Fox News Digital has learned that the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) will post an updated Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) at the close of business Wednesday that paves the way for artificial intelligence to improve government efficiency and enhance the federal record-keeping process. 

This will be the first time the United States government has applied the use of artificial intelligence for federal employee record-keeping after President Donald Trump issued an executive order in January to ‘solidify [America’s] position as the global leader in AI and secure a brighter future for all Americans.’

A senior White House official spoke with Fox News Digital, outlining the implementation process, detailing that the Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program (FedRAMP)-approved AI system will be used to drastically speed up the retirement process for the roughly 2.3 million federal employees and improve the accuracy of what is now mostly paper-based record keeping.

While the AI system will not be immediately operational, updating the PIA is the first step in opening the door to a full-scale roll-out. The senior White House official explained that the artificial intelligence program has already been tested to 100% accuracy in a simulated environment, but that no testing on actual data can be completed without the updated PIA.

Part of the inspiration for using AI to improve federal record keeping comes from Elon Musk’s DOGE keying in on a decommissioned, underground mine in Boyers, Pennsylvania. The mine, which is home to more than 400,000,000 personal records for federal employees, is heavily reliant on an ineffective paper-based system. 

Though federal employee records are now filed through OPM’s electronic Official Personnel Folder (eOPF), there is also a duplicate paper record printed as a PDF that is stored at the Pennsylvania mine.

Operating under the current system, processing the retirement of a federal employee can take weeks or months, per file, and there is still room for human error.

With the implementation of artificial intelligence, the senior White House official told Fox it could take less than one second to finalize a federal employee’s retirement.

While there is no intention to digitize or remove the hundreds of millions of files that exist in the mine, the AI system would ensure that no new paper files would be added to the already overwhelming number of physical copies that exist. 

Outdated filing systems have placed a burden on the efficiency of federal record keeping, as many of the files are old, illegible PDFs that can take several employees days or weeks to review, and the results have a higher chance of being inaccurate.

‘Antiquated, inefficient, and slow are words synonymous with government, all of which ended the day President Trump took office,’ Harrison Fields, Principal White House Deputy Press Secretary, told Fox News Digital, ‘Today’s action follows the president’s historic AI Executive Order and will usher in historic efficiency at the Office of Personnel Management, streamlining the organization tasked with serving as the human resources agency and personnel policy manager for the Federal Government.’

The White House also issued an AI-focused concentrated fact sheet Tuesday, establishing federal ‘Agency Chief AI Officer roles’ who ‘are tasked with promoting agency-wide AI innovation and the adoption of lower-risk AI, mitigating risks for higher-impact AI, and advising on agency AI investments and spending.’

The senior White House official clarified to Fox News Digital that despite the AI implementation, federal employees will still be able to self-review and assess personal records at their discretion.

Preston Mizell is a writer with Fox News Digital covering breaking news. Story tips can be sent to Preston.Mizell@fox.com and on X @MizellPreston

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts on Wednesday agreed to temporarily halt the reinstatement of two fired federal board members, delivering another near-term win to President Donald Trump as his administration continues to spar in federal courts over the extent of his executive branch powers.

The brief stay issued by Roberts is not a final ruling on the reinstatement of the two board members, National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) member Gwynne Wilcox and Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) member Cathy Harris, two Democrat appointees who were abruptly terminated by the Trump administration this year. 

Both had challenged their terminations as ‘unlawful’ in separate suits filed in D.C. federal court.

But the order from Roberts temporarily halts their reinstatement from taking force two days after a federal appeals court voted to reinstate them.

Judges for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit voted 7-4 on Monday to restore Wilcox and Harris to their respective boards, citing Supreme Court precedent in Humphrey’s Executor and Wiener v. United States to back their decision. 

They noted that the Supreme Court had never overturned or reversed the decades-old precedent regarding removal restrictions for government officials of ‘multimember adjudicatory boards,’ including the NLRB and MSPB. 

‘The Supreme Court has repeatedly told the courts of appeals to follow extant Supreme Court precedent unless and until that Court itself changes it or overturns it,’ judges noted in their opinion.

Monday’s ruling from the full panel was expected to spark intense backlash from the Trump administration, which has lobbed accusations at ‘activist judges’ who have slowed or halted some of Trump’s executive orders and actions.

The Trump administration appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court almost immediately.

The lower court’s decision was the latest in a dizzying flurry of court developments that had upheld, then blocked and upheld again the firings of the two employees, and it came after D.C.-based federal judges issued orders blocking their terminations. 

‘A President who touts an image of himself as a ‘king’ or a ‘dictator,’ perhaps as his vision of effective leadership, fundamentally misapprehends the role under Article II of the U.S. Constitution,’ U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell, who oversaw Wilcox’s case, wrote in her opinion. 

Likewise, U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras, who was presiding over Harris’ case, wrote that if the president were to ‘displace independent agency heads from their positions for the length of litigation such as this, those officials’ independence would shatter.’

Both opinions cited a 1935 Supreme Court precedent, Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, which notably narrowed the president’s constitutional power to remove agents of the executive branch, to support Wilcox’s and Harris’ reinstatements. 

In February, Trump’s Justice Department penned a letter to Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., stating that it was seeking to overturn the landmark case. 

‘To the extent that Humphrey’s Executor requires otherwise, the Department intends to urge the Supreme Court to overrule that decision, which prevents the President from adequately supervising principal officers in the Executive Branch who execute the laws on the President’s behalf, and which has already been severely eroded by recent Supreme Court decisions,’ acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris wrote in the letter.

The Trump administration appealed the orders to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, where a three-judge panel ruled 2-1 in favor of the Trump administration, allowing the firings to proceed. 

Wilcox and Harris, who had their cases consolidated, filed a motion for an en banc hearing, requesting the appeals court hear the case again with the entire bench present. 

In a ruling issued April 7, the D.C. Circuit voted to block the terminations, reversing the previous appellate holding. 

The judges voted 7-4 to restore Wilcox and Harris to their posts.

Harris and Wilcox’s cases are among several legal challenges attempting to clearly define the executive’s power. 

Hampton Dellinger, a Biden appointee previously tapped to head the Office of Special Counsel, sued the Trump administration over his termination. Dellinger filed suit in D.C. district court after his Feb. 7 firing.

He had maintained the argument that, by law, he could only be dismissed from his position for job performance problems, which were not cited in an email dismissing him from his post.

Dellinger dropped his suit against the administration after the D.C. appellate court issued an unsigned order siding with the Trump administration.

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

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., is delaying a key vote on legislation aimed at advancing President Donald Trump’s agenda in the face of a likely rebellion on Wednesday evening.

It comes as fiscal hawks in the lower chamber have raised alarms at the Senate’s version of the plan, which guarantees far fewer spending cuts than the House’s initial offering.

Johnson told reporters he would aim to hold the vote Thursday, the last scheduled day in session for House lawmakers before a two-week recess. He added, however, that lawmakers could be kept in session next week if needed to pass the legislation.

‘I don’t think we’ll have a vote on this tonight, but probably in the morning,’ the speaker said. ‘We want everybody to have a high degree of comfort about what is happening here, and we have a small subset of members who weren’t totally satisfied with the product as it stands. So we’re going to we’re going to talk about maybe going to conference with the Senate or add an amendment, but we’re going to make that decision.’

He also said there were multiple ways the House could move forward and Republicans would look at each one. Johnson said, ‘Everything is moving along just fine. We have a little bit of room here to work, and we’re going to use that.’

The House floor was paralyzed for over an hour during an earlier unrelated vote as Johnson met with Republican holdouts behind closed doors.

Two sources in the room said the holdouts did not speak with Trump, though it’s not clear if he called people individually.

Outside that room, in the cavernous House chamber, lawmakers began filtering out or impatiently pacing as time went by with little information.

Democrats, meanwhile, began calling for Republican leaders to close the lingering vote.

Tensions were high for those GOP lawmakers who remained on the House floor, Fox News Digital was told – and much of that frustration is aimed at Johnson.

‘I think he’s quickly losing faith from the rest of us. I mean, he kept the entire conference out on the floor for 80 minutes while you play grab-a– with these people,’ one House Republican fumed. ‘And all day it was like, ‘Oh, we’re going to get this done.”

That House Republican said, ‘All the chatter we were hearing was [holdouts were] down to single digits. But 17, 20 people were in that room. So clearly there was a much bigger problem than they were letting on all day.’

The gap between the House and Senate versions is significant; the House version that passed in late February calls for at least $1.5 trillion in spending cuts, while the Senate’s plan mandates at least $4 billion.

Some conservatives are also wary of congressional leaders looking to use the current policy baseline to factor the total amount of dollars the bill will add to the federal deficit. The current policy baseline allows lawmakers to essentially zero out the cost of extending Trump’s 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) because they are already in effect.

‘We’ve got to have something more substantive out of the Senate. If you were going to sell your house, and I offered you a third of the price, you would laugh,’ Rep. Andy Ogles, R-Tenn., one of the earliest holdouts, told reporters on Wednesday.

Trump has directed Republicans to work on ‘one big, beautiful bill’ to advance his agenda on border security, defense, energy and taxes.

Such a measure is largely only possible via the budget reconciliation process. Traditionally used when one party controls all three branches of government, reconciliation lowers the Senate’s threshold for passage of certain fiscal measures from 60 votes to 51. As a result, it has been used to pass broad policy changes in one or two massive pieces of legislation.

The first step traditionally involves both chambers of Congress passing an identical ‘framework’ with instructions for relevant committees to hash out policy priorities in line with the spending levels in the initial legislation.

The House passed its own version of the reconciliation framework earlier this year, while the Senate passed an amended version last week. House GOP leaders now believe that voting on the Senate’s plan will allow Republicans to enter the next step of crafting policy.

‘Why does President Trump call it one big, beautiful bill? Because it does a lot of critically important things, all in one bill, that help get this country back on a strong footing. And what else it does is it produces incredibly needed savings,’ House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., said during debate on the bill.

The legislation as laid out would add more money for border security, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), as well as some new funding for defense. 

Republicans are also looking to repeal significant portions of former President Joe Biden’s green energy policies, and institute new Trump policies like eliminating taxes on tipped and overtime wages.

But House conservatives had demanded added assurances from the Senate to show they are serious about cutting spending.

The House and Senate must pass identical versions of the final bill before it can get to Trump’s desk to be signed into law.

They must do so before the end of this year, when Trump’s TCJA tax cuts expire – potentially raising taxes on millions of Americans.

Trump himself worked to persuade holdouts both in a smaller-scale White House meeting on Tuesday and in public remarks at the National Republican Congressional Committee.

He also fired off multiple Truth Social posts pushing House Republicans to support the measure, even as conservatives argued it would not go far enough in fulfilling his own agenda.

‘Republicans, it is more important now, than ever, that we pass THE ONE, BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL. The USA will Soar like never before!!!’ one of the posts read.

President Donald Trump told reporters that if Iran does not give up its nuclear weapons program, military action led by Israel is a real possibility, adding he has a deadline in mind for when the two countries must come to an agreement.

The U.S. and Iran are expected to hold negotiations Saturday in Oman as the Trump administration continues to try to rein in the country’s nuclear program, threatening ‘great danger’ if the two sides fail to come to an agreement. 

Trump told reporters from the Oval Office Wednesday he did have a deadline in mind for when the talks must culminate in an agreed-upon solution, but the president did not go into details about the nature of the timeline.

‘We have a little time, but we don’t have much time, because we’re not going to let them have a nuclear weapon. We can’t let them have a nuclear weapon.’ Trump said when pressed on details about his potential timeline. ‘I’m not asking for much. I just — I don’t — they can’t have a nuclear weapon.’

When asked about the potential for military action if Iran does not make a deal on their nuclear weapons, Trump said ‘Absolutely.’ 

‘If it requires military, we’re going to have military,’ the president told reporters. ‘Israel will obviously be very much involved in that. They’ll be the leader of that. But nobody leads us. We do what we want to do.’

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has expressed support for Iran’s complete denuclearization. During a visit to the White House, he expressed support for a deal similar to the one Libya sealed with the international community in 2003. The country gave up its entire nuclear arsenal.

‘Whatever happens, we have to make sure that Iran does not have nuclear weapons,’ Netanyahu said during the meeting.

The talks with Iran scheduled for Saturday in Oman have been characterized as ‘direct’ talks by Trump, but Iran’s foreign leaders have disputed that assertion, describing the talks as ‘indirect.’ Iran’s leaders have said if the talks go well Saturday, they would be open to further direct negotiations with the U.S. 

The House of Representatives passed a bill Wednesday to limit federal district judges’ ability to affect Trump administration policies on a national scale.

The No Rogue Rulings Act, led by Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., passed the House and limits district courts’ power to issue U.S.-wide injunctions, instead forcing them to focus their scope on the parties directly affected in most cases.

All but one Republican lawmaker voted for the bill, which passed 219 to 213. No Democrats voted in favor.

The Trump administration has faced more than 15 nationwide injunctions since the Republican commander-in-chief took office, targeting a wide range of President Donald Trump’s policies, from birthright citizenship reform to anti-diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) efforts.

Issa himself was confident the bill would pass, telling Fox News Digital on Tuesday morning, ‘We’ve got the votes.’

He was less certain of the bill getting Democratic support, though he noted former Biden administration solicitor general Elizabeth Prelogar made her own complaints about district judges’ powers during the previous White House term.

‘We’re hoping some people look at it on its merits rather than its politics,’ Issa said.

Rep. Derek Schmidt, R-Kan., who has an amendment on the bill aimed at limiting plaintiffs’ ability to ‘judge shop’ cases to favorable districts, told Fox News Digital before the vote, ‘A lot of things get called commonsense around here, but this one genuinely is.’

‘The basic policy of trying to rein in the overuse of nationwide injunctions was supported by Democrats before. It’s supported by Republicans now, and I’m hoping [this vote will] be supported by both,’ he said.

Rep. Lance Gooden, R-Texas, who, like Schmidt and Issa, is a House Judiciary Committee member, told Fox News Digital after the bill’s passage, ‘Many Democrat-appointed lower court judges have conducted themselves like activist liberal lawyers in robes while attempting to stop President Trump’s nationwide reforms. The No Rogue Rulings Act limits this unchecked power.’

Another GOP lawmaker, Rep. Randy Feenstra, R-Iowa, told Fox News Digital, ‘More than 77 million Americans voted for [Trump’s] pro-American policies and want to see them implemented quickly. There is no reason that activist judges whose authority does not extend nationally should be allowed to completely stop [his] agenda.’

Republicans’ unity on the issue comes despite some early divisions over how to hit back at what they have called ‘rogue’ and ‘activist’ judges.

Rep. Marlin Stutzman, R-Ind., who supported impeachment and Issa’s bill, told Fox News Digital, ‘The judicial vendetta against President Trump’s agenda needs to be checked. Nationwide injunctions by activists judges have stood in the way of the American people’s will and in come cases their safety, since the President was sworn into office.’

Stutzman said Issa’s bill ‘will stop individual judge’s political beliefs from preventing the wants and needs of our citizens from being implemented.’

A group of conservatives had pushed to impeach specific judges who have blocked Trump’s agenda, but House GOP leaders quickly quashed the effort in favor of what they see as a more effective route to take on the issue.

Despite its success in the House, however, the legislation does face uncertain odds in the Senate, where it needs at least several Democrats to hit the chamber’s 60-vote threshold.