A former deputy to Lois Lerner — who oversaw the IRS division accused of targeting conservative groups during the Obama years — was placed on leave after lawmakers raised alarms that a new sub-department she was leading was becoming politicized.

In 2013, Lerner was hauled before Congress, where it was revealed her agency had wrongfully scrutinized tax-exempt applications related to the phrases ‘Tea Party,’ ‘9/12’ and ‘Constitution.’ The Treasury’s inspector general later confirmed ‘inappropriate criteria’ was used to target conservative groups and criticized ineffective oversight of systemic bias.

IRS Commissioner of Large Business and International Division Holly Paz – Lerner’s then-deputy – was placed on leave last week as lawmakers drew attention to a subordinate work-unit aimed at auditing pass-through businesses that Biden-era Commissioner Danny Werfel had created and assigned her to lead.

Werfel called the new work-unit a big step in ‘ensur[ing] the IRS holds the nation’s wealthiest filers accountable,’ and Paz called it an ‘important change’ in the IRS structure.

However, by 2025, lawmakers, including Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., warned that the pass-thru-business compliance unit had transformed to be ‘motivated by ideology rather than principles of sound tax administration.’

‘Pass-through entities form the bulk of Main Street businesses across the country. This includes countless family businesses, professional services firms, and real estate ventures that serve as the backbone of our local economies,’ Blackburn and Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso, R-Wyo., wrote to the Treasury in May.

Around that time, Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa., warned Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent that Paz’s team ‘has made tongue-in-cheek political comments,’ including their stated wish to ‘make basis great again’ – a phrase regarding taxation loss/gain that hearkens to President Donald Trump’s MAGA slogan.

In that regard, Rep. Lloyd Smucker, R-Pa., wrote to IRS Commissioner Billy Long in July that a Biden-era ‘basis-shifting transaction rule’ had ‘extended the scope’ of enforcement.

‘American taxpayers and businesses deserve clear and consistent tax rules that allow them to confidently comply with the law,’ Smucker wrote, adding he and Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Pa., are seeking to have that rule ‘reconsidered’ for the sake of unburdening ‘Main Street’ businesses.

Chuck Flint, a former top aide to Blackburn and president of the Alliance for IRS Accountability, told Fox News Digital on Tuesday that Paz’s past targeting of conservative groups makes her ‘unfit for government service.’

Flint said her statements to Congress and role as LB&I chief ‘places a cloud over the IRS.’

‘Paz’s Biden-era pass-through unit is now bludgeoning conservative businesses with fines and must be disbanded. Commissioner Long is flexing his muscles on the IRS Deep State and sending a signal to rogue bureaucrats by placing Paz on leave.’

Blackburn warned in her letter to Bessent that an IRS news release referencing targeting ‘complex arrangements’ lacked clear definitions and created the impression that legitimate business structures could be unfairly targeted based on legal structure versus actual tax compliance risk.

‘Even more concerning, the announcement explicitly states that the bureaucratic changes were designed primarily to ‘achieve its goal of increased audit rates in this complex area’.’

‘This focus on increasing audits rather than improving compliance suggests an agenda-driven approach to enforcement,’ Blackburn said.

In her letter, Ernst warned Bessent that Paz’s team members ‘have also undermined their appearance of impartiality by comparing legally acceptable transactions to obscene material, saying, ‘It’s one of those ‘You know it when you see it’ – a joking reference to [Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart’s] attempt to define pornography.

‘This team is reportedly acting independently and duplicating existing IRS processes, wasting taxpayer money, and not coordinating with the pre-existing offices,’ Ernst said.

‘Most concerning of all, the new pass-through auditors even use a new template for requesting taxpayer information they’ve deemed ‘The Art of the IDR,’ (versus ‘The Art of the Deal’) which treats taxpayers as guilty until proven innocent.’

‘Unfortunately, the Biden administration picked up right where Ms. Lerner and her team left off. On September 20, 2023, then-Commissioner Daniel Werfel announced, with language that resembled Democrat talking points, the creation of a duplicative new work unit [led by Paz] to specifically audit pass-through businesses and partnerships. The new office subjects these businesses to potentially two separate IRS examinations in the same year.

‘One would think Commissioner Werfel would go to great lengths to avoid hearkening back to previous scandals. Instead, he thumbed his nose at taxpayers by placing Lois Lerner’s deputy— Holly Paz—at the helm,’ Ernst wrote.

Lerner was front-and-center during the Obama-era scandal, testifying before Congress as head of the tax-exempt organizations division, as a deluge of reports of targeting right-leaning nonprofits abounded.

During the 2013 investigation by the House Oversight Committee, Reps. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and Darrell Issa, R-Calif., demanded Paz answer for ‘inconsistencies’ from a transcribed interview with committee staff involving statements about ‘intervention’ against Tea Party groups.

A 2015 report by then-Senate Finance Committee leaders Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Ronald Wyden, D-Ore., found that in other cases, some liberal terminology was also flagged, including ‘ACORN,’ ‘progressive’ and ‘medical marijuana.’

‘While handled poorly, groups on both sides of the political spectrum were treated the same in their efforts to secure tax-exempt status,’ Wyden said at the time, while then-Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas, said Democrats should be equally outraged as Republicans.

Fox News Digital reached out to Treasury, the IRS and an email connected to Paz for comment.

The Supreme Court on Friday ordered additional arguments in a major case centered on whether race can factor into drawing congressional maps, a clear sign that redistricting remains top-of-mind for the justices ahead of the 2026 midterms.

Justices ordered both parties in Louisiana v. Callais to return for additional arguments next term. At issue is whether Louisiana’s latest congressional map — which includes the creation of a second, majority-Black district — should be considered an unconstitutional ‘illegal racial gerrymander.’ 

The Supreme Court order comes months after justices first heard oral arguments in the case in March. It requires both parties to file supplemental briefs by mid-September, outlining in further detail their view of whether Louisiana’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority congressional district ‘violates the Fourteenth or Fifteenth Amendments to the U. S. Constitution.’ 

Reply briefs should be filed no later than Oct. 3, the Supreme Court said in the unsigned, single-page order — just three days before the high court gavels in for the 2025-2026 session. 

The order comes after the Supreme Court in June said they would not decide the case this term as had been expected — punting it to the fall for further consideration. At the time, the justices said they needed more information before ruling on the case.

The issue underscores the challenges states face with congressional redistricting. 

Louisiana has revised its congressional map twice since the 2020 census. The first version, which included only one majority-Black district, was blocked by a federal court in 2022. The court sided with the Louisiana State Conference of the NAACP and other plaintiffs, ruling the map diluted Black voting power and ordering the state to redraw it by January 2024.

The new map, S.B. 8, created the second Black-majority district at the center of the Supreme Court case. However, S.B. 8 was almost immediately challenged by a group of non-Black plaintiffs in court, who took issue with a new district that stretched some 250 miles from Louisiana’s northwest corner of Shreveport to Baton Rouge, in the state’s southeast. 

They argued in the lawsuit that the state violated the equal protection clause by relying too heavily on race to draw the maps, and created a ‘sinuous and jagged second majority-Black district.’

That map remains in place for now, until the Supreme Court can hear the additional information submitted to the court this fall.  

Oral arguments in March focused heavily on whether Louisiana’s redistricting efforts were narrowly tailored enough to meet constitutional requirements and whether race was used in a way that violated the law, as appellees had alleged.

The high court’s request for additional information comes at a pivotal time for the U.S., as new and politically charged redistricting fights have popped up in other U.S. states ahead of next year’s midterm elections. 

In Texas, tensions reached a fever pitch this week after Democratic state legislators fled the Lone Star State to block Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s ability to convene a legislative quorum needed to pass the state’s aggressive new redistricting map, which would create five additional Republican-leaning districts. 

Under the state’s constitution, two-thirds of the House legislators must be present for the body to conduct business. With an eye to this rule, Democratic lawmakers fled the state to Chicago, New York and Boston — beyond the reach of Texas authorities and of Abbott, who has little power in the near-term to compel their returns.

The governor has, however, threatened to take them to court to have them removed from office altogether.

In a press conference Monday, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul stressed the magnitude of the redistricting efforts, and vowed to explore ‘every option’ in redrawing state lines.

‘We are at war,’ Hochul said, speaking alongside the six Texas Democrats who fled to her state.

 ‘And that’s why the gloves are off — and I say, bring it on,’ she added.

The move is part of a broader redistricting push aimed at helping Republicans defend their slim House majority. As with most midterms following a new president’s election, 2026 is expected to serve as a referendum on the White House — raising GOP concerns that they could lose control of the chamber.

Former first lady Michelle Obama praised former President Barack Obama as her ‘everything’ and the ‘coolest guy I know’ on his 64th birthday after the longtime couple joked about divorce rumors that have been swirling for months. 

‘Happy birthday to my love, my best friend, my everything! @BarackObama, even after all these years, you’re still the coolest guy I know,’ the former first lady posted to Instagram Monday afternoon, accompanied by a photo of the pair. 

The former president turned 64 Monday, with the former first lady sharing the birthday post on both Instagram and Facebook. Michelle Obama’s birthday message followed months of speculation that the couple’s more than 30-year marriage was on the rocks before the couple joked about the rumors during a July podcast. 

‘It’s my husband, ya’ll!’ Michelle Obama said jokingly at the start of a podcast of ‘IMO’ in July when the former president first joined the set. ‘When we aren’t (in the same room), folks think we’re divorced.’ 

The former first lady hosts ‘IMO’ with her brother Craig Robinson. 

‘She took me back!’ Barack Obama quipped during his appearance, joking, ‘It was touch and go for a while.’ 

Speculation had mounted for months that the presidential couple was headed to divorce, which heightened in January when the former first lady did not attend high-profile events such as President Donald Trump’s inauguration or President Jimmy Carter’s funeral. 

‘There hasn’t been one moment in our marriage where I’ve thought about quitting my man,’ Michelle Obama said during an ‘IMO’ podcast in July. ‘We’ve had some really hard times. We’ve had a lot of fun times, a lot of adventures, and I have become a better person because of the man I’m married to.’

‘Don’t make me cry now,’ Barack said. ‘Don’t let me start tearing up now.’

Michelle previously had dismissed divorce rumors, including in April when she addressed questions as to why she did not join the 44th president at Trump’s inauguration or Carter’s funeral. 

‘But the interesting thing is that when I say no, for the most part, people are like, ‘I get it, and I’m OK,’ right?’ she told podcast host Sophia Bush in April about how she spends her time. ‘And that’s the thing that we as women, I think we struggle with, like disappointing people. I mean so much so that this year people were, they couldn’t even fathom that I was making a choice for myself, that they had to assume that my husband and I are divorcing, you know? This couldn’t be a grown woman just making a set of decisions herself, right? But that’s what society does to us.’

‘If it doesn’t fit into the sort of stereotype of what people think we should do, then it gets labeled as something negative and horrible,’ Obama continued.

Fox News Digital reached out to Michelle Obama’s office for any additional comment Tuesday morning but did not immediately receive a reply. 

Fox News Digital’s David Rutz and Hannah Panreck contributed to this report. 

President Donald Trump appeared on the roof of the White House on Monday, indicating to the press that he was reviewing potential renovations for the presidential residence.

Trump specifically appeared above the West Wing and the press briefing room, with reporters crowded on the White House lawn to see him. There was also heavy security during the appearance due to the president’s exposure.

Trump spoke with several people while on the roof, though the White House has not identified them or said what they discussed.

The appearance comes just days after Trump announced that he and private donors will fund an estimated $200 million cost of a new ballroom at the White House.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Thursday during a briefing that the construction is scheduled to begin in September and will be ‘completed long before the end of President Trump’s term.’

Trump similarly financed the installation of two 88-foot American flags flanking the White House earlier this year, each reportedly costing around $50,000.

‘The White House is currently unable to host major functions honoring world leaders in other countries without having to install a large and unsightly tent approximately 100 yards away from the main building’s entrance,’ Leavitt said, adding the new ballroom will be ‘a much-needed and exquisite addition.’

She said the United States Secret Service will provide the necessary security enhancements and modifications during the construction.

The project is intended to provide a dedicated space for hosting official events, state dinners and large ceremonial gatherings.

The planned 90,000-square-foot addition will accommodate approximately 650 seated guests and will stay true to the classical design of the White House.

Fox Business’ Amanda Macias contributed to this report

President Donald Trump answered Tuesday whether he would try to campaign for the White House a fourth time around. 

During a phone interview on CNBC’s ‘Squawk Box,’ Trump was discussing Bureau of Labor Statistics job numbers that he argues were ‘rigged’ during the 2024 presidential election to inflate former President Joe Biden’s economic performance. While discussing gerrymandering, Trump said he ‘got the highest vote in the history of Texas’ – a claim CNBC anchorman Joe Kernen initially challenged but then admitted a network fact-check showed Trump did get the highest number of votes in Texas. 

‘I got the highest vote in the history of Texas, a record that they say won’t be beaten unless I run again,’ Trump said. 

CNBC anchorwoman Rebecca Quick interjected, ‘Are you going to run again? The Constitution…’

‘No, probably not,’ Trump responded. ‘Probably not.’ 

‘And you’re not going to, and you’re not going to fire Jay Powell,’ Kernen added, referencing tensions between Trump and Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell. 

Trump circled back to address Quick directly:  ‘I’d like to run,’ Trump told the anchorwoman. ‘I have the best poll numbers I’ve ever had. You know why. Because people love the tariffs, and they love the trade deals, and they love that countries – they love that foreign countries aren’t ripping us off. For years, they ripped us. A friend, and foe and a friend. And the friends were worse.’ 

The 22nd amendment of the U.S. Constitution says a person can be elected president only twice. If someone takes over as president – as a vice president would due to death or resignation – and serves more than two years in that term, the amendment states that person can only be elected president once more. It effectively sets a maximum of 10 years for any person to serve as commander-in-chief. 

George Washington set the tradition of stepping down as president after two terms, but the amendment came about in response to Franklin D. Roosevelt’s unprecedented four terms. Roosevelt served during the Great Depression and World War II. 

Trump earlier this year both teased and distanced himself from the idea of a third term, as some conservative circles have floated changing the 22nd amendment to allow an exception for nonconsecutive presidencies. 

Before Trump, the last and only other president to serve two nonconsecutive terms was Grover Cleveland in the late 1800s.

In May, Trump said he considered it a ‘compliment’ that ‘so many people’ wanted him to run in 2028 but said it was not something he was interested in pursuing. 

‘I have never had requests so strong as that. But it’s something to the best of my knowledge, you’re not allowed to do,’ Trump told MSNBC’s Kristen Welker. ‘There are many people selling the 2028 hat, but this is not something I’m looking to do. I’m looking to having four great years, and turn it over to somebody, ideally a great Republican. A great Republican to carry it forward. But I think we’re going to have four years, and four years is plenty of time to do something really spectacular.’ 

Trump said he believed the MAGA movement could survive without him, floating Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio as potential successors.

The Justice Department is weighing the release of the audio file and transcript of Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s interview late last month with Jeffrey Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell, senior administration officials told Fox News — the latest in a nearly month-long saga that has consumed the Trump administration and the attention of the public since early July. 

Blanche’s interviews with Ghislaine Maxwell took place over a two-day period in Florida, where she had been serving out a 20-year prison sentence for sex trafficking at the Federal Correctional Institution in Tallahassee, Florida. 

The questions took place at the U.S. Attorney’s office in Tallahassee.

Maxwell was transferred last week without explanation to a new, minimum-security women’s federal prison camp in Texas.

It is unclear how long the tape and transcripts from the interviews between Blanche and Maxwell are, but they do exist, Fox News has learned, and discussions are underway today involving whether — and when — to release them. 

Anything released by the Trump administration would almost certainly involve heavily redacting any identifying information of individuals named in the transcript in order to protect victims— something Attorney General Pam Bondi has stressed in public on multiple occasions.

The Justice Department declined to comment on additional specifics involving the interview or its release.

Still, the news comes as the Justice Department and FBI have struggled to quell the mounting public pressure on them to release more information related to the Epstein investigation— underscoring the story’s sticking power in a fast-moving news cycle, and among Trump supporters, who have been some of the leading voices in demanding the information be released.

This pressure reached a fever pitch on July 7, after the Justice Department said in an unsigned memo that it did not plan to release more information about the investigation. They also said there was no ‘client list,’ as had been suggested. 

In the face of mounting public protest, Tuesday’s news makes clear the degree to which the Trump administration appears to be rethinking that response to the fallout.

Trump, for his part, has called for the Justice Department to release ‘all credible’ evidence in the files. 

‘We’d like to release everything, but we don’t want people to get hurt that shouldn’t be hurt, and I would assume that was why he was there,’ he told Newsmax late last week.

Also on Tuesday, House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer issued multiple subpoenas related to the Epstein investigation, including subpoenaing the Justice Department for production of the ‘complete’ Epstein files to the committee ‘by or before August 19,’ according to a letter.

The House Oversight Committee subcommittee panel also subpoenaed former government officials for depositions in the Epstein probe, including Bill and Hillary Clinton. 

The panel voted by unanimous voice vote in late July to subpoena the individuals, and held a separate vote on subpoenaing the Justice Departent. 

Fox News’s Elizabeth Elkind contributed to this report.

The Netherlands will become the first European state to provide cash to purchase U.S.-made weapons for Ukraine, under a plan agreed to by President Donald Trump and NATO chief Mark Rutte. 

Dutch Defense Minister Ruben Brekelmans announced Monday his nation will contribute €500 million ($576 million) to a fund called the NATO Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List (PURL) initiative.

Brekelmans said the funding would go toward Patriot systems and missiles, a mobile surface-to-air interceptor. 

Developed in the 1980s and still considered one of the U.S.’s most advanced air defense systems, the Patriot can thwart attacks from aircraft, tactical ballistic missiles and cruise missiles.

A new Patriot system and the missiles to go along with it could cost around $1.1 billion, according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). The newest version of the missile costs around $4 million a piece.

Last month during a White House meeting with Rutte, Trump promised Europe would spend ‘billions’ on U.S. weapons to arm Ukraine.

‘Billions of dollars’ worth of military equipment is going to be purchased from the United States, going to NATO… And that’s going to be quickly distributed to the battlefield,’ Trump said.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy thanked the Netherlands for the funding on X. 

‘Ukraine, and thus the whole of Europe, will be better protected from Russian terror,’ he wrote.

‘I am sincerely grateful to the Netherlands for their substantial contribution to strengthening Ukraine’s air shield,’ he added.

Rutte also thanked the Netherlands and encouraged other European NATO allies to follow suit.

‘This is about getting Ukraine the equipment it urgently needs now to defend itself against Russian aggression,’ he said in a statement.

‘I have written to all NATO Allies, urging them to contribute towards this burden-sharing initiative, and I expect further significant announcements from other Allies soon.’

The Netherlands has emerged as one of Ukraine’s top defense donors, committing close to €3 billion in military aid since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022. Dutch support has included tanks, F-16 training, and now, contributions toward strategic air defense platforms like the Patriot.

The new Trump-NATO agreement came after Republicans expressed frustration with the nearly $128 billion in aid the U.S. has offered to Ukraine, arguing Europe should take up the burden. At the same time, Trump has increasingly grown impatient with Russian President Vladimir Putin during peace negotiations. 

White House envoy Steve Witkoff is set to head to Moscow this week before the deadline Trump gave Putin for ending the war. The president has threatened to slap steep tariffs on Russia and any nations that do business with it if this week’s negotiations fail to produce a deal.