July 12, 2025, 1:00 p.m. ETPresident Emmanual Macron of France declared in a social media post his “very strong disapproval” of Trump’s plan to levy 30 percent tariffs on E.U. exports. France has been one of the loudest voices in Europe calling for retaliatory tariffs against the United States if a deal isn’t reached, and Macron reiterated a plea for Brussels, which negotiating on behalf of all 27 E.U. countries, to mobilize “all the instruments at its disposal.” Many in Europe had been expecting Trump to keep a current 10 percent across-the-board tariff on Europe, and Macron suggested the 30 percent rate had come as a surprise after weeks of negotiations “made in good faith.”July 12, 2025, 12:53 p.m. ETRosie O’Donnell in Dublin.Credit...Ellius Grace for The New York TimesPresident Trump said he was weighing using the power of the government against one of his longtime entertainment world nemeses, the comedian and actress Rosie O’Donnell, threatening to revoke her citizenship.Shortly before 10 a.m. on Saturday, Mr. Trump said on Truth Social, “Because of the fact that Rosie O’Donnell is not in the best interests of our Great Country, I am giving serious consideration to taking away her Citizenship.”The president called Ms. O’Donnell a “threat to humanity” and said she should stay in Ireland, where she moved to in January after Mr. Trump won a second term.Mr. Trump’s headline-grabbing provocation about Ms. O’Donnell comes at a moment in which his administration is contending with criticism on many fronts: His top law enforcement officials are bitterly feuding over the Jeffrey Epstein saga; there remain unanswered questions about the decision to halt munitions to Ukraine and who authorized it; the homeland security chief is facing intense scrutiny over FEMA’s response in Texas; and so on.Ms. O’Donnell snapped back at Mr. Trump with her own barrage of insults on Instagram.“The president of the USA has always hated the fact that I see him for who he is — a criminal con man sexual abusing liar out to harm our nation to serve himself,” she said. “This is why I moved to Ireland.”She further taunted the president in a subsequent post showing a photo of Mr. Trump with Jeffrey Epstein, taken in 1997 in Palm Beach, Fla.“You want to revoke my citizenship? Go ahead and try, King Joffrey with a tangerine spray tan,” she said, referring to the sadistic child-king in “Game of Thrones.”Experts said the president does not have the power to take away the citizenship of a U.S.-born citizen.Julia Gelatt, associate director of the immigration program at the Migration Policy Institute, said: “U.S. citizens can relinquish their citizenship voluntarily, and federal courts can strip naturalized citizens of their citizenship if there is proven fraud or misrepresentation or other major cause. But U.S.-born citizens cannot have their citizenship taken away.”Amanda Frost, an expert on citizenship law at the University of Virginia School of Law, cited Supreme Court precedent.“In 1967, the U.S. Supreme Court declared in Afroyim v. Rusk that the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment bars the government from stripping citizenship, stating: ‘In our country the people are sovereign and the government cannot sever its relationship to the people by taking away their citizenship,’” she said in an email.Mr. Trump’s feud with Ms. O’Donnell dates back to 2006, when she mocked the president on “The View” for defending a Miss USA contestant roiled in a controversy. She questioned his own moral compass and role as a businessman. Mr. Trump, who at the time was best known for his show, “The Apprentice,” threatened to sue “The View” over her comments.Soon after, Mr. Trump began hurling insults at Ms. O’Donnell, calling her “fat” and “wacko.” In a 2015 G.O.P. debate on Fox News, one of the moderators said, “You’ve called women you don’t like fat pigs, dogs, slobs and disgusting animals.” Mr. Trump interjected: “Only Rosie O’Donnell.”July 12, 2025, 12:17 p.m. ETWorkers assemble products at the Danfoss factory in Apodaca, Mexico.Credit...Cesar Rodriguez for The New York TimesMexican officials have been negotiating for months in hopes of reaching a trade deal with Washington that would not devastate the country’s export-driven economy, but President Trump upended those talks on Saturday when he threatened to impose a 30 percent tariff on Mexican imports, potentially igniting a trade war with one of America’s largest trading partners.In a letter to Mexico’s president, Claudia Sheinbaum, Mr. Trump said that Mexico was not doing enough to curb the flow of fentanyl into the United States and cited that as the reason for the tariffs. Mr. Trump added that Mexican companies were welcome to manufacture their products in the United States to avoid the tariffs.The tariffs are set to take effect on Aug. 1 and are similar to the levies that the United States is imposing on imports from Canada and the European Union, which Mr. Trump said separately on Saturday would also face 30 percent duties. The tariffs come despite the fact that Mr. Trump brokered a trade deal with Mexico and Canada during his first term that was intended to stabilize economic relations between the United States and its neighbors.Mr. Trump also warned Mexico not to retaliate with higher tariffs of its own. He said that whatever additional tariffs Mexico might impose would be added to the 30 percent rate he announced.The president added that drugs were not the only issue of concern to the United States and pointed to other Mexican policies that contributed to “unsustainable” trade deficits.“The Trade Deficit is a major threat to our Economy and, indeed, our National Security!” Mr. Trump wrote in the letter.Mr. Trump has been going back and forth on tariffs on Mexico for months.In March he announced plans to impose a 25 percent tariff on Mexican imports. Mexican officials warned that the import tax would cause food shortages in the United States and called it a “strategic mistake.”Later, he exempted goods that trade under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, the trade pact Trump negotiated in his first term. Currently, because of that U.S.M.C.A. exemption, about 87 percent of Mexican exports to the U.S. trade tariff free, according to data from the Mexican government.It remains unclear whether the tariffs that Mr. Trump is now threatening to impose on Mexico may continue to include exemptions for those goods. The White House said no final decision had been made.American car factories also rely on Mexico for parts, and economists said in March that the auto and electric equipment sectors in Mexico would be most exposed to disruption if tariffs were enacted.The Mexican economy minister, Marcelo Ebrard, who is leading a Mexican delegation in Washington to discuss issues on border security, migration and trade, said U.S. officials told their Mexican counterparts that, “as part of the profound change in the United States’ trade policy,” the Trump administration was going to send letters to all world leaders announcing new tariffs.“We mentioned at the negotiating table that it was an unjust move and that we did not agree with it,” Mr. Ebrard said in a statement posted on social media on Saturday.Mexican officials said that they would work to ensure that, before the new tariffs take effect on Aug. 1, “we have an alternative that allows us to protect businesses and jobs on both sides of the border.”Emiliano Rodríguez Mega contributed reporting from Mexico City.July 12, 2025, 12:00 p.m. ETThe main lobby group representing Germany’s industrial companies urged the German government and European leaders to “find solutions very quickly” through discussions with U.S. representatives before the new 30 percent tariffs announced on Saturday take effect on Aug. 1 “A trade conflict between two economic areas as closely intertwined as the E.U. and the U.S.A. damages economic recovery, innovative strength and ultimately also trust in international cooperation,” Wolfgang Niedermark, a member of the board of the Federation of German Industries, or B.D.I. said.July 12, 2025, 11:36 a.m. ETA 30 percent tariff on European goods exported to America would have “a significant trade destruction effect,” Dan O’Brien, chief economist at the Institute of International and European affairs, said in a post on X. He added that the chances of a wider trade war between the United States and Europe had risen after Trump’s threat to meet any E.U. tariff retaliation with an equal increase in the U.S. tariffs.July 12, 2025, 11:34 a.m. ETBrando Benifei, the chair of the delegation for relations with the United States at the European Parliament, called on the E.U.’s executive branch to retaliate to Trump’s 30 percent tariffs. “Let’s immediately put on the table a series of new credible countermeasures on goods, services, and intellectual property rights that would take effect Aug. 1 without an agreement, and let’s no longer postpone those that are due to come into force next week,” Mr. Benifei said in a written message.July 12, 2025, 11:17 a.m. ETIt’s not clear yet, but the tariffs that Trump is threatening on Mexican may continue to include exemptions for goods that trade under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, the trade pact Trump negotiated in his first term. The White House had said that U.S.M.C.A. exemptions, and other previous exemptions for oil and potash from Canada, would likely continue under new tariffs, though no final decisions had been made.Those exemptions will make a big difference. Currently, because of that U.S.M.C.A. exemption, about 87 percent of Mexican exports to the U.S. trade tariff free, according to data from the Mexican government.July 12, 2025, 11:00 a.m. ETSeveral Justice Department employees connected to the criminal cases against President Trump have been fired in recent days, according to two people familiar with the matter. Among them were two prosecutors who worked under the former special counsel, Jack Smith. At least seven others were career support staff who were not involved directly in the cases but assisted prosecutors. It appeared to be the first time that members of support teams who were merely called in to help on logistical efforts on the Trump cases had lost their jobs.July 12, 2025, 10:56 a.m. ETPrime Minister Giorgia Meloni of Italy is one of the few European leaders that Trump likes. She has visited him at the White House and has attempted to play a balancing role. After Trump said he would impose a 30 percent tariff on European goods on Saturday, her office issued a statement cautioning that it would make “no sense to spark a trade war between the two sides of the Atlantic,” and urging negotiators to avoid “polarizations that would make reaching an agreement more complex.” Europe’s own negotiations will intensify in the coming days, the statement said.July 12, 2025, 10:53 a.m. ETThe Mexican economy minister, Marcelo Ebrard, who is leading a delegation to Washington to discuss a range of issues, said U.S. officials told their Mexican counterparts that “as part of the profound change in the United States’ trade policy,” the Trump administration was going to send letters to all world leaders announcing new tariffs. “We mentioned at the negotiating table that it was an unfair move and that we did not agree with it,” Ebrard said in a statement on social media.Comunicado relevante sobre aranceles de Estados Unidos : pic.twitter.com/V5HtSsNzyg— Marcelo Ebrard C. (@m_ebrard) July 12, 2025Mexican officials agreed that they would work to ensure that before Aug. 1, when the new tariffs take effect, “we have an alternative that allows us to protect businesses and jobs on both sides of the border,” Ebrard said. “Mexico,” he added, “is already negotiating.”July 12, 2025, 10:38 a.m. ETKarin Karlsbro, a European Parliament member who sits on its international trade committee, called on the European Union to remain united after Trump’s threat to impose 30 percent tariffs on the bloc. “We will not give in to blackmail. Tariffs are a tax on consumers & businesses,” she wrote on X. Europe must “not back down and make use of our toolbox if the US refuses a fair deal.”July 12, 2025, 10:37 a.m. ETShortly before 10 a.m. on Saturday, the president of the United States wrote on social media that he was weighing using the power of the government against one of his longtime entertainment world nemeses. “Because of the fact that Rosie O’Donnell is not in the best interests of our Great Country, I am giving serious consideration to taking away her Citizenship,” Trump wrote. “She is a Threat to Humanity, and should remain in the wonderful Country of Ireland, if they want her.”Trump’s headline grabbing provocation about O’Donnell comes at a moment in which his administration is contending with criticism on many fronts: His top law enforcement officials are bitterly feuding over the Jeffrey Epstein saga; there remain unanswered questions about the decision to halt munitions to Ukraine and who authorized it; the homeland security chief is facing intense scrutiny over FEMA’s response in Texas; and so on.July 12, 2025, 10:07 a.m. ETThe European Union was informed of President Trump’s latest tariffs in advance, learning of them Friday, said Paula Pinho, a spokeswoman for the bloc’s executive arm.July 12, 2025, 9:45 a.m. ETIn reaction to President Trump’s 30 percent tariffs on the European Union, Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the E.U.'s executive branch, said in a statement that such tariffs “would disrupt essential transatlantic supply chains, to the detriment of businesses, consumers and patients on both sides of the Atlantic.” She also threatened to hit back, though she did not make a retaliation sound imminent, talking about the “adoption of proportionate countermeasures if required.”July 12, 2025, 9:05 a.m. ETElectric vehicles at a Volkswagen factory in Zwickau, Germany, last year.Credit...Ingmar Nolting for The New York TimesPresident Trump announced in letters posted to social media on Saturday that he would place a 30 percent tariff on goods from the European Union and Mexico, upending months of careful negotiations and roiling America’s economic relationships with two of its biggest trading partners.Mr. Trump’s tariffs would take effect on Aug. 1, like those on many other trading partners.But the letters to Mexico, America’s largest source of imports, and the European Union, a trading bloc of 27 nations that collectively make up the world’s third-largest economy, are notable. They marked a significant escalation aimed squarely at two of America’s closest and most pivotal trading partners.Both economies do a huge amount of trade in goods and services with the United States. And both governments have been in intense negotiations with the United States, right up until Mr. Trump’s letters were sent.Maros Sefcovic, the European Union’s trade commissioner, was in regular contact with the U.S. commerce secretary and trade representative. Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, spoke to Mr. Trump. And until very recently, officials had hoped they were on the cusp of a deal.E.U. policymakers had gradually come around to the possibility that the bloc could face 10 percent across-the-board tariffs on all goods sent to the United States, and were hoping to negotiate exceptions for important products. Many of the policymakers were eager to end the economic uncertainty that Mr. Trump’s trade announcements had unleashed on German carmakers, Italian wine exporters and Irish pharmaceutical companies alike.But things changed with Mr. Trump’s announcement on Saturday of a flat 30 percent tariff, and his threat to make that rate even higher should the bloc retaliate.“If for any reason you decide to raise your tariffs and retaliate, then, whatever the number you choose to raise them by, will be added onto the 30 percent that we charge,” Mr. Trump wrote in the letter, which echoed a form letter he has been sending out to many American trading partners announcing their tariff rate.Mexican officials had also been in active negotiations. A delegation led by economy minister Marcelo Ebrard arrived in Washington on Friday to discuss an “integral agreement” with U.S. officials covering border security, migration, trade and water management.After an intense volley of tariffs from the United States earlier this year related to Washington’s desire to curb the flow of fentanyl across the border, Mexican officials felt they had cultivated a more productive relationship with U.S. officials.Mr. Trump placed a 25 percent tariff on all Mexican imports earlier this year, sparking an intense dispute. But the administration ultimately lifted most of those tariffs by exempting goods that trade under the United States Mexico Canada Agreement, the North American trade pact, which includes agriculture and other products. According to data from Mexican officials, about 87 percent of exports from Mexico to the United States are not currently subject to tariffs.Mr. Ebrard said in a statement posted on social media Saturday that U.S. officials had told their Mexican counterparts that, “as part of the profound change in the United States’ trade policy,” the Trump administration was going to send letters to all world leaders announcing new tariffs.“We mentioned at the negotiating table that it was an unjust move and that we did not agree with it,” Mr. Ebrard. He said that Mexican officials would work to ensure that they had an alternative proposal that protects jobs and businesses on both sides of the border before the tariffs take effect Aug. 1.To avoid an earlier threat of tariffs this spring, President Claudia Sheinbaum deployed 10,000 troops to the U.S.-Mexico border, building on recent efforts to curb migration by intercepting migrant caravans and busing migrants to places far from the border. Crossings have plummeted to their lowest level in decades.Ms. Sheinbaum also announced a crackdown that has led to record fentanyl seizures, and agreed to extradite dozens of cartel operatives to the United States, breaking with Mexico’s previous stance on extraditing the leaders. Mexico’s leaders also imposed tariffs and restrictions on many Chinese imports.Ms. Sheinbaum was broadly praised for her cool-headed approach to Mr. Trump, who called her a “marvelous woman” after the two spoke about tariffs in February and he offered Mexico an additional month to make gains.Mr. Trump earlier this week announced that he would aim 35 percent tariffs at Canada — another key trading partner, and another nation that had hoped it might be closing in on a negotiated deal with the United States. And he has threatened to slap tariffs ranging from 20 to 50 percent on other nations, including Brazil, Japan and South Korea.The latest round of levies underscores that Mr. Trump is willing to upend long-held relationships in his quest to rewrite the rules of global commerce. But for major trading partners, the question now is whether they will hit back.Mexico has never retaliated against the United States, but officials have repeatedly said that they reserve the right to, and have analyzed which U.S. exports they could apply tariffs to.Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the E.U. executive, said in a statement that Mr. Trump’s latest tariffs “would disrupt essential trans-Atlantic supply chains, to the detriment of businesses, consumers and patients on both sides of the Atlantic.”She also threatened to hit back, though she did not make a retaliation sound like a foregone conclusion at this point, talking about the “proportionate countermeasures if required.”The bloc had already prepared a retaliatory package in response to earlier tariffs, but had paused them to create leeway for negotiation. That retaliation would apply to some 21 billion euros (nearly $25 billion) worth of imports from the United States. The tariffs are scheduled to kick in at 12:01 a.m. Tuesday unless E.U. officials choose to suspend them.“Of course, there are possibilities to react, but we don’t want to,” Kaja Kallas, the European Union’s top diplomat, said in an interview on Friday in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. “We don’t want to retaliate. We don’t want this trade war.”In the run-up to Mr. Trump’s announcement, officials from the European Union had reiterated that their goal was to reach an agreement in principle, a sort of rough-draft trade plan that could serve as a basis for more detailed negotiations.If the newly announced tariffs rates remain, however, “that means trade war,” said Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, a senior fellow at the economic think tank Bruegel in Brussels.He did not think that Mr. Trump’s warning against retaliation would have much effect on the E.U.’s appetite to hit back. He said the best Europe can hope for is a situation in which many of America’s global trading partners retaliate, perhaps in a coordinated way, and Mr. Trump is pressured to strike a less extreme stance.“They have consistently said they would defend themselves under the right circumstances,” he said. “Now those circumstances are here.”Zunaira Saieed, Emiliano Rodríguez Mega and Annie Correal contributed reporting.July 12, 2025, 9:04 a.m. ETTrump released letters imposing new 30 percent tariffs on imports from Mexico and the European Union. The tariffs will take effect on Aug. 1. They will be on top of “sectoral” levies that are already being imposed on imports of goods such as steel. Trump wrote that the trade deficit is “a major threat to our Economy and, indeed, our National Security!”July 12, 2025, 9:04 a.m. ETThe tariffs on Mexico are similar to what Trump imposed on Canada and come despite the fact that the three countries already have a trade pact that was sealed during the first Trump administration. Mexico and Canada are among the largest U.S. trading partners.July 12, 2025, 5:01 a.m. ETAna SwansonAna Swanson covers international trade and reported from Washington.Even when President Trump strikes trade deals, double-digit tariffs are often left in place, with more levies on foreign products on the way.Credit...Haiyun Jiang/The New York TimesEven after President Trump announced sweeping global tariffs in April, some investors and supporters comforted themselves by arguing that the president’s goal was still to open global markets, not close them off.The belief, promoted by Mr. Trump himself, was that he was using his tariffs as a lever to crack open commercial opportunities and the administration would soon deliver dozens of deals that would increase U.S. exports and help American businesses flourish abroad.Three months later, that optimism is being replaced by doubts that Mr. Trump’s goal was ever to strike the kind of trade deals that would open up markets.Instead, the president is making new announcements daily about bruising tariffs that will come into effect against dozens of trading partners in just a few weeks. On Saturday, Mr. Trump announced on social media that he would place a 30 percent tariff on goods from the European Union and Mexico, starting on Aug. 1. That followed similar threats this week warning Canada, Japan, South Korea, Brazil, and numerous other nations large and small, of forthcoming tariffs.Administration officials continue to describe the president’s tariff threats as a gambit aimed at getting more concessions from foreign countries in trade negotiations. But, according to Mr. Trump’s timeline, the window to strike deals and avoid punishing tariffs is rapidly diminishing. So far, the administration has only announced two preliminary deals, with Britain and Vietnam, and the status of the Vietnam deal is now in question.While handshake agreements with India, Taiwan and other governments could soon be pending, they are likely to be limited pacts that leave much to be negotiated. And even when deals have been announced, Mr. Trump has left double-digit tariffs in place, and promised that more levies on foreign products are on the way.With less than a month before the Aug. 1 tariffs are supposed to kick in, the Trump administration may have the capacity to deal with only a fraction of the other countries the president is threatening with stiff levies. Some governments that have sought out meetings with U.S. officials have not been able to schedule them.When Mr. Trump paused his global tariffs for 90 days in April, he said the delay would give his administration time to reach trade deals with countries across the world. Mr. Trump boasted in the intervening months about how countries were lining up to talk to the United States and at one point claimed he had reached 200 deals.But in the last several weeks, Mr. Trump has seemed unbothered by not having more deals to announce. Instead, he has extolled the volume of tariffs he is heaping on America’s trading partners, claiming that they are more than justified and are bringing in huge sums of money to the United States.“Everybody has to pay and the incentive is that they have the right to deal in the United States. If they don’t want to, they don’t have to pay,” he said during a cabinet meeting on Tuesday.He also acknowledged that his government doesn’t have the capacity to do trade deals with every nation.“We have made some deals,” he said. “We can make a lot more deals. It’s just too time consuming. It just makes it more complicated. And we can do things over the years, too.”“We got 200 countries. We can’t meet with 200 countries,” he added.The White House did not respond to a request for comment. A White House official said that deals and tariffs weren’t mutually exclusive for the Trump administration. For many deals, including the one announced with Britain, higher tariffs have been part of the overall package, along with concessions to open up the foreign market, he said.Many of Mr. Trump’s supporters are happy that he is leaving high tariffs in place, saying they are needed to ensure that the valuable U.S. market is preserved for American companies.Several of the major trading partners that Mr. Trump has threatened with tariffs this week had already previously negotiated trade deals with the United States, or with Mr. Trump himself. That includes Canada and Mexico, which signed a trade deal with the United States during Mr. Trump’s first term, as well as South Korea and Japan.Many other countries that have received tariff letters have been in active negotiations with the United States. Mexican officials were in Washington on Friday to discuss a pact that would address trade, migration and border security. But that has appeared to be little deterrent to Mr. Trump.The renewed threats — and the prospect of the trade wars they could bring about — raise questions about whether any of the president’s supporters will break with him on his aggressive strategy.Republicans who have long supported free trade, or who come from agricultural states that depend on foreign markets, have long tried to argue that, in the hands of a consummate dealmaker, Mr. Trump’s tariffs could be a tool for more trade, not less. But some have been dismayed by the prospect of stiff tariffs against allies like Canada, Mexico and Europe, all major markets for U.S. farmers and exporters.During a hearing in April, shortly after Mr. Trump had announced his global tariffs, Republican senators argued that trade wars would harm U.S. exporters and pressed Jamieson Greer, Mr. Trump’s top trade negotiator, not to keep tariffs in place in the long run.Steve Daines, a Republican senator from Montana, said there was “hope that these tariffs are a means and not solely an end.”Senator Chuck Grassley, a Republican of Iowa, said he had taken a “wait and see” approach to tariffs because he believed Mr. Trump was using them as a tool to get fairer trade. “If that’s not the case, level with me,” he told Mr. Greer.Stock market investors also appear to have been betting that Mr. Trump will not actually follow through on many of his tariffs, seeing them more as a negotiating tool than a concrete economic threat.But Mr. Trump’s Aug. 1 deadline is closing in and he has insisted he will not delay the global tariffs any longer.Ernie Tedeschi, the director of economics at the Budget Lab at Yale University, said that the country’s average effective tariff rate on imported products had gone from just 2.5 percent at the beginning of the year to 18.7 percent, including the tariff letters the president issued last week. That’s the highest average U.S. tariff rate since 1933, on par with the Smoot-Hawley tariff peaks that worsened the Great Depression.“To me that’s pretty conclusive evidence that he’s a protectionist,” Mr. Tedeschi said. “I think this is an administration that just likes tariffs as a policy.”Wendy Cutler, the vice president at the Asia Society Policy Institute, said that Mr. Trump’s policies included an element of opening markets, as well as protectionism. U.S. negotiators are working hard to push other countries to open up their markets, she said. “That’s all about increased access for U.S. exporters. But, let’s be honest, at the same time, we’re putting up high tariffs.”She also argued that, even if the administration doesn’t strike many deals, it could cover a significant portion of U.S. trade through a few deals with major trading partners. “If indeed deals are announced with India and the E.U. over the next three weeks, that would carry a lot of weight,” she said.Mr. Trump’s tariffs have clearly created leverage with other trading partners, and dozens of foreign countries have appealed to the White House to try to strike better trade terms. But business leaders have stressed that, so far, the president’s tactics are making it more difficult, rather than easier, for them to do business abroad.Jake Colvin, the president of the National Foreign Trade Council, which lobbies on behalf of international business, said that it was “shocking how far the center of gravity has moved on the tariff conversation.”“Back when the president floated the idea of a universal baseline tariff a year ago as a candidate, everyone was aghast at how dramatic that would be,” he said. “And now there’s almost relief by companies and businesses that a 10 percent baseline tariff might be the best they can get.”July 11, 2025, 9:07 p.m. ETJerome H. Powell on Capitol Hill in February. On Friday, the Federal Reserve’s website posted a “Frequently Asked Questions” section about renovations to its headquarters.Credit...Haiyun Jiang for The New York TimesThe Federal Reserve took steps on Friday to defend itself against accusations by President Trump and his allies that Jerome H. Powell, the Fed chair, mismanaged renovations at the central bank’s headquarters and then lied to Congress about those plans.The new line of attack, after Mr. Trump aimed a barrage at the Fed’s reluctance to lower borrowing costs, has raised alarm that the White House is trying to lay the groundwork to fire Mr. Powell for cause.In an update to its website late Friday, the central bank laid out details intended to support Mr. Powell’s statements to lawmakers regarding the project, which kicked off in 2021 and is estimated to be $700 million over budget at around $2.5 billion.The extent of the renovations and their swelling cost have spawned intense criticism from both the White House and a number of leading Republicans, who have taken issue with luxury features in an initial plan, including rooftop garden terraces and marble finishings.Mr. Trump said on Friday that he was not planning to fire Mr. Powell, despite saying the Fed chair was doing a “terrible job.” But legal experts warned that the latest front in the White House’s attacks on the central bank could potentially be pursued as an avenue to remove Mr. Powell as chair before his term expires in May.“We can’t ignore context when we are looking at these accusations,” said Kathryn Judge, a financial regulation expert at Columbia Law School. “What they’re trying to do is build up a public case and to discredit him.”Russell Vought, director of the Office of Management and Budget and one of the most vocal critics of Mr. Powell regarding the renovations, has pressed for an investigation into whether the chair was deceptive about the plans when he testified in Congress last month.“This is about the largess and the fact that he has systemically mismanaged the Fed,” Mr. Vought said in an interview with CNBC on Friday.A day earlier, he wrote a letter to Mr. Powell in which he condemned the project and questioned whether it was in compliance with rules around such renovations. “Instead of attempting to right the Fed’s fiscal ship, you have plowed ahead with an ostentatious overhaul of your Washington, D.C., headquarters,” he wrote.In a post on its website on Friday, the Fed addressed many of the questions in Mr. Vought’s letter, which specifically asked about the latest plans that Mr. Powell had relayed to lawmakers.“There’s no V.I.P. dining room, there’s no new marble,” the chair said at the time. “There are no special elevators — there’s just, there are old elevators that have been there — there are no new water features, there’s no beehives and there’s no roof terrace gardens.”Mr. Powell added that the project’s plans had “continued to evolve” and that some features that had been initially incorporated were scrapped.The “Frequently Asked Questions” post on Friday reaffirmed those responses and said: “The Federal Reserve takes seriously the responsibility to be a good steward of public resources. The project will reduce costs over time by allowing the Board to consolidate most of its operations.”A person familiar with the matter at the Fed said that Mr. Powell had been honest during his testimony and that no one involved in the project had informed the central bank that any scaling back of the plans needed to be resubmitted to the National Capital Planning Commission, which is responsible for reviewing the Fed’s proposal.This week, Mr. Trump installed three White House advisers to that commission, including a deputy chief of staff, James Blair, and the staff secretary, Will Scharf.The latest attempt to undermine the Fed chair comes as the Supreme Court has re-established that the president is limited in his ability to remove an official at the central bank without cause. That typically has meant serious misconduct and other violations.Scott Alvarez, a former general counsel at the Fed board, said proving that is “really, really hard to do” because it is so ambiguous.“The case here is so light that I don’t think it’s credible,” he said. “I think this is just about building pressure on the chair to make him feel uncomfortable and make him want to leave.”Graham Steele, a longtime financial regulation lawyer and former Treasury Department official, likened it to a “game of chicken" in which the White House was pressuring the Fed so that it either lowered interest rates or was thrust “in the middle of this giant political storm.”July 11, 2025, 5:57 p.m. ETThe changes would reduce funding for solar power projects to about $42 million from $318 million.Credit...Tim Gruber for The New York TimesThe Energy Department plans to eliminate hundreds of millions of dollars in funding for major renewable and efficiency projects this year, the latest move by the Trump administration to undo efforts to shift the nation away from fossil fuels.The cuts, which would take money away from projects budgeted for the fiscal year that ends Sept. 30, focus on solar and wind projects, as well as state and local assistance for low-income families, according to an Energy Department document reviewed by The New York Times and Democratic lawmakers in Washington. Critics argue that the moves are illegal because Congress had previously approved the funding for specific projects.In a joint statement about the funding changes, ranking Democrats on the Senate and House energy subcommittees called it a “reckless decision” and demanded the agency immediately reverse its action. They argued that the moves would harm efforts to strengthen U.S. energy independence and drive up costs for all consumers.“This outrageous, unlawful decision by the Trump administration is a direct attack on our energy independence and American families’ ability to afford their monthly energy bill,” wrote Senator Patty Murray, Democrat from Washington, and Representative Marcy Kaptur, an Ohio Democrat. “This isn’t a bureaucratic misstep — it’s a deliberate, partisan effort to sabotage bipartisan law and redirect funding.”In response to inquiries about the cuts, an Energy Department spokeswoman said in a statement that the agency is working to “instill a culture of transparence, performance and common sense.”“The Department of Energy is working to advance its critical mission of unleashing affordable, reliable and secure energy for all Americans while increasing efficiency and promoting better stewardship of taxpayer dollars,” the spokeswoman said. The new funding levels “help ensure that the Department accomplishes its critical mission for the American people.”The changes would cut up to 90 percent of the funding from the two fastest growing renewable energy technologies, according to the document, which details planned budget appropriations. Cuts include reducing money for wind power projects to about $30 million from $137 million, and solar power to about $42 million from $318 million.In addition, the plan cuts nearly all of the money from state and local government community energy programs, which help reduce heating and cooling costs and assist with services like home energy audits and increasing insulation in homes.The Trump administration has targeted solar and wind power and energy efficiency programs for funding cuts in its push to reshape the nation’s energy future. The administration has emphasized broader use of fossil fuels, including natural gas for electricity and oil for transportation.That strategy also calls for rolling back emissions standards to encourage more use of oil and gas — a major reversal of the Biden administration’s policies to reduce carbon emissions and encourage the use of clean energy technologies such as solar and wind power, and electric vehicles. Earlier this year, the Energy Department said that it would roll back energy and water conservation standards for a long list of electric and gas appliances. The Environmental Protection Agency is shutting down the popular Energy Star program.The shift away from the clean energy and energy efficiency initiatives could lead to a dramatic increase in costs for all consumers.Solar and onshore wind power are among the least expensive sources of electricity. And energy efficient appliances have helped keep residential electric bills a bit in check.But extreme weather events, driven by climate change, are pushing up energy costs as utility companies invest in long-overdue upgrades to the aging power system. And electricity demand has grown in recent years because of energy-hungry data centers that technology companies are using to support the development of artificial intelligence.That growth in demand and the need for increased power supply and storage has created challenges in the reliability of the electric grid.“Solar and storage is the fastest — and in most cases the cheapest — way to meet the skyrocketing demand from A.I., data centers, and American innovation,” Abigail Ross Hopper, chief executive of the Solar Energy Industries Association, said in response to the planned cuts. “In the race to ensure global A.I. leadership and energy independence at home, we should be focused on getting every electron that we can generate on the grid.”Solar and wind power have become more readily available to meet some of those needs, along with battery storage. But a lack of supply of massive turbines — used to generate electricity from natural gas — has slowed the construction of new fossil fuel generators, and hopes for new nuclear power plants remain far into the future.Some of the money designated for solar and wind power in the budget has been redistributed to other clean energy resources, such as hydroelectric power and geothermal energy, but those also are expensive to build and can take years to bring online.That has left critics of the cuts questioning the strategy the Trump administration is using at a time of grid constraints and rising costs.The nationwide average cost for the typical 1,000 kilowatt-hours of use by a residential consumer rose almost 4 percent to $175 a month in April compared to the same time a year ago, according to data from the Energy Information Administration.That has added an even greater burden on those who can least afford the higher costs, who now face cuts to programs like the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program, and the community energy assistance dollars.“Both of these programs are incredibly important for affordability,” said Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, a California organization that helps low-income energy consumers. “Zeroing out the state community energy programs will directly harm low-income families.”July 11, 2025, 5:49 p.m. ETRobert F. Kennedy Jr., the health secretary, has the authority to declare the spread of measles a public health emergency, an action that would mobilize federal funding and expedite the availability of tests and treatments.Credit...Tierney L. Cross/The New York TimesDays after measles cases in the United States hit a record high, a top Democrat called on Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the health secretary, to declare the spread of the virus a public health emergency.In a letter to Mr. Kennedy on Friday, Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the minority leader, argued this step was necessary to control the “rapid resurgence” of the highly contagious virus. There have been 1,288 cases in 2025, more than any other year since the United States declared measles eliminated in 2000.Mr. Kennedy has the sole authority to make this declaration, which would mobilize federal funding and expedite the availability of tests and therapeutics. There are no immediate plans to declare a public health emergency, according to a Department of Health and Human Services official who was not authorized to speak publicly on the subject.Most of the measles cases this year have been connected to the Southwest outbreak, which started in a Mennonite community in West Texas and spread to Oklahoma and New Mexico. Three people have died from the virus this year, the first such deaths in a decade.Mr. Schumer criticized the secretary’s handling of the outbreak in the letter, arguing that layoffs and cuts to public health funding have destabilized the country’s infectious disease response. He also chided the secretary for downplaying the outbreak and undermining vaccines.“The longer the federal government delays, the more children are placed in danger, and the more states will see Texas’s nightmare play out in their own communities,” he wrote.