Moments after Daniris Espinal walked into her new apartment in Brooklyn, she prayed. In ensuing nights, she would awaken and touch the walls for reassurance — finding in them a relief that turned to tears over her morning coffee.

Those walls were possible through a federal program that pays rent for some 60,000 families and individuals fleeing homelessness or domestic violence. Espinal was fleeing both.

But the program, Emergency Housing Vouchers, is running out of money — and quickly.

Funding is expected to be used up by the end of next year, according to a letter from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and obtained by The Associated Press. That would leave tens of thousands across the country scrambling to pay their rent.

It would be among the largest one-time losses of rental assistance in the U.S., analysts say, and the ensuing evictions could churn these people — after several years of rebuilding their lives — back onto the street or back into abusive relationships.

“To have it stop would completely upend all the progress that they’ve made,” said Sonya Acosta, policy analyst at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, which researches housing assistance.

“And then you multiply that by 59,000 households,” she said.

The program, launched in 2021 by then-President Joe Biden as part of the pandemic-era American Rescue Plan Act, was allocated $5 billion to help pull people out of homelessness, domestic violence and human trafficking.

People from San Francisco to Dallas to Tallahassee, Florida, were enrolled — among them children, seniors and veterans — with the expectation that funding would last until the end of the decade.

But with the ballooning cost of rent, that $5 billion will end far faster.

Last month, HUD sent letters to groups dispersing the money, advising them to “manage your EHV program with the expectation that no additional funding from HUD will be forthcoming.”

The program’s future rests with Congress, which could decide to add money as it crafts the federal budget. But it’s a relatively expensive prospect at a time when Republicans, who control Congress, are dead set on cutting federal spending to afford tax cuts.

Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters, who championed the program four years ago, is pushing for another $8 billion infusion.

But the organizations lobbying Republican and Democratic lawmakers to reup the funding told the AP they aren’t optimistic. Four GOP lawmakers who oversee the budget negotiations did not respond to AP requests for comment.

“We’ve been told it’s very much going to be an uphill fight,” said Kim Johnson, the public policy manager at the National Low Income Housing Coalition.

Espinal and her two daughters, aged 4 and 19, are living on one of those vouchers in a three-bedroom apartment with an over $3,000 monthly rent — an amount extremely difficult to cover without the voucher.

Four years ago, Espinal fought her way out of a marriage where her husband controlled her decisions, from seeing her family and friends to leaving the apartment to go shopping.

When she spoke up, her husband said she was wrong, or in the wrong or crazy.

Isolated and in the haze of postpartum depression, she didn’t know what to believe. “Every day, little by little, I started to feel not like myself,” she said. “It felt like my mind wasn’t mine.”

When notices arrived in March 2021 seeking about $12,000 in back rent, it was a shock. Espinal had quit her job at her husband’s urging and he had promised to cover family expenses.

Police reports documenting her husband’s bursts of anger were enough for a judge to give her custody of their daughter in 2022, Espinal said.

But her future was precarious: She was alone, owed thousands of dollars in back rent and had no income to pay it or support her newborn and teenage daughters.

Financial aid to prevent evictions during the pandemic kept Espinal afloat, paying her back rent and keeping the family out of shelters. But it had an expiration date.

Around that time, the Emergency Housing Vouchers program was rolled out, targeting people in Espinal’s situation.

A “leading cause of family homelessness is domestic violence” in New York City, said Gina Cappuccitti, director of housing access and stability services at New Destiny Housing, a nonprofit that has connected 700 domestic violence survivors to the voucher program.

Espinal was one of those 700, and moved into her Brooklyn apartment in 2023.

The relief went beyond finding a secure place to live, she said. “I gained my worth, my sense of peace, and I was able to rebuild my identity.”

Now, she said, she’s putting aside money in case of the worst. Because, “that’s my fear, losing control of everything that I’ve worked so hard for.”

WASHINGTON — First the nation’s top law firms. Then its premier universities. Now, President Donald Trump is leaning on the advocacy groups that underpin U.S. civil society.

Trump said Thursday that the administration is looking at the tax-exempt status not just of Harvard, but environmental groups and specifically the ethics watchdog organization Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW. It could be a devastating financial blow to the nonprofit organizations — and his perceived political foes.

The president’s remarks, during an event at the White House, began to confirm what advocacy groups have been quietly warning: Trump’s campaign of retribution is coming next for them.

“It’s supposed to be a charitable organization,” Trump said about CREW, in particular. “The only charity they had is going after Donald Trump. So we’re looking at that. We’re looking at a lot of things.”

Trump and his team have been working their way through the nation’s institutions, threatening to chisel away at the independence and autonomy of the law firms, college campuses and now advocacy groups — or putting them at risk of losing their federal funds or professional livelihood.

It’s all coming quickly, not yet 100 days into the new administration, and in ways historically unheard of in this country for their speed and scope. And it’s sending shock waves reverberating throughout the American system.

“It’s a sad day in this country when organizations that provide critical services to their communities are under attack from their government,” said Cole Leiter, executive director of the advocacy group Americans Against Government Censorship. “No administration, Republican or Democratic, should be able to weaponize the weight of the government against their political enemies.”

On their own, Trump’s actions are an almost daily list of executive pronouncements from the White House. The Trump administration has issued orders against the law firms that had cases or attorneys perceived to be against him, and it has made demands of the universities over their rules around campus activism.

Thursday brought potentially more to the stack: Trump singled out CREW, the watchdog group whose founder, Norm Eisen, played a pivotal role in Trump’s first impeachment, and the environmental groups that largely stand at odds with his “drill baby drill” agenda.

“Tax exempt status — I mean, it’s a privilege. It’s really a privilege, and it’s been abused by a lot more than Harvard,” Trump said. “We’ll be making some statements. It’s a big deal.”

But taken together, the executive orders and actions and memos are making one thing clear: The Trump administration is eager to test new ways to flex executive power, and dare the courts and Congress to intervene. And there’s more expected to come.

Environmental, immigration and civil society advocacy groups have been bracing for potential threats to their tax-exempt status, according to a person familiar with the situation and granted anonymity to discuss it. The person said some expect Trump might start taking action against the environmental groups on Earth Day, which is Tuesday.

These are the largely nonprofit organizations and groups, many based in Washington, advocating for various communities, constituencies and causes.

Kieran Suckling, executive director of the Center for Biological Diversity, said environmental groups have heard that the Trump administration is preparing executive orders targeting the tax status of environmental groups that work on climate change, as well as that of any foundations that fund their work.

“Trump is marshaling all the power of government to punish his perceived enemies,” Suckling said. “We’ve got a crack legal team and will have him in court within 24 hours. We’re ready and waiting for him to come at us.”

CREW has been a leading ethics group in Washington, with Trump long the subject of its probes.

Ahead of the 2024 election, the group was part of the legal effort to disqualify Trump from regaining the White House under the 14th Amendment, in the aftermath of the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the Capitol. More recently, CREW sued over the firing of federal workers by Trump and the Department of Government Efficiency.

“For more than 20 years, CREW has exposed government corruption from politicians of both parties who violate the public trust and has worked to promote an ethical, transparent government,” said Jordan Libowitz, the organization’s vice president.

Trump’s attacks on civil society have created a climate that is potentially chilling for the organizations in question — but they have had mixed results.

Five of the major law firms and Trump reached a deal in which they agreed to provide a combined hundreds of millions of dollars in pro bono counsel to causes the administration says it supports. The firms are trying to avoid various sanctions, including terminated federal contracts, federal employment investigations over diversity hiring and others.

While Columbia University agreed to the Trump administration’s demands to overhaul its rules for public protests rather than risk billions of dollars in lost federal funds, Harvard rebuffed the administration and now faces a $2 billion federal funding freeze and the threat to its tax-exempt status.

The tax-exempt status allows nonprofit organizations to receive donations that are crucial to their financial bottom line. Changing that could, in some situations, lead to calamity.

“Good governance groups are the heart of a healthy democracy,” Libowitz said. “We will continue to do our work to ensure Americans have an ethical and accountable government.”

___

Associated Press writers Matthew Daly and Tammy Webber in Fenton, Michigan, contributed to this report.

PHOENIX — Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs on Thursday vowed to veto all bills not already on her desk amid a standoff with the Republican-controlled Legislature over funding for a state agency that provides services for some of Arizona’s most vulnerable residents.

Hobbs is demanding that lawmakers find a bipartisan compromise that would guarantee funding through the end of the fiscal year for the state’s Division of Developmental Disabilities, which supports close to 60,000 people with autism, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, Down syndrome and other cognitive and intellectual disabilities.

Before signing off on a funding package, Republicans want to establish guardrails for the program, such as reducing the number of paid hours that parents who care for their children with disabilities can receive per week. Democrats want to approve funding first and discuss reforms later.

The strategy of holding back on signing bills isn’t new. Hobbs’ Republican predecessors also withheld their signatures over budget disputes.

Republicans became frustrated after learning that Hobbs was requesting about $13 million more in supplemental funding for the Division of Developmental Disabilities, despite having already released her executive budget proposal.

Republicans contend that Hobbs has mismanaged the funds — going so far as to convene an ad hoc committee earlier this month to discuss “executive budget mismanagement.” Rep. David Livingston, chair of the House Appropriations Committee, said during a hearing earlier this week that it was unacceptable for programs within the division to be shut down in early May because of a lack of funding.

House Speaker Steve Montenegro in a statement called the governor’s veto threat “political blackmail.”

Hobbs, who is up for reelection in 2026, claims that Republicans are leveraging the crisis for “political warfare.” The governor is willing to even veto legislation she supports so long as a bipartisan compromise is not reached, said her spokesperson Christian Slater.

“We have been waiting for far too long,” Slater said in an interview. “Families are at the brink.”

——-

Govindarao covers Arizona government and politics for The Associated Press, with a focus on women in state government. She is based in Phoenix.

DES MOINES, Iowa — A 30-year-old community service program that sends young adults to work on projects across the U.S. was the latest target of the Trump administration ‘s campaign to slash government spending.

AmeriCorps’ National Civilian Community Corps informed volunteers Tuesday that they would exit the program early “due to programmatic circumstances beyond your control,” according to an email obtained by The Associated Press.

The unsigned memo to corps members said NCCC’s “ability to sustain program operations” was impacted by the Trump administration’s priorities and President Donald Trump’s executive order creating the Department of Government Efficiency. Members would be officially dismissed April 30.

AmeriCorps did not respond Wednesday to an AP email seeking comment.

AmeriCorps NCCC, which completed its 30th year last year, employs more than 2,000 people ages 18 to 26 participating for a roughly 10-month service term, according to the program’s website. The teams of corps members are tasked with working on several projects related to education, housing, urban and rural development, land conservation, and disaster relief, driving from one assignment to another across the country.

The agency pays for volunteers’ basic expenses, including housing, meals and a “limited health benefit,” as well as a “modest” living allowance, according to the program. The program also provided members who complete their 1,700-hour service term with funding for future education expenses or to apply to certain student loans. That benefit was worth about $7,300 this service year.

Funding for AmeriCorps and NCCC has long been scrutinized when Congress talks of budget trims. The federal agency’s budget showed NCCC funding amounted to nearly $38 million last fiscal year.

A White House official said the Trump administration questioned using taxpayer money for the program. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to comment publicly.

The traditional NCCC volunteers worked with sponsors including community and faith-based based organizations, nonprofits, schools, cities and tribes. Some of the recent service projects included working at a food bank in Washington state, building homes with Habitat for Humanity in North Carolina, and facilitating after school programs in Arizona.

AmeriCorps NCCC also has a partnership with the Federal Emergency Management Agency and, more recently, the U.S. Forest Service. Those volunteers over the last year responded to tornadoes and flooding in Iowa, hurricane damage in North Carolina and wildfires in California, among other natural disasters, when volunteers are especially visible.

Young corps members were told Tuesday night to pack up. Many started long road trips from their latest assignment to campuses in Vicksburg, Mississippi; Vinton, Iowa; Sacramento, California; and Aurora, Colorado. Members would receive their allowance and health coverage through the end of April, according to the memo.

Members were told in the memo that those who have completed 15% or more of their term would be eligible for a prorated amount of their education award.

But Kate Raftery, who was NCCC director from 2011 to 2014, said she’s worried about the corps members, many of whom were the “unusual suspects” who “saw this as a really impactful education or career launching pad.”

“They were not young people who had been striving to be service members somewhere,” Raftery said. “They were looking for an opportunity to improve their life. They were looking for an opportunity to build some skills, and to be part of a community.”

JUNEAU, Alaska — After President Donald Trump returned to office, Alaska Republican Gov. Mike Dunleavy declared “happy days are here again.” He likened Trump’s friendly approach to energy development as “Christmas every day” for a state whose fortunes rise or fall with oil.

But the nearly three months since Trump’s inauguration have been tumultuous, roiling Alaska’s substantial federal workforce and raising questions about the reliability of federal funding.

And his on-again, off-again tariffs, and a related drop in oil prices, have compounded the uncertainty for Alaska lawmakers, who each year must craft a state budget based on volatile oil prices. The legislative session is set to end in mid-May, well before Trump’s recently announced pause on higher tariffs for many countries expires.

The whiplash has worsened long-standing tension over how much money should go toward the yearly oil-wealth fund check most Alaska residents receive as opposed to education or other needs. Lawmakers have shown scant interest in raising taxes and have blown through billions in savings plugging recurring budget deficits dating back more than a decade.

“We’re all in a pickle,” said House Speaker Bryce Edgmon, an independent who leads a coalition of Democrats, independents and two Republicans.

Alaska is no stranger to the boom-bust cycle of oil. The government spends more freely on infrastructure and other projects when prices are high and shutters facilities or slashes costs when they are low. Lawmakers base spending off twice-a-year revenue outlooks pegged to oil price and production forecasts.

A year ago, North Slope oil was around $90 a barrel. It settled in the low-to-mid-$70 range beginning last fall and hit as low as $65 this week before Trump announced the 90-day tariff pause.

At current prices, each dollar change in oil equates to about $35 million to $40 million in state revenue, according to the nonpartisan Legislative Finance Division. The March revenue forecast was based on $68-a-barrel oil for the upcoming budget year, down $2 from a December forecast.

Oil prices change frequently and plans by OPEC+ members to add more oil to the market could cause a price softening, said Dunleavy spokesperson Jeff Turner, who noted the governor is focused on Trump’s executive order supporting increased oil and gas drilling, mining and logging in Alaska, and that it is “great to have an administration that supports Alaska’s responsible resource development.”

Some state political leaders hope Trump’s threatened tariffs could prompt countries like Japan, South Korea and Taiwan to invest in or commit to buying gas from a proposed massive liquefied natural gas project in Alaska. The project, repeatedly touted by Trump, has struggled for years to gain traction amid cost concerns, competition from other projects and questions about its economic feasibility.

Trump carried Alaska in November’s election.

Besides oil, Alaska relies heavily on earnings from its nest-egg oil-wealth investment fund. The fund’s principal is protected, but its earnings can be spent. Lawmakers cap withdrawals based on a percentage of the fund’s average market value over a five-year period. The yearly dividend paid to residents has traditionally come from earnings, but since lawmakers also began using earnings for state services in 2018, there has been friction over how much should go toward each.

Dunleavy proposed a roughly $3,800 dividend per resident, which would cost $2.5 billion — two-thirds of this year’s earnings withdrawal — and result in a deficit he suggested covering by tapping the state’s diminished savings. That amount hews to a formula abandoned years ago by lawmakers as unaffordable.

The proposal is a nonstarter with legislative leaders, who are hearing pleas for more funding for K-12 schools squeezed by years of inflation and energy and health care costs. Education advocates also want the state to tackle a maintenance backlog that they say has created unsafe learning environments for students, including mold and structural issues at some schools.

Last year, residents received $1,702, a combined dividend and energy relief payment. The dividend the past five years has been as low as $992 in 2020 and as high as $3,284, another combined dividend and energy relief check.

House Majority Leader Chuck Kopp, a Republican, said politicians should not be “even stoking the fantasy” of a dividend as large as Dunleavy proposed.

“We cannot pay an unsustainable dividend, and that dividend distorts the fiscal reality that we’re facing,” he said. “Do we need new revenue, or do we need to get a handle on the size of the dividend we’re paying and honestly figure out how we’re going to prioritize that?”

Some members of the bipartisan-led Senate have urged changes to oil taxes to raise revenue, but overall support has been limited.

PORTLAND, Maine — The deadline has arrived for Maine officials to reach a resolution with the U.S. Education Department over a finding that the state violated antidiscrimination laws by allowing transgender athletes to participate in girls’ sports.

The Education Department said in March that an investigation concluded the Maine Department of Education violated the federal Title IX law by allowing transgender girls to participate on girls’ teams. The investigation followed a public disagreement between Democratic Maine Gov. Janet Mills and President Donald Trump at a February meeting of governors.

The U.S. Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights issued a final warning on March 31 telling the state it needed to comply with the law in 10 business days or face enforcement from the U.S. Justice Department. That deadline arrived Friday.

Maine education officials have declined to comment on the investigation. Trump has said the state risks losing federal funding if it does not come into compliance.

“The Maine Department of Education’s indifference to its past, current, and future female athletes is astonishing. By refusing to comply with Title IX, MDOE allows — indeed, encourages — male competitors to threaten the safety of female athletes, wrongfully obtain girls’ hard-earned accolades, and deny females equal opportunity in educational activities to which they are guaranteed under Title IX,” said Craig Trainor, acting assistant secretary for the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights.

Federal funding is critical to Maine schools. Maine got $358 million in federal funding for K-12 schools in 2021-22, or 10% of its budget, according to data from the Census. About 13% of that money went to Title I, 14% to special education and 20% to child nutrition programs such as school lunches.

Almost half of federal funds were simply marked as “other,” which likely points to the substantial COVID relief funds schools got that year. Prior to the pandemic, Maine got 6% of its funding from federal sources, almost $185 million in 2018-19.

The issue of school funding and transgender participation in sports in Maine began to bubble up when Mills and Trump sparred over the subject during the February meeting at the White House. During the meeting, Trump threatened to pull federal funding from Maine if the state did not comply with his executive order barring transgender athletes from sports.

Mills responded: “We’ll see you in court.”

Soon after, the Education Department and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services launched investigations into the state.

Health and Human Services officials said in March that the Maine Department of Education, Maine Principals’ Association and a high school are each in violation of Title IX because of the participation of transgender athletes. The Health Department has already referred the issue to the Justice Department for enforcement in court.

The principals’ association and school district both said they would not comply with a proposed agreement to ban the athletes. The Maine education department declined to comment.

Maine Republicans, who are in the minority in both houses of the Legislature, have put pressure on state Democrats to resolve the investigations. House Republican Leader Billy Bob Faulkingham, speaking during a news conference, said Mills has created a “hostage situation” that jeopardizes federal funding.

“The governor, and her administration, is holding Maine schools and Maine education under hostage,” Faulkingham said. “This standoff is not going to end well for the state of Maine and its education funding.”

LGBTQ+ rights groups in Maine have defended the state’s approach. “We’re not giving in, and we’re not giving up on our trans community,” EqualityMaine said in a social media post.

Federal authorities have also said they are investigating Maine due to claims school districts in the state violate federal law by withholding information about students’ gender transitioning from parents.

___

Associated Press writer Sharon Lurye in New Orleans contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — Republicans narrowly got their budget plan over the finish line. Now comes the hard part.

The resolution adopted this week was only a first step that allows Republicans to draft legislation that they can push through Congress without Democratic support. Next, they begin crafting a final bill with enough spending cuts to satisfy those on the right while not jeopardizing the reelection prospects of more vulnerable lawmakers whose constituents rely on key safety net programs.

With thin majorities in the House and Senate, Republicans can afford to lose hardly any votes from their side of the aisle as they draft legislation, giving every individual lawmaker leverage over the process.

“It’s going to take all of us to get it done,” said House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La.

The road ahead is daunting.

Republicans are determined to extend the individual tax cuts that were approved during President Donald Trump’s first term before they expire at year’s end. But they intend for the legislation to do far more than that, potentially enacting a host of tax reductions that Trump promised during the campaign, such as no income tax on tips and overtime.

And the tax cuts are only half the equation. Conservatives in the House gave the budget plan the final votes needed for passage Thursday after they said they received assurances from leadership in both chambers that they would work to have a final product with at least $1.5 trillion in spending cuts — forcing changes to federal programs including Medicaid that could prove hard for some in the party to support.

“The struggles Republicans have faced so far are only a glimmer of what’s to come,” said Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer.

Rep. Max Miller, R-Ohio, senses a difficult fight for Republicans. He said Trump has made clear he doesn’t want any benefit cuts for those who get health insurance coverage through Medicaid, which could conflict with the desire some conservatives have for steep spending cuts.

“If it’s this rocky now, it’s only going to get worse from here on out if the speaker is not able to get the entire conference in line,” Miller said.

Democrats have framed the debate as Republicans looking to slash key government programs so they can pass tax cuts that predominately help wealthier households. It’s a message Democrats will hammer home leading up to the 2026 midterm elections.

“At this point, they’re all worried about primaries and they are worried about Elon’s money, but they ought to be worried about a general election as well,” said Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., referring to Trump’s billionaire ally, Elon Musk. “I think it’s going to be very difficult for a moderate Republican, if there’s still any left, to be able to vote for this and go home and defend it.”

Some Republicans also made clear to GOP leadership before Thursday’s budget vote that they will be closely monitoring the changes to Medicaid in the final bill.

“This was just making sure that there is a clear understanding here that there are a group of members that will not cut benefits from seniors and our most vulnerable New Yorkers who rely on Medicaid,” said Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, R-N.Y.

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, who is up for reelection next year, said she’s also made her position known to leadership.

“I could not make my position on Medicaid cuts clearer,” she said. “I am not going to support cuts that affect low-income families, disabled individuals, low-income seniors, rural hospitals.”

Republicans say their focus is on instilling work requirements for able-bodied beneficiaries and more rigorous eligibility assessments. But Democrats say Republicans can’t generate the savings being discussed without also cutting benefits.

Meanwhile, Republicans see extending the individual and estate tax cuts passed in Trump’s first term as key to their electoral success next year. The House Ways and Means Committee says a family of four making $80,610, the median income in the United States, would see a $1,695 tax increase if the tax cuts are not extended.

Republicans spent the last few years blaming the Biden administration for increasing the debt, and a key test will be how many keep that focus as they seek to extend and expand tax cuts.

A recent estimate from the Joint Committee on Taxation projects that extending the 2017 tax breaks will add $5.5 trillion over the next decade when including interest, and $4.6 trillion not including interest. On top of that, adding Trump’s campaign promises would swell the price tag to $7 trillion.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said he’ll advocate for splitting the measure into two reconciliation bills if Republicans take too long to get to a final product.

“I’m going to say break it apart, because they need money for the border yesterday and they also need money for DoD,” Graham said, referring to the Department of Defense.

House Speaker Mike Johnson said he looked forward to the challenge and there was a lot of work ahead.

“The American people are counting on us,” Johnson said.

Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla., said he’s confident a final bill will pass with the House winning the most important tussles on the scope of taxes and spending cuts.

“I will bet you they will fold rather than inflict the largest tax increase in American history on their voters,” Cole said of the Senate. “And two-thirds of them, with all due respect, aren’t on the ballot next time. … Whereas everyone here is on the line. And our majority is much more on the line that their majority is.”

——

Associated Press staff writers Mary Clare Jalonick, Lisa Mascaro and Stephen Groves contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — More than $1 billion in federal funding for Cornell University and around $790 million for Northwestern University have been frozen while the government investigates alleged civil rights violations at both schools, the White House says.

It’s part of a broader push to use government funding to get major academic institutions to comply with President Donald Trump ’s political agenda. The White House confirmed the funding pauses late Tuesday night, but offered no further details on what it entails, or what grants to the schools are being affected.

The moves come as the Trump administration has increasingly begun using governmental grant funding as a spigot to try and influence campus policy — previously cutting off money to schools including Columbia University and the University of Pennsylvania.

That has left universities across the country struggling to navigate cuts to grants for research institutions.

In a statement, Cornell said it had received more than 75 stop work orders earlier Tuesday from the Defense Department related to research “profoundly significant to American national defense, cybersecurity, and health” but that it had not otherwise received any information confirming $1 billion in frozen grants.

“We are actively seeking information from federal officials to learn more about the basis for these decisions,” said the statement from Michael I. Kotlikoff, the university president, and other top school officials.

In an email to the Northwestern community, university president Michael Schill said it had not been notified by the federal government of the cuts, according to The Daily Northwestern, the campus newspaper.

Last month, the Education Department sent letters to more than 60 universities — including Cornell and Northwestern — warning of “potential enforcement actions if they do not fulfill their obligations” under federal law to “protect Jewish students on campus, including uninterrupted access to campus facilities and educational opportunities.”

The Trump administration has threatened to cut off federal funding for universities allowing alleged antisemitism to go unchecked at campus protests last year against Israel’s war with Hamas in Gaza — accusations the universities have denied.

Officials have already singled out Columbia University, making an example of it with threats to withhold $400 million in federal funds.

The administration repeatedly accused Columbia of failing to stop antisemitism during protests against Israel that began at the New York City university last spring and quickly spread to other campuses — a characterization disputed by those involved in the demonstrations.

As a precondition for restoring that money — along with billions more in future grants — the Republican administration demanded unprecedented changes in university policy.

Columbia’s decision to bow to those demands, in part to salvage ongoing research projects at its labs and medical center, has been criticized by some faculty and free speech groups as capitulating to an intrusion on academic freedom.

WASHINGTON — After a long wait, the Senate is launching action on President Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” of tax breaks and spending cuts at a risky moment for the U.S. and global economy.

More than a month after House Republicans surprised Washington by advancing their framework for Trump’s $4.5 trillion in tax breaks and $2 trillion in spending cuts, Senate Republicans voted Thursday to start working on their version. The largely party-line vote, 52-48, sets the stage for a potential Senate all-nighter Friday spilling into the weekend.

But work on the multitrillion-dollar package is coming as markets at home and abroad are on edge in the aftermath Trump’s vast tariffs scheme, complicating an already difficult political and procedural undertaking on what Republicans hope will become their signature domestic policy package.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., opened the chamber Thursday saying they expected to be ready to begin.

Trump says he’s on board with the plan and Republicans, in control of Congress, are eager to show the party is making progress toward delivering on their campaign promises. By nightfall, as voting began, one Republican, the libertarian-leaning Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, voted against, as did all Democrats.

Democrats, as the minority party, don’t have the votes to stop the GOP plan. But they intend to use the procedural tools available to prolong the process. Democrats argue that Republicans are focusing on tax breaks for the wealthy at the expense of the programs and services millions of Americans rely on for help with health care, child care, school lunches and other everyday needs.

“They’re mean, they’re nasty, they’re uncaring,” Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said about the Republicans. “We, tonight and tomorrow, are going to show just who they are.”

Senate Democrats started consuming up to 25 hours of their available debate time, holding the floor into the night and railing against potential GOP cuts to Medicaid, veterans programs, DOGE cuts and the impact of Trump’s tariffs.

Sen. Jeff Merkley of Oregon, the ranking Democrat on the Budget committee, repeated a slogan he has been sharing: “Families lose and billionaires win.”

“That,” he said, “is the Republican plan.”

Fundamental to the Senate package is making sure Trump’s first-term tax cuts, which are set to expire at the end of the year, are continued and made a permanent fixture of the tax code. The senators also will consider adding Trump’s proposed tax cuts on tipped wages, Social Security income and others.

The Senate package also would bolster border security funds by some $175 billion to carry out Trump’s mass deportation campaign, which is running short of cash, and it would add national security funds for the Pentagon — all priorities the Senate GOP tucked into an earlier version that was panned by House Republicans.

Republican Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming, the party whip, said that without action tax cuts would expire, becoming a $4 trillion tax hike on Americans. “Republicans are focused on getting America back on track,” he said.

What’s unclear is how it will all be paid for, since Republican deficit hawks typically require spending offsets to help defray the lost tax revenue and avoid piling onto the nation’s $36 trillion debt load.

While House Republicans approved their package with $4.5 trillion in tax breaks and up to $2 trillion in spending cuts, the Senate Republicans are taking a different tack.

Senate Budget Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham is making the case that since the existing Trump tax breaks are the current policy, they are not considered new, and do not need to be offset with reductions in spending — an approach Democrats compare to “going nuclear” with the normal rules, particularly if the strategy is put to the test with an unfavorable ruling before the Senate parliamentarian.

Instead, Senate Republicans are considering offsets mostly for any new Trump tax breaks. Raising alarms from the most conservative budget hawks, the senators have set a floor of about $4 billion in budget reductions to health and other programs — a fraction of the package’s expected $4 trillion-plus price tag for tax breaks.

GOP leaders are assuring the deficit hawks within their own ranks that the legislation says the cuts can rise to as much as $2 trillion.

After an expected Friday night vote-a-rama, with dozens of amendments being offered to the package, the senators are planning to stay into Saturday if needed to take a final vote to approve it, sending it to the House for action.

The House and Senate will ultimately need to merge their frameworks into a final product, expected in May, but House Speaker Mike Johnson’s intention to have it all wrapped up by Memorial Day could prove optimistic.

The political environment is uncertain, and the public’s appetite for steep budget cuts is being tested in real time, with Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency headed by billionaire Elon Musk blazing through federal offices, firing thousands of workers and shuttering long-running government mainstays — from scientific research projects on diseases to educational services for schoolchildren to offices that help with Social Security, tax filing and the weather.

At the same time, the staunchest fiscal conservatives in both the House and Senate, many aligned with the Freedom Caucus, are pushing for even more cuts.

Trump told senators publicly and privately this week he would have their backs, particularly when it comes to standing up for the spending reductions. At a White House announcing the tariffs Wednesday, Trump said the Senate plan had his “complete and total support.”

The president’s steep tariffs threw the global economy into a tailspin Thursday, with stocks down around the world, the U.S. markets leading the way.

__

Associated Press writers Leah Askarinam and Kevin Freking contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration is planning to halt more than half a billion dollars in contracts and grants awarded to Brown University, adding to a list of Ivy League colleges that have had their federal money threatened as a result of their responses to antisemitism, a White House official said.

Nearly $510 million in federal contracts and grants are on the line, said the official, who was not authorized to speak publicly about the plan and spoke on condition of anonymity.

In an email Thursday to campus leaders, Brown Provost Frank Doyle said the university was aware of “troubling rumors” about government action on its research money. “At this moment, we have no information to substantiate any of these rumors,” Doyle said.

It comes two days after President Donald Trump’s administration halted research grants at Princeton University. Dozens of universities are facing federal investigations into antisemitism following a wave of pro-Palestinian protests last year, but the administration has focused special attention on elite colleges.

Columbia University was the first one targeted, losing $400 million in federal money with threats to terminate more if it didn’t make the campus safer for Jewish students. The school agreed to several demands from the government last month, including an overhaul of student discipline rules and a review of the school’s Middle East studies department.

Trump’s administration has promised a more aggressive approach against campus antisemitism, accusing former President Joe Biden of letting schools off the hook. It has opened new investigations at colleges and detained and deported several foreign students with ties to pro-Palestinian protests.

___

AP Education Writer Collin Binkley contributed. Mumphrey reported from Phoenix.

___

The Associated Press’ education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.