With countless legal challenges to the Trump administration’s federal spending actions, legal experts say plaintiffs in these suits are attempting to block President Donald Trump’s agenda as the courts navigate conceivably new territory. 

‘I think this is a continuation of the warfare that we’ve seen over the past four-plus years during the Biden administration,’ Zack Smith, Senior Legal Fellow at the Heritage Foundation, told Fox News Digital. 

‘The only difference now is that the instigators of the lawfare are outside of government, and they’re trying to use different advocacy groups, different interest groups to try to throw up obstructions to Donald Trump’s actions.’

The Trump administration so far has become the target of more than 90 lawsuits since the start of the president’s second term, many of which are challenging the president’s directives. 

Plaintiffs ranging from blue state attorneys general to advocacy and interest groups are specifically challenging Trump’s federal spending actions, including the administration’s attempt to halt federal funding to various programs and the Department of Government Efficiency’s (DOGE) efforts to slash excess government spending.

Smith said he suspects these plaintiffs are attempting to ‘slow down’ the Trump administration’s progress and agenda via these lawsuits ‘even if they know or suspect their lawsuits will ultimately not be successful.’

UC Berkeley Law Professor John Yoo told Fox News Digital that the plaintiffs in the spending cases are showing ‘political weakness’ by seeking judicial recourse rather than going to Congress.

‘I think that what you’re seeing is political weakness, because, if they had popular support, they should go to Congress,’ Yoo said. ‘That’s the branch for which the Founders expected to be responsible in containing or reacting to any expansion of presidential power that went too far.’

Despite the public outcry from conservatives that judges blocking Trump’s federal spending actions are ‘activist judges,’ Yoo said the judges are ‘confused.’

‘There’s a lot of confusion going on in the lower courts,’ he said. ‘I think they misunderstand their proper role.’

Smith said that in the cases at hand, many judges are ‘interposing their own views of what [are] appropriate actions for the executive branch of government,’ saying this is ‘not the proper role of a judge.’ 

‘And yet you see some of these judges who are issuing these TROs, they’re being very aggressive, and they’re impeding on core executive branch functions when it really should be the president and his advisers who get to make important decisions,’ Smith said. 

Smith added he hopes the Supreme Court is ‘taking a skeptical eye towards some of these actions by these judges.’

Both Smith and Yoo said they expect these challenges to eventually make their way up to the Supreme Court, with Smith saying the high court ‘is going to have to confront some questions that it’s been trying to skirt for several years now.’

‘This has to go to the Supreme Court because you’re seeing confusion in the lower courts about what is the proper procedural way to challenge spending freezes,’ Yoo said. 

On Wednesday, Chief Justice John Roberts paused a federal judge’s order that required the Trump administration to pay around $2 billion in foreign aid funds to contractors by midnight. Smith called the move by Roberts ‘actually pretty stunning.’

‘And I think a reasonable interpretation of that would be that the justices, particularly the Chief Justice, is kind of sending a shot across the bow to some of these judges that, ‘Look, if you keep this up, we’re going to step in and intervene,” Smith said. 

Yoo said he expects the Trump administration to ultimately prevail on many of the suits launched against him, saying that ‘he’s really, in many ways, following the decisions of the Roberts Court itself about how far executive power goes.’

‘Now, just because Trump won an election doesn’t mean he gets to do whatever he wants — he has to achieve his mandate through constitutional processes, which I think he’s doing,’ Yoo said. 

‘He’s litigating, he’s appearing at the Supreme Court, so he’s not ignoring the courts. He’s doing what you should do if you’re the president and you have the responsibility to execute the law,’ Yoo continued. 

Fox News Digital’s Bradford Betz contributed to this report. 

President Donald Trump believes former President Joe Biden or his son, Hunter Biden, left behind the infamous bag of cocaine at the White House in 2023, the 47th president revealed in a recent interview. 

‘So … who actually left the cocaine in the White House?’ The Spectator’s Ben Domenech asked Trump in an interview at the White House Thursday afternoon. 

‘Well, either Joe or Hunter,’ Trump responded. ‘Could be Joe, too.’ 

The bag of cocaine was discovered July 2, 2023, in a storage locker near the entrance to the White House’s West Wing. The Secret Service discovered the small bag of cocaine and launched an investigation, which turned up inconclusive for a suspect. 

‘That was such a terrible thing because, you know, those bins are very loaded up with … they’re not clean, and they have hundreds and even thousands of fingerprints,’  Trump said of the discovery. ‘And when they went to look at it, it was absolutely stone cold, wiped dry. You know that, right?’

Trump added that the lockers typically are covered with fingerprints, but that the locker containing the bag of cocaine ‘was wiped out with, with the strongest form of alcohol.’

‘By the way, and I have to tell you, I think I’m going to look into that because it was … bad stuff happened there,’ Trump added without elaborating. 

The Biden family, including the former president and his son, Hunter Biden, were not staying at the White House when the cocaine was discovered. Instead, the family was staying at presidential retreat Camp David in Maryland.

Hunter Biden has a long and well-documented history with substance abuse, and he detailed his hourly need for crack cocaine in his 2021 memoir, ‘Beautiful Things.’ He has since gone through recovery efforts and has been sober since 2019, according to sworn testimony in federal court in 2023.

Former White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre was grilled about the cocaine when it was found but stressed the Biden family was not at the White House when it was discovered in a high-traffic area of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. 

‘The Biden family was not here,’ Jean-Pierre said during a July 2023 press conference when pressed about the cocaine. 

‘They were not here. They were at Camp David,’ she said. ‘They were not here Friday. They were not here Saturday or Sunday. They were not even here Monday. They came back on Tuesday. So, to ask that question is actually incredibly irresponsible, and I’ll just leave it there.’ 

Shortly after the Secret Service announced it had discovered the cocaine, the agency announced it had closed its investigation and could not determine a suspect.

‘There was no surveillance video footage found that provided investigative leads or any other means for investigators to identify who may have deposited the found substance in this area,’ the Secret Service said in a statement announcing an end to the investigation. 

‘Without physical evidence, the investigation will not be able to single out a person of interest from the hundreds of individuals who passed through the vestibule where the cocaine was discovered.’

Fox News Digital reached out to Biden’s office and Hunter Biden’s legal team for comment on Trump’s remarks but did not immediately receive a reply. 

Questions surrounding the resignation of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky sparked on Friday after Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-SC, suggested he may need to step down after a spat erupted between him and President Donald Trump during live coverage.

But that wasn’t the first time the Republican Party has  suggested such a move, and it began earlier this month after Trump pushed the idea following a call with Russian President Vladimir Putin. 

Trump first said Ukraine should hold elections after falsely claiming he only enjoyed a 4% approval rating, though under Ukraine’s constitution the country cannot hold elections when Martial Law is in effect during a time of war. 

Zelenskyy, whose approval rating is closer to 63% according to a Reuters report, on Friday once again reiterated he would resign if Kyiv was granted NATO membership. 

Ultimately, he emphasized during an interview with Fox News’ Bret Baier, that just like in the U.S. where ‘Americans vote for American president,’ just as ‘each European country vote for their president,’ the same sovereign right is held in Ukraine – suggesting it is not a negotiating tactic he will allow Trump to use to appeal to Putin. 

But who may be in the running should Zelenskyy ever decide to step down?

Vitali Klitschko

The former boxer-turned politician who has served as the mayor of Kyiv since 2014 with strong support among those living in the capital city, has also proven himself on the international stage.

In a trip to Brussels earlier this month, Klitschko stressed the need to stand behind Zelenskyy as he fielded verbal attacks from the Trump administration while also trying to counter Putin’s war. 

The voice of support for the Ukrainian leaders was particularly noticeable given his previous criticism of Zelenskyy.

During his trip last week, Klitschko reportedly emphasized that an election could ‘destroy the country from within’ while it faces existential threats from the north and on its eastern flank.

Ruslan Stefanchuk

Stefanchuk, the chairman of Ukraine’s Parliament, has also reportedly been floated as a potential future contender for the top role in Ukraine. 

Though Stefanchuk is said to be a top ally of Zelenskyy, he has ardently rejected the recent international suggestions  that Ukraine hold elections.

In a Facebook post earlier this month he argued that ‘If there is anyone who needs to be forced into real, free and fair elections, it is [Putin].’

He noted that Ukraine needs ‘bullets, not ballots,’ according to a report by Newsweek. 

Kyrylo Budanov

Head of Ukraine’s GUR military intelligence agency, Budanov, could be another who may be a contender for the top job in Kyiv given.

Budanov, who has not expressed a desire to seek high office according to a Newsweek report, happens to have an even higher trust rating than Zelenskyy among Ukrainians. 

The military intelligence head earlier this month apparently voiced his confidence that Ukraine may finally be able to reach a peace deal after three years of war.

‘I think it is going to happen. There are most of the components for it to happen,’ Budanov reportedly said during a YouTube interview. ‘How long it will be, how effective it will be – [is] another question.’

General Valery Zaluzhny

The former Commander-in-Chief of Ukraine’s armed forces, Zaluzhny, and presently his country’s ambassador to the U.K. is seen as a popular and credible successor to Zelenskyy if the president were to step aside. 

Zaluzhny and Zelenskyy have had their differences, resulting in the general being dismissed from his military post in 2024. Carnegie Politika blog recently reported that his popularity is strong, with 80% of Ukranians saying they trust him. The publication also noted that a hypothetical second-round runoff between the two resulted in a statistical tie.

Zaluzhny has not said if he would challenge Zelenskyy or if he was even interested in running for the president. 

Vice President JD Vance defended President Donald Trump and his administration’s foreign policy agenda Friday during a tense exchange with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy — inserting himself into a spotlight rarely seen by vice presidents. 

Trump and Vance sparred in the Oval Office Friday with Zelenskyy amid negotiations to end the war in Ukraine — an exchange that ultimately prompted Trump to announce an end to peace negotiations and request that the Ukrainian leader leave the White House. 

A source familiar with the meeting told Fox News Digital that there was no expectation of the meeting leading to a combative exchange, and that Trump and Vance were both caught off guard by Zelenskyy’s behavior. 

While vice presidents traditionally remain in the wings while the president takes center stage, Friday’s encounter with Zelenskyy exposed the weight Vance carries directing and advancing the Trump administration’s America First agenda — both at home and abroad. 

Edward-Isaac Dovere, a senior CNN reporter, said the moment may have amounted to one of the most significant for the vice presidency, just behind Vice President Dick Cheney’s efforts backing the U.S. to invade Iraq. 

‘Possible that JD Vance today had the most significant 90 seconds of his vice presidency, and the biggest impact any VP other than Cheney has had on shifting American foreign policy in the way he changed the trajectory of the conversation in the Oval Office today,’ Dovere said in a Friday post on X. 

The Oval Office encounter with Zelenskyy also comes on the heels of Vance’s Feb. 14 appearance at the Munich Security Conference — an event that left a lasting impression on European nations and their relationships with the U.S. 

Specifically, Vance said Russia and China don’t pose as great a threat to European nations as the ‘threat from within,’ in reference to issues like censorship and illegal immigration. 

‘To many of us on the other side of the Atlantic, it looks more and more like old entrenched interests hiding behind ugly Soviet-era words like misinformation and disinformation, who simply don’t like the idea that somebody with an alternative viewpoint might express a different opinion or, God forbid, vote a different way, or even worse, win an election,’ Vance said. 

The remarks prompted backlash from European leaders, including German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius, who said he interpreted the remarks as a comparison to ‘conditions in parts of Europe with those in authoritarian regimes.’ 

Tensions escalated in the Oval Office Friday after Zelenskyy pushed back on Vance’s statements that the path forward was through diplomacy, asserting that Russian President Vladimir Putin has broken other agreements in the past. 

‘What kind of diplomacy, JD, you are speaking about?’ Zelenskyy said. ‘What do you mean?’

In response, Vance said, ‘I’m talking about the kind of diplomacy that’s going to end the destruction of your country.’

‘Mr. President, with respect, I think it’s disrespectful for you to come into the Oval Office to try to litigate this in front of the American media,’ Vance told Zelenskyy. ‘Right now, you guys are going around and forcing conscripts to the front lines because you have manpower problems. You should be thanking the president for bringing it, to bring it into this country.’

Zelenskyy then asked Vance if he’d ever visited Ukraine, prompting Vance to question again if Zelenskyy disagreed that Ukraine has had challenges recruiting new troops. 

‘And do you think that it’s respectful to come to the Oval Office of the United States of America and attack the administration that is trying to prevent the destruction of your country?’ Vance said. 

Zelenskyy replied that everyone faces challenges during wartime, and that although an ocean protected the U.S. from Russia, he cautioned that the U.S. would feel the threat eventually. 

‘Don’t tell us what we’re going to feel,’ Trump said. ‘We’re trying to solve a problem. Don’t tell us what we’re going to feel.

‘You are in no position to dictate that, remember that.’

Vance and Zelenskyy also sparred when Vance asked if Zelenskyy had ever said ‘thank you once this entire meeting,’ prompting Zelenskyy to assert that Vance was speaking ‘loudly.’ 

Trump then snapped at Zelenskyy and warned him that Ukraine was in ‘big trouble.’ 

‘Wait a minute,’ Trump said. ‘No, no, you’ve done a lot of talking. Your country is in big trouble.’

Zelenskyy visited Washington amid negotiations to end the war in Ukraine and was expected to sign a minerals agreement that would allow the U.S. access to Ukraine’s minerals in exchange for support the U.S. has provided the country since Russia’s invasion in 2022. 

But after the tense exchange in the Oval Office, Trump announced a halt to peace negotiations and said that Zelenskyy could return to the White House when he was ‘ready for Peace.’ Additionally, Zelenskyy left the White House without signing the minerals deal. 

‘I have determined that President Zelenskyy is not ready for peace if America is involved, because he feels our involvement gives him a big advantage in negotiations,’ Trump wrote in a Truth Social post Friday. ‘I don’t want advantage, I want PEACE. He disrespected the United States of America in its cherished Oval Office. He can come back when he is ready for Peace.’

Zelenskyy also followed up with a social media post on X expressing gratitude to the U.S. for its support. 

‘Thank you America, thank you for your support, thank you for this visit,’ Zelenskyy said. ‘Thank you @POTUS, Congress, and the American people. Ukraine needs just and lasting peace, and we are working exactly for that.’

The exchange prompted mixed reactions from those on Capitol Hill. Republican Sen. Lindsay Graham of South Carolina said Zelenskyy should resign, while Democrat Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said that ‘Trump and Vance are doing Putin’s dirty work.’ 

The Associated Press and Fox News’ Emma Colton contributed to this report. 

Democrats and Republicans in Congress are gearing up to blame each other for a potential partial government shutdown next month, even as negotiations to avoid the pitfall continue.

‘The federal government will run out of money on March 14. Republicans, who control Congress and thus decide whether the government shuts down, will bring to the floor tomorrow arguably one of the worst budget bills ever,’ Rep. Greg Landsman, D-Ohio, wrote on X recently.

With just over 10 days left in session before the deadline, congressional Republicans are tentatively looking at passing a short-term extension of last year’s federal funding, known as a continuing resolution (CR), while potentially modifying it to account for priorities set by President Donald Trump, Fox News Digital was told.

It could also include extra funding for military readiness to ease defense hawks’ concerns.

Trump himself weighed in on Truth Social on Thursday night: ‘We are working very hard with the House and Senate to pass a clean, temporary government funding Bill (‘CR’) to the end of September. Let’s get it done!’

But Republicans have drawn a red line at Democrats’ demands for added assurances that Trump will not move to unilaterally cut cash flows already appropriated by Congress.

House Appropriations Committee Chairman Tom Cole, R-Okla., said in a closed-door GOP meeting last week that the Democrats’ price was too high, a lawmaker at the meeting told Fox News Digital.

On Friday, the top two Democratic negotiators released a blistering statement accusing Republicans of ‘walking away from bipartisan negotiations to fund the government — and raising the risk of a shutdown in so doing.’

And Democratic lawmakers for weeks have already been positioning to place the blame on Republicans if no agreement is reached.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., dodged a question from Fox News Digital earlier this week about whether Democratic leaders would encourage their members to reject a funding bill if it did not meet their demands.

‘The appropriations process at this moment is in the hands of [House Appropriations Committee ranking member Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn.] on behalf of House Democrats,’ he said.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., wrote on X this week, ‘Republicans are spending precious time trying to cater to the wishes of Trump’s billionaire buddies INSTEAD OF working to avoid a disastrous government shutdown that would hurt tens of millions of American families. Democrats are fighting for families.’

Since Republicans took back control of the House in 2023, any government funding bill that’s been signed into law has needed Democratic support in both chambers to pass.

But this year, some Democrats are arguing that Republicans will fully own a shutdown, since they now control both chambers of Congress and the White House.

Republicans, however, have accused Democrats of being unreasonable and are readying to blame them if a shutdown occurs. 

‘If that happens, that’s because the Democrats do not want to do the necessary work of getting waste and inefficiency out of our government,’ Rep. Byron Donalds, R-Fla., told Fox News’ Bill Hemmer.

House Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar, D-Calif., suggested liberals were still playing hardball earlier this week during his weekly press conference.

‘If they are interested in collaborating with us and us putting up votes to fund government, then they have to work with us. If they walk away, that is a signal that they have this on their own… We’re not interested in putting up votes just because,’ he said. 

‘We’re interested in funding a government that protects vulnerable populations, protects our communities, makes investments in our national security and defense. Those are the things that Democrats care about. If Republicans don’t want to partner with us, then, clearly they must have a strategy to fund this on their own, using their own votes.’

Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Patty Murray, D-Wash., said Democrats ‘are at the table negotiating in good faith to fund the government.’

‘But Republicans are the majority in the House and Senate. If they want our votes, they need to work with us,’ she said, warning Republicans not to ‘follow [Elon Musk] toward a shutdown.’

The Trump administration’s efforts to broker a peace negotiation ending the war in Ukraine came to a halt Friday following a testy exchange between President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. 

The encounter ultimately led to a canceled press conference, Trump requesting Zelenskyy to leave the White House, and the failure to sign a rare-earth minerals deal between the U.S. and Ukraine that would have allowed the U.S. access to Ukraine’s minerals. 

Tensions escalated in the Oval Office after Zelenskyy challenged Vance, who said that the path forward was through diplomacy. Instead, Zelenskyy issued a caution and noted that Russian President Vladimir Putin has broken other agreements in the past. 

‘What kind of diplomacy, JD, you are speaking about?’ Zelenskyy said. ‘What do you mean?’

In response, Vance said: ‘I’m talking about the kind of diplomacy that’s going to end the destruction of your country.’

‘Mr. President, with respect, I think it’s disrespectful for you to come into the Oval Office to try to litigate this in front of the American media,’ Vance told Zelenskyy. ‘Right now, you guys are going around and forcing conscripts to the front lines because you have manpower problems. You should be thanking the president for bringing it, to bring it into this country.’

Trump also snapped at Zelenskyy and warned him that Ukraine was in ‘big trouble’ and was ‘gambling with World War III.’ 

Following the encounter, Trump announced a pause to peace negotiations and said that Zelenskyy could return to the White House when he was ‘ready for Peace.’ Additionally, Zelenskyy left the White House without signing the minerals deal. 

‘I have determined that President Zelenskyy is not ready for peace if America is involved, because he feels our involvement gives him a big advantage in negotiations,’ Trump said in a Truth Social post Friday. ‘I don’t want advantage, I want PEACE. He disrespected the United States of America in its cherished Oval Office. He can come back when he is ready for Peace.’

Zelenskyy also followed up with a social media post on X expressing gratitude to the U.S. for its support. 

‘Thank you America, thank you for your support, thank you for this visit,’ Zelenskyy said. ‘Thank you @POTUS, Congress, and the American people. Ukraine needs just and lasting peace, and we are working exactly for that.’

Despite the fallout from the meeting, Zelenskyy told Fox News’ Bret Baier on Friday that the relationship between Ukraine and the U.S. could be salvaged. 

Here’s what else happened at the White House this week:

Large-scale reductions in force 

The Trump administration also sent a memo instructing agencies across the federal government to launch plans for ‘large-scale reductions in force’ and construct reorganization plans by mid-March. 

The White House’s Office of Management and Budget and Office of Personnel Management sent a memo on Wednesday ordering agencies to prepare to cut staffers and share reorganization plans by March 13. 

‘The federal government is costly, inefficient, and deeply in debt,’ the memo said. ‘At the same time, it is not producing results for the American public.’

Several federal government roles are exempt from the order, including those ‘necessary to meet law enforcement, border security, national security, immigration enforcement, or public safety responsibilities,’ according to the memo. 

First Cabinet meeting

Trump held his second administration’s first meeting with Cabinet members Wednesday, where he shared plans to massively cut the Environmental Protection Agency and seek to retrieve military equipment left in Afghanistan. 

Trump revealed that EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin is eyeing cutting 65% of federal employees from the agency.

‘I spoke with Lee Zeldin, and he thinks he’s going to be cutting 65 or so percent of the people from Environmental, and we’re going to speed up the process too at the same time,’ Trump said. ‘He had a lot of people that weren’t doing their job, they were just obstructionists, and a lot of people that didn’t exist.’

Trump also shared that he wanted back the military equipment U.S. troops left behind when withdrawing from Afghanistan, but didn’t share plans on how the U.S. would retrieve the equipment. 

‘We left billions, tens of billions of dollars worth of equipment behind, brand new trucks,’ Trump said Wednesday. ‘You see them display it every year, or their little roadway, someplace where they have a road and they drive the, you know, waving the flag and talking about America … that’s all the top of the line stuff. I think we should get a lot of that equipment back.’

The Taliban seized most of the more than $7 billion worth of equipment U.S. troops left in Afghanistan at the time of the withdrawal in August 2021, according to a Department of Defense report released in 2022.

English official US language 

Trump signed an executive order Friday mandating English as the official language of the U.S. The order eradicates a previous mandate from President Bill Clinton in 2000 requiring federal agencies and recipients of federal funding to issue language assistance to those who don’t speak English. 

The executive order allows each federal agency to determine whether it will offer services in languages besides English. 

The U.S. is an anomaly in that it has never had an official language, whereas roughly 180 countries out of the 195 countries in the world have official languages, a White House official told Fox News Digital. 

Fox News’ Emma Colton and Brooke Singman contributed to this report.