NEW YORK (AP) — An estimated 24.6 million television viewers watched President Donald Trump’s second inauguration, the smallest audience for the quadrennial ceremony since Barack Obama’s second inauguration in 2013.

The Nielsen Company said Tuesday that viewership was down from Joe Biden’s 2021 inauguration, which reached 33.8 million, and Trump’s first move into the White House, seen by 30.6 million in 2017.

Inauguration viewership has varied widely over the past half-century, from a high of 41.8 million when Ronald Reagan came into office in 1981 to a low of 15.5 million for the start of George W. Bush’s second term in 2004.

The length of Trump’s inauguration coverage may have hurt him in bragging rights. The 24.6 million figure represents the average number of people tuning in to coverage on one of 15 networks between 10:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m. Eastern. In past years, the coverage didn’t go on for so long, which meant the averages were likely higher because people tune away as the day goes on.

Nielsen had no immediate estimate, for example, of how many people watched Trump up until 4 p.m. Eastern, the cutoff point for most inauguration coverage in the past.

There’s no doubt where most viewers gravitated on Monday: Fox News Channel had 10.3 million viewers between 11:30 a.m. and 1 p.m., when Trump was sworn in and gave his inaugural speech. In that same period, ABC had 4.7 million viewers, NBC had 4.4 million, CBS had 4.1 million, CNN had 1.7 million and MSNBC had 848,000, Nielsen said.

Four years ago, 13.4 million people watched Biden’s inauguration on CNN and MSNBC, compared to only 2.4 million on Fox News.

David Bauder writes about media for the AP. Follow him at http://x.com/dbauder and https://bsky.app/profile/dbauder.bsky.social

WASHINGTON (AP) — Many Republican senators say they do not agree with President Donald Trump’s decision to pardon and commute sentences for more than 1,500 people who assaulted police officers, broke into the building or committed other crimes related to the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol four years ago.

“We’re not looking backwards, we’re looking forward,” said Senate Majority Leader John Thune, repeating his frequent response to questions about Trump’s promises of retribution from his first term.

Thune did not say whether he supported or opposed the pardons, which rattled many on Capitol Hill who lived through the attack and fled the mob of Trump’s supporters as they violently broke into the building and halted the certification of President Joe Biden’s victory.

Republican Sen. Kevin Cramer of North Dakota said he would have preferred “a more surgical approach” to the pardons, looking at them case by case. “It’s not ideal in my mind,” Cramer said. “But I do think I understand the spirit of it, and I’m comfortable with it … hopefully we move forward now.”

Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., agreed.

“It’s a hard one, because we work with them up here,” Tuberville said of the Capitol Police who were beaten by the rioters and guard lawmakers every day. “At the end of the day, we’ve got to get Jan. 6 behind us.”

Moving beyond the attack on the Capitol — and downplaying its violence — have become a central approach for congressional Republicans who have enthusiastically re-embraced Trump after his 2020 defeat and his attempts to overturn Biden’s win. And the muted GOP response to his sweeping pardons of both non-violent and violent Jan. 6 rioters was another display of their longtime strategy of praising Trump when they agree and ignoring him when they don’t.

“We’re looking forward and beyond on other policy issues,” said West Virginia Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, a member of Republican leadership.

The pardons, part of a flurry of executive orders on Trump’s first day in office, immediately upended what had become the largest prosecution in Justice Department history and freed criminals who brutally beat police and members of far-right extremist groups determined to stop Biden from assuming office. More than 100 police officers were injured. Some were never able to fully return to work.

Many prominent Republicans, including Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, Vice President JD Vance and Attorney General nominee Pam Bondi, had suggested that Trump would review the cases individually. But, as he had long promised, Trump’s actions were much more sweeping.

In defending Trump’s move, Republicans have also been able to point to Biden’s own flurry of preemptive pardons, including of his own family and House members who investigated the Jan. 6 attack, as he left office.

“How come everybody’s asking me about January 6th? Aren’t you going to ask me about the Biden pardons?” asked Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa.

“What we should be focusing on is the Biden pardons,” Kansas Sen. Roger Marshall said angrily as reporters asked him about the clemency for Jan. 6 rioters.

Many Democrats said they disagreed with Biden’s actions, as well. Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal said that he opposed the preemptive pardons, and was frustrated that they gave Trump “an argument — even though it’s a false argument — to pardon the Jan. 6 insurrectionists as well.”

A few Republicans said they agreed with Trump.

New Ohio Sen. Bernie Moreno said that he appreciates Capitol Police officers, but “nobody’s been treated worse” than the rioters. Wyoming Sen. Cynthia Lummis said she is “so glad those people are out of jail.”

More than 200 people convicted of Jan. 6 crimes were released from federal Bureau of Prisons custody by Tuesday morning, officials told The Associated Press.

A few Republican senators said they opposed the pardons, even as they appeared resigned to the idea. North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis said he has an “honest disagreement” with the president over pardoning violent offenders. South Dakota Sen. Mike Rounds said he couldn’t defend them.

Maine Sen. Susan Collins said she had received a message from a police officer who sent her a video of his assault. “I don’t disagree with him at all,” she said. “People who committed violent crimes on January 6th, 2021, should not be pardoned.”

The pardons by both Trump and Biden “erodes public confidence,” she said.

Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski said she was disappointed in the pardons, and pointed to a police officer who was guarding Republicans as they entered their weekly luncheon.

“I do fear the message that is sent to these great men and women that stood by us,” Murkowski said.

Associated Press writers Stephen Groves, Lisa Mascaro and Ellen Knickmeyer contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department has reassigned key senior officials across multiple divisions as part of a leadership shakeup ahead of the expected confirmation of President Donald Trump’s pick for attorney general, Pam Bondi, multiple people familiar with the matter said Tuesday.

Another affected official is George Toscas, a veteran deputy assistant attorney general in the department’s national security division who, in addition to helping oversee major terrorism and espionage investigations, has also been a key supervisor in politically charged probes over the last decade including into Hillary Clinton’s handling of classified information and Trump’s hoarding of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate.

A Justice Department spokesman did not immediately return a call seeking comment.

The reasons for the moves were not immediately known. Though it is common for a new administration to appoint its own political hires at the top of the Justice Department, it is not standard for career lawyers to be reassigned. They serve the department across administrations and typically retain their positions even when control of the department changes hands.

The moves could foreshadow additional changes given Trump’s keen interest in the Justice Department, which investigated him in his first term through a special counsel and then indicted him twice last year in separate cases that never reached trial and were withdrawn after Trump’s November election win. A key veteran prosecutor in the classified documents case, Jay Bratt, retired earlier this month.

Trump’s fury over the investigations has raised alarms that he could seek to use the law enforcement powers of the department to pursue retaliation against his adversaries.

On his first day in office Monday, he pardoned, commuted the prison sentences or vowed to dismiss the cases of all of the 1,500-plus people charged with crimes in the Jan. 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol riot, including people convicted of assaulting police officers. The reassignments were first reported by the Washington Post.

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump’s administration is directing that all federal diversity, equity and inclusion staff be put on paid leave, and that agencies develop plans to lay them off, according to a memo Tuesday from the Office of Personnel Management.

The memo follows an executive order Trump signed on his first day ordering a sweeping dismantling of the federal government’s diversity and inclusion programs that could touch on everything from anti-bias training to funding for minority farmers and homeowners.

The memo direct agencies to place DEI office staffers on paid leave by 5 p.m. Wednesday and take down all public DEI-focused webpages by the same deadline. Several federal departments had removed the webpages even before the memorandum.

By Thursday, federal agencies are directed to compile a list of federal DEI offices and workers as of Election Day. By next Friday they are expected to develop a list to execute a “reduction-in-force action” against those federal workers.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. AP’s earlier story follows below.

NEW YORK (AP) — President Donald Trump has ordered a sweeping dismantling of the federal government’s diversity and inclusion programs that could include everything from anti-bias training to funding for minority farmers and homeowners.

That step is the first salvo in an aggressive campaign to upend DEI efforts nationwide, including leveraging the Justice Department and other agencies to investigate private companies pursuing training and hiring practices that conservative critics consider discriminatory against non-minority groups such as white men.

The executive order picks up where Trump’s first administration left off: One of Trump’s final acts during his first term was an executive order banning federal agency contractors and recipients of federal funding from conducting anti-bias training that addressed concepts like systemic racism. Biden promptly rescinded that order on his first day in office and issued a pair of executive orders — now rescinded — outlining a plan to promote DEI throughout the federal government.

While many changes may take months or even years to implement, Trump’s new anti-DEI agenda is more aggressive than his first and comes amid far more amenable terrain in the corporate world. Prominent companies companies from Walmart to Facebook have already scaled back or ended some of their diversity practices in response to Trump’s election and conservative-backed lawsuits against them.

Here’s a look at some of the policies and programs that Trump will aim to dismantle:

Diversity offices, training and accountability

Trump’s order will immediately gut Biden’s wide-ranging effort to embed diversity and inclusion practices in the federal workforce, the nation’s largest at about 2.4 million people.

Biden had mandated all agencies to develop a diversity plan, issue yearly progress reports and contribute data for a government-wide dashboard to track demographic trends in hiring and promotions. The administration also set up Chief Diversity Officers Council to oversee implementation of the DEI plan. The government’s released its first DEI progress report in 2022 that included demographic data for federal workforce, which is about 60% white and 55% male overall, and more than 75% white and more than 60% male at the senior executive level.

Trump’s executive order will toss out equity plans developed by federal agencies and terminate any roles or offices dedicated to promoting diversity. That will likely include eliminating initiatives such DEI-related training or diversity goals in performance reviews.

Federal grant and benefits programs

Trump’s order paves the way for an aggressive but bureaucratically complicated overhaul of billions of dollars in federal spending that conservative activists claim unfairly carve out preference for racial minorities and women.

The order does not specify which programs it will target but mandates a government-wide review to ensure that contracts and grants are compliant with the Trump’s administration anti-DEI stance. It also proposes that the federal government settle ongoing lawsuits against federal programs that benefit historically underserved communities, including some that date back decades.

Trump’s executive order is “seismic shift and a complete change in the focus and direction of the federal government,” said Dan Lennington, deputy council for the conservative Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, which has pursued several lawsuits against federal programs. The institute recently released an influential report listing dozens of programs the Trump administration should consider dismantling, such credits for minority farmers or emergency relief assistance for majority-Black neighborhoods.

He acknowledged that unwinding some entrenched programs may be difficult. For example, the Treasury Department implements housing and other assistance programs through block grants to states that have their own methods for implementing diversity criteria.

Pay equity and hiring practices

It’s not clear whether the Trump administration will target every initiative that stemmed from Biden’s DEI executive order.

For example, the Biden administration banned federal agencies from asking about an applicant’s salary history when setting compensation, a practice many civil rights activists say perpetuates pay disparities for women and people of color.

It took three years for the Biden administration to issue the final regulations, and Trump would have to embark on a similar rule-making process, including a notice and comment period, to rescind it, said Chiraag Bains, former deputy director of the White House Domestic Policy Council under Biden and now a nonresident senior fellow with Brookings Metro.

Noreen Farrell, executive director of gender rights group Equal Rights Advocates, said that she was hopeful that the Trump administration “will not go out of its way to undo the rule,” which she said has proved popular in some state and cities that have enacted similar policies.

And Biden’s DEI plan encompassed some initiatives with bipartisan support, said Bains. For example, he tasked the Chief Diversity Officers Executive Council with expanding federal employment opportunities for those with criminal record. That initiatives stems from the Fair Chance Act, which Trump signed into law in 2019 and bans federal agencies and contractors from asking about applicants criminal history before a conditional job offer is made.

Bains said that’s what Biden’s DEI policies were about: ensuring that the federal government was structured to include historically marginalized communities, not institute “reverse discrimination against white men.”

Despite the sweeping language of Trump’s order, Farrell said “the reality of implementing such massive structural changes is far more complex.”

“Federal agencies have deeply embedded policies and procedures that can’t simply be switched off overnight,” she added.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Officers enforcing immigration laws will now be able to arrest migrants at sensitive locations like schools and churches after the Trump administration threw out policies limiting where those arrests could happen.

“This action empowers the brave men and women in CBP and ICE to enforce our immigration laws and catch criminal aliens — including murderers and rapists — who have illegally come into our country. Criminals will no longer be able to hide in America’s schools and churches to avoid arrest,” the Department of Homeland Security said in a statement Tuesday.

The ICE guidance dates back to 2011. Customs and Border Protection issued similar guidance in 2013.

Trump has made cracking down on immigration a top priority, just as he did during his first term in the White House from 2017 to 2021. On Monday he signed a slew of executive actions that included cutting off access to an app that facilitated the entry of hundreds of thousands of migrants; suspending the refugee system; and promoting greater cooperation between ICE and local and state governments.

He has often portrayed his efforts as unleashing the ability of ICE agents and others in immigration enforcement from Biden-era guidelines that he said restricted their efforts to find and remove people who no longer have the authority to remain in the country.

The announcement Tuesday had been expected as Trump works to deliver on his campaign promise to carry out mass deportations of anyone in the country illegally. But it was still jarring for advocates who have argued that raising the prospect of deportation at churches, schools or hospitals can prevent migrants from getting medical attention or allowing their children to attend school.

“This action could have devastating consequences for immigrant families and their children, including U.S. citizen children, deterring them from receiving medical attention, seeking out disaster relief, attending school, and carrying out everyday activities,” the Center for Law and Social Policy said in a statement.

“Should ICE presence near such locations become more common, the likelihood also increases that children could witness a parent’s detention, arrest, or other encounters with ICE agents,” the organization said.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Senators vetting the nomination of Pete Hegseth for defense secretary received an affidavit Tuesday from a former sister-in-law alleging that the onetime Fox News host was abusive to his second wife, to the point where she feared for her safety. Hegseth denies the allegations.

The affidavit describes Hegseth’s treatment of his second wife, Samantha, and alleges repeat drunkenness and a domestic situation where Samantha Hegseth had a safe word to indicate if she was in danger at home. Danielle Hegseth said Samantha texted that safe word to her sometime in 2015 or 2016, which prompted her to call a third party for help.

“I have chosen to come forward publicly, at significant personal sacrifice, because I am deeply concerned by what Hegseth’s confirmation would mean for our military and our country,” she said.

An attorney for Pete Hegseth vehemently denied the allegations. Tim Parlatore said the affidavit was filled with “belated claims” by an ex-relative with “an axe to grind against the entire Hegseth family.”

“Sam has never alleged that there was any abuse, she signed court documents acknowledging that there was no abuse and recently reaffirmed the same during her FBI interview,” Parlatore said in a statement. “Belated claims by Danielle Dietrich, an anti-Trump far left Democrat who is divorced from Mr. Hegseth’s brother and never got along with the Hegseth family, do nothing to change that.”

The affidavit was filed in response to a request from Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, who said he was seeking her statement to gain “personal knowledge about Mr. Hegseth’s fitness to occupy this important position.”

In the affidavit, Danielle Hegseth says she believes Hegseth’s marriage to Samantha was abusive. She said Samantha in 2014 told her she once hid in her closet because she feared for her safety. She acknowledged she did “not personally witness physical or sexual abuse” by Pete Hegseth toward his wife.

“I believe what Samantha told me because what she told me is consistent with what I personally observed of Hegseth’s erratic and aggressive behavior over many years,” she said.

Neither Samantha Hegseth nor an attorney who represented her in divorce proceedings immediately responded to requests for comment. A lawyer for Danielle Hegseth noted that she wouldn’t be commenting further than the affidavit.

In a statement to NBC News, which first reported on the affidavit, Samantha Hegseth said there “was no physical abuse in my marriage. This is the only further statement I will make to you, I have let you know that I am not speaking and will not speak on my marriage to Pete. Please respect this decision.”

Samantha Hegseth and Pete Hegseth both signed a Minnesota court document in 2021 during their divorce saying neither claimed to be a victim of domestic abuse.

Republican leaders said they doubted the new allegations would change the votes of support they are lining up for Hegseth. They marched ahead with the nomination Tuesday evening, taking a key procedural step needed to confirm him by week’s end.

“Looks like a desperate ploy by Democrats who are being driven by the far left because they know that we have the votes to confirm,” said Sen. John Barrasso, the No. 2 GOP leader.

Asked if the new allegations changes the votes for Hegseth, he said: “No.”

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, said he was aware of the reported allegations and compared the situation to the claims made against Brett Kavanaugh during his own confirmation hearing, before he was eventually confirmed as a Supreme Court justice.

“I don’t really have anything to offer,” Cornyn said. “I was involved in the Kavanaugh hearings, where people came out of the closet making all sorts of false allegations.”

Questions were raised before Hegseth’s hearing last week about the scope of the FBI background check, which some said failed to include interviews with those who had raised allegations against him. Democrats pushed for a deeper FBI review that could be more broadly shared with senators.

During the hearing, Hegseth did not directly answer yes or no to questions about his drinking, instead saying the issue was part of an orchestrated smear campaign against him.

At the time, it was left to the Trump transition team to decide how much more information to pursue and share on Hegseth.

The information in the affidavit was not relayed to the leaders of the Armed Services Committee when FBI officials briefed them earlier this month on the results of Hegseth’s background check, according to a person familiar with the contents of the briefing who was granted anonymity to discuss it.

“As I have said for months, the reports of Mr. Hegseth’s history of alleged sexual assault, alcohol abuse, and public misconduct necessitate an exhaustive background investigation,” Reed said in a statement Tuesday. “I have been concerned that the background check process has been inadequate, and this affidavit confirms my fears.”

Hegseth was grilled by senators during his hearing about his behavior, including excessive drinking, extramarital affairs and allegations of sexual assault, which he has denied.

Hegseth has promised not to drink on the job and has denied a 2017 sex assault allegation but acknowledged paying the woman a settlement. He was going through a divorce at the time after having a child with a Fox News producer who became his current wife, according to court records and his social media posts.

In the affidavit, Danielle Hegseth also alleges that Pete Hegseth, while under the influence of alcohol and both were leaving a bar, repeatedly shouted “no means yes!”

“I took this to mean that, in his opinion, nonconsensual sex is ok,” Danielle Hegseth said in the affidavit.

AP reporters Eric Tucker and Lolita C. Baldor contributed from Washington.

NEW YORK (AP) — Democrats knew this was coming.

But in the hours since Trump’s inauguration, Democrats are struggling to confront the sheer volume of executive orders, pardons, personnel changes and controversial relationships taking shape in the new administration.

In less than two days, the Republican president has moved to end diversity and inclusion programs across the federal government, withdrawn the U.S. from the Paris climate accords, blocked a federal law banning TikTok, and sought to end the constitutional guarantee of birthright citizenship. He has also pardoned the rioters who stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, and granted unprecedented access to some of the world’s richest men, raising questions about his commitment to the working-class voters who enabled his election.

Each of those actions enrages part of the Democratic base. Together, they make it difficult to formulate a response by an already fractured party.

“It is a fire hose right now. That’s what he does. He creates a ton of chaos so it’s hard to keep up with it,” said Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Texas, who instructed her staff to track Trump’s executive orders, so her constituents could keep up. “Everything is overload.”

Democrats warn of Trump’s ‘plans to screw over America’

The Democratic National Committee, under the direction of retiring chair Jaime Harrison, has been running an active rapid response this week, issuing press releases and social media posts to push back against Trump’s actions. That stands in contrast to the party’s operation following Trump’s 2017 inauguration, which was largely dark as a far more active protest movement became the focal point of the Democratic resistance.

For now, the Democratic establishment is largely focused on the prominent role of billionaires in Trump’s nascent presidency, which follows Biden’s farewell warning about the rise of oligarchs.

The DNC shared talking points with its allies on Tuesday, encouraging them to focus on “Trump’s plans to screw over America.” Specifically, the talking points focus on the new president’s move to rescind a Biden order designed to limit the cost of prescription drugs.

The DNC guidance also seizes on ultra-wealthy tech executives like Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla and Space X, and Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon and Blue Origin, who were seated in front of some of Trump’s Cabinet picks during his inauguration. On Musk, the talking points accuse him of giving multiple Nazi salutes during Trump’s inauguration parade.

Right-wing extremists are celebrating Musk’s straight-arm gesture during a speech Monday, although his intention wasn’t totally clear and some hate watchdogs are saying not to read too much into it.

The seating for some of the world’s richest men at the inauguration — with big-state governors and major allies relegated to an overflow area — initially offered Democrats an issue to rally around. Beyond the tech leaders featured at the inauguration, the Republican president has tapped more than a dozen billionaires for prominent roles.

Democratic strategist Andrew Bates, who left his job as a White House spokesman on Friday, attacked Trump’s GOP for “partying with rightwing billionaires” on their first day in control of Washington and “plotting tax welfare for the super rich” on Day 2.

“Republicans have revealed their establishment-bought true colors and are selling out every American except their well-connected donors,” Bates said.

The party remains fractured

Crockett, who has become one of her party’s most visible messengers on Capitol Hill, is concerned that the focus on billionaires might not resonate with average voters, who likely didn’t recognize Bezos or other tech executives at the inauguration.

“I’m not sure average people know that’s not normal,” Crockett said of the seating arrangement. “The brilliance of Trump, if I had to give him accolades, is that he understands how much people don’t understand.”

Even under normal circumstances, a transition to a new presidential administration would bring a flurry of executive orders and personnel changes that would be difficult to track. But little is normal about the second incarnation of President Trump, a 78-year-old term-limited outsider at the height of his political power with little regard for political norms or legal consequences.

“Everyone’s reeling and trying to process the information coming at them,” said Joseph Geevarghese, executive director of the progressive advocacy group Our Revolution. “People are not confident that the Democratic Party knows what to do in this moment.”

Some prominent allies of the Democratic Party aren’t especially engaged either.

Billionaire businessman Mark Cuban, who was among Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris’ most visible surrogates last fall, downplayed the impact of Trump’s early moves when asked to weigh in.

“He hasn’t really done anything yet,” Cuban told The Associated Press. “I’ll pay attention to what he does. But my focus is figuring out healthcare rather than getting mad about what he does.”

“Just getting angry,” Cuban continued, “is not the way to go.”

Faiz Shakir, a candidate for DNC chair and a longtime ally of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, said he was shocked by the prominent placement of the billionaires in the nationally televised event, which he said threatened to undermine Trump’s popularity with working-class voters.

“He has given people a window into how he’s going to govern,” Shakir said.

Still, he acknowledged that Democrats must confront “fatigue and exhaustion” within their own ranks that lingers two months after Trump’s victory: “There’s a creeping hopelessness that needs to be fought against.”

Crockett encouraged her party to adopt a much more organized campaign to educate the public about Trump’s three most egregious moves. What are they? She’s not sure yet.

“But in my opinion, we can’t fight it all,” she said.

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump once expressed concern with how low showerhead flow affected his “perfect” hair. Now back in the White House, he’s again taking aim at some high-efficiency household items — and that may mean higher water and electric bills in your home.

One of Trump’s several dozen first-day executive orders promises to “unleash American energy,” including a pledge to ease efficiency standards for household appliances and fixtures.

The standards are intended to make dishwashers, showerheads, refrigerators, laundry machines, toilets and the like use less energy and water. The higher-efficiency appliances can have higher upfront costs, but they save water and electricity.

Here’s what Trump said and what it means.

What did Trump’s executive order say?

Trump vowed that consumers won’t be forced to buy or use such items — mirroring action he took during his first time in office.

His order would “safeguard the American people’s freedom to choose from a variety of goods and appliances, including but not limited to lightbulbs, dishwashers, washing machines, gas stoves, water heaters, toilets, and shower heads.”

For the president, it’s personal. Trump has long been distressed by the water flow — or apparent lack thereof — from showerheads, saying during his first stint in the White House that he wasn’t getting wet enough in the shower and that his hair needed to be “perfect.” Trump has also incorrectly claimed before that people weren’t getting any water out of their fixtures and had to flush their toilets 10 or 15 times.

Trump is following the lead of humorist Dave Barry who complained in 1997 about having “to lurk in the bathroom for what seems like several presidential administrations flushing, checking, waiting, flushing, checking.”

What standards already exist?

For over three decades, federal energy law has outlined appliance standards that determine new showerheads shouldn’t pour out more than 2.5 gallons of water per minute. The Obama administration refined the restrictions and applied those limits to the water that comes out of the entire showerhead, even ones with several nozzles.

During the first Trump administration, the president relaxed that to allow each nozzle of a showerhead spray as much as 2.5 gallons.

The Biden administration reversed Trump’s action in 2021.

Other appliances and devices at risk under Trump are dishwashers, washing machines and more, the efficiency of which was boosted through rules under the previous administration and others.

These standards are meant to reduce water consumption and save Americans money through lower energy bills, experts say.

What can President Trump feasibly change?

The president’s complaints are meant to justify pulling back long-held appliance conservation standards and boost water flow.

Climate Analytics policy analyst Thomas Houlie said “industries and private sectors see it (energy efficiency) as adding more constraints on them. They tend to overlook the benefits that will be gained from the measures.”

But law specific to the appliance standards law includes a no-rollback clause, experts say, which states no new standard can be weaker than the existing standard. That means any changes have to skirt existing stipulations.

“What President Trump tried in the first administration was to find ways to create loopholes that would enable energy- or water-wasting products to flood to market,” said Andrew deLaski, executive director of the Appliance Standards Awareness Project.

He noted that “No manufacturers, to our knowledge, took advantage of those loopholes,” and added “to see toilets and shower heads on the list of presidential priorities is striking.”

Why does it matter and what are the consequences of changing policies?

These standards don’t just matter for consumers’ power bills or their ability to enjoy a good shower.

“The megawatt we don’t use is the cheapest megawatt and cleanest megawatt,” Margie Alt, director of the Climate Action Campaign, said Tuesday.

That means these are conservation measures that climate experts say is a low-hanging fruit and way for the United States to meet goals for reducing emissions to stave off climate change — and keep costs in check.

Natural Resources Defense Council President Manish Bapna called energy efficiency “the most effective antidote to energy price inflation.”

What’s being done internationally?

While renewable energy and solutions are often the center of climate action attention, efficiency efforts are a low-cost way to curb planet-heating gases.

The trouble is they are easy to talk about and then forget to do, even on an international scale. In 2023, the world adopted the Dubai climate accord that pledged to double energy efficiency improvements by 2030.

A year later at international climate negotiations, Rocky Mountain Institute CEO Jon Creyts bemoaned how the issue was forgotten.

Climate Action’s Alt vowed not let it go: “Perhaps it’s not the sexiest fight that’s ever been fought, but sometimes we win those the best, so we will be there.”

What does this mean for consumers?

There are no requirements telling consumers exactly what appliances or fixtures to purchase. But studies say consumers are generally happy with how energy-efficient and water-conserving appliances perform.

YouGov polling last summer found that 58% of Americans support tougher standards for appliance efficiency; only 26% oppose them and the rest did not have a view. A Morning Consult poll in 2023 found similar results.

Rating sites including Consumer Reports and Wirecutter show “We don’t need to use unlimited energy and water to do a good job of cleaning clothes, washing dishes, or providing a great shower,” deLaski said.

“Let’s face it, consumers have a vast array of choices when it comes to efficient, modern appliances. Often, the appliances that work best are also the most energy-efficient ones,” he added. “So we don’t want to go backwards, back to the energy hogs of the old days. It’s just not necessary and it would drive up people’s energy bills.”

St. John reported from Detroit.

The Associated Press’ climate and environmental 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.

President Donald Trump has directed his Justice Department to pause enforcement of the TikTok ban until early April, but a host of questions remain – including whether Trump has the authority to issue such an order and if TikTok’s China-based parent would be amenable to selling the popular social media platform.

In an executive order signed on Monday, Trump instructed the U.S. attorney general to not enforce the ban for 75 days while his administration determines “the appropriate course forward in an orderly way that protects national security while avoiding an abrupt shutdown” of TikTok.

Under a federal law that was upheld by the Supreme Court last week, TikTok’s parent company ByteDance was required to sell the platform to an approved buyer by Sunday or face a nationwide ban. On Saturday evening, a few hours before the ban took effect, TikTok became unusable for U.S. users. But it came back online on Sunday, with TikTok crediting Trump for helping the platform after he vowed on social media to stall the ban.

The federal law, passed with bipartisan support in Congress last year, provides a 90-day extension if progress has been made toward a sale. But Trump’s executive order now complicates matters for companies who could be liable for delivering TikTok’s service to U.S. users.

Some — at least as of now — appear to be taking a cautious approach. On Tuesday, both Apple and Google, which operate the two most prominent app stores, did not offer TikTok or any other ByteDance-affiliated apps, such as Lemon8 or the video editing app CapCut, on their digital marketplaces.

Here’s what we know:

Can Trump put a pause on the TikTok ban?

The Justice Department is generally tasked with enforcing the laws of the federal government. But Trump does not have the power to overturn a law that Congress passed and subsequently upheld by the Supreme Court.

The law does give the sitting president latitude on certain details, such as what would count as a “qualified divesture” of TikTok. But since an extension on a ban can only occur if “significant progress” has been made towards a sale of TikTok’s U.S. platform, it’s possible that Trump’s order could face legal challenges.

On Tuesday, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital rights organization that filed amicus briefs in support of TikTok’s legal challenge against the statute, said it believed it would be “unconstitutional” to ignore the law.

“There are no winners here, unless Congress repeals this law,” David Greene, the organization’s Civil Liberties Director, said in a statement.

On Sunday, Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas posted a message on X listing a number of state and federal agencies, and private entities, that might be willing to go to court to get the ban enforced. However, it’s unclear if anyone is planning to challenge Trump’s order.

And Trump’s order also warns possible challengers that because of “the national security interests at stake,” attempts by parties to enforce the law “represents an encroachment on the powers” of the executive branch.

Is TikTok going to be sold?

Even if an extension faces and fails to withstand legal scrutiny, it will buy time for ByteDance and TikTok to figure out their next move.

Trump on Monday said he is looking to have the U.S. government broker a deal for 50% control of TikTok, adding that “every rich person” has called him about acquiring the social media platform.

A day prior, he proposed terms in which the U.S. would have a 50% stake “in a joint venture” that would be “set up between the U.S. and whichever purchase we so choose.” But the details remain murky, and it was unclear whether Trump was proposing control of the app by the government or another U.S. entity.

According to TikTok, roughly 60% of the privately-held ByteDance is owned by global investors, such as General Atlantic and Susquehanna International Group. ByteDance employees and the company’s founder, Zhang Yiming, also each have a 20% stake.

The technology company has not disclosed financial details for its subsidiaries, including TikTok’s global or U.S. operation.

Even if an American company can acquire a 50% stake in TikTok, it’s unclear how a Trump-orchestrated transaction would address some of the national security concerns that led lawmakers and the Biden administration to push for a divestment.

For example, Trump has not addressed whether he will allow ByteDance to keep controlling the TikTok algorithm that fuels what users see on the platform. The algorithm, which is updated and maintained by ByteDance engineers in China, has been one of the main concerns among supporters of the law.

Trump’s executive order notes the administration must have a review period to assess government intelligence and the steps TikTok has taken to address Washington’s concerns.

What happens next?

Most likely, lots of negotiations about the future of TikTok.

Last year, Beijing called the push in Washington to require a divestment of TikTok a “robbers” act. But on Monday, China signaled a possible softening of its stance.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning said that business operations and acquisitions “should be independently decided by companies in accordance with market principles.”

“If it involves Chinese companies, China’s laws and regulations should be observed,” Mao said on Monday.

President Trump has threatened to slap tariffs as high as 100% on Chinese goods if Beijing refuses to allow a sale of TikTok. If China doesn’t approve the deal, Trump said on Monday he would consider it somewhat of a “hostile act.”

After the law was passed last year, ByteDance said it did not have any plans to sell TikTok and then fought a legal battle against the statute for months. Representatives for the company and TikTok did not immediately respond Tuesday on whether they are willing to cut ties with each other within the new 75-day extension period.

In a note, Gabriel Wildau, a managing director of the Teneo consultancy, wrote that if amicable negotiations happen, Beijing might ultimately approve the export of TikTok’s algorithm. However, a sale that excludes that technology might be more feasible legally and technically, Wildau wrote. Previously, Teneo had made a case that Beijing would not allow ByteDance to sell TikTok because of its concern for national dignity.

“This is all a game of high stakes poker,” said Wedbush analyst Dan Ives. “TikTok is a chip on the table in broader U.S.-China negotiations.”

Associated Press writer Didi Tang contributed to this story.

WASHINGTON (AP) — For Marco Rubio, the easy part is over. He was confirmed by the Senate as secretary of state with unanimous support, Democrats joining Republicans in praising his acumen and judgment.

Now comes the task that will make or break his tenure: retaining the full backing of his new boss, Donald Trump.

The 53-year-old Rubio is coming into the job with more experience than President Trump’s previous secretaries of state, having spent the last 14 years in the Senate becoming intimately acquainted with U.S. foreign policy from the Indo-Pacific to the Middle East and Latin America. But that traditional experience, coupled with Rubio’s longstanding hawkish views on Russia and support for America’s role in NATO, is what some worry will eventually make him the target of Trump’s wrath.

“Rubio is going to face some challenges as he and the president try to come to terms about what is the purpose of American power?” said Thomas Shannon, a former U.S. diplomat, who often worked with Rubio during both the Obama and the first Trump administrations.

Still, it was a collegial scene Tuesday as Rubio was sworn into office. Vice President JD Vance, who served alongside him in the Senate, called him a friend and a “bipartisan solutions seeker” as he delivered the oath.

Rubio echoed Trump in his own brief remarks, emphasizing that anything the government and State Department do must make the country stronger, safer or more prosperous.

“If it doesn’t do one of those three things, we will not do it,” Rubio said.

He repeated that sentiment as he made his first appearance at the State Department, telling staffers that his job, and theirs, would be to defend and execute Trump’s “America First” policies.

Rubio’s support in Washington has an establishment tinge, with many hopeful he will prove a steady hand at a time of global upheaval. In interviews with more than a dozen people, including Republican and Democratic lawmakers, as well as former diplomats and colleagues, he was repeatedly described as the “responsible” choice to represent the U.S. abroad, a known quantity both at home and on the global stage.

“I think he’ll be able to deliver that message, country by country, continent by continent, and that’s uncompromising, but also that’s comforting,” said Sen. Kevin Cramer, a Republican from North Dakota. “Not that I’m looking for every other country to be comfortable with us, but in a way that I think is not alarming.”

Rubio’s worldview has been largely shaped by his own history: the son of Cuban immigrants who arrived in Miami in May 1956 “with nothing but the dream of a better life,” he testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last week. His father was a bartender and his mother a hotel maid.

“Because of them, I had the privilege to be born a citizen of the greatest nation in the history of the world,” he said. “And to be raised in a safe and stable home, by parents who made their children’s future the very purpose of their lives.”

The “only in America” story is one that helped him get elected to public office in Florida, making his way from city commissioner to the Florida House of Representatives, eventually becoming the first Cuban American speaker in the Legislature’s history.

When Rubio became speaker, “it was a very big deal. I think the ceremony was projected towards Cuba, whether they wanted to hear it or not,” said Dan Gelber, who served as Democratic leader at the same time. He said that he and Rubio remained friends over the years despite “severe disagreements about policy.”

“He was never a jerk. He was always respectful of the process and our voice,” Gelber said. “It was sort of the way I always thought a partisan government should operate.”

Rubio’s rise continued in 2010 as he was elected to the Senate as part of the “tea party” wave of outsiders taking on Washington. His first Senate speech focused on the “American miracle” that brings immigrants from all around the world to the U.S. to “leave their children better off then themselves.”

A few years later, he was part of a bipartisan group that advocated for allowing a path to citizenship for immigrants in the country illegally. He played a key role in crafting a sweeping, bipartisan immigration bill that passed the Senate but went nowhere in the House, defeated by a fierce conservative backlash.

In the decade since, Rubio’s views on immigration have shifted toward the hard-line stance of Trump, who on Monday made good on his campaign pledge to aggressively pursue deportations and restrict entry into the United States in his second term.

In his confirmation hearing, Rubio echoed Trump’s dark vision of America’s immigration system, saying that “despots and narco-terrorists” have taken advantage of “open borders to drive mass migration, traffic women and children, and flood our communities with fentanyl and violent criminals.”

It was a remarkable tone for Rubio, who is working overtime to ensure there is no daylight between his public statements and Trump’s. While his colleagues across the aisle believe that he is conforming to Trump’s rhetoric, they’re hopeful he will maintain some of his mainstream views.

“I think Marco is a hawk, but he’s also an internationalist, and I think the challenge for him will be to maintain the long bipartisan tradition of America being indispensable in world affairs,” said Sen. Brian Schatz, a Hawaii Democrat who served with Rubio on the Foreign Relations Committee. “And there are people in the Trump world who want us to run away from being the leaders of the free world. And I’m hoping that Marco’s instincts towards American strength will win the day.”

Both sides agree that it will be Trump who decides if Rubio is MAGA enough to remain a member of his administration and represent his views around the world. He unceremoniously fired his first secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, via tweet, and has long made clear he views foreign policy as his domain.

Rubio is also no stranger to Trump’s fury. The two men exchanged schoolyard jabs during the 2016 Republican primary with the president labeling him “little Marco.” Rubio responded by insulting the size of Trump’s hands and calling him a “con artist” and “vulgar.”

Asked if he believes Rubio can last in the job, Rep. Michael McCaul, who until recently served as chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, gave a nod to past turmoil.

“Well, it is the Trump administration,” McCaul said. “But I think he’s a survivor.”

Associated Press writers Matthew Lee, Michelle L. Price and Darlene Superville contributed to this report.