Politics
What happened with Trump's trials in January
Former President Trump faces four felony criminal trials and several civil trials over the next few months as he’s running for re-election. Having trouble keeping up?
Here are the key developments in Trump’s trials in January.
Delays in the DC election-subversion case
Early in the month, a three-judge panel in Washington held a hearing about Trump’s claim that he is immune from prosecution on criminal charges that he plotted to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
Questions from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia panel indicated the judges were inclined to reject his argument, but what most observers assumed would be a quickly issued opinion has dragged on for weeks. (Trump could still ask the full court to rule and then go to the Supreme Court, causing even more delays.)
The case originally scheduled to begin March 4 has been on hold since December and there has to be time for both sides to file pretrial motions, objections, poll jurors, etc.
The court on Thursday took Trump’s federal election interference trial off its March calendar. A new date has not been listed.
Millions awarded in E. Jean Carroll’s defamation case
In the middle of the month, a jury heard and decided a second defamation case brought by longtime advice columnist E. Jean Carroll, and quickly awarded her $83.3 million. That amount comes on top of the $5 million a jury awarded her in an initial defamation trial last year in which the jury also found that Trump sexually assaulted Carroll in a Manhattan department store in 1996.
Jurors were asked to decide whether Trump should pay Carroll for two statements he made as president after a magazine published excerpts of Carroll’s memoir. Jurors were not asked to reconsider whether the sexual assault had occurred.
Trump attended much of the trial, unlike the first, even though he was not required to. Trump testified for just over three minutes after the judge limited what he could say, ruling the former president had missed the chance to argue his innocence in the first trial.
Trump is appealing both awards.
Awaiting a verdict in the New York fraud case
Trump is awaiting a verdict from Judge Arthur Engoron in a New York civil fraud trial targeting his business, in which state lawyers seek $370 million after he was found liable for habitually exaggerating his wealth on financial statements he provided to banks, insurance companies and others in order to receive more beneficial loan terms.
State lawyers also seek to ban Trump, his elder sons and the Trump Organization from doing business in New York, where the bulk of his real estate empire is located.
Engoron has already found Trump liable for fraud in the nonjury trial, but the awaited verdict is expected to detail whether the former president violated other laws and the size of the penalty.
The trial has lasted for several months and has included several high tension moments, including two fines from the judge for Trump making unfounded claims about Engoron’s clerk and loud exclamations by Trump, including a lengthy speech during closing arguments.
Questions arise about prosecutors in Georgia election-subversion case
Trump faces similar charges over attempts to stay in power after losing the 2020 election in Fulton County, Georgia. That case has not been scheduled but was in the news in January given allegations from one of Trump’s co-defendants that Dist. Atty. Fani Willis had an inappropriate romantic relationship with a special prosecutor she hired for the case.
An attorney for Trump co-defendant Michael Roman filed a motion seeking to dismiss the indictment and to remove Willis and special prosecutor Nathan Wade from the case. Trump has joined the filing and Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee has set a hearing on the matter for Feb. 15.
Neither Willis nor Wade have responded publicly to the allegations but are expected to respond in a court filing due before the hearing.
Politics
Video: Fed Chair Responds to Inquiry on Building Renovations
new video loaded: Fed Chair Responds to Inquiry on Building Renovations
transcript
transcript
Fed Chair Responds to Inquiry on Building Renovations
Federal prosecutors opened an investigation into whether Jerome H. Powell, the Federal Reserve chair, lied to Congress about the scope of renovations of the central bank’s buildings. He called the probe “unprecedented” in a rare video message.
-
“Good evening. This new threat is not about my testimony last June or about the renovation of the Federal Reserve buildings. This is about whether the Fed will be able to continue to set interest rates based on evidence and economic conditions, or whether instead, monetary policy will be directed by political pressure or intimidation.” “Well, thank you very much. We’re looking at the construction. Thank you.”
By Nailah Morgan
January 12, 2026
Politics
San Antonio ends its abortion travel fund after new state law, legal action
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
San Antonio has shut down its out-of-state abortion travel fund after a new Texas law that prohibits the use of public funds to cover abortions and a lawsuit from the state challenging the city’s fund.
City Council members last year approved $100,000 for its Reproductive Justice Fund to support abortion-related travel, prompting Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton to sue over allegations that the city was “transparently attempting to undermine and subvert Texas law and public policy.”
Paxton claimed victory in the lawsuit on Friday after the case was dismissed without a finding for either side.
WYOMING SUPREME COURT RULES LAWS RESTRICTING ABORTION VIOLATE STATE CONSTITUTION
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton claimed victory in the lawsuit after the case was dismissed without a finding for either side. (Hannah Beier/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
“Texas respects the sanctity of unborn life, and I will always do everything in my power to prevent radicals from manipulating the system to murder innocent babies,” Paxton said in a statement. “It is illegal for cities to fund abortion tourism with taxpayer funds. San Antonio’s unlawful attempt to cover the travel and other expenses for out-of-state abortions has now officially been defeated.”
But San Antonio’s city attorney argued that the city did nothing wrong and pushed back on Paxton’s claim that the state won the lawsuit.
“This litigation was both initiated and abandoned by the State of Texas,” the San Antonio city attorney’s office said in a statement to The Texas Tribune. “In other words, the City did not drop any claims; the State of Texas, through the Texas Office of the Attorney General, dropped its claims.”
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said he will continue opposing the use of public funds for abortion-related travel. (Justin Lane/Reuters)
Paxton’s lawsuit argued that the travel fund violates the gift clause of the Texas Constitution. The state’s 15th Court of Appeals sided with Paxton and granted a temporary injunction in June to block the city from disbursing the fund while the case moved forward.
Gov. Greg Abbott in August signed into law Senate Bill 33, which bans the use of public money to fund “logistical support” for abortion. The law also allows Texas residents to file a civil suit if they believe a city violated the law.
“The City believed the law, prior to the passage of SB 33, allowed the uses of the fund for out-of-state abortion travel that were discussed publicly,” the city attorney’s office said in its statement. “After SB 33 became law and no longer allowed those uses, the City did not proceed with the procurement of those specific uses—consistent with its intent all along that it would follow the law.”
TRUMP URGES GOP TO BE ‘FLEXIBLE’ ON HYDE AMENDMENT, IGNITING BACKLASH FROM PRO-LIFE ALLIES
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed a law in August that blocks cities from using public money to help cover travel or other costs related to abortion. (Antranik Tavitian/Reuters)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The broader Reproductive Justice Fund remains, but it is restricted to non-abortion services such as home pregnancy tests, emergency contraception and STI testing.
The city of Austin also shut down its abortion travel fund after the law was signed. Austin had allocated $400,000 to its Reproductive Healthcare Logistics Fund in 2024 to help women traveling to other states for an abortion with funding for travel, food and lodging.
Politics
California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta opts against running for governor. Again.
California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta announced Sunday that he would not run for California governor, a decision grounded in his belief that his legal efforts combating the Trump administration as the state’s top prosecutor are paramount at this moment in history.
“Watching this dystopian horror come to life has reaffirmed something I feel in every fiber of my being: in this moment, my place is here — shielding Californians from the most brazen attacks on our rights and our families,” Bonta said in a statement. “My vision for the California Department of Justice is that we remain the nation’s largest and most powerful check on power.”
Bonta said that President Trump’s blocking of welfare funds to California and the fatal shooting of a Minnesota mother of three last week by a federal immigration agent cemented his decision to seek reelection to his current post, according to Politico, which first reported that Bonta would not run for governor.
Bonta, 53, a former state lawmaker and a close political ally to Gov. Gavin Newsom, has served as the state’s top law enforcement official since Newsom appointed him to the position in 2021. In the last year, his office has sued the Trump administration more than 50 times — a track record that would probably have served him well had he decided to run in a state where Trump has lost three times and has sky-high disapproval ratings.
Bonta in 2024 said that he was considering running. Then in February he announced he had ruled it out and was focused instead on doing the job of attorney general, which he considers especially important under the Trump administration. Then, both former Vice President Kamala Harris and Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) announced they would not run for governor, and Bonta began reconsidering, he said.
“I had two horses in the governor’s race already,” Bonta told The Times in November. “They decided not to get involved in the end. … The race is fundamentally different today, right?”
The race for California governor remains wide open. Newsom is serving the final year of his second term and is barred from running again because of term limits. Newsom has said he is considering a run for president in 2028.
Former Rep. Katie Porter — an early leader in polls — late last year faltered after videos emerged of her screaming at an aide and berating a reporter. The videos contributed to her dropping behind Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, a Republican, in a November poll released by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies and co-sponsored by The Times.
Porter rebounded a bit toward the end of the year, a poll by the Public Policy Institute of California showed, however none of the candidates has secured a majority of support and many voters remain undecided.
California hasn’t elected a Republican governor since 2006, Democrats heavily outnumber Republicans in the state, and many are seething with anger over Trump and looking for Democratic candidates willing to fight back against the current administration.
Bonta has faced questions in recent months about spending about $468,000 in campaign funds on legal advice last year as he spoke to federal investigators about alleged corruption involving former Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao, who was charged in an alleged bribery scheme involving local businessmen David Trung Duong and Andy Hung Duong. All three have pleaded not guilty.
According to his political consultant Dan Newman, Bonta — who had received campaign donations from the Duong family — was approached by investigators because he was initially viewed as a “possible victim” in the alleged scheme, though that was later ruled out. Bonta has since returned $155,000 in campaign contributions from the Duong family, according to news reports.
Bonta is the son of civil rights activists Warren Bonta, a white native Californian, and Cynthia Bonta, a native of the Philippines who immigrated to the U.S. on a scholarship in 1965. Bonta, a U.S. citizen, was born in Quezon City, Philippines, in 1972, when his parents were working there as missionaries, and immigrated with his family to California as an infant.
In 2012, Bonta was elected to represent Oakland, Alameda and San Leandro as the first Filipino American to serve in California’s Legislature. In Sacramento, he pursued a string of criminal justice reforms and developed a record as one of the body’s most liberal members.
Bonta is married to Assemblywoman Mia Bonta (D-Alameda), who succeeded him in the state Assembly, and the couple have three children.
Times staff writer Dakota Smith contributed to this report.
-
Detroit, MI1 week ago2 hospitalized after shooting on Lodge Freeway in Detroit
-
Technology6 days agoPower bank feature creep is out of control
-
Dallas, TX4 days agoAnti-ICE protest outside Dallas City Hall follows deadly shooting in Minneapolis
-
Delaware3 days agoMERR responds to dead humpback whale washed up near Bethany Beach
-
Dallas, TX1 week agoDefensive coordinator candidates who could improve Cowboys’ brutal secondary in 2026
-
Iowa6 days agoPat McAfee praises Audi Crooks, plays hype song for Iowa State star
-
Montana2 days agoService door of Crans-Montana bar where 40 died in fire was locked from inside, owner says
-
Health1 week agoViral New Year reset routine is helping people adopt healthier habits