Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s book, ‘Antisemitism in America: A Warning,’ is slated for release on Tuesday, but promotional events for the long-serving lawmaker’s book that were scheduled for this week are being called off.

‘Due to security concerns, Senator Schumer’s book events are being rescheduled,’ a statement to Fox from a book tour spokesperson noted.

The senator had been scheduled for multiple events this week.

Schumer irked some Democrats last week by voting to overcome a procedural hurdle and advance a Trump-backed government funding measure to a vote as the nation faced the prospect of a partial government shutdown.

He and a number of other Senate Democratic caucus members voted to invoke cloture, but then voted against passing the measure.

Two members of the Senate Democratic caucus – Sens. Angus King, I-Maine, and Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H. – voted to both invoke cloture and to pass the measure. 

Shaheen announced last week that she will not seek re-election in 2026.

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., was the only Senate Republican who voted against passing the funding measure last week.

Ahead of the vote, Schumer said that while the ‘bill is very bad, the potential for a shutdown has consequences for America that are much, much worse.’

Fox News’ Kelly Phares contributed to this report

Americans like the idea of downsizing the federal government but are far from thrilled with how billionaire Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) are carrying out cuts to the federal bureaucracy, according to new national polling.

President Donald Trump, after winning back the White House in last November’s election, created DOGE with marching orders to overhaul and downsize the federal government.

Trump named Musk, the world’s richest person and the chief executive of Tesla and SpaceX, to steer the organization.

DOGE has swept through federal agencies during the first two months of the Trump administration, rooting out what the White House argues was billions in wasteful federal spending. Additionally, it has taken a meat cleaver to the federal workforce, resulting in a massive downsizing of employees. The moves by DOGE grabbed tons of national attention and have triggered a slew of lawsuits in response.

American voters, by a 46%-40% margin in an NBC News poll conducted March 7-11 and released on Sunday, said creating DOGE was a good idea rather than a bad idea. 

However, when asked about their feelings towards DOGE, 47% of respondents held negative views, with 41% saying they saw DOGE in a positive light.

It is a similar story in a Reuters/IPSOS survey conducted March 11-12.

By a 59%-39% margin, Americans questioned in the poll said they supported downsizing the federal government.

However, 59% opposed the firing of tens of thousands of federal workers, with 38% supporting the moves by the Trump administration, and by a 50%-38% margin, they said Trump and Musk had gone too far in cutting federal spending.

Trump has repeatedly praised Musk for his efforts with DOGE, including during a primetime address earlier this month to a joint-session of Congress.

During an interview a week ago on Fox News’ ‘Sunday Morning Futures,’ Trump called Musk a ‘real patriot’ whose efforts have ‘opened a lot of eyes.’

However, Americans do not hold such rosy views of Musk, according to the surveys. Only 39% of those questioned in the NBC News poll had a positive view of Musk, with 51% holding a negative view.

He was underwater at 38% favorable and 59% unfavorable in the Reuters/Ipsos survey.

According to a Quinnipiac University national poll conducted March 6-10, 60% disapproved of the way Musk and DOGE are dealing with workers employed by the federal government, with only 36% approving.

The survey’s release noted that ‘54% of voters think Elon Musk and DOGE are hurting the country, while 40% think they are helping the country.’

A CNN poll conducted March 6-9 indicated that more than six in 10 thought the cuts by DOGE would go too far and that important federal programs would be shut down, with 37% saying the cuts wouldn’t go far enough in eliminating fraud and waste in the government.

It appears Trump is well aware of the negative reviews for Musk and DOGE.

Two weeks ago, Trump told the Cabinet secretaries that they, rather than Musk, would be in charge of department downsizing at their agencies.

In a social media post, Trump said they would use a ‘scalpel’ rather than a ‘hatchet’ in making government staffing cuts.

Ukraine now has a cruise missile that can travel over 600 miles, far enough to reach Moscow, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy boasted over the weekend. 

‘We have significant results,’ Zelenskyy said Saturday. ‘Long Neptune has been tested and successfully used in combat. A new Ukrainian missile, an accurate strike. The range is a thousand kilometers,’ or 620 miles. 

That puts Moscow within striking range. 

The missile has been in development for years. Battle watchers believe the combat success Zelenskyy referred to was a Friday strike on an oil refinery in Tuapse, Russia, some 300 miles from the front line. 

The refinery is under 60 miles from Russian President Vladimir Putin’s sprawling cliffside palace on the Black Sea in Gelendzhik. 

The Neptune cruise missile was used in April 2022 to take out a flagship of Russia’s Black Sea fleet. 

Zelenskyy recently pledged that Ukraine would produce 100,000 long-range munitions in 2025.

Russia intercepted and destroyed several Ukrainian drones flying over Moscow on Friday, with some coming as close as just two miles away from the Kremlin, according to Russian officials. White House envoy Steve Witkoff was in Moscow last week.

The fresh attacks and new offensive weapons contradict the delicate ceasefire negotiations that will culminate in a phone call between President Donald Trump and Putin on Tuesday. 

Zelenskyy has already agreed to the terms of a 30-day ceasefire after meetings with U.S. officials in Saudi Arabia. 

‘We’ll be talking about land, we’ll be talking about power plants, that’s a big question. But I think we have a lot of it already discussed, very much, by both sides, Ukraine and Russia,’ Trump said of his call. 

Russia has not accepted the terms of the ceasefire and accelerated attacks on Ukraine after Zelenskyy said he would agree to it. 

State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said Monday that ‘the ball is now in Russia’s court’ to accept a U.S.-proposed ceasefire deal that Ukraine agreed to last week.

The U.S.-backed proposal, which includes an immediate 30-day ceasefire and guaranteed resumption of U.S. military aid and intelligence to Ukraine, was finalized during diplomatic talks in Saudi Arabia last week.

‘Ukraine expressed readiness to accept the U.S. proposal to enact an immediate interim 30-day ceasefire to the Russia-Ukraine conflict. The ball is now in Russia’s court,’ Bruce said during the State Department’s second briefing of Trump’s second term. ‘Following this historic meeting, Secretary [of State Marco] Rubio traveled to the G7 in Canada, where our partners expressed support for a swift and a durable end to this conflict.’

After President Donald Trump’s Special Envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, met with Russian President Vladimir Putin last week, Putin said during a news conference that he agreed with the truce in principle, noting, ‘The idea itself is correct, and we certainly support it.’ Meanwhile, Trump’s national security advisor, Michael Waltz, said following the meeting that there is ‘cautious optimism’ a ceasefire could be close at hand.

While a ceasefire appears imminent, Russia and Ukraine still need to resolve key disagreements before finalizing the deal.

These include negotiations related to Ukraine’s entrance into NATO — which Russia has said is a non-starter — territorial integrity disputes and security guarantees, such as whether NATO peacekeeping troops will be allowed in Ukraine to maintain the ceasefire. Potential prisoner swaps will also need to be ironed out between the two warring nations.

Trump has also signaled that control of certain land and power plants in Ukraine would also be part of the negotiations.

While Trump and his team have expressed optimism about the deal, GOP South Dakota Sen. Mike Rounds said only ‘time will tell’ whether Putin plans on ‘deceiving us.’

Nationwide injunctions ordered against the first Trump administration account for more than half of the total injunctions ordered against the federal government since 1963, data show. 

Nationwide injunctions are court orders that prevent the federal government from implementing a policy or law that has a cascading effect impacting the entire country, not just the parties involved in the court case. 

Trump’s first administration faced 64 injunctions out of the total 127 nationwide injunctions issued since 1963. There were 32 injunctions issued against the Bush, Obama and Biden administrations collectively since 2001, meaning the first Trump administration was on the receiving end of double the amount of nationwide injunctions than his two predecessors and successor combined, according to the April 2024 edition of the Harvard Law Review. 

The Harvard Law Review found there were six injunctions issued against the Bush administration, 12 against the Obama administration and 14 against the Biden administration. 

Trump’s return to the Oval Office in January has brought with it more than 120 lawsuits from activists, government employees and others targeting his executive orders and actions. The lawsuits have resulted in nationwide injunctions in some cases, including 15 in February alone, according to Trump’s acting solicitor general, Sarah Harris.

Trump filed an emergency appeal Thursday asking the Supreme Court to narrow three injunctions that were issued to halt Trump’s nullification of birthright citizenship. The emergency appeal requests the injunction only cover individuals directly impacted by the relevant courts. 

Harris argued in the emergency appeal that nationwide injunctions have hit ‘epidemic proportions’ under the second Trump administration, noting that the federal government faced 14 universal injunctions in the first three years of the Biden administration compared to 15 leveled against the Trump admin in one month alone. 

‘Years of experience have shown that the Executive Branch cannot properly perform its functions if any judge anywhere can enjoin every presidential action everywhere,’ Harris wrote.

Officials in the first Trump administration also railed against the flow of injunctions ordered against the 45th president’s policies and laws, including the former chiefs of the Department of Justice. 

‘Courts issued an average of only 1.5 nationwide injunctions per year against the Reagan, Clinton, and George W. Bush administrations, and 2.5 per year against the Obama administration,’ former Assistant Attorney General Beth Williams said in February 2019.  

‘In President Trump’s first year in office, however, judges issued a whopping 20 nationwide injunctions – an eightfold increase. This matches the entire eight-year total of such injunctions issued against President Obama during his two terms. We are now at 30, matching the total number of injunctions issued against the first 42 presidents combined.’

Former Trump administration Attorney General Bill Barr added in remarks later in 2019 that there were ‘only 27 nationwide injunctions­ in all of the 20th century’ compared to 37, at the time, against the first Trump administration. 

‘Since President Trump took office, federal district courts have issued 37 nationwide injunctions against the Executive Branch. That’s more than one a month. By comparison, during President Obama’s first two years, district courts issued two nationwide injunctions against the Executive Branch, both of which were vacated by the Ninth Circuit. And according to the Department’s best estimates, courts issued only 27 nationwide injunctions­ in all of the 20th century,’ the former AG said in May 2019. 

Harvard Law Review found that the judges who issued the injunctions against the first Trump administration were overwhelmingly ordered by judges who were appointed by a Democrat. 

Democratic-appointed judges ordered 92.2% of the injunctions against the Trump administration, meaning just five of the 64 injunctions were ordered by Republican-appointed judges. 

Republican-appointed judges ordered all 14 of the nationwide injunctions against the federal government under the Biden administration. 

Injunctions under the Bush and Obama eras were much more bipartisan, with 50% of the injunctions in the Bush era issued by Democratic-appointed judges, and Republican-appointed judges ordering 58.3% of the 12 injunctions in the Obama era. 

Fox News Digital’s Breanne Deppisch contributed to this report. 

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis has been ordered to pay more than $54,000 for violating the state’s open records laws in relation to the prosecution of President Donald Trump.

The county’s Superior Court Judge Rachel Krause formalized her ruling Friday and ordered Willis to pay $54,264 in attorneys’ fees and litigation costs after ‘intentionally’ failing to provide records requested by Ashleigh Merchant, the attorney who filed the motion to disqualify Willis from prosecuting Trump on charges of allegedly interfering with the 2020 presidential election.

Krause stated that Willis’ office failed to provide documents related to the employment of Nathan Wade, the former special assistant district attorney forced to resign from the Trump case due to his romantic relationship with Willis. 

Merchant believed that Willis and Wade may have financially benefited from Wade’s appointment as the special prosecutor in the case.

‘Defendants — through the Open Records custodian, Dexter Bond — were openly hostile to counsel for Plaintiff, Ms. Merchant, and testified that Ms. Merchant’s requests were handled differently than other requests,’ the court order said.

Bond, who testified that his usual practice was to call a requestor to receive additional information to fulfill requests, indicated that he refused to communicate with Merchant by telephone, the court order stated.

‘While there is no requirement under the ORA for Mr. Bond to call any requestor about a particular request, Mr. Bond’s handling of Ms. Merchant’s requests in this manner indicates a lack of good faith,’ the order said. ‘Defendants’ failures were intentional, not done in good faith, and were substantially groundless and vexatious.’

Merchant, who reacted to the ruling in a post on X Friday, said she was ‘proud that we have judges willing to hold people in power accountable when they ignore the law!!!!’

Fox News Digital reached out to Merchant and Willis’ office for additional statements but did not immediately receive a response.

The DA’s office has 30 days from the court’s order to pay the penalty. The plaintiff also received injunctive relief directing Willis to finally provide the requested documents.