Marco Rubio Says No Judge Has Authority Over Him in Alarming Testimony

Secretary of State Marco Rubio flippantly said he does not have to listen to court orders at a Senate hearing Tuesday.

Senator Chris Van Hollen asked Rubio about the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who was mistakenly deported to El Salvador on the government’s own admission. Rubio repeated the Trump administration’s false claims of Abrego Garcia’s gang membership and alleged crimes.

“We deported gang members. Gang members, including the one you had a margarita with. And that guy is a human trafficker, and that guy is a gang banger, and the evidence is going to be clear in the days to come,” Rubio said, referring to Van Hollen’s visit to El Salvador last month to verify Abrego Garcia’s well-being.

Van Hollen interrupted and tried to refute Rubio’s lies, telling Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chair Jim Risch that Rubio “can’t make unsubstantiated claims like that.”

“Secretary Rubio should take that testimony to federal court in the United States because he hasn’t done it under oath,” Van Hollen asserted, only to be reprimanded by Risch. Then Rubio made his outrageous claim about the federal judiciary.

“There is a division in our government between the federal branch and the judicial branch. No judge, and the judicial branch, cannot tell me or the president how to conduct foreign policy,” Rubio said. “No judge can tell how I have to outreach to a foreign partner or what I need to say to them. And if do reach to that foreign partner and talk to them, I am under no obligation to share that with the judiciary branch.”

First of all, Rubio completely gets the branches of government wrong, as there are three of them: the executive branch, consisting of the presidency; the legislative branch, comprising Congress; and the judicial branch, made up of the federal court system. But perhaps even more troubling, Rubio also declared that he did not believe in the Constitution’s separation of powers, in which the three branches exist together in a system of checks and balances.

Rubio betrayed what seems to be the Trump administration’s actual beliefs about the U.S. government: that the presidency is more like an absolute monarchy that isn’t subject to congressional or judicial oversight. The conservative-controlled Supreme Court seems to have inspired that belief last year in its ruling on presidential immunity. Now, as President Trump deports immigrants without evidence or due process, we are seeing the actions of a president who believes he is above the law.

Step aside, presidents and prime ministers: Vice President JD Vance says he wants to work with the newest world leader, Pope Leo XIV.

Vance told NBC News Tuesday that he and Secretary of State Marco Rubio had discussed U.S. foreign policy during his first meeting with the new pontiff, who hails from Chicago.

“We talked a lot about what’s going on in Israel and Gaza. We talked a lot about the Russia-Ukraine situation,” Vance said. “It’s hard to predict the future, but I do think that not just the pope, but the entire Vatican, has expressed a desire to be really helpful and to work together on facilitating, hopefully, a peace deal coming together in Russia and Ukraine.”

President Donald Trump posted on Truth Social Monday that “the Vatican, as represented by the Pope” was “very interested” in hosting negotiations between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy.

But the Vatican gave no indication it intends to wade into talks. In a statement about the meeting Monday, the Vatican said, “There was an exchange of views on some current international issues, during which hope was expressed that humanitarian law and international law be respected in areas of conflict and that there be a negotiated solution between the parties involved.”

Earlier this month, Pope Leo had called for an end to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, where the U.S. has directly funded Israel’s relentless slaughter of Palestinians in violation of international law. Since entering the White House, Trump has approved at least $12 billion in arms sales to Israel.

Pope Leo also called for an end to the “war of words and images,” and to end the targeting of journalists—which seemed, again, to be an indirect criticism of Trump’s administration and the MAGA movement. The pontiff had previously shared criticism of Trump’s immigration policies during his first administration, as well as some of Vance’s statements about Catholicism. The noted White Sox fan has also distanced himself from the MAGA crowd by advocating for gun reform and ending racism.

Now it seems Vance is hoping to make nice so as not to alienate a huge swath of the world’s population.

“We have an American pope of the world’s largest single religion—a guy who doesn’t have an army, but who I think has an incredible amount of capacity to convene and to influence not just Europe but, really, the entire world,” Vance told NBC News.

“I hope it’s the beginning of a very good relationship because I think he does care a lot about peace,” he said. “If there is a single most productive thing [from the trip], my hope is that it will be that the relationship between us and the Vatican leads to a lot fewer people getting killed and a lot less humanitarian disaster.”

The United States has maintained diplomatic relations with the papal state for more than 40 years, when former President Ronald Reagan established a partnership with Pope John Paul II to open an embassy in the Holy See.

The president’s threats against Bruce Springsteen are not a joke.

In a post on Truth Social early Monday, Donald Trump said he would be directing the federal government to conduct a “major investigation” into how much money Kamala Harris paid celebrity musicians to endorse her during her 2024 campaign, including the likes of Springsteen, Beyoncé, and U2’s Bono.

One day later, the late-night post appeared less like a stray arrow and more like an administrative agenda.

“Accountability for a class of people who act as if they’re above the law may be uncomfortable for Rolling Stone, but it’s refreshing to the American people,” Trump White House spokesperson Harrison Fields told Rolling Stone Tuesday. Fields said that the Justice Department and the Federal Election Commission would “act independently in [their] decision-making” as to whether or not they would get involved, as they have final jurisdiction over such an investigation.

But Trump’s assertion that Harris paid for endorsements isn’t correct. Harris’s campaign was roundly scrutinized for cashing big checks to celebrity production companies, including $165,000 to Beyoncé’s Parkwood Production Media LLC on November 19 and $1 million to Oprah’s Harpo Productions for services that they provided during her campaign. Harpo provided the stage and staff during her livestreamed Detroit town hall, while Beyoncé was paid for “campaign event production,” according to FEC records, weeks after she made a guest appearance at the Democratic presidential nominee’s Houston rally in October. (On Monday, Trump claimed without citation that Beyonce had received $11 million to walk on stage and endorse Harris without performing.)

Springsteen’s production company, meanwhile, received $76,000 from the Harris campaign after he performed as a musical guest at Harris’s Georgia rally in October.

“Campaign finance laws require campaigns to pay fair-market value to vendors. If she failed to pay any of these companies for performing services at an event or rally, it would constitute an illegal in-kind contribution to the campaign in two ways: The contribution would exceed donation limits, and companies are not permitted to donate directly to candidates,” reported Rolling Stone.

The president’s decision to hone in on campaign finance corruption, per those who have spoken to him in recent months, boils down to one word: revenge. Despite skirting consequences by winning the presidency, Trump has seemingly not gotten over the fact that he is the first U.S. president convicted as a felon (and the first convicted felon to become president). Trump was convicted last year on charges related to campaign finance fraud for issuing hush-money payments to porn star Stormy Daniels during the 2016 election.

“Democrats pretended to care about campaign finance violations when they persecuted President Trump with their lawfare,” Mike Davis, a conservative lawyer close to Trump who is a key player of the MAGA legal elite, told Rolling Stone. “Maybe they shouldn’t have thrown stones in glass houses. Nobody is above the law.”

Trump and Springsteen have traded barbs for years, but Trump’s fury against the “Born in the USA” singer was reignited last week when the rock star told a crowd in Manchester, England, that the Trump administration was “taking sadistic pleasure in the pain that they inflict on loyal American workers.”

“The mighty E Street Band is here tonight to call upon the righteous power of art, of music, of rock ’n’ roll, in dangerous times,” Springsteen said Wednesday. “In my home, the America I love, the America I’ve written about that has been a beacon of hope and liberty for 250 years, is currently in the hands of a corrupt, incompetent, and treasonous administration.”

That sparked Trump’s multi-day tirade against The Boss, writing on Truth Social that the singer of one of his favorite campaign tracks was actually “highly overrated.”

“Never liked him, never liked his music, or his Radical Left Politics and, importantly, he’s not a talented guy—Just a pushy, obnoxious JERK, who fervently supported Crooked Joe Biden, a mentally incompetent FOOL, and our WORST EVER President, who came close to destroying our Country,” Trump posted after clips of Springsteen’s remarks went viral. “If I wasn’t elected, it would have been GONE by now!”

“This dried out ‘prune’ of a rocker (his skin is all atrophied!) ought to KEEP HIS MOUTH SHUT until he gets back into the Country, that’s just ‘standard fare.’ Then we’ll all see how it goes for him!” Trump added.

In response, Springsteen spoke out again on Saturday, telling another stadium crowd in Manchester that Trump was “unfit” to be president.

“Things are happening right now that are altering the very nature of our country’s democracy, and they’re too important to ignore,” he said.

One House Republican is calling out the Trump administration’s lies that the “big, beautiful” budget bill won’t raise the deficit.

Speaking to CNN’s Manu Raju on Tuesday, Representative Thomas Massie said that “Under the policies of this bill, we’re going to add $20 trillion dollars to the debt over the next 10 years, which is three and a half to $5 trillion more than would have been added otherwise.”

When Raju told Massie about the White House’s claims that the bill is deficit neutral, Massie chuckled. 

“That’s a joke,” the Kentucky congressman, whose votes often align with libertarian principles. 

Earlier in the day, President Trump attacked Massie after a meeting with House Republicans on Capitol Hill.

“I don’t think Thomas Massie understands government. I think he’s a grandstander, frankly,” Trump said. “We don’t even talk to him much, I think he should be voted out of office.”  

Trump’s threats to oust Massie may not go very far, as he was able to survive a primary challenge in the 2024 election despite facing attack ads over his criticism of Israel. He ended up winning with 75 percent of the vote, and even stepped up his criticisms over the next year. 

Massie has long been skeptical of the Trump administration claims about fiscal responsibility, and is not likely to cave and vote for the budget bill if there’s any indication that it would increase the budget deficit. With the GOP’s narrow margin in the House, the bill would likely need near-unanimous approval to pass, and Massie’s opposition could inspire other Republicans to join him.

The likely next head of the Internal Revenue Service refuses to say whether President Trump is allowed to use the agency to strip organizations of their nonprofit status as he sees fit. 

Senator Elizabeth Warren had IRS commissioner nominee Billy Long visibly shaken with a series of questions during his confirmation hearing Tuesday regarding the legality of Trump levying the IRS against nonprofit groups he doesn’t like. 

“I sent you the statute, you’ve had three weeks to talk to the lawyers about it. So let’s jump in. Mr. Long, is it illegal for the president to direct the IRS to revoke a taxpayer’s nonprofit status?”

“In the first place, he wouldn’t do that—”

“That’s not my question, Mr. Long, please don’t start down this—”

“Are we on section 72-12 or 72-17?”

“I’m at 26 U.S.C 72-17. Do I need to read it to you?” 

“Prohibits any member of the executive branch to request the IRS to conduct or terminate an audit on a taxpayer,” Long read aloud from the statue. 

“Alrighty. So is it illegal?”

“I’m gonna follow the law, and if that’s the law, yes.” 

“That is the law, so I just want to be clear, is it illegal for the president of the United States to instruct the IRS to remove a taxpayer’s nonprofit status?” 

Long recited the statute again in response. 

“Is that a yes?” Warren pressed.

“I’d have to go to the lawyers at the IRS to tell me.” 

“Come on, you just read it!”

“I know, but see, the instance that you’re speaking about in there, correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t see …” he tailed off. 

“Look, it says ‘it shall be unlawful for any applicable person’—which in this case includes the president—‘to request directly or indirectly, any officer or employee of the Internal Revenue Service to conduct or terminate an audit or other investigation of any particular taxpayer.’” Warren asked Long once again if what Trump has already threatened to do is illegal. 

“I’m not gonna have the answer that you need, and I apologize, but like I said—”

“Why are you not having the answer? You’ve had three weeks to consult with lawyers, the statute is about as clear as plain English—”

“Well if I say I’m gonna follow the law, why would you need to ask me the question?” 

“Because I wanna make sure that you understand what the law says. If you think ‘follow the law’ means you just get to make it up on the spot, then you don’t get to be the IRS commissioner. The point here is to follow the law as it is written.… Can the president of the United States legally tell the IRS to change someone’s nonprofit status?”

Long again refused to answer. 

Warren and Long continued to spar, with Warren getting more frustrated and Long getting more flustered as neither of them got anywhere with their questioning and Long refused to plainly state that he wouldn’t let his future boss force him to break the law. 

“You know, Mr. Long, you’d have a lot more credibility if you just say ‘yes.’ It’s clear that the statute makes it illegal for the president to direct the IRS vis-à-vis any particular taxpayer. And the fact that you wanna sit there and dance around about this tells me that you shouldn’t be within a thousand miles of the directorship of the IRS.”  

Trump has repeatedly threatened to strip universities like Harvard of their nonprofit status. Meanwhile, Republicans in Congress are working to give him more power to kill just about any nonprofit he disagrees with .