President Donald Trump on Tuesday announced the U.S. will stop its bombing campaign against the Houthis in Yemen after the terrorist group told him they ‘don’t want to fight.’

‘They just don’t want to fight,’ Trump told reporters from the Oval Office. ‘They just don’t want to, and we will honor that. We will stop the bombings.’

Trump said the bombings on Houthi targets will stop ‘effectively immediately.’

Secretary of State Marco Rubio then said the ‘job’ was to get attacks on ships in the region to stop.

‘If that’s going to stop, we will stop,’ he added.

This is a breaking news story. Check back for updates.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., signaled there is little appetite for judicial impeachments among House Republican leaders. 

He said a bill passed by the House earlier this year, aimed at limiting federal district judges from issuing nationwide injunctions in most cases, was a ‘silver bullet’ against activist judges.

Johnson refused to pull impeachment off the table indefinitely when pressed by Fox News Digital, but he cautioned that there was a high bar for such maneuvers, while noting that getting enough votes to impeach in the House and remove in the Senate is an uphill battle in itself.

‘Look, impeachments are never off the table if it’s merited. But in our system, we’ve had 15 federal judges impeached in the entire history of the country. I mean, there may be some that I feel merit that, but you’ve got to get the votes for it, right? And it’s a very high burden,’ Johnson said.

‘And by the way, even if we could get an impeachment article through the House on a federal judge, it’s unlikely that they would be tried and convicted in the Senate on that, with the divided number we have. So, short of that, what can we do?’

The speaker said House Republicans had ‘done everything within our power to solve that problem.’

‘Darrell Issa’s bill is a great response: The No Rogue Rulings Act would prohibit a single individual judgment issuing a nationwide injunction like that to stop the entire policy of an administration,’ Johnson said. 

‘We passed it to the House, we sent it to the Senate with every expectation that they should be able to take that up. And I certainly hope they can, because, again, shouldn’t be a partisan issue.’

Some conservatives, however, are still hungry to pursue the impeachment route. They could force the House to do so by introducing a ‘privileged’ resolution, meaning Johnson would need to take it up within two legislative days. 

However, it is a politically risky undertaking that is ultimately guaranteed to fail in the Senate, where at least several Democrats would be needed to meet the two-thirds threshold for removal. 

It comes amid the Trump administration’s continued standoff with the courts over a litany of the new White House’s policies — from deportation flights to the Department of Government Efficiency.

Republicans have dismissed the rulings as political decisions by activist judges, while Democrats accuse the White House of waging war on a co-equal branch of government. 

The Trump administration, meanwhile, has consistently said it is complying with all lawful court orders while denouncing activist judges in court and in the media sphere. 

Americans who don’t have their REAL IDs will still be allowed to fly after the May 7 deadline, but they will face extra screening and delays at the airport.

Homeland Security Sec. Kristi Noem made the announcement during a House Appropriations Committee hearing on Tuesday. Noem said 81% of travelers already have IDs that comply with the REAL ID requirements and added that security checkpoints will also be accepting passports and tribal identification when the deadline hits Wednesday.

‘People will be allowed to fly,’ Noem told lawmakers. ‘We will make sure it’s as seamless as possible.’

Those who still lack identification that complies with the REAL ID law ‘may be diverted to a different line, have an extra step,’ Noem said.

REAL ID is a federally compliant state-issued license or identification card that Homeland Security says is a more secure form of identification. It was a recommendation by the 9/11 Commission and signed into law in 2005, but implementation has been repeatedly delayed.

Obtaining a REAL ID includes more stringent requirements for verifying a person’s identity than has been used in the past with non-REAL ID driver’s licenses. The switch to this new form of identification has caused a lot of chaos and confusion, with many travelers expressing fear they won’t be able to get a REAL ID before the Wednesday deadline.

Travelers without a REAL ID can use their passport, but even without that there are still alternatives to the new requirement, though they just might add delays to your trip and aren’t guaranteed to work.

Passengers will be required to fill out a Transportation Security Administration (TSA) Form 415, also known as a Certification of Identity form, and if the TSA officials are able to confirm the details given to them, passengers will be allowed to go through the security checkpoint and board their flight. Passengers who go this route may be subject to additional pat-downs, questioning or other extra security screening.

Even if you get denied, you may still be able to take advantage of airline policies that allow passengers to re-book their flight the following day, providing those without the proper identification time to get it. 

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

House Democrats, led by Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., walked out of a joint hearing of the Agriculture and Financial Services committees. Within seconds of Crypto Subcommittee Chairman Rep. Bryan Steil, R-Wis., calling the meeting to order, Waters rose to object. 

She was asked multiple times to explain her objection, and eventually said it was ‘because of the corruption of the president of the United States and his ownership of crypto and his oversight of all the agencies.’

Waters and the Democrats objected to the hearing based on concerns about President Donald Trump’s cryptocurrency ventures, which include his meme coin and World Liberty Financial, according to the Hill. The congresswoman also expressed concerns about Trump’s family’s involvement in crypto, including his sons’ launch of a Bitcoin-mining company.

When Waters, who serves as ranking member of the Financial Services Committee, opened the ‘shadow hearing,’ she accused Republicans of ‘legitimizing’ Trump’s alleged ‘corruption.’

‘…our Republican colleagues refused to address the unprecedented conflicts of interest presented by President Donald Trump and his family. I am deeply concerned that Republicans aren’t just ignoring Trump’s corruption—they are legitimizing Trump’s and his family’s efforts to enrich themselves on the backs of average Americans. Through his crypto business, Trump has turned the office of the presidency into a personal moneymaking machine,’ Waters said in her opening remarks. She later went on to accuse Trump of undermining democracy.

Waters also criticized Trump’s creation of a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve, which she claimed was a method of using taxpayer resources to boost the value of the president’s cryptocurrency.

The Democrats’ hearing featured a panel that included Chastity Murphy,, a former economic policy advisor for Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich.; Timothy Massad, director of the Digital Assets Policy Project at the Harvard Kennedy School; and Mark Hays, associate director for Cryptocurrency and Financial Technology at Americans for Financial Reform.

The three panelists largely criticized Trump and Republicans’ handling of the cryptocurrency industry. However, they all emphasized the need for stronger regulation—a topic that was intended to be the focus of the original joint hearing.

House Financial Services Committee Chairman Rep. French Hill, R-Ark., responded to Waters’ objection to the hearing with a statement.

‘Committee Republicans on Financial Services and the House Committee on Agriculture will continue to work with legislators on both sides of the aisle who are serious about creating a lasting framework that protects Americans, encourages innovation, and brings digital asset leadership back to the U.S.’

On Monday, the Financial Services Committee released a discussion draft of a bill to establish a regulatory framework for digital assets in the U.S. The committee is looking to lay out ‘clear regulations’ for the industry and prevent ‘bad actors’ from thriving.

‘By providing strong safeguards and long-overdue regulatory certainty, the discussion draft advances President Trump’s vision to make the U.S. the ‘crypto capital of the world’ and reinforces America’s leadership in the global financial system,’ the committee’s one-pager reads.

The Trump administration has removed the vice chair of the National Transportation Safety Board, who was appointed to the role in the waning days of the Biden administration, Fox News Digital learned. 

The White House removed Alvin Brown from the National Transportation Safety Board, a White House official confirmed to Fox News Digital Tuesday morning. Brown had served on the five-person safety panel since March 2024, before President Joe Biden appointed him as vice chair of the board in December 2024 – one month before President Donald Trump’s inauguration. 

The National Transportation Safety Board is an independent government agency charged with investigating major transportation accidents, such as plane crashes, and crafting safety guidance to prevent accidents. 

Brown, a Democrat, was the first Black mayor of Jacksonville, Florida, serving from 2011 to 2015, before serving as senior advisor for Community Infrastructure Opportunities for the U.S. Department of Transportation in 2022, according to his biography. 

The National Transportation Safety Board’s website, as of Tuesday morning, lists four members, all of whom were appointed by Trump either during his first or second administration. They are Chair ​​​​​​​​​​​​Jennifer L. Homendy, ​​​Michael Graham, ​​Thomas B. Chapman and ​​​J. Todd Inman. 

The Trump administration was rocked by a plane crash on Jan. 29 near the nation’s capital, when 67 people were killed after an Army Black Hawk helicopter and an American Airlines passenger plane collided near Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport. That accident was followed by other high-profile plane crashes. 

Air travel was hit with delays in recent days, most notably at New Jersey’s Newark Liberty International Airport, when air traffic controllers briefly lost communication with planes. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy joined Fox News’ Laura Ingraham Monday evening, where he addressed the delays and said he plans to overhaul and ‘radically transform’ America’s air traffic control system.

‘We’re going to build a brand-new air traffic control system – from new telecom, to new radars, to new infrastructure. We’re bringing on new air traffic controllers,’ he said. ‘This has been a problem in the decades coming, and we’re going to fix it.’

‘When you have an incident like this, you want to make sure that people are safe,’ he added, referring to the delays in Newark. ‘And so, you just have less departures out of the airport until we feel comfortable and safe that the system isn’t going to go down again.’

Friedrich Merz was elected chancellor of Germany after facing a historic loss in the Bundestag. In the second round, 325 lawmakers voted for Merz, bringing him past the 316-vote threshold. The far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) has already demanded that Merz step down and call for new elections following his loss in the first round.

Merz’s initial loss marked a historic moment, as it was the first of its kind in post-war Germany.

The result came as a major upset, as Merz was widely expected to win, thanks to a coalition deal involving his party, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU); its Bavarian sister party, the Christian Social Union (CSU); and the Social Democratic Party (SPD).

In February, Merz led his party to a federal election victory and later signed the deal that many assumed would secure him the votes needed to become chancellor. However, on Tuesday, Merz received 310 votes—falling short by six—as at least 18 Members of the German Parliament in the coalition did not back him, according to Reuters.

To secure the position of chancellor, Merz would have needed to win 316 out of 630 in the Bundestag. The coalition of CSU/CDU and SPD has 328 seats, more than enough to secure a majority victory. However, Merz received 310 votes, while 307 members voted against him and nine others abstained.

Despite his unexpected loss, Merz is not out of luck. The Bundestag now has 14 days to elect the next chancellor, and Merz still has a chance of winning the position. Germany’s socialist Left Party, however, is pushing to hold another round of chancellor elections as soon as Wednesday, according to Germany-based news outlet DW.

Merz had already lined up victory trips to France and Poland on Wednesday, Reuters reported, though it is unclear whether he will proceed with the visits as planned following the defeat.

The governors of six northeastern U.S. states have invited the premiers of six Canadian provinces to meet in Boston as both sides face the impacts of tariffs.

President Donald Trump’s policy of imposing tariffs on products imported from America’s northern neighbor and other nations has sparked controversy both in the U.S. and abroad.

The group of governors includes five Democrats — Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey, Maine Gov. Janet Mills, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont, and Rhode Island Gov. Daniel McKee — and one Republican — Vermont Gov. Phil Scott.

The governors are inviting the premiers of the Canadian provinces of New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Prince Edward Island and Québec, Healey and Mills press releases indicate.

‘While the international uproar over tariffs threatens to upend the economies of our respective communities, we write to reaffirm our friendship and unique interdependence. Ours is a cherished relationship that is founded not only on mutual financial advantages but also on centuries-old familial and cultural bonds that supersede politics,’  the U.S. politicians said in their invitation.

‘As Governors of the Northeast, we want to keep open lines of communication and cooperation and identify avenues to overcome the hardship of these uninvited tariffs and help our economies endure. As we continue to navigate this period of great uncertainty, we are committed to preserving cross border travel, encouraging tourism in our respective jurisdictions, and promoting each other’s advantages and amenities,’ they noted.

Trump, who has repeatedly indicated that he would like Canada to become America’s 51st state, is meeting with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney on Tuesday.

‘Meet the Press’ moderator Kristen Welker asked Trump if he would speak to Carney about making the country the 51st state. 

‘I’ll always talk about that. You know why? We subsidize Canada to the tune of $200 billion dollars a year. We don’t need their cars, in fact we don’t want their cars. We don’t need their energy, we don’t even want their energy, we have more than they do. We don’t want their lumber, we have great lumber, all I have to do is free it up from the environmental lunatics. We don’t need anything that they have,’ Trump declared.

Mills said that the economic and cultural relationships between the U.S. and Canada have been ‘strained by the president’s haphazard tariffs and harmful rhetoric targeting our northern neighbors,’ according to the press releases.

Tensions on the Supreme Court have flared this term as justices have clashed with each other and with lawyers at oral arguments amid a wave of Trump-era emergency appeals. 

These exchanges at any other forum would hardly even raise an eyebrow. But at the Supreme Court, where decorum and respect are bedrock principles and underpin even the most casual cross-talk between justices, these recent clashes are significant. 

After one particularly acrimonious exchange, several longtime Supreme Court watchers noted that the behavior displayed was unlike anything they’d seen in ‘decades’ of covering the high court.

Here are two high-profile Supreme Court spats that have made headlines in recent weeks.

Mahmoud v. Taylor

Last month, Supreme Court Justices Samuel Alito and Sonia Sotomayor quarreled briefly during oral arguments in Mahmoud v. Taylor, a case focused on LGBTQ-related books in elementary schools and whether parents with religious objections can ‘opt out’ children being read such material. 

The exhange occurred when Sotomayor asked Mahmoud attorney Eric Baxter about a book titled ‘Uncle Bobby’s Wedding,’ a story that invoked a same-sex relationship. Sotomayor asked Baxter whether exposure to same-sex relationships in children’s books like the one in question should be considered ‘coercion.’

Baxter began responding when Alito chimed in.

‘I’ve read that book as well as a lot of these other books,’ Alito said. ‘Do you think it’s fair to say that all that is done in ‘Uncle Bobby’s Wedding’ is to expose children to the fact that there are men who marry other men?’

After Baxter objected, Alito noted that the book in question ‘has a clear message’ but one that some individuals with ‘traditional religious beliefs don’t agree with.’

Sotomayor jumped in partway through Alito’s objection, ‘What a minute, the reservation is – ‘

‘Can I finish?’ Alito said to Sotomayor in a rare moment of frustration. 

He continued, ‘It has a clear moral message, and it may be a good message. It’s just a message that a lot of religious people disagree with.’

‘There is a growing heat to the exchanges between the justices,’ Fox News contributor Jonathan Turley observed on social media after the exchange. 

A.J.T. v. Osseo Area Schools

The Sotomayor-Alito spat made some court-watchers uncomfortable. But it paled in comparison to the heated, tense exchange that played out just one week later between Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch and Lisa Blatt, a litigator from the firm Williams & Connolly.

The exchange took place during oral arguments in A.J.T. v. Osseo Area Schools, a case about whether school districts can be held liable for discriminating against students with disabilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. 

Gorsuch scolded Blatt, an experienced Supreme Court litigator who was representing the public schools in the case, after she accused the other side of ‘lying.’ 

What played out was a remarkably heated exchange, if only by Supreme Court standards. Several court observers noted that they had never seen Gorsuch so angry, and others remarked they had never seen counsel accuse the other side of ‘lying.’

‘You believe that Mr. Martinez and the Solicitor General are lying? Is that your accusation?’ Gorsuch asked Blatt, who fired back, ‘Yes, absolutely.’

 Counsel ‘should be more careful with their words,’ Gorsuch told Blatt in an early tone of warning.

‘OK, well, they should be more careful in mischaracterizing a position by an experienced advocate of the Supreme Court, with all due respect,’ Blatt responded.

Several minutes later, Gorsuch referenced the lying accusation again, ‘Ms. Blatt, I confess I’m still troubled by your suggestion that your friends on the other side have lied.’

‘I’d ask you to reconsider that phrase,’ he said. ‘You can accuse people of being incorrect, but lying, lying is another matter.’

He then began to read through quotations that she had entered before the court, before she interrupted again. 

‘I’m not finished,’ Gorsuch told Blatt, raising his voice.

‘Fine,’ she responded.

Shortly after, Gorsuch asked Blatt to withdraw her earlier remarks that accused the other side of lying.

‘Withdraw your accusation, Ms. Blatt,’ Gorsuch said.

‘Fine, I withdraw,’ she shot back.

Plaintiffs said in rebuttal that they would not dignify the name-calling.

The exchange sparked some buzz online, including from an experienced appeals court litigator, Raffi Melkonian, who wrote on social media, ‘I’ve never heard Justice Gorsuch so angry.’

‘Both of those moments literally stopped me in my tracks,’ said Steve Vladeck, a professor at the Georgetown University Law Center. ‘You might want to listen somewhere where you can cringe in peace.’

‪Mark Joseph Stern‬, a court reporter for Slate, described the exchange as ‘extremely tense’ and described Blatt’s behavior as ‘indignant and unrepentant.’