The Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed the Trump administration to move forward, at least for now, with plans to implement large-scale cuts to the federal workforce, issuing a stay that lifts a lower court’s injunction against the administration’s executive order.

In a 6–3 decision, the justices granted the emergency request filed by the White House last week, clearing the way for Executive Order No. 14210 to take effect while legal challenges play out in the Ninth Circuit and potentially the high court.

The order directs federal agencies to carry out sweeping reductions in force (RIFs) and agency reorganizations. 

It has been described by administration officials as a lawful effort to ‘streamline government and eliminate waste.’ Critics, including labor unions, local governments and nonprofit organizations, argue the president is unlawfully bypassing Congress to dismantle major parts of the federal government.

A majority on the Court stressed that it was not ruling on the legality of specific agency cuts, only the executive order itself.

‘Because the Government is likely to succeed on its argument that the Executive Order and Memorandum are lawful—and because the other factors bearing on whether to grant a stay are satisfied—we grant the application,’ the Court wrote. ‘We express no view on the legality of any Agency RIF and Reorganization Plan produced or approved pursuant to the Executive Order and Memorandum. The District Court enjoined further implementation or approval of the plans based on its view about the illegality of the Executive Order and Memorandum, not on any assessment of the plans themselves. Those plans are not before this Court.’

The district court in California had blocked the order in May, calling it an overreach. But the Supreme Court’s unsigned decision on Tuesday set aside that injunction, pending appeal. The majority said the government is ‘likely to succeed’ in defending the legality of the order.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented forcefully, writing that ‘this Court sees fit to step in now and release the President’s wrecking ball at the outset of this litigation.’ She warned that the executive action represents a ‘structural overhaul that usurps Congress’s policymaking prerogatives’ and accused the majority of acting prematurely in an emergency posture without fully understanding the facts.

‘This unilateral decision to ‘transform’ the Federal Government was quickly challenged in federal court,’ she wrote. ‘The District Judge thoroughly examined the evidence, considered applicable law, and made a reasoned determination that Executive Branch officials should be enjoined from implementing the mandated restructuring… But that temporary, practical, harm-reducing preservation of the status quo was no match for this Court’s demonstrated enthusiasm for greenlighting this President’s legally dubious actions in an emergency posture.’

The executive order, issued in February, instructed agencies to prepare immediate plans for reorganizations and workforce reductions, including eliminating roles deemed ‘non-critical’ or ‘not statutorily mandated.’ The administration says it is a necessary response to bloated government and outdated structures, claiming the injunction was forcing agencies to retain ‘thousands of employees whose continuance in federal service… is not in the government and public interest.’

Labor unions and state officials opposing the plan say it goes beyond normal workforce management and could gut services across multiple agencies. They point to proposed cuts of over 50% at the Department of Energy, and nearly 90% at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.

The case is Trump v. American Federation of Government Employees.

‘Today’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling is another definitive victory for the President and his administration,’ wrote White House principal deputy press secretary Harrison Fields in an email to Fox News Digital. ‘It clearly rebukes the continued assaults on the President’s constitutionally authorized executive powers by leftist judges who are trying to prevent the President from achieving government efficiency across the federal government.’

Former Vice President Kamala Harris offered a take so ‘weird’ and ‘not good’ in an interview with social media personality Kareem Rahma that they both agreed to nix airing the footage, according to Rahma. 

Rahma, who hosts the popular series ‘Subway Takes,’ where he asks commuters and sometimes celebrities their opinions, previously told the New York Times that he conducted an interview with Harris during the summer of 2024, but that it was never released. 

Rahma said in an interview clip with Forbes’ Steven Bertoni posted on social media Monday that Harris’ take was so ‘bad’ he felt fortunate it didn’t make the cut. 

‘Her take was really confusing and weird – not good,’ Rahma told Bertoni. And we ‘mutually agreed to not publish it. And I got lucky, because I didn’t want to be blamed for her losing.’

‘Her take was that bad?’ Bertoni said. 

‘It was really, really bad… it like, didn’t make any sense,’ Rahma said, revealing Harris’ take was ‘bacon as a spice.’ 

Neither Harris nor Rahma immediately responded to a request for comment from Fox News Digital. 

Rahma, who is Muslim, told the New York Times in a story published in November 2024 that Harris’ team originally proposed she would share a ‘hot take’ against people removing their shoes on airplanes.

But Harris went on to declare that bacon was a spice – a food that Rahma and other Muslims do not consume for religious reasons. The Times reported that Rahma was ‘taken aback’ by Harris’ statement. 

‘Think about it, it’s pure flavor,’ she said, per the unaired footage obtained by the Times. 

The Times’ story said two senior campaign managers for Harris said the topic of bacon had been previously raised, while Rahma and his manager said that wasn’t the case. Harris’ campaign reportedly apologized for sharing her take on bacon and offered to re-film the episode, but Rahma declined, according to the Times. 

Rahma told the Times that his reasoning for not airing the interview was because he didn’t want to upset the Muslim community, and that he was hoping to ask Harris questions about the Biden administration’s policy regarding the Israel–Hamas war. 

‘It was so complicated because I’m Muslim and there’s something going on in the world that 100% of Muslims care about,’ Rahma told the Times. ‘And then they made it worse by talking about anchovies. Boring!’

Harris’ running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, also appeared on Rahma’s series leading up to the 2024 election, where he discussed gutter maintenance. Walz’s interview was posted in August 2024. 

Fox News’ Yael Halon contributed to this report. 

As the fragile ceasefire between Israel and Iran continues, the Jewish State’s leader said that he would be open to having access to some of America’s most powerful military equipment.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made a stop on Capitol Hill Tuesday afternoon to meet with House Speaker Mike Johnson before a later confab with the Senate. It’s his first trip to Washington since the 12-day war between Israel and Iran erupted, and comes on the heels of a stoppage in fighting between the two countries.

When asked if he would be open to Israel gaining access to B-2 stealth bombers and bunker-busting bombs — the same U.S. military equipment used to cripple Iran’s nuclear program — Netanyahu appeared to relish the thought.

‘Would I like to see Israel have the capacities that the United States has? Of course we’d like it. Who wouldn’t want it?’ he said.

‘But we are appreciative of what assistance we’ve received, and I think it’s served not only the interest of Israel’s security but America’s security and the security of the free world,’ Netanyahu continued.

Netanyahu’s sentiment comes as a bipartisan duo in the House, Reps. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., and Josh Gottheimer, D-N.J., are pushing to allow President Donald Trump the capability to send Israel the stealth bomber and powerful, 30,000-pound bombs capable of burrowing 200-feet into the ground before exploding, if Iran is found to still be marching forward with its nuclear program.

Their bill currently has three other Democratic co-sponsors, including Reps. Jared Moskowitz, D-Fla., Tom Suozzi, D-N.Y., and Juan Vargas, D-Calif.

The same aircraft and munitions were used in Operation Midnight Hammer, the secretive strike authorized by Trump last month to hit some of Iran’s key nuclear facilities, including Fordow, a facility buried below layers of rock that previous Israeli strikes couldn’t crack. Currently, the U.S. does not loan out any of its fleet of B-2s to allies.

Netanyahu’s remarks also came after he met with Trump on Monday, and he lauded his work with the president since his return to the White House.

‘I have to say that the coordination between our two countries, the coordination between an American president and Israel Prime Minister has been unmatched,’ he said. ‘It offers great promise for Israel, for America, for our region and for the world.’

He also hinted that ‘it may be very likely’ the pair may meet again before he leaves Washington. 

Morgan Phillips contributed to this report.

Even amid a fragile ceasefire, Iran continues to warn the United States and Israel that it retains the ability to inflict serious damage if provoked. 

Iranian officials have declared the country can sustain daily missile strikes for two years — a claim drawing increasing scrutiny from military experts and Western intelligence analysts.

‘Our armed forces are at the height of their readiness,’ said Major General Ebrahim Jabbari of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), speaking to the semi-official Mehr News Agency. ‘The warehouses, underground missile bases, and facilities we have are so enormous that we have yet to demonstrate the majority of our defense capabilities and effective missiles.’

‘In case of a war with Israel and the U.S., our facilities will not run out even if we launch missiles at them every day for two years,’ he added.

Maj. Gen. Yahya Rahim Safavi, senior military advisor to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, echoed that warning: ‘The Zionists know that some of our forces, such as the Navy and the Quds Force, have not yet entered into battle,’ he said. ‘So far, we have produced several thousand missiles and drones, and their place is secure.’

But intelligence analysis suggests Iran’s claims mask serious losses.

Tehran began the conflict with an arsenal of about 3,000 missiles and 500 missile launchers to 600 missile launchers, according to open-source intelligence. By the end of the so-called ’12-Day War’ — a series of attacks by Israel on its military storage warehouses and production facilities followed by U.S. attacks on nuclear sites and Iran’s counterattacks — it was down to between 1,000 missiles and 1,500 missiles and only 150 launchers to 200 launchers. 

‘The regime has increasingly been forced to choose between using or losing these projectiles as Israel targeted missile launchers,’ said Behnam Ben Taleblu, Iran expert at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. 

Replacing the missile launchers after Israel degraded their production capabilities will be extremely difficult, according to Danny Citrinowicz, Iran expert at the Institute for National Security Studies. 

‘Israel attacked every place that the Iranians manufacture missiles,’ he told Fox News Digital. 

Iran may have the capacity to attack Israel with its missiles, but ‘not in the hundreds.’ 

Could Iran strike the US homeland?

Iranian rhetoric occasionally has floated the idea of striking the U.S. directly, but analysts agree that the threat is far more limited.

‘The theoretical way they can strike the U.S. is just using their capacity in Venezuela,’ Citrinowicz said, referring to Iran’s growing military cooperation with its capital of Caracas. ‘Strategically, it was one of the main goals that they had — to build their presence in Venezuela. But it’s a long shot. It would be very hard to do so, and I’m not sure the Venezuelan government would like that to happen.’

Instead, any retaliatory strike would likely focus on U.S. assets and personnel in the Middle East.

Can Kasapoglu, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and Middle East military affairs expert, said Israel’s war aims went beyond missile factories, targeting Iran’s nuclear infrastructure and advanced weapons development.

‘We are not 100% sure about the damage to centrifuges, so we cannot say the nuclear program is annihilated,’ Kasapoglu said. ‘But we can safely assume the nuclear program had a setback for years.’

He added that Israel focused heavily on Iran’s solid-propellant, medium-range ballistic missiles — many of which have ‘very high terminal velocity, close to Mach 10,’ and are capable of evasive maneuvers. 

‘That makes them even more dangerous,’ he said.

Still, despite the setbacks, Iran ‘is still the largest ballistic missile power in the Middle East,’ he emphasized. ‘We saw that during the war, as Iran was able to penetrate Israeli airspace — even when Israeli and American interceptors were firing interceptor after interceptor to stop a single ballistic missile.’

Comparing ‘magazine depth,’ Kasapoglu noted Iran still maintains a deeper stockpile of missiles than Israel, even with U.S. assistance, and has interceptors.

Proxy forces and Chinese involvement

The regional threat isn’t limited to Iran’s mainland arsenal. Iran’s proxies, particularly the Houthis in Yemen, remain a potent force.

‘The Houthis are the one Iranian proxy I am really concerned about.’ 

Kasapoglu pointed to new intelligence accusing Chinese satellite companies of providing real-time targeting data to the Houthis, who have resumed maritime attacks in the Red Sea. 

‘Two days ago, they attacked a Liberian-flagged Greek merchant vessel,’ he said.

With advanced Chinese satellite support and hardened anti-ship cruise missiles, the Houthis could destabilize shipping lanes and widen the conflict beyond the Israel-Iran front.

‘Iran still has significant asymmetric capabilities in the maritime domain and transnational terrorist apparatus, but it’s hard to see how deploying these assets would not invite further ruin,’ said Taleblu. ‘Bluster and hyperbole have long been elements of Iran’s deterrence strategy.’ 

The so-called ’12-Day War’ ended in a U.S.-brokered ceasefire, but the region remains on edge. Iran’s leaders continue to boast about untapped military capabilities, but battlefield losses, manufacturing disruptions and previous counter-attack measures have limited its options. 

While Tehran retains the power to project force and threaten both Israel and U.S. regional assets, experts agree that its ability to launch sustained, high-volume attacks has been meaningfully curtailed.

Iran may still be dangerous, but its bark, for now, may be louder than its bite.

President Joe Biden’s former chief of staff and a fixture of his re-election campaign, Ron Klain, privately announced during Biden’s disastrous debate performance: ‘We’re f—ed.’

‘2024: How Trump Retook the White House and the Democrats Lost America,’ a new book released Tuesday by journalists Josh Dawsey of The Wall Street Journal, Tyler Pager of The New York Times and Isaac Arnsdor of The Washington Post, is the latest analysis of how Biden lost the White House. 

The authors described how, during the June 2024 debate, ‘Biden’s aides winced as the president started answering the first question about the economy and voters who felt they were worse off under his presidency.’ 

And backstage, as Biden stumbled over an answer that questionably ended with, ‘We finally beat Medicare,’ back in the holding room, Klain stood up and announced, ‘We’re f—ed,’ according to the authors. 

Mike Donilon, Bruce Reed and Klain were among those leading Biden’s final prep ahead of the debate, according to the book. 

Despite Klain expressing doubt internally, Klain continued to defend the president amid calls from donors and politicians for Biden to step down. 

On June 30, 2024, Klain reshared an X post that urged Americans to ignore the ‘news reports’ with ‘anonymous sources about Dem donors calling for Biden to withdraw.’

‘We are the Democratic Party! These people don’t get to decide to oust a pro-labor pro-people President,’ Klain said on July 4, 2024, in response to The New York Times reporting about the Democrats’ pressure campaign against Biden. 

According to the book, after the debate, Klain called Jeff Zients, his successor as Biden’s chief of staff, to say he was ‘disturbed that Biden was planning to spend the weekend at Camp David.’

‘We have an emergency,’ Klain told Zients, according to the book. ‘We have a crisis on Capitol Hill, and the crisis is going to accelerate.’

But Zients insisted Biden was going to Camp David to be with his family, instead of Klain’s plan to appease the progressive wing of the party with a bold second-term agenda. 

‘I have no f—ing clue why he’s going to Camp David this weekend,’ Klain said, according to the authors. ‘He needs to be working the phones, day and night.’

Even before the debate, when concerns about the first octogenarian president’s ability to lead the country through a second term came to a boiling point, Klain had concerns, as portrayed in the book. 

Klain had overseen debate prep for every Democratic presidential candidate since 2004, according to the authors. Between Biden’s cold, a shorter prep window than usual and staffers privately expressing concern, debate prep in Camp David did not quite go as planned, the authors claimed.

‘This is going to be really touch and go in Atlanta,’ Klain told Donilon and Reed ahead of the debate, according to the book. 

Fox News Digital has written extensively dating back to the 2020 presidential campaign about Biden’s cognitive decline and his inner circle’s alleged role in covering it up.

When reached for comment, Klain told Fox News Digital, ‘I have nothing to add.’

Biden did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.