate rentals, and single-family homes is ready to move forward as soon as we can supply it with water. Thanks to the Appalachian Regional Commission funding that has also been secured, the planning and engineering phase is now underway. This Congressionally Directed Spending ensures we can see the future phases of this project through to completion,” said Mayor Andrew Sauder, Town of Oakland.

The total FY26 Congressionally Directed Spending secured for Allegany County is as follows:

Project Name: Planetarium Equipment

Applicant: Frostburg State University

Project Description: Funds will be used to purchase new equipment for Frostburg State University's Planetarium to support STEM education in Western Maryland.

Amount Included: $2,808,000

Project Name: UPMC Western Maryland Health Access

Applicant: UPMC Western Maryland Corporation

Project Description: Funds will support UPMC Western Maryland Schwab Family Cancer Center's comprehensive radiation therapy services and expand treatment services to include intracranial radiation for patients.

Amount Included: $2,750,000

Project Name: Potomac Fire Company Engine Replacement

Applicant: Potomac Fire Company No.2 Inc.

Project Description: Funds will be used to replace a 35-year-old fire engine to better serve and protect the Town of Westernport.

Amount Included: $675,000

Project Name: Canal Place Preservation and Development Authority for Sediment Testing and Remediation

Applicant: Canal Place Preservation and Development Authority

Project Description: Funds will be used to test and remove contaminants from sediment around the Industrial Dam on the Potomac River in Cumberland, MD, and to develop methods to more efficiently remove sediment to improve water quality.

Amount Included: $500,000

The total FY26 Congressionally Directed Spending secured for Garrett County is as follows:

Project Name: Garrett County Sanitary District for Gorman Water Source Project

Applicant: Garrett County Sanitary District, Inc.

Project Description: Funds will be used to provide water source redundancy by drilling a new production well to replace the previous production well that collapsed.

Amount Included: $1,659,000

Project Name: Town of Oakland for Water System Improvements

Applicant: Town of Oakland

Project Description: Funds will be used to replace Oakland’s antiquated water system infrastructure. The proposed project is necessary to correct critical distribution failures, including low pressure and volume issues, and ensure compliance with the International Fire Code.

Amount Included: $1,092,000",1,2026-09-05T08:49:07Z,2026-09-05T08:50:44Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/trump-administration-refuses-to-close-tax-loophole-exploited-by-private-jet-owners,Trump Administration Refuses to Close Tax Loophole Exploited by Private Jet Owners,2026-09-03,2026,2026-09,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Senators Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) in blasting the Treasury Department’s refusal to close the Standard Industry Fare Level (SIFL) loophole, which has long been abused by private jet owners to substantially undervalue the taxable cost of personal travel on a corporate private jet. The Trump Treasury Department’s pro-billionaire pronouncement came in a response to a July 24 request from the senators.

The Treasury Department argued in its new letter that calculating the true market value for employer-provided flights taken by employees for personal purposes, rather than using the existing SIFL method, would be “administratively burdensome” for taxpayers and the Internal Revenue Service. The Department also claims that the SIFL method is intended to produce consistent results – regardless of the staggering gap between the SIFL rate and the actual charter market rates.

“Donald Trump’s priorities revolve around enriching himself and his billionaire friends. While working families struggle to afford groceries, housing, and gas, this Administration focuses on tax breaks for billionaires – including tax breaks for private jets. What a disgrace,” said Senator Van Hollen.

“President Trump’s 2017 tax law and Big, Beautiful-for-Billionaires bill handed billionaires and big corporations massive tax breaks on private jets. The Trump administration now says it would be ‘burdensome’ to close the private jet tax loophole because this is an administration hell-bent on using the powers of government to make the ultra-rich even richer, and they don’t care if middle-class taxpayers get stuck with the tab,” said Senator Whitehouse.

Passage of President Trump and Congressional Republicans’ Big, Beautiful-for-Billionaires Bill made permanent an egregious tax provision allowing 100 percent bonus depreciation for the purchase of corporate aircraft, which the senators argued exacerbates the tax giveaway created by the SIFL loophole, letting the ultrawealthy skirt the true cost of personal private jet travel on corporate aircraft.",1,2026-09-09T09:27:09Z,2026-09-09T09:29:04Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-alsobrooks-mcclain-delaney-announce-250000-to-rehabilitate-boonsboros-wastewater-system,"Van Hollen, Alsobrooks, McClain Delaney Announce $250,000 to Rehabilitate Boonsboro’s Wastewater System",2026-09-01,2026,2026-09,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen and Angela Alsobrooks and Congresswoman April McClain Delaney (all D-Md.) announced $250,000 in federal funding from the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) for the Town of Boonsboro to rehabilitate its wastewater system. The project includes inspecting 20,000 linear feet of sewer mains to identify infiltration sources and installing cured-in-place pipe (CIPP) lining in deteriorated sections. This work will prevent overflows during rain events, reduce treatment costs, and improve wastewater service to 42 businesses and 475 households.

“Upgrading aging sewage infrastructure is essential to the health and well-being of our communities and the local economy. This federal funding will support these much-needed improvements in Boonsboro, help prevent costly problems in the future, and ensure the town’s wastewater system is well-equipped to serve the needs of the residents and businesses for years to come,” said Senator Van Hollen.

“The Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) makes critical investments in Western Maryland and across the Appalachian region, and that is why I am fighting so hard to protect it against cuts. As a member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, I oversee ARC and know its critical work is not just a priority for Marylanders but also to the 12 other qualified states. I am proud to partner with Senator Van Hollen and Congresswoman McClain Delaney in announcing that ARC is investing $250,000 in federal investment for the Town of Boonsboro to upgrade its wastewater system. Critical investments in aging infrastructure like this one help fuel our economy and keep us healthy and safe,” said Senator Alsobrooks.

“Strong rural communities depend on strong, reliable infrastructure,” said Congresswoman McClain Delaney. “This $250,000 federal investment will help Boonsboro modernize its wastewater system, lower long-term costs, and deliver more reliable service for hundreds of families and local businesses. I’m proud to work with Senators Van Hollen and Alsobrooks to bring federal resources home and make sure our rural communities have the infrastructure they need to grow and thrive.”

“Municipalities have tight budgets, so large-scale improvements like this often depend on grant funding. Boonsboro is extremely grateful to the Appalachian Regional Commission for the financial support to make this project happen,” said Mayor Howard Long, Town of Boonsboro.

This investment is provided through the Appalachian Regional Commission, an economic development partnership entity of the federal government and 13 state governments, focusing on 423 counties across the Appalachian Region. Senator Van Hollen secured $1 billion in federal funding over five years for the ARC through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021. The lawmakers worked to fund the ARC at an additional $200 million through the FY26 Energy & Water Development appropriations bill and have worked to prevent cuts to the program from the Trump Administration.

This funding builds on the $1,426,613 in federal funding Senator Van Hollen has worked to secure in recent years through Fiscal Year 2022 Congressionally Directed Spending and the Appalachian Regional Commission to support Boonsboro’s work to modernize their wastewater and sewage systems.",1,2026-09-02T09:19:58Z,2026-09-02T09:20:51Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-colleagues-file-amicus-brief-defending-courts-right-to-seek-answers-transparency-in-jgg-v-trump,"Van Hollen, Colleagues File Amicus Brief Defending Court’s Right to Seek Answers, Transparency in JGG v. Trump",2026-08-31,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), joined by Senators Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Cory Booker (N.J.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), and Peter Welch (D-Vt.), submitted an amicus brief to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in the case of In re Donald J. Trump, et. al, supporting the legal authority of the District Court to inquire whether government attorneys misrepresented or concealed facts before the Court and warning of serious consequences of permitting one branch to avoid inquiry and transparency when questioned by another co-equal branch of our federal government. The lawmakers’ amicus brief argues that Congress and the American public have an interest in knowing whether government attorneys misrepresented or concealed facts before a United States District Court, and that concerns of judicial overreach in this case are unfounded because federal courts have an inherent contempt power which includes some inquiry before a referral is made.

This case arises from JGG v. Trump, one of several legal challenges to the Trump Administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act. In March 2025, President Trump and the Department of Homeland Security sought to detain and remove individuals from the United States. Several of the individuals who were detained sought emergency relief under the Administrative Procedure Act and federal habeas corpus claims. Proceedings ensued before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, which issued a temporary restraining order preventing further removal of individuals, an order that was then vacated by the Supreme Court. The District Court then began an investigation into potential criminal contempt against the government decisionmakers. Of particular concern to the Court was to determine whether government attorneys had misrepresented, concealed, or otherwise gave misleading information to the Court. Following the contempt inquiry, the government sought a writ of mandamus before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to prevent the District Court from further investigating the actions of the government and its attorneys.

The Senators begin the brief, “Congress requires that lawyers tell the truth in judicial proceedings. It has set forth through statute that government attorneys are subject to the same rules as all other attorneys requiring truthfulness and transparency to the Courts. When a party or counsel is not honest in proceedings before them, Courts have the fundamental power to punish contempt. Congress has explicitly codified this power. And the exercise of this power is squarely within the providence of the judiciary...The Court has every right to try to make sense of these events. Mandamus to prevent that inquiry should not issue.”

“The executive branch, through counsel, may have misrepresented or concealed facts when questioned by a federal court...The executive branch must follow court orders the same as the rest of the citizenry...Such conclusion flows inexorably from perhaps the most evident and well-accepted point in constitutional law: that the government of the United States is comprised of three coequal branches,” the Senators stress.

On the unfounded concerns of judicial overreach, the Senators note, “All federal courts other than the Supreme Court are creations of Congress. Congress has explicitly provided federal courts with the authority to conduct contempt proceedings and punish accordingly... Exercising the contempt power is fundamentally within the providence of the judiciary... Excusing the executive branch at this stage is simply premature, and the District Court should be permitted to act within its statutorily conferred authority.”

“Mandamus is simply not appropriate. This case presents one coequal branch acting in defiance of an order from another coequal branch. This is too critical to prevent inquiry. The District Court was well within its authority to utilize the mechanism of contempt—a power inherent in all courts and explicitly codified by Congress,” the Senators conclude.

Full text of the argument in the brief can be viewed here.

###",1,2026-09-01T09:48:49Z,2026-09-01T09:49:51Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-alsobrooks-mcclain-delaney-announce-240000-for-frederick-municipal-airports-air-traffic-control-tower,"Van Hollen, Alsobrooks, McClain Delaney Announce $240,000 for Frederick Municipal Airport’s Air Traffic Control Tower",2026-08-28,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen and Angela Alsobrooks and Congresswoman April McClain Delaney (all D-Md.) announced $240,000 in federal funding for infrastructure upgrades at Frederick Municipal Airport’s air traffic control tower. The investment will fund the rehabilitation of the tower’s HVAC system. This funding is in addition to $1.6 million in federal support that the lawmakers have secured for other infrastructure projects at Frederick Municipal Airport, which serves as a reliever airport for Baltimore Washington International Airport and supports local business and a range of community-related operations, including emergency medical needs.

“As Maryland’s second busiest airport, Frederick Municipal Airport serves as a local economic hub, driving regional businesses, bringing visitors to Maryland, and supporting the surrounding community with a broad array of services. That’s why we’ve worked to support the airport’s modernization and deliver federal investments to upgrade its infrastructure. This investment will help ensure the airport’s control tower has the infrastructure it needs to continue providing safe and efficient service to all travelers,” said Senator Van Hollen.

“This $1.6 million in critical federal funding will enable the Frederick Municipal Airport to continue serving Maryland—supporting small businesses, moving goods, and strengthening our health care response. This investment will improve our infrastructure, strengthen our economy, and help keep Marylanders safe,” said Senator Alsobrooks.

“As Frederick County continues to grow, we need infrastructure that grows with it,” said Congresswoman McClain Delaney. “This $240,000 federal investment will modernize Frederick Municipal Airport’s air traffic control tower, strengthen safety and reliability, and support an airport that is critical to our local economy. I’m proud to work with Senators Van Hollen and Alsobrooks to bring federal dollars home and deliver for Frederick County.”

This investment is provided through the Federal Aviation Administration’s Contract Tower Competitive Grant Program, which was created and funded at $100 million over five years through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act passed by Congress in 2021.",1,2026-09-02T09:19:58Z,2026-09-02T09:20:51Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-alsobrooks-mcclain-delaney-announce-over-3-million-in-federal-funding-to-improve-water-infrastructure-in-western-maryland,"Van Hollen, Alsobrooks, McClain Delaney Announce Over $3 Million in Federal Funding to Improve Water Infrastructure in Western Maryland",2026-08-28,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen and Angela Alsobrooks and Congresswoman April McClain Delaney (all D-Md.) announced $3,340,000 in federal funding to improve water and wastewater infrastructure across Western Maryland. This investment, comprising a $2,779,000 loan for the Town of Emmitsburg to replace a critical Main Street water line, a $465,000 grant for the Town of Luke’s replacement of its sewer collection system, and a $96,000 grant for Garrett County’s planning costs for the Friendsville and Crellin wastewater treatment upgrades, will help Western Maryland communities upgrade critical infrastructure.

“Aging water systems put the health and safety of communities at risk. That’s why it’s essential we invest in modernizing community water and sewer infrastructure. This federal funding will support these much-needed improvements across Western Maryland and help prevent costly problems for communities, businesses, and residents in the future,” said Senator Van Hollen.

“From Mountain Maryland to the Eastern Shore, I will always work to ensure Marylanders across our state have access to clean and safe drinking water. Investing in clean water – as we are in Frederick, Allegany, and Garrett Counties with this over $3 million federal investment – protects public health, helps us meet our environmental goals, and ensures our infrastructure is modern and resilient,” said Senator Alsobrooks.

“Every rural community deserves reliable water and wastewater infrastructure, no matter its size or ZIP code,” said Congresswoman McClain Delaney. “This more than $3 million federal investment will help replace aging water and sewer systems and lay the groundwork for critical upgrades across Frederick, Allegany, and Garrett Counties. I’m proud to work alongside Senators Van Hollen and Alsobrooks to bring federal resources home and ensure our rural communities have the infrastructure they need to grow and thrive.”

The federal funding has been awarded as follows:

$2,779,000 loan to the Town of Emmitsburg in Frederick County to replace a water line along Main Street.

$465,000 grant to the Town of Luke in Allegany County to replace its sewer collection system.

$96,000 grant to the Garrett County Sanitary District to conduct Preliminary Engineering and Environmental reports for the Friendsville and Crellin wastewater treatment plants.

This federal funding is provided through the U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Development Water and Waste Disposal Loans and Grants Program, which the lawmakers worked to fund at $140 million in the Fiscal Year 2026 appropriations package.",1,2026-09-02T09:19:58Z,2026-09-02T09:20:51Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-joins-murray-colleagues-in-demanding-nih-director-restore-lifesaving-pediatric-research,"Van Hollen Joins Murray, Colleagues in Demanding NIH Director Restore Lifesaving Pediatric Research",2026-08-28,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Senators Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), and Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) in sending a letter to National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya demanding restoration of a promising clinical trial to help children that is ending because of the Trump administration’s budget cuts for contracts and extreme delays in Notices of Funding Opportunities impacting pediatric research, specifically the NIH’s Pediatric Trials Network (PTN). As a direct result of this administration’s actions the PTN is ending the Pediatric Opportunistic Pharmacokinetic Study (POPS), which focuses on determining the right dose of dozens of medicines commonly used in children. The abrupt end to this trial means that children and their families who have already enrolled and donated blood samples for this scientific effort will not see the trial’s goal achieved.

“We write with great concern regarding the National Institute of Health’s (NIH) budget cuts for contracts and extreme delays in Notices of Funding Opportunities and their impact on pediatric research, specifically the NIH’s Pediatric Trials Network (PTN). We recently learned that, as part of these actions, the PTN is ending its promising clinical trial, the Pediatric Opportunistic Pharmacokinetic Study (POPS), which focuses on determining the right dose of dozens of medicines commonly used in children,” write the senators. “Ending the POPS study will stop enrollment in 25 states and the testing of several dozen drugs in children: including premature infants, critically ill children, and obese children. Ending this study will also mean that children and their families who have already enrolled and donated blood samples for this important scientific effort will not see the trial’s goal achieved.”

“You cannot claim to be making American children healthier while shutting down the research that would do exactly that. We demand that you reverse this reckless decision immediately and explain your decision making to Congress and the families of the children who rely on this research,”

In the letter, the senators slam the Trump administration for this wasteful and unnecessary move. “Cancelling this research doesn't save a dime, in fact it wastes millions of dollars of taxpayer money. Congress established the BPCA and appropriated the funding for this research. Now the Trump administration is forcing it to shut down, and throwing years of data and children's blood down the drain. Clinical trials aren't light switches - you can't turn this research on and off, and now lifesaving research for our kids is gone.”

The lawmakers also call out Director Bhattacharya for his hypocrisy—because in May, during the FY 2027 NIH Budget Hearing before the Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee, he vowed to protect these sorts of trials. They note: “When asked if you were aware that last year NIH’s PTN received only part of its funding, you replied that you ‘were absolutely committed to making sure that we do have opportunities for children across the country to participate in clinical trials.’ But your actions are ripping away opportunities for children to participate in clinical trials and scientists’ ability to learn from trials that could benefit all children. Your actions are squandering the investments previously made by NIH to secure data and specimens in a highly productive trial; and wasting the contributions of children and families participating in the POPS study.”

The full text of the letter is available here and below:

Dear Director Bhattacharya:

We write with great concern regarding the National Institute of Health’s (NIH) budget cuts for contracts and extreme delays in Notices of Funding Opportunities and their impact on pediatric research, specifically the NIH’s Pediatric Trials Network (PTN). We recently learned that, as part of these actions, the PTN is ending its promising clinical trial, the Pediatric Opportunistic Pharmacokinetic Study (POPS), which focuses on determining the right dose of dozens of medicines commonly used in children. Ending the POPS study will stop enrollment in 25 states and the testing of several dozen drugs in children: including premature infants, critically ill children, and obese children. Ending this study will also mean that children and their families who have already enrolled and donated blood samples for this important scientific effort will not see the trial’s goal achieved. We urge NIH to reinstate the POPS study to prevent the irreplaceable loss of benefit of these precious blood samples from our most vulnerable populations.

The PTN was authorized by Congress in the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act (BPCA) (P.L. 107-109), bipartisan legislation that authorized $25 million per year for trials of off-patent medicines and devices used in children. Since then, the PTN has developed into an NIH-funded consortium of over 100 clinical research sites across the United States dedicated to conducting studies on the safety, efficacy, and dosing of drugs and medical devices for children. It aims to improve pediatric medication labeling and reduce off-label prescribing in children and provides critical data on how medications act across developmental stages of childhood and adolescence. Currently, the infrastructure for the BPCA trials is supported by contracts. Thus, reductions in contract funding pose barriers to the BPCA implementation. Due to an arbitrary new rule concocted by the Trump administration, the “Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Cost Efficiency Initiative,” created in response to Executive Order 14222, that institutes an agency-wide maximum contract spending cap for fiscal years (FY) 2025 and 2026, the BPCA trial funding was cut to substantially less than what has been authorized by Congress.

POPS provides infrastructure to support pediatric research at 33 sites in 25 states including Washington, New Jersey, and California. Until its recent cancellation, the study was investigating 60 medicines and had enrolled over 2,000 children. Due to its abrupt, unplanned termination, there are drugs for which the PTN will not be able to provide appropriate dosing information for one or more subgroups of children. Stopping this trial will diminish the value of irreplaceable blood samples donated by children and will prevent our ability to learn the safe dose of medicines routinely used to treat American children.

Cancelling this research doesn't save a dime, in fact it wastes millions of dollars of taxpayer money. Congress established the BPCA and appropriated the funding for this research. Now the Trump administration is forcing it to shut down, and throwing years of data and children's blood down the drain. Clinical trials aren't light switches - you can't turn this research on and off, and now lifesaving research for our kids is gone.

The National Institute on Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) previously announced it was planning to support a unified pediatric research consortium. However, that potential effort was discussed nearly a year ago at the NICHD’s Advisory Council. To date, NIH has not released a Notice of Funding Opportunity, meaning that it will likely be years before awards are made and children are enrolled in approved trials. On top of the years it will take to get a unified pediatric research consortium up and running, the PTN was informed that there will be further cuts to the network in FY 2026 because NICHD was directed to reduce the amount of money they spend via contracts in compliance with the administration’s Cost Efficiency Initiative rule.

This is not the first time cuts to the PTN has been brought to your attention. In May, during the FY 2027 Budget Hearing before the Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee, Senator Murray asked you about this very issue. When asked if you were aware that last year NIH’s PTN received only part of its funding, you replied that you “were absolutely committed to making sure that we do have opportunities for children across the country to participate in clinical trials.” But your actions are ripping away opportunities for children to participate in clinical trials and scientists’ ability to learn from trials that could benefit all children. Your actions are squandering the investments previously made by NIH to secure data and specimens in a highly productive trial; and wasting the contributions of children and families participating in the POPS study.

This pediatric trial didn’t have to end prematurely. It is just one example of a direct impact of the arbitrary decisions the Trump administration has made that are hurting our most vulnerable population - children. The contracts that support BPCA infrastructure received 40% less last year (FY 2025) than was received in 2024, and researchers were told by NIH that this year’s funding (FY 2026) will be even less. Senator Murray warned you in May that “researchers at Seattle Children’s were going to have stop their work investigating how pain medications could be safely used to help some of our sickest children as they face surgeries and hospitalization.” Yet, here we are, in the exact place we feared we would be just a few months ago.

We urge you to do whatever is necessary to ensure full funding for the NIH’s BPCA infrastructure for the PTN so the important work of the POPS trial and other vital research can move forward. This is not about a budget line—this is about keeping our kids safe and healthy. You cannot claim to be making American children healthier while shutting down the research that would do exactly that. We demand that you reverse this reckless decision immediately and explain your decision making to Congress and the families of the children who rely on this research.",1,2026-09-09T09:27:09Z,2026-09-09T09:29:04Z
https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/news/press-releases/alsobrooks-on-cnn-measles-crisis-directly-tied-to-rfk-jr/,ALSOBROOKS ON CNN – MEASLES CRISIS DIRECTLY TIED TO RFK JR.,2026-08-27,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Angela D. Alsobrooks,A000382,www.alsobrooks.senate.gov,alsobrooks,https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/,scraper,"August 27, 2026

WASHINGTON, DC – Senator Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.) joined Inside Politics with Dana Bash on CNN to discuss the surge in measles cases happening now in Maryland and across the country and how this crisis is directly tied to the disinformation coming from RFK Jr. and HHS.

“Well, what we know is that we’re seeing a serious surge in these measles cases. This is something I’ve been discussing since last year when we [saw] the outbreak of measles across our country, now going from 285 cases just in 2024 to over 2,777 cases. And we can tie it directly to the horrific leadership of Secretary Kennedy… And so we have a large number of unvaccinated individuals, including, as you mentioned, children who are dying from a disease that we had eliminated—we [had] an elimination status as of 2000 in our country, and now we’re seeing the resurgence of measles. No one should die of measles in 2026… It’s horrific and it’s completely preventable. It should not have happened, and it is directly tied, I believe, to the misinformation and disinformation coming out of HHS,” said Senator Alsobrooks during the interview.

###",1,2026-08-28T17:11:49Z,2026-08-28T17:13:14Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-kaine-sanders-announce-privileged-resolution-seeking-answers-on-west-bank-violence,"Van Hollen, Kaine, Sanders Announce Privileged Resolution Seeking Answers on West Bank Violence",2026-08-27,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), along with eight of their colleagues, announced their intent to introduce a 502B privileged resolution requiring the Department of State to report to Congress on increasing violence in the West Bank, including the killings of Americans in the West Bank. Nine Americans have been killed in the West Bank in recent years – and more detained – and none have received accountability or justice from either the Israeli or United States Governments. The Senators’ resolution would require the Department of State to provide information and assessments related to investigations of the killing of United States citizens by violent Israeli settlers or Israeli security forces in the West Bank, as well as an assessment of the human rights situation in the West Bank, specifically related to the detention of Palestinian children. They were joined in introducing the resolution by Senators Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ed Markey (D-Mass), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), and Peter Welch (D-Vt.).

“This Administration has said ensuring the safety and security of American citizens abroad is one of its highest priorities. And yet, as we’ve seen violence rise in the West Bank, American citizens have been killed time and again, and they have received no justice and no accountability. It’s past time we get answers on their deaths – and on the growing violent instability in the West Bank and the injustices facing Palestinian civilians on a daily basis. This resolution will require the State Department to begin to produce these answers, which are owed to the families of those who have lost loved ones, to the American people, and to all of those who want to ensure recipients of U.S. taxpayer dollars are acting in line with our laws and our values,” said Senator Van Hollen.

“The violence committed by Israeli settlers in the West Bank is reaching an unprecedented level, and as a result more and more Americans and Palestinians are being killed and injured. These actions – and the Israeli government’s lack of response to this violence – are unacceptable and threaten the long-term safety and security of the entire region,” said Senator Kaine. “Friends need to listen to each other, and my colleagues and I have repeatedly urged Israeli leaders to take firmer action to curtail illegal settlements in the West Bank, prosecute violent settlers, and protect Palestinian residents as well as American citizens living in or visiting the West Bank. I encourage all of my colleagues to support this resolution to require the State Department to conduct a formal assessment and provide a report to Congress on the situation in the West Bank, in particular the safety and security of Americans.”

“Every day, Palestinians in the West Bank experience horrific violence at the hands of Israeli settlers and security forces — and for years, the Israeli government has offered impunity instead of accountability. Enough is enough. The United States cannot keep bankrolling this violence and looking the other way — it’s time to end our complicity, once and for all,” said Senator Sanders.

“In my visits to the West Bank, I’ve heard numerous stories about the organized strategy of harassment and violence settlers are inflicting upon Palestinian villagers and Palestinian Americans. Tactics include cutting off villagers from their wells, their vineyards, and their orchards, burning their vehicles, and assaulting defenseless individuals, all with the implicit support of the Netanyahu government. This is wrong under every moral code,” said Senator Merkley. “This resolution demands answers about these abuses and accountability for those responsible.”

“The Netanyahu government has failed to stop Israeli security forces and settler attacks in the West Bank for years, including attacks that killed American citizens. The Trump administration has even gone so far as to reverse sanctions against individuals connected to this pattern of horrific violence. It's long past time for the U.S. government to stand up for human rights, investigate this violence against Americans and Palestinian civilians, provide full information to Congress, and hold the perpetrators accountable,” said Senator Warren.

“Israeli settlers in the West Bank have perpetrated violent crimes against Palestinians, including American citizens, with impunity. It is completely reasonable for Congress to demand our own government to report who was involved in these attacks. The United States has a moral obligation to seek justice for both our own citizens and Palestinians, including many children, targeted by Israeli security forces or settlers in the West Bank,” said Senator Smith. “A mature democracy can face up to its failures and commit to doing better. I am not at all convinced that Benjamin Netanyahu’s government is up to that task, which is why it’s up to the United States.”

“We have a responsibility to protect Americans abroad and seek justice when Americans are killed,” said Senator Luján. “The escalating violence in the West Bank and lack of accountability for the deaths of American citizens are deeply concerning. This resolution will help us get the answers we need, demand accountability, and ensure that we have a better assessment of the human rights situation in the West Bank.”

“Israeli military and police forces are a leading perpetrator of deadly violence against American civilians—including 9 killed since 2022,” said Senator Welch. “Too often there are no serious investigations and there is no accountability after violent attacks. Israel should be held to the same standards as every other nation when it comes to the lives of American citizens—that’s what this resolution demands.”

The resolution draws upon Section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act, which allows Congress to file a privileged resolution that, if passed, would require the State Department to provide information on any country receiving U.S. security assistance and that country’s observance of internationally-recognized human rights. After introduction, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee has ten days to consider it in committee, and if it fails to do so, the resolution can be called up for a vote on the Senate floor. If the resolution passes the Senate, the Trump Administration must submit the report within 30 days or the majority of security assistance authorized to Israel would be prohibited. If the resolution passes, and following the receipt of the State Department report, Congress may consider any necessary changes to U.S. security assistance to that country in light of the information received. If the Administration declines or fails to submit the required report, the Administration’s decision would prompt the termination of certain covered security assistance programs for Israel.",1,2026-08-28T17:11:49Z,2026-08-28T17:13:14Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-joins-cortez-masto-colleagues-in-opposing-ice-rollout-of-electric-shock-gloves,"Van Hollen Joins Cortez Masto, Colleagues in Opposing ICE Rollout of Electric Shock Gloves",2026-08-27,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) and 14 of their Senate colleagues called on the Trump Administration to abandon its reckless plan to outfit U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers with gloves that deliver painful electric shocks. Their letter also demands that if ICE proceeds with this purchase, it first provides Congress with answers and documentation for over 30 questions about how these devices will be used, the protocol for using them, safety guardrails, and accountability measures.

On August 10, 2026, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published a notice concerning ICE’s planned acquisition of the CTG-5 G.L.O.V.E., a glove designed to deliver a painful electric shock. The notice estimates the potential value of the acquisition between $10 million and $20 million.

“We write to express deep concern about U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) plans to spend up to $20 million on gloves that deliver electric shocks,” the Senators began. “…The blatant and tragic misuse of force in Los Angeles, Chicago, Minneapolis, Houston, Maine, and other locations around the country raises significant skepticism about the agency’s professional capability to safely deploy a new tool that could be used to harm Americans without cause. Therefore, we urge ICE to cancel the contract and reconsider the purchase.”

“The proposed acquisition raises serious questions about necessity, proportionality, medical safety, training, accountability, and constitutional rights,” the Senators continued. “Those questions are particularly important given the significant public scrutiny surrounding ICE’s excessive use of force. A device capable of delivering an electrical shock through direct contact with an individual presents substantial risks if deployed during civil arrests – even more so if it is deployed without clear limits, appropriate training, and comprehensive oversight.”

“At a time when the American people have demanded de-escalation in immigration enforcement, it is not clear why existing tools and tactics are insufficient for the agency,” the Senators wrote. “In the past year, DHS has repeatedly spent millions of taxpayer dollars on purchases it ends up not using, including $464 million for airplanes, $700 million on warehouses, and more than $2.25 million for SUVs wrapped with ICE branding. Many of these ICE transactions, including the planned electric-shock glove purchase, are completed through no-bid contracts that circumvent the normal competitive procurement process without a sufficient rationale.”

“If ICE proceeds with purchasing $20 million worth of electric-shock gloves, Congress needs a clear understanding of the device’s safety and authorized uses,” the Senators concluded.

In addition to Senators Chris Van Hollen and Cortez Masto, the letter was signed by Senators Angus King (I-Maine), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), and Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.).

The full text of the letter is available here and below.

Dear Acting Director Venturella,

We write to express deep concern about U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) plans to spend up to $20 million on gloves that deliver electric shocks. Over the past year, ICE personnel have been involved in numerous well-documented incidents of excessive force and civil rights violations. These incidents have shown the American people that ICE personnel are not adequately trained or accountable for their interactions with civilians. The blatant and tragic misuse of force in Los Angeles, Chicago, Minneapolis, Houston, Maine, and other locations around the country raises significant skepticism about the agency’s professional capability to safely deploy a new tool that could be used to harm Americans without cause. Therefore, we urge ICE to cancel the contract and reconsider the purchase.

On August 10, 2026, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published a notice concerning ICE’s planned acquisition of the CTG-5 G.L.O.V.E., a glove designed to deliver a painful electric shock that is described as a “Conductive Distraction and De-escalation Device,” for use by both Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) and Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO). The notice estimates the potential value of the acquisition between $10 million and $20 million. Congress has an obligation to ensure that federal law enforcement agencies have the resources necessary to perform their duties safely and effectively while ensuring that taxpayer dollars are being used for tools that are necessary, proportionate, and subject to meaningful safeguards. The proposed acquisition raises serious questions about necessity, proportionality, medical safety, training, accountability, and constitutional rights. Those questions are particularly important given the significant public scrutiny surrounding ICE’s excessive use of force. A device capable of delivering an electrical shock through direct contact with an individual presents substantial risks if deployed during civil arrests – even more so if it is deployed without clear limits, appropriate training, and comprehensive oversight.

ICE personnel have access to pepper spray, Tasers, batons, and restraint techniques, not to mention deescalation strategies that are widely used by law enforcement throughout the country. At a time when the American people have demanded de-escalation in immigration enforcement, it is not clear why existing tools and tactics are insufficient for the agency. In the past year, DHS has repeatedly spent millions of taxpayer dollars on purchases it ends up not using, including $464 million for airplanes, $700 million on warehouses, and more than $2.25 million for SUVs wrapped with ICE branding. Many of these ICE transactions, including the planned electric-shock glove purchase, are completed through no-bid contracts that circumvent the normal competitive procurement process without a sufficient rationale. This history raises concerns about wasteful spending and unethical contracting practices that could benefit individuals who have personal relationships with administration officials rather than those who can provide the best service at the lowest cost to the taxpayer.

If ICE proceeds with purchasing $20 million worth of electric-shock gloves, Congress needs a clear understanding of the device’s safety and authorized uses. The manufacturer identifies restrictions on the device’s use, including limitations involving children, pregnant women, elderly or disabled individuals, and repeated or simultaneous use. The manufacturer also warns that use of the electric-shock glove may cause or contribute to death or serious injury, and that longer exposure increases that potential risk. If it proceeds with this contract, ICE must establish and make public clear, enforceable limits on when and against whom the electric-shock gloves may be used, especially given that ICE may not be able to immediately assess whether an individual is pregnant or disabled. Given that ICE is most frequently engaged in civil immigration enforcement rather than criminal arrests, the agency must carefully evaluate whether deployment of the electric-shock gloves in such situations is proportionate to the task.

ICE must also establish and make public the training requirements the agency will put in place prior to and throughout any potential deployment of these gloves. Over the past year, ICE has undermined the public’s trust in the agency’s training standards by putting new personnel into operational situations who are not properly vetted or adequately trained. Training for ICE recruits was slashed before being extended again following significant backlash. Additionally, ICE has put new recruits in the field before even completing their background checks, with tragic consequences. The issuance of these electric-shock gloves to personnel in the field without sufficient training would be yet another failure of ICE in the eyes of the public.

ICE has continually failed to meet basic standards of transparency and accountability. The electric-shock gloves present a particular accountability challenge because the use of force may cause significant pain and internal injury without necessarily producing obvious visible injuries. If the electric-shock gloves are deployed, ICE must establish a robust system for documenting and reviewing every deployment and instance of use. ICE should not deploy the gloves without evidence that personnel understand and take seriously the device’s risks and that individuals subjected to its use can receive an appropriate medical response. ICE must also ensure robust internal procedures for investigating misuse of the device and all use-of-force tools provided to personnel, and effective consequences for those who are found to have abused them.

In light of these many concerns, we request answers to the following questions and production of the documents identified below.

Necessity, Procurement, and Alternatives

1. What specific operational capability does the G.L.O.V.E. provide that existing ICE defensive tactics and less-lethal tools—including pepper spray, Tasers, batons, and restraint techniques—do not? Please provide the operational analysis or other documentation supporting the acquisition.

2. How many electric-shock gloves does ICE intend to purchase, at what projected per-unit cost? How many personnel will be issued the device?

3. What alternatives did ICE consider before selecting the G.L.O.V.E.?

4. Did ICE consult with other law enforcement agencies that use the device regarding effectiveness, injuries, complaints, misuse, training requirements, or other concerns?

5. Please provide the justification for the purchase of the G.L.O.V.E. via a non-competitive contract process.

Safety and Appropriate Use

6. How does ICE classify the G.L.O.V.E. under DHS Use of Force Policy 044-05? Are the electric-shock gloves considered a de-escalation tactic under this policy?

7. In what specific circumstances will use of the electric-shock gloves be authorized?

8. Will use of the electric-shock gloves require supervisory authorization?

9. Which positions and units will carry the device?

10. What is the protocol for usage of the electric-shock gloves? Will ICE personnel be instructed to issue a warning before gloves are activated?

11. Will ICE expressly prohibit use of the electric-shock gloves as a routine compliance or punishment tool?

12. What restrictions will apply to vulnerable populations?

13. Will ICE prohibit the use of the electric-shock gloves against animals?

14. Will ICE prohibit the use of the electric-shock gloves in crowd-control situations?

15. What restrictions will govern the duration and repetition of electrical shocks?

16. Will the electric-shock gloves be authorized for use against U.S. citizens?

17. Will the electric-shock gloves be authorized for use in custodial settings? Will they be authorized for use in removal operations?

18. How will protocol for use differ between HSI and ERO?

Testing, Medical Safety, and Training

19. What testing has DHS or ICE conducted or reviewed concerning the safety and effectiveness of the electric-shock gloves? Please provide all manufacturer testing, independent testing, medical evaluations, risk assessments, and other relevant documentation.

20. Will ICE conduct a limited pilot program before broad deployment? If so, provide the parameters, location, duration, and evaluation criteria for the pilot.

21. What medical contraindications or risks has ICE identified related to use of the electricshock gloves?

22. What training will be required before an officer or agent may carry or use the electricshock gloves? Please provide all existing and proposed training and written guidance concerning the G.L.O.V.E., including curricula, lesson plans, instructor materials, certification standards, policy directives, field guidance, and manufacturer training materials.

23. Will ICE require recurring certification and refresher training? Please provide the certification requirements, frequency of recertification, proficiency standards, and consequences for personnel who fail to maintain certification.

Accountability, Reporting, and Oversight

24. What is the required response when a person is injured or appears to be in medical distress following use of the electric-shock gloves? Please provide the applicable medical response protocols, including requirements for medical evaluation, documentation, notification of supervisors, and preservation of evidence.

25. Will every activation or use of the electric-shock gloves against a person be reported as a use of force?

26. Will ICE require body-worn cameras to be activated and operational whenever the electric-shock gloves are deployed, regardless of whether the officers are in plainclothes?

27. Will every activation require written justification and supervisory review? Please identify who will review these incidents, what factors supervisors must consider, and what specific consequences will apply when personnel violate the applicable restrictions.

28. How will ICE track complaints and injuries? Will ICE maintain and publicly report data concerning internal and external complaints, injuries, improper uses, disciplinary actions, and uses of force involving the electric-shock gloves?

29. How will ICE evaluate, track, and report complaints of civil rights violations involving the use of the electric-shock gloves?

30. Will ICE conduct an independent audit of the program?

31. Please provide records reflecting any internal concerns or objections regarding the electric-shock gloves, including communications involving the Office of Tactical Programs and Firearms.

We request that ICE provide written responses to the questions above and produce the requested documents no later than September 10, 2026. The American people have made it clear that ICE must de-escalate its immigration enforcement operations. ICE must refrain from deployment of the G.L.O.V.E. and instead invest in de-escalation tools, training, and accountability. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.",1,2026-09-09T09:27:09Z,2026-09-09T09:29:04Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-joins-schiff-schumer-booker-colleagues-in-urging-netanyahu-to-immediately-crack-down-on-settler-violence-in-west-bank-protect-us-citizens,"Van Hollen Joins Schiff, Schumer, Booker, Colleagues in Urging Netanyahu to Immediately Crack Down on Settler Violence in West Bank, Protect U.S. Citizens",2026-08-26,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Senator Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Senator Cory Booker (D-N.J.), and over 40 of their Senate colleagues in urging Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to take immediate actions to reduce violence in the West Bank and prevent further incidents amidst a significant increase in harassment, threats, and acts of violence in recent weeks. They also called on the government of Israel to complete investigations into the deaths of nine American citizens who have been killed by settlers or security forces in the West Bank in recent years.

“We urge you to take measures to prevent and intercede in this violence, establish a credible mechanism to investigate violations of law, and to make clear that the Government of Israel will not tolerate violence by its people, just as it does not tolerate violence against its people,” the Senators wrote in a letter signed by almost the entire Senate Democratic Caucus.

The Senators warn that “continued settlement expansion and fighting in the West Bank will harm Israel’s long-term security and the prospects for lasting peace, prosperity, and freedom for Israelis and Palestinians alike.”

President Donald Trump and U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio previously expressed their opposition to annexation of and violence in the West Bank, which the Israeli government has failed to address.

“Like you, the safety and security of our constituents is of paramount importance. We urge your government to ensure that Americans in the Israeli-controlled parts of the West Bank are able to enjoy the security and protection of property to which they are entitled. We also hope to see the conditions improved so that Israelis and Palestinians may one day live in peace with each other without the fear of terrorism or lawless violence,” the Senators concluded.

Additionally, the Senators call for those responsible for such violent acts to be held accountable and investigated.

In addition to Van Hollen, Schiff, Schumer, and Booker, the letter was signed by U.S. Senators Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Lisa Blunt-Rochester (D-Del.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Catherine Cortez-Masto (D-Nev.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Angus King (I-Maine), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Edward Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).

The full text of the letter is available here and below.

Dear Mr. Prime Minister,

We write in shared concern and opposition to the growing levels of violence in the West Bank. Many of us have previously expressed to President Trump that continued settlement expansion and fighting in the West Bank will harm Israel’s long-term security and the prospects for lasting peace, prosperity, and freedom for Israelis and Palestinians alike.

Incidents of fatal violence by settlers have reportedly already surpassed 2025 levels and continue to increase. The last few weeks alone saw a significant surge in violence on both sides, resulting in a large-scale response by Israeli security forces, mass arrests of Palestinians, and reported attacks by settlers on mosques. We urge you to take measures to prevent and intercede in this violence, establish a credible mechanism to investigate violations of law, and to make clear that the Government of Israel will not tolerate violence by its people, just as it does not tolerate violence against its people.

We write particularly on behalf of American citizens who have been killed or threatened in such violence. Many of us have heard first-hand from their families and other constituents who have themselves been threatened without cause by settlers. We have engaged the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem and your embassy in Washington to ensure their protection and appreciate measures taken on their behalf, but a more significant response from your government is clearly needed. We ask for your personal and direct engagement and intervention in order to protect our constituents and their families.

President Trump and Secretary of State Rubio have expressed their opposition to all violence in the West Bank and actions aimed at annexation, but those concerns have gone unaddressed. Now, we urge you to take the following actions:

Issue clear directives to the Israeli Police and Israeli Defense Forces to prevent and intervene in harassment, threats, and actual use of violence, regardless of the perpetrators.

Ensure that all those responsible for harassment, threats, and violence against Palestinians, including Palestinian-Americans, are held accountable through a transparent and credible process. This includes completing investigations into and ensuring accountability for the deaths of nine American citizens who have been killed by settlers or security forces in the West Bank since 2022.

Stop approving additional settlements and stop allowing the construction of, and take steps to remove, illegal outposts in the West Bank.

Like you, the safety and security of our constituents is of paramount importance. We urge your government to ensure that Americans in the Israeli-controlled parts of the West Bank are able to enjoy the security and protection of property to which they are entitled. We also hope to see the conditions improved so that Israelis and Palestinians may one day live in peace with each other without the fear of terrorism or lawless violence.",1,2026-09-09T09:27:09Z,2026-09-09T09:29:04Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-joins-gallego-colleagues-in-sounding-alarm-on-fed-chair-warshs-plan-to-scale-back-interest-rate-meeting-schedule,"Van Hollen Joins Gallego, Colleagues, in Sounding Alarm on Fed Chair Warsh’s Plan to Scale Back Interest Rate Meeting Schedule",2026-08-25,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Senator Ruben Gallego (D.Ariz.) and five of their Senate colleagues in calling on Federal Reserve Chair Kevin Warsh to maintain the Federal Open Market Committee’s (FOMC) longstanding schedule of at least eight meetings per year.

The letter was sent in response to the New York Times’ recent reporting that Warsh is considering reducing the frequency of the meetings.

“Since 1981, the FOMC has held a minimum of eight regularly scheduled meetings per year. At these meetings, the Committee reviews economic and financial conditions, determines the appropriate stance of monetary policy, and assesses risks to its statutory goals of price stability and maximum employment,” wrote the senators. “This cadence has provided a predictable framework for the conduct of monetary policy for 45 years. Fewer rate-setting meetings would represent the largest scheduled cutback in the modern history of the Federal Reserve.”

“The Federal Reserve’s job is to stay engaged with the economy in real time, not to check in less and hope for the best,” concluded the senators. “If the Federal Reserve continues down this increasingly opaque path, you will be putting the broader economy at risk.”

In addition to Van Hollen and Gallego, Senators Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) signed onto the letter.

The full text of the letter is available here and below.

Dear Chairman Warsh,

We write regarding reports that you are considering reducing the frequency of Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meetings. We have serious concerns about the implications of such a change for financial markets, American consumers, and the conduct of monetary policy.

Since 1981, the FOMC has held a minimum of eight regularly scheduled meetings per year. At these meetings, the Committee reviews economic and financial conditions, determines the appropriate stance of monetary policy, and assesses risks to its statutory goals of price stability and maximum employment. This cadence has provided a predictable framework for the conduct of monetary policy for 45 years. Fewer rate-setting meetings would represent the largest scheduled cutback in the modern history of the Federal Reserve.

We are concerned that a thinner meeting schedule would cripple the Committee's ability to respond to fast-moving economic conditions, and amounts to a unilateral rewriting of how the Federal Reserve communicates with markets and the American public. This communication underpins trust in the world's most important central bank.

Given that reporting indicates a revised schedule could be finalized before the Committee's next required meeting in September, please submit written answers to the following questions no later than September 2, 2026:

Please confirm whether the FOMC's regularly scheduled meeting dates for 2026 and 2027, as previously published, remain in effect, or whether any of those dates are under consideration for cancellation or postponement.

At your Senate confirmation hearing, you testified that four meetings a year was ""not enough,"" and that ""having more meetings than that is appropriate."" Please reconcile that testimony with your current consideration of a reduced meeting schedule, whether your position on this question has changed since your confirmation and, if so, on what basis.

Please describe any analysis that the Federal Reserve has conducted regarding the impact of a reduced meeting schedule on the Committee's capacity to respond to changes in inflation, employment, and financial stability. Please provide copies of any such analysis.

Please identify the specific statutory authority under which the Federal Reserve would implement a change of this kind, and clarify whether the Board of Governors, the full FOMC, or some other body has voted on or approved this proposal.

Did the Federal Reserve consult with, or notify Congress, market participants, task force members, or other stakeholders prior to public reports of this change? If so, with whom and when?

Do you intend to alter the current cadence of post-meeting press conferences, and if so, how?

Please state whether this change is intended to be permanent or is being considered on a trial basis, and if the latter, what criteria will be used to evaluate its success or failure.

The Federal Reserve's job is to stay engaged with the economy in real time, not to check in less and hope for the best. If the Federal Reserve continues down this increasingly opaque path, you will be putting the broader economy at risk. We appreciate your prompt attention to this important matter and look forward to your response.",1,2026-09-09T09:27:09Z,2026-09-09T09:29:04Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-joins-murray-colleagues-in-slamming-the-trump-administrations-anti-women-agenda-and-threats-to-abortion-reproductive-care,"Van Hollen Joins Murray, Colleagues in Slamming the Trump Administration’s Anti-Women Agenda and Threats to Abortion, Reproductive Care",2026-08-25,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Senator Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and their colleagues in sending a letter to Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. expressing outrage over the Trump administration’s efforts to ban abortion nationwide and limit access to reproductive health care for women across the country. The senators called out this administration’s harmful restrictions on mifepristone as well as their moves to threaten access to essential preventative care, contraceptives, and abortion care.

“The decades-long Republican attacks on reproductive health, rights, and justice have culminated in a nation where women today have less autonomy over their bodies and their medical care than their grandmothers did,” wrote the Senators. “And with women already suffering and dying as a result of your policies, you are doubling down with an even more aggressive and dangerous anti-women agenda.”

In the letter, the Senators call out the Trump Administration’s “pro-family” claims, highlighting their hypocrisy. “Despite proclaiming to be a “pro-family” administration, the Trump administration has orchestrated a coordinated attempt to limit access to reproductive health care and move closer to a national abortion ban by whatever means necessary. From partnering with Congressional Republicans to defund clinics that provide preventive care like annual physicals and cervical cancer exams, because they also provide abortion care; terminating women’s health research at the National Institutes of Health; withholding millions in already awarded and appropriated Title X funding, the only federal stream solely dedicated to family planning; to terminating more than 50 Teen Pregnancy Prevention Grants, a program that has shown great success in lowering the teen birth rate; this administration has stopped at nothing to strip access to providers, basic services, and health information.”

The Senators continue by outlining the administration’s ongoing attacks on every possible aspect of reproductive health care, including: spreading misinformation, politicizing federal funding and grants, attempting to restrict access to mifepristone, and implementing regulatory strategies that grossly violate women’s privacy and autonomy.

“Women are less safe, less free, and less able to see a doctor today because of the choices this administration has made. Senate Democrats will keep fighting in every way possible to protect every woman’s right to the care they need and the freedom to make their own decisions about their own body and their own future,” The Senators conclude.

In addition to Van Hollen and Murray, the letter was signed by Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and U.S. Senators Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Angela D. Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Michael F. Bennet (D-Colo.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Christopher A. Coons (D-Del.), Gary C. Peters (D-Mich.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Mazie K. Hirono (D-Hawaii), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Cory A. Booker (D-N.J.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.).

The full text of the letter is available here and below.

Dear Secretary Kennedy,

We write with outrage over the numerous actions taken by the Trump administration to threaten and limit access to reproductive health care for women and girls across the country, including essential preventive care, contraceptives, and abortion care. The decades-long Republican attacks on reproductive health, rights, and justice have culminated in a nation where women today have less autonomy over their bodies and their medical care than their grandmothers did. And with women already suffering and dying as a result of your policies, you are doubling down with an even more aggressive and dangerous anti-women agenda.

The decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization that overturned Roe v. Wade and removed the constitutional right to an abortion has had life-threatening consequences for women across America, especially in states with abortion bans. We know that Republicans’ ultimate goal is to ban all abortions nationwide. Currently, women in 13 states live under total abortion bans and those in 28 other states live under gestational bans, some as early as six weeks—often before a woman even knows she is pregnant. These bans create a system in which women can’t get the health care they need, requiring them to travel across state lines when abortion care via telehealth is unavailable, and in some circumstances forcing them to carry a pregnancy to term. In too many devastating cases, these bans have forced women to wait until their lives are at risk before they can receive adequate care. A 2025 report released by the Gender Policy Equity Institute showed that women living in states that banned abortion were nearly two times as likely to die during pregnancy, childbirth, or soon after giving birth, compared to women living in states where abortion is legal and accessible.

Despite proclaiming to be a “pro-family” administration, the Trump administration has orchestrated a coordinated attempt to limit access to reproductive health care and move closer to a national abortion ban by whatever means necessary. From partnering with Congressional Republicans to defund clinics that provide preventive care like annual physicals and cervical cancer exams, because they also provide abortion care; terminating women’s health research at the National Institutes of Health; withholding millions in already awarded and appropriated Title X funding, the only federal stream solely dedicated to family planning; to terminating more than 50 Teen Pregnancy Prevention Grants, a program that has shown great success in lowering the teen birth rate; this administration has stopped at nothing to strip access to providers, basic services, and health information. Instead, the Trump administration has promoted, through moms.gov, “crisis pregnancy centers” that spread misinformation and employ deceptive practices to further an anti-abortion agenda. People cannot make informed decisions about their bodies if they do not have medically accurate information to begin with, or access to providers who can provide that education. Furthermore, the recently proposed Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulation on federal financial assistance will politicize the entire grants process, undermining federal agencies’ ability to carry out the programs enacted by Congress and significantly hampering the grantees’ work on programs and services related to women’s and reproductive health. The dismantling and politicization of reproductive health care programs is a thinly veiled attempt at ensuring politicians have even more control over women’s bodies.

The administration has also systematically attacked mifepristone, one of the medications commonly used for abortion care. Mifepristone is safe and effective, has been used for decades by over 7.5 million people since its approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2000, and is part of the two-drug regimen used in more than 60% of abortions in the U.S. each year. In September 2025, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced that it would conduct, through the FDA, “its own review of the evidence” on the safety and effectiveness of mifepristone, despite the overwhelming evidence already proving this. This exercise seeks to disregard the vast safety evidence of mifepristone and further politicize the medication as part of your attempts to limit abortion access nationwide. The Department of Justice has repeatedly cited the FDA's baseless ""review"" in ongoing litigation brought by anti-abortion extremists in an attempt to gut access to mifepristone, including in a brief filed at the Fifth Circuit just last month. In November 2025, all Democratic Senators sent a letter to you and then-Commissioner Makary demonstrating our concern over this review and requesting additional information. We have yet to receive a response.

Congressional Republicans and the Trump administration often pretend these restrictions to reproductive health care are designed to give power back to states. However, the Trump administration continues to undermine this argument and attack states that do protect access to reproductive health care. Most recently, the then-Acting Attorney General of the United States, Todd Blanche stated on a private call that the Trump administration’s anti-abortion efforts are “taking longer than we want” and promised that the Department of Justice (DOJ) is working hand in hand with HHS, the FDA, the White House, and President Trump’s team to get permanent solutions. And in Blanche’s July confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, he doubled down on restricting abortion, committing DOJ's resources to an effort clearly aimed at further limiting access to mifepristone. In March 2026, the Trump administration misused the Weldon Amendment, a harmful refusal of care law, to launch an investigation into 13 states with laws that require state-regulated insurance plans to cover abortion care. In April, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), at the request of the Republican Speaker of the House, House Majority Leadership, and other Members of Congress, sent interview requests to a number of states that require abortion coverage in their Affordable Care Act (ACA) Marketplace Plans. If the administration’s goal is to make abortion care a state issue, the federal government should not be interfering and investigating states with lawful abortion protections.

On July 3, the Trump administration released its 2026 Unified Agenda and annual Regulatory Plan. This agenda includes regulatory actions that seek to entrench “fetal personhood,” the idea that fertilized eggs, embryos, and fetuses should receive full rights and legal protections. Granting “fetal personhood” could have enormous consequences, and could ultimately lead to criminal charges and conviction of pregnant and postpartum women for seeking necessary health care. The agenda also includes a regulatory action that may roll back access to abortions for unaccompanied immigrant children in detention, a policy that the first Trump administration tried to implement in 2017. After legal proceedings, the 2017 policy was eventually abandoned and replaced with a new policy that prohibited the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) staff from interfering with unaccompanied pregnant minors’ access to abortion.

The attacks on reproductive health care don’t stop there. Just last month, on July 7, the Department of Justice asked the Third U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to allow any employer to opt out of the ACA’s requirement that insurance plans include coverage of the full range of birth control without additional cost, a provision that has helped millions of people to use contraceptives more consistently and effectively, furthering their health and wellbeing. The FDA has also newly imposed a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) on two birth control products, adding new burdensome certification, reporting, and dispensing requirements. Of note, the use of REMS is extremely rare; of the over 20,000 FDA-approved drugs, there are only 73 drugs that have a REMS. This administration has imposed REMS on these products under the guise of ensuring the benefits of the device outweigh its risk of complications, however the agency has failed to answer detailed questions about the research that informed its actions. We believe that, just as politicians shouldn’t be able to make decisions about women’s bodies, neither should their employers. Decisions about birth control, pregnancy, and abortion should be made between a patient and their provider.

If this administration was truly committed to helping families, President Trump would work to lower the cost of living and make health care and child care more affordable and accessible. Instead, the President has stated on the record that we must prioritize “fighting wars” and that we simply cannot afford to address these issues. In fact, in the year and a half they’ve been in charge, President Trump and Congressional Republicans have made the largest cut to Medicaid in our nation’s history. This action directly impacts reproductive health care access for women, as Medicaid pays for more than half of the births in our country and has already led hospitals to close their doors and cut services.

From the moment Donald Trump returned to office, this administration has waged a relentless, coordinated assault on women's health and the freedom to make their own medical decisions. Stripping away the emergency-room protections that guarantee women can get life-saving care, moving to restrict access to safe and effective medication like mifepristone, gutting the maternal health programs that keep moms and babies safe, and so much else—your policies constitute serious attacks on women’s health that are not rooted in safety or science, but would simply advance an extreme ideological agenda that is wildly out of touch with America’s pro-choice majority.

Women are less safe, less free, and less able to see a doctor today because of the choices this administration has made. Senate Democrats will keep fighting in every way possible to protect every woman’s right to the care they need and the freedom to make their own decisions about their own body and their own future.",1,2026-09-09T09:27:09Z,2026-09-09T09:29:04Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-joins-over-35-bicameral-colleagues-in-demanding-release-of-us-citizen-in-israeli-military-prison,Van Hollen Joins Over 35 Bicameral Colleagues in Demanding Release of U.S. Citizen in Israeli Military Prison,2026-08-25,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Representative Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.-12) and 39 Members of Congress, including 5 Senators, in a letter to U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, demanding the immediate and permanent release of U.S. citizen Sama Safi, a 20-year-old student with a severe chronic health condition, from Israeli military prison. On June 2, in the middle of the night, Sama was torn from her family’s home in the occupied West Bank as part of a series of raids targeting Birzeit University students.

“With every additional day that Sama is subjected to deprivation and abuse by Israel, our fear grows that her spark is being dimmed; that we are losing pieces of her health, her strength, and the vibrant, loving spirit that makes her who she is,” said Sama’s parents. “Every morning, we wake wishing this was only a nightmare, hoping to open our eyes to the sound of Sama playing music. Every waking moment, we cannot help but imagine what she must be facing alone. Yet we are holding on to hope through those who stand with us and are helping us bring Sama home. We are deeply grateful to Congresswoman Tlaib and all the signatories of this letter for standing with us in our urgent call to free Sama.”

“Every day that Sama remains wrongfully detained in these inhumane conditions, she is at greater risk of irreversible and life-threatening repercussions,” the Members wrote to Secretary Rubio. “It is your responsibility to ensure the safety of all Americans abroad, with no exceptions. Her life is at risk on your watch. We urge you to act swiftly and use every tool at your disposal to secure the immediate release of Sama Safi so that she can receive the medical care she urgently needs and return to her family, her studies, and the life and freedom that every 20-year-old deserves.”

Sama has described horrific conditions and violence by guards in Israeli military detention, including frequent physical assault, gas and stun grenades thrown in overcrowded cells, and lack of food and water. Every day, thousands of Palestinians in Israeli detention are subjected to these conditions as part of what the United Nations Committee Against Torture described as “a de facto State policy of organized and widespread torture and ill-treatment.”

“Such wretched conditions and treatment have caused Sama’s health to rapidly decline to dangerous levels in detention. Sama suffers from a severe and complex chronic medical condition known as Familial Mediterranean Fever (FMF), which requires regular monitoring, daily medication, and recurring specialized biologic treatment abroad,” the Members wrote. “Sama has reported receiving her medication inconsistently, resulting in several missed doses. Stress positions and shackling have exacerbated her condition, causing severe rheumatoid and chest pain. Her doctors have warned that with her continued military detention and ‘being constantly exposed to conditions that exacerbate her inflammatory status, the possibility of progressive tissue injury and irreversible organ damage is our greatest concern.’”

On August 17, over 100 faith-based groups wrote a letter to Secretary Rubio demanding Sama’s release.

In addition to Van Hollen and Tlaib, the letter was signed by Senators Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and Peter Welch (D-Vt.), as well as Representatives Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.-03), André Carson (D-Ind.-07), Greg Casar (D-Texas-35), Joaquin Castro (D-Texas-20), Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.-05), Christopher Deluzio (D-Pa.-17), Mark DeSaulnier (D-Calif.-10), Maxine Dexter (D-Ore.-03), Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas-37), Maxwell Frost (D-Fla.-10), Chuy García (D-Ill.-04), Robert Garcia (D-Calif.-42), Al Green (D-Texas-09), Adelita Grijalva (D-Ariz.-07), Jonathan Jackson (D-Ill.-01), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.-07), Hank Johnson, Jr. (D-Ga.-04), Ro Khanna (D-Calif.-17), Summer Lee (D-Pa.-12), Sam Liccardo (D-Calif.-16), Betty McCollum (D-Minn.-04), James McGovern (D-Mass.-02), Analilia Mejia (D-N.J.-11), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.-14), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.-05), Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.-07), Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.-03), Emily Randall (D-Wash.-06), Lateefah Simon (D-Calif.-12), Paul Tonko (D-N.Y.-20), Derek Tran (D-Calif.-45), Nydia Velázquez (D-N.Y.-07), Maxine Waters (D-Calif.-43), and Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-N.J.-12).

The letter is endorsed by 85 organizations: IMEU Policy Project, A New Policy, Action Corps, American Muslims for Palestine (AMP), Americans for Justice in Palestine Action (AJP Action), Arab American Caucus of the California Democratic Party, Arab and Muslim Ethnicities and Diasporas Studies at San Francisco State University, Arab Resource & Organizing Center Action (AROC Action), Arlington for Palestine, Beyt Tikkun Synagogue, Boston Coalition For Palestine, Brooklyn For Peace, CAIR Action, California Democrats for Justice in Palestine, Center for Constitutional Rights, Christians for a Free Palestine, Churches for Middle East Peace (CMEP), Cleveland Peace Action, Codepink, Common Defense, Community Alliance for Peace and Justice, Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN), Detroit & MI National Lawyers Guild, Disability Justice for Palestine, Doctors Against Genocide, Emgage Michigan, Friends Committee on National Legislation, Gen-Z for Change, Global Ministries of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) and United Church of Christ, Hind Rajab Foundation, Historians for Peace and Democracy, IfNotNow Movement, Indiana Center for Middle East Peace, Institute for Policy Studies New Internationalism Project, Jewish Voice for Peace, Just Foreign Policy, Majdal: Arab Community Center of San Diego, MARUF CT, Massachusetts Peace Action, Methodist Federation for Social Action, Minnesota Peace Project, MPower Change Action Fund, Musicians Against Genocide, Muslim Advocates, Muslims for Just Futures, NE Oakland Indivisible, NH Peace Action, North Carolina Peace Action, Northshore For Palestine, Orange County for Justice in Palestine, Palestine House of Freedom, Palestine Legal, Palestinian House Of New England, Pax Christi New York State, Peace Action Montgomery, Peace Action New York State, Peace Action of San Mateo County, Peace Justice Sustainability NOW, Philly Neighborhood Networks, Pittsburgh Palestine Solidarity Committee, Progressive Democrats of America – Central New Mexico, Queer Folk Inc., Rabbis for Ceasefire, Rachel Corrie Foundation for Peace and Justice, ReThinking Foreign Policy, River Valley for Palestine, RootsAction, Statewide Indivisible Michigan, Stu Maismith Veterans For Peace, Syrian Community Network, Teaching Palestine: Pedagogical Praxis and the Indivisibility of Justice, The American Council for Judaism, The Justice Coalition, Transition Security Project, U.S. Palestinian Community Network (USPCN), United Methodists for Kairos Response (UMKR), US Campaign for Palestinian Rights Action, US Palestinian Council, Veterans For Peace, Veterans For Peace Chapter 74, Washington for Peace and Justice, and We the People Dissent.

The full text of the letter can be found here and below.

Dear Secretary Rubio,

We write with urgency to demand that the Department of State act now to ensure the immediate and permanent release of U.S. citizen Sama Safi, a 20-year-old university student with a severe complex chronic health condition, who the Israeli military has arbitrarily and wrongfully detained since June 2nd. Sama’s medical condition has rapidly deteriorated after being subjected to abysmal detention conditions in the months since armed Israeli soldiers raided her family’s home in the occupied West Bank in the middle of the night and tore her from her family. Her doctors have warned of irreversible and life-threatening damage to her internal organs if her detention continues. You have a duty to secure the safety and security of U.S. citizens abroad, and we urge you to act quickly to prevent further irreparable harm to Sama by securing her immediate release.

Sama, a current honors psychology student at Birzeit University in the occupied West Bank, was kidnapped and detained without charge in a pre-dawn raid on June 2nd, as part of a series of raids targeting Birzeit University students that morning that wrongfully detained three other young women: Natalie Abu Diah, Leila Khalil, and Joulan Abu Awad. This targeting of Palestinian students is not an isolated incident but part of what United Nations human rights experts have called a systematic policy to “undermine the right to education.”

Since June 2nd, Sama has suffered under appalling conditions in Israeli military detention. She has been transferred through multiple facilities, including an illegal transfer out of the occupied West Bank to the Damon Israeli military prison near Haifa—a blatant violation of the 4th Geneva Convention. Sama has described the use of serious physical violence by guards against detainees, including frequent physical assault, shackling, and the throwing of gas and stun grenades into already overcrowded and poorly ventilated cells. Sama recounted her treatment, stating, “After I was taken into custody, I was shackled, blindfolded, driven around for several hours. I was given no food or water for the first 24 hours.” She describes being subjected to repeated verbal abuse and being placed in painful stress positions, as well as the presence of rapidly spreading infectious skin disease, rats, and mattresses reeking of feces.

These inhumane conditions and violence towards detainees are not unique to one facility. They are systemic and well-documented throughout Israel’s vast military prison system, where thousands of Palestinians are held every day, many indefinitely and without charge. In December, the United Nations Committee Against Torture denounced Israel’s application of “a de facto State policy of organized and widespread torture and ill-treatment” in these prisons, including evidence of sexual violence, electrocution, waterboarding, systemic denial of medical care, denial of adequate nutrition and water, and deprivation of clothing, sleep, and access to hygiene facilities.

Such wretched conditions and treatment have caused Sama’s health to rapidly decline to dangerous levels in detention. Sama suffers from a severe and complex chronic medical condition known as Familial Mediterranean Fever (FMF), which requires regular monitoring, daily medication, and recurring specialized biologic treatment abroad. Sama has reported receiving her medication inconsistently throughout her detention, resulting in frequent missed doses. Since returning to detention on August 16 following a brief medical release, Sama has reportedly not once received her daily medication nor been seen by doctors. Stress positions and shackling have exacerbated her condition, causing severe rheumatoid and chest pain. Her doctors have warned that with her continued military detention and “being constantly exposed to conditions that exacerbate her inflammatory status, the possibility of progressive tissue injury and irreversible organ damage is our greatest concern.”

Every day that Sama remains wrongfully detained in these inhumane conditions, she is at greater risk of irreversible and life-threatening repercussions. On August 17, over 100 faith-based, human rights, and civil rights groups wrote to you urging immediate action to secure her release. It is your responsibility to ensure the safety of all Americans abroad, with no exceptions. Her life is at risk on your watch. We urge you to act swiftly and use every tool at your disposal to secure the immediate release of Sama Safi so that she can receive the medical care she urgently needs and return to her family, her studies, and the life and freedom that every 20-year-old deserves.",1,2026-09-09T09:27:09Z,2026-09-09T09:29:04Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-alsobrooks-secure-20-million-in-federal-funding-for-ocean-city-beach-replenishment,"Van Hollen, Alsobrooks Secure $20 Million in Federal Funding for Ocean City Beach Replenishment",2026-08-24,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"On August 14, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) visited Ocean City’s beachfront to highlight the $20 million federal investment he, along with Senator Angela Alsobrooks, secured in Congress to replenish the beach and protect the shoreline. This project, led by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), will widen the beach and create a buffer against storms and erosion, protecting homes, businesses, and public infrastructure.

“Ocean City’s beach is a destination for Marylanders and out-of-state visitors alike, making it an important economic driver for the region. It’s critical that we not only protect the beach from erosion, but that we also restore the shoreline to protect local communities from flooding and extreme weather. Businesses and livelihoods that depend on Ocean City’s beach must continue to thrive, and that’s why we worked to secure $20 million in federal funding for Ocean City’s beach replenishment. With these federal funds, we will be able to restore and expand the shoreline, helping to ensure that Ocean City can continue to be a destination point and the economic driver that it is,” said Senator Chris Van Hollen, a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee.

""We need to do all we can to protect Maryland communities, homes, and businesses from storms and erosion. That's why I am proud to partner with Senator Van Hollen in investing $20 million of federal funding to replenish Ocean City's shoreline and beaches. Replenishing this shoreline will create a critical buffer to better protect the homes and businesses of Ocean City,"" said Senator Alsobrooks.

“More than just a location where summer memories are made, the beaches of Ocean City are also a critical line of defense for the lives and livelihood of the community. By blending vital engineering with strong federal, state, and local partnerships, this project safeguards our community and ensures Ocean City remains strong, resilient, and safe for generations to come,” said Colonel Francis B. Pera, Baltimore District Commander, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Senator Van Hollen, along with then-Senator Ben Cardin, also helped secure $11.1 million in federal funding for the last replenishment in 2022 through the Fiscal Year 2021 USACE Work Plan.",1,2026-08-25T05:31:37Z,2026-08-25T05:33:09Z
https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/news/press-releases/senator-alsobrooks-celebrates-office-opening-visits-health-center-meets-with-seniors-and-more-in-western-maryland/,"SENATOR ALSOBROOKS CELEBRATES OFFICE OPENING, VISITS HEALTH CENTER, MEETS WITH SENIORS, AND MORE IN WESTERN MARYLAND",2026-08-20,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Angela D. Alsobrooks,A000382,www.alsobrooks.senate.gov,alsobrooks,https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/,scraper,"August 20, 2026

WESTERN MARYLAND – On Wednesday, Senator Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.) was in Western Maryland to celebrate her new office opening in Frederick, meet with local leaders, visit Mountain Laurel Medical Center, meet with seniors, and host a housing discussion.

At the office opening celebration, Senator Alsobrooks was joined by State Senator Karen Lewis Young, Delegate Ken Kerr, Delegate Karen Simpson, Delegate Kris Fair, County Executive Jessica Fitzwater, County Council Vice President Kavonté Duckett, County Councilman Jerry Donald, County Councilwoman M.C. Keegan-Ayer, City of Frederick Mayor Michael O’Connor, City Councilman Peter Brehm, City Councilman Derek Shackelford, City Councilwoman Sarah Hempel Irani, Former City Councilwoman Kelly Russell, Former County Executive Jan Gardner, Myersville Councilman Wayne Creadick, Jr., and dozens of constituents from Western Maryland.

Senator Alsobrooks then stopped for lunch in Hagerstown with Hagerstown Mayor Bill McIntire, Councilwoman Caroline Anderson, City Administrator Scott Nicewarner, and Councilwoman Erika Bell.

Next, Senator Alsobrooks traveled to Grantsville to visit the Federally Qualified Health Center, Mountain Laurel Medical Center. Senator Alsobrooks met with medical staff and learned about the center’s offerings, made possible in part by federal funding through the Appalachian Regional Commission.

At Mountain Laurel Medical Center, Senator Alsobrooks was joined by Grantsville Mayor Emily Newman-Edwards, Mountain Laurel Medical Center CEO Michelle Dixon and the Mountain Laurel Medical Center staff.

Then, the Senator spent the evening in Mountain Lake Park. First, she met with Garrett County Community Action Committee leadership, including Executive Director Chris Mullett, to discuss workforce housing and housing needs in the region. Afterwards, she met with seniors for a conversation about rising costs.

“What I’ve seen and heard as I’ve gone around the state – and heard today in Western and Mountain Maryland – is that residents everywhere want the same things. We all want affordable health care, the ability to buy a home, groceries we can actually afford, gas that isn’t skyrocketing out of control every single day, and the opportunity to actually create generational wealth. And while we’re currently dealing with an administration that doesn’t care about solving these issues, my focus since day one has been to deliver access to affordable health care, to fight this affordability crisis clouding the nation, and to create opportunities for all Marylanders to thrive,” said Senator Alsobrooks.

###",1,2026-08-21T05:30:57Z,2026-08-21T05:32:22Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-joins-merkley-colleagues-in-calling-on-watchdog-to-probe-tax-subsidies-for-lng-exporters,"Van Hollen Joins Merkley, Colleagues in Calling on Watchdog to Probe Tax Subsidies for LNG Exporters",2026-08-20,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senator Chirs Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Senators Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) in urging the Acting Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) to launch an investigation into the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) providing tax breaks for liquefied natural gas (LNG) exporters and determine whether the IRS’ decision was intended to reward President Trump’s political donors.

The Senators stressed that providing LNG tankers with Alternative Fuel Excise Tax (AFET) credits would favor fossil fuel companies – at an unfair cost to the average taxpayer – and do nothing to protect our environment, reduce costs for working families, or lessen America’s reliance on fossil fuels.

“Despite these facts, news reports and public financial filings suggest the IRS has allowed taxpayers to claim the AFET credit for fuel used on LNG tankers, without publishing any updated guidance. Therefore, we request TIGTA investigate whether the IRS has made a determination that fuel used on LNG tankers is eligible for the AFET credit, and, if so, how the IRS made this determination and what guidance, if any, was provided to taxpayers,” wrote the Senators in a letter to the TIGTA.

They emphasized, “We would further urge the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration to investigate the extent to which Secretary Bessent was involved in any decision to make LNG tankers eligible for the AFET, who Secretary Bessent may have discussed this issue with at the IRS, whether Secretary Bessent communicated with any impacted party about LNG tankers being motorboats under the AFET, and to what extent Secretary Bessent or his staff communicated with anyone in the White House, including President Trump, about a request for AFET credits for LNG tankers.”

Previously, Van Hollen, Merkley, and their colleagues pressed the IRS on its decision to give Cheniere Energy – the largest LNG exporter in the United States – a questionable $370 million tax break for using LNG as “alternative” fuel.

Full text of the letter can be found here and below.

Dear Acting Inspector General Hill,

We are writing to request you open an investigation into reports the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has improperly determined that companies using liquefied natural gas (LNG) for propelling LNG tankers qualify for credits under the Alternative Fuel Excise Tax (AFET) and whether the determination was intended to reward the President’s campaign contributors.

Providing LNG tankers with AFET credits would unnecessarily waste taxpayer money while doing nothing to protect the environment, reduce costs for everyday Americans, or lessen the United States’ dependence on oil. The AFET credit was created to decrease oil dependence by subsidizing the use of alternative fuels. The AFET credit provided 50 cents for every gallon equivalent of a nonliquid alternative fuel sold for use in a motorboat used by the taxpayer for the same purpose. While the tax code does not define “motorboats,” federal shipping regulations have defined “motorboats” as ships no more than 65 feet long since 1965. It is safe to assume that in drafting the AFET credit, Congress understood motorboat to retain the meaning that had been in federal regulations for almost 50 years.

LNG Tankers are typically 1,000 feet or more in length. The more appropriate descriptor for an LNG tanker is the term “vessel,” which Congress explicitly defined in section 4221 of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) as ships employed in fishing, whaling, foreign trade, or war. Vessels already receive special tax free treatment for using alternative fuels if they are “engaged in foreign trade or trade between the Atlantic and Pacific ports of the United States or between the United States and any of its possessions.” Vessels, as defined in the IRC, are not referenced in the AFET credit, implying that Congress did not intend for these ships to qualify for this tax credit.

The AFET credit was intended to encourage new and expanded use of alternative fuels but allowing taxpayers to claim the AFET for LNG tankers would allow companies to claim a tax credit for an activity they would have done regardless, on vessels that seemingly should not have qualified. Many LNG tankers are designed to operate by burning their own cargo, as LNG in tankers is continuously evaporating, and the gas must be removed, or “boiled-off,” from the tanks in order to maintain safe tank pressure. The boiled-off gas is often used to fuel the tanker; if it were not removed, the gas would have to be flared or vented into the atmosphere or reliquefied back into LNG. Tankers burn this gas for propulsion because it allows for the utilization of a valuable resource that would be otherwise wasted and potentially hazardous.

Despite these facts, news reports and public financial filings suggest the IRS has allowed taxpayers to claim the AFET credit for fuel used on LNG tankers, without publishing any updated guidance. Therefore, we request TIGTA investigate whether the IRS has made a determination that fuel used on LNG tankers is eligible for the AFET credit, and, if so, how the IRS made this determination and what guidance, if any, was provided to taxpayers.

We would further urge the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration to investigate the extent to which Secretary Bessent was involved in any decision to make LNG tankers eligible for the AFET, who Secretary Bessent may have discussed this issue with at the IRS, whether Secretary Bessent communicated with any impacted party about LNG tankers being motorboats under the AFET, and to what extent Secretary Bessent or his staff communicated with anyone in the White House, including President Trump, about a request for AFET credits for LNG tankers.

The IRS is designed to operate impartially to ensure that all taxpayers pay their fair share. We urge you to thoroughly investigate this matter.",1,2026-08-21T05:30:57Z,2026-08-21T05:32:22Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-joins-rosen-colleagues-in-demanding-answers-from-trump-administration-about-ice-conduct-tsa-cooperation-in-airports,"Van Hollen Joins Rosen, Colleagues in Demanding Answers from Trump Administration About ICE Conduct, TSA Cooperation in Airports",2026-08-20,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Senator Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) and their Senate colleagues in demanding answers from Secretary of Homeland Security Markwayne Mullin, Acting Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Director David Venturella, and Transportation Security Administration (TSA) Administrator David Cummins about recent ICE actions at airports. Senators Van Hollen and Rosen were joined by Senators Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.). This letter comes after a string of incidents nationwide, in which ICE agents – with cooperation from TSA – have acted with impunity, at times targeting people at airports.

“We write to express concerns regarding recent immigration enforcement actions at airports across the nation conducted by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), with the apparent assistance and support of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA),” wrote the Senators. “Such actions create fear in our communities and cause disruption and distress to the traveling public.”

“Unfortunately, recent reporting by the New York Times indicates that troubling events like these are occurring frequently across the nation at America’s Airports. Such actions only served to disrupt local communities, create fear among immigrant families, and undermine the travel and tourism sector at a time when it is trying to rebound from a 5.5% decline in international tourism in 2025 that occurred due to President Trump’s misguided tariff, immigration, and foreign policies,” the Senators continued. “With all this in mind, we request your response to several questions regarding the operating relationship between ICE and TSA and the type of information that is being shared between the agencies.”

The full text of the letter is available here and below.

Dear Secretary Mullin, Administrator Cummins, and Acting Director Venturella:

We write to express our serious concerns regarding recent immigration enforcement actions at airports across the nation conducted by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), with the apparent assistance and support of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). Such actions create fear in our communities and cause disruption and distress to the traveling public. It is further alarming to read recent reports that ICE and TSA have a formal agreement to share passenger information with each other, which could be used in immigration enforcement at airports. We therefore request that you provide Congress and the American people details about any information sharing agreements that are in place between ICE and TSA and ask the Department of Homeland Security and its component agencies, ICE and TSA, to let us know what concrete steps you are taking to ensure all immigration enforcement agents conducting operations at airports operate solely based on active judicial warrants, wear and utilize body cameras, wear and display clear identifying information, and refrain from wearing masks, which shield ICE from accountability for abuses and instill fear in travelers.

Just a few weeks ago, masked and plain-clothed ICE officers attempted to violently arrest an elderly man at the Harry Reid International Airport in Las Vegas (LAS), without any identification, before running off following public intervention. Even more recently, ICE arrested a pregnant woman at the same airport, separating her from her fiancé. News reports indicate similar enforcement operations are taking place at Reno-Tahoe International Airport (RNO), Denver International Airport (DEN), and San Francisco International Airport (SFO) as well. Additionally, the recent detention of several Marylanders, including a medical researcher and former Fulbright scholar and a pharmacy professor, both asylum-seekers traveling domestically with lawful documentation, raises serious concerns that ICE’s expanded presence at airports is subjecting law-abiding individuals to detention.

Unfortunately, recent reporting by the New York Times indicates that troubling events like these are occurring frequently across the nation at America’s airports. Such actions have only served to disrupt local communities, create fear among immigrant families, and undermine the travel and tourism sector by actively discouraging travelers from visiting the United States. They hurt our nation’s travel and tourism industry at a time when it is trying to rebound from a 5.5% decline in international tourism in 2025 that occurred due to President Trump’s misguided tariff, immigration, and foreign policies. Additionally, these actions are increasingly targeting individuals who have expired visas, even though many such individuals often have a legitimate pending application for a visa extension or renewal with USCIS. With a backlog of nearly 12 million visa applications at USCIS, visa processing delays are impacting the ability for USCIS to process a variety of visas, employment authorization documents (EAD) applications, and renewals in a timely manner, meaning that a person can have an expired visa with a legitimate pending application yet still be detained by ICE at an airport due to visa processing delays that are out of their control.

News reports also indicate that according to a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) recently obtained through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, ICE and TSA have a formal framework to coordinate the sharing, storage, and management of passengers’ sensitive information. This is particularly concerning because Acting TSA Administrator Ha Nguyen McNeill claimed during congressional testimony she gave in January 2026 that TSA does not send information to ICE; however, the MOA appears to directly contradict that statement. Of similar concern, when just last month then TSA Administrator nominee David Cummins was asked about the conduct of ICE agents at America’s airports in questions for his nomination hearing, he did not even attempt to answer how he would or would not work with ICE if confirmed to the role.

With all this in mind, we request your response to several questions regarding the operating relationship between ICE and TSA and the type of information that is being shared between the agencies. We look forward to a prompt response to this inquiry.

Is there an official process in place to ensure that local airports are aware of an impending immigration enforcement operation?

Does the information-sharing agreement between ICE and TSA require ICE to provide proof that the individuals they are requesting information about have active warrants for their arrest? Does this information-sharing agreement distinguish between judicial and administrative warrants, and is such a warrant a requirement for TSA to cooperate with ICE in enforcement actions at airports? If this information is sensitive, then we ask for a member or staff level briefing to receive this information in a classified or secure setting.

According to the MOA, TSA shares data with ICE that ICE then stores in its own repository. What specific data is shared between the two agencies? What criteria is being used, either with or without this data, to determine when to conduct an immigration enforcement operation at an airport?

Reporting indicates TSA shared information on more than 31,000 travelers, leading to more than 800 immigration-related arrests. Please provide a breakdown of what information caused the 800 individuals to be arrested, and how many people were detained for an expired visa that had an application pending with USCIS, including information on how many of these arrests led to a deportation? Additionally, if a warrant was issued for those arrested, please also provide a breakdown of how many arrests were based on ICE having a judicial versus administrative warrant.

What safeguards are in place to protect passenger privacy and ensure that the individuals being targeted in enforcement operations at airports are dangerous or violent criminals and not merely immigrants who have followed the law and have had a temporary lapse in status solely due to USCIS processing delays?

Does TSA have any policy regarding how law enforcement agencies such as ICE are to identify themselves when they are in an airport or when they are attempting to take an enforcement action in an airport?

Do DHS, ICE, or TSA factor in the impact on domestic and international travel that enforcement operations could have when planning their execution? Have DHS, ICE, TSA, or any other agency or official in this administration been in contact with travel and tourism industry leaders and experts to ensure that such actions do not negatively harm our travel and tourism industry?

We look forward to your prompt response to these questions. Thank you for your attention to this important matter.",1,2026-09-04T09:19:37Z,2026-09-04T09:20:58Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-joins-warnock-warren-colleagues-in-pushing-federal-reserve-chair-to-include-labor-in-new-federal-reserve-ai-task-force,"Van Hollen Joins Warnock, Warren, Colleagues, in Pushing Federal Reserve Chair to Include Labor in New Federal Reserve AI Task Force",2026-08-20,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Senators Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), along with Senators Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), and Jack Reed (D-R.I.), in demanding that Federal Reserve Chairman Kevin Warsh include worker perspectives as the Fed assesses the implications of new technologies for the American workers whose jobs may be displaced by artificial intelligence (AI).

“AI’s potential to reshape work is significant, and the stakes for workers are high: even a partial shift in how tasks are automated could affect millions of jobs across the economy, and workers have the necessary first-hand accounting of how AI is currently reshaping day-to-day tasks,” wrote the Senators. “A task force asked to assess AI’s real economic impact on the labor force and the Fed’s mandate to promote maximum employment cannot do so accurately while excluding the very people best positioned to describe how that impact is unfolding: American workers.”

The letter comes after Chairman Warsh launched the Federal Reserve’s Task Force on Productivity and Jobs last month to evaluate how AI and other emerging technologies could affect the economy and the labor market. Yet, in an alarming conflict of interest, all three advisors selected to advise the Fed on AI have financial ties to the industry.

The full text of the letter is available here and below.

Dear Chair Warsh:

We write to request that you ensure that the Federal Reserve’s (“the Fed”) newly-announced Task Force on Productivity and Jobs includes the perspective of individuals who represents the interests of workers. Congress gave the Fed a dual mandate that includes promoting maximum employment, and Artificial Intelligence’s (AI) potential to disrupt the labor market bears directly on the Fed’s ability to fulfill that mandate. We welcome the Fed evaluating AI’s effects on productivity and jobs, but it is important that the Fed search outside of industry when appointing alternative, diverse viewpoints for this new task force.

On June 17, 2026, you announced the creation of five task forces to “advance the conduct of monetary policy.” The task forces have been directed to “follow the evidence, provide candid feedback, and produce rigorous findings for the Federal Open Market Committee” (FOMC). This included a Task Force on Productivity and Jobs, which is tasked with “assess[ing] the economic impact of new general-purpose technologies, including artificial intelligence, to inform the Federal Reserve’s policy judgments.” The Fed explained that the task forces would be “co-led by external advisers . . . with deep expertise in their fields” and “supported by Federal Reserve Staff.”

On July 9, 2026, the Fed announced the three individuals who would lead the Task Force on Productivity and Jobs: Marc Andreessen, cofounder and general partner of Andreessen Horowitz; Charles Jones, a researcher at the Anthropic Institute; and Asha Sharma, executive vice president at Microsoft and Xbox CEO. All three have direct financial ties to the AI industry.

These potential conflicts were raised directly at your press conference on July 29, 2026, where you defended your selection process by explaining that your approach to building each task force was to find “the best subject matter experts anywhere in the world and put them together,” particularly with people who “might disagree with them.” You added that this design was meant to ensure each panel could have its own “family fight” of divergent views. By your standard, however, a task force whose members are all financially tied to the AI industry cannot produce the genuine “divergence of views” that you say you support.

Multiple members on the Senate Banking Committee, including Senators Warnock and Smith, raised these questions during your hearing before the Committee on July 15, 2026. Senator Warnock asked you, “Yes or no, will the Fed include anyone on this task force with an alternative viewpoint on AI? For example, anyone who represents the workers whose lives may be upended by increased adoption of AI tools and technology?” You replied that a task force member is an academic, yet this member (Professor Charles Jones) is currently on leave at Anthropic.

We’re glad the Fed is assessing the economic effects of AI, among other emerging technologies, and we generally support your assertion that the Fed must have a “divergence of views,” while undertaking this assessment, including but not limited to perspectives from industry.

We strongly believe, however, having more viewpoints represented will produce stronger conclusions and support the FOMC in improved policymaking. Additional viewpoints on AI will help better inform the FOMC as key monetary policy decisions are made in order to fulfil the Fed’s dual-mandate. AI’s potential to reshape work is significant, and the stakes for workers are high: even a partial shift in how tasks are automated could affect millions of jobs across the economy, and workers have the necessary first-hand accounting of how AI is currently reshaping day-to-day tasks. A task force asked to assess AI’s real economic impact on the labor force and the Fed’s mandate to promote maximum employment cannot do so accurately while excluding the very people best positioned to describe how that impact is unfolding: American workers.

AI has the potential to greatly improve American’s lives. It also has the potential to disrupt the labor market across sectors all at once. While reviewing AI’s impact on employment and inflation, the Fed cannot leave out workers and only hear from the people who stand to benefit the most financially from the continued deployment of AI. We therefore urge you to add individuals with no financial ties to the artificial AI industry and who represent the perspective of workers to this task force before it begins issuing recommendations to the Fed.

We look forward to continued engagement on this issue.",1,2026-09-04T09:19:37Z,2026-09-04T09:20:58Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-colleagues-press-for-transparency-on-unprecedented-exchanges-between-federal-reserve-chair-warsh-president-trump,"Van Hollen, Colleagues Press for Transparency on Unprecedented Exchanges Between Federal Reserve Chair Warsh, President Trump",2026-08-19,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), joined by Senators Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), called on Federal Reserve Chair Kevin Warsh to publicly disclose his conversations with President Donald Trump, pushing Warsh to demonstrate the Federal Reserve’s independence from the White House after he repeatedly declined to clarify his contacts with the President.

The Senators begin, “We write to ask for public disclosure of your conversations with President Trump. Recent press reports indicate that you have spoken with the President “repeatedly” since your confirmation in May. It is critical that the Fed be transparent about these discussions to demonstrate its independence from the White House, a norm that you have said you intend to uphold. Instead, you have declined on multiple occasions to confirm your conversations with President Trump, raising sincere doubts about the independent conduct of monetary policy and your transparency with the public.”

“As the leader of an independent agency, the Fed must be forthcoming about your conversations with the President, as your predecessors have recognized. Undisclosed, frequent conversations with the President, whose family business remains very active, can create a perception that the White House is shaping monetary policy. To dispel these doubts, previous Chairs have issued statements about meetings with the President and shown meetings or calls with the President on their publicly released calendars,” the Senators continue.

The Senators highlighted the unprecedented lack of transparency,noting “But if the reporting is accurate, you seem to have attempted to conceal your calls with the President. In your first press conference as Chair, you avoided a straightforward question about whether you and President Trump had spoken since your swearing-in. You likewise declined to acknowledge your conversations with the President at a Senate hearing in July. And the appointment calendars you have released to date do not show any calls with President Trump, even though they have reportedly taken place. Your lack of transparency about contacts with the President is even more curious because you have disclosed meetings with top White House economic officials on your calendar, including separate meetings with the Chair and the General Counsel of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers.”

“To clarify your interactions with President Trump, please either confirm to us in writing that you have had no contacts with the President since being sworn in, or amend your publicly released calendars to disclose any such contacts. We also request a public read-out of any conversations with the President. Finally, if the reporting is accurate, please explain why you have been reticent to admit or describe your conversations with the President. Please provide this information as part of the next monthly disclosure of your calendar,” the Senators conclude.

The full text of the letter is available here and below.

Dear Chairman Warsh:

We write to ask for public disclosure of your conversations with President Trump. Recent press reports indicate that you have spoken with the President “repeatedly” since your confirmation in May. It is critical that the Fed be transparent about these discussions to demonstrate its independence from the White House, a norm that you have said you intend to uphold. Instead, you have declined on multiple occasions to confirm your conversations with President Trump, raising sincere doubts about the independent conduct of monetary policy and your transparency with the public.

While the contours of your discussions are not clear, they have apparently touched on a range of subjects relevant to the economy and financial markets, including the economic implications of the war in Iran and artificial intelligence. You have also reportedly offered the President your perspective on the economy. These conversations occurred at the same time as you have cut back on the Fed’s transparency with the public about its approach to monetary policy.

As the leader of an independent agency, the Fed must be forthcoming about your conversations with the President, as your predecessors have recognized. Undisclosed, frequent conversations with the President, whose family business remains very active, can create a perception that the White House is shaping monetary policy. To dispel these doubts, previous Chairs have issued statements about meetings with the President and shown meetings or calls with the President on their publicly released calendars.

But if the reporting is accurate, you seem to have attempted to conceal your calls with the President. In your first press conference as Chair, you avoided a straightforward question about whether you and President Trump had spoken since your swearing-in. You likewise declined to acknowledge your conversations with the President at a Senate hearing in July. And the appointment calendars you have released to date do not show any calls with President Trump, even though they have reportedly taken place. Your lack of transparency about contacts with the President is even more curious because you have disclosed meetings with top White House economic officials on your calendar, including separate meetings with the Chair and the General Counsel of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers.

Effective conduct of monetary policy depends on transparency, accountability, and integrity from the Chair, all of which are undermined by secret conversations with the President. While periodic communications with the President and Administration about the state of the economy are not objectionable in and of themselves, the repeated, free-flowing conversations described in the reporting are unprecedented in the modern era. If true, they raise serious questions about the Fed’s relationship with the White House.

To clarify your interactions with President Trump, please either confirm to us in writing that you have had no contacts with the President since being sworn in, or amend your publicly released calendars to disclose any such contacts. We also request a public read-out of any conversations with the President. Finally, if the reporting is accurate, please explain why you have been reticent to admit or describe your conversations with the President. Please provide this information as part of the next monthly disclosure of your calendar.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

###",1,2026-08-20T05:28:41Z,2026-08-20T05:29:58Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/08/20/2026/van-hollen-colleagues-press-for-transparency-on-unprecedented-exchanges-between-federal-reserve-chair-warsh-president-trump,"Van Hollen, Colleagues Press for Transparency on Unprecedented Exchanges Between Federal Reserve Chair Warsh, President Trump",2026-08-19,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), joined by Senators Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), called on Federal Reserve Chair Kevin Warsh to publicly disclose his conversations with President Donald Trump, pushing Warsh to demonstrate the Federal Reserve’s independence from the White House after he repeatedly declined to clarify his contacts with the President.

The Senators begin, “We write to ask for public disclosure of your conversations with President Trump. Recent press reports indicate that you have spoken with the President “repeatedly” since your confirmation in May. It is critical that the Fed be transparent about these discussions to demonstrate its independence from the White House, a norm that you have said you intend to uphold. Instead, you have declined on multiple occasions to confirm your conversations with President Trump, raising sincere doubts about the independent conduct of monetary policy and your transparency with the public.”

“As the leader of an independent agency, the Fed must be forthcoming about your conversations with the President, as your predecessors have recognized. Undisclosed, frequent conversations with the President, whose family business remains very active, can create a perception that the White House is shaping monetary policy. To dispel these doubts, previous Chairs have issued statements about meetings with the President and shown meetings or calls with the President on their publicly released calendars,” the Senators continue.

The Senators highlighted the unprecedented lack of transparency,noting “But if the reporting is accurate, you seem to have attempted to conceal your calls with the President. In your first press conference as Chair, you avoided a straightforward question about whether you and President Trump had spoken since your swearing-in. You likewise declined to acknowledge your conversations with the President at a Senate hearing in July. And the appointment calendars you have released to date do not show any calls with President Trump, even though they have reportedly taken place. Your lack of transparency about contacts with the President is even more curious because you have disclosed meetings with top White House economic officials on your calendar, including separate meetings with the Chair and the General Counsel of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers.”

“To clarify your interactions with President Trump, please either confirm to us in writing that you have had no contacts with the President since being sworn in, or amend your publicly released calendars to disclose any such contacts. We also request a public read-out of any conversations with the President. Finally, if the reporting is accurate, please explain why you have been reticent to admit or describe your conversations with the President. Please provide this information as part of the next monthly disclosure of your calendar,” the Senators conclude.

The full text of the letter is available here and below.

Dear Chairman Warsh:

We write to ask for public disclosure of your conversations with President Trump. Recent press reports indicate that you have spoken with the President “repeatedly” since your confirmation in May. It is critical that the Fed be transparent about these discussions to demonstrate its independence from the White House, a norm that you have said you intend to uphold. Instead, you have declined on multiple occasions to confirm your conversations with President Trump, raising sincere doubts about the independent conduct of monetary policy and your transparency with the public.

While the contours of your discussions are not clear, they have apparently touched on a range of subjects relevant to the economy and financial markets, including the economic implications of the war in Iran and artificial intelligence. You have also reportedly offered the President your perspective on the economy. These conversations occurred at the same time as you have cut back on the Fed’s transparency with the public about its approach to monetary policy.

As the leader of an independent agency, the Fed must be forthcoming about your conversations with the President, as your predecessors have recognized. Undisclosed, frequent conversations with the President, whose family business remains very active, can create a perception that the White House is shaping monetary policy. To dispel these doubts, previous Chairs have issued statements about meetings with the President and shown meetings or calls with the President on their publicly released calendars.

But if the reporting is accurate, you seem to have attempted to conceal your calls with the President. In your first press conference as Chair, you avoided a straightforward question about whether you and President Trump had spoken since your swearing-in. You likewise declined to acknowledge your conversations with the President at a Senate hearing in July. And the appointment calendars you have released to date do not show any calls with President Trump, even though they have reportedly taken place. Your lack of transparency about contacts with the President is even more curious because you have disclosed meetings with top White House economic officials on your calendar, including separate meetings with the Chair and the General Counsel of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers.

Effective conduct of monetary policy depends on transparency, accountability, and integrity from the Chair, all of which are undermined by secret conversations with the President. While periodic communications with the President and Administration about the state of the economy are not objectionable in and of themselves, the repeated, free-flowing conversations described in the reporting are unprecedented in the modern era. If true, they raise serious questions about the Fed’s relationship with the White House.

To clarify your interactions with President Trump, please either confirm to us in writing that you have had no contacts with the President since being sworn in, or amend your publicly released calendars to disclose any such contacts. We also request a public read-out of any conversations with the President. Finally, if the reporting is accurate, please explain why you have been reticent to admit or describe your conversations with the President. Please provide this information as part of the next monthly disclosure of your calendar.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.",1,2026-08-21T05:30:57Z,2026-08-21T05:32:22Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-joins-blumenthal-wyden-and-himes-in-introducing-bicameral-bill-protecting-domestic-violence-survivors-from-gun-violence,"Van Hollen Joins Blumenthal, Wyden, and Himes in Introducing Bicameral Bill Protecting Domestic Violence Survivors from Gun Violence",2026-08-19,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), and U.S. Representative Jim Himes (D-Conn.) in introducing the Lori Jackson-Nicolette Elias Domestic Violence Survivor Protection Act, legislation to close a dangerous loophole that allows domestic abusers to legally obtain weapons. The Lori Jackson-Nicolette Elias Domestic Violence Survivor Protection Act restricts those under temporary restraining orders from purchasing or possessing a firearm and extends protections to domestic violence survivors who have been abused by their dating partners.

The bill is named in memory of Lori Jackson, a Connecticut mother who was tragically shot and killed by her estranged husband who had legally obtained a handgun even though he was subject to a temporary restraining order, and Nicolette Elias, a Connecticut mother who, despite securing restraining orders and temporary stalking orders against her estranged and abusive ex-husband, was murdered by her former spouse in front of their children with a handgun that he refused to relinquish.

The legislation is cosponsored in the U.S. Senate by U.S. Senators Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Mazie K. Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and Peter Welch (D-Vt.).

The legislation is supported by a number of organizations, including Brady, Sandy Hook Promise Action Fund, GIFFORDS, Newtown Action Alliance, Everytown, Jewish Women International, March for Our Lives, National Domestic Violence Hotline, National Network to End Domestic Violence, National Resource Center on Domestic Violence, and CT Coalition Against Domestic Violence.",1,2026-09-04T09:19:37Z,2026-09-04T09:20:58Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-alsobrooks-secure-14-million-in-federal-funding-for-berlins-community-center-at-historic-flower-street-school-site,"Van Hollen, Alsobrooks Secure $1.4 Million in Federal Funding for Berlin’s Community Center at Historic Flower Street School Site",2026-08-18,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"On Thursday, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) visited the location of the historic Flower Street School in Berlin to highlight the $1.4 million federal investment that he, along with Senator Angela Alsobrooks, secured in Congress to help transform the site into a new community center. The future building will house the SHORE UP! Head Start Center, Worcester Youth and Family Counseling Services summer camp and after-school programs, computer labs, recreational spaces, and a museum honoring the history of the Flower Street School and the neighborhood.

“For the Town of Berlin, this new community center will be a place for people of all ages and backgrounds to come together. With federal funding we fought to secure, Berlin will transform the site of the historic Flower Street School into a hub with educational and recreational services for residents. This initiative will honor the Town’s history while creating new opportunities and building a better future for the community,” said Senator Chris Van Hollen, a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee.

“Our communities need spaces where people can go to learn, socialize, and better their community. The Community Center on Flower Street in Berlin will soon become a space of fellowship, friendship, history, and advocacy where children and seniors alike can grow. I am proud that the funding Senator Van Hollen and I worked to secure will launch this terrific project,” said Senator Angela Alsobrooks.",1,2026-08-19T05:29:02Z,2026-08-19T05:30:24Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/maryland-delegation-members-statement-on-states-victory-in-lawsuit-to-restore-greenbelt-fbi-headquarters,Maryland Delegation Members’ Statement on State’s Victory in Lawsuit to Restore Greenbelt FBI Headquarters,2026-08-17,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"WASHINGTON – Today, members of Maryland’s Congressional delegation, including U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen and Angela Alsobrooks and Representatives Steny Hoyer, Glenn Ivey, Kweisi Mfume, Jamie Raskin, Sarah Elfreth, and Johnny Olszewski (all D-Md.), released the following statement regarding the State of Maryland’s victory in its lawsuit to restore the FBI headquarters project to Greenbelt, Maryland:

“For years, Team Maryland has fought to bring the men and women of the FBI a headquarters that meets their mission and their needs. After a years-long, competitive, and transparent process, Greenbelt, Maryland, was selected as the site for that new headquarters, based on its merits – including its ability to provide a secure space for the Bureau while ensuring the cost-effective use of taxpayer dollars. The Trump Administration had no grounds to ignore this selection, or redirect even one penny that Congress specifically appropriated for construction of the competitively selected site. We’re glad to see the Court acknowledge this fact, ruling that the Trump Administration’s actions are unlawful and void. This is an important step forward for the rule of law. This process began in 2009, and it’s past time it was concluded. Hopefully, the Trump Administration will agree with the conclusion that the Congress, the General Services Administration, and the District Court have all found, which is that Greenbelt is the proper home of the FBI. We will not stop fighting to fulfill our promise to the men and women of the Bureau to deliver a new, secure headquarters in Maryland so they can do their work without compromising their safety or our national security.”",1,2026-08-18T05:27:41Z,2026-08-18T05:29:06Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/following-approval-of-trump-crypto-company-bank-application-van-hollen-warren-colleagues-introduce-the-ending-presidential-corruption-in-banking-act,"Following Approval of Trump Crypto Company Bank Application, Van Hollen, Warren, Colleagues Introduce the Ending Presidential Corruption in Banking Act",2026-08-15,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Immediately following the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency's (OCC) approval of the Trump crypto company bank charter, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ranking Member of the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, and Senators Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), and Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) in introducing the Ending Presidential Corruption in Banking Act. The bill would ensure that no President, Vice President, their immediate families, or other senior government officials can exploit their positions to own or control a bank, which could serve as a major vehicle for corrupt dealings.

On January 5, 2026, the Trump Family crypto company World Liberty Financial (WLF) applied to the OCC for a national bank charter. President Trump, through EO 14215, had previously asserted control of the OCC.

“Our banking regulators should work to protect consumers and the integrity of our financial system, not enrich their bosses. President Trump and his family have raked in billions of dollars through corrupt deals and are now attempting to get the President’s own administration to approve a bank for his family’s crypto business. It is critical that Congress stand up against this corruption and protect consumers, safeguard our financial system, and prevent politicians from abusing these assets for their own personal gain,” said Senator Van Hollen.

“President Trump is now the first President in history to approve, operate, and supervise his own bank,” said Ranking Member Warren. “This is the most brazen act of self-dealing our financial system has ever seen — and Congress cannot allow it to stand. The Ending Presidential Corruption in Banking Act will close the door on this kind of unprecedented corruption.”

“This President's corruption knows no bounds. For the first time in our history, a President is now chartering and overseeing his own bank—injecting risk into our financial system and fueling the Trump family’s business endeavors. It is Congress' responsibility and duty now to rein in this corruption and ensure that bank charters, deposit insurance, and other banking licenses cannot be handed out to entities influenced or controlled by any President’s family,” said Senator Alsobrooks.

“President Trump has systematically weakened oversight of the crypto industry while his family has raked in billions through their numerous crypto schemes,” said Senator Blumenthal. “Now, Trump’s hand-picked regulators at the Treasury Department have granted World Liberty Financial a banking charter. This latest act of self-dealing puts our banking system in danger by legitimizing a company that has proven to be unscrupulous. Our measure would strengthen the integrity of our banking system by barring Presidents, their families, and other trusted government officials from controlling their own banks while in office.”

“While the President and his family accumulate billions of dollars through dubious deals, normal hardworking Americans are struggling just to get by,” said Senator Reed. “The Trump family appears to be gaming the system to enrich itself at the expense of ordinary taxpayers in ways that could imperil the integrity and soundness of America’s banking system. This bill would clamp down on corruption and restore much needed guardrails.”

“Trump will stop at nothing to use the presidency to enrich himself and those around him. We can’t restore trust in our democracy until we stop these abuses of power. This bill is an important step to building the kind of accountability the American people demand and deserve,” said Senator Kim.

“Trump has proven time and time again his desire to enrich himself while serving as President of the United States. At a time when costs continue to rise and families must make tough financial decisions, this president looks out for himself, not working Americans. This bill makes clear no public officials, including the president, nor their families, should be able to enrich themselves by owning and controlling banks,” said Senator Gallego.

The Ending Presidential Corruption in Banking Act would:

Prohibit the Federal Reserve Board, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation from approving a range of banking applications, including charters, deposit insurance, and master accounts if the applicant is owned or controlled by the President, Vice President, a spouse or child of the President or Vice President, a Member of Congress, a presidentially appointed executive branch official, or a special government employee.

Require the agencies, no later than 60 days after enactment, to review all banking applications granted after January 20, 2025, and terminate those that were approved while a covered person owned or controlled the applicant.

Prohibit the President, Vice President, and a child or spouse of the President or Vice President from owning or controlling a bank.",1,2026-08-18T05:27:41Z,2026-08-18T05:29:06Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-joins-hirono-colleagues-in-raising-alarms-about-increased-naturalization-fees,"Van Hollen Joins Hirono, Colleagues, in Raising Alarms About Increased Naturalization Fees",2026-08-13,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Senator Mazie K. Hirono (D-Hawaii), a senior member of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary who is a Naturalized Citizen, and 10 of their Democratic Senate colleagues in pressing the Trump Administration on their recent proposed rule to increase naturalization fees and remove reduced fee options and fee waivers for those attempting to become citizens. In a letter to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Director Joseph B. Edlow, the senators raised alarms about how the proposed fee increases would limit citizenship for thousands of immigrants.

“USCIS’s actions have repeatedly increased the burden of and difficulty in obtaining U.S. citizenship,” wrote the senators. “Naturalization is a critical pathway to immigrant integration, civic engagement, and democratic participation, yet your agency’s actions represent a significant departure from these values.”

Under the Trump Administration’s proposed rule, immigrants seeking U.S. citizenship would face hundreds of dollars of fee increases, up to 80 percent more. Immigrants seeking a hearing on naturalization proceedings would also face an up to 83 percent fee increase. Additionally, the proposed rule eliminates preexisting reduced-fee options and fee waivers, designed to help immigrants achieve citizenship no matter their financial status. In their letter, the senators highlighted how the proposed rule burdens the pathway to citizenship without providing clear guidance about how access will be preserved for immigrants who are unable to meet the increased financial threshold.

“While your agency asserts that the increased fees are necessary to recover the full cost of adjudicating naturalization applications and to support enhanced screening and vetting measures, it fails to address the increased fees’ deterrent effect on eligible applicants, particularly those from low-income communities,” the senators continued.

Despite the Trump Administration’s consistent claims that it supports legal immigration, the senators highlighted how the naturalization fee increase will have the opposite effect. In addition to the proposed fees, UCSIS has also increased the difficulty of the civics test required to become citizens and eliminated the Citizenship Integration and Grant Program designed to help immigrants navigate the process.

In their letter, the senators demanded prompt responses to explain the agency’s methodology when electing to increase naturalization fees, the anticipated impact of these fee increases on lawful permanent residents’ abilities to become naturalized citizens, and the changes in the naturalization process that necessitated the increased fees.

The letter was also signed by Senators Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), and Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.).

The full text of the letter is available here and below.

Dear Director Edlow:

We write regarding the proposed rule issued by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on June 23, 2026. That proposed rule would substantially increase naturalization fees and eliminate the reduced-fee option and fee waivers. These changes will place U.S. citizenship out of reach for many low-income lawful permanent residents who are otherwise eligible to naturalize.

Under the proposed rule, an applicant seeking U.S. citizenship would face fee increases of up to 80 percent and up to an 83 percent increase for a hearing on a decision in naturalization proceedings. The proposed rule would also eliminate both the reduced-fee option and the fee-waiver provision for non-military applicants. While your agency asserts that the increased fees are necessary to recover the full cost of adjudicating naturalization applications and to support enhanced screening and vetting measures, it fails to address the increased fees’ deterrent effect on eligible applicants, particularly those from low-income communities. The proposed rule does not demonstrate that USCIS considered applicants' reliance interests, evaluated reasonable alternatives that would preserve access to naturalization, or adequately justified why naturalization applicants should bear the costs of expanded adjudicatory processes.

USCIS’s actions have repeatedly increased the burden of and difficulty in obtaining U.S. citizenship. In addition to these proposed fees, your agency increased the difficulty of the civics test that individuals must take to become citizens. You also eliminated the Citizenship and Integration Grant Program that helps immigrants navigate the process. Naturalization is a critical pathway to immigrant integration, civic engagement, and democratic participation, yet your agency’s actions represent a significant departure from these values.

To fulfill our Congressional oversight responsibilities, we respectfully request that you provide written answers to the following questions by August 25th:

What analysis did your agency conduct regarding the impact of moving from an ability-to-pay framework to a strict beneficiary-pays model? Please include any analysis your agency conducted on the broader public benefits of naturalization, the equity implications, and how these factors were weighed in establishing the proposed fees.

What analysis did your agency conduct regarding the anticipated impact of the proposed fee increases on low-income communities? Please include any estimates of how many otherwise eligible lawful permanent residents may be unable to apply for naturalization or may delay filing as a result of the fee increases. Please also provide any assessment of the impacts on legal service providers, community-based organizations, and other stakeholders assisting applicants with the naturalization process.

What specific pre- and post-approval screening and vetting processes are needed by the agency for naturalization adjudications that necessitated the increased fees? Please also include the following:

The authority requiring such processes, including whether the additional processing is required by a specific Executive Order, statute, or policy change within the agency;

Whether and how these processes are authorized to be funded through Immigration Examinations Fee Account (IEFA) funds;

The costs associated with each process;

Whether those costs are directly attributable to individual naturalization adjudications; and

What alternatives were considered by the agency before proposing the fee increases.

What USCIS personnel responsible for naturalization adjudication and processing have been terminated, reassigned, or otherwise removed since January 2025? Of that number, how many positions have been refilled? Please also detail any reductions in USCIS funding or resources related to application processing, backlog reduction, or naturalization adjudications since January 2025.

We should not price citizenship outside the reach of immigrants; instead, we should explore ways to encourage individuals to fulfill the American Dream. If you have any questions, please reach out to my staff.",1,2026-08-15T05:23:20Z,2026-08-15T05:24:50Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-joins-blumenthal-baldwin-colleagues-in-demanding-hhs-rescind-cancellation-of-lifesaving-research-grants-that-improve-patient-safety-and-care,"Van Hollen Joins Blumenthal, Baldwin Colleagues in Demanding HHS Rescind Cancellation of Lifesaving Research Grants that Improve Patient Safety & Care",2026-08-12,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) and over 20 of their Democratic colleagues in the Senate in demanding that Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. reverse the Department’s destructive cancelations of lifesaving health research grants administered by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). Congressionally appropriated funding for AHRQ grants benefitted critical research and initiatives to advance effective healthcare delivery, such as training for rural healthcare workers, testing the use of artificial intelligence in hospitals, improving autism screening and services for Black children, and equipping primary care providers with effective chronic pain treatment.

In a letter sent today to Kennedy, the Senators raised concerns about the impact of HHS’s mass cancelations of these research grants, writing, “This unprecedented action, which has led to the disruption of nearly 200 different research programs across nearly 30 states, undermines decades of taxpayer investments to improve healthcare delivery, patient safety, and health outcomes for all Americans. We demand that you immediately rescind these cancelations and ensure that the funding Congress appropriates to AHRQ is invested in health research in accordance with the law.”

The Senators continued, “We want to be clear: Democrats and Republicans did not work together to appropriate funds for AHRQ as a gentle suggestion for the Department to follow at their discretion or leisure. We provided this money with the explicit instruction that the Department faithfully support life-saving research to improve access and health outcomes for Americans. We did not appropriate these funds so that money could remain unspent while Americans suffer and our healthcare system struggles.”

The Senators continued, “The agency’s actions over the last year are an outrageous abuse of administrative power that will leave Americans sicker, poorer, and dying from preventable causes. Each of these canceled grants put real life patients further from the care that they need.”

The Senators called on Kennedy to immediately restore full funding to research projects affected by the cancelations and ensure AHRQ’s full FY26 appropriations are obligated as required by law: “At a time when medical errors kill hundreds of thousands of Americans annually, when healthcare costs are crushing family budgets, and when we face unprecedented health challenges, your department has chosen to sabotage the very research designed to solve these problems. This is not leadership—this is sabotage of public health. And it must end, immediately.”

“The American people deserve a healthcare system informed by the best available evidence. They deserve research that makes their care safer, more effective, and more affordable. Congress has provided the resources to support this vital work. It is your responsibility to ensure these resources are used as intended,” the Senators concluded.

The letter was also signed by U.S. Senators Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), and Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.).

Full text of the letter is available here and below.

Dear Secretary Kennedy,

We write to express our profound concern and unequivocal opposition to the recent mass cancelations of lifesaving health research grants administered by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) as well as the year-long refusal to faithfully execute the Fiscal Year (FY25) and Fiscal Year (FY26) appropriations laws. This unprecedented action, which has led to the disruption of nearly 200 different research programs across nearly 30 states, undermines decades of taxpayer investments to improve healthcare delivery, patient safety, and health outcomes for all Americans. We demand that you immediately rescind these cancelations and ensure that the funding Congress appropriates to AHRQ is invested in health research in accordance with the law.

On July 15, 2026, approximately 150 AHRQ grantees received a generic form letter notifying them that their grants were canceled, effective immediately. For many, this was the first notice or communication that they have received from AHRQ in nearly a year. The grant cancelation letters cite regulations that require the Agency to consider the grantee's progress and management practices and the availability of funds, yet none of the notices substantively address any of these factors. Instead, these cancelation notices list a series of Agency priorities that do not appear in the subsections cited. Further, many of the grants that were canceled were explicitly investigating the topics that AHRQ has described as a priority. The cancelation letters, which were sent to a broad range of grantees, use the exact same language, which is evidence that the agency is categorically denying grants without making individual grant determinations.

A small sample of the research programs that were just devastated include:

Work in Connecticut on training rural healthcare workers to better respond to maternal medical emergencies;

Research in New York on how to improve healthcare delivery systems for patients to access home dialysis;

A program in Colorado that reduces risk factors for patient falls in rural hospitals;

Work in Utah to reduce antibiotic overuse at hospital discharge;

Research in Wisconsin testing the use of artificial intelligence to improve the experience of hospitalized children and their families;

A grant in North Carolina that improved autism screening, diagnosis, and services among Black children;

Research in Maryland to improve patient safety via telehealth;

Work in Virginia to equip primary care providers with more effective chronic pain treatment to reduce reliance on opioids; and

Research in Michigan on patient financial burden after a COVID-19 infection.

This is just a fraction of the important work that has been permanently discontinued, despite years of work and millions of taxpayer dollars that were invested to advance our understanding of effective healthcare delivery.

This recklessness is not the only crisis facing the Agency. Since October 1, 2025, the Agency has only awarded 5 percent of the funds available for extramural grants. Grantees were left in limbo, without notice or clarification, in some cases for over a year. Programs across the country were forced to layoff staff, discontinue research, shutdown programs, or not pursue new research opportunities at all. In 2025, AHRQ lost 80 percent of its staff, including the vast majority of those working to vet grant applications and work with grantees, so there is no one left to adequately manage the programming mandated by statute.

We want to be clear: Democrats and Republicans did not work together to appropriate funds for AHRQ as a gentle suggestion for the Department to follow at their discretion or leisure. We provided this money with the explicit instruction that the Department faithfully support life-saving research to improve access and health outcomes for Americans. We did not appropriate these funds so that money could remain unspent while Americans suffer and our healthcare system struggles. AHRQ has saved our country billions of dollars in healthcare costs and improved patient safety. Abandoning this work is antithetical to the mission of the Department.

The agency’s actions over the last year are an outrageous abuse of administrative power that will leave Americans sicker, poorer, and dying from preventable causes. Each of these canceled grants put real life patients further from the care that they need.

At a time when medical errors kill hundreds of thousands of Americans annually, when healthcare costs are crushing family budgets, and when we face unprecedented health challenges, your department has chosen to sabotage the very research designed to solve these problems. This is not leadership—this is sabotage of public health. And it must end, immediately.

We call upon you to take the following immediate actions:

Rescind all recent grant cancelations and restore full funding to all affected research projects;

Ensure that AHRQ’s full FY26 appropriation is obligated for health services research as the bipartisan majorities of Congress and President Trump’s signature intended;

Provide a detailed explanation to Congress within one month of receiving this letter regarding the decision-making process that led to these cancelations, including any written criteria, instructions, funding plans, rankings, spreadsheets, analyses, or other documents used to identify or select affected grants;

Explain how the priorities identified in the non-continuation notice were applied to grants that were terminated and explain why grants focused on listed priority research areas were selected for non-continuation;

Provide to Congress a spend plan to ensure that the approximately $200 million remaining in funding for extramural research grants are awarded before October 1, 2026, including any contract arrangements with other federal agencies and a description of how such contracts advance research on health care costs, quality, and outcomes;

Provide to Congress a detailed description of the number of employees at AHRQ that are performing grants-management functions, including issuing awards, processing continuations, and monitoring awards for compliance as of August 6, 2026, September 30, 2025, and January 1, 2025;

Provide a written assurance that such arbitrary cancelations will never happen again.

Countless researchers who have devoted their careers to improving healthcare for all of us have watched years of painstaking work and hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer investments destroyed overnight. The scientific and health pipelines that have been demolished will take decades to build back and may never be recovered.

The American people deserve a healthcare system informed by the best available evidence. They deserve research that makes their care safer, more effective, and more affordable. Congress has provided the resources to support this vital work. It is your responsibility to ensure these resources are used as intended.

We look forward to your response no later than August 25, 2026.",1,2026-08-15T05:23:20Z,2026-08-15T05:24:50Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-shaheen-booker-merkley-issue-statement-ahead-of-elections-in-zambia,"Van Hollen, Shaheen, Booker, Merkley, Issue Statement Ahead of Elections in Zambia",2026-08-12,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), and Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), all members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, issued the below statement calling for peaceful, fair elections ahead of the August 13th elections in Zambia.

“The United States values its long-standing partnership with Zambia. Over the last two decades, the United States and Zambia have partnered on peacekeeping, the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) programming and democracy initiatives that have improved global health, stability and social mobility. Although this partnership has been strained by the Trump Administration’s attempts to link lifesaving health assistance with critical minerals access through the Global Health Memorandum of Understanding, close cooperation between our countries remains more important than ever.

“This is why we are especially concerned by the Zambian ruling party’s attempts to undermine the country’s electoral environment ahead of its August 13th elections. The ruling party’s recent actions are reminiscent of previous elections where political opponents – including current President Hakainde Hichilema – were arrested in an effort to silence opposition. President Hakainde Hichilema and the United Party for National Development (UPND) appear to be using the same laws that once victimized and imprisoned political figures like Hichilema to propel him to a second term. Laws governing political campaign gatherings are selectively enforced to stifle opposition rallies, and Zambia’s Constitution and electoral framework were hastily reformed without meaningful civil society consultation.

“We urge all parties and candidates to commit to peaceful elections and to ensure laws are enforced consistently and fairly, regardless of party affiliation. We also call on the Department of State to increase its engagement with Zambian civil society, consistent with its longstanding efforts, to help Zambia and other important international partners uphold democracy and the rule of law before, during and after elections. We commend Zambian advocacy groups working tirelessly to improve election integrity and remain cautiously hopeful that the election on August 13th will provide an opportunity for a free and fair contest.”",1,2026-08-15T05:23:20Z,2026-08-15T05:24:50Z
https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/news/press-releases/alsobrooks-marylanders-cant-afford-life-under-president-trump/,ALSOBROOKS: MARYLANDERS CAN’T AFFORD LIFE UNDER PRESIDENT TRUMP,2026-08-11,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Angela D. Alsobrooks,A000382,www.alsobrooks.senate.gov,alsobrooks,https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/,scraper,"August 11,2026

WASHINGTON, DC – Senator Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.) released the following statement after the Joint Economic Committee released a report finding that Marylanders are having to spend over $3,000 more under President Trump.

“Gas prices are skyrocketing, groceries are still unaffordable, and millions have been kicked off their health care because of this President’s actions. Marylanders can’t afford life under President Trump.”

$455 more on gas

The average family in Maryland has spent $455 more on gas since the start of Trump’s Iran War.

$310 more on groceries

Americans paid $310 more for groceries in President Trump’s first year than in 2024.

Grocery prices are now more than 4% higher than when Trump took office.

Since the President took office, the average price of ground beef has risen almost every month to a record high of more than $7 per pound. Coffee prices also spiked and are now nearly $10 per pound.

$230 more on electricity

Families in Maryland paid $230 more for electricity in 2025 under President Trump than they did in 2024.

And, in just the first six months of 2026, Maryland families are expected to spend an estimated $266 more for electricity than they did in the first half of 2024.

$666 more on housing

Maryland families have had to spend $666 more on housing costs such as rent and mortgage payments since President Trump took office.

$1,000+ more on health care

Monthly premiums for Affordable Care Act (ACA) plans rose over 50% on average in 2026 compared to last year. Meanwhile, deductibles surged to record highs, increasing by more than $1,000 on average because of Republicans’ refusal to extend the ACA tax cuts that help people afford their health insurance.

###",1,2026-08-12T06:18:38Z,2026-08-12T06:20:33Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-joins-padilla-colleagues-in-demanding-state-department-process-student-visas-without-delays,"Van Hollen Joins Padilla, Colleagues in Demanding State Department Process Student Visas Without Delays",2026-08-11,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) and 28 of their Senate colleagues in expressing concern about the unavailability of student and exchange visitor visa appointments in time for the start of the academic year and demanding answers regarding delays in processing of these applications at U.S. embassies and consulates.

“We urge the State Department to ensure timely processing of F, M, and J student and exchange visitor nonimmigrant visas, consistent with the approach taken by administrations of both parties in the past, and to implement other measures to avoid diminishing U.S. competitiveness,” wrote the Senators. “Specifically, we are hearing from constituents and stakeholders that no timely visa appointments are available for students at some embassies and consulates. This only exacerbates uncertainty about whether students’ visas will be processed in time for them to travel to the United States to begin their studies.”

The Senators highlighted the vital contributions international students make to universities and communities nationwide, including expanding opportunities for American students, generating economic activity, strengthening the U.S. workforce, and building international partnerships.

“International students are critical to the success of our universities, including contributing nearly $43 billion annually to local communities and supporting more than 355,000 American jobs during the 2024-2025 academic year. Even though international students make up only six percent of the total higher education population, their enrollment creates opportunities for American students,” continued the Senators. “International students also improve our national security by fostering global relationships, cross cultural understanding, and long-lasting diplomatic ties. These benefits are at risk if visa processing delays persist.”

The Senators urged the State Department to ensure the timely review and processing of student and exchange visitor visas, extend interview waivers for vetted returning student applicants, provide sufficient staffing for visa processing, and improve transparency and engagement with stakeholders. The Senators also requested an explanation within 30 days about the causes of the delays and the measures being implemented to ensure student and exchange visitor visa applications are processed in a timely manner moving forward.

In addition to Van Hollen and Padilla, the letter was signed by U.S. Senators Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Angus King (I-Maine), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM), Ed Markey (D-MA), Patty Murray (D-WA), Gary Peters (D-MI), Jack Reed (D-RI), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Reverend Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).

The full text of letter is available here and below.

Dear Secretary Rubio,

We write to express our concerns regarding the ongoing unavailability of visa appointments during the peak visa application season for students and scholars seeking to enter the U.S. in time for the start of classes and the academic year. We urge the State Department to ensure timely processing of F, M, and J student and exchange visitor nonimmigrant visas, consistent with the approach taken by administrations of both parties in the past, and to implement other measures to avoid diminishing U.S. competitiveness. Specifically, we are hearing from constituents and stakeholders that no timely visa appointments are available for students at some embassies and consulates. This only exacerbates uncertainty about whether students’ visas will be processed in time for them to travel to the United States to begin their studies.

These challenges come at a time when major academic institutions need skilled, international talent to begin their semesters. Without a fix, the repercussions will be felt across the academic and skilled-technical talent pipeline.

International students are critical to the success of our universities, including contributing nearly $43 billion annually to local communities and supporting more than 355,000 American jobs during the 2024-2025 academic year. Even though international students make up only six percent of the total higher education population, their enrollment creates opportunities for American students. For every additional international undergraduate enrolled at a U.S. public university, two additional in-state freshman students can enroll. Most international students pay out-of-state tuition, injecting vital revenue into our colleges and universities and helping keep costs down for domestic students. International students also improve our national security by fostering global relationships, cross cultural understanding, and long-lasting diplomatic ties. These benefits are at risk if visa processing delays persist.

The case-by-case nature of availability for access to expedited appointments or National Interest Exception requests is neither efficient nor sustainable. Instead of diverting already limited personnel resources, the State Department should ensure that its consular sections restore priority to interview, adjudicate, and process student visas in time for the upcoming school year.

In addition to the above, we urge the State Department to extend interview waivers for vetted returning student applicants; ensure adequate staffing for timely visa vetting and processing; and meaningfully engage with stakeholders to promote greater transparency.

International students bolster the American workforce, drive innovation, and better position our country to maintain its competitive edge. Therefore, we request a written response answering these questions within 30 days:

1. What resources has the Department devoted to processing the backlogs and streamlining processing of F, J, and M visas?

2. Have consular process priorities changed since the spring and summer of 2025? What visa interview categories are currently prioritized by the Bureau of Consular Affairs and where do student visas fall within that list? Provide the list of visa interview prioritization.

3. What guidance has been sent to embassies and consulates regarding prioritization or deprioritization of student and exchange visitor visa processing? Provide a copy of all guidance regarding the prioritizing or deprioritizing of student and exchange visitor visas since August 2025 until the present day.

4. How are interview slots being allocated at embassies and consulates and where do student and exchange visitor visa appointments fit within that allocation?

5. How often are consular post websites and the main State Department website updated for relevant and current information regarding current U.S. consulate operations including visa appointment availability and approximate processing times?

6. When will you resume publicly posting monthly, accurate visa issuance data by category?

7. Will the Department commit to implementing regular, ongoing outreach and collaboration with stakeholders and relevant agencies about the student and exchange visitor visa process and ensure the timely processing of F, J, and M visas?

8. How do you ensure that embassies and consulates are accurately and timely informed of any regulatory or policy changes regarding student and exchange visitor visas?

9. What are the average processing times for F, M, and J visas at the top five locations processing these visas from September 2025 to date, disaggregated by month?

10. Last year, the Department of State announced new vetting, including online presence vetting, of all student and exchange visitor applicants in the F, M, and J nonimmigrant classification",1,2026-09-04T09:19:37Z,2026-09-04T09:20:58Z
https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/news/press-releases/alsobrooks-leads-senators-in-introducing-bill-to-end-tariffs-on-back-to-school-supplies/,ALSOBROOKS LEADS SENATORS IN INTRODUCING BILL TO END TARIFFS ON BACK-TO-SCHOOL SUPPLIES,2026-08-06,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Angela D. Alsobrooks,A000382,www.alsobrooks.senate.gov,alsobrooks,https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/,scraper,"August 6, 2026

WASHINGTON, DC – As reported in The Hill, U.S. Senators Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), and John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.) introduced the Back-to-School Supplies Affordability Act, legislation that would exempt school supplies and educational materials from tariffs, helping reduce costs for families, teachers, schools, and local governments.

According to Groundwork Collaborative and The Century Foundation, the cost of back-to-school supplies has increased by nearly 11% this year, driven in part by President Trump’s tariffs, including the latest Section 301 tariffs affecting imports from much of the global economy. According to the study, lunch boxes are up nearly 27%, notebooks are up nearly 23%, and nearly every school item, from pens to paper, is higher than it was before the Trump Tariffs.

“Families and teachers should be focused on preparing children for a successful school year–not worrying about whether they can afford the supplies students need to learn. As parents and teachers continue to feel the strain of rising costs, this legislation provides targeted relief by eliminating tariffs on essential classroom supplies. Every child deserves the opportunity to start the school year with the tools they need to succeed,” said Senator Alsobrooks.

“The Trump Administration’s sweeping global tariffs are raising prices for working families across the country, and our students, teachers, and schools are caught right in the middle of it. This legislation will lower back-to-school costs for families and help students start the year with the tools they need to learn and succeed,” said Senator Van Hollen.

“As school districts across Nevada begin the new school year, parents are being squeezed by the high cost of school supplies thanks to Donald Trump’s reckless tariffs,” said Senator Rosen. “I am proud to help introduce this bill to repeal tariffs on school supplies and provide some financial relief for hardworking families as they prepare our children for another school year. I promise that I will continue fighting in the Senate to lower the cost of living for families all across Nevada.”

“Parents have struggled all year with the impact of Trump’s tariffs on everything from gas to groceries, cell phones to furniture, and now they have to deal with eye-watering costs for backpacks, books, lunch boxes, notebooks, and other back-to-school supplies,” said Senator Coons. “Our children shouldn’t be held back because the tools they need to learn and grow are made unaffordable by Trump’s disastrous tariffs. This bill would make it so parents and children don’t face an unfair tax on back to school.”

“Trump’s tariffs are squeezing families in all directions, and back-to-school season is already stressful enough. This bill helps give them much needed relief on classroom essentials so parents can have some peace of mind while getting their kids ready for the school year,” said Senator Kim.

“Back-to-school season is already expensive enough without tariffs making backpacks, notebooks, pencils, and other essential supplies even more costly,” said Senator Blunt Rochester, Ranking Member of the Senate Banking Subcommittee on Education and the American Family. “The Back-to-School Supplies Affordability Act will help lower costs for families and educators by exempting school supplies from President Trump’s tariffs so students can start the school year ready to learn—not worrying about higher prices.”

“Working families have already paid a high price under President Trump’s illegal tariffs. They shouldn’t have to pay a tariff tax on their children’s back-to-school supplies,” said Hickenlooper. “This bill will help make it easier for every child to start the school year with the supplies they need.”

“Families shouldn’t have to pay a Trump tariff tax just to send their kids back to school. Senator Alsobrooks’ Back-to-School Supplies Affordability Act would help lower the cost of essentials like backpacks, notebooks, and pencils. Third Way is proud to support this commonsense legislation to deliver meaningful cost relief for families, teachers, and schools,” said Zach Moller, Senior Director of the Economic Program, Third Way.

“This back-to-school season is coming with significant sticker shock. Stocking backpacks and lockers this year will cost nearly 8% more thanks to Trump’s tariffs and war in Iran. As half of parents are forced to cut back on other expenses to make sure their children are prepared to succeed this school year, working families need relief from Trump’s reckless economic agenda,” said Elizabeth Pancotti, Vice President of Policy, Advocacy, and Research, Groundwork Collaborative.

The Back-to-School Supplies Affordability Act would exempt school supplies and educational materials from most tariffs, including the latest Section 301 tariffs raising prices on goods from much of the global economy.

The legislation directs the Secretaries of Commerce and Education to work together to create a list of tariff-free school supplies, but also specifically exempts:

Office and school supplies

Backpacks

Notebooks, memorandum pads, and similar paper products

Children’s picture, drawing, and coloring books

Calendars

Computer keyboards

Hairbrushes

Pencils, crayons, chalk, and other drawing materials

Pens, markers, and related writing instruments

The bill preserves congressional oversight by allowing Congress to disapprove the designation of specific items for tariff exemptions through a Joint Resolution of Disapproval.

Read full text of the bill here.

###",1,2026-08-07T06:11:19Z,2026-08-07T06:12:42Z
https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/news/press-releases/alsobrooks-on-cnn-our-country-is-in-a-race-to-the-bottom-with-republicans-at-the-helm/,ALSOBROOKS ON CNN: OUR COUNTRY IS IN A RACE TO THE BOTTOM WITH REPUBLICANS AT THE HELM,2026-08-06,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Angela D. Alsobrooks,A000382,www.alsobrooks.senate.gov,alsobrooks,https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/,scraper,"WASHINGTON, DC – Senator Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.) joined CNN News Central with Kate Bolduan to discuss the unserious witch hunt against Dr. Fauci, this President’s disastrous and costly war, and how Democrats will win back the Senate in the midterm elections.

“These Republicans have now become the masters of the Jedi mind trick. They prefer for us to focus on Anthony Fauci at a time when Cyclospora is spreading through our communities; it is surging. Where we see measles at the highest rates that we’ve seen in 35 years, where RFK Jr. has lied every single time that I have been in a hearing with him…These Republicans are so unserious,” said Senator Alsobrooks during the interview.

###",1,2026-08-07T06:11:19Z,2026-08-07T06:12:42Z
https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/news/press-releases/alsobrooks-on-cnn-rfk-jr-is-making-americans-sicker-and-poorer/,ALSOBROOKS ON CNN – RFK JR. IS MAKING AMERICANS SICKER AND POORER,2026-08-06,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Angela D. Alsobrooks,A000382,www.alsobrooks.senate.gov,alsobrooks,https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/,scraper,"August 6, 2026

WASHINGTON, DC – Senator Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.) joined The Lead with Jake Tapper on CNN to discuss RFK Jr.’s continued lies and how his actions and rhetoric are endangering American families.

“[RFK Jr.] is presently causing harm to Americans. Where we see Cyclospora. People are asking why they’re in the emergency rooms. Measles [cases] are at the highest rates that we’ve seen in 35 years. The fact that we have canceled important research. And instead of focusing on what is causing harm right this second – what is making Americans sicker, and by the way, poorer – they decide instead to do the Jedi mind trick and to focus on Dr. Fauci. So these people are so unserious. This clown show today was disgraceful, and I think Americans are going to be able to see through it,” said Senator Alsobrooks during the interview.

###",1,2026-08-07T06:11:19Z,2026-08-07T06:12:42Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-curtis-introduce-bipartisan-legislation-to-combat-affordable-housing-crisis-strengthen-usps,"Van Hollen, Curtis Introduce Bipartisan Legislation to Combat Affordable Housing Crisis, Strengthen USPS",2026-08-06,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and John Curtis (R-Utah) introduced bipartisan legislation to confront the shortage of affordable housing across the country while simultaneously helping to address funding shortfalls at the United States Postal Service (USPS). Amid record-breaking housing costs, the Senators’ new bill, the Delivering Americans Affordable Homes Act, would allow local communities to lease Postal Service property rights for new affordable housing construction. At the same time, this legislation protects against the sale of Postal Service assets, supports the rehabilitation and new construction of Postal facilities, and eases the Postal Service’s critical financial constraints.

“Far too many working Americans are faced with housing costs they simply cannot afford. At the same time, the Postal Service faces financial struggles that, if left unaddressed, will result in USPS running out of money to operate. With this legislation, we’re not only bringing new, affordable homes to communities across the country, we’re also working to shore up the Postal Service so that it can continue serving Americans for generations to come. It’s a win-win,” said Senator Van Hollen.

“Utah desperately needs more housing, and the Postal Service needs new sources of revenue; this commonsense legislation helps accomplish both,” said Senator Curtis. “By giving USPS the authority to lease underutilized property for housing development, we can put unused land to work, expand the housing supply, and strengthen an institution that millions of Americans rely on every day.”

Currently, the Postal Service owns about 8,500 properties around the United States, many of which are located in places suitable for housing construction and in areas with high housing demand. According to a recent analysis from Brookings, housing construction on postal property could build over 200,000 new homes and bring hundreds of millions of dollars to the Postal Service each year.

The Delivering Americans Affordable Homes Act would set guardrails on housing construction by USPS by allowing for the lease, but prohibiting the sale, of Postal Service property for housing construction and ensuring USPS maintains discretion over its real estate assets. The bill also requires housing units constructed on Postal Service property to include tenant affordability restrictions on at least 20% of units, among other provisions.

This legislation is supported by a broad array of stakeholders including Chamber of Progress, Bipartisan Policy Center Action, Inclusive Abundance Action, and Up for Growth.

“Solving the nationwide housing crisis calls for innovative solutions, and Senator Van Hollen and Senator Curtis are proposing one: repurposing U.S. Postal Service-owned properties into housing. This effort would drive new housing to supply-constrained areas like Maryland while also generating revenue and supporting the Postal Service's continued success,” said Maryland Department of Housing and Community Development Secretary Jake Day. “This approach echoes what the Moore-Miller Administration is doing at the state level, giving state government-owned property a new life as home to affordable housing, vibrant communities, and walkable places with easy access to transit. I commend the Senators for proposing this common-sense, bipartisan housing bill that would be a win-win for Americans.”

“I applaud Senators Van Hollen and Curtis for their leadership in crafting this win-win legislation,” said Aaron Shroyer, Nonresident Senior Fellow, Brookings Metro. “This bill would enable the United States Postal Service to tap an underutilized asset – its land – to create a durable revenue source, while also adding much-needed housing to main streets and downtowns across the country.”

“USPS-owned sites could offer meaningful opportunities to add homes in communities where housing is badly needed,” said Ben Metcalf, Managing Director, Terner Center for Housing Innovation. “Terner Center research has identified hundreds of USPS-owned sites that warrant closer evaluation for housing. While not every site will be feasible, underutilized postal properties could offer one solution to policymakers who are looking for ways to increase their affordable housing stock.”

“The Postal Service owns 8,500 properties, many of them on prime, well-located land that cities and states need for housing,” said Colin Higgins, Executive Director of the National Housing Crisis Task Force. “In our Federal Housing Policy Agenda, the National Housing Crisis Task Force called for putting federal land to work this way, and it's good to see a bipartisan bill take up the idea. The hope is that cities and states can chart a path to build homes on underused public land while the Postal Service keeps its footprint and earns revenue.”

“The Postal Service is sitting on excess land that could be used for more than 200,000 new homes,” said Adam Kovacevich, Founder and CEO of Chamber of Progress. “Sen. Van Hollen and Sen. Curtis’s legislation will turn underused postal sites and parking lots into housing in the places people want to live, and provide much needed revenue back to the Postal Service.”

“America’s housing affordability crisis is driven, in part, by a severe shortage of homes. One of the most practical ways to close that gap is to build on well-located land the public already owns,” said Mike Kingsella, Chief Executive Officer of Up for Growth and Up for Growth Action. “This bill puts underutilized postal property to work creating new homes. Long-term leases on thousands of sites across the country could support affordable housing near jobs and transit while generating steady revenue to help keep the Postal Service strong.”",1,2026-08-07T06:11:19Z,2026-08-07T06:12:42Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-secures-committee-passage-of-bill-to-rename-post-office-in-olney-after-beloved-employee-edward-ramsey,"Van Hollen Secures Committee Passage of Bill to Rename Post Office in Olney After Beloved Employee, Edward Ramsey",2026-08-06,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, legislation introduced by U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen and Angela Alsobrooks (both D-Md.) to name the U.S. Post Office located at 3570 Olney Laytonsville Road in Olney, Maryland, after Sergeant Edward Lawrence Ramsey unanimously passed the Senate Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs Committee. Ed Ramsey was an Army veteran and employee of the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) until his passing in 2022. Ramsey served honorably in the United States Army for over 20 years, serving in Panama, Louisiana, Walter Reed Medical Center in Washington, D.C., and Fort Sam Houston in San Antonio, Texas. During his 27-year USPS career, he served as a clerk at the Olney Post Office, where he became a beloved fixture of the Olney community. Congressman Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) introduced companion legislation, which passed the House of Representatives earlier this year. Following this key Committee passage, the bill is eligible for consideration by the full Senate.

“Sergeant Ed Ramsey lived a life of public service – joining the Army to defend our nation, then going on to serve his community in his local post office for nearly three decades. During those years, his unstinting kindness made such an impression on his neighbors that they launched a grassroots effort to rename the Olney Post Office in his memory after his passing. I have been honored to stand with them and lead this charge in the Senate. Today’s Committee passage is an important step forward, and I will continue working to pass this legislation in the Senate to honor Ed’s legacy as a committed public servant and beloved member of the community,” said Senator Van Hollen.

“Sergeant Ed Ramsey spent 20 years serving our country in the Army followed by another 27 years working for USPS. He is a patriot and a public servant who served with courage, kindness, and conviction. At the Olney Post Office, every member of our community became a quick friend of Ed’s. It is fitting that the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee has passed our bill to rename the Olney Post Office in his honor so every day we can all be reminded of his great service and continue to cherish his memory,” said Senator Alsobrooks.",1,2026-08-07T06:11:19Z,2026-08-07T06:12:42Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-alsobrooks-mcclain-delaney-announce-over-560000-for-workforce-development-supportive-housing-in-western-maryland,"Van Hollen, Alsobrooks, McClain Delaney Announce Over $560,000 for Workforce Development, Supportive Housing in Western Maryland",2026-08-05,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen and Angela Alsobrooks and Congresswoman April McClain Delaney (all D-Md.) announced $562,851 in federal funding from the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) for education, workforce development, and supportive housing for adults recovering from mental illness or with developmental disabilities in Allegany, Garrett, and Washington Counties.

“When we invest in opportunities for education, workforce training, and supportive housing, we invest in the long-term success of our communities. These federal dollars from the Appalachian Regional Commission will help create educational opportunities, open pathways to good-paying jobs, and strengthen the financial stability of Marylanders,” said Senator Van Hollen.

“When we invest in Western Maryland, our entire state benefits. This federal investment will support research at the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science’s Appalachian Lab in Frostburg, create more opportunities for Marylanders developing their careers at Garrett College’s Career Technology Training Center, and renovate critical housing for adults recovering from mental illness or developmental disabilities. This isn’t just an investment in Marylanders; it’s an investment in our economy and our future,”said Senator Alsobrooks.

“Western Maryland is full of talent and potential, and these federal investments will help turn that potential into opportunity,” said Congresswoman McClain Delaney. “This funding will expand research and student training at Frostburg’s Appalachian Lab, prepare Garrett College students for good-paying welding jobs, and provide stable housing and employment support through Archway Station. I’ll keep fighting to bring home resources that strengthen our rural communities.”

The federal grants have been awarded as follows:

$312,851 to the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science’s Appalachian Lab in Frostburg to acquire advanced scientific equipment and computing infrastructure, including atmospheric gas analyzers, upgrades to a high-capacity computing cluster, a dilution system for laboratory analysis, and more. The funds will expand the Appalachian Lab’s ability to conduct high-precision environmental and agricultural research, improve data processing and artificial intelligence capabilities, and support workforce training opportunities for students and participants.

$200,000 to Archway Station, Inc., to renovate seven apartments to support up to 18 participants in the Archway Recovery Program. Participants will receive temporary supportive housing, assistance with securing permanent housing, obtaining and retaining jobs, and advancing financial stability.

$50,000 to Garrett College to upgrade equipment in the existing welding lab at the Career Technology Training Center. The funds will support the purchase of 11 multi-process welders and one band saw and are anticipated to support 135 students over the course of three years.

These investments are provided through the Appalachian Regional Commission, an economic development partnership entity of the federal government and 13 state governments, focusing on 423 counties across the Appalachian Region. Senator Van Hollen secured $200 million in federal funding for the ARC through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021, and the lawmakers have since worked to prevent cuts to the program from the Trump Administration.",1,2026-08-06T07:37:31Z,2026-08-06T07:38:34Z
https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/news/press-releases/icymi-alsobrooks-on-ms-now-americans-are-done-settling-for-the-status-quo/,ICYMI – ALSOBROOKS ON MS NOW: AMERICANS ARE DONE SETTLING FOR THE STATUS QUO,2026-08-04,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Angela D. Alsobrooks,A000382,www.alsobrooks.senate.gov,alsobrooks,https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/,scraper,"August 4, 2026

WASHINGTON, DC – Senator Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.) joined MS NOW’s The Beat with Melissa Murray to discuss the Trump Administration’s continued attacks on the American people, this President’s disastrous war, and how Democrats plan to win back the Senate in the midterms.

“The truth is this president took our country into a war without a strategic aim, and he had no idea how to get our country out of this war. We voted here 13 different times to end the war. And what we know, as a matter of fact, is while this war is going on, our kids are dying at the same time that this President’s children are getting rich. The cost of the war is being borne by working-class people in our country, the ones who are not only being killed but those who are injured. We see the gas prices, the utility prices, the grocery prices. The cost of the war is being borne by working-class people in our country, and so it’s beyond a point of being concerned; it absolutely must end,” said Senator Alsobrooks during the interview.

“Fighting for the status quo is over. Nobody wants the status quo. I think that everyone is hungry at this point for tremendous change… we need a change in our country for everyday hardworking people who do everything right and still cannot make it. That’s the message,” continued Senator Alsobrooks.

###",1,2026-08-05T07:37:37Z,2026-08-05T07:38:44Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-joins-warren-pressley-colleagues-in-probing-insurance-companies-on-usage-of-credit-based-insurance-scores-as-costs-rise,"Van Hollen Joins Warren, Pressley, Colleagues in Probing Insurance Companies on Usage of Credit-Based Insurance Scores As Costs Rise",2026-08-04,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senator Chirs Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Representative Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), and 17 other members of Congress in a set of letters to USAA, State Farm, Progressive, Liberty Mutual, Farmers, and Allstate requesting information on the usage of credit-based insurance scores in homeowners insurance underwriting and pricing.

In the letters, the lawmakers underscored concerns that insurance companies are unfairly jacking up rates based on customer credit history, “Property and casualty insurance products price the risk of loss due to damage to a property and its contents; and unlike debt, these products do not hinge on a customer’s ability to repay or carry the risk of defaulting on a loan. Despite this, recent reporting indicates that Americans with weaker credit history pay significantly more for homeowners insurance, all other characteristics of the policyholder and property held equal.”

“Insurers have cited increasing climate-related disasters – along with rising building and reinsurance costs – as the key sources behind rising homeowners insurance premiums. Yet recent research shows that credit scores impact homeowners insurance premiums as much, if not more than, disaster risk in many parts of the country,” continued the lawmakers.

“Insurers should not charge consumers higher premiums simply because of their personal credit history, which could have been impacted by job loss, a surprise medical bill, predatory lending, or simply inaccurate information, rather than an actual risk associated with a home,” the lawmakers wrote.

The lawmakers called on the insurance companies to provide information on how they use credit-based scoring when offering or pricing homeowners insurance policies, requesting responses from the companies by August 17.

The letters are cosigned by Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Representatives André Carson (D-Ind.), Sean Casten (D-Ill.), Sylvia Garcia (D-Tex.), Al Green (D-Tex.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), Shri Thanedar (D-Mich.), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-NJ), Nikema Williams (D-Geo.).",1,2026-08-05T07:37:37Z,2026-08-05T07:38:44Z
https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/news/press-releases/alsobrooks-gillibrand-introduce-new-tax-credit-for-seniors/,"ALSOBROOKS, GILLIBRAND INTRODUCE NEW TAX CREDIT FOR SENIORS TO INSTALL AGING-RELATED MODIFICATIONS TO THEIR HOMES",2026-08-03,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Angela D. Alsobrooks,A000382,www.alsobrooks.senate.gov,alsobrooks,https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/,scraper,"August 3, 2026

WASHINGTON, DC – As reported in Politico’s Morning Tax, Senators Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), both members of the Senate Aging Committee, introduced the Senior Accessible Housing Tax Credit Act of 2026 which would create a new tax credit for seniors to install essential, aging-related modifications to their homes. Similar to legislation introduced by U.S. Rep. George Latimer (D-N.Y.), this legislation would help older adults age in place by making their homes safer.

“We have a responsibility to care for our seniors. This critical legislation allows for seniors to stay in their homes – for many that means homes they love and have been in for decades – and install essential, aging related modifications. Caring for our seniors isn’t just our duty–it is a privilege, and we should treat it as such by passing this bill,” said Senator Alsobrooks.

“A safe, accessible place for seniors to live should be a right, not a privilege,” said Senator Gillibrand. “The Senior Accessible Housing Tax Credit Act would help our nation’s older adults age with dignity by assisting with the cost of home modifications that meet their mobility needs. As the top Democrat on the Senate Aging Committee, I am committed to getting this bill passed to remove barriers to accessible housing for older Americans.”

“Homeownership should support Americans through every stage of life. The Senior Accessible Housing Tax Credit Act recognizes that simple home modifications can help older adults remain safe, independent, and connected to the communities they call home. By helping offset the cost of accessibility improvements, this legislation gives more seniors the opportunity to age in place with dignity while preserving the stability that homeownership provides. The National Association of REALTORS® is grateful for Senator Alsobrooks’ and Senator Gillibrand’s leadership on this bill and is proud to support this commonsense legislation,” said Shannon McGahn, Chief Advocacy Officer and Executive Vice President of the National Association of REALTORS®.

“The opportunity to age in community is critical for America’s older adults to thrive. But too many are not able to do so because of housing that cannot accommodate their needs. Less than five percent of the nation’s homes are accessible to households with even moderate mobility limitations at a time when, due to our country’s rapidly aging population, America desperately needs more age-friendly housing. LeadingAge applauds Senators Alsobrooks and Gillibrand, along with Congressman Latimer, for recognizing this. As the trusted voice for aging, LeadingAge supports the Senior Accessible Housing Tax Credit, which is an important step toward ensuring older adults can make the home modifications they need to live independently for longer,” said Katie Smith Sloan, president and CEO, LeadingAge.

The Senior Accessible Housing Tax Credit would create a nonrefundable tax credit for taxpayers aged 60 or older for expenses related to certain residence modifications on their principal residence or a qualifying second home. The credit would be equal to the cost of eligible expenditures, with an annual credit limitation of $10,000. Qualifying expenditures would also include certain labor costs related to the preparation, assembly, or installation of an eligible modification.

Qualifying expenditures would include:

The installation of wheelchair ramps

The widening of doorways

The installation of handrails or grab bars

The installation of non-slip flooring

The installation of bathtub cuts or shower seats

The installation of furniture risers

The installation of chair lifts

The replacement of toilets or bathroom vanities

The replacement of kitchen or bathroom faucets

Read the full bill text here.",1,2026-08-04T07:35:49Z,2026-08-04T07:37:27Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-leads-20-colleagues-in-urging-trump-administration-to-use-leverage-to-prevent-further-atrocities-in-sudan,Van Hollen Leads 20 Colleagues in Urging Trump Administration to Use Leverage to Prevent Further Atrocities in Sudan,2026-08-03,2026,2026-08,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, led 20 of his Senate Democratic colleagues in pressing the State Department to use its leverage to prevent further atrocities in Sudan and help bring the war to an end. To do so, the Senators urge the State Department to cease certain U.S. arms sales to external actors like the United Arab Emirates (UAE) which continues to arm the Rapid Support Forces’ (RSF) in Sudan. The Senators’ letter notes the immediate need for the State Department to take action in light of the impending siege of the city of El Obeid and following the mass atrocities and bloodshed that occurred in El Fasher last year.

Senator Van Hollen was joined in sending this letter by Senators Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), and Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.).

“We write with alarm regarding the Rapid Support Forces’ (RSF) impending siege of the city of El Obeid in Sudan, which threatens a repeat of the mass atrocities and bloodshed that occurred in El Fasher this past October. While we welcome the State Department’s expression of concern about the escalating situation in El Obeid, words are not enough. The United States must use the leverage and influence at our disposal to prevent further atrocities in El Obeid and help bring this brutal war in Sudan to an end. These actions should include ceasing certain U.S. arms sales to external actors that are fueling this war, including the United Arab Emirates, which continues to arm the RSF,” the Senators begin.

They continue, “We have already witnessed what happens when the international community fails to heed warnings of RSF atrocities. The RSF’s siege and devastation of El Fasher bore the ‘hallmarks of genocide’ according to United Nations investigators. […] The siege of El Fasher lasted for over 500 days, and the ensuing atrocities were widely foreseen and repeatedly forewarned by the United Nations, intelligence from the U.S. State Department and foreign governments, humanitarian monitors, and researchers. We remain greatly concerned by this administration’s grave failure to act despite the chorus of alarm bells. What occurred in El Fasher is a stark warning of what could unfold in El Obeid and across Sudan if this administration—and the international community—continues this current pattern of inaction.”

The lawmakers go on to warn, “And now those alarm bells are ringing once again – this time in El Obeid. Volker Türk, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, said on July 3, ‘This is not a drill. It is a red alert that needs to land on the desks of heads of state and government around the world. Their phones should be running hot in the coming days and weeks, with ideas on how to prevent atrocity crimes in El Obeid and in other places in Kordofan.’ […] The State Department has also recognized that this is a critical moment. On June 22, the State Department spokesperson warned of ‘alarming indications that mass atrocities could be imminent’ and said ‘the RSF and their allied forces must cease any actions that could endanger civilians, impede humanitarian assistance, or contribute to further atrocities and suffering.’”

“The evidence is clear – the United Arab Emirates is the primary external backer of the RSF, providing unparalleled military, financial, and technical support to the group,” the Senators note.

“Now, an estimated 500,000 civilians are at risk in El Obeid, including many who have sought shelter there after fleeing RSF attacks across the Kordofan region. The encirclement and systematic crippling of resources in El Obeid increasingly parallels El Fasher, and this administration must use its leverage and influence to prevent a repeat of El Fasher’s horrors in El Obeid before it is too late. We urge this administration to take concrete actions to prevent such mass atrocities in El Obeid, including by ceasing certain U.S. arms sales to the UAE and other external actors that are fueling this war. We also request an update on what other actions the administration is taking, beyond just words, to prevent mass atrocities in El Obeid and to help bring this war to an end,” the lawmakers conclude.

The full text of the letter is available here and below.

Secretary Rubio,

We write with alarm regarding the Rapid Support Forces’ (RSF) impending siege of the city of El Obeid in Sudan, which threatens a repeat of the mass atrocities and bloodshed that occurred in El Fasher this past October. While we welcome the State Department’s expression of concern about the escalating situation in El Obeid, words are not enough. The United States must use the leverage and influence at our disposal to prevent further atrocities in El Obeid and help bring this brutal war in Sudan to an end. These actions should include ceasing certain U.S. arms sales to external actors that are fueling this war, including the United Arab Emirates, which continues to arm the RSF.

We have already witnessed what happens when the international community fails to heed warnings of RSF atrocities. The RSF’s siege and devastation of El Fasher bore the “hallmarks of genocide” according to United Nations investigators. A United Nations Independent International Fact-Finding Mission found that “the Rapid Support Forces steadily squeezed the life out of El-Fasher and surrounding displacement camps, cutting off food, water, medical supplies, and humanitarian assistance, while subjecting the city to recurring shelling and ground assaults. Civilians were increasingly trapped, as escape routes were restricted or closed, and forced to endure conditions of life progressively incompatible with human survival.” This 18-month siege culminated in a 3-day rampage in October 2025, where survivors describe the slaughter of civilians, mass executions, and crimes against humanity.

El-Fasher University “became one of the bloodiest execution sites in the city.” According to survivors, over a hundred civilians were gunned down or executed as they sought shelter or attempted to flee. Survivors described notorious RSF commander Abu Lulu, known as the “Butcher of El-Fasher"", asking a pregnant woman how far she was in her pregnancy and then firing seven bullets into her abdomen when she replied that she was seven months along. He at one point said, “I was planning to kill 2000 people today, but I lost count, so I will start all over again.” In the case of El-Saudi Hospital, RSF forces stormed the hospital and “proceeded to search the wards and killing those they found, including patients, accompanying persons and medical personnel...it is estimated that over 460 patients and others present were killed.” Flight didn’t bring safety, according to survivors, as “The Rapid Support Forces pursued fleeing civilians along escape routes...where they had established ambushes and checkpoints...the perpetrators chasing people in open fields, firing at them with automatic rifles and mounted submachine guns, and running over fleeing persons with vehicles, causing mass casualties.” The horrors were visible from space, with satellite images analyzed by the Yale Humanitarian Research Lab showing bodies piled up in the streets, pools of blood on the ground, and mass burial sites.

The siege of El Fasher lasted for over 500 days, and the ensuing atrocities were widely foreseen and repeatedly forewarned by the United Nations, intelligence from the U.S. State Department and foreign governments, humanitarian monitors, and researchers. We remain greatly concerned by this administration’s grave failure to act despite the chorus of alarm bells. What occurred in El Fasher is a stark warning of what could unfold in El Obeid and across Sudan if this administration—and the international community—continues this current pattern of inaction.

And now those alarm bells are ringing once again – this time in El Obeid. Volker Türk, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, said on July 3, ""This is not a drill. It is a red alert that needs to land on the desks of heads of state and government around the world. Their phones should be running hot in the coming days and weeks, with ideas on how to prevent atrocity crimes in El Obeid and in other places in Kordofan.” Tom Fletcher, the United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, said of El Obeid on June 30, “Too often in this brutal war, clear warnings have been ignored. Civilians have paid the price. The international community must make itself heard. We cannot say we were not warned.”

The State Department has also recognized that this is a critical moment. On June 22, the State Department spokesperson warned of “alarming indications that mass atrocities could be imminent” and said “the RSF and their allied forces must cease any actions that could endanger civilians, impede humanitarian assistance, or contribute to further atrocities and suffering.” On June 23, State Department Senior Advisor for Africa Massad Boulos said that he spoke with RSF leadership and “strongly urged them to halt any actions that could endanger civilians in and around El Obeid.” And this Administration has repeatedly affirmed, including in July 2025, that “The Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and allied militias have committed genocide.” In November 2025, you yourself said that the RSF is “clearly receiving assistance from outside” and that “something needs to be done to cut off the weapons and the support the RSF is getting as they continue their advances.”

The evidence is clear – the United Arab Emirates is the primary external backer of the RSF, providing unparalleled military, financial, and technical support to the group. In May 2026, a new report by Human Rights Watch found that the UAE trained hundreds of Colombian mercenaries who then “took part in combat in and around El Fasher and, according to media reports, provided training to RSF recruits–including child soldiers”. In February 2026, a Reuters investigation found that Ethiopia has built a secret camp to train thousands of RSF fighters, and that the UAE financed the construction of the camp and provided military trainers and logistical support. This follows U.S. intelligence from October 2025, including separate reports from the Defense Intelligence Agency and the State Department’s intelligence bureau, that “show an increase in the flow of materiel from the U.A.E. to the rebel Rapid Support Forces since the spring.” These findings are part of a large and growing body of credible evidence that the UAE is both arming and providing military support to the RSF.

Now, an estimated 500,000 civilians are at risk in El Obeid, including many who have sought shelter there after fleeing RSF attacks across the Kordofan region. The encirclement and systematic crippling of resources in El Obeid increasingly parallels El Fasher, and this administration must use its leverage and influence to prevent a repeat of El Fasher’s horrors in El Obeid before it is too late. We urge this administration to take concrete actions to prevent such mass atrocities in El Obeid, including by ceasing certain U.S. arms sales to the UAE and other external actors that are fueling this war. We also request an update on what other actions the administration is taking, beyond just words, to prevent mass atrocities in El Obeid and to help bring this war to an end.

We request a response to this letter by August 17, 2026.",1,2026-08-04T07:35:49Z,2026-08-04T07:37:27Z
https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/news/press-releases/alsobrooks-warren-and-senators-investigate-rfk-jr-s-unresolved-financial-conflicts-question-whether-his-family-is-profiting-from-bogus-vaccine/,"ALSOBROOKS, WARREN, AND SENATORS INVESTIGATE RFK JR.’S UNRESOLVED FINANCIAL CONFLICTS, QUESTION WHETHER HIS FAMILY IS PROFITING FROM BOGUS VACCINE LAWSUITS",2026-07-30,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Angela D. Alsobrooks,A000382,www.alsobrooks.senate.gov,alsobrooks,https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/,scraper,"July 30, 2026

Text of Letter (PDF)

WASHINGTON, DC — As reported in The Hill, U.S. Senators Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), and Andy Kim (D-N.J.) opened a new investigation into whether Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s family may be financially benefiting from a $50 million anti-vaccine settlement that his actions as Secretary could have influenced.

In June, Merck & Co., Inc. (Merck) announced that the company would pay $50 million to settle more than 200 lawsuits regarding the use of Gardasil, a safe, effective vaccine that prevents multiple types of cancer. The settlement covers lawsuits for which Secretary Kennedy was listed as the attorney of record and cases represented by Secretary Kennedy’s former employer, Wisner Baum. Secretary Kennedy’s son is currently employed at the same firm.

“This settlement appears to reinforce a lucrative and dangerous playbook – litigators with ties to anti-vaccine organizations sue drug companies with scientifically dubious claims and undermine trust in vaccines and America’s public health as a result,” wrote the senators.

During his confirmation process last year, Secretary Kennedy revealed he was entitled to — and initially planned to keep — a 10 percent fee from settlements tied to cases he referred to Wisner Baum for the Gardasil lawsuit.

“This arrangement was alarming,” said the lawmakers, warning that Secretary Kennedy could influence public perception of Gardasil’s safety and, in turn, the outcome of the lawsuits “by publishing unfounded anti-vaccine information, influencing Merck’s interest in a settlement, or adding unproven injuries to the vaccine injury table.”

After significant pressure from lawmakers, Secretary Kennedy agreed to transfer his stake in the Gardasil cases to his son, a move legal experts have called “a loophole” in federal ethics law. Secretary Kennedy refused to take any further steps to divest the Gardasil stake from his family.

“Now, it appears that your son could stand to gain millions of dollars from Merck’s recent settlement agreement, raising fresh concerns about conflicts of interest,” wrote the lawmakers.

Secretary Kennedy has refused to recuse himself from various communications related to Gardasil and from making decisions related to the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program — even while his former employer seeks awards from the program in dozens of cases. He has also refused to decline compensation from vaccine injury lawsuits.

“Merck’s settlement focuses renewed scrutiny on your potential unresolved conflicts of interest as Secretary…The settlement – and the ongoing questions about whether you or your immediate family will benefit from it – raise further serious questions about any role HHS may have played in influencing the lawsuit’s outcome,” said the senators.

The lawmakers asked Secretary Kennedy to reveal whether he played any role in the settlement, how many of the Gardasil cases covered by the settlement he referred to Wisner Baum, and how much money he has received from vaccine injury lawsuits while serving as HHS Secretary by August 11, 2026.

Senator Alsobrooks was the first Senator to call on RFK Jr. to resign or be fired. She has also led the Senate on oversight of RFK Jr’s dangerous actions and rhetoric

###",1,2026-07-31T07:49:23Z,2026-07-31T07:50:48Z
https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/news/press-releases/senator-alsobrooks-votes-yes-again-to-advance-iran-war-powers-resolution-3/,Senator Alsobrooks Votes Yes AGAIN to Advance Iran War Powers Resolution,2026-07-30,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Angela D. Alsobrooks,A000382,www.alsobrooks.senate.gov,alsobrooks,https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/,scraper,"July 30, 2026

WASHINGTON, DC – Senator Alsobrooks (D-Md.) released the following statement after voting for Senator Kirsten Gillibrand’s (D-N.Y.) Iran War Powers Resolution. The resolution was not agreed to 49-50.

“For the eleventh time, Republicans have voted against the will of the American people.

“This war needs to end, but Republicans continue to enable this President. Grocery prices keep rising, gas is above $4 a gallon, and more American servicemembers have died.

“Here is my message to my Republican colleagues: you don’t need to pray for this war to end—vote to end it.”",1,2026-07-31T07:49:23Z,2026-07-31T07:50:48Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/federal-workforce-caucus-co-chairs-file-amicus-brief-defending-civil-service-protections-for-federal-workers,Federal Workforce Caucus Co-Chairs File Amicus Brief Defending Civil Service Protections for Federal Workers,2026-07-30,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Congressman James R. Walkinshaw (D-Va.-11), and Congressman Steny Hoyer (D-Md.-05), co-chairs of the Federal Workforce Caucus, led 43 Members of Congress in filing an amicus brief in Jackler and Jaroch v. Department of Justice. The brief urges the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to reverse a Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) decision that would weaken longstanding civil-service protections for immigration judges and potentially jeopardize due-process rights across the federal workforce.

The filing comes after the Federal Circuit granted an en banc hearing in the case, following an earlier amicus brief led by Senators Van Hollen, Mark Warner (D-Va.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), and Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.).

The MSPB ruled that the Attorney General has constitutional authority under Article II to remove immigration judges at will, despite protections established by Congress through the Civil Service Reform Act. The brief argues that Congress has the constitutional authority to set protections for federal employees, including notice, an opportunity to respond, and the right to appeal adverse personnel actions.

If upheld, the decision could allow agencies to argue that other federal employees deemed “inferior officers” are not entitled to traditional civil-service protections. As the Members write in their brief, “Millions of federal workers would become removable at will—the civil service merit system would functionally cease to exist.” The brief warns that the ruling could undermine the merit-based civil service, expose career public servants to arbitrary removal, and erode Congress’s constitutional authority to govern the federal workforce.

The brief was joined by U.S. Senators Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), and Mark Warner (D-Va.), as well as Representatives Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.-11), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.-At Large), Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas-37), Frederica Wilson (D-Fla.-24), Dave Min (D-Calif.-47), Veronica Escobar (D-Texas-16), Norma Torres (D-Calif.-35), Ed Case (D-Hawaii-01), Sarah Elfreth (D-Md.-03), Mike Quigley (D-Ill.-05), Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.-08), Sean Casten (D-Ill.-06), Judy Chu (D-Calif.-28), Jennifer McClellan (D-Va.-04), Paul Tonko (D-N.Y.-20), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.-12), Don Beyer (D-Va.-08), Jamie Raskin (D-Md.-08), Robert Garcia (D-Calif.-42), Lateefah Simon (D-Calif.-12), Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-N.J.-12), Bobby Scott (D-Va.-03), April McClain Delaney (D-Md.-06), Hank Johnson (D-Ga.-04), Glenn Ivey (D-Md.-04), Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.-09), Mary Gay Scanlon (D-Pa.-05), Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.-13), Kweisi Mfume (D-Md.-07), Seth Moulton (D-Mass.-06), Steven Horsford (D-Nev.-04), Gwen Moore (D-Wis.-04), Maxine Waters (D-Calif.-43), Suhas Subramanyam (D-Va.-10), and Jahana Hayes (D-Conn.-05), Johnny Olszewski (D-Md.-02), and Emily Randall (D-Wash.-06).

In their brief, the Members argue that immigration judges are covered by the Civil Service Reform Act and that the President’s Article II authority does not permit the executive branch to disregard Congress’s statutory protections. They also note that the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Trump v. Slaughter, concerning removal protections for principal officers, does not control this case involving immigration judges, who are at most inferior officers.

The brief further warns that the MSPB’s reasoning has no clear limiting principle. If immigration judges can be stripped of civil-service safeguards because of the authority they exercise, countless other career federal employees could face similar challenges to their protections.

Full text of the argument in the brief can be viewed here and below.

INTRODUCTION

The Merit Systems Protection Board’s decision was incorrect. Article II does not permit the President to override Congress’s constitutional power to pass laws governing the federal civil service. Upholding the final administrative decision would fundamentally alter the balance of power between the Executive and Legislative branches. Millions of federal workers would become removable at will—the civil service merit system would functionally cease to exist.

“Patronage practice is not new to American politics. It has existed at the federal level at least since the Presidency of Thomas Jefferson, although its popularization and legitimation primarily occurred later, in the Presidency of Andrew Jackson.” Elrod v. Burns, 427 U.S. 347, 353 (1976). The levels of corruption occurring during the apex of the spoils system in the late 1800s compelled Congress to enact legislative reforms laying the foundation of the civil service for over 140 years. During postreconstruction America, appointments in the federal executive government were not given based on merit: “....federal employees came and went, depending upon party service and changing administrations rather than meritorious performance[.]” United States Civ. Serv. Comm’n v. Nat’l Ass’n of Letter Carriers, 413 U.S. 548, 557 (1973).

The pitfalls of the spoils system were countless. Corruption and fraud at the expense of the taxpayer were the norm. Officials would regularly take home more than two or three times their government salary in bribes and exactions. See William B. Wedgwood, CIVIL SERVICE REFORM 9-11 (1883). Indeed, “[t]he avenues to bribery were open wide by these practices, and the lapse from a gratuity to a bribe was easy. Many shifted their fealty from the government they professed to serve to the merchants or brokers who paid them a larger compensation.” Id. at 58 (abridged statement of Silas W. Burt, Naval Officer of the Port of New York before the Committee on Civil Service and Retrenchment, Feb. 11, 1882).

Instances of this corruption resulted in significant financial losses to the federal government. See Carl Russel Fish, THE CIVIL SERVICE AND PATRONAGE 137-140 (1905) (discussing the various schemes and frauds resulting in significant losses of public funds). “These vast losses of revenue, this demoralization of the service, these great scandals, were rendered possible and easy by the methods of appointment. Each one attended sedulously to his partisan work, paid large political assessments cheerfully, and re-imbursed himself from plunder from the merchant or the government.” Wedgwood, supra at 59.

The government simply did not function efficiently, and the federal employee was less qualified: “[a] spoils system does not drive ability from the civil service. […] The really deleterious change that the spoils system does make is to throw open the doors of office to a very inferior class of men, and to lower the minimum of capacity required.” Fish, supra at 135. Employees worked in “fear of arbitrary changes…[t]he same thing occurs every time there is a change of administration or Secretary…[i]t is a continued system of terrorism and demoralization.” Wedgwood, supra at 75 (abridged statement of Edward O. Graves, Senior Official at the Treasury Department before the Committee on Civil Service and Retrenchment).

An early legislative effort to curtail the spoils system was the Tenure of Office Act in 1867. The Act required Senate concurrence before the President could remove certain executive officials. See Raines v. Byrd, 521 U.S. 811, 826 (1997). In the floor debate on the bill, Senator Charles Sumner articulated that the actions of President Andrew Johnson and his administration were the primary motivation for this legislation:

Andrew Johnson, who came to supreme power by a bloody accident, has become the successor of Jefferson Davis in the spirit by which he is governed and in the mischief he is inflicting on his country…. He is a usurper, who promising to be a Moses, has become a Pharoah.

Do you ask for evidence? It is found in public acts which are beyond question. It is already written in the history of our country. And now in the maintenance of his usurpation he has employed the power of removal from office. Some, who would not become the partisans of his tyranny, he has, according to his own language, ‘kicked out.’

Others are left, but silenced by this menace…. Wherever any vacancy occurs, whether in the loyal or the rebel States, it is filled by the partisans of his usurpation. Other vacancies are created to provide for these partisans. I need not add that just in proportion as we sanction such nominations or fail to arrest them, according to the measure of our power, we become parties to his usurpation.

Fish, supra at 194-95 (quoting Senator Charles Sumner in Congressional Globe, 39 Cong. 2 sess. 542) (ellipses in original). “The Tenure-of-Office Bill of 1867 marked the first definite success that the Senate had obtained in its contest with the president for the control of the patronage[.]” Id. at 197. The Act was not without its faults, see e.g., Myers v. United States, 272 U.S. 52, 177 (1926), and it was ultimately repealed in 1887. Raines, 521 U.S. at 826. But Congress continued to combat the patronage system.

In 1883, Congress passed the Pendleton Act, the precursor to the modern Civil Service Reform Act (CSRA). During consideration of the bill, Edward Graves, an official at the Treasury Department, testified before the Committee on “Civil Service and Retrenchment” and articulated: “clerks suspected of being Democrats were ruthlessly slaughtered. One of my best book-keepers was discharged on that ground, although he was appointed under the civil service rules. I have no doubt, from general information, that the same system prevails with like results in all departments of the Government.” Wedgwood, supra at 7, 13 (emphasis in original). The Act created the Civil Service Commission which could investigate and adjudicate violations of civil service rules promulgated by the President. See Letter Carriers, 413 U.S. at 558.

Congress once again made strides in the battle against patronage via the Lloyd-LaFollette Act of 1911. The Act “provided that ‘no person in the classified civil service of the United States shall be removed therefrom except for such cause as will promote the efficiency of said service and for reasons given in writing….’” Bush v. Lucas, 462 U.S. 367, 383 (1983) (quoting HOUSE COMMITTEE ON THE POST OFFICE AND CIVIL SERVICE, History of the Civil Service Merit Systems of the United States and Selected Foreign Countries, 94th Cong., 2d Sess., 202-203 (1976)) (ellipses in original). The Act also codified the right of employees to disclose information to members of Congress. Id. at 383-84.

But patronage practice re-emerged in the early 1970s. The Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities found the Nixon Administration imposed an elaborate, multi-layered scheme to maximally corrupt the federal government for partisan political purposes. See SEN. SEL. COMM. ON PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN ACTIVITIES,93D CONG., 1ST SESS., FINAL REPORT (1974). One aspect of the Nixon Administration’s scheme was to hire individuals into competitive service positions that were politically aligned with the President. Id. at 416. Another finding of the Committee was that evidence suggested the Administration diverted taxpayer-funded grants and contracts to groups and areas that were most politically helpful to the President—and done so in a manner that could constitute a criminal conspiracy. Id. at 439-440. The Nixon Administration even went so far as to meddle with a proceeding before the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC); evidence presented to the Committee suggested administration officials convinced the Chair of the EEOC to not pursue an action against the University of Texas because it could harm Nixon politically. Id. at 410. The Committee recommended criminal prosecution where appropriate and identified a number of statutory reforms aimed at curtailing the ability of the executive branch to weaponize the government for political ends. Id. at 442-44.

As part of reversing this Nixon Administration corruption and implementing the Committee’s reforms, the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 transformed the “outdated patchwork of statutes and rules built up over almost a century” with respect to executive branch employees. S. Rep. No. 95-969 at 3 (1978); Pub. L. No. 95-454, 92 Stat. 1111 (1978). The CSRA stands today as the chief line of defense between an independent civil service and a return to the spoils system.

Congress acted squarely within its constitutional authority when creating the position of Immigration Judge and placing it under the protection of the Civil Service Reform Act. This is the will of Congress—that Immigration Judges are entitled to the protections of 5 U.S.C. § 7513. By removing Megan Jackler and Brandon Jaroch without those protections, the President acted against the will of Congress. That action is sustainable “only by disabling the Congress from acting upon the subject.” Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579, 637 (1953) (Jackson, J., concurring). Article II does not allow the President such power.

These removals run counter to centuries of historical Congressional practice affirmed by the courts. For almost 50 years, the Board has judiciously and even-handedly applied the CSRA while leaving constitutional review to this Court. Until now.

The Board’s decision must be reversed. Given the nature and consequences of this matter, amici request that this Court issue a decision on an expedited basis.

ARGUMENT

I. The Removals of Jackler and Jaroch Are Against the Will of Congress and Not Justifiable Under Article II.

The position of Immigration Judge was created by Congress pursuant to its power to “establish a uniform rule of naturalization[.]” U.S. CONST. ART. I, § 8., cl. 4; 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(a)(1). As employees defined under 5 U.S.C. § 7511, Immigration Judges are entitled to the procedural protections set forth in 5 U.S.C. § 7513. Appx012. The removals of Jackler and Jaroch without the protections of 5 U.S.C. § 7513 is therefore contrary to the will of Congress. The President’s removal power under Article II cannot “disabl[e]” Congress from enacting a reasonable restriction on the removal of employees whose duties mirror tremendous swaths of the civil service. Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579, 637-38 (1953) (Jackson, J., concurring).

a. The Creation and Regulation of the Position of Immigration Judge Is Well Within the Constitutional Authority of Congress.

The Constitution vests Congress with the power to “establish a uniform rule of naturalization” and to enact all laws that are “necessary and proper for carrying into execution” that power. U.S. CONST. ART. I, § 8., cl. 4, 18. The naturalization power is understood as a power “exclusively in congress[.]” Chirac v. Lessee of Chirac, 15 U.S. 259, 269 (1817). “[The Supreme Court] has repeatedly emphasized that ‘over no conceivable subject is the legislative power of Congress more complete than it is over’ the admission of aliens.” Fiallo v. Bell, 430 U.S. 787, 792 (1977) (quoting Oceanic Steam Navigation Co. v. Stranahan, 214 U.S. 320, 339 (1909)). In Federalist No. 42, James Madison stated that “[t]he dissimilarity in the rules of naturalization has long been remarked as a fault in our system.” THE FEDERALIST No. 42 (James Madison). “By granting Congress the exclusive power to fashion rules of naturalization, the Constitution removes these dissimilarities.” United States v. Vazquez-Ramirez, 163 F.4th 706, 715 (9th Cir. 2026). Additionally, “[a]t the founding, the word ‘naturalization’ meant ‘[t]he act of investing aliens with the privileges of native subjects.’” Zivotofsky v. Kerry, 576 U.S. 1, 46 (2015) (Thomas, J., concurring in part, dissenting in part) (quoting 2 S. Johnson, A Dictionary of the English Language 1293 (4th ed. 1773)).

“[T]he Necessary and Proper Clause makes clear that the Constitution’s grants of specific federal legislative authority are accompanied by broad power to enact laws that are ‘convenient, or useful’ or ‘conducive’ to the authority’s ‘beneficial exercise.’” United States v. Comstock, 560 U.S. 126, 133-134 (2010) (quoting McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316, 413, 418 (1819)). Indeed, “Congress is permitted to determine for itself what is necessary and what is proper.” Ex parte Curtis, 106 U.S. 371, 372 (1882). This is not a demanding standard: “[i]n determining whether the Necessary and Proper Clause grants Congress the legislative authority to enact a particular federal statute, we look to see whether the statute constitutes a means that is rationally related to the implementation of a constitutionally enumerated power.” Comstock,560 U.S. at 134 (citing Sabri v. United States, 541 U.S. 600, 605 (2004)).

In Ex Parte Curtis, the Supreme Court upheld a law prohibiting government employees from contributing or soliciting money for political purposes. 106 U.S. at 372-74. The Court analogized to several other laws where Congress set restrictions on government employees, such as a law “which makes it unlawful for certain officers of the Treasury Department to engage in the business of trade or commerce” and a law “which makes it an offence for a clerk in the same department to carry on trade or business in the funds or debts of the States or of the United States, or in any kind of public property[.]” Id. at 372. Justifying the law at issue, the Court stated: “[t]he evident purpose of Congress in all this class of enactments has been to promote efficiency and integrity in the discharge of official duties, and to maintain proper discipline in the public service.Clearly such a purpose is within the just scope of legislative power[.]” Curtis, 106 U.S. at 373.

Congress explicitly set forth the position and duties of Immigration Judges by statute. As defined, “[t]he term ‘immigration judge’ means an attorney whom the Attorney General appoints as an administrative judge within the Executive Office for Immigration Review, qualified to conduct specified classes of proceedings, including a hearing under section 1229a of this title.” 8 U.S.C. § 1101(b)(4). Further, “[a]n immigration judge shall be subject to such supervision and shall perform such duties as the Attorney General shall prescribe[.]” Id. The central function of an Immigration Judge is to “conduct proceedings for deciding the inadmissibility or deportability of an alien.” 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(a)(1). These proceedings are “the sole and exclusive procedure for determining whether an alien may be admitted to the United States or, if the alien has been so admitted, removed from the United States.” 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(a)(3). This statutory scheme and Congress’s decision to apply civil service adverse action procedures to Immigration Judges, is more than fairly “rationally related” as a necessary and proper exercise of Congress’s “exclusive” power to establish a uniform rule of naturalization. Comstock, 560 U.S. at 134; Chirac, 15 U.S. at 269. It is further consistent with Congress’s Constitutional legislative authority to promote efficiency and integrity in the discharge of immigration judges’ official duties and “to maintain proper discipline” in the immigration court system. See Curtis, 106 U.S. at 373.

b. Congress Protects Immigration Judges Via the Civil Service Reform Act.

The Civil Service Reform Act provides certain procedural protections for employees in the executive branch. See Pub. L. 95-454, 92 Stat. 1111 (1978); 5 U.S.C. § 7513. Specifically, an employee subjected to an adverse action is entitled to “at least 30 days’ advance written notice” and “a reasonable time, but not less than 7 days, to answer orally and in writing” as well as “a written decision and the specific reasons therefor[e] at the earliest practicable date.” 5 U.S.C. § 7513(b). If the action is sustained, the employee may appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board. 5 U.S.C. § 7513(d).

Jackler and Jaroch are employees within the meaning of the CSRA. See 5 U.S.C. § 7511; Appx012 (“the agency asserts that the appellants met the definition of ‘employee’ under 5 U.S.C. § 7511 and thus were entitled to appeal certain adverse actions to the Board”). Accordingly, Congress has provided that adverse action may be taken against them “only for such cause as will promote the efficiency of the service” and in accordance with the procedures providing for notice and an opportunity to be heard. 5 U.S.C. § 7513(a).

c. The Exercise of Article II Power in Removing Jackler and Jaroch Cannot Displace the Will of Congress.

“When the President takes measures incompatible with the expressed or implied will of Congress, his power is at its lowest ebb, for then he can rely only upon his own constitutional powers minus any constitutional powers of Congress over the matter.” Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579, 637 (1953) (Jackson, J., concurring). “Courts can sustain exclusive presidential control in such a case only by disabling the Congress from acting upon the subject.” Id. at 637-38. The President is in “the least favorable of possible constitutional postures” under these circumstances. Id. at 640.

The Board’s decision styles this case as one controlled by Article II of the Constitution, holding that “Article II abrogates the removal protections 5 U.S.C. § 7513 otherwise provide[d] to employees covered under 5 U.S.C. § 7511[.]” Appx011. That ignores the work and power of Congress.

Indeed, Congress “determine[d] for itself” that Immigration Judges, along with the rest of the positions falling under § 7511, are entitled to the procedural protections of the CSRA. Curtis, 106 U.S. at 372. Doing so is necessary and proper to ensure a uniform rule of naturalization untainted by political pressure or fear of reprisal, as well as a civil service built on “efficiency and integrity[.]” Id. at 373; 5 U.S.C. § 2301(b)(8)(A) (“Employees should be—protected against arbitrary action, personal favoritism, or coercion for partisan political purposes”).

This is the will of Congress. Removing Jackler and Jaroch is contrary to the will of Congress because they were not afforded the procedural guarantees of 5 U.S.C. § 7513. The only way to sustain this action is to hold that the “exclusive presidential control” over the position of Immigration Judge “disabl[es]” Congress from acting. Youngstown, 343 U.S. at 637-38. In other words, the removal power would disable Congress from enacting laws necessary and proper to establish a uniform rule of naturalization, an area of “exclusive[]” Congressional control. Chirac, 15 U.S. at 269. Under such an interpretation, Congress becomes subordinate to the President’s whims if it wishes to exercise its constitutional power. This result contradicts the text of the constitution and unduly cedes Congressional power to the President.

Moreover, this is not a case where Congress seeks to reserve the removal power for itself, a fact pattern the Supreme Court has viewed with intense skepticism. In Bowsher v. Synar, the Court struck down a removal scheme providing that the Comptroller General was removable only by impeachment or joint resolution of Congress. 478 U.S. 714, 728-32 (1986). In short, “Congress cannot reserve for itself the power of removal of an officer charged with the execution of the laws except by impeachment.” Id. at 726. Two years later, in Morrison v. Olson, the Court distinguished the scheme in Bowsher to a Special Counsel removable only for “good cause” by the Attorney General. 487 U.S. 654, 695-697 (1988). The Court upheld this removal provision because “this case simply does not pose a ‘dange[r] of congressional usurpation of Executive Branch functions.’” Id. at 694 (quoting Bowsher, 478 U.S. at 727) (bracket in original).

Congress, in the CSRA or Immigration and Nationality Act, does not “reserve for itself” the power to remove employees of the Executive Branch. Bowsher, 478 U.S. at 726. The opposite is true. The CSRA created the Merit Systems Protection Board, an “independent body” designed to “adjudicate cases of alleged violation of the merit system, enforce compliance with its decisions and orders, order stays of personnel actions in cases where it determines that such relief is justified, and conduct studies of the civil service and other merit systems.” S. Rep. No. 95-969, at 6 (1978). Congress has no role in the functions of the Board other than Senate confirmation of members of the Board. Id.

Congress was acutely aware of the perception that it was too difficult to fire employees under the prior Civil Service System: “Many managers and personnel officers complain that the existing procedures intended to assure merit and protect employees from arbitrary management actions have too often become the refuge of the incompetent employee.” S. Rep. No. 95-969, at 3. And “[o]ne of the central tasks of the civil service reform bill is simple to express but difficult to achieve: Allow civil servants to be able to be hired and fired more easily, but for the right reasons.” S. Rep. No. 95-969, at 4. Indeed, the structure and requirements of the CSRA are so engrained across OPM and federal agencies that upsetting that framework would have a cascading effect across the entire government.

Congress had no designs to hinder the Executive Branch in the performance of its duties. If the performance of Jackler and Jaroch was unsatisfactory or if they had engaged in misconduct, there is no outright prohibition on their removal. Congress only requires that the employee be given a chance to defend themselves before action is taken. See 5 U.S.C. § 7513. Delaying the ultimate removal of an employee for a short time to ensure they have received due process is a more than tolerable guardrail on the President’s obligation to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” U.S. CONST. ART. II, § 3.

d. The Constitutional Basis for Congress Setting Removal Restrictions Is Even Stronger Here Than Other Cases Where Restrictions Have Been Upheld.

The Supreme Court has upheld removal restrictions in cases where Congress acts upon far weaker footing than it does here. See Morrison, 487 U.S. at 660; United States v. Arthrex, 594 U.S. 1, 23-26 (2021). If those restrictions are permissible, then Congress can certainly employ the CSRA’s restrictions to a position created pursuant to a power that is “exclusive[]” and “complete[.]” Chirac, 15 U.S. at 269; Fiallo, 430 U.S. at 792 (quoting Oceanic Steam, 214 U.S. at 339).

The necessary and proper clause allows Congress to enact laws that are “essential to the beneficial exercise of the [enumerated] power, but not indispensably necessary to its existence.” McCulloch, 17 U.S. at 417; see also Comstock, 560 U.S. at 146. For instance, Congress executes “the power “to establish post offices and post roads’…by the single act of making the establishment,” but this also gives Congress “the power and duty of carrying the mail along the post road, from one post office to another. And, from this implied power, has again been inferred the right to punish those who steal letters from the post office, or rob the mail.” McCulloch, 17 U.S. at 417. But the more degrees of separation a particular law is from the enumerated power, the more it becomes attenuated and subject to being struck down as an unconstitutional exercise of Congressional power. See Comstock, 560 U.S. at 146 (quoting United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549, 567 (1995)) (“Invoking the cautionary instruction that we may not ‘pile inference upon inference’ in order to sustain congressional action under Article I”).

There is an exceptionally close connection between creating the position of Immigration Judge and Congress’s power under the Naturalization Clause. The text reads that Congress has the power to “establish a uniform rule of naturalization[.]” U.S. CONST. ART. I, § 8., cl. 4. Creating the position of a Judge obligated to make rulings and decisions concerning naturalization is “indispensably necessary” to “establish a uniform rule of naturalization[.]” McCulloch, 17 U.S. at 417; U.S. CONST. ART. I, § 8., cl. 4. And setting the removal conditions for that position is undoubtedly “essential to the beneficial exercise” if not “indispensably necessary” to effectuating that power. McCulloch, 17 U.S. at 417. This connection is far less attenuated than other removal cases with Congressional action based in more general grants of authority, such as the Commerce Clause, yet where the Supreme Court has still upheld removal protections. See U.S. CONST. ART. I, § 8., cl. 7; e.g.,Comstock, 560 U.S. at 147-148 (“Congress relies on different enumerated powers (often, but not exclusively, its Commerce Clause power) to enact its various federal criminal statutes”).

For example, Morrison v. Olson involved an Independent Counsel appointed under the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 and given the power “to investigate and, if appropriate, prosecute certain high ranking Government officials for violations of federal criminal laws.” 487 U.S. at 660. The Court held that removal of the Counsel for only “good cause” by the Attorney General was constitutional. Id. at 695-697. The McCulloch-style inferences required to justify this scheme are numerous: the substantive criminal laws at issue would first likely have to pass muster under a Commerce Clause analysis, that the conduct at issue “substantially affect[s]” interstate commerce. See e.g., Gonzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1, 17 (2005). Then, from this, Congress has the power to employ people to prosecute these crimes, then the power create a position to specifically prosecute high ranking government officials, and finally, to determine how the Counsel can be removed as a way to further the Counsel’s independence and efficiency. In short, the logic to justify the special prosecutor under the constitutional authority of Congress requires several inferences of the implied power of Congress. McCulloch, 17 U.S. at 417.

Similarly, in United States v. Arthrex, the Court allowed CSRA removal protections to stand for Administrative Patent Judges provided that their decisions would be reviewed by the Director of the Patent and Trademark Office. 594 U.S. at 17, 23-26. Similar to Morrison, this scheme requires several analytical leaps to get to the Congressional root: the sale of goods and products affects commerce; patents are necessary to protect people that make those goods and products; some office must issue patents; someone in that office must determine the merits of a patent; and for-cause removal ensures the officials that review patents can do their jobs independently.

In stark contrast, an Immigration Judge, as a neutral, unbiased arbiter of Immigration Laws, is “indispensably necessary” to “establishing a uniform rule of naturalization[.]” McCulloch, 17 U.S. at 417; U.S. CONST. ART. I, § 8., cl. 4. Congress would not get far in effecting a uniform law without judges who apply that law. Where the Court has upheld removal protections when Congress has legislated by “inference upon inference” limits of its constitutional power, then removal protections are certainly permissible when Congress legislates directly pursuant to a “complete” and “exclusive[]” power. Comstock, 560 U.S. at 146 (quoting Lopez, 514 U.S. at 549); Fiallo, 430 U.S. at 792 (quoting Oceanic Steam, 214 U.S. at 339); Chirac, 15 U.S. at 269.

II. Congress Has Consistently Legislated Protections for the Federal Workforce.

Outside of the Article II removal context, Congress has set, and the Supreme Court has affirmed, a variety of safeguards for federal employees. The Fair Labor Standards Act sets forth a minimum wage that certain employees must be paid. See generally 29 U.S.C. §§ 201, et. seq. In United States v. Darby, the Supreme Court upheld the Fair Labor and Standards Act as a proper exercise of Congressional power under the Commerce Clause. 312 U.S. 100, 122-126 (1941). The act applies to the United States government as an employer and is a congressional restriction upon how the executive branch may pay certain employees. 29 U.S.C. § 203(d), (x).

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 regulates the ways in which the federal government may treat its employees; specifically, the government may not take personnel actions against its employees or applicants on the basis of “race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e16. In Brown v. GSA, the Court stated: “[a]lthough federal employment discrimination clearly violated both the Constitution, Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497 (1954), and statutory law, 5 U.S.C. § 7151, before passage of the 1972 Act, the effective availability of either administrative or judicial relief was far from sure.” 425 U.S. 820, 825 (1976) (citations in original) (discussing the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972). The Court’s holding dealt with the exclusivity of the remedies under the Civil Rights Act, but the point remains: Congress may, and has, provided protection for the federal workforce against discrimination.

Similarly, the Whistleblower Protection Act makes it unlawful for the government to take certain personnel actions against employees that have disclosed violations of law. See generally 5 U.S.C. § 2302. The Court has acknowledged these protections for public servants, enacted by Congress, stating: “the government may certainly choose to give additional protections to its employees beyond what is mandated by the First Amendment, out of respect for the values underlying the First Amendment, values central to our social order as well as our legal system. See, e. g., Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989.” Waters v. Churchill, 511 U.S. 661, 674 (1994) (citation in original).

The Hatch Act broadly prohibits certain federal employees from engaging in partisan political activity both on and off duty. See 5 U.S.C. §§ 7323-7326. The Supreme Court upheld these restrictions on federal employees against a constitutional challenge in United States Civ. Serv. Comm’n v. Nat’l Ass’n of Letter Carriers, 413 U.S. 548 (1973). The Court succinctly stated: “Our judgment is that neither the First Amendment nor any other provision of the Constitution invalidates a law barring this kind of partisan political conduct by federal employees.” Id. at 556.

Though these cases have not squarely encountered the intersection between Article II removal authority and the CSRA, or its predecessor, the message is clear: Congress setting protections and guardrails for the federal workforce at-large has been a consistent practice since the founding, the very same principle undergirding the decision in Ex Parte Curtis. 106 U.S. at 373 (noting the Congressional purpose to “promote efficiency and integrity in the discharge of official duties, and to maintain proper discipline in the public service”). Upholding the Board’s decision opens the door for a return to the spoils system and the catastrophic consequences of inefficiency, patronage, and corruption.

III. The Position of Immigration Judge Does Not Hold Unique Authority Such That Removal Is Obligated by Article II.

In permitting the removals, the Board reasons that Immigration Judges exercise “significant policymaking and administrative authority.” Appx015. These duties include receiving evidence, issuing subpoenas, conducting hearings, exercising adjudicative authorities, issuing sanctions, and potentially—if the Attorney General does not disagree—making a final decision of the United States. Appx015-16. These are simply not unique functions.

Throughout the federal workforce, countless other positions share the same or similar duties as Immigration Judges. The 1895 – Customs and Border Protection job series includes duties such as “mak[ing] informed decisions regarding the admissibility of aliens into the United States and admitting, holding, or releasing merchandise” and “exercis[ing] sound judgment necessary to apprehend, detain, or arrest persons at the point of entry who are violating Federal immigration, customs, agriculture, or other laws.” Positions in the 0967 – Passport and Visa Examining Series are responsible for “managing, supervising, or performing administrative work concerned with adjudicating applications for United States passports or visas, including related work involving determining citizenship or fitness of non-citizens for admission to the United States.” The 1980 – Agricultural Commodity Grading Series is responsible for “examining and evaluating agricultural products to determine their official U.S. grade and/or their acceptability in terms of quality or condition in accordance with official standards and related regulations.”

These are only a few of the many job series that would be swept into the realm of at-will removal and outside of the CSRA if the Board’s decision stands. The danger of a broad impact on swathes of the federal workforce is real—the dividing line on what constitutes an inferior officer is increasingly blurred. See, e.g., Arthrex, 594 US at 55-57 (Thomas, J., dissent). The potential consequence here is that the CSRA is functionally eliminated and federal employees will no longer have protections against arbitrary removal, reprisal, or the assurance of due process.

IV. Trump v. Slaughter Is Not Controlling Because This Case Does Not Concern Principal Officers.

On June 29, 2026, the Supreme Court decided Trump v. Slaughter, overturning Humphrey’s Executor and holding the for-cause removal restrictions for members of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) are unconstitutional. No. 25-332, 2026 U.S. LEXIS 2877, 609 U.S. ___ (2026). The decision concerns only principal officers under Article II of the Constitution and therefore is not controlling in this matter because—as Petitioners relay in their opening brief—Immigration Judges are, at most, inferior officers. In the majority opinion, while discussing Justice Story’s analysis of the Decision of 1789, the Chief Justice writes: “He [Justice Story] identified the very ‘question’ at issue in this case: “[W]hether congress can give any duration of office in such cases [of principal officers], not subject to the exercise of this [Presidential] power of removal?” 2026 U.S. LEXIS 2877, at 47 n. 6 (quoting 3 Story §1531, at 389) (brackets in original). In fact, the majority opinion never uses theterm inferior officers. Justice Sotomayor notes in dissent (without rebuttal in the majority opinion) that “the majority studiously ignores” the issue of “inferior officers and civil-service employees.” Id. at *125(Sotomayor, J., dissenting).

Justice Gorsuch in his concurrence also notes this distinction, observing that “the civil service laws […] ordinarily afford rank-and-file agency employees considerable protection against removal.” Id. at *65(Gorsuch, J., concurring). Accordingly, as Slaughter’s holding did not extend to inferior officers or civil service employees, it does not control the instant matter—especially in the face of clear contrary authority such as United States v. Perkins, 116 U.S. 483 (1886), Morrison and Arthrex.

CONCLUSION

That the President now asserts this authority under Article II does not change the fact that the removals of Jackler and Jaroch are in violation of the CSRA, and accordingly against the will of Congress. “Neither the President’s view that he can remove federal executive officials, see [Myers v. United States, 272 U.S. 52 (1926)], nor his having done so, change the meaning of the statute or the binding nature of this Court’s interpretation of it.” Margolin v. Nat’l Ass’n of Immigr. Judges, 146 S. Ct. 1285, 1289 (May 26, 2026) (Thomas, J., concurring).

Accordingly, amici respectfully ask this Court to reverse the Board’s decision and to issue that decision on an expedited basis.",1,2026-08-05T07:37:37Z,2026-08-05T07:38:44Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-joins-bennet-colleagues-in-demanding-trump-administration-crack-down-on-russian-crypto-sanctions-evasion-network,"Van Hollen Joins Bennet, Colleagues in Demanding Trump Administration Crack Down on Russian Crypto Sanctions Evasion Network",2026-07-30,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"U.S. Senator Chirs Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Senator Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), a member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and Senate Finance Committee, and seven colleagues in a letter to Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent urging the Trump Administration to crack down on A7 LLC, a Russian state-backed cryptocurrency sanctions evasion network supporting Russia’s unprovoked full-scale war against Ukraine. Senate Armed Services Committee Ranking Member Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee Ranking Member Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), and Senators Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Angus King (I-Maine), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) also signed the letter.

“We write to urge the Trump Administration to immediately investigate and address Russia’s ongoing, widespread evasion of U.S. and allied sanctions through the A7 LLC (A7) network. Doing so is crucial to limit the revenue Russian President Vladimir Putin has available to wage his unjustified war against Ukraine, threaten our NATO allies, and help Iran target U.S. troops, according to public reporting,” began the senators.

The Russian state-owned bank Promsvyazbank and a Moldovan oligarch convicted of stealing from Moldova’s banking system launched A7 in late 2024. The revenue Moscow accrues through the A7 network – with the A7A5 stablecoin as its backbone – directly supports the Russian military-industrial complex and thus Putin’s war on Ukraine. Even after the United States imposed sanctions on a small number of A7 entities in 2025, the network openly claimed to have over 30 shell companies enabling around 1,500 daily transactions with over 10,000 customers. As of January 2026, the A7A5 stablecoin had reportedly processed over $100 billion in transactions, accounting for nearly 19 percent of the total volume of Russian businesses’ foreign trade operations.

“Unfortunately, the Trump Administration has largely stood by and watched the growth of this large-scale evasion enterprise. Under previous administrations, the Departments of State and Treasury went beyond targeting Russia’s attempts to establish new evasion pathways by publicly and privately warning third countries to turn away such efforts. [...] In contrast, the Trump Administration has not used its Russia sanctions authority or even, it seems, warned countries to root out A7,” wrote the senators.

Accordingly, the letter urges the Department of the Treasury to:

Identify remaining unsanctioned entities involved in the A7 network and A7A5 ecosystem;

Impose sanctions on third-country entities facilitating the A7 network;

Engage partner nations to better counter A7;

Identify G7 financial institutions’ vulnerabilities to A7;

Target A7A5 developers and facilitators helping Russia purchase missile components despite G7 sanctions;

Explain how the Trump Administration will prevent decentralized exchanges from facilitating U.S. users from trading in A7A5; and

Support anti-money laundering requirements for business behind decentralized trading platforms and for “front end” users for interfaces for centralized platforms.

The text of the letter is available here and below.

Secretary Bessent:

We write to urge the Trump Administration to immediately investigate and address Russia’s ongoing, widespread evasion of U.S. and allied sanctions through the A7 LLC (A7) network. Doing so is crucial to limit Russian President Vladimir Putin’s ability to acquire key technology and revenue to wage his unjustified war against Ukraine, threaten our NATO allies, and help Iran target U.S. troops, according to public reporting.

Many of us have warned for over a year that the administration’s halt in the imposition of regular counter evasion sanctions allows Russia to evade restrictions meant to impede Putin’s war of aggression against Ukraine. One clear example is Moscow’s development of A7, a state-enabled cryptocurrency financial system that circumvents standard international payment networks, allowing Russia and shell companies to bypass G7 sanctions.

The Russian state-owned bank Promsvyazbank and Ilan ?or, a Moldovan oligarch convicted of stealing from Moldova’s banking system, launched A7 in late 2024. The imports and revenue Russia accrues through the A7 network directly support the Russian military-industrial complex and thus Putin’s war on Ukraine. A7 appears to maintain deep ties to Putin and the Kremlin: In September 2025, Putin attended a virtual ribbon-cutting ceremony for the opening of A7’s Vladivostok branch.

The A7A5 stablecoin, launched in 2025, appears to be the A7 network’s backbone. The Russian ruble-pegged stablecoin enables financial activities that would otherwise be difficult following a range of sanctions that G7 partners have implemented since 2022. As of January 2026, the A7A5 stablecoin had reportedly processed over $100 billion in transactions in less than a year.

In December 2025, A7 claimed to have accounted for nearly 19 percent of the total volume of foreign trade operations of Russian businesses. While the A7A5 stablecoin claims independence from A7, as of February 2026 the stablecoin continued to advertise A7’s imitation banknotes (issued by A7 Kyrgyzstan) on its site and directs prospective buyers to A7 Russia offices.

Even after the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) imposed sanctions on a small number of A7 entities in August 2025, the network has openly claimed to have over 30 shell companies enabling around 1,500 daily transactions with over 10,000 customers. Many of these companies operate in “secrecy jurisdictions,” which, through complex legal structures, make tracing difficult. Reports indicate that the United Arab Emirates hosts several shell companies, and that Hong Kong hosts at least one suspected shell company.

Unfortunately, the Trump Administration has largely stood by and watched the growth of this large-scale evasion enterprise. Under previous administrations, the Departments of State and Treasury went beyond targeting Russia’s attempts to establish new evasion pathways by publicly and privately warning third countries to turn away such efforts. The Departments also issued alerts underscoring the sanctions risk for foreign financial institutions that chose to join Russia’s System for Transfer of Financial Messages, and for countries considering allowing the opening of new branches or subsidiaries of Russian banks.

In contrast, the Trump Administration has not used its Russia sanctions authority or even, it seems, warned countries to root out A7. The administration’s lone August 2025 sanctions rollout – in which Treasury refrained from using its Russia sanctions authority, making no effort to emphasize A7’s Kremlin ties – targeted a handful of entities, fell short of what allies and partners have done even last year, and has clearly been insufficient to address A7’s operations. There remain numerous undesignated global affiliates and A7 enablers that the administration has not sanctioned. We also note that this is only one of the alternative payment mechanisms Russia appears to have set up to acquire critical items for its war, without any administration pushback.

Our allies are again pushing forward without us. The European Union (EU) has banned A7A5, and the EU’s 20th sanctions package focused on entities that distribute tokens such as A7A5, such as exchanges and decentralized platforms that list them, and payment agents that settle the underlying trade.

President Trump and his administration must similarly employ our considerable financial tools to cut into Russia’s evasion mechanisms. Accordingly, we urge you to:

Identify all remaining unsanctioned individuals and legal entities involved in the A7 network ecosystem and A7A5 stablecoin project, including but not limited to the aforementioned shell companies;

Impose sanctions on entities in third-country jurisdictions facilitating the A7 network;

Engage third-country governments to more effectively coordinate action to counter A7, and consider sanctions if they do not comply with existing and future sanctions;

Identify any pathways by which A7 may exploit financial institutions in G7 countries including the United States;

Target the developers and facilitators of the A7A5 stablecoin who continue to provide services enabling Russia to purchase missile components despite G7 sanctions;

Explain how you will prevent decentralized exchanges from facilitating trades by U.S. users in A7A5, including “wrapped” versions of A7A5; and

Support basic anti-money laundering requirements for businesses behind decentralized trading platforms and for “front end” user interfaces for decentralized platforms, which would make it much harder to, for example, swap A7A5 into other currencies without detection.

We respectfully request that you inform our offices, in writing, of your actions on these seven items by August 21, 2026. We request an unclassified summary with a classified annex, if necessary.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. We stand ready to work with you in a bipartisan manner to address these important issues.",1,2026-08-05T07:37:37Z,2026-08-05T07:38:44Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-shaheen-call-on-treasury-secretary-bessent-to-explain-inaction-on-long-overdue-harriet-tubman-20-bill-redesign,"Van Hollen, Shaheen Call on Treasury Secretary Bessent to Explain Inaction on Long Overdue Harriet Tubman $20 Bill Redesign",2026-07-30,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) led eight of their Senate colleagues in pressing the U.S. Department of the Treasury to explain why it is no longer planning to redesign the $20 bill to depict Harriet Tubman’s likeness – as indicated in recent comments from Treasury Secretary Bessent – and urging the Department to resume plans for the new bill. The Senators note that the Department has put this long-standing effort on hold while also devoting resources towards circulating multiple coins with President Trump’s likeness and plans for an illegal $250 bill depicting the President.

The Senators begin, “We write to express our deep frustration that the Department of the Treasury is ‘not at present’ planning to move forward with the long-standing effort to place Harriet Tubman on the twenty-dollar bill. The process to celebrate Tubman through our currency included extensive public engagement and bipartisan recognition of her extraordinary contributions to our nation, but your recent decision ignores that and abandons years of work at Treasury to honor her legacy. We urge you to immediately reconsider and resume plans to create the new bill without further delay.”

“While we acknowledge the creation of a new currency note is a multi-year process involving design, counterfeit protection and implementation into our financial system, the administration has released plans for a $250 bill depicting President Trump to celebrate America’s 250th birthday, a currency that would be illegal for the Treasury Department to issue under current law. You also released plans for multiple coins featuring President Trump’s likeness for the semiquincentennial. Meanwhile, a woman has not been featured on modern American currency in over a century and recognition for their contributions to our nation are long overdue. If the administration is actively working on new currency notes, the administration should focus on the long-standing plan to feature Harriet Tubman rather than develop a new design,” they continued.

“Honoring Harriet Tubman on our nation's currency is an important recognition of her legacy and we urge you to reconsider. In addition, we request that you provide a detailed explanation of your comments about placing Harriet Tubman on the twenty-dollar bill, including what factors informed the decision and whether the redesign has been permanently canceled or merely delayed. The American people and Congress deserve transparency regarding this decision, and we request a briefing no later than August 12, 2026,” the Senators concluded.

In addition to Senators Van Hollen and Shaheen, the letter is cosigned by U.S. Senators Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).

The full text of the letter is available here and below.

Dear Secretary Bessent:

We write to express our deep frustration that the Department of the Treasury is ""not at present"" planning to move forward with the long-standing effort to place Harriet Tubman on the twenty-dollar bill. The process to celebrate Tubman through our currency included extensive public engagement and bipartisan recognition of her extraordinary contributions to our nation, but your recent decision ignores that and abandons years of work at Treasury to honor her legacy. We urge you to immediately reconsider and resume plans to create the new bill without further delay.

The long effort to feature a woman on U.S currency gained momentum in 2015 when a grassroots movement, “Women on 20s”, launched a public campaign to select a woman to appear on a new twenty-dollar bill in circulation before the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage in 2020. After over 600,000 people participated in an online ballot, the public chose Harriet Tubman from an array of inspirational women.

Now ten years after that campaign, the American people are understandably frustrated with the delay. While we acknowledge the creation of a new currency note is a multi-year process involving design, counterfeit protection and implementation into our financial system, the administration has released plans for a $250 bill depicting President Trump to celebrate America’s 250th birthday, a currency that would be illegal for the Treasury Department to issue under current law. You also released plans for multiple coins featuring President Trump’s likeness for the semiquincentennial.

Meanwhile, a woman has not been featured on modern American currency in over a century and recognition for their contributions to our nation are long overdue. If the administration is actively working on new currency notes, the administration should focus on the long-standing plan to feature Harriet Tubman rather than develop a new design.

Born into slavery in Dorchester County, Maryland, Harriet Tubman escaped to freedom and then repeatedly risked her life to lead dozens of enslaved people to freedom through the Underground Railroad. During the Civil War, she served as a spy and nurse for the Union Army and became the first woman to lead an armed military expedition in U.S. history. Her courage, sacrifice and unwavering commitment to freedom embody the highest ideals of our nation, making her a fitting choice for the honor of being depicted on our currency.

Honoring Harriet Tubman on our nation's currency is an important recognition of her legacy and we urge you to reconsider. In addition, we request that you provide a detailed explanation of your comments about placing Harriet Tubman on the twenty-dollar bill, including what factors informed the decision and whether the redesign has been permanently canceled or merely delayed.

The American people and Congress deserve transparency regarding this decision, and we request a briefing no later than August 12, 2026.

Sincerely,",1,2026-08-05T07:37:37Z,2026-08-05T07:38:44Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-joins-ossoff-colleagues-in-pressuring-trump-administration-to-release-hiv/aids-prevention-funding-to-cdc,"Van Hollen Joins Ossoff, Colleagues in Pressuring Trump Administration to Release HIV/AIDS Prevention Funding to CDC",2026-07-29,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Senator Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) and over 10 Senate colleagues in urging Secretary of State Marco Rubio to approve the transfer of $2 billion in funds meant for the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) to the CDC. This inquiry comes as new internal guidance by the State Department would end the transfer of PEPFAR funds to the CDC. According to former CDC Directors, without this dedicated funding stream, more than 18 CDC outposts could close before the end of the year, reducing the ability for the agency to launch timely and sufficient global health responses to disease outbreaks.

Senators Van Hollen and Ossoff are joined by Senators Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Ben Ray Lujan (D-N.M.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), and Ed Markey (D-Mass.).

“The rushed abandonment of a proven and effective structure threatens to increase the risk of future global health pandemics and disease outbreaks,” the Senators wrote. “Countries are struggling to maintain the programs set up by USAID and PEPFAR funding, facing more new infections and more deaths.”

“We urge you to immediately rescind any guidance suggesting that State will no longer honor the transfer of $2 billion to CDC and commit to upholding this long-standing transfer that keeps Americans safe,” the Senators continued.

The full text of the letter is available here and below:

Dear Secretary Rubio,

We write to you with alarm at the Administration’s cut to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)’s global HIV/AIDs program. This decision is particularly troubling as these funds allow CDC to implement the President’s Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) and support CDC’s critical global health operations that have provided the backbone for PEPFAR and other U.S. global health programs for decades.1 The rushed abandonment of a proven and effective structure threatens to increase the risk of future global health pandemics and disease outbreaks which is wholly antithetical to an America First Global Health Strategy.

Not only does the proposed fee-for-service mechanism threaten to severely gut PEPFAR efficacy and further hinder CDC’s work identifying and mitigating health threats at their source, which is especially alarming given the expanding outbreak of the novel strain of Ebola, but the Administration also seems to be leveraging these agreements for concessions not related to global health, such as for negotiating access to critical minerals.2 This type of coercive diplomacy does not serve U.S. global health interests and is extremely susceptible to risk of corruption.

Therefore, we urge you to immediately rescind any guidance suggesting that State will no longer honor the transfer of $2 billion to CDC and commit to upholding this long-standing transfer that keeps Americans safe. We also ask you to respond to the following questions by August 11th , 2026:

1. What specific problem or concern is State attempting to address through the proposed fee-for-service model?

a. Did State consider alternative approaches? If so, why were these options rejected?

b. What measurable improvements does State expect to achieve with these changes?

c. What are the projected costs of implementing these changes?

2. Please describe the currently proposed timeline for implementation of this new fee-forservice system for FY27.

a. If a country has not signed an MOU purchasing CDC services before State implements this new system, will funding for CDC infrastructure within that partner country be terminated?

b. Please explain the rationale for moving forward with the proposed fee-for-service model that risks undermining CDC’s presence and programs overseas, such as the closure of at least 18 CDC global outposts close before the end of the year, before MOU negotiations are finalized and implementation plans are in place?3

c. Given CDC’s significant presence and infrastructure in both the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda, and the current Ebola outbreak, are there any plans to delay the implementation of this new system until which time the outbreak has been contained, and CDC technical expertise and resources do not need to be surged?

3. How does the State Department intend to bridge the funding gap that will likely occur between the maximum value of CDC services a country could purchase under the fee schedule, and CDC’s necessary PEPFAR operating budget for that country?

a. If there is no intention to bridge this funding gap, please describe any analysis State Department undertook highlighting potential consequences and operational gaps resulting from this gap in funds.

b. If countries are not able to meet their financial commitments, what mitigation efforts is State putting in place to ensure that programming can still continue?

c. How will State ensure that CDC technical expertise is utilized to the maximum possible capacity?

d. Please describe any analysis State did of the risk of service disruption that could occur during the transition.

e. Has State modeled the potential effects on HIV infections, AIDS-related deaths, tuberculosis outcomes, malaria outcomes, or other health indicators? f. How will continuity of care be protected for patients receiving treatment supported by CDC implemented programs?

4. How many CDC personnel will be impacted by this change, including U.S. direct hires and locally-employed staff?

a. What, if anything, is State doing to ensure a minimum number of CDC staff is maintained overseas?

5. In light of the current Ebola outbreak, CDC has surged resources and is providing strategic and technical assistance with disease tracking and contact tracing, risk communication and community engagement, infection prevention and control, among other resources.4 Under this new system, will partner countries be required to pay additional fees for these additional services if a global health outbreak occurs?

6. Will the State Department commit to sharing with Congress the implementation plans of MOUs already signed with partner countries, and any additional MOU that the Administration signs, within 30 days of signature?

a. Will the Administration continue to pursue negotiations on other non-health related topics as part of these bilateral health agreements?

Following this Administration’s dismantlement of USAID, a key implementor of PEPFAR programming, countries are struggling to maintain the programs set up by USAID and PEPFAR funding, facing more new infections and more deaths.5 Without USAID, CDC’s global health infrastructure remains the most effective tool the U.S. has to monitor and prevent global health emergencies. Ceasing the transfer of these funds only further puts the lives of Americans at risk.

Sincerely,",1,2026-08-05T07:37:37Z,2026-08-05T07:38:44Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-joins-markey-schumer-peters-colleagues-in-raising-alarm-about-trumps-threats-to-send-armed-federal-agents-to-polling-sites-to-intimidate-voters-during-november-elections,"Van Hollen Joins Markey, Schumer, Peters, Colleagues in Raising Alarm About Trump’s Threats to Send Armed Federal Agents to Polling Sites to Intimidate Voters During November Elections",2026-07-28,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Senator Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and 10 Senate colleagues in writing to Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, Secretary of Homeland Security Markwayne Mullin, and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth demanding to know whether the Trump administration plans to deploy armed federal law enforcement officers at polling sites during the November 2026 elections, an escalation of the Administration’s assault on free and fair elections that is clearly meant to intimidate voters.

The letter was signed by Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Senator Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Ranking Member of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee (HSGAC), and Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), and Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.).

Beginning in October 2025, the Democratic National Committee submitted eleven Freedom of Information Act requests seeking records concerning the possible deployment of federal law enforcement officers to polling places, ballot-drop locations, and election offices. During ensuing litigation, ICE first represented that it had located no responsive records. But earlier this month, after its searches were challenged, ICE acknowledged finding more than 11,000 potentially responsive pages and U.S. Customs and Border Protection said it had turned up almost 117,000 records. These belated disclosures reinforce the fear that the Administration is planning a potentially unlawful, illegal, and unconstitutional intrusion into the November election.

In the letter, the senators wrote, “In May, when President Trump was asked whether he would send the National Guard or ICE to polling places in November, he refused to rule it out, responding: ‘I’d do anything necessary to make sure we have honest elections.’ And earlier this month, President Trump delivered a prime-time address to the nation in which he repeated outlandish falsehoods about the 2020 election, continuing to sow doubts about voting integrity ahead of the mid-terms. President Trump’s statements, coupled with his repeated threats to invoke the Insurrection Act — which authorizes the president to deploy military forces inside the United States to suppress rebellion or domestic violence — only heighten concerns.”

The senators continued, “Congress has enacted longstanding criminal prohibitions against sending federal personnel to polling places and using federal power to interfere with elections. For example, federal law makes it a crime for a federal official to bring or keep troops or armed personnel at a place where an election is held. Americans should never have to wonder whether the federal government intends to police the ballot box with armed agents. Yet that is precisely what the Trump administration appears to be considering, if not planning. The Administration now has a choice. It can continue to fuel the appearance that it is laying the groundwork for an unprecedented federal intrusion into state-run elections, or it can finally provide Congress and the American people with the transparency they deserve.”

The lawmakers requested the following information by August 11, 2026:

Will any federal law enforcement officers or troops be deployed to or near any polling place or other election sites during the November 2026 election? If so, identify who, where, under what authority, and for what purpose.

Who directed or authorized discussions concerning the possible deployment of federal law enforcement officers or troops to polling places or other election sites? Identify every meeting or communication concerning this subject involving your Department or agency and the White House, the Executive Office of the President, Stephen Miller, other presidential advisers, or any other federal entity.

Produce all records concerning the possible deployment of federal law enforcement personnel or troops to polling places or other election sites, including legal memoranda, operational plans, policy guidance, emails, text messages, meeting notes, directives, and communications with the White House or other federal entities.

The full text of the letter is available here and below:

Dear Acting Attorney General Blanche, Secretary Mullin, and Secretary Hegseth:

Senior Trump administration officials have repeatedly refused to rule out deploying federal law enforcement officers at November 2026 mid-term election polling places and other election sites, despite such action being illegal under federal law. President Trump himself has publicly advocated an unprecedented — indeed, unconstitutional — federal takeover of state-run elections. And, after initially telling a federal court that your Departments possessed essentially no records concerning federal agents or troops at the polls, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) now acknowledges possessing thousands of potentially responsive records that remain hidden from public view. Congress and the American people must know — now — whether the Trump administration is planning to use armed federal officers at the polls and for what purpose.

Rather than assuaging public concern about the Administration’s intentions, its highestranking officials have consistently left open the possibility of armed federal law enforcement officers policing polling places, which federal law expressly prohibits. In March, at the Conservative Political Action Conference, Acting Attorney General Blanche rhetorically asked: “Why is there an objection to sending ICE to polling stations?” Just days ago, during his Senate confirmation hearing, he repeatedly declined to assure Congress that the Department of Justice would not deploy armed federal agents to polling places, responding only that he would “follow the law.” Likewise, in March, at his confirmation hearing, Secretary Mullin testified that he might send armed federal law enforcement to the polls “if there was a specific threat.” But he could neither articulate such a threat nor explain how it would supersede federal law barring armed law enforcement at the polls. And in May, in similar testimony before the House Armed Services Committee and the Senate Armed Services Committee, Secretary Hegseth refused to say whether he would deploy troops to polling places.

For his part, in February, President Trump said: “The Republicans should say, ‘We want to take over. We should take over the voting in at least — many, 15 places.’ The Republicans ought to nationalize the voting.” But under the Constitution, states run elections, not the federal government. In May, when President Trump was asked whether he would send the National Guard or ICE to polling places in November, he refused to rule it out, responding: “I’d do anything necessary to make sure we have honest elections.” And earlier this month, President Trump delivered a prime-time address to the nation in which he repeated outlandish falsehoods about the 2020 election, continuing to sow doubts about voting integrity ahead of the midterms.

President Trump’s statements, coupled with his repeated threats to invoke the Insurrection Act — which authorizes the president to deploy military forces inside the United States to suppress rebellion or domestic violence — only heighten concerns. His remarks raise a serious question about whether the Administration believes it possesses emergency authority to deploy federal personnel in connection with the administration of the November election. Congress is entitled to know whether any such legal theory has been developed, considered, or is in the process of being implemented.

The idea that the Administration might send law enforcement officers or troops to the polls became even more concerning when — in litigation seeking records about possible pollingplace deployments — the Administration abruptly reversed its position that it had no responsive documents. Beginning in October 2025, the Democratic National Committee submitted eleven Freedom of Information Act requests seeking records concerning the possible deployment of federal law enforcement officers, immigration agents, military personnel, or National Guard members to polling places, ballot-drop locations, and election offices. Your Departments initially produced virtually nothing. During the ensuing litigation, ICE first represented that it had located no responsive records. But earlier this month, after its searches were challenged, ICE acknowledged finding more than 11,000 potentially responsive pages and U.S. Customs and Border Protection said it had turned up almost 117,000 records. The documents have yet to be produced to the plaintiff for review.

These belated disclosures reinforce the fear that the Administration is planning a potentially unlawful, illegal, and unconstitutional intrusion into the November election. Congress has enacted longstanding criminal prohibitions against sending federal personnel to polling places and using federal power to interfere with elections. For example, federal law makes it a crime for a federal official to bring or keep troops or armed personnel at a place where an election is held. Americans should never have to wonder whether the federal government intends to police the ballot box with armed agents. Yet that is precisely what the Trump administration appears to be considering, if not planning.

The Administration now has a choice. It can continue to fuel the appearance that it is laying the groundwork for an unprecedented federal intrusion into state-run elections, or it can finally provide Congress and the American people with the transparency they deserve. Accordingly, please respond to the following questions in writing no later than August 11, 2026:

1. Will any federal law enforcement officers or troops be deployed to or near any polling place or other election sites during the November 2026 election? If so, identify who, where, under what authority, and for what purpose.

2. Who directed or authorized discussions concerning the possible deployment of federal law enforcement officers or troops to polling places or other election sites? Identify every meeting or communication concerning this subject involving your Department or agency and the White House, the Executive Office of the President, Stephen Miller, other presidential advisers, or any other federal entity.

3. Produce all records concerning the possible deployment of federal law enforcement personnel or troops to polling places or other election sites, including legal memoranda, operational plans, policy guidance, emails, text messages, meeting notes, directives, and communications with the White House or other federal entities.

The Administration’s own actions have created the appearance that it may be preparing to do something that Congress has expressly prohibited: sending federal law enforcement officers or troops to polling places. If that is something the Administration is not going to do, you should have no difficulty saying so and proving it through complete transparency.

Sincerely,",1,2026-08-05T07:37:37Z,2026-08-05T07:38:44Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-joins-klobuchar-welch-colleagues-in-raising-concerns-about-usda-rural-development-reorganization,"Van Hollen Joins Klobuchar, Welch, Colleagues in Raising Concerns About USDA Rural Development Reorganization",2026-07-27,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), and Peter Welch (D-Vt.), and 19 of their colleagues in raising strong concerns about the plan to reorganize the Rural Development mission area at the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

“We write with significant concern regarding the reorganization of the Rural Development mission area at the U.S. Department of Agriculture,” wrote the Senators. “Rural communities, small businesses, and families will lose access to important services if the proposed reorganization plan moves forward. Rural Development is a unique division within the Department, supporting agriculture and ensuring that rural communities prosper by administering grants and loans to support rural businesses, providing financial support for rural housing, financing the construction of rural health clinics and daycare centers, and championing critical infrastructure projects for water, electric, or broadband.”

“In order for rural communities to benefit from these projects, the Rural Development agency must have the capacity to process applications and disburse funds,” the Senators continued. “Rural Development’s depletion of staff has already left rural America without the support it needs as the prices of gas, groceries, and agricultural inputs are skyrocketing as a result of tariffs and foreign conflicts. Without adequate and expert staff, the money that Congress has appropriated to help rural communities will not reach its intended beneficiaries.”

Along with Van Hollen, Klobuchar and Welch, the letter was signed by Senators Angus King (I-Maine), Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), and Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.).

The full text of the letter is available here and below.

Dear Deputy Secretary Vaden:

We write with significant concern regarding the reorganization of the Rural Development mission area at the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Rural communities, small businesses, and families will lose access to important services if the proposed reorganization plan moves forward.

Rural Development is a unique division within the Department, supporting agriculture and ensuring that rural communities prosper by administering grants and loans to support rural businesses, providing financial support for rural housing, financing the construction of rural health clinics and daycare centers, and championing critical infrastructure projects for water, electric, or broadband.

In order for rural communities to benefit from these projects, the Rural Development agency must have the capacity to process applications and disburse funds. The mission area has already lost about 36 percent of its staff last year, with nearly a third of those who left having more than 20 years of USDA experience. The reorganization plan for Rural Development will result in even further cuts, with 60 percent of staff in the National Capital Region being required to relocate to St. Louis or Dallas.

Recent court filings reveal the intention of these relocations. Internal memos set a goal of reducing Rural Development staff by 50 percent, according to a March 13, 2025 Agency RIF and Reorganization Plan submission, achieved through forced relocations because the agency was “anticipating that a significant number of employees will decline geographic reassignments ….”

Rural Development’s depletion of staff has already left rural America without the support it needs as the prices of gas, groceries, and agricultural inputs are skyrocketing as a result of tariffs and foreign conflicts. Without adequate and expert staff, the money that Congress has appropriated to help rural communities will not reach its intended beneficiaries.

Please provide a response to the following requests about the planned reorganization by August 5, 2026:

What analysis did the Department conduct to determine the impacts of staffing cuts on delivering Rural Development services?

Please provide a current breakdown of staffing levels and projection of staffing for the next two years by sub-mission area.

Given the significant depletion of staff, is Rural Development hiring now or planning to recruit new staff in the next three months? If so, for what positions and where?

If USDA anticipates hiring new staff, how will the Department ensure they receive the training needed to effectively serve rural communities with the required expertise and level of service?

How does the USDA plan to successfully recruit the next generation of Rural Development employees?

While we appreciate the willingness to modernize Rural Development’s technology, previous efforts have been unsuccessful and costly. How will the Department ensure that these technology projects remain within budget and on time? When will these new technologies be available to staff and customers?

Thank you for your attention to this important matter.",1,2026-08-01T07:27:26Z,2026-08-01T07:28:22Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/maryland-democrats-urge-ferc-to-protect-marylanders-from-rising-electricity-costs-due-to-out-of-state-data-centers,Maryland Democrats Urge FERC to Protect Marylanders from Rising Electricity Costs Due to Out-of-State Data Centers,2026-07-27,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, Maryland Congressional Delegation members – U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen and Angela Alsobrooks and U.S. Representatives Steny Hoyer, Kweisi Mfume, Jamie Raskin, Glenn Ivey, Sarah Elfreth, April McClain Delaney, and Johnny Olszewski (all D-Md.) – are calling on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to take action to ensure Marylanders are not forced to bear skyrocketing electricity costs due to increasing energy demand from data centers located outside of the state. The lawmakers urged FERC to require PJM Interconnection (PJM) to implement strong protections that would ensure fair energy costs for Marylanders after PJM, the grid operator responsible for coordinating electricity transmission in the region, assigned roughly $2 billion in costs to Maryland ratepayers for infrastructure that is needed primarily to serve out-of-state data centers. The lawmakers’ letter supports a complaint at FERC filed by the Maryland Office of People’s Counsel challenging PJM’s existing transmission cost allocation rules.

“As members of the Maryland Congressional Delegation, we write regarding a pressing matter that has the potential to significantly raise energy costs for our constituents. PJM Interconnection LLC’s (PJM) existing transmission cost allocation rules result in the unjust assignment of billions of dollars in costs to Marylanders, contributing to unaffordable electricity bills,” the lawmakers begin.

On the rising costs of electricity due to data centers outside of Maryland, the lawmakers write, “Data centers being built outside of Maryland are driving one of the largest transmission expansions in PJM’s history. Across its three most recent regional transmission planning rounds, PJM has advanced $22 billion in projects needed principally to serve data centers. Under PJM’s current cost allocation rules, roughly $2 billion of those costs have been assigned to Maryland ratepayers rather than the data centers that are driving the demand.”

“Marylanders are already shouldering the immense burden of skyrocketing electricity costs, and it is unjust and unreasonable to force our constituents to subsidize the energy infrastructure needs of the wealthiest companies in the world. Unless the Commission acts, our constituents will pay an estimated $1.6 billion on their electric bills over the next ten years for these projects alone, and $823 million of that total cost will fall on residential customers, which equates to roughly $345 for the average customer,” the lawmakers continue.

On PJM’s current cost allocation rules, the Maryland lawmakers note, “PJM’s cost allocation rules have not kept pace with the build out of hyperscale data centers, just one of which can equal the electricity demand of a small city. PJM’s current rules spread costs broadly across the region regardless of where, and for whom, the underlying projects are actually needed. Maryland regulators have no ability to assign such costs to data centers located in other states, and with tens of thousands of megawatts of additional data center demand growth projected across PJM over the next two decades, our constituents face billions of dollars in further charges absent Commission action to address this unjust and unreasonable cost allocation. Furthermore, because much of the forecasted growth in data center energy demand is speculative, our constituents bear the unacceptable risk of paying for projects built to serve potential data centers that are never built due to any number of external reasons.”

“We urge the Commission to act expeditiously to provide relief from these costs for Maryland ratepayers, including as requested in OPC’s complaint. Thank you for your consideration of this important issue that is essential to ensuring just and reasonable energy costs for our constituents,” the lawmakers conclude.

The full text of the letter is available here and below.

Dear Chairman Swett,

As members of the Maryland Congressional Delegation, we write regarding a pressing matter that has the potential to significantly raise energy costs for our constituents. PJM Interconnection LLC’s (PJM) existing transmission cost allocation rules result in the unjust assignment of billions of dollars in costs to Marylanders, contributing to unaffordable electricity bills. This matter has been brought before the Commission by the Maryland Office of People's Counsel (OPC) (Docket: EL26-63), and the basic principle underpinning this issue is simple: our constituents should not be forced to pay for transmission projects that they did not cause and from which they will not meaningfully benefit.

Data centers being built outside of Maryland are driving one of the largest transmission expansions in PJM’s history. Across its three most recent regional transmission planning rounds, PJM has advanced $22 billion in projects needed principally to serve data centers. Under PJM’s current cost allocation rules, roughly $2 billion of those costs have been assigned to Maryland ratepayers rather than the data centers that are driving the demand.

Marylanders are already shouldering the immense burden of skyrocketing electricity costs, and it is unjust and unreasonable to force our constituents to subsidize the energy infrastructure needs of the wealthiest companies in the world. Unless the Commission acts, our constituents will pay an estimated $1.6 billion on their electric bills over the next ten years for these projects alone, and $823 million of that total cost will fall on residential customers, which equates to roughly $345 for the average customer.

PJM’s cost allocation rules have not kept pace with the build out of hyperscale data centers, just one of which can equal the electricity demand of a small city. PJM’s current rules spread costs broadly across the region regardless of where, and for whom, the underlying projects are actually needed. Maryland regulators have no ability to assign such costs to data centers located in other states, and with tens of thousands of megawatts of additional data center demand growth projected across PJM over the next two decades, our constituents face billions of dollars in further charges absent Commission action to address this unjust and unreasonable cost allocation. Furthermore, because much of the forecasted growth in data center energy demand is speculative, our constituents bear the unacceptable risk of paying for projects built to serve potential data centers that are never built due to any number of external reasons.

We were encouraged by the Commission’s June 18, 2026 orders directing PJM and five other grid operators to justify or reform how they assign the costs of serving large loads, which advance the essential goal of protecting ordinary consumers. Those orders, however, are forward-looking. We also seek to obtain relief for our constituents from the billions in costs PJM has already assigned, and because most of those costs have not yet appeared on customer bills, timely Commission action can prevent much of this harm before it occurs.

We urge the Commission to act expeditiously to provide relief from these costs for Maryland ratepayers, including as requested in OPC’s complaint. Thank you for your consideration of this important issue that is essential to ensuring just and reasonable energy costs for our constituents.",1,2026-08-05T07:37:37Z,2026-08-05T07:38:44Z
https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/news/press-releases/senator-alsobrooks-votes-yes-again-to-advance-iran-war-powers-resolution-2/,Senator Alsobrooks Votes Yes AGAIN on Iran War Powers Resolution,2026-07-23,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Angela D. Alsobrooks,A000382,www.alsobrooks.senate.gov,alsobrooks,https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/,scraper,"July 23, 2026

WASHINGTON, DC – Senator Alsobrooks (D-Md.) released the following statement after voting for Senator Chris Van Hollen’s (D-Md.) Iran War Powers Resolution. The resolution was not agreed to 47-49.

“Congress voted in a bipartisan, bicameral way to end this war. The President won’t end the war, prices continue to rise, and more American servicemembers have died.

“I have heard from my colleagues across the aisle saying they are praying for an end to this war. I urge them to vote for that too.”",1,2026-07-24T07:30:11Z,2026-07-24T07:31:13Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-puts-forward-war-powers-resolution-to-stop-iran-war,Van Hollen Puts Forward War Powers Resolution to Stop Iran War,2026-07-23,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) spoke on the Senate floor urging his Senate colleagues to vote in favor of his war powers resolution, which would require an end to the illegal Iran war that President Trump launched over 140 days ago. A video of the Senator’s remarks is available here, and a transcript is available below:

Mr. President, I want to start by thanking Senator Sheehy for his service to our country in our armed forces – and thank every single soldier who serves our country in uniform – and mourn the deaths of every single American service member who has been lost in this war and any other war.

I listened carefully to the Senator from Montana. He's right that the Iranian regime doesn't care about what's happening in the United States – doesn't care about politics in the United States. You know what else they don't care about? They don't care about the Constitution of the United States of America. They don't care about that either.

But we, we in the Senate, we should care about the Constitution of the United States of America, because the framers of our Constitution deliberately vested the power to declare war in Congress, because they understood the enormous consequences of sending Americans into harm's way.

So, if our Republican colleagues have the strength of their convictions, they should bring an authorization to use military force in Iran to this floor. We've not seen that in 140 days. We've seen nothing. If you want to be true to the Constitution of the United States, that's what Republicans would do.

And the Iranians don't give a damn about our Constitution. But I would hope that those in this body who've been sworn to uphold it would give a damn about our Constitution.

Because the framers understood – they understood that decisions involving war and peace should not rest with any one individual. You can glorify President Trump all you want, but the founders, the founders, those who helped write the Constitution, understood that that power should not vest with one person, whoever that person may be, regardless of party. That’s what the founders said.

The Constitution entrusted that solemn responsibility to the Congress, where the elected representatives could openly debate and vote on those questions before any President sent our sons and daughters to fight and die in foreign lands. We may disagree about whether this is a good idea or a bad idea, but we should not disagree that that is what the Constitution requires, and that is what our oath requires.

So, Mr. President, yes, I rise to urge my colleagues to support my War Powers Resolution to end this disastrous and illegal war against Iran that President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu launched over 140 days ago.

The Constitution is unambiguous. This is not a close call. And yet, right now, right now, we are finding ourselves confronting exactly the circumstances the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution of 1973 were designed to prevent. They were designed to prevent one person from taking this country to war. They were actually designed in hopes that this Senate and this Congress would do their constitutional duty and vote yes or no, but take responsibility for decisions that send our men and women into harm's way. Take responsibility.

Nearly five months ago, President Trump launched this illegal war. He launched it against Iran. And as I said, he launched it without any authorization.

Since then, Senate Democrats and some Republicans have tried to reassert the constitutional role of Congress. We have voted 11 times on resolutions to end the war.

And finally, last month both chambers passed House Concurrent Resolution 86, directing the President to terminate hostilities against Iran. It was a historic vote. It marked the first time since the War Powers Resolution was enacted in 1973 that Congress successfully used this mechanism that was designed to halt the unauthorized use of force by a president – by any president.

That resolution was not a suggestion. It is legally binding.

The Iranian regime may not care about that resolution, but we should care, and the Constitution requires that we care. The passage of that resolution should have marked the end of this disastrous war. But time and again, President Trump has shown he has no respect for the Constitution. He was asked months ago whether he had to abide by the Constitution. His answer: “I don't know.” That is a president who has no respect for the rule of law. But we should. Instead, what the Trump Administration has done is steadily expanded this conflict, moved farther away from diplomacy, and farther away from a durable peace.

When the Memorandum of Understanding between the United States and Iran was signed in June, I stood on this floor and said I hoped it would become the foundation for a broader diplomatic settlement. Many of my Republican colleagues opposed that Memorandum of Understanding. I hoped that it would finally begin the long task of climbing out of the big hole this illegal war has created. That hope is gone now.

Mr. President, this moment, this moment we're in now is a pivotal one in the war and for our role in it. Just this morning, the House of Representatives passed another resolution to end the war. That's how democracy works. The Iranian regime doesn't care about our democracy, but we should. And the Senate should pass this resolution just as the House passed a War Powers resolution.

This is the first War Powers resolution since the United States resumed daily strikes against Iran, and the first since we reimposed a full naval blockade. It's the first resolution since another four American soldiers were killed. It's the first resolution since shipping in the Strait of Hormuz has once again been ground to a halt. And I think all of us here in the Senate know the Strait of Hormuz was open before President Trump launched this war.

In the weeks since the last vote, more civilians have been killed as well. And the United States and Iran are now deliberately targeting civilian infrastructure. President Trump said that he will destroy a bridge or power plant in Iran for every ship attacked in the Strait.

It did not have to be this way. Many of us warned before this war began that military force would not achieve the vague, constantly shifting objectives its advocates promised. We warned that abandoning diplomacy would make the region more dangerous, not less. We warned that military action would strengthen the most hardline voices inside Iran rather than weaken them. We warned that this conflict would destabilize the region, threaten the global economy, drive up costs for American families, and ultimately leave the United States worse off.

And Mr. President, since then, every single one of those warnings has come true. I wish they hadn't, but they have.

Mr. President, we’ve heard the arguments warmongers have used to justify this stupid war before. The promises of quick victories – just one more bombing campaign would finally produce lasting peace. We have heard that regime change is just around the corner. We have heard repeated calls for military adventurism while diplomacy – diplomacy was dismissed as some kind of weakness. Those arguments were wrong before. And they are wrong today.

This is the same kind of delusional thinking that sucked the United States into endless wars in the past. The kind of endless wars that this President promised he would keep us out of when he promised he would focus on bringing down prices – he's done the opposite.

So, Mr. President, we must make better choices, and we cannot allow the past to repeat itself. But that’s what happens when your objectives keep changing. That’s what happens when you convince yourself, against all available evidence, that just one more week or one more month of fighting will bring victory.

You know, on March 1st, the day after starting the war, President Trump was asked how long the war would go on. Does anybody remember what he said? “Four to five weeks. It'll be over in four to five weeks,” he said. Well, the President said that about 20 weeks ago, and it was all a lot of nonsense. In late March, he repeatedly claimed victory. President Trump said we won. Go look it up. It's all over his social media channels. “We won, we won.”

Colleagues, I have some questions. If we won back in March, why are more Americans getting killed in July? If we won in March, why is the Strait of Hormuz closed? If we won back in March, why is the war expanding, as the Houthis attack ships transiting the Bab el-Mandeb Strait into the Red Sea? If we won back in March, why are oil and gas prices and diesel prices shooting through the roof again, imposing costs on every American family? Is that their definition of ”winning”?

Well, I wondered what their answer to that question was. So, earlier this week, I asked Secretary of Defense Hegseth what his definition of winning looks like. And there was no clear answer. And that’s because their objectives keep changing. He finally settled on making sure Iran does not get a nuclear weapon.

But colleagues, remember this: last year, just last year, shortly after Operation Midnight Hammer, the Twelve-Day War – here's what Secretary Hegseth told the country, and I quote, “Our bombing campaign obliterated Iran’s ability to create nuclear weapons.” The President told us the same thing. And the President's Director of National Intelligence testified in this Senate just months ago that it was the assessment of the U.S. government that Iran did not intend to restart any enrichment program. The President, during the time the Memorandum of Understanding was in place, hailed the fact that the Iranians said they had no plans and would not build a nuclear weapon. Apparently, the President had not been informed that they had made that commitment over a period of years.

The whole purpose of the JCPOA was to hold them to that commitment – to make sure that we could identify immediately if they were violating that commitment. Of course, that's the agreement that President Trump tore up in his first administration.

But so, when I pointed all this out to Secretary Hegseth, all he could go back was to tired old talking points that have gotten us into this mess and keep us in this mess. In fact, it clarified the reality of what we've known since day one. That the Iran war is a war in search of a mission.

And Mr. President, that's how forever wars begin.

18 American servicemembers have lost their lives.

Hundreds more have been wounded, including over 100 just from the last two weeks.

And the civilian death toll continues to rise.

At the start of the war, an American Tomahawk missile strike killed more than 150 Iranian civilians in Minab, more than 100 of them children. On top of those killings of school kids, thousands of other civilians have been killed or injured across Iran, Lebanon, Israel, and the rest of the region.

And on top of that, oil prices have jumped, then they settled a little bit during the Memorandum of Understanding, and now they're jumping again. They've risen back to a national average of around $4 a gallon and rising. Diesel prices have surged above $5 a gallon.

All of us understand that when gas and diesel prices go up, those increased costs filter throughout the economy. Trucks that are trucking food from one place to another – higher diesel prices, higher food prices, higher grocery prices throughout our economy – imposed on families already struggling with the costs of groceries, and housing, and health care, and child care, and other necessities.

And again, this is the President who said that he was going to end wars and focus on bringing down costs.

This is a strategic blunder on a massive scale. It's a self- inflicted wound on our country. And all for what? That is the question every one of us should be asking as we vote shortly on this War Powers Resolution.

How has continuing this war made the American people safer? How has it made the Middle East more stable? How has it strengthened America's national security? I have yet to hear a credible answer to that question, and that’s because there isn’t one. You know, Mr. President, these are the kind of questions that should be asked before a war is started – before we put American troops at risk.

Colleagues, there is no good way out of a bad war.

But as I have said repeatedly, when you're digging yourself a hole, the first thing you should do is stop digging. And that's what this resolution seeks to do. Let us stop pretending that Congress has no role to play while American servicemembers remain in harm's way.

Many of the people who enthusiastically supported launching this war have been unwilling to take responsibility for authorizing it. That should concern every member of this body. It should concern every American, regardless of party. Because if a member of the Senate truly believes that this war is justified and the right thing to do, put it up for a vote. Put it up for a vote for an authorization to use military force.

I disagreed with the decision to go to war in Iraq. President Bush asked for an authorization for military force, and this Congress acted on it. My view – they made the wrong decision, but at least they took responsibility for their actions as the Constitution requires.

So, Mr. President, this is an opportunity – as the war escalates even further, as more American servicemembers are killed, as more civilians are killed, as oil and gas prices and other prices go up – this is an opportunity for this Congress to finally take responsibility. We passed a concurrent resolution that passed. We know the President has no respect for the law, but we have an obligation to our constituents. We should not duck that responsibility.

We should not simply allow this war to go on without an up or down votes on an authorization to use military force.

And today, we have a chance to take accountability and send a message by supporting this War Powers Resolution.

I urge all my colleagues to adopt it, and I yield the floor.",1,2026-08-05T07:37:37Z,2026-08-05T07:38:44Z
https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/news/press-releases/alsobrooks-barragan-introduce-three-bills-to-close-gaps-in-dental-coverage/,"ALSOBROOKS, BARRAGÁN INTRODUCE THREE BILLS TO CLOSE GAPS IN DENTAL COVERAGE",2026-07-22,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Angela D. Alsobrooks,A000382,www.alsobrooks.senate.gov,alsobrooks,https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/,scraper,"July 22, 2026

WASHINGTON, DC – Today, Senator Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.) and Congresswoman Nanette Barragán (D-Calif.-44) introduced three bills that will close historical gaps in dental coverage across the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), Medicaid, and Medicare. These bills will ensure that children, low-income adults, and seniors can access necessary dental care without facing the barriers of caps and optional benefits.

The Ensuring Kids Have Access to Medically Necessary Dental Care Act strengthens CHIP by banning annual and lifetime dollar limits in children’s dental benefits and requiring wraparound coverage where it is currently optional.

The Medicaid Dental Benefit Act of 2026 makes adult dental care a mandatory Medicaid benefit rather than a state-by-state option with full federal funding for the first three years.

The Medicare Dental Benefit Act of 2026 would add routine, basic, major, and emergency dental coverage to Medicare Part B, reducing the disparities that leave half of all Medicare beneficiaries without dental coverage today.

18 years ago, a young Marylander named Deamonte Driver died of complications from a tooth infection because his family was kicked off Medicaid and could not afford the care they needed. He was only 12 years old. Senator Cardin worked tirelessly throughout his career to ensure that no child should ever suffer Deamonte’s fate, and Senator Alsobrooks is continuing to carry on that legacy.

“No one. No child, adult, or senior should have to choose between affording groceries or being able to have access to dental treatment. I am so proud to be introducing three bills to address this issue and to finally ensure quality, affordable access to dental care for Marylanders – and all Americans. In Maryland, we know all too well that access to dental care is literally a matter of life and death. In 2007, we lost 12-year-old Deamonte Driver because of a toothache. That should have never happened. And while Republicans seem hellbent on kicking as many people off their health insurance as possible, we will fight to expand coverage and to ensure that every American, every child in particular, has access to the care they need,” said Senator Alsobrooks.

“Dental health is an often-overlooked part of your overall health, particularly for those from underserved and vulnerable communities who lack comprehensive health insurance coverage and cannot afford to pay for these routine services out-of-pocket. That is why Senator Alsobrooks and I are reintroducing my bills to strengthen dental benefits so we can make dental care more affordable and prevent health conditions before they become more expensive and deadly,” said Congresswoman Barragán.

“Dental care and coverage is key to overall health, employment, and economic stability. There is widespread concern about rising health care costs, including for oral care access and affordability — and especially among low-income families and seniors on fixed incomes. The Medicaid Dental Benefit Act and Medicare Dental Benefit Act would close the oral health gap for those on key public programs: guaranteeing comprehensive dental coverage for adults on Medicaid, and adding dental care to Medicare Part B. We applaud Representative Barragán and Senator Alsobrooks for their leadership in reimagining what affordable, accessible oral health care can look like for all,” said Anthony Wright, Executive Director of Families USA

“Everyone deserves access to comprehensive dental care,” said Melissa Burroughs, Senior Director of Public Policy at CareQuest Institute for Oral Health. “We’re proud to support this legislation that addresses existing gaps in oral health coverage for seniors, children, low-income families, and people with disabilities. Oral health is essential to overall health, and ensuring people have access to this critical form of care will support healthier communities, reduce health care costs, and advance health equity across the country.”

“Oral health is health care, yet far too many people still struggle to get the dental care they need because of gaps in coverage and affordability. Community Catalyst is proud to stand with partners supporting legislation that strengthens and expands oral health coverage in Medicaid, Medicare, and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP). These bills would help ensure adults can access comprehensive dental services, bring needed dental coverage to Medicare beneficiaries, and strengthen protections so children can receive the care they need without unnecessary coverage limits. Together, these proposals represent an important step toward treating oral health as an essential part of health care,” said Shaina Goodman, Vice President for Policy & Government Affairs, Community Catalyst

The Medicaid Dental Benefit Act has been endorsed by: American Dental Association, Academy of General Dentistry, American Academy of Oral & Maxillofacial Pathology, American Academy of Orofacial Pain, American Academy of Periodontology, American Association for Dental, Oral, and Craniofacial Research, American Association of Public Health Dentistry, American Dental Education Association, American Student Dental Association, National Network for Oral Health Access, Society of American Indian Dentists, ASTDD Foundation, Inc., American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry, and National Dental Association.

The Medicare Dental Benefit Act has been endorsed by: Community Catalyst, Families USA, CareQuest Institute for Oral Health, Center for Medicare Advocacy, and Justice in Aging.

The Ensuring Kids Have Access to Medically Necessary Dental Care Act has been endorsed by: American Dental Association, Academy of General Dentistry, American Academy of Oral & Maxillofacial Pathology, American Academy of Orofacial Pain, American Academy of Periodontology, American Association for Dental, Oral, and Craniofacial Research, American Association of Endodontists, American Association of Public Health Dentistry, American Dental Education Association, American Student Dental Association, National Network for Oral Health Access, Society of American Indian Dentists, ASTDD Foundation, Inc., American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry, National Dental Association, and American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

Read full bill text for the Ensuring Kids Have Access to Medically Necessary Dental Care Act here.

Read full bill text for the Medicaid Dental Benefit Act of 2026 here.

Read full bill text for the Medicare Dental Benefit Act of 2026 here.",1,2026-07-23T07:31:02Z,2026-07-23T07:32:26Z
https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/news/press-releases/alsobrooks-cramer-introduce-legislation-to-ease-federal-permitting-process-for-transit/,"ALSOBROOKS, CRAMER INTRODUCE LEGISLATION TO EASE FEDERAL PERMITTING PROCESS FOR TRANSIT",2026-07-22,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Angela D. Alsobrooks,A000382,www.alsobrooks.senate.gov,alsobrooks,https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/,scraper,"July 22, 2026

WASHINGTON, DC – Today, U.S. Senators Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Ranking Member of the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee, and Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) Chairman of the EPW Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee, introduced the Modal Parity in Permitting Act, legislation that would allow transit and passenger rail project sponsors to acquire ‘real property interest’ and parity during the federal permitting process.

Congresswoman Dina Titus (D-Nev.-01) and Congressman Rob Bresnahan (R-Pa.-08) introduced this bipartisan legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Currently, Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funds may only be used for acquisition of rights-of-way such as rail assignments, guideways, and associated easements, before a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review is completed. This limits transit agencies’ ability to secure other property needed for projects like station sites, maintenance facilities, and parking areas. This bill would expand eligibility by allowing FTA funds to be used for a wider range of real property interests, giving transit agencies more flexibility to acquire land and facilities needed to move projects forward.

“I am proud to partner with Senator Cramer in introducing the Modal Parity in Permitting Act. This bipartisan bill will allow transit and passenger rail projects to have the same flexibility as highway projects when it comes to securing the property they need while their environmental reviews move forward. It just makes sense, let’s get this done,” said Senator Alsobrooks.

“Every time we cut red tape and get the federal government out of the way, infrastructure projects move faster and more efficiently,” said Senator Cramer. “The Modal Parity in Permitting Act removes unnecessary permitting hurdles, allowing local agencies to spend less time navigating bureaucracy and more time delivering transportation improvements for their communities. It’s a simple change with a significant impact.”

“Providing transit and passenger rail projects with greater flexibility to secure property needed for future investments, while maintaining important environmental protections, means agencies like the Maryland Department of Transportation can better manage project timelines, costs and risks,” said Maryland Transportation Secretary Katie Thomson. “We value Senator Alsobrooks’ leadership in advancing solutions that help our state deliver meaningful transportation projects.”

“Many folks in Southern Nevada depend on bus services to get around our community,” said Congresswoman Titus. “Another emerging critical mode of transportation in our region is passenger rail. When high-speed rail comes to Southern Nevada, it will support tourism, improve air quality, and ease traffic congestion. The Modal Parity in Permitting Act will help ensure that the permitting process that allows these services to be built in our community is in line with the process for highway projects.”

“We applaud Sen. Alsobrooks and Sen. Cramer for introducing the Modal Parity in Permitting Act. Public transit and passenger rail projects deserve the same permitting opportunities as highway projects. By allowing FTA and FRA projects to acquire property before completion of the NEPA review—just as highway projects can—this bipartisan legislation will help advance critical public transportation investments more efficiently. We urge Congress to pass this commonsense bill without delay,” said American Public Transportation Association (APTA) President and CEO, Paul P. Skoutelas.

Read full bill text here.",1,2026-07-23T07:31:02Z,2026-07-23T07:32:26Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-presses-supreme-court-to-make-good-on-commitment-to-prevent-abuse-of-prediction-markets-by-justices-staff,"Van Hollen Presses Supreme Court to Make Good on Commitment to Prevent Abuse of Prediction Markets by Justices, Staff",2026-07-22,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) called on the Supreme Court of the United States to fulfil the commitment Justices Barrett and Kagan made in response to his questioning at the July 14, 2026, Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Subcommittee hearing requesting that the Court review its codes of conduct to ensure there is a prohibition against participation in prediction markets both for justices and for staff of the Supreme Court, as well as for lower court judges and their staff. In the letter, Senator Van Hollen also requests that the Court announce any resulting changes to ensure public transparency on these policies.

Senator Van Hollen begins, “At the July 14, 2026, hearing of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government, I asked Justice Kagan and Justice Barrett if the Court would adopt a prohibition against participation in prediction markets both for justices and for the staff of the Supreme Court. They responded that their understanding is that it is already covered by the ‘prohibition on using information that you know within the court to make financial gain,’ but Justice Kagan also said the Court would ‘willingly take on’ the charge to ‘go back and look for any loopholes.’ I write in the spirit of that commitment and the Supreme Court’s responsibility to avoid both impropriety and the appearance of impropriety to encourage you to take action that will bolster public trust.”

“As I noted in my questioning of Justice Kagan and Justice Barrett, the use of prediction markets by judges and judicial personnel can raise significant concerns. These instruments create new opportunities for conflicts of interest if judges or staff make wagers about ongoing litigation or matters that are likely to come before the courts. And I am concerned that prediction markets can compromise the judiciary’s independence from other branches of government were judges or their clerk permitted to place bets on official action from Congress or the Executive Branch. Our courts work best when the public knows judges approach cases and litigants impartially. Judges’ unrestricted participation in the wide range of bets that prediction markets allow risks compromising that confidence,” Senator Van Hollen continues.

On the current Code of Conduct for insider trading, Senator Van Hollen writes, “While the Justice’s Code of Conduct, the Judge’s Code of Conduct, and the Code of Conduct for Judicial Employees may protect against insider trading, they do not adequately prevent other inappropriate uses of prediction markets. For example, if justices or their staff place bets on government activities, even without nonpublic information, it could create conflicts of interest with future cases or undermine perceptions of the Court’s independence from other branches of government. Confidence in the Court is likewise undermined were a justice or their staff to hold a contract on an issue likely to come before the courts, or about a matter that could sow doubt about their impartiality, such as an election outcome. It is vitally important that the American public have trust in the courts, and taking further action to create a clear standard is critical to regaining that trust.”

“I respectfully encourage the Court to review the codes for the judicial branch and consider clearly and expressly prohibiting all justices, judges, staff, clerks, officers, and employees of the judicial branch from participating in prediction markets. I also request that the Court make a public announcement of the resulting changes to ensure that the public knows the Court has a clear policy in place. The American public must be able to have confidence that the court and its officers are acting exclusively in the interest of justice,” Senator Van Hollen concludes.

The full text of the letter is available here and below.

Dear Chief Justice Roberts:

At the July 14, 2026, hearing of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government, I asked Justice Kagan and Justice Barrett if the Court would adopt a prohibition against participation in prediction markets both for justices and for the staff of the Supreme Court. They responded that their understanding is that it is already covered by the “prohibition on using information that you know within the court to make financial gain,” but Justice Kagan also said the Court would “willingly take on” the charge to “go back and look for any loopholes.” I write in the spirit of that commitment and the Supreme Court’s responsibility to avoid both impropriety and the appearance of impropriety to encourage you to take action that will bolster public trust.

As I noted in my questioning of Justice Kagan and Justice Barrett, the use of prediction markets by judges and judicial personnel can raise significant concerns. These instruments create new opportunities for conflicts of interest if judges or staff make wagers about ongoing litigation or matters that are likely to come before the courts. And I am concerned that prediction markets can compromise the judiciary’s independence from other branches of government were judges or their clerk permitted to place bets on official action from Congress or the Executive Branch. Our courts work best when the public knows judges approach cases and litigants impartially. Judges’ unrestricted participation in the wide range of bets that prediction markets allow risks compromising that confidence.

While the Justice’s Code of Conduct, the Judge’s Code of Conduct, and the Code of Conduct for Judicial Employees may protect against insider trading, they do not adequately prevent other inappropriate uses of prediction markets. For example, if justices or their staff place bets on government activities, even without nonpublic information, it could create conflicts of interest with future cases or undermine perceptions of the Court’s independence from other branches of government. Confidence in the Court is likewise undermined were a justice or their staff to hold a contract on an issue likely to come before the courts, or about a matter that could sow doubt about their impartiality, such as an election outcome. It is vitally important that the American public have trust in the courts, and taking further action to create a clear standard is critical to regaining that trust.

On April 30, 2026, the United States Senate unanimously passed a resolution amending the Standing Rules of the Senate to prohibit Senators, Senate staff, and all officers and employees of the Senate from trading on prediction markets. The Senate did so because it recognized that as public servants, we are uniquely responsible for upholding public trust in our democracy, and even the appearance of insider trading, conflict of interest, or other impropriety erodes that trust. The Senate resolution also stated that, “It is the sense of the Senate that the House of Representatives, executive branch, and judicial branch should establish restrictions similar to those [in the resolution] relating to participation in prediction markets.” I believe this step is crucial to strengthening the American public’s trust in our courts.

I respectfully encourage the Court to review the codes for the judicial branch and consider clearly and expressly prohibiting all justices, judges, staff, clerks, officers, and employees of the judicial branch from participating in prediction markets. I also request that the Court make a public announcement of the resulting changes to ensure that the public knows the Court has a clear policy in place. The American public must be able to have confidence that the court and its officers are acting exclusively in the interest of justice.",1,2026-07-24T07:30:11Z,2026-07-24T07:31:13Z
https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/news/press-releases/alsobrooks-joins-60-colleagues-in-cosponsoring-legislation-to-hold-purchasers-of-russian-oil-accountable/,ALSOBROOKS JOINS 60+ COLLEAGUES IN COSPONSORING LEGISLATION TO HOLD PURCHASERS OF RUSSIAN OIL ACCOUNTABLE,2026-07-17,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Angela D. Alsobrooks,A000382,www.alsobrooks.senate.gov,alsobrooks,https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/,scraper,"July 17, 2026

WASHINGTON, DC – Senator Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD) joined Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Darline Graham (R-SC), and over 60 members of the Senate in introducing the Senator Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia Act of 2026, legislation to hold major purchasers of Russian oil and gas accountable for supporting Russia’s war in Ukraine.

U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to discuss the effort last week and secured an agreement with the White House on Friday, before his death.

“Vladimir Putin’s illegal war in Ukraine has raged on for too long and cost countless innocent lives. This critical legislation will hold the enablers of Putin’s war machine accountable and represents one of the most consequential Congressional efforts to promote peace in Europe. Let’s get this done,” said Alsobrooks.

The legislation is cosponsored by U.S. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD); U.S. Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Ranking Member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee; U.S. Senator Katie Britt (R-AL); U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), Co-Chair of the Senate Ukraine Caucus; U.S. Senator Roger Wicker (R-MS), Chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee; U.S. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI); U.S. Senator Jim Risch (R-ID), Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee; U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-DE); U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee; U.S. Senator Michael Bennet (D-CO); U.S. Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR), Chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence; U.S. Senator Jack Reed (D-RI), Ranking Member of the Senate Armed Services Committee; U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-SC), Chair of the Senate Banking Committee; U.S. Senator Angus King (I-ME); U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY), Majority Whip; U.S. Senator Tim Kaine (D-VA); U.S. Senator Susan Collins (R-ME), Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee; U.S. Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY); U.S. Senator Mark Kelly (D-AZ); U.S. Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC); U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY); U.S. Senator Joni Ernst (R-IA); U.S. Senator Jacky Rosen (D-NV); U.S. Senator Pete Ricketts (R-NE); U.S. Senator Brian Schatz (D-HI); U.S. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX); U.S. Senator Adam Schiff (D-CA); U.S. Senator Tim Sheehy (R-MT); U.S. Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN); U.S. Senator John Curtis (R-UT); U.S. Senator John Fetterman (D-PA); U.S. Senator Dan Sullivan (R-AK); U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL); U.S. Senator Gary Peters (D-MI); U.S. Senator James Lankford (R-OK); U.S. Senator John Hickenlooper (D-CO); U.S. Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-MS); U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-NM); U.S. Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN); U.S. Senator Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD); U.S. Senator John Boozman (R-AR); U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD); U.S. Senator Kevin Cramer (R-ND); U.S. Senator Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV); U.S. Senator Jon Husted (R-OH); U.S. Senator John Hoeven (R-ND); U.S. Senator Deb Fischer (R-NE); U.S. Senator Jim Justice (R-WV); U.S. Senator Mike Rounds (R-SD); U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX); U.S. Senator John Kennedy (R-LA); U.S. Senator Cynthia Lummis (R-WY); U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK); U.S. Senator Rick Scott (R-FL); U.S. Senator Ted Budd (R-NC); U.S. Senator Jerry Moran (R-KS); U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville (R-AL); U.S. Senator Dave McCormick (R-PA); U.S. Senator Alan Armstrong (R-OK); and U.S. Senator Steve Daines (R-MT).

“Ukraine is at a critical crossroads — and we must meet this pivotal moment with a powerful sanctions bill. As Ukraine turns the tide on the battlefield, our Russia sanctions bill would be historically impactful in stopping Russia’s murderous slaughter,” Blumenthal said. “When Senator Graham and I last spoke, he was absolutely exultant, calling from Kyiv with news that President Trump would support this bill to impose scorching tariffs and sanctions on purchasers of Russian oil and stop them from fueling Putin’s war machine. Now is the time to push Russia toward peace. Ukraine is gaining net territory and reaching deep into Russia with its drones and missiles. Sanctions provide a path toward peace. Our bill is the product of lengthy, detailed, difficult bipartisan work, and now has broad bipartisan support. Passing this legislation right now would be a fitting tribute to Senator Graham’s fierce support for Ukraine’s freedom.”

“Until the very day he passed, Lindsey remained focused on passing the Russia sanctions bill. Passing this legislation would honor my brother’s steadfast commitment to our national security and it would provide President Trump with additional leverage to bring this war to an end. I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this legislation and send it to President Trump’s desk,” said Senator Darline Graham.

“Lindsey was a firm believer that the United States is a force for good around the world, and he worked tirelessly on this important effort,” said Thune. “I’m proud to support this legislation that not only honors our friend and colleague, but will also promote peace by cutting off the funding fueling Russia’s war machine. I can’t think of a better way to honor his legacy.”

“Russia is losing ground, it is suffering tens of thousands of casualties each month and Ukraine continues to bring the consequences of the war to the Kremlin’s doorstep through its deep strike campaign. Putin is in an incredibly precarious position both at home and on the battlefield. This legislation would level tough new sanctions on Russia and choke off key export markets for the energy it sells to fund its war machine. We must seize on the opportunity before us to finally exert economic pressure on the Kremlin and bring this war to a close,” said Shaheen.

“One of the many pillars of Senator Graham’s exemplary career of public service was his dedication to putting America’s national security first and promoting liberty around the world. It is an honor to help champion one of his highest priorities: imposing crushing sanctions to cripple Russia’s war machine and hold those fueling it accountable. Putin’s war against Ukraine has claimed hundreds of thousands of lives, and it must end. Lindsey believed that getting this legislation passed and signed into law would be the most consequential thing he achieved in his career. I am sincerely grateful to Senators Blumenthal, Shaheen, and Wicker for their continued leadership on this issue and, very importantly, for the support of President Trump and the White House—these sanctions will provide President Trump with a critical tool to hold Russia accountable and secure a lasting peace,” said Britt.

“This bipartisan bill that Senator Graham worked so tirelessly to advance couldn’t be better timed. Momentum in the war has shifted toward Ukraine and tightening sanctions on Russia and those key purchasers of Russian oil should help add pressure for the Kremlin to finally negotiate. Having just returned from the NATO Summit, I can share that we and our NATO allies are united in wanting to see Ukraine prevail in this bloody war started by Vladimir Putin. I am pleased to help co-lead this timely legislation,” said Durbin.

“We should enact this bipartisan measure to exert maximum economic pressure on Putin’s war machine and help bring this unjust war to an end,” said Wicker.

“Today’s bill continues the work of the late Senator Graham, my dear friend and one of Ukraine’s most relentless advocates in the Senate,” said Whitehouse. “This forceful, bipartisan measure will disrupt the Kremlin’s massive oil and gas economy, up the financial stakes, and help achieve victory for Ukraine.”

“I am proud to support the imposition of new, hard-hitting sanctions on key sectors of Russia’s war economy, including the shadow fleet, and penalties on bad actors like China who help fund the war. Russia is not winning this war against Ukraine, and applying additional pressure now will force Putin to shift his calculus and bring us closer to ending the war. In honor of our friend Lindsey Graham, I strongly encourage my colleagues to pass this legislation and send it to the President’s desk as soon as possible,” said Risch.

“Ukraine is winning on the battlefield against Russian invaders, and there’s much more the United States can do to strangle Russia’s war machine without putting ourselves at risk. Curbing Russian revenue by sanctioning the foreign buyers of their oil that are keeping Russia’s economy and military afloat will strengthen Ukraine, weaken Moscow, and hasten a just and lasting end to this war,” said Coons.

“Putin’s invasion of Ukraine unleashed destruction, chaos and bloodshed in the largest land war in Europe since World War II. Our legislation sends a clear message to Putin: your unprovoked, violent invasion comes at an enormous cost. The late-Senator Graham was a champion of this bipartisan legislation, and I’m proud to help move it forward as an original cosponsor,” Grassley said.

“For over four years, the Ukrainian people have shown us what it looks like to fight and die for democracy, for their country, and for the West. Their courage in the face of Vladimir Putin’s war offers the greatest example of how to fight back against authoritarian aggression. Amid Putin’s intransigence at the negotiating table and daily attacks on civilians across Ukraine, Congress must make Russia pay a further price,” said Bennet. “This bill will impose greater pressure on Putin to end his unprovoked war, especially as Ukraine makes progress on the battlefield and as the Russian economy struggles under the weight of U.S. and allied measures. Only by demonstrating our firm resolve can the United States and our allies support Ukraine’s pursuit of a just and durable end to this war and successfully defend the principle of a Europe whole, free, and at peace. Backing Ukraine today will be our best deterrence against authoritarian ambitions tomorrow.”

“Vladimir Putin’s unprovoked war has dragged on for more than four years. As Senator Graham knew well, raising the costs on Russia is the only solution. Our bill will further restrict their energy sales to strangle Putin’s war machine and bring him to the negotiating table. Congress should pass this bill immediately and help finish a war Lindsey fought so hard to end,” said Cotton.

“This measure is a tribute to Senator Graham’s tenacious, bipartisan work in support of Ukraine, and a necessary step to deprive Putin’s war machine of financial resources for its illegal invasion,” said Reed.

“South Carolina lost a statesman, and I lost a friend. Lindsey Graham spent his time in the Senate reminding us that peace is protected by strength, and that America has a responsibility to stand up to dictators who threaten our allies, our interests, and the values we hold dear,” said Tim Scott. “This legislation is a fitting way to honor Lindsey’s legacy: tough, principled, and focused on keeping America safe. Lindsey would be proud to see Republicans and Democrats come together in support of his and the President’s goal to end Moscow’s senseless war in Ukraine.”

“Putin’s war of aggression against Ukraine has gone on long enough, and I believe this legislation is an important step on bringing this bloody, unprovoked conflict to an end,” said King. “This war has already cost hundreds of thousands of lives on both sides unnecessarily, and we believe that this step will finally bring Putin face to face with the reality that he is not going to be successful in subjugating the Ukrainian people.”

“This is a pivotal moment in the Ukrainian people’s fight to protect their freedom. While Ukraine continues to demonstrate impressive resilience and patriotism and real expertise on the battlefield, Russians are becoming increasingly exhausted by Putin’s war, which his own finance officials are telling him he can’t afford,” said Kaine. “This is the perfect time for the United States to bring down the full force of comprehensive sanctions on Russia, and I’m proud to join a bipartisan group of colleagues in putting forward a plan that would do that.”

“Vladimir Putin’s brutal, unprovoked war of aggression against Ukraine must end. As Ukraine makes important gains on the battlefield, now is the time to increase the economic pressure on Russia and those who continue to finance Putin’s war machine,” said Collins. “Senator Lindsey Graham understood the consequences of allowing Putin’s aggression to go unchecked and worked tirelessly to build bipartisan support for this consequential legislation. I am proud to join my colleagues in supporting this bill, which would both honor Lindsey’s legacy and help pressure Putin to bring an end to this horrific war.”

“The fastest way to end this illegal war is to cut off the money that Putin is using to fuel it,” said Kelly. “Stronger sanctions will put pressure on Putin and those helping him. This is a crucial step toward achieving lasting peace that protects Ukraine’s sovereignty and strengthens U.S. national security.”

“As Russia continues its needless bloodshed of innocent people and drags out peace talks, I am proud to join my colleagues in enacting crippling sanctions against them,” said Ernst. “This legislation carries forward the tireless work Senator Graham was doing until his final days and strengthens the fight I’ve led for years against Putin’s shadow fleet, shutting down the network of tankers and shell insurers keeping his oil money flowing and fueling this war.”

“For more than four years, Vladimir Putin has conducted a brutal, unprovoked war against Ukraine in an attempt to take over a sovereign nation. The time is now for the U.S. to increase pressure and do all we can to end this war and send a clear message to Putin that he cannot act with impunity. This is why I’m joining my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to bring forward this critical bipartisan bill to make those who enable Russia’s energy and defense sectors pay a heavy price,” said Rosen.

“Lindsey Graham was clear eyed on Putin and fought for years to build peace through strength,” said Ricketts. “This bill is a small part of his legacy combatting a foreign adversary threatening peace and prosperity for Americans. Sanctioning Putin and his cronies is necessary for undermining their aggression around the world.”

“Senator Graham was unyielding in his support for the Ukrainian people as they fight to defend their sovereignty, and I can think of few ways more fitting to honor him than by finishing what he started and imposing strict sanctions on the bad actors who have supported Russia’s war against Ukraine,” said Cornyn. “I’m proud to join with my colleagues on this bipartisan legislation, which will honor Lindsey’s legacy, help dismantle Putin’s war machine, and strengthen U.S. national security.”

“Standing with the Ukrainian people has been a bipartisan goal of our Congress for more than four years. This bill reaffirms that commitment by enacting the sanctions needed to curtail Russia’s primary source of income and cripple its war effort — the single most important thing the U.S. government can do to end Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine,” said Schiff.

“The surest way to bring about peace through strength and get Putin to the negotiating table is to cut off the money funding his war machine. This bipartisan legislation delivers real consequences for those keeping Russia’s economy afloat. Senator Lindsey Graham spent years leading this fight, and passing this bill will be a fitting tribute to his commitment to American strength and the cause of freedom,” said Sheehy.

“Since I visited Ukraine with Lindsey Graham and John McCain in 2016, Lindsey and I worked together in support of Ukraine’s democracy, meeting with President Zelenskyy multiple times and advocating for the return of Ukrainian children kidnapped by Russia. This legislation will add significant economic pressure on Russia, helping to move us closer to ending this war,” said Klobuchar.

“As long as Vladimir Putin’s war machine is funded by countries willing to buy Russian oil and gas, the war in Ukraine will continue,” said Curtis. “This bipartisan legislation gives a powerful tool to increase pressure on Russia, hold its enablers accountable, and ensure Russia does not win this war.”

“We must hold Russia and its enablers accountable, and stand with Ukraine,” said Fetterman. “This is just and important legislation. I know it will honor our late colleague Senator Lindsey Graham.”

“These strong sanctions, a top priority I shared with my friend and our late colleague Senator Graham, are critically important to weakening Putin’s grip in Ukraine, imposing severe costs on those supporting Russia’s unprovoked war of aggression, and undermining the energy-fueled Russian war machine that threatens our allies,” said Sullivan.

“Ukraine is in the fight of their lives, and this bipartisan announcement is the boost they need to inflict maximum pain on Russia,” said Duckworth. “Our bipartisan bill will rightfully hit foreign buyers of Russian oil with heavy sanctions, cutting Putin off from the money machine funding his unprovoked war of aggression against our ally. Senator Graham knew it and we do too: The United States must remain united with Ukraine, now and always.”

“Ukraine is standing strong against Russian aggression, but the United States must use every tool possible to help secure a lasting peace for the Ukrainian people and the entire region,” said Peters. “Imposing strong sanctions on Russia would send a clear message that the American people will always stand alongside Ukraine against Putin’s invasion.”

“Putin is a murderous KGB thug, and the countries still buying Russian oil and natural gas know they are funding his war against Ukraine. If we cut off Russia’s oil money, we cut off the weapons murdering Ukrainians. Lindsey Graham was an outspoken advocate for the freedom-loving people of Ukraine. Let’s finish what he started and put the pressure on Russia and everyone who bankrolls them,” said Lankford.

“This bill honors Senator Lindsey Graham’s legacy by strengthening pressure on Russia and those who continue to finance Vladimir Putin’s illegal and brutal war against Ukraine, which threatens our own national security and economic interests. I am proud to cosponsor this bipartisan legislation to continue the work that our late friend and colleague fought so hard to advance,” said Hyde-Smith.

“By securing this agreement with the White House to impose sanctions on major purchasers of Russian oil and gas, Senator Graham delivered a powerful tool to hold those who are enabling Putin’s war accountable,” said Blackburn. “This bill will help bring this war to an end.”

“Senator Graham tirelessly worked to impose real consequences on Putin and end Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine. This bipartisan and thoughtfully crafted legislation is a testament to his tremendous leadership,” said Boozman. “I am proud to join my colleagues and send a clear message that Senator Graham’s work will not go unfinished and that Moscow must finally end its unprovoked attack on Ukrainian sovereignty.”

“The Sanctioning Russia Act of 2026 will issue decisive consequences aimed at deterring Russian aggression. This bill sends a clear message: bullies have a price to pay for their actions. Vladimir Putin and Russia must face serious consequences for their destructive and unprovoked war on Ukraine,” said Cramer.

“Russia’s war against Ukraine, which has killed far too many and upended global stability, must come to an end,” said Capito. “This legislation empowers President Trump to cut off the financial flows that enable Putin’s deadly invasion and to impose serious consequences on the countries that are helping finance Russia’s war machine. I’m proud to join my colleagues in honoring Senator Graham’s life by advancing this effort to strengthen America’s national security and give President Trump the economic leverage to secure a lasting peace.”

“For years, Senator Lindsey Graham led the effort to hold Russia accountable for its aggression and support Ukraine’s fight for freedom. This bill honors his legacy by tightening sanctions on the energy exports and financial tools that sustain the Russian war machine. With support from the White House and a bipartisan group of senators, we are sending a clear message to Putin: America stands with Ukraine, and we will continue working to bring this unjust war to a durable end,” said Husted.

“Russia relies on oil and gas revenue to fund its war against Ukraine, and those enabling this aggression should be held accountable,” said Hoeven. “This bipartisan legislation strengthens sanctions to increase pressure on Russia, reduce the resources fueling Putin’s aggression, and help advance a lasting peace. Senator Lindsey Graham dedicated tremendous effort to moving this legislation forward, and Congress should act to pass it.”

“Senator Lindsey Graham was relentless in his quest to hold Vladimir Putin accountable for his unprovoked invasion of Ukraine. Because of his extensive work over the years, we have an opportunity to help bleed Putin’s war machine dry. I thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for taking this necessary action,” said Fischer.

“Senator Graham was one of the most formidable foes America’s enemies ever faced in the United States Senate. He was unapologetic and uncompromising in countering the threat the Russian regime poses to American national security and the safety and security of the American people. I worked alongside my friend for years to counter those malign activities, including through sanctions legislation aimed at depriving Putin’s war machine of the resources it needs to threaten America and our allies. This bipartisan legislation honors Senator Graham’s legacy while advancing the badly needed policies for which he tirelessly advocated. I urge my colleagues to pass it without delay,” said Cruz.

“Lindsey Graham spent his final months fighting to make sure Putin knew America’s fuse hadn’t burned out. Wyoming understands what it means to power the world responsibly, and it’s long past time Russia stopped profiting from war while claiming to seek peace. This bill puts real teeth behind that demand by telling every nation still buying Russian oil that they’re choosing a side, and it puts Putin on notice that the road to any lasting peace runs through economic ruin if he refuses to take it,” said Lummis.

“Russia’s unprovoked and illegal war against the people of Ukraine has left the nation scarred and battered over the last four years, but no less determined to defend its sovereignty,” said Murkowski. “The bipartisan Sanctioning Russia Act honors Senator Graham’s longstanding leadership in foreign affairs by supporting Ukraine while reaffirming America’s commitment to stand with peaceful democracies against the authoritarian regimes that seek to destroy them.”

“The time to increase pressure on Moscow is now. Our overwhelmingly bipartisan sanctions package has the power to cripple Putin’s revenue streams by targeting the energy exports that bankroll Russia’s unjust war machine. Our colleague and friend, Senator Lindsey Graham, worked tirelessly to stand up to Russian aggression, and now we have the opportunity to honor his leadership and cement his legacy,” said Budd.

“This bipartisan legislation would make a difference against Russia’s unjust war in Ukraine and serves as a fitting tribute to the legacy of Senator Lindsey Graham,” said Moran. “America’s continued involvement and leadership throughout the world are critical to deterring Vladimir Putin. This legislation sends a clear message to friends and foes alike: you can do business with Russia, or you can do business with the United States, but you can’t do both. I look forward to voting for the Sanctioning Russia Act and sending it to the President to be signed into law.”

“Imposing stronger sanctions on Russia will ensure America remains strong on the world stage and will help bring an end to Putin’s unjust war against Ukraine. I can think of no better way to cement the legacy of Lindsey Graham, who spent years of his life devoted to this cause and to fighting for freedom across the globe,” said Daines.

The Sanctioning Russia Act would impose primary and secondary sanctions against Russia and actors supporting Russia’s war in Ukraine.

The sanctions target Russian officials, oligarchs, their family members, foreign persons, and Russian banks and financial institutions, as well as the Russian Shadow Fleet.

The legislation also directs the President to impose up to 100 percent tariffs on imported goods from countries that buy the majority of Russian oil, gas, and enable Russian sanctions evasion. The new text limits these tariffs to the five largest importers of Russian crude oil and gas.

A one-pager on the legislation is available here. The text of the bill is available here.

###",1,2026-07-18T06:58:50Z,2026-07-18T07:00:34Z
https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/news/press-releases/alsobrooks-keith-sonderling-is-the-wrong-pick-to-be-labor-sec/,ALSOBROOKS: KEITH SONDERLING IS THE WRONG PICK TO BE LABOR SEC,2026-07-16,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Angela D. Alsobrooks,A000382,www.alsobrooks.senate.gov,alsobrooks,https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/,scraper,"July 16, 2026

WASHINGTON, DC – Today, Senator Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), member of the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP), questioned Keith Sonderling, nominee for Secretary of Labor.

“When we last met and had our last exchange, it was in February, and it was at that time that I asked you a question about whether collective bargaining agreements were legally enforceable. You shared with me that you were unfamiliar with the collective bargaining process, and in fact, went on to say this was basically above your pay grade and outside your area of expertise, and that you would ‘rely on career experts’ to work on those issues. And in the weeks that followed our exchange, I was horrified to see this Administration took successive action and steps to undermine the [collective bargaining agreement]’s and to hurt federal workers, and it started with the Executive Order removing collective bargaining rights for large portions of the federal workforce. It is so disturbing to me and really a horrible twist of fate that we are now faced with your nomination, a person who I have seen aid and abet this President’s protracted campaign against federal workers’ rights,” said Senator Alsobrooks.

###",1,2026-07-17T07:15:58Z,2026-07-17T07:17:05Z
https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/news/press-releases/alsobrooks-russell-vought-has-traumatized-our-civil-servants-and-destroyed-the-consumer-financial-protection-bureau/,ALSOBROOKS: RUSSELL VOUGHT HAS TRAUMATIZED OUR CIVIL SERVANTS AND DESTROYED THE CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU,2026-07-16,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Angela D. Alsobrooks,A000382,www.alsobrooks.senate.gov,alsobrooks,https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/,scraper,"July 16, 2026

WASHINGTON, DC – Today, Senator Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), member of the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, questioned Russell Vought, Acting Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) during the hearing “The CFPB Semi-Annual Report: A New Day at the CFPB Through Reform.”

“The 160,000 federal employees in my state – these are the patriots of our country who have worked for decades. They did not care whether the president is a Democrat or Republican. They are here to serve the American people, and they will not forget how they were treated, and neither will I. In fact, one Marylander who lost his federal job said the following, ‘I can’t tell you how terrifying it is to be a parent of two children faced with the thought that you cannot provide for your family.’ So, I ask you, is that the kind of trauma you were talking about? Did you intend to sow terror for parents who need to provide for their families?” said Senator Alsobrooks.

###",1,2026-07-17T07:15:58Z,2026-07-17T07:17:05Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-pettersen-lead-lawmakers-in-introducing-legislation-to-bring-transparency-to-corporate-abuse-of-tax-havens-job-offshoring,"Van Hollen, Pettersen Lead Lawmakers in Introducing Legislation to Bring Transparency to Corporate Abuse of Tax Havens, Job Offshoring",2026-07-16,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and U.S. Representative Brittany Pettersen (D-Colo.-07) led their colleagues in reintroducing the Disclosure of Tax Havens and Offshoring Act, legislation to provide transparency around corporations’ use of tax havens and incentives to offshore jobs. This bill would require public companies to disclose their financial reporting on a country-by-country basis. Ensuring public access to this information would both provide investors the tools they need to understand the tax structures and risks of the businesses in which they invest and give Americans insight into the extent to which the tax system is incentivizing the outsourcing of American jobs or enabling corporations to dodge U.S. taxes. Senator Van Hollen and Representative Pettersen were joined in introducing this legislation by U.S. Senators Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), and Peter Welch (D-Vt.) and U.S. Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.).

“While working Americans struggle to get by, large corporations continue to ship jobs overseas and take advantage of tax loopholes to hide their profits. This bill will provide critical transparency to both the American public and investors as to how these corporations abuse our broken tax system and the risks they are taking in the use of offshore tax havens. We must stand up for American workers, end incentives for big corporations to offshore jobs, and unrig our broken corporate tax code. Sunlight is the best disinfectant – shining a light on this issue is the first step,” said Senator Van Hollen.

“As everyday families struggle to find jobs and pay for basic necessities, corporations are dodging taxes by shifting profits outside the country and making the rest of us pay. I'm proud to support this legislation that will require companies to disclose foreign operations, and ensure corporations pay into the system here at home,” said Congresswoman Pettersen. “The Disclosure of Tax Havens and Offshoring Act will increase transparency, and make corporations start paying their fair share.”

“For too long, many of the world’s most profitable corporations have taken advantage of foreign tax havens to skirt paying their fair share here in the U.S. And it only became easier when Republicans passed their tax plan, which was chockfull of new incentives for corporations to ship profits and jobs overseas,” said Senator Durbin. “We cannot let this go unnoticed. With the Disclosure of Tax Havens and Offshoring Act, we can finally hold these corporations accountable.”

“It’s wrong that corporations can use their wealth to secretly exploit foreign tax havens while everyday Americans contribute their fair share,” said Senator Whitehouse. “This common-sense legislation would shine a light on the murky world of offshore tax dodging to hold corporations accountable and provide important information to investors.”

“While hardworking American families are paying their fair share, many of the world’s most profitable corporations abuse tax havens to avoid paying the taxes they owe,” said Senator Blumenthal. “This critical legislation ensures necessary transparency for consumers and investors about how corporations are taking advantage of our country’s broken tax system and sending their jobs overseas. The Disclosure of Tax Havens and Offshoring Act makes it easier to hold corporations accountable for tax avoidance.”

“Big companies know how to scheme our tax system and hide their profits – all while hard-working families are playing by the rules and paying their fair share. It’s a sham. We need to right this ship, and it starts with some basic transparency so Americans can see exactly how these wealthy companies are abusing our tax system and shipping their profits and American jobs overseas,” said Senator Baldwin.

“Corporations have long abused offshore loopholes to avoid paying their fair share in taxes and move their profits overseas—and jobs along with it,” said Senator Duckworth. “Consumers deserve to know if the companies they’re buying from are outsourcing American jobs to other countries and dodging American taxes. It’s long past time that we pass our commonsense legislation to help deliver transparency and hold these corporations accountable.”

“Americans should not have to pay while corporations exploit tax loopholes to avoid paying their fair share,” said Senator Smith. “President Trump has made it easier than ever for big corporations to get away with dodging U.S. taxes through foreign tax havens, and American are forced to foot the bill as more jobs and investment move overseas. This bill would hold corporations accountable by requiring them to publicly report tax information on their foreign activities and reveal the extent of their offshore tax avoidance.”

“Our tax law in the United States is totally broken–we have a system where corporations are incentivized to ship profits and good-paying jobs overseas. The American people deserve full transparency about how companies are using these loopholes to avoid paying their fair share of taxes. We’re working to ensure that corporations are held accountable for hiding profits in foreign tax havens,” said Senator Welch.

While the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act established a new global tax framework, it also introduced incentives for large U.S. companies to shift profits and jobs overseas. The One, Big, Beautiful Bill Act largely preserved those incentives. New research shows that in 2025, large corporations reduced their tax liability by more than $11 billion through the use of tax havens. Firms continue to benefit from shifting profits because they can pool income and foreign taxes across affiliates in both high- and low-tax countries, while foreign income remains subject to a significantly lower U.S. tax rate than domestic income.

The Disclosure of Tax Havens and Offshoring Act would ensure there is more transparency in these tax practices by requiring large corporations to disclose basic information on each of their subsidiaries, and country-by-country financial information that sums together all of their subsidiaries in each country – including profits, taxes, employees, and tangible assets.

All of this information is already reported to the Internal Revenue Service, under an international Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development framework, but this legislation would ensure public disclosure to provide data on how international tax laws are working and where corporations are locating their business activities and taxes. Thus, when a corporation sends jobs overseas, their country-by-country financial report would show the extent to which the U.S. tax system is rewarding their behavior.

“Billionaires and large corporations continue to rake in record profits while exploiting tax loopholes to avoid paying their fair share in U.S. taxes,” said AFSCME President Lee Saunders. “Many of these companies are moving jobs overseas to benefit their bottom line, while draining resources from the communities they leave behind. The Disclosure of Tax Havens and Offshoring Act would ensure long overdue transparency for these large corporations that are offshoring jobs and profits to avoid paying U.S. taxes. It is unacceptable that while working people pay our taxes, many of the most profitable corporations pay little or nothing in taxes. Corporate tax avoidance means less funding for the services people need to go to work—like health care, child care, and public transportation. We thank Sen. Van Hollen and his colleagues for introducing this legislation to shine a light on corporations who are moving jobs overseas to avoid taxes, and we urge Congress to act swiftly to pass it.”

Robert Weissman, co-president, Public Citizen, said “Corporations mock their duty to pay taxes by pretending that that they earned their profits in tax haven countries, depriving the government of tax revenue for urgent priorities like healthcare, education and addressing the climate crisis -- and making suckers of those of us who do pay our taxes, fair and square. Sen. Van Hollen and Rep. Pettersen’s Disclosure of Tax Havens and Offshoring Act would simply use the sunlight of disclosure to disinfect this dirty corporate practice. Every member should support this commonsense measure.”

“We applaud Senator Van Hollen and Representative Pettersen for leading this vital legislation to pull back the curtain of tax secrecy and strengthen our tax system,” said Zorka Milin, policy director at the FACT Coalition. “Recent accounting disclosures have provided fresh evidence of widespread tax haven use among the nation's largest and most profitable companies. Increased transparency is essential to creating a fairer corporate tax system that raises needed revenue and protects American manufacturing and jobs from offshoring.""

“The Trump administration's regrettable choice to end cooperation with the OECD's global minimum tax makes it all the more important for the U.S. to require detailed tax disclosures. The Disclosure of Tax Havens and Offshoring Act would pull back the curtain on the rampant offshoring our most profitable corporations are currently engaged in,” said Matthew Gardner, Senior Fellow, Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.

This legislation is supported by the Financial Accountability & Corporate Transparency (FACT) Coalition, Public Citizen, Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy, and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME).",1,2026-07-17T07:15:58Z,2026-07-17T07:17:05Z
https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/news/press-releases/alsobrooks-votes-to-advance-water-resources-development-act-of-2026/,ALSOBROOKS VOTES TO ADVANCE WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2026,2026-07-15,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Angela D. Alsobrooks,A000382,www.alsobrooks.senate.gov,alsobrooks,https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/,scraper,"July 15, 2026

WASHINGTON, DC – Today, Senator Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Ranking Member of the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works’ (EPW) Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee, attended the EPW’s Committee markup of the Water Resources Development Act of 2026. After the markup, Senator Alsobrooks voted “yes” along with Committee colleagues to unanimously advance the Water Resources Development Act of 2026.

WATCH ALSOBROOKS’ FULL QUESTIONING HERE

“Every family, every business, every school, and every community depends on safe, abundant, reliable water—and on the partnerships that cross municipal lines and unite rural and urban communities to manage flood risk and harness the economic opportunities afforded to us by our waterways. In Maryland—whether you’re from the Eastern Shore or Mountain Maryland, Baltimore or the suburbs, we are all connected by the same rivers, the same streams, and the Chesapeake Bay,” said Senator Alsobrooks.

Senator Alsobrooks is proud of the real results for Maryland included in this legislation:

Environmental Infrastructure Implementation

Amends Section 219, which authorizes the Army Corps to assist non-federal partners with local environmental infrastructure and water-related projects, to allow non-federal interests to lead design and construction and receive reimbursement for the federal share of costs, which will streamline implementation and lower costs.

Potomac River Basin Water Supply Study

Much of Montgomery County, Prince George’s County, Washington, DC, and parts of Northern Virginia rely on the Potomac River for drinking water. If the river were contaminated by a chemical spill, major infrastructure failure, or other emergency, there is only a limited amount of stored treated water available. The Army Corps has noted that some systems have only 24 to 48 hours of supply if the Potomac became unusable. This study will evaluate long-term and large-scale secondary water supply options in the Potomac River Basin, primarily for Montgomery County, Prince George’s County, and DC.

Assateague Island Shoreline Restoration

Assateague Island has been eroding at an accelerated rate and is extremely vulnerable to breaching. This bill authorizes a study to extend federal participation in the shoreline restoration project.

Chesapeake Bay Oyster Recovery Program Authorization Increase

The Chesapeake Bay Oyster Recovery Program focuses on the restoration and rehabilitation of reef habitat to provide for self-sustaining native oyster populations and associated fish and wildlife habitat within the Chesapeake Bay watershed. The program is roughly $38M away from its authorized cap of $120M. The bill increases authorized funds for the oyster recovery program from $120,000,000 to $150,000,000, allowing for critical oyster recovery work to continue.

Chesapeake & Ohio Canal Re-Watering Cost Share Adjustment

Under previous WRDA authorities, the federal government is responsible for 65 percent of project costs, and the City of Cumberland is responsible for 35 percent of the project costs. This high cost ratio is overly burdensome for Cumberland’s budget, and work is currently halted for the project. The cost share for the C&O re-watering project is adjusted from 65-35 to 90-10, allowing the Corps and Cumberland to begin to move forward with the project. The project will restore and rewater the historic C&O Canal terminus, supporting downtown revitalization, tourism, and economic development while complementing Cumberland’s broader flood risk management efforts.

Mussel Restoration Authorization

Adds mussels to the Chesapeake Bay Oyster Recovery Program, allowing Maryland to continue its mussel restoration work.

Curtis Creek Maintenance

The Curtis Creek Federal Navigation Channel serves the U.S. Coast Guard Yard in Baltimore, the Coast Guard’s only shipbuilding and major repair facility. The existing federal maintenance dredging authorization is limited to a depth of 22 feet, which no longer reflects the operational needs of the modern Coast Guard fleet. The Coast Guard is currently funding and completing an initial dredging of the channel to accommodate newer vessels. However, once that work is complete, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will only be authorized to maintain the channel at its currently authorized depth of 22 feet. This bill fixes that and allows the Corps to dredge to maintain a depth of 27 feet, provided the Corps determines that it is economically justified, important for national security benefits, and environmentally acceptable. Maintaining reliable access to the Yard is not just critical for our national security, but it is also important to Maryland’s economy. The Yard supports more than 6,500 jobs and generates approximately $900 million in annual economic output. Ensuring the channel can continue accommodating modern Coast Guard vessels protects these jobs, sustains Maryland’s maritime industrial base, and preserves the Yard’s long-term operational capability.

###",1,2026-07-16T07:21:44Z,2026-07-16T07:23:13Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-lujan-beyer-schrier-van-drew-reintroduce-bipartisan-bicameral-legislation-to-help-reduce-medical-misdiagnosis,"Van Hollen, Luján, Beyer, Schrier, Van Drew Reintroduce Bipartisan, Bicameral Legislation to Help Reduce Medical Misdiagnosis",2026-07-15,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) and U.S. Representatives Don Beyer (D-Va.), Kim Schrier (D-Wash), and Jeff Van Drew (R-N.J.) announced their reintroduction of the Saving Lives and Reducing Health Care Waste by Improving Diagnosis in Medicine Act – bipartisan, bicameral legislation to address the alarming rate of medical diagnostic error in our country. The lawmakers’ legislation aims to prevent and mitigate the devastating impacts these errors can have, including misdiagnosis, delayed diagnosis, permanent disability, and death. Recent research published in March 2025 estimates that across health care settings, over 900,000 Americans a year suffer permanent disability or death because of diagnostic error. These findings build on a 2015 report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine that concluded most people will experience at least one diagnostic error in their lifetime, and it’s estimated that 80% of all harm caused by diagnostic error is preventable.

This legislation would create an Interagency Council on Improving Diagnosis in Health Care, as well as a new grant program for the establishment and maintenance of Research Centers of Diagnostic Excellence – such as the Armstrong Institute Center for Diagnostic Excellence at Johns Hopkins – that advance research and progress in diagnostic quality, safety, and health care value.

“Far too many Americans have experienced the loss, pain, and hardship that come with a misdiagnosed medical condition – and for many, these errors cause permanent disability or death. Medical diagnostic errors not only impact patients’ lives – they also cost patients and our nation billions of dollars each year. This legislation will invest in efforts to prevent and reduce diagnostic errors, giving medical experts, patients, and their families the research and resources they need to better treat patients and save lives,” said Senator Van Hollen.

“Every year, millions of Americans suffer the consequences of diagnostic errors, costing lives and burdening patients and our health care system with billions of dollars in avoidable costs. Every patient deserves an accurate diagnosis delivered in time to make a difference,” said Senator Luján. “That's why I'm joining my colleagues in reintroducing the Improving Diagnosis in Medicine Act to advance research and improve diagnostic quality and safety. No one should lose their life to a mistake we have the power to prevent.”

“Diagnostic delays affect millions of Americans, drive up health care costs, and contribute to thousands of preventable deaths each year – but it doesn’t have to be this way. Our bill invests in better data collection, stronger research, and sharing of best practices to improve diagnostic accuracy, deliver better outcomes for patients, and reduce health disparities. It also establishes Research Centers of Diagnostic Excellence to advance research, helps bring proven methods for preventing misdiagnosis into everyday clinical practice, and gives patients pathways to report delays and contribute to a growing body of data to inform policymaking. I thank Senators Van Hollen and Luján and Representatives Schrier and Van Drew for their leadership on this legislation, and will continue to work with colleagues to build support for it in the House,” said Representative Beyer.

“Getting the right diagnosis at the right time can make the difference between life and death,” said Representative Van Drew. “Too many patients are suffering because of preventable mistakes that should never happen. This bipartisan bill focuses on improving the way we diagnose illnesses, giving doctors better tools and helping patients get the care they need sooner.”

Diagnostic errors stem from a wide variety of causes, including failure to provide an accurate or timely diagnosis; inadequate communication between providers, patients, and their families; a lack of information for patients on navigating the diagnostic process; and a system that discourages transparency and disclosure of diagnostic errors, which impedes attempts to learn from these events and improve diagnosis. The National Academies study concluded that: “Despite the pervasiveness of diagnostic errors and the risk for serious patient harm, diagnostic errors have been largely unappreciated within the quality and patient safety movements in health care.”

The Saving Lives and Reducing Health Care Waste by Improving Diagnosis in Medicine Act would:

Authorize a federal grant program for the establishment and maintenance of Research Centers of Diagnostic Excellence that advance research and progress in diagnostic quality, safety, and value in health care

Require the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality to develop a strategic plan to modernize federal approaches and mechanisms to enable patients and their families to voluntarily report experiences of diagnostic error

Establish an Interagency Council on Improving Diagnosis in Health Care to:

Enhance the quality, appropriateness, and effectiveness of diagnosis in health care;

Identify and eliminate systemic barriers to supporting research in improving diagnosis in health care; and

Identify knowledge gaps, research and data needs, and policies to strengthen the clinical and translational research pipeline to improve diagnostic safety and quality

The text of the bill is available here.

This legislation is endorsed by Patients for Patient Safety US, the Armstrong Institute Center for Diagnostic Excellence, and Physician-Parent Caregivers.

""Diagnostic errors are the most common, the most costly, and the most catastrophic of serious medical errors. Diagnostic errors stem from a wide variety of causes, including inadequate communication between providers, patients, and their families; the absence of metrics to gauge performance, limited feedback to clinicians, and system failures, like lost test-results which happened in my family"", said Sue Sheridan, President and CEO of Patients For Patient Safety US. ""Much of the research to date has focused on defining the magnitude of the problem. This legislation moves us toward identifying solutions to equip clinicians, patients and their families with the tools needed to arrive at the right diagnosis timely. It will save lives. PFPS US commends Senators Van Hollen and Lujan, and Representatives Beyer, Schrier, and VanDrew for their leadership and willingness to take on difficult healthcare issues that others often overlook. We look forward to this bill moving through the legislative process and into law”.

“Senator Van Hollen and Representatives Beyer, Dr. Schrier, and Van Drew should be warmly applauded by patients and clinicians everywhere for taking up the call"", said David Newman-Toker, MD, Ph.D, Professor of Neurology and Director of the Armstrong Institute Center for Diagnostic Excellence at Johns Hopkins. ""Accurate diagnosis is a prerequisite for quality healthcare —put simply, it’s hard to apply the right treatment if you start out with the wrong diagnosis. Furthermore, failure to accurately diagnose is a major driver of excess healthcare costs. But diagnosis is also one of the most complex tasks in modern medicine; until we have a larger body of research that supports data-driven, reliable improvement strategies that are ‘shovel ready,’ our clinicians and healthcare system will be left struggling. There is much work yet to be done by all healthcare stakeholders to move this life-saving research forward.”",1,2026-07-16T07:21:44Z,2026-07-16T07:23:13Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-joins-murphy-colleagues-in-introducing-bill-to-block-trump-from-taking-qatari-jet-with-him-when-he-leaves-office,"Van Hollen Joins Murphy, Colleagues in Introducing Bill to Block Trump from Taking Qatari Jet with Him When He Leaves Office",2026-07-15,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), and Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), in introducing legislation to block President Trump from taking the luxury jumbo jet gifted by the Qatari government with him for his own personal use after he leaves office. The Luxury Jet Ethics and Transparency Act would bar Trump from transferring the jet away from the U.S. Air Force to his personal control – in line with the brazenly corrupt plan he, his administration, and his family cling to. The bill would also require an independent GAO review of the cost of the jet’s retrofit and the potential conflicts of interest and national security impacts of the president accepting a $400 million plane from a foreign country.

“We cannot allow this brazen corruption to stand. American foreign policy decisions must be made based on the interests of our national security – not based on the highest bidder. Since the President wouldn’t reject the gift of a $400 million luxury jet, Congress must step in and prohibit Trump from transferring the jet away from the U.S. Air Force to his own personal control,” said Senator Van Hollen.

“It’s hard to decide what’s worse: accepting a $400 million bribe from a foreign government or spending a billion dollars in American taxpayer money to put gold plating on that bribe,” said Senator Murphy. “For Donald Trump, it’s not enough to sell our national security to enrich himself. He also has to steal from American taxpayers.”

“Jumbo jet, jumbo corruption,” said Senator Markey. “So let’s 86 this 747 transfer to Trump after he leaves office, and pass the Luxury Jet Ethics and Transparency Act.”

""This President and his family are the most corrupt we’ve ever seen in the White House. And we know he will be corrupt as the day is long—planes, pardons, falsifying business records, and the list goes on. It is my responsibility, and the responsibility of Congress, to bar this President from transferring his new Qatari jet from the U.S. Air Force to his personal control. We need to take every possible step to stop this President from his own corruption. Our country deserves better,"" said Senator Alsobrooks.

“We cannot allow this brazen corruption to stand. American foreign policy decisions must be made based on the interests of our national security – not based on the highest bidder. Since the President wouldn’t reject the gift of a $400 million luxury jet, Congress must step in and prohibit Trump from transferring the jet away from the U.S. Air Force to his own personal control,” said Senator Van Hollen.

“Donald Trump has repeatedly used the Presidency to enrich himself and leave taxpayers with the bill—and it has to stop,” said Senator Duckworth. “Accepting a foreign jet was a mistake from the start and a tremendous waste of resources. Trump burned through nearly half a billion taxpayer dollars, only to partially retrofit his Qatari-gifted 747 that is still less safe than the old Air Force One. Taxpayers deserve a guarantee that their money didn’t just go toward bankrolling needless upgrades for yet another private jet in this Grifter-in-Chief’s personal collection.”

“Donald Trump and his regime are defined by rampant corruption, treating the presidency as a get-rich-quick scheme at the expense of the American people. Trump never should have been able to accept a $400 million gift from another country. Under no circumstances should he be able to keep a luxury jet, whose upgrades and retrofitting cost millions of taxpayer dollars, for his personal use. This common-sense legislation will ensure he cannot,” said Senator Hirono.

“President Trump continues to sell access and influence to the highest bidders. Without action, we stamp a Congressional seal of approval on this corruption,” said Senator Merkley. “We need the Luxury Jet Ethics and Transparency Act because Americans deserve answers and accountability for the Trump Administration’s misuse of taxpayer funds for Trump’s luxury jumbo jet.”

This month, Senators Van Hollen and Murphy sent a letter to the Secretary of the U.S. Air Force and a key government contractor to demand basic details about the Qatari jet’s costs to taxpayers, national security risks, and the questionable process the Trump administration pursued to upgrade the plane.",1,2026-08-05T07:37:37Z,2026-08-05T07:38:44Z
https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/news/press-releases/alsobrooks-joins-epw-committee-leadership-in-introducing-the-water-resources-development-act-of-2026/,ALSOBROOKS JOINS EPW COMMITTEE LEADERSHIP IN INTRODUCING THE WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2026,2026-07-14,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Angela D. Alsobrooks,A000382,www.alsobrooks.senate.gov,alsobrooks,https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/,scraper,"July 14, 2026

WASHINGTON, DC – Senator Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Ranking Member of the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee, joined U.S. Senators Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), Chairman of the EPW Committee, Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Ranking Member of the EPW Committee, Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), Chairman of the EPW Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee, and Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Ranking Member of the EPW Fisheries, Water, and Wildlife Subcommittee in introducing the bipartisan Water Resources Development Act of 2026 (WRDA 2026).

The Water Resources Development Act is biennial legislation that authorizes flood risk management, navigation, and ecosystem restoration projects for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). WRDA 2026 also reauthorizes the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) drinking water and wastewater infrastructure programs, including the State Revolving Funds (SRFs).

Senator Alsobrooks is proud of the real results for Maryland included in this legislation:

Environmental Infrastructure Implementation

Amends Section 219, which authorizes the Army Corps to assist non-federal partners with local environmental infrastructure and water-related projects, to allow non-federal interests to lead design and construction and receive reimbursement for the federal share of costs, which will streamline implementation and lower costs.

Potomac River Basin Water Supply Study

Much of Montgomery County, Prince George’s County, Washington, DC, and parts of Northern Virginia rely on the Potomac River for drinking water. If the river were contaminated by a chemical spill, major infrastructure failure, or other emergency, there is only a limited amount of stored treated water available. The Army Corps has noted that some systems have only 24 to 48 hours of supply if the Potomac became unusable. This study will evaluate long-term and large-scale secondary water supply options in the Potomac River Basin, primarily for Montgomery County, Prince George’s County, and DC.

Assateague Island Shoreline Restoration

Assateague Island has been eroding at an accelerated rate and is extremely vulnerable to breaching. This bill authorizes a study to extend federal participation in the shoreline restoration project.

Chesapeake Bay Oyster Recovery Program Authorization Increase

The Chesapeake Bay Oyster Recovery Program focuses on the restoration and rehabilitation of reef habitat to provide for self-sustaining native oyster populations and associated fish and wildlife habitat within the Chesapeake Bay watershed. The program is roughly $38M away from its authorized cap of $120M. The bill increases authorized funds for the oyster recovery program from $120,000,000 to $150,000,000, allowing for critical oyster recovery work to continue.

Chesapeake & Ohio Canal Re-Watering Cost Share Adjustment

Under previous WRDA authorities, the federal government is responsible for 65 percent of project costs, and the City of Cumberland is responsible for 35 percent of the project costs. This high cost ratio is overly burdensome for Cumberland’s budget, and work is currently halted for the project. The cost share for the C&O re-watering project is adjusted from 65-35 to 90-10, allowing the Corps and Cumberland to begin to move forward with the project. The project will restore and rewater the historic C&O Canal terminus, supporting downtown revitalization, tourism, and economic development while complementing Cumberland’s broader flood risk management efforts.

Mussel Restoration Authorization

Adds mussels to the Chesapeake Bay Oyster Recovery Program, allowing Maryland to continue its mussel restoration work.

“As Ranking Member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee, I am so proud of this bipartisan effort and the commitment we’ve had to advancing this critical legislation. I’m especially proud to have fought for provisions that deliver real results for Maryland—from increasing the federal cost share for the Cumberland flood risk management project to extending federal participation in the Assateague Island Shoreline Restoration and authorizing a funding increase for the Chesapeake Bay Oyster Recovery Program. We’re working together to modernize our infrastructure, protect our habitats, accomplish our environmental goals, and support communities across the country and Maryland. That is worth celebrating,” said Senator Alsobrooks.

“The Army Corps of Engineers conducts essential work to modernize water resources infrastructure, manage risk from floods and coastal storms, and improve navigation along our waterways and at Ports. This work protects lives and property, and bolsters our economy. As Chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, I am proud to have led this bipartisan effort in crafting WRDA 2026, which will provide the Army Corps with the resources it needs to continue its critical work nationwide. WRDA 2026 will also help provide West Virginia with vital funds to address our water infrastructure needs. This bill includes key wins for West Virginia and all fifty states. I hope to see it move forward with strong bipartisan support during Wednesday’s business meeting,” said Chairman Capito.

“Our markup to advance this significant package of legislation demonstrates a bipartisan commitment to maintaining and upgrading the nation’s water infrastructure. The Ocean State stands to benefit much from this bill, which supports investments in safe drinking water and wastewater systems as well as flood risk management, ecosystem restoration, and navigation,” said Ranking Member Whitehouse.

“Under both Republican and Democrat leadership, members of the Environment and Public Works Committee have worked together to pass a bipartisan Water Resources Development Act every two years through regular order. This year’s WRDA is a testament to the continued cooperation of the committee, especially the leadership of Chairman Capito and Ranking Member Whitehouse. The bill delivers wins for communities across North Dakota and the nation by authorizing critical water infrastructure programs, advancing efforts to streamline project delivery, and pursuing key regulatory reforms. I look forward to working with my colleagues to get this done,” said Senator Cramer.

“Our bipartisan legislation will provide critical resources to address water supply, conservation and development, advance resilient water infrastructure, and deliver clean drinking water to millions of Americans. In California, these investments will lower rising water bills, provide necessary flood protection, and modernize aging infrastructure to ensure reliable access to safe drinking water,” said Senator Schiff.

The bill text is availablehere.

A section-by-section overview of the bill is available here.

###",1,2026-07-15T07:12:08Z,2026-07-15T07:13:45Z
https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/news/press-releases/alsobrooks-to-vote-no-on-advancing-2027-ndaa/,ALSOBROOKS TO VOTE NO ON ADVANCING 2027 NDAA,2026-07-14,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Angela D. Alsobrooks,A000382,www.alsobrooks.senate.gov,alsobrooks,https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/,scraper,"July 14, 2026

WASHINGTON, DC – Senator Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.) released the following statement ahead of voting “No” on the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to the Fiscal Year 2027 National Defense Authorization Act.

“Maryland is home to thousands of servicemembers, veterans, and civilians who work every day to protect our nation’s national security. I am proud of the wins I secured in this legislation for them and their service to this nation. However, I cannot overlook that this bill authorizes over $1 trillion, which will continue to enable this President to take America deeper into a war with Iran that Congress has voted in a bipartisan and bicameral way to end. This war continues to rage on against the will of Congress and the American People. It remains clear this President has no plan to get us out of this war. All the while, hardworking Americans are paying for it at the gas pump and at their grocery stores.

“I am voting no on the National Defense Authorization Act today. War is always paid for by hardworking Americans. We cannot afford this.”

###",1,2026-07-15T07:12:08Z,2026-07-15T07:13:45Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/maryland-democrats-urge-omb-to-rescind-rule-politicizing-federal-grant-decision-making,Maryland Democrats Urge OMB to Rescind Rule Politicizing Federal Grant Decision-Making,2026-07-14,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Maryland Congressional Delegation members – U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen and Angela Alsobrooks and U.S. Representatives Steny Hoyer, Kweisi Mfume, Jamie Raskin, Glenn Ivey, Sarah Elfreth, April McClain Delaney, and Johnny Olszewski (all D-Md.) – are calling out the Trump Administration’s attempts to undermine and politicize the federal grant-making process. In a letter to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Russell Vought, the lawmakers press OMB to rescind a new proposed rule that would overhaul the grantmaking and cooperative agreement processes across the entire federal government, centralizing power within OMB, reducing transparency and accountability, undermining Congress, and clearing the path for the Trump Administration to continue weaponizing and politicizing the federal grantmaking process.

“We write to express strong opposition to the Office of Management and Budget’s sweeping proposed “Regulation for Federal Financial Assistance” rule that would completely overhaul and politicize the grantmaking and cooperative agreement processes across the entire federal government,” the lawmakers begin.

They go on to stress the importance of federal grants, noting, “Across the state, federal investment supports research into our ocean and waterways as well as our air, crops, livestock and soil. Federal grants support advancements in health and medicine including research into the treatment of diseases such as pediatric cancer and sickle cell disease and drive the development of new technologies that will keep Americans healthy. Grant-funded childcare through Head Start and Early Head Start serves families from the Eastern Shore to Garrett County. These dollars power cutting-edge developments in space technology, satellites, AI, and quantum computing. Federal funds also allow organizations to support victims of sexual assault, violence, and other crimes. The proposed Regulation for Federal Financial Assistance represents a threat to every one of those efforts to better American lives, strengthen our economy, and keep our country competitive.”

On the proposed rule, the lawmakers write, “In reality, if finalized, this more than 400-page rule will make significant, sweeping, and binding policy changes to the Uniform Guidance across more than 40 federal grant-making agencies and offices responsible for awarding billions of dollars in funding and federal financial assistance each fiscal year. It would codify the Trump Administration’s campaign to eviscerate our research infrastructure and authorize more arbitrary cancellations, job losses due to funding uncertainty, and disruptions of work that require consistent data collection to maintain scientific validity.”

“This rule would further centralize power within OMB giving it authority over the heads of dozens of federal agencies as well as merit-based processes in matters of grantmaking and cooperative agreements. In doing so, this rule would place layers of bureaucratic and political red tape between elected representatives who are Constitutionally-responsible for appropriations, the federal agencies whose resources support our state and help drive our local economies, and Marylanders who rely on grants to support valuable research and services,” they continue.

The lawmakers detail the impact of federal grants on Maryland, noting, “Since the beginning of the President’s term, the Administration and OMB’s intentional delay in spending appropriated funds, grant terminations and disruptions, and overall fewer federal grants being awarded has impacted billions of dollars in federal funding to Maryland, including our state and local governments, schools, and research institutions. As a result, hundreds of our constituents have lost their jobs, Maryland research institutions and universities are undergoing hiring freezes and layoffs, and graduate and post-doctoral programs have been forced to cut or limit admissions–all which threaten to stifle U.S. leadership and innovation for decades to come.”

“The people of Maryland and the United States deserve actual transparency, reliability, and accountability from our federal government, not arbitrary rules and political interference from OMB that would weaken our scientific and research enterprise, risk more jobs, and slow down hard-won progress. We urge you to rescind this proposed rule immediately,” the lawmakers conclude.

The full text of the letter is available here and below.

Dear Director Vought:

We write to express strong opposition to the Office of Management and Budget’s sweeping proposed “Regulation for Federal Financial Assistance” rule that would completely overhaul and politicize the grantmaking and cooperative agreement processes across the entire federal government.

Year after year, Maryland turns federal investment into public goods with national and global benefits. Across the state, federal investment supports research into our ocean and waterways as well as our air, crops, livestock and soil. Federal grants support advancements in health and medicine including research into the treatment of diseases such as pediatric cancer and sickle cell disease and drive the development of new technologies that will keep Americans healthy. Grant- funded childcare through Head Start and Early Head Start serves families from the Eastern Shore to Garrett County. These dollars power cutting-edge developments in space technology, satellites, AI, and quantum computing. Federal funds also allow organizations to support victims of sexual assault, violence, and other crimes. The proposed Regulation for Federal Financial Assistance represents a threat to every one of those efforts to better American lives, strengthen our economy, and keep our country competitive. We urge you to immediately rescind this proposed rule that will further risk evidence-based science, research, and innovation in Maryland and across the United States.

On Friday, May 29, 2026, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), in conjunction with federal grant-making agencies, published a proposed rule in the federal register with the stated intent to “improve and clarify government-wide policies and requirements related to the management of Federal financial assistance including grants and cooperative agreements.” The purported objectives of the proposed rule include: improving transparency, accountability, and oversight of federal funds; reducing recipient burden; and clarifying 2 C.F.R regulatory text– commonly referred to as the “Uniform Guidance”– as an OMB regulation.

In reality, if finalized, this more than 400-page rule will make significant, sweeping, and binding policy changes to the Uniform Guidance across more than 40 federal grant-making agencies and offices responsible for awarding billions of dollars in funding and federal financial assistance each fiscal year. It would codify the Trump Administration’s campaign to eviscerate our research infrastructure and authorize more arbitrary cancellations, job losses due to funding uncertainty, and disruptions of work that require consistent data collection to maintain scientific validity.

This rule would further centralize power within OMB giving it authority over the heads of dozens of federal agencies as well as merit-based processes in matters of grantmaking and cooperative agreements. In doing so, this rule would place layers of bureaucratic and political red tape between elected representatives who are Constitutionally-responsible for appropriations, the federal agencies whose resources support our state and help drive our local economies, and Marylanders who rely on grants to support valuable research and services.

The federal grantmaking process includes essential, non-political guardrails that this rule seeks to eviscerate. Should it be finalized, OMB would have the legal authority to cancel any grant at any time simply because it no longer aligns with “federal agency priorities.” In almost all circumstances, Maryland grant recipients would not be able to appeal that decision or have a neutral party, such as a judge, review it. Just last year, legal action helped restore millions of dollars in wrongfully cancelled funding by the Trump Administration for AmeriCorps, mental health services, and biomedical research, among others. This proposed rule would make such cancellations easier. Without the ability to appeal or contest an arbitrary cancellation, grant- supported research including clinical trials and jobs can end with the stroke of a pen. Allowing political appointees to have the final say, rather than merit-based processes or Congress’s decision to fund programs, does not advance the stated goals of transparency or accountability.

Further, the rule contains a tangle of undefined new standards that would not clarify regulations. Federal regulations must be sufficiently clear to allow recipients to understand and comply with their obligations in good faith. This proposed rule introduces new criteria for evaluating grants such as adherence to “gold standard science,” whether they “promote anti-American values,” or specific consideration for, “a history of questionable practices,” like “affiliation with a group that has undermined public safety” but does not provide meaningful definitions for these new standards. Grantees must even ensure that all subrecipients do not, “take actions that could significantly damage the reputation of the pass-through entity, the Federal agency making the award, or the Federal Government.” The rule does make clear, however, that non-compliance with any of the new vague and underdefined standards can result in immediate termination of support.

Beyond the arbitrary standards that are ripe for abuse, this proposed rule seeks to prohibit freedom of association, speech, and the international collaboration that has made Maryland a leader not only in our region, but in the world. This regulation would bar researchers from using federal funds to publish the research they undertake with our collective resources and would prohibit researchers from attending professional conferences without pre-approval from the federal government. This rule would also presumptively prohibit many international collaborations and further restrict any scientific engagement with foreign entities. Fields from biomedical research to space science regularly put Marylanders in the position of leading work with teams of scientists and engineers in other countries. While security safeguards are always important, this rule would not strengthen them, but in practice, will limit freedom, research, and collaboration in the name of security.

Of course, this proposal does not come in a vacuum; it is being offered in the midst of illegal attacks, uncertainty, and gutting of the entire U.S. scientific and research enterprise by the Trump Administration. We are facing the consequences of these actions in real time. In fiscal year 2025 alone, the Trump Administration indiscriminately terminated thousands of NIH grants and disrupted more than 300 clinical trials, putting thousands of patients including children at risk. Recent reports suggest hundreds of NIH grants are actively being delayed because of the Administration’s unprecedented politicalization of the NIH grant review process–and as a result, Maryland-specific NIH competitive awards have decreased by 33% in fiscal year 2026 compared to prior years.

Since the beginning of the President’s term, the Administration and OMB’s intentional delay in spending appropriated funds, grant terminations and disruptions, and overall fewer federal grants being awarded has impacted billions of dollars in federal funding to Maryland, including our state and local governments, schools, and research institutions. As a result, hundreds of our constituents have lost their jobs, Maryland research institutions and universities are undergoing hiring freezes and layoffs, and graduate and post-doctoral programs have been forced to cut or limit admissions– all which threaten to stifle U.S. leadership and innovation for decades to come.

The people of Maryland and the United States deserve actual transparency, reliability, and accountability from our federal government, not arbitrary rules and political interference from OMB that would weaken our scientific and research enterprise, risk more jobs, and slow down hard-won progress. We urge you to rescind this proposed rule immediately.",1,2026-07-15T07:12:08Z,2026-07-15T07:13:45Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-alsobrooks-highlight-2-million-in-federal-funding-to-support-veteran-owned-small-businesses,"Van Hollen, Alsobrooks Highlight $2 Million in Federal Funding to Support Veteran-Owned Small Businesses",2026-07-14,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen and Angela Alsobrooks (both D-Md.) joined the Veteran Institute for Procurement (VIP) at their annual INTERNATIONAL training program to present the organization and leaders from the Montgomery County Chamber Community Foundation (MCCCF) with a $2,000,000 federal investment to expand VIP and provide more resources to veteran-owned small businesses in Maryland and across the country. The Senators fought to secure this investment in Fiscal Year 2026 appropriations.

“We can never fully repay our veterans for their sacrifice in serving our country. But we have a duty to support them when they return home – and that includes ensuring they have every opportunity to succeed. That’s why we fought to secure this $2 million in federal funds to build on our investments over the years and continue expanding the Veteran Institute for Procurement’s small-business and workforce training programs. I’ve been proud to partner with VIP to support their critical work over the years, and with these funds, the Montgomery County Chamber Community Foundation and VIP will continue to support veteran entrepreneurs and help veteran-owned small businesses continue to grow,” said U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen, a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee.

“We have an obligation to do more than say thank you to those who served our country. We must ensure veterans have the health care they need, housing that is affordable and safe, and opportunities to generate wealth and truly thrive. I am proud to have partnered with Senator Van Hollen to secure $2 million to support veteran-owned businesses and veteran entrepreneurs. Small businesses are the backbone of Maryland and our nation. Veteran-owned small businesses help fuel our economy while supporting those who served,” said Senator Angela Alsobrooks.

VIP delivers training programs that support small businesses owned by veterans – including those with service-connected disabilities – and help them secure federal small business contracts, pursue entrepreneurship, and invest in their workforces. It has served more than 3,600 veteran-owned businesses across all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, and American Samoa. VIP graduates have secured over $50 billion in prime federal contracts and $15 billion in subcontract awards to date.

“Veteran-owned small businesses in Maryland play a vital role in creating jobs and strengthening communities, while also contributing to the national economy,” said Barbara Ashe, National Director of the Veteran Institute for Procurement and President of the Montgomery County Chamber Community Foundation. “With the support of Senators Van Hollen and Alsobrooks, this funding enables us to help more Veteran entrepreneurs build sustainable companies that fuel economic growth locally and well beyond our state.”

Senator Van Hollen has a long history of supporting VIP, including supporting the organization’s national expansion in 2011, securing $2 million in Congressionally Directed Spending in FY 2023, and supporting investments from the Small Business Administration to VIP.",1,2026-07-15T07:12:08Z,2026-07-15T07:13:45Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-joins-markey-garcia-fitzpatrick-in-reintroducing-legislation-to-strengthen-supports-for-airport-service-workers,"Van Hollen Joins Markey, García, Fitzpatrick in Reintroducing Legislation to Strengthen Supports for Airport Service Workers",2026-07-14,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Senator Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and and Representatives Chuy García (D-Ill.-04) and Brian Fitzpatrick (D-Pa.-01) in reintroducing the Good Jobs for Good Airports Act, legislation that would improve wages and working conditions for airport service workers. The legislation would also support working families and help stabilize the air travel industry as airlines pocket record profits while airport service workers remain stuck at minimum wage.

“Our airports – and the workers that keep them running – are critical to our economy, moving millions of people and goods throughout our country every day. It’s past time these workers see the pay, benefits, and working conditions that they deserve. I am proud to fight for the Good Jobs for Good Airports Act, legislation to provide improved wages, benefits, and labor standards to this vital workforce,” said Senator Van Hollen.

“These workers serve through extreme temperatures, holiday travel surges, and even pandemics — yet too many still struggle with low pay, unaffordable care, and rising costs,” said Senator Markey. “Because airports are the gateway to the world for travelers, they must also be the gateway to stable, middle-class jobs for workers. I am proud to partner with Congressmen Garcia and Fitzpatrick to lead this bipartisan, pro-worker legislation.”

“America’s airports support millions of jobs and move hundreds of millions of travelers each year. While U.S. airlines generated $6 billion in profit last year, airport frontline workers, who are predominantly Latino, Black and immigrant, are barely making ends meet. In fact 7 per cent of them live under the poverty level,” said Congressman Chuy García. “The Good Jobs for Good Airports Act, seeks to ensure airport workers, who make our air travel possible, get the dignity and compensation they deserve for their hard work.”

“Airport service workers are entrusted every day with the safety, order, and reliability of one of the most complex transportation systems in the world. We cannot ask them to carry that responsibility while denying them the economic security that comes with fair wages and meaningful benefits. The Good Jobs for Good Airports Act establishes one clear principle: the value of the work does not change because a job is outsourced or a different contractor signs the paycheck. By investing in the people who keep our airports moving, we strengthen the entire aviation system—and uphold our obligation to the workers, families, and travelers who depend upon it,” said Congressman Fitzpatrick.

The legislation is also cosponsored in the Senate by Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Senators Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.).

“Airport workers keep millions of Americans moving every day—and a job that keeps America moving should be a job that lets a family get ahead. The Good Jobs for Good Airports Act will raise wages, strengthen benefits, and ensure these workers finally receive the dignity and respect they’ve earned. It’s past time Congress made sure good jobs take off at every airport in America,” said Senator Schumer.

“It’s a no-brainer that we should be paying our airport service workers fairly for all they do to keep our transportation systems safe and running. I’m fighting hard alongside Senator Markey to make sure airport workers finally get the compensation they deserve, which will make our infrastructure even stronger in Massachusetts and across the country,” said Senator Warren.

“Georgia’s airports connect tens of millions of travelers to the state’s incredible history, culture, and businesses,” said Senator Warnock. “This is only possible because of the airport service workers who keep our aviation system running. Our legislation is an important step toward ensuring these workers receive the support and compensation they have earned.”

“Providing airport workers with fair compensation and protections is long overdue,” said Senator Blumenthal. “Airlines have consolidated power and raked in profits while airport service workers struggle to make ends meet. The Good Jobs for Good Airports Act will deliver the fair pay and benefits these critical workers who keep our country moving deserve.”

“Every Arizonan deserves to be fairly compensated for their hard work, including the men and women who keep our airports running smoothly,” said Senator Gallego. “The Good Jobs for Good Airports Act invests in airports that invest in their workers, ensuring airports are economic hubs not just for travels, but for the communities they’re located in. I’m proud to help reintroduce this legislation.”

“Every day, thousands of airport workers get passengers to their next destination, but many don’t make enough to cover their basic needs. The Good Jobs for Good Airports Act will make sure federal investments in our nation’s airports also support the workers who keep them running,” said Senator Murphy.

The Good Jobs for Good Airports Act is endorsed by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), UNITE HERE, and the Communications Workers of America (CWA).

“I've given years of my life to this airport, keeping planes clean and passengers safe — and I still can't afford to take my kids to the doctor,” said Nicole Ray, a wheelchair agent at Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport. “Something is deeply wrong when the airlines I serve are posting record profits while I'm choosing between groceries and medicine. It’s time for Congress to decide whose side they’re on and pass the Good Jobs for Good Airports Act.”

“Every day, airport service workers keep our country moving. They do the essential work that keeps our airports safe, our aviation system running, and millions of travelers connected. Airport service workers deserve more than our thanks, they deserve good jobs that provide dignity, security, and the opportunity to build a better life,” said April Verrett, President of Service Employees International Union (SEIU). “The Good Jobs for Good Airports Act is about recognizing the value of that work. Congress should stand with the workers who keep our airports running and pass this legislation. When we invest in working people, we build a stronger economy and a stronger nation.”

“Our tax dollars continue to be invested in the expansion and improvement of the nation’s airports. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act committed billions for airports, with the final $2.9 billion invested this year. However, airports are not just buildings with tarmacs and airplanes: a successful airport depends on its workers. Despite this, there are UNITE HERE members working in airport concessions and airline catering who are struggling to make ends meet. Some of them work multiple jobs and with no healthcare. Our investments must support a healthy workforce and offer wages that lift workers out of poverty — the Good Jobs for Good Airports Act would set a fair national standard for wages and benefits for airport workers across the United States,” said Gwen Mills, President of UNITE HERE.",1,2026-07-15T07:12:08Z,2026-07-15T07:13:45Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-murray-call-out-blanche-for-failing-to-meet-with-epstein-survivors-press-him-to-make-good-on-his-commitment,"Van Hollen, Murray Call Out Blanche for Failing to Meet with Epstein Survivors, Press Him to Make Good on His Commitment",2026-07-14,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Ranking Member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies (CJS), and Senator Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, called on Acting United States Attorney General Todd Blanche to fulfill the commitment he made at the May 19, 2026, CJS Appropriations hearing to meet with Epstein survivors. The Senators’ letter comes nearly two months after Acting AG Blanche committed to meet with the survivors in response to the Senators’ questioning at the hearing and nearly seven months after the first tranche of Epstein files were released by DOJ in accordance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Despite repeated attempts from the Senators’ offices to facilitate a meeting, Blanche has still not done so.

The senators begin, “At the May 19, 2026, hearing of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, we asked whether you would meet with Epstein survivors if we connected you with them. You responded, ‘Absolutely.’ It has been nearly two months since then, and even though we provided the Department of Justice (the Department) with the point of contact for the Epstein survivors—and have followed up on this request multiple times—the survivors have not received the promised outreach.”

“Recently, reporting revealed that you were present at several meetings last summer in the White House Situation Room with the President’s closest advisors, confirming that the White House and the Department have been more interested in minimizing damage to the President relating to his personal friendship with Jeffrey Epstein than providing transparency to survivors and holding accountable those who may be implicated in Epstein’s crimes,” they note.

“Your responsibility as Acting Attorney General is to pursue justice, not to shield the President. We therefore expect a response no later than July 28, 2026, confirming a date for the meeting with survivors you committed to hold,” the senators conclude.

The full text of the letter is available here and below.

Dear Acting Attorney General Blanche:

At the May 19, 2026, hearing of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, we asked whether you would meet with Epstein survivors if we connected you with them. You responded, “Absolutely.”

It has been nearly two months since then, and even though we provided the Department of Justice (the Department) with the point of contact for the Epstein survivors—and have followed up on this request multiple times—the survivors have not received the promised outreach. Additionally, our offices have not received any substantive responses from the Department indicating when the meeting will be scheduled.

Recently, reporting revealed that you were present at several meetings last summer in the White House Situation Room with the President’s closest advisors, confirming that the White House and the Department have been more interested in minimizing damage to the President relating to his personal friendship with Jeffrey Epstein than providing transparency to survivors and holding accountable those who may be implicated in Epstein’s crimes.

Your responsibility as Acting Attorney General is to pursue justice, not to shield the President. We therefore expect a response no later than July 28, 2026, confirming a date for the meeting with survivors you committed to hold.",1,2026-07-15T07:12:08Z,2026-07-15T07:13:45Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-alsobrooks-mcclain-delaney-announce-over-800000-for-infrastructure-workforce-development-in-washington-allegany-counties,"Van Hollen, Alsobrooks, McClain Delaney Announce Over $800,000 for Infrastructure, Workforce Development in Washington, Allegany Counties",2026-07-13,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen and Angela Alsobrooks and Congresswoman April McClain Delaney (all D-Md.) announced $802,731 in federal funding from the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) for infrastructure and workforce development in Washington and Allegany Counties. These investments will support water infrastructure upgrades, improve the Evergreen Heritage Center, and expand job training opportunities for local students.

“From upgrading water infrastructure and expanding access to our natural resources to creating more workforce training opportunities for good-paying jobs, these investments will directly support Western Maryland communities and contribute to Mountain Maryland’s economy and growth,” said Senator Van Hollen.

“Western Maryland has so much to offer our state and our entire nation, that’s why it is so critical that we improve our infrastructure, make sure young people have access to apprenticeship and trade programs, and maintain all the recreation opportunities Mountain Maryland has to offer – fueling our tourism economy,” said Senator Alsobrooks.

“When we invest in our communities, we invest in our people. I'm committed to bringing federal resources home to Western Maryland to help lower costs and expand opportunity. These investments will modernize critical infrastructure, strengthen workforce development, and support local organizations that make our communities stronger. I'm proud to work alongside Senators Van Hollen and Alsobrooks to ensure Western Maryland receives the federal support it deserves,” said Congresswoman McClain Delaney.

The federal grants have been awarded as follows:

$577,000 to the Town of Keedysville to replace approximately 2,600 linear feet of aging ductile iron water lines in the Bedrock and Coffman Farms neighborhoods with high-density polyethylene (HDPE) lines. The water infrastructure upgrades will provide improved service to 129 businesses and 1,826 households connected to the system.

$197,331 to Hagerstown Community College (HCC) to expand apprenticeship and trade programs to accommodate 274 students. HCC will provide students with hands-on training and connect participants to local employers, establishing a pipeline to help meet the growing demand for HVAC technicians, carpenters, plumbers, electricians, and more in Appalachian Maryland.

$28,400 to the Evergreen Heritage Center Foundation to install 5 experiential enhancements on its Forest Evolution Trail in partnership with Allegany County Public Schools and Frostburg State University, and will create Activity User Guides for residents and tourists who visit the trail. These upgrades will benefit an estimated 200 visitors in the first year alone, while supporting the education of 500 public school students and 15 Frostburg State University students.

These investments are provided through the Appalachian Regional Commission, an economic development partnership entity of the federal government and 13 state governments, focusing on 423 counties across the Appalachian Region. Senator Van Hollen secured $200 million in federal funding for the ARC through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021, and the lawmakers have since worked to prevent cuts to the program from the Trump Administration.",1,2026-07-15T07:12:08Z,2026-07-15T07:13:45Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-joins-gillibrand-colleagues-in-demanding-pentagon-release-long-awaited-report-on-us-bombing-of-iranian-elementary-school,"Van Hollen Joins Gillibrand, Colleagues in Demanding Pentagon Release Long-Awaited Report on U.S. Bombing of Iranian Elementary School",2026-07-13,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) and 23 of their Senate colleagues in continuing to demand answers from the Department of Defense (DoD) over the U.S.’ bombing of an Iranian elementary school in February. The strike on the Shajareh Tayyebeh Elementary School in Minab, which reportedly killed approximately 120 children and at least 175 people in total, represented the worst civilian casualty incident caused by the U.S. military in decades.

In a letter to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Commander of U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) Admiral Brad Cooper, the senators called for the swift completion and release of the Pentagon’s investigation into the school strike, which was reportedly submitted in April, but remains under review by senior military officials. They also requested that the Pentagon provide Congress with a comprehensive plan to ensure that this type of incident does not happen again.

“More than four months after the strike, and after the reported submission of the investigation in April, Congress and the American people still have not received the Department’s investigation and findings,” the senators wrote. “There is no justification for withholding an unclassified accounting of what happened, what went wrong, and what the Department is doing to prevent recurrence.”

In early March, Reuters first reported that U.S. military investigators believed U.S. forces were likely responsible for the Minab strike. Days later, Pentagon officials reportedly concluded through their preliminary investigation that a U.S. Tomahawk missile had struck the school. Investigators have also reportedly found that multiple failures led the school to be targeted in error, including missed 2019 remarks by an intelligence analyst indicating that the site had changed from a naval facility to a school. The analyst had entered the remarks into a digital system that was not connected to the authoritative targeting database, and officials planning the attack used imagery that had not been updated in several years and did not show a school at the site. In fact, according to recent reporting, senior U.S. military commanders ignored warnings that intelligence about potential targets was severely out of date for the sake of “expediency,” which directly contributed to the strike on the school.

“These reported issues, if accurate, raise deeply troubling questions about the integrity of U.S. target development, the adequacy of target validation and vetting procedures, the interoperability of intelligence and targeting databases, the timeliness and reliability of intelligence used for lethal targeting, and the Department’s implementation of civilian harm mitigation policies,” the senators wrote. “They also raise urgent questions about whether the Department has sufficient targeting personnel, training, accountability mechanisms, and technical safeguards to support large-scale conventional operations.

Despite this reporting, Trump administration officials have not publicly taken responsibility for the strike or the resultant civilian deaths. President Trump himself has suggested multiple times that the strike was not the U.S.’ fault and has even blamed Iran. Additionally, Sec. Hegseth has spent his tenure deriding the rules of engagement and cutting DoD programs that aim to prevent harm to civilians during war, including slashing civilian harm mitigation and response staff at the U.S. combatant commands by over 90 percent.

The senators concluded, “The United States military has a legal and moral obligation to take all feasible precautions to prevent civilian harm. When a U.S. strike kills civilians, the Department owes Congress, the American people, and the victims’ families a clear accounting of what happened and a credible plan to prevent future failures.”

In addition to Senators Van Hollen and Gillibrand, the letter was signed by Senators Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Edward Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and Peter Welch (D-Vt.).

The full text of the letter can be found here and below.

Dear Secretary Hegseth and Admiral Cooper:

We write regarding the Department of Defense’s investigation into the February 28, 2026 strike on Shajareh Tayyebeh Elementary School for girls in Minab, Iran, which reportedly killed approximately 120 children and at least 175 people in total. If true, this incident would constitute the U.S. military’s largest civilian casualty incident since 1991. The Department must promptly provide Congress with the complete and unredacted investigation, and submit a concrete plan to ensure such a tragedy does not happen again.

Recent press reporting indicates that the investigation ordered by Admiral Cooper was submitted in April but remains under review by senior DoD leadership. That reporting further indicates that investigators have identified multiple potential failures, including that an analyst noted as early as 2019 that the site appeared to have changed from a naval facility into a school, but that remark was entered into a digital intelligence tool that was not connected to the authoritative targeting database used to develop strike targets. The reporting also indicates that the site was reviewed multiple additional times in subsequent years without the targeting database being updated. Additional reporting from this week alleges that warnings were made in the system indicating the intelligence for the targets was dated, but those warnings were ignored for “expediency” even though the Administration spent weeks planning for President Trump’s war of choice.

These reported issues, if accurate, raise deeply troubling questions about the integrity of U.S. target development, the adequacy of target validation and vetting procedures, the interoperability of intelligence and targeting databases, the timeliness and reliability of intelligence used for lethal targeting, and the Department’s implementation of civilian harm mitigation policies. They also raise urgent questions about whether the Department has sufficient targeting personnel, training, accountability mechanisms, and technical safeguards to support large-scale conventional operations.

More than four months after the strike, and after the reported submission of the investigation in April, Congress and the American people still have not received the Department’s investigation and findings. There is no justification for withholding an unclassified accounting of what happened, what went wrong, and what the Department is doing to prevent recurrence.

Accordingly, we request that the Department of Defense and U.S. Central Command take the following actions no later than July 20, 2026:

1. Promptly finalize the investigation into the February 28 strike on Shajareh Tayyebeh Elementary School and provide Congress with the complete and unredacted investigation.

2. Provide an unclassified version of the report to Congress, suitable for public release.

3. Submit to Congress a prevention and remediation plan that identifies the specific corrective actions the Department will take to ensure this does not happen again.

4. Provide a briefing to Congress on the investigation and all steps being taken to ensure errors of this kind do not happen again.

The United States military has a legal and moral obligation to take all feasible precautions to prevent civilian harm. When a U.S. strike kills civilians, the Department owes Congress, the American people, and the victims’ families a clear accounting of what happened and a credible plan to prevent future failures.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this urgent matter. We look forward to your response.

Sincerely,",1,2026-07-15T07:12:08Z,2026-07-15T07:13:45Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-statement-on-passing-of-senator-lindsey-graham,Van Hollen Statement on Passing of Senator Lindsey Graham,2026-07-12,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) released the following statement on the passing of South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham.

“I’m deeply saddened by Senator Lindsey Graham’s sudden passing. While Lindsey and I disagreed on many, many things, we always had an open line of communication and honest conversation. Whenever possible, we worked together to find common ground, including our joint efforts to support our Syrian Kurdish partners and the SDF, who have been our main allies in the fight against ISIS.

“My heart goes out to Lindsey’s loved ones during this difficult time.”",1,2026-07-14T07:08:55Z,2026-07-14T07:10:52Z
https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/news/press-releases/alsobrooks-road-to-housing-becomes-law/,ALSOBROOKS: ROAD TO HOUSING BECOMES LAW,2026-07-11,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Angela D. Alsobrooks,A000382,www.alsobrooks.senate.gov,alsobrooks,https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/,scraper,"WASHINGTON, DC – Senator Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), a member of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, released the following statement after the Renewing Opportunity in the American Dream (ROAD) to Housing Act officially became law, without the President’s signature.

“Marylanders across our state tell me the same thing: housing costs too much.

“At midnight, the ROAD to Housing Act became law without President Trump’s signature. His priorities are clear – he doesn’t care to lower the cost of housing. He only cares about himself and his billionaire friends. What a shame.

“I am proud I worked across the aisle with colleagues in the Senate to ensure this legislation became law – the most comprehensive housing legislation in over 30 years. This bill will lower costs, cut red tape, increase the housing supply, and help make the dream of homeownership more affordable.”

###",1,2026-07-12T07:28:31Z,2026-07-12T07:30:18Z
https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/news/press-releases/alsobrooks-breaks-ground-on-new-springhill-lake-elementary-school-built-through-p3-she-spearheaded/,ALSOBROOKS BREAKS GROUND ON NEW SPRINGHILL LAKE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL BUILT THROUGH P3 SHE SPEARHEADED,2026-07-09,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Angela D. Alsobrooks,A000382,www.alsobrooks.senate.gov,alsobrooks,https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/,scraper,"July 9, 2026

GREENBELT, MD – Today, Senator Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.) joined Prince George’s County Public Schools (PGCPS) and Prince George’s County Executive Aisha Braveboy to break ground on the new 103,000-square-foot Springhill Lake Elementary School, which will accommodate up to 850 prekindergarten through 5th grade students. When she served as County Executive of Prince George’s County, Senator Alsobrooks worked with former PGCPS CEO Dr. Monica Goldson to create a Public Private Partnership (P3) school construction model that they worked to pass through the Maryland General Assembly. Under the continued guidance and leadership of the Progressive Education Partners (PEP), county students will see a total of 14 new P3 schools in 6 years – 18 schools in all including traditional school construction.

Senator Alsobrooks released the following statement following the groundbreaking:

“Our communities can tell what you value by where you invest your resources. As County Executive, I learned Prince George’s County faced an $8.5 billion school construction backlog. The truth is – it’s expensive to build and maintain schools. Coming up with a plan would take vision. It would require a willingness to act boldly because the need was immediate. And because these kinds of projects take a lot of time – even without unexpected challenges like a global pandemic – making it to this point would take patience and a commitment to the process even when success wasn’t immediately visible. This was a bold move – an innovative public-private model that had never before been done at this level for any school system. I am so proud of this work and know we need to continue working together, in innovative ways, to deliver for our children. This is a model that worked and should be used across the nation.”

###",1,2026-07-10T08:20:04Z,2026-07-10T08:21:18Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-alsobrooks-warner-kaine-press-administration-for-answers-on-trumps-takeover-of-dc-golf-courses,"Van Hollen, Alsobrooks, Warner, Kaine Press Administration for Answers on Trump’s Takeover of DC Golf Courses",2026-07-09,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), joined by Senators Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), and Tim Kaine (D-Va.), pressed the Trump Administration for detailed answers to a series of questions on the Department of the Interior’s plans for East Potomac Park redevelopment, citing concerns about impacts on public access and affordability, historic preservation, misuse of taxpayer funds, and environmental and public health. The Senator’s letter comes after public reporting and the Administration’s social media announcements of new plans for the park – which have yet to be detailed to the public – and follows up on a previous unanswered letter from the Senators earlier this year.

“We write to follow up on our letter from January 26, 2026 that raised serious concerns regarding the Administration’s termination of the lease held by the National Links Trust (NLT) for operation of East Potomac Golf Links, Langston Golf Course, and Rock Creek Park Golf Course. More than five months have passed since this letter was sent to you, and we have yet to receive a response. At an April Senate Appropriations hearing, Secretary Burgum acknowledged that he had not seen the letter, but assured Senator Van Hollen that the Department would respond. In the interim, the Administration has continued to advance plans for these courses, including Secretary Burgum's announcement on social media of a renovation design by Fazio Design for East Potomac Golf Links, without any disclosure to the public or to Congress of the scope, cost, or basis on which that engagement was awarded. The absence of any reply is itself troubling, and recent developments have made our concerns considerably more urgent,” the Senators begin.

On the National Park Service’s plans for East Potomac redevelopment and the lack of transparency, the Senators wrote, “the only detail provided was a low-resolution image of the proposed course, leaving the public and Congress entirely in the dark about the scope of the redevelopment, including to what extent redevelopment will ensure continued public access to the waterfront, address existing infrastructure issues on Hains Point, and protect important artifacts such as the historic cherry trees on the White Course – the oldest grove of Japanese cherry trees in D.C..”

On Trump’s visit to East Potomac Golf Links on June 28, 2026, the Senators wrote, “Following that visit, the President announced on social media that work on East Potomac would begin on September 1, 2026, described the course as severely neglected, and stated that the redesigned course could host major professional golf tournaments. These photos and statements seem to illustrate the Administration’s plans for East Potomac Park, yet the Department has still not provided Congress or the public with basic details about the scope of the project, the funding source, the expected period of closure or disruption, the effect on current users, or how such an accelerated timeline can be reconciled with applicable environmental, historic-preservation, procurement, and public-engagement requirements.”

The Senators go on to request answers to the following questions:

How will the Department ensure that course fees and access at East Potomac Golf Links remain genuinely affordable for the communities that have depended on these public courses for nearly a century? Does the Department anticipate that course fees will increase or that the annual number of publicly available rounds of golf will decrease, as compared to when the course was managed by National Links Trust? If so, please provide estimates of the expected changes in cost and availability.

How will the Department ensure continued access for the bikers, walkers, runners, and recreational fishermen that utilize the popular waterfront Hains Point Loop Trail at East Potomac Park?

What assessment has been made of potential health risks to golfers, course employees, youth program participants, and the surrounding environment at East Potomac Park, including the Potomac River?

What plans are in place to remediate hazardous substances identified in the debris pile, what is the expected timeline for remediation actions, and who will bear the cost of these cleanup efforts?

How does the Department intend to ensure compliance with all applicable federal environmental and public health laws, including any requirements for environmental assessment?

Does the Department intend to rebuild the seawall before starting broader redevelopment at East Potomac Golf Links? How does the Department intend to fund the full scope of redevelopment, including seawall reconstruction? Will this be financed through federal appropriations, private donations, or some combination thereof, and has Congress been consulted about any use of taxpayer funds?

What steps is the Department taking to protect the historic cherry trees on the White Course at East Potomac Golf Links, reportedly among the last surviving trees from the original 1910 gift from Japan, from any planned redevelopment or restoration work? How will the Department protect cherry trees along the waterfront at East Potomac Park?

East Potomac Park serves a wide range of users beyond golfers, including runners, cyclists, tennis players, fishermen, and families who rely on its open spaces and waterfront access. What assurances can the Department provide that the planned redevelopment will preserve access to these public spaces?

“The municipal golf courses of Washington, D.C. are public assets with deep historical, recreational, and community value. Decisions affecting their future, and the health and safety of those who use them, must be guided by law, transparency, and fidelity to the public trust. The Administration’s failure to respond to the questions posed in the January letter, combined with the significant new developments outlined above, compels us to seek answers with greater urgency,” the lawmakers concluded.

Full text of the letter is available here and below:

Dear Secretary Burgum and Acting Director Bowron,

We write to follow up on our letter from January 26, 2026 that raised serious concerns regarding the Administration’s termination of the lease held by the National Links Trust (NLT) for operation of East Potomac Golf Links, Langston Golf Course, and Rock Creek Park Golf Course. More than five months have passed since this letter was sent to you, and we have yet to receive a response. At an April Senate Appropriations hearing, Secretary Burgum acknowledged that he had not seen the letter, but assured Senator Van Hollen that the Department would respond. In the interim, the Administration has continued to advance plans for these courses, including Secretary Burgum's announcement on social media of a renovation design by Fazio Design for East Potomac Golf Links, without any disclosure to the public or to Congress of the scope, cost, or basis on which that engagement was awarded. The absence of any reply is itself troubling, and recent developments have made our concerns considerably more urgent.

On May 8, 2026, the Department of the Interior announced an agreement under which the National Links Trust will receive a new long-term lease for Langston Golf Course and Rock Creek Park Golf, while continuing to operate East Potomac Golf Links until the National Park Service is prepared to begin a restoration project there. Public statements accompanying the agreement referenced future restoration and redevelopment concepts at the courses, including expanded facilities and community programming, as well as continued partnerships with organizations including First Tee of Greater Washington, D.C., the Western Golf Association, and the Evans Scholars Foundation. While we welcome commitments to keep the courses open, accessible, and affordable, the announcement raises important questions about the scope of any future work contemplated for East Potomac and the extent to which plans have already been developed. Secretary Burgum publicized the agreement on social media, posting that he was excited to unveil a renovation design from Fazio Design. However, the only detail provided was a low-resolution image of the proposed course, leaving the public and Congress entirely in the dark about the scope of the redevelopment, including to what extent redevelopment will ensure continued public access to the waterfront, address existing infrastructure issues on Hains Point, and protect important artifacts such as the historic cherry trees on the White Course – the oldest grove of Japanese cherry trees in D.C..

Those concerns were further heightened by President Trump’s unannounced visit to East Potomac Golf Links on June 28, 2026, with Secretary Burgum, representatives of Fazio Design, and White House staff. Photos captured during that visit show President Trump holding designs with a substantially increased project scope as compared to the initial design shared by Secretary Burgum. This new golf course design appears to encompass the entire peninsula stretching down to the southern end of Hains Point. The design also appears to jeopardize some of East Potomac Park’s most popular features including the Hains Point bicycle trail, the miniature golf course, and historic cherry trees. Following that visit, the President announced on social media that work on East Potomac would begin on September 1, 2026, described the course as severely neglected, and stated that the redesigned course could host major professional golf tournaments. These photos and statements seem to illustrate the Administration’s plans for East Potomac Park, yet the Department has still not provided Congress or the public with basic details about the scope of the project, the funding source, the expected period of closure or disruption, the effect on current users, or how such an accelerated timeline can be reconciled with applicable environmental, historic-preservation, procurement, and public-engagement requirements. A public commitment to preserve access is welcome, but it is not a substitute for a transparent plan that ensures East Potomac Park remains a genuinely affordable municipal golf course and public parkland for residents of the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia.

The environmental and public health concerns stemming from the Administration’s decision to dump dirt and debris from the White House East Wing project on the White Course at East Potomac, raised in our original letter, have also grown more serious. A recent analysis of the debris provided by Jacobs Engineering Group detected many toxic compounds in the dirt pile including heavy metals, volatile organic compounds, and pesticides. Several of these compounds, including arsenic and lead, were detected at levels that could pose a risk to human health. The public deserves a full account of what has been deposited there and what risks, if any, it poses.

The questions posed in the original letter remain unanswered. We respectfully request responses to all of the following:

How will the Department ensure that course fees and access at East Potomac Golf Links remain genuinely affordable for the communities that have depended on these public courses for nearly a century? Does the Department anticipate that course fees will increase or that the annual number of publicly available rounds of golf will decrease, as compared to when the course was managed by National Links Trust? If so, please provide estimates of the expected changes in cost and availability.

How will the Department ensure continued access for the bikers, walkers, runners, and recreational fishermen that utilize the popular waterfront Hains Point Loop Trail at East Potomac Park?

What assessment has been made of potential health risks to golfers, course employees, youth program participants, and the surrounding environment at East Potomac Park, including the Potomac River?

What plans are in place to remediate hazardous substances identified in the debris pile, what is the expected timeline for remediation actions, and who will bear the cost of these cleanup efforts?

How does the Department intend to ensure compliance with all applicable federal environmental and public health laws, including any requirements for environmental assessment?

Does the Department intend to rebuild the seawall before starting broader redevelopment at East Potomac Golf Links? How does the Department intend to fund the full scope of redevelopment, including seawall reconstruction? Will this be financed through federal appropriations, private donations, or some combination thereof, and has Congress been consulted about any use of taxpayer funds?

What steps is the Department taking to protect the historic cherry trees on the White Course at East Potomac Golf Links, reportedly among the last surviving trees from the original 1910 gift from Japan, from any planned redevelopment or restoration work? How will the Department protect cherry trees along the waterfront at East Potomac Park?

East Potomac Park serves a wide range of users beyond golfers, including runners, cyclists, tennis players, fishermen, and families who rely on its open spaces and waterfront access. What assurances can the Department provide that the planned redevelopment will preserve access to these public spaces?

The municipal golf courses of Washington, D.C. are public assets with deep historical, recreational, and community value. Decisions affecting their future, and the health and safety of those who use them, must be guided by law, transparency, and fidelity to the public trust. The Administration’s failure to respond to the questions posed in the January letter, combined with the significant new developments outlined above, compels us to seek answers with greater urgency.

We look forward to a response by July 20, 2026.",1,2026-07-10T08:20:04Z,2026-07-10T08:21:18Z
https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/news/press-releases/alsobrooks-schrier-demand-action-on-infant-mortality-due-to-rising-rate-of-vitamin-k-refusal/,"ALSOBROOKS, SCHRIER DEMAND ACTION ON INFANT MORTALITY DUE TO RISING RATE OF VITAMIN K REFUSAL",2026-07-08,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Angela D. Alsobrooks,A000382,www.alsobrooks.senate.gov,alsobrooks,https://www.alsobrooks.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/,scraper,"July 8, 2026

WASHINGTON, DC – As reported today in the New York Times, Senator Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.) and Congresswoman Kim Schrier (D-Wash.-08) demanded immediate action to address a growing and preventable public health crisis: the rising rate of vitamin K refusal at birth and resulting vitamin K deficiency bleeding (VKDB) among newborns in a letter to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya.

“RFK Jr. has spewed lies and dangerous rhetoric about vaccines, and now we are seeing the devastating consequences. Newborns are dying because their parents are refusing to give them a shot of vitamin K, an essential nutrient. We need leadership and action right now. Rep. Schrier and I are calling on the CDC to monitor and understand the burden of vitamin K refusal rates, and the related deaths – and then to make that information publicly available. This is objective information that the public deserves to see,” said Senator Alsobrooks.

“The vaccine misinformation and confusion that RFK Jr. has championed for years has now created a ‘spillover effect’ that is causing parents to refuse the vitamin K shot and other routine care, putting their babies at risk of life-threatening hemorrhage,” said Congresswoman Kim Schrier. “As a pediatrician and member of Congress, I am focused on doing all I can to hold RFK Jr. accountable for every preventable death and illness of our nation’s children. That is why I am proud to join Senator Alsobrooks in this effort to demand the CDC follow and publicly release data on the burden of vitamin K refusal rates.”

“More than 60 years ago, scientists discovered that a simple injection of vitamin K administered shortly after childbirth could protect newborn babies from potentially deadly bleeding disorders. This was a game changer and is why the American Academy of Pediatrics has recommended a vitamin K injection as part of a newborn “safety bundle” since the 1960s. But false and misleading claims have led to increased rates of refusal, putting the youngest and most vulnerable babies at unnecessary risk, and now we’re seeing the devastating impacts,” said AAP President Andrew D. Racine, MD, PhD, FAAP. “I want to thank Representative Schrier and Senator Alsobrooks for bringing attention to this important issue and calling on HHS to take action to protect children, and I encourage parents with questions about vitamin K or any aspect of newborn care to speak with their child’s doctor.”

Read full text of the letter here or below:

Dear Dr. Bhattacharya:

We write to urge the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to take immediate action to address a growing and preventable public health crisis: the rising rate of vitamin K refusal at birth and resulting vitamin K deficiency bleeding (VKDB) among newborns. Specifically, we call on the CDC to establish ways to monitor and understand the burden of vitamin K refusal rates, VKDB and VKDB-related deaths, and to make that information publicly available.

Vitamin K is an essential nutrient which helps blood clot. Because infants are born with very low levels of vitamin K, they are at high risk for developing dangerous bleeding disorders, including internal bleeding. A single vitamin K shot is a highly effective newborn intervention to help prevent bleeding until babies can absorb sufficient vitamin K when they typically begin eating solid foods containing the nutrient and their gut microbiomes develop. Without it, babies are 81 times more likely to develop late VKDB, which can cause bleeding in the brain. According to CDC data, 1 in every 5 babies who develop VKDB will die. There are no warning signs in most cases of VKDB: a baby can be bleeding into their intestines or brain before their parents know anything is wrong. Some parents are requesting oral vitamin K instead, which is not recommended by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) or CDC. Babies don’t absorb oral vitamin K consistently, and research shows oral drops are ineffective.

Unfortunately, as medical misinformation grows, it appears that more American parents are declining the vitamin K shot for their newborns. A December 2025 study of more than 5 million births found that more than 5 percent of U.S. babies did not receive the vitamin K shot at birth in 2024, a 77 percent increase from 2017. Recent informal pulse surveys of pediatricians across the country also show that doctors are seeing parents and caregivers refuse routine preventative care for newborns, including vitamin K shots, erythromycin eye ointment, and hepatitis B vaccination, according to AAP. Pediatricians are also reporting that vitamin K refusal often occurs alongside vaccine hesitancy.

Recent reporting from ProPublica has highlighted a major problem: the federal government does not currently track vitamin K shot refusal, vitamin K deficiency bleeding, or the preventable deaths related to vitamin K deficiency.

Without a good understanding of the scope of these issues, we cannot assess the true toll of refusal, identify trends, or develop targeted public health campaigns. Since vitamin K became a part of standard newborn care in 1961, there was previously no need for robust monitoring systems to track incidences of VKDB in infants. However, rising vitamin K refusal rates justify investing in modern diagnostic tests to better assess the scope and impact of VKDB in babies who do not receive the vitamin K shot. This will help clinicians gain the information they need to effectively counsel families. The CDC has the tools to better understand the burden of vitamin K shot refusal, VKDB, and VKDB-related deaths. We urge you to use them, and to share that data with the public, so that we can prevent tragic illness and death in infants and VKDB-related deaths. We urge you to use them, and to share that data with the public, so that we can prevent tragic illness and death in infants.

Sincerely,

###",1,2026-07-09T08:24:13Z,2026-07-09T08:26:05Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/trumps-luxury-jet-corruption-van-hollen-joins-murphy-senate-democrats-in-demanding-answers-on-misuse-of-federal-resources-after-rushed-costly-retrofit-job,"Trump’s Luxury Jet Corruption: Van Hollen Joins Murphy, Senate Democrats in Demanding Answers on Misuse of Federal Resources After Rushed, Costly Retrofit Job",2026-07-07,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), both members of the U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations, and eleven of their Senate colleagues in sending a letter to Troy E. Meink, Secretary of the U.S. Air Force, and Christopher Kubasik, CEO of L3Harris, demanding transparency into the taxpayer-funded modification of the $400-million luxury jet gifted to President Trump by the government of Qatar. Since Trump announced the gift in May 2025, the Trump administration has refused to provide Congress with basic details about the costs to taxpayers, national security risks, diversion of federal resources, and questionable decision-making process associated with sprinting to upgrade President Trump’s new luxury plane.

In the letter, Van Hollen and Murphy, along with U.S. Senators Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), note that available public reporting indicates the Trump administration dedicated as much as $1 billion dollars to rushing the sensitive Air Force One modification process, with hundreds working around the clock to condense a yearslong process into just ten months. The Senators’ letter demands answers on this irresponsible use of federal resources.

“Americans deserve answers on how the administration has decided to spend their taxpayer dollars and assume new national security risks with the VC-25B Bridge aircraft and the rushed retrofit program contracted to L3Harris – all in service to President Trump’s interest in having a pretty, luxurious plane for himself,” the Senators wrote.

The Senators called out the Trump administration for withholding information from Congress, preventing oversight of the luxury jet and its upgrade program: “For over a year, the administration has stonewalled congressional requests for information about Qatar’s luxury jet gift to President Trump. Congress and the American public have expressed due outrage about this corrupt, illegal exchange, but Pentagon officials have mostly deflected questions or claimed inability to share classified details about the luxury jet, the memorandum of understanding with Qatar, and the program to modify it for use by the President. The Trump administration has refused to share the information Congress needs to conduct oversight of this foreign gift and the estimated $1 billion in taxpayer dollars spent to upgrade and outfit the luxury jet for President Trump’s use during – and reportedly after – his term in office.”

They highlighted new reporting that indicates the luxury jet project has been another hotbed for corruption and misuse of taxpayer dollars: “After months of limited public information about the jet, new reporting has deepened concerns about the administration’s irresponsible management of U.S. national security funding to prioritize President Trump’s personal interest in this jet. In a Breaking Defense interview on June 23, L3Harris executive Jason Lambert reported that the company was contracted by the Air Force to oversee the jet’s modifications, with a deadline of July 4, 2026, from the White House. This timeline drove L3Harris to scale back the usual Air Force One upgrade package while committing 400 employees to working around the clock to complete in ten months a process that would normally take years. This accelerated luxury jet upgrade required other large expenses, including building a 3D mockup of the plane’s interior and the leasing and purchase of additional 747 aircraft for pilot and crew training.”

The Senators objected strongly to the Trump administration decision to shift resources away from national security priorities just so President Trump could enjoy luxury flying as soon as possible: “The Air Force seems to have committed to a rushed, expensive aircraft modification program in order to meet President Trump’s demand to fly on ‘the world’s most luxurious plane,’ with his favored paint job, during Independence Day festivities. Trump’s own statements – including his celebration of ‘a level of luxury that nobody’s ever seen before’ – make it clear that these decisions prioritized Trump’s personal comfort and tastes over U.S. national security.”

The Senators concluded by calling for a congressional briefing and demanding full transparency from the Secretary of the Air Force and the Pentagon contractor responsible for the project: “Congress needs full information about program costs, the diversion of resources away from other Pentagon priorities, and the national security and funding implications of upgrades skipped during the rush. The American public deserves transparency into this costly and questionable modification work – conducted with their taxpayer dollars on a luxury jet that President Trump reportedly plans to take with him after he leaves office.”

The full text of the letter is available here and below.

Dear Secretary Meink and Mr. Kubasik:

We write to ask the U.S. Air Force and L3Harris to provide Congress full information on the modification work recently completed on the $400-million Boeing 747-8 luxury jumbo jet gifted by the Government of Qatar to President Donald Trump. Americans deserve answers on how the administration has decided to spend their taxpayer dollars and assume new national security risks with the VC-25B Bridge aircraft and the rushed retrofit program contracted to L3Harris – all in service to President Trump’s interest in having a pretty, luxurious plane for himself.

For over a year, the administration has stonewalled congressional requests for information about Qatar’s luxury jet gift to President Trump. Congress and the American public have expressed due outrage about this corrupt, illegal exchange, but Pentagon officials have mostly deflected questions or claimed inability to share classified details about the luxury jet, the memorandum of understanding with Qatar, and the program to modify it for use by the President. The Trump administration has refused to share the information Congress needs to conduct oversight of this foreign gift and the estimated $1 billion in taxpayer dollars spent to upgrade and outfit the luxury jet for President Trump’s use during – and reportedly after – his term in office.

After months of limited public information about the jet, new reporting has deepened concerns about the administration’s irresponsible management of U.S. national security funding to prioritize President Trump’s personal interest in this jet. In a Breaking Defense interview on June 23, L3Harris executive Jason Lambert reported that the company was contracted by the Air Force to oversee the jet’s modifications, with a deadline of July 4, 2026, from the White House. This timeline drove L3Harris to scale back the usual Air Force One upgrade package while committing 400 employees to working around the clock to complete in ten months a process that would normally take years. This accelerated luxury jet upgrade required other large expenses, including building a 3D mockup of the plane’s interior and the leasing and purchase of additional 747 aircraft for pilot and crew training.

The Air Force seems to have committed to a rushed, expensive aircraft modification program in order to meet President Trump’s demand to fly on “the world’s most luxurious plane,” with his favored paint job, during Independence Day festivities. Trump’s own statements – including his celebration of “a level of luxury that nobody’s ever seen before” – make it clear that these decisions prioritized Trump’s personal comfort and tastes over U.S. national security.

Congress needs full information about program costs, the diversion of resources away from other Pentagon priorities, and the national security and funding implications of upgrades skipped during the rush. The American public deserves transparency into this costly and questionable modification work – conducted with their taxpayer dollars on a luxury jet that President Trump reportedly plans to take with him after he leaves office.

To this end, we request that the Air Force and L3Harris coordinate to provide written answers to the following questions no later than July 27, 2026. Recognizing that some of this information is classified, we also request a joint classified briefing for all U.S. Senators no later than August 6, 2026, to discuss your answers and the upgrade program in greater detail.

What was the total cost of preparing the VC-25B Bridge aircraft for delivery? Provide a comprehensive breakout of costs of L3Harris’s upgrade work, as well as associated expenses by the Air Force (including new equipment, mockups, and training).

How were the work schedule and timeframe for this aircraft modification program developed? What were the Air Force’s stated priorities for this program? Who, formally or informally, played a role in setting requirements and finalizing the contract? Describe the contract negotiations in detail and release the contract text for review.

How did the surge of Air Force and L3Harris personnel and resources to support the program’s accelerated schedule impact overall cost?

How did the surge of Air Force and L3Harris personnel and resources to support the program’s accelerated schedule impact other Air Force efforts or other Pentagon work being conducted at L3Harris? How were resources diverted from other programs?

How would the Air Force and L3Harris have adjusted the program’s schedule and cost structure have changed without a July 4, 2026, deadline?

How did the program’s accelerated schedule impact the scope of the Air Force One upgrade package? Detail capabilities that were not added to the VC-25B Bridge aircraft and describe the national security implications.

What additional resources, personnel, and equipment will be necessary to make up for the neglected upgrades when operating the aircraft as Air Force One? What will the cost be?

How did the aircraft modification program account for President Trump’s stated plan to transfer the VC-25B Bridge aircraft to his Presidential library upon leaving office?

We urge you to answer these questions and arrange the briefing as soon as possible to shed much-needed light on Trump’s luxury jet upgrade program. We look forward to the opportunity to finally deliver answers to the American people about Trump’s foreign-gifted luxury jet and the federal resources poured into upgrading and delivering it in time for his July 4 celebrations.

Sincerely,",1,2026-07-10T08:20:04Z,2026-07-10T08:21:18Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-joins-hickenlooper-colleagues-in-urging-white-house-to-rescind-political-rule-that-hurts-american-science-research,"Van Hollen Joins Hickenlooper, Colleagues in Urging White House to Rescind Political Rule That Hurts American Science, Research",2026-07-07,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen joined Senator John Hickenlooper and 9 of thier Senate colleagues in submitting public comment to the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Russ Vought to demand OMB rescind a proposed rule, broadly titled “Regulation for Federal Financial Assistance” that could alter how nearly all federal agencies administer grants and financial agreements. The proposed change would give more political control over these awards by the White House, which could enable corruption, undermine U.S. scientific investments and competitiveness, and block funding for critical life-saving research and collaboration.

“The proposed changes solidify federal grant-making as an unprecedented partisan power-grab that eliminates transparency of how taxpayer dollars are spent. This rule would derail American innovation and competitiveness at the local and national levels, kill good-paying American jobs, drive up costs for families, and halt essential projects in local communities,” wrote the senators. “Instead of supporting data-driven investments that pay dividends for the American people, this guidance facilitates partisan ideals and cronyism, leaving Americans in the dark.”

The senators continued: “We share the goals of improved transparency, accountability, and oversight; clarification of regulatory structure; and reducing recipient burden–all in pursuit of continuing America’s global leadership in science and innovation. However, these regulations would act in opposition to these goals. They would undermine our country’s competitiveness, erode our scientific ecosystem, increase unwanted bureaucracy, enable corruption, and perpetuate uncertainty across our local communities. We strongly urge you to withdraw this proposed rule.”

OMB has proposed sweeping changes to the rules governing how federal agencies award and administer grants and cooperative agreements. These are the primary mechanisms through which the country funds basic research, applied science, and scientific workforce development. These agencies also fund a wide array of grants for local projects including but not limited to infrastructure, public health, resource conservation, and rural development. The proposed rules formalize an August 7, 2025, Executive Order that directed OMB to expand political oversight over all federal awards.

Also joining the public comment were Senators Mark Warner (D-Va.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Angus King (I-Maine), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), and Kristen Gillibrand (D-N.Y.).",1,2026-07-10T08:20:04Z,2026-07-10T08:21:18Z
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases/van-hollen-warren-wyden-lofgren-lead-new-probe-into-cantor-fitzgerald-usar-after-16-billion-trump-administration-deal,"Van Hollen, Warren, Wyden, Lofgren Lead New Probe Into Cantor Fitzgerald, USAR After $1.6 Billion Trump Administration Deal",2026-07-07,2026,2026-07,Democrat,Senate,MD,Chris Van Hollen,V000128,www.vanhollen.senate.gov,vanhollen,https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/news/press-releases,scraper,"U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Ranking Member on the Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ranking Member on the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Ranking Member on the Senate Finance Committee, and Representative Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), Ranking Member of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, pressed Cantor Fitzgerald (Cantor) — led by Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick’s sons — and USA Rare Earth (USAR) on ethics concerns following their recent $1.6 billion agreement with the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce).

USAR’s reported engagement with Secretary Lutnick and financial arrangement with Cantor in conjunction with the Commerce deal — an agreement that potentially resulted in a multi-million-dollar payout to a firm led by the Secretary’s sons — raises glaring red flags.

“It is imperative your compan(ies) provide complete transparency about the substantive conflict of interest concerns raised by the circumstances of this investment,” wrote the lawmakers.

In January 2026, USAR and Commerce announced a tentative $1.6 billion deal in which the federal government agreed to take a 10% stake in USAR. To close the deal, USAR raised $1.5 billion in a private offering for the company’s stock and selected Cantor, Secretary Lutnick’s former financial firm, as the deal’s placement agent. Cantor is currently led by Secretary Lutnick’s son, Brandon Lutnick.

Secretary Lutnick appears to have played a key role in securing the lucrative deal. USAR’s CEO attested to Secretary Lutnick’s decisive and personal involvement after a meeting in November, describing how he opened doors to influential agency staff that manage billions in CHIPS Act funding and officials at other federal agencies. The lawmakers sounded the alarm on potential bribery concerns surrounding the deal, both in relation to Secretary Lutnick and company officials.

“The circumstances around how this deal came together raise serious questions about Secretary Lutnick’s exposure to federal conflicts of interest and bribery laws,” wrote the lawmakers.

“If USAR selected Cantor as its broker as a way to induce, reward, or otherwise curry favor with the Department of Commerce, Secretary Lutnick, or other government officials, it would raise serious questions about USAR’s exposure to federal anti-bribery or gratuity laws,” continued the lawmakers.

Senator Van Hollen has previously joined Senator Warren and members of Congress in raising concerns over the Commerce Department’s investment in USAR. In response, USAR’s CEO said: “(o)ur best move was to go with the team who knew us.” Following Secretary Lutnick's refusal to provide answers, the lawmakers expanded their investigation to press Cantor and USAR directly.

The lawmakers pushed Cantor Fitzgerald and USA Rare Earth to provide answers regarding the circumstances around this deal and transaction documents by July 23, 2026.

The full text of the letter to Cantor Fitzgerlad is available here. The full text of the letter to USA Rare Earth is available here. The full text of both letters are available below.

Letter to Cantor Fitzergerald

Mr. Lutnick:

We write regarding ongoing ethics and corruption concerns in light of the June 3, 2026 announcement that the U.S Department of Commerce (Commerce) has finalized a $1.6 billion definitive agreement with USA Rare Earth (USAR). Given the massive investment by the American public in USAR, and USAR’s fiduciary responsibility to its shareholders as a publicly traded company, it is imperative your company provide complete transparency about the substantive conflict of interest concerns raised by the circumstances of this investment.

In February of this year, we wrote to Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick in regard to our concerns about the January 2026 announcement that USAR and Commerce had reached a tentative $1.6 billion deal in which the federal government tentatively agreed to take a 10% stake in USAR. To close the deal, USAR set a $1.5 billion-dollar private offering for the company’s stock and selected Secretary Lutnick’s former financial firm, Cantor Fitzgerald (Cantor), as the deal’s placement agent. The deal likely benefited two of Secretary Lutnick’s adult sons, who now operate the firm. Secretary Lutnick has refused to provide answers, and we are expanding our investigation to seek information regarding any knowledge you may have involving Secretary Lutnick’s role or the role of Cantor Fitzgerald.

Under the terms of the January 2026 deal, Commerce would offer “up to $277 million in direct funding and up to $1.3 billion in loans” to USAR. In conjunction with this investment agreement, the US government also took a direct 10% stake in USAR, tentatively agreeing to purchase 16.1 million shares.

Commerce’s $1.6 billion investment in USAR was predicated on a capital matching requirement that mandated USAR raise its own private funds. To meet Commerce’s conditions, USAR raised $1.5 billion in a “private investment in public equity” (PIPE) transaction, in which the company sold 69.8 million USAR shares—offering around one-third of its outstanding stock—at a discounted price to private investors through a financial broker. USAR chose Cantor as “lead placement agent,” alongside Moelis, and the two were ultimately successful in securing the requisite investors, including several prominent donors to President Trump.

Secretary Lutnick appears to have played a part in facilitating USAR’s deal with Commerce. USAR’s CEO Barbara Humpton attested to Secretary Lutnick’s decisive and personal involvement after meeting with him in November, describing how he opened doors to influential agency staff that manage billions in CHIPS Act funding and officials at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and Department of Defense (DoD). The USAR CEO claimed that Secretary Lutnick was especially interested in USAR, and recounted that Secretary Lutnick asked: “[w]hat would it take to go faster and scale further?”

Ultimately, the deal was likely lucrative for the Lutnick family. Secretary Lutnick led Cantor for decades, before transferring his stake in the company to his sons last year. Though no estimate of the fee Cantor collected has been released publicly, previous SEC disclosures and industry estimates indicate that fees for placement agents in PIPE transactions can range between 2.5-10%. USAR’s public filings indicate that the company incurred approximately $50 million in PIPE financing costs. Even a conservative estimate, therefore, indicates that USAR may have paid Cantor millions—if not tens of millions—in its quest to secure a $1.6 billion government contract from a government agency led by Cantor’s former CEO. The circumstances around how this deal came together raise serious questions about Secretary Lutnick’s exposure to federal conflicts of interest and bribery laws.

Secretary Lutnick’s Ethics Commitments & Exposure to Federal Conflict of Interest Laws

We and other members of Congress previously raised concerns about the conflicts of interest posed by this deal. In response, USAR’s CEO explained USAR’s selection of Cantor by saying: “[o]ur best move was to go with the team who knew us.”

Indeed, USAR and Cantor’s relationship appears to date back to when Secretary Lutnick was still CEO and Chairman of Cantor. In August 2024, USAR announced that it would become a publicly traded company via a business combination with Inflection Point Acquisition Corp II, a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) with ties to Cantor dating back to May 2023 when Cantor served as the representatives of the underwriters for the SPAC’s initial public offering. Since then, Mr. Lutnick became Secretary of Commerce but the relationship between Cantor and USAR continued. USAR’s CEO confirmed that Cantor helped USAR go public in March, and Cantor led USAR’s first post-merger PIPE in the following months.

This history raises questions about the degree to which Secretary Lutnick was aware of the preexisting business relationship and connection between USAR and Cantor when USAR’s CEO met with him November and strengthens the arguments that Secretary Lutnick should have recused himself from any particular involvement in the USAR deal. Notably, Secretary Lutnick agreed in his federal ethics agreement that pursuant to the impartiality regulation at 5 C.F.R. § 2635.502, he would “not participate personally and substantially in any particular matter involving specific parties in which I know Cantor Fitzgerald L.P., or its subsidiaries, is a party or represents a party” for a period of one year following his resignation from the company. If Lutnick was personally involved in negotiating or approving Commerce’s side of the deal— which included the capital matching requirement that ultimately involved and benefitted Cantor —Lutnick’s involvement would likely be a textbook conflict of interest.

Accordingly, we seek clarity as to Lutnick’s direct involvement in the USAR-Cantor deal, including whether and to what degree USAR or Cantor representatives met with Secretary Lutnick with regards to the Department of Commerce’s negotiations or tentative investment agreement with USAR.

USAR’s Exposure to Federal Anti-Bribery Laws

Even if Secretary Lutnick was not aware of USAR’s relationship to Cantor, the deal may implicate federal bribery and gratuity laws and regulations concerning use of public office for private gain.

Federal laws forbid bribing or rewarding federal public officials. Anyone who “directly or indirectly, corruptly gives, offers or promises anything of value to any public official” with the intent to influence any official act or decision may be in violation of bribery laws. Even without a direct quid pro quo, federal law also prohibits anyone who “directly or indirectly gives, offers, or promises anything of value to any public official . . . for or because of any official act performed or to be performed by such public official.” If USAR selected Cantor as its broker as a way to induce, reward, or otherwise curry favor with the Department of Commerce, Secretary Lutnick, or other government officials, it would raise serious questions about USAR’s exposure to federal anti-bribery or gratuity laws. USAR’s reported personal engagement with Secretary Lutnick and financial arrangement with Cantor in the pursuit of the Commerce deal— an agreement that potentially resulted in a multi-million-dollar payout to a firm led by the Secretary’s sons—raises glaring red flags.

Though Secretary Lutnick may no longer hold a direct stake in Cantor, the direct financial interest of his family members is a central legal consideration in this matter. Legal experts and federal courts have determined that a “thing of value need not go to the public official himself” for an action to be considered germane under bribery law. The multi-million dollar fundraising fee Cantor may have collected on USAR’s requisite private stock transaction, which was needed to secure the Commerce investment, could reasonably be considered a tangible “thing of value.” USAR should disclose at what point it notified US government officials that Cantor would be acting on its behalf in this transaction.

Your actions and the involvement of Cantor may also expose Secretary Lutnick to federal antibribery laws. Federal law applies equal scrutiny to those soliciting bribes as to those offering them. Any government official who “directly or indirectly, corruptly demands, seeks, receives, accepts, or agrees to receive or accept anything of value” in order to be influenced in the performance of an official act, such as approving a government contract, may also be subject to federal anti-bribery laws.

Likewise, 5 C.F.R. § 2635.702 prohibits federal employees from using public office for their own private gain or for the private gain of relatives. Specifically, employees “may not use or permit the use of their Government position or title, or any authority associated with their public office, in a manner that is intended to coerce or induce another person . . . to provide any benefit, financial or otherwise, to the employee or to . . . relatives.” The extent of Lutnick’s involvement in the USAR-Commerce deal, therefore, could raise additional red flags.

Cantor should immediately report if any US government representatives, including Secretary Lutnick, Commerce employees, or other Trump administration officials, suggested that Cantor be involved or chosen as the broker in USAR’s private fundraising round.

Questions

In order to better inform our legislative responsibilities as they relate to rooting out corruption and securing critical minerals supply chains, we ask that you answer the following questions by July 20, 2026:

1. Have any employees or representatives of Cantor Fitzgerald met with any members of the Department of Commerce regarding critical mining investments or CHIPS and Science Act funding? If so, please provide a log with the date of any meeting, list of meeting attendees, meeting notes, and any correspondence between Commerce officials and Cantor.

a. Have any employees or representatives of Cantor Fitzgerald met with Secretary Lutnick, or any other representative from the Office of the Secretary regarding USAR?

b. Have Cantor Fitzgerald employees or representatives met with the CHIPS and Science team?

c. Have Cantor Fitzgerald employees or representatives met with Commerce officials regarding the Department’s potential investment in USAR?

d. Have Cantor Fitzgerald employees or representatives met with Commerce officials with regards to Cantor’s role as the lead placement agent in USAR’s PIPE transaction?

2. How was Cantor chosen as the lead placement agency in the USAR PIPE?

a. When and how did Cantor become aware of the PIPE?

b. With whom at USAR did Cantor negotiate with over its role as lead placement agency?

c. When did these negotiations begin, and when were they finalized?

d. When and how did Cantor inform Commerce Department officials of its role?

e. How was Cantor compensated for its role as the lead placement agent in the USAR PIPE?

f. Did Cantor collect a placement agent fee for its role in the PIPE? If so, what was the rate it charged USAR?

g. How much was Cantor compensated for its services in the PIPE transaction?

3. What internal policies, trainings, and procedures, does Cantor have, if any, as they relate to engagement with federal employees and compliance with federal bribery and ethics laws?

a. What processes does USAR have in place to address potential breaches of such ethics policies?

Sincerely,

Letter to USA Rare Earth

Ms. Humpton: We write regarding ongoing ethics and corruption concerns in light of the June 3, 2026 announcement that the U.S Department of Commerce (Commerce) has finalized a $1.6 billion definitive agreement with USA Rare Earth (USAR). Given the massive investment by the American public in USAR, and USAR’s fiduciary responsibility to its shareholders as a publicly traded company, it is imperative your company provide complete transparency about the substantive conflict of interest concerns raised by the circumstances of this investment.

In February of this year, we wrote to Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick in regard to our concerns about the January 2026 announcement that USAR and Commerce had reached a tentative $1.6 billion deal in which the federal government tentatively agreed to take a 10% stake in USAR. To close the deal, USAR set a $1.5 billion-dollar private offering for the company’s stock and selected Secretary Lutnick’s former financial firm, Cantor Fitzgerald (Cantor), as the deal’s placement agent. The deal likely benefited two of Secretary Lutnick’s adult sons, who now operate the firm. Secretary Lutnick has refused to provide answers, and we are expanding our investigation to seek information regarding any knowledge you may have involving Secretary Lutnick’s role or the role of Cantor Fitzgerald.

Under the terms of the January 2026 deal, Commerce would offer “up to $277 million in direct funding and up to $1.3 billion in loans” to USAR. In conjunction with this investment agreement, the US government also took a direct 10% stake in USAR, tentatively agreeing to purchase 16.1 million shares.

Commerce’s $1.6 billion investment in USAR was predicated on a capital matching requirement that mandated USAR raise its own private funds. To meet Commerce’s conditions, USAR raised $1.5 billion in a “private investment in public equity” (PIPE) transaction, in which the company sold 69.8 million USAR shares—offering around one-third of its outstanding stock—at a discounted price to private investors through a financial broker. USAR chose Cantor as “lead placement agent,” alongside Moelis, and the two were ultimately successful in securing the requisite investors, including several prominent donors to President Trump.

Secretary Lutnick appears to have played a part in facilitating USAR’s deal with Commerce. You attested to Secretary Lutnick’s decisive and personal involvement after meeting with him in November, describing how he opened doors to influential agency staff that manage billions in CHIPS Act funding and officials at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and Department of Defense (DoD). You claimed that Secretary Lutnick was especially interested in USAR, and recounted that Secretary Lutnick asked: “[w]hat would it take to go faster and scale further?”

Ultimately, the deal was likely lucrative for the Lutnick family. Secretary Lutnick led Cantor for decades, before transferring his stake in the company to his sons last year. Though no estimate of the fee Cantor collected has been released publicly, previous SEC disclosures and industry estimates indicate that fees for placement agents in PIPE transactions can range between 2.5-10%. USAR’s public filings indicate that the company incurred approximately $50 million in PIPE financing costs. Even a conservative estimate, therefore, indicates that USAR may have paid Cantor millions—if not tens of millions—in its quest to secure a $1.6 billion government contract from a government agency led by Cantor’s former CEO.

The circumstances around how this deal came together raise serious questions about Secretary Lutnick’s exposure to federal conflicts of interest and bribery laws.

Secretary Lutnick’s Ethics Commitments & Exposure to Federal Conflict of Interest Laws

We and other members of Congress previously raised concerns about the conflicts of interest posed by this deal. In response, you have explained USAR’s selection of Cantor by saying: “[o]ur best move was to go with the team who knew us.”

Indeed, USAR and Cantor’s relationship appears to date back to when Secretary Lutnick was still CEO and Chairman of Cantor. In August 2024, USAR announced that it would become a publicly traded company via a business combination with Inflection Point Acquisition Corp II, a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) with ties to Cantor dating back to May 2023 when Cantor served as the representatives of the underwriters for the SPAC’s initial public offering. Since then, Mr. Lutnick became Secretary of Commerce but the relationship between Cantor and USAR continued. You confirmed that Cantor helped USAR go public in March, and Cantor led USAR’s first post-merger PIPE in the following months.

This history raises questions about the degree to which Secretary Lutnick was aware of the preexisting business relationship and connection between USAR and Cantor when you met in November and strengthens the arguments that Secretary Lutnick should have recused himself from any particular involvement in the USAR deal. Notably, Secretary Lutnick agreed in his federal ethics agreement that pursuant to the impartiality regulation at 5 C.F.R. § 2635.502, he would “not participate personally and substantially in any particular matter involving specific parties in which I know Cantor Fitzgerald L.P., or its subsidiaries, is a party or represents a party” for a period of one year following his resignation from the company. If Secretary Lutnick was personally involved in negotiating or approving Commerce’s side of the deal— which included the capital matching requirement that ultimately involved and benefited Cantor —Lutnick’s involvement would likely be a textbook conflict of interest.

Accordingly, we seek clarity as to Lutnick’s direct involvement in the USAR-Cantor deal, including whether and to what degree USAR or Cantor representatives met with Secretary Lutnick with regards to the Department of Commerce’s negotiations or tentative investment agreement with USAR.

USAR’s Exposure to Federal Anti-Bribery Laws

Even if Secretary Lutnick was not aware of USAR’s relationship to Cantor, the deal may implicate federal bribery and gratuity laws and regulations concerning use of public office for private gain.

Federal laws forbid bribing or rewarding federal public officials. Anyone who “directly or indirectly, corruptly gives, offers or promises anything of value to any public official” with the intent to influence any official act or decision may be in violation of bribery laws. Even without a direct quid pro quo, federal law also prohibits anyone who “directly or indirectly gives, offers, or promises anything of value to any public official . . . for or because of any official act performed or to be performed by such public official.” If USAR selected Cantor as its broker as a way to induce, reward, or otherwise curry favor with the Department of Commerce, Secretary Lutnick, or other government officials, it would raise serious questions about USAR’s exposure to federal anti-bribery or gratuity laws. USAR’s reported personal engagement with Secretary Lutnick and financial arrangement with Cantor in the pursuit of the Commerce deal — an agreement that potentially resulted in a multi-million-dollar payout to a firm led by the Secretary’s sons—raises glaring red flags.

Though Secretary Lutnick may no longer hold a direct stake in Cantor, the direct financial interest of his family members is a central legal consideration in this matter. Legal experts and federal courts have determined that a “thing of value need not go to the public official himself” for an action to be considered germane under bribery law. The multi-million dollar fundraising fee Cantor may have collected on USAR’s requisite private stock transaction, which was needed to secure the Commerce investment, could reasonably be considered a tangible “thing of value.” USAR should disclose at what point it notified US government officials that Cantor would be acting on its behalf in this transaction.

Your actions and the involvement of Cantor may also expose Secretary Lutnick to federal antibribery laws. Federal law applies equal scrutiny to those soliciting bribes as to those offering them. Any government official who “directly or indirectly, corruptly demands, seeks, receives, accepts, or agrees to receive or accept anything of value” in order to be influenced in the performance of an official act, such as approving a government contract, may also be subject to federal anti-bribery laws.

Likewise, 5 C.F.R. § 2635.702 prohibits federal employees from using public office for their own private gain or for the private gain of relatives. Specifically, employees “may not use or permit the use of their Government position or title, or any authority associated with their public office, in a manner that is intended to coerce or induce another person . . . to provide any benefit, financial or otherwise, to the employee or to . . . relatives.” The extent of Lutnick’s involvement in the USAR-Commerce deal, therefore, could raise additional red flags.

USAR should immediately report if any US government representatives, including Secretary Lutnick, Commerce employees, or other Trump administration officials, suggested that Cantor be involved or chosen as the broker in USAR’s private fundraising round.

Questions

In order to better inform our legislative responsibilities as they relate to rooting out corruption and securing critical minerals supply chains, we ask that you answer the following questions by July 20, 2026:

1. Was Secretary Lutnick involved in USAR’s PIPE transaction in which Cantor acted as a placement agent?

a. What was the nature of your meeting with Secretary Lutnick in November, 2025? Please provide the date, list of attendees, and any transcripts, notes, or agendas, from your meeting with Secretary Lutnick and any correspondence between USAR and government officials related to the meeting.

i. Did you discuss any role for Cantor Fitzgerald in the USAR transaction at that meeting?

b. Have you met or spoken with Secretary Lutnick since November, 2025?

c. Was USAR in any way pressured or solicited to choose Cantor as its placement agent by officials at the Department of Commerce?

2. Did the Department of Commerce have any involvement in USAR’s PIPE transaction?

a. Did USAR notify the Department of Commerce about its intention to proceed with a PIPE transaction to raise matching funds during its negotiations with the Department?

b. Did USAR notify the Department of Commerce that Cantor Fitzgerald would represent USAR as its lead placement agent in the PIPE transaction? If so, when? Please provide all correspondence between USAR and Commerce officials related to the PIPE transaction.

c. Did representatives of Cantor meet with Commerce officials in relation to the PIPE transaction?

3. What was the nature of the interagency meeting between USAR and the Departments of Defense, Commerce, and Energy at the Pentagon?

a. Please provide the date, list of attendees, and any transcripts, notes, or agendas, from the meeting and any correspondence between USAR and government officials related to the meeting.

4. Please provide a copy of USAR’s negotiated agreement with the Department of Commerce, including any negotiated milestones, cost-sharing agreements, and reporting requirements for the duration of the contract.

a. Please provide a copy of the negotiated agreement between USAR and the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Energy Technology Laboratory.

5. Please describe the history between USAR and Cantor Fitzgerald.

a. Identify the date on which USAR first engaged, retained, or otherwise entered into any business relationship with Cantor Fitzgerald & Co. or any Cantor Fitzgerald affiliate, including any relationship or role in connection with the August 2024 business combination agreement with Inflection Point & Acquisition Corp. II.

b. Describe the process by which USAR selected Cantor as lead placement agent for both the April-May 2025 $75 million PIPE and the January 2026 $1.5 billion PIPE, including whether competing proposals from other entities were solicited, reviewed, or considered for the transactions.

6. Have you or anyone else at USAR communicated with Brandon Lutnick or Kyle Lutnick regarding the $1.5 billion PIPE anchored by Cantor?

a. Please provide a copy of any and all correspondence between Brandon and Kyle Lutnick, and USAR with regards to the January 2026 PIPE transaction.

7. USAR’s Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ending March 31, 2026 states that the financing costs for the January 2026 PIPE reached approximately $50 million. Please provide a breakdown of that $50 million.

a. How did USAR compensate Cantor for its role as the lead placement agent in the $1.5 billion PIPE transaction? What was the negotiated fee between Cantor and USAR for Cantor’s role in the PIPE transaction? i. How much was Cantor compensated for its services in the PIPE transaction?

b. How much did USAR pay—in fees, commissions or other compensation—to other agents involved in the USAR-Commerce deal and PIPE, including Moelis & Company.

8. What internal policies, trainings, and procedures, does USAR have, if any, as they relate to engagement with federal employees and compliance with federal bribery laws?

a. What processes does USAR have in place to address potential breaches of such ethics policies?

Sincerely,",1,2026-07-10T08:20:04Z,2026-07-10T08:21:18Z