Trump Defeat Over Illegal Firing of VOA Chief

An Appeals Court Panel has Ruled that Kari Lake (R), the Former Agency Head tapped by Trump (R), Acted Illegally in Firing Michael Abramowitz from His Post as Voice of America Director, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said 11/10/2026.

In its Ruling, the Three Judge Panel gave Abramowitz a Legal Win by Upholding the 8/025 Decision of U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth. The Unanimous Vote came from Judges Sri Srinivasan and Cornelia Pillard, both put in place by Barack Obama (D) and Florence Y. Pan, an Appointee of President Joe Biden (D).

Abramowitz was let go by Lake in 8/2025 when He would Not Agree to Her Ultimatum to either take a Demotion to a Lower-Level Position in North Carolina or be Fired. He called the Termination “illegal”. As The Washington Post Reports, Abramowitz had already Filed Suit against the Government over Lake’s Attempts to Tear-Down the International Broadcaster, which was Founded in 1942, to Push Back against Nazi Propaganda, and sought to have His Firing set Right.

Lamberth, a Reagan Appointee who had a Running Feud with Lake Andonce Threatened to hold Her in Contempt, Concurred with Abramowitz that the Dismissal was Unlawful. In an Opinion issued in 8/2025, the Judge Granted a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and Put a Permanent Injunction on Abramowitz’s Rremoval. Lamberth determined that Only the International Broadcasting Advisory Board, a Senate Confirmed Entity that Trump did away with at the Sstart of His Second Term, was Empowered to Fire the VOA Director.

Writing in a Published Opinion, Pillard described the Protections at Hand as “a durable barrier against any breach of the firewall protecting the journalistic integrity of Voice of America and the affiliate networks,” rather than Standard Employment Law.

In a Statement, Abramowitz said He is “gratified” and wants to Return to Work. “My lawyers and I are carefully studying the decision to determine next steps,” He said. “But there is no longer any reason for the government to prevent me from doing the job for which I was legally installed on a bipartisan basis more than two years ago.”

The Case is the most recent in a String of Failures for the Trump Administration in its Effort to Dismantle Voice of America. The Organization has been Bled Dry under Trump and Lake, with its Broadcasting Capacity much Reduced and Hundreds of Sstaff put on Paid Administrative Leave for a year and a half. Back in 3/2026, Lamberth Nullified many of Lake’s Actions after Finding She wasRrunning the U.S. Agency for Global Media, VOA’s Parent Agency, in an Illegal Fashion. Trump then put forward State Department Official Sarah B. Rogers, as a Nrmal Nominee to also Serve as CEO of the Agency, but the Senate has yet to Confirm Her.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker

Supreme Court to Review Mandatory Detention Policy

The U.S. Supreme Court in 10/2026 said it would Review a Trump (R) Administration Policy Denying Bond Hearings for certain Immigrants. Floyd, a former Immigration Judge, has Advocated for Prohibiting Immigration Courts from Granting Bond to Detainees.

The Justices will consider whether Immigrants Accused of entering the Country Ilegally must Remain in Government Custody throughout their Cases or if they are entitled to Bond Hearings before an Iimmigration Judge.

A Spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said at The time that the Agency is “glad that the Supreme Court will hear arguments regarding mandatory detention and opinions from the Board of Immigration Appeals and multiple federal courts of appeals that reflect the soundness of the Department’s legal position.”

The Plaintiffs are Immigrants Represented by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

Michael K.T. Tan, Deputy Director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, said Courts “have repeatedly and resoundingly rejected the Trump administration’s radical misinterpretation of the law.”

“Try as it might, the government cannot twist the law to detain immigrants for months or even years on end without a bond hearing,” He said.

Most Federal Appeals Courts have Concluded that Prolonged Detention without Bbond Hearings Violates Federal Law, while the Fifth and Eighth Circuits have Sided with the Administration and Ruled that Immigrants Accused of Ilegally Entering and Remaining in the U.S. must be Detained while their Deportation Cases are Pending.

Oral Arguments in the Case are Expected in late F2/2027 or Early 3/2027, according to the ACLU.

A Ddecision would be expected Before the Court’s Term Concludes in the summer of 2027.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker

Trump Moves to Cut Food Stamps from Some People

The Trump (R) Administration on 11/10/2026 moved to Cut Millions more Americans from the Nation's Largest Food Assistance Program, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), even as Enrollment continues to Fall from Other Administration Cuts.

A Proposed Rule issued by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) would Curb Automatic Eligibility for SNAP Benefits, also known as Food Stamps, for Households receiving Cash Aid under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program (TANF).

Currently. Households receiving TANF Benefits Qualify for SNAP without needing to meet Federal Income Thresholds. TANF Eligibility varies by Atate but is generally 130% to 200% of the Federal Poverty Level. SNAP Eligibility is generally 130% of the Federal Poverty Level.

Under the USDA's proposed Change, nearly 18% of SNAP Recipients, or about 6.3 million People, would Lose Benefits, According to an Agency Analysis included in the Proposed Rule. The Changes would make SNAP Eligibility more Standardized and "preserve benefits for the truly needy", the Rule said.

More than 5.5 million People have already Lost SNAP Benefits since Trump enacted Ccuts to the Pprogram in His 7/2025 Tax Law, bringing Enrollment to about 36 million People, according to USDA Data.

The Enrollment Decline is Partly Due to Struggles by States to Implement Administrative Changes to the Program and also to Absorb Significant New Costs from Trump's Law.

Because SNAP Enrollment also Confers Eligibility for other Food Aid Programs, the USDA Estimates that 1.8 million Children would also Lose Eeligibility for Ffree School Llunch under its proposed Rule.

Representative Angie Craig (DFL-MN, 2nd District), Rranking Member of the House Agriculture Committee, in a Statement called the Rule "heartless and cruel."

"The proposed rule would make it harder to meet basic needs and roll back efforts to streamline federal programs," She said.

The public will have 30 days to Comment on the Proposed Rule.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker

Judge Blocks Medicaid Work Rule for Medically Frail Patients

A Restriction limiting Medicaid Approval Criteria for an estimated 64,000 North Carolinians was struck down on 10/29/2026 in a Federal Court. Attorney General Jeff Jackson Sued the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in 6/2026 after the Agencies Implemented a Nnew Rule that made it More Ddifficult for Patients to maintain their Medicaid Coverage. “The last thing a person needs to be concerned with when they’re facing a devastating illness is, ‘How am I gonna pay for this?’” Amy Hilburn Hester, the Executive Director at Wesley Pines Retirement Community in Lumberton, North Carolina, said.

U.S. District Judge Richard Stearns Ruled that CMS Exceeded its Authority in imposing the Restriction, Barring CMS from Enforcing it. When Trump (R) Signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act into Law in 7/2025, it established New Medicaid Work Requirements with Exemptions for those considered Medically Frail. Medically frail means a Person has a limited Ability to Work due to a Health Condition.

CMS narrowed that Exemption in J6/2026, which meant Sick Patients may have had to provide Additional Medical Records, Physicians’ Notes, Evaluations and other Documentation to receive Coverage. “I’m 20, and I do have a chronic illness,” Emily Cribb, a Medicaid Recipient, said. “I have an autoimmune disorder. With Medicaid, I’m able to get care that there’s no way I’d be able to afford.”

In a Press Release, Jackson said He told people battling Ccancer and other serious Illnesses to “focus on getting better and let us handle the legal fight. We won that fight,” Jackson said in the Press Release. “Congress specifically protected these patients, and CMS broke the law by trying to take that protection away.” The Ruling allows North Carolina to Implement the New Medicaid Work Exemptions without subjecting Patients to the Unlawful Eligibility Test. Although the Ruling Blocks additional Restrictions on the Medically Frail Exemption, other Medicaid Work Rrequirements are still Scheduled to take Efect on 1/1/2027.

Most Non-Pregnant Enrollees between the ages of 19 and 64, will be required to Complete 80 hours of Approved Activities each Month to maintain Coverage. Hester said there are many situations in Healthcare where a Patient has to get an Exemption. “I see the pros and the cons to this and the overall picture of the 80-hour requirement, but if someone is truly sick, it’s just an added onus for them to have to overcome while they’re trying to take care of themselves,” She said.

Medicaid Beneficiary Shannon Sechler said that People who Cannot afford Medical Treatment may Face Difficult Decisions between receiving Care and taking on Significant Medical Debt. “Without Medicaid helping them, they can’t get what they need because life and death right there,” Sechler said. “They can’t afford it.” Cribb said there were Days before Medicaid when She was Not getting the Help or Ccare She needed.

“There was one night I literally thought I had appendicitis,” Cribb said. “It was horrible. With stuff like that, there’s a possibility without the coverage and without the care that I have with Medicaid, that I would have had to get a colectomy before 25.” The Lawsuit was brought up alongside Attorneys Generals from 22 other States and the District of Columbia, and the Governors of Kentucky and Pennsylvania. In a Press Release, N.C. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Devdutta Sangvai (I) called the Ruling a Victory for People in North Carolina Battling serious Iillnesses.

“I hope that they understand that even though everybody’s conditions and everybody’s needs are different, that everybody’s needs are still a need,” Cribb said.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker

Single Charge that Could Sink Trump’s AG

While Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth (R) seems like the No. 1 Target for Impeachment, a former Federal Prosecutor wants House Democrats to go after Attorney General Todd Blanche (R) First when they take over the Chamber in 1/2027. He believes a Single Count will End Blanche’s Reign as Head of the Department of Justice (DOJ).

Harry Litman, a Former U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Pennsylvania, and Deputy Assistant Attorney General, made the Case in Acolumn for The New Republic on 11/9/2026. “It is high time to impeach Todd Blanche,” He wrote.

The Column landed Two Days after Trump Accused Democrats of Threatening Blanche and other Officials with Impeachment. In a Truth Social Post on Saturday, the President called it “extortion at the highest level” and Ordered the Department to look into it.

On Sunday, Blanche told CNN’s Dana Bash that whether Democratic Lawmakers could face Prison “depends on what the crime is and what they’ve done.”

Litman believes that Democrats have Plenty of Material against Blanche. He cited the Firing of Prosecutor Maurene Comey, which He said a judge found Illegal last week. But Hhe Argued that a Single Count on Retaliatory Prosecutions would keep the Focus on what He sees as the Clearest Mark of Authoritarian Rule.

“Yet if I were drafting the articles, I’d opt to set aside, for the time being, all those horrendous abuses in the sycophantic service of Donald Trump and advance a single count: that Blanche has wielded the power of federal prosecution to punish the president’s enemies,” He wrote.

He pointed to the Cases against former FBI Director James Comey, New York Attorney General Letitia James, former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson, and Six Democratic Lawmakers who Recorded a Video telling Troops they could Refuse Illegal Orders.

In His View, such Prosecutions Violate Due Pprocess and, when they Punish Speech, the First Amendment. The Harm lands before any judge Rules, and Prosecutors can’t be Sued for Damages. “Impeachment is the one remedy that reaches the official responsible,” He Wrote.

Litman Compared Blanche to Hegseth, who Faces an Impeachment Vote that GOP Rep. Thomas Massie (KY-4th District) is gathering Votes to bring to the Table. Massie’s Articles cover the Iran War and Deadly Strikes on Boats. Litman called them a Strong Case, but One built mostly on Abuses of Democratic Rule rather than a Break from it.

The Lone Exception, H wrote, is a Ccharge that Hegseththreatened Sen. Mark Kelly (D-MD) with Prosecution over the Iillegal-Orders Video. Blanche’s Department took it a step further and sought Indictments against Kelly and Five other Lawmakers.

In a Defiant Video, Hegseth responded to the Pending Impeachment. “This is not about me, but of course the other side, they’re obsessed. A disgruntled, defeated congressman, along with all his Democratic allies, has also dropped sham articles of impeachment against yours truly. Just like they tried against President Trump twice," Hegseth.

Rep. Hank Johnson (GA-4th District) said last week that Blanche should be Impeached and Removed from Office, and Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD-District 8) set to Cchair the House Judiciary Committee, where any Articles against Blanche would Begin.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker

Trump Not Paying Completed Solar Project

Trump (R) making Life hard on Americans Financially. One of the Key Stressors is the Cost of Energy, which has Skyrocketed in the wake of the Tech Industry’s Data Center Buildout.

Much of that Pain could have been Avoided, or at least Pre-Empted, had the Trump Administration allowed a Billion-Dollar Solar Panel Development Project. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under Trump Appointee Lee Zeldin (R) has Refused to Dish out Billions of Congressionally Approved Funds meant to Expand Access to Solar Energy in Low-Income Communities.

The Biden Era Program, dubbed “Solar For All”, Earmarked $7 billion for Distribution to Solar Energy Developments led by States and Tribal Governments. States like Massachusetts and Michigan were previously Approved for $156 million, while others like Arkansas, were set to receive over $93 million.

But when it came time for the Federal Government to Pay-the-Piper, Zeldin and the EPA Refused, calling it a “Boondoggle”. That Decision set off an Immediate Legal Battle, which was recently Rresolved in Favor of the Solar For All Recipients

Despite a Federal Court Order that the Government Dish Out the Funds, the EPA has yet to loosen its Purse Strings, leaving Questions as to whether the Agency will Appeal the Decision, or even Ignore itc Entirely.

“This is a program that has the potential to lower people’s energy bills, get inexpensive clean electricity on the grid, and help the communities that the Solar For All program was designed to help,” senior attorney at the Conservation Law Foundation James Crowley, who is representing plaintiffs in one of the court cases, told WBUR.

Though it might be one of the more ironic examples of Zeldin’s EPA shooting itself in the foot, it’s hardly the first. Zeldin, a former center-right Republican turned MAGA-die hard, has moved aggressively to dismantle dozens of environmental regulations since winning the job, many of which were explicitly designed to protect poor American communities.

So while Trump’s side may have lost handily in the midterms, it’s clear his administration’s war on poor and working class Americans is far from over — as the ongoing refusal to release cheap, green energy makes abundantly clear.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker

Supreme Court Lifts Pause on Border Construction in Big Bend Texas

The Supreme Court is paving the way for the Trump (R) Administration to resume Border Construction throughout the Big Bend Region in Texas, including inside Big Bend National Park. The Supreme Court Ruled 11/9/2026 that the Government “is exceedingly likely to prevail” in its Argument that a District Ccourt lacked Jurisdiction to Pause Construction when it issued a Preliminary Injunction in 20/2026.

The Trump Administration’s Plans to Build a Combination of Physical Walls, Access Roads, and Vehicle Barriers in the Big Bend Region have sparked Bipartisan Backlash. In 5/2026 BC News spoke with Charlie Angell, a Resident and Landowner in Redford, Texas, who said He received a Letter from U.S Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Alerting Him that the Ggovernment wanted Access to His Lland for Border Construction and may want to take Ownership of it, if He Declined to Agree.

Angell runs an outdoor Expedition Company out of His Property on the Banks of the Rio Grande. According to a Map of the Administration’s Plans, His Property would be Split-in-Half and He’d be Cut-Off from the River, where He often launches Kayaks for His Business. “It's devastating for me. I'm almost 60 in August, so that's almost at the end of my career. And I've faced all my life savings and everything into retiring right where I'm at,” He told ABC News.

The Plans for Big Bend National Park initially included a Physical Wwall, but after Public Outcry, the Plans were Changed to include Only a Combination ofVvehicle Barriers, and Surveillance Technology. In their Petition to the Supreme Court, the Government Reiterated its Claims that the Big Bend Sector, the Largest along the Southern U.S. Border, is an area of “high illegal entry”. However, Opponents of the Administration’s Plans have Expressed Doubt about those Claims.

According to CBP Statistics, only about 1% of Encounters with Migrants happen in the Sector. The Rugged, Remote and Dangerous Terrain has Long been thought to be One of its most Deterring Factors. Plaintiffs Challenging the Construction in Court Argued in part that Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Exceeded its Authority when it Waived Several Environmental and Conservation Laws to Expedite the Construction.

On 11/9/2026, the Supreme Court Re-Affirmed that the Secretary has Wide Discretion to Waive certain Laws in the Interest of Border Security and Ruled that the Preliminary Iinjunction Prevented the Government from “advancing its ‘compelling interests’ in border security and integrity”. The Court also Appeared Swayed in part by the Trump Administration’s Claim that Stalling Construction was Costing nearly half-a-million dollars a Day.

Some Rresidents of the Big Bend Region worry that the Construction will Ccut off Access to the Rio Grande, Destroy the Natural Habitats, and Beauty that draw Tthousands of People to the Region, and would Decimate their Local Economies, which Reply heavily on Tourism. “The Trump administration and its contractors are hellbent on destroying one of America’s greatest national parks, and the Supreme Court just gave them the green light,” said Laiken Jordahl, National Public Lands Advocate at the Center for Biological Diversity. “This horrific decision clears the way for contractors to bulldoze pristine desert and dynamite canyon walls before the courts have even decided whether this destruction is legal. They’re signing off on the permanent destruction of the wildest place in Texas, and the theft of a great American river from all of us.”










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker