Trump’s first vetoes of his second term arrived Tuesday with two bills that had passed Congress with bipartisan support, but which became politically charged after the White House announced the rejections. The actions spotlight an early test of how quickly the president’s new term will confront members of his own party who have strained ties on other issues, including immigration and the Justice Department’s handling of files related to Jeffrey Epstein.
The Colorado veto targeted drinking-water pipeline legislation sponsored by Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert, a longtime ally who broke with Trump in November by pushing for the release of files related to Epstein. The other veto blocked a Florida measure that would have given the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida more control of some tribal lands—land the tribe has been fighting to protect amid an immigration detention center plan in the Everglades that critics have dubbed “Alligator Alcatraz.”
Trump’s veto letter to Congress about the Florida bill directly referenced the tribe’s opposition to the detention facility. In it, Trump wrote that “The Miccosukee Tribe has actively sought to obstruct reasonable immigration policies that the American people decisively voted for when I was elected.” The White House did not publicly respond to questions about whether the vetoes were intended as punishment, and instead pointed back to Trump’s explanations.
While Trump’s veto letter cited the tribe’s stance in the Everglades case, Trump did not mention Boebert by name in the veto of her drinking-water legislation. In the account of his reasoning presented to lawmakers, Trump raised concerns about the cost of the water pipeline at the heart of the bill.
The water-pipeline fight now lands in the middle of a broader intra-party dispute for Boebert. She had been one of four House Republicans who sided with Democrats to force the release of Epstein files earlier, even after Trump had initially fought the proposal before reversing course amid growing Republican backing. Boebert responded to the veto with a statement on social media suggesting it could be political retaliation, saying, “I sincerely hope this veto has nothing to do with political retaliation for calling out corruption and demanding accountability.”
In another post, Boebert added: “This isn’t over.” The White House did not address the retaliation framing when asked, according to the reporting, but the episode underscored how quickly bipartisan votes can become vulnerable when a president uses veto power early in a term.
The Florida bill had been sponsored by Republican Rep. Carlos Gimenez. The tribe and other groups have sued the administration over the Everglades detention center plan, according to the reporting, and Gimenez and the Miccosukee Tribe were not immediately available for comment on Wednesday.
As Democrats and Republicans weigh possible next moves, lawmakers face a procedural hurdle: Congress can override a presidential veto only with a two-thirds vote of the House and Senate. With the chambers still controlled by Republicans, the article said it was unclear whether there are enough votes to overcome the vetoes, particularly with many lawmakers on the ballot in a midterm election year.
On Wednesday, Trump also expanded the political temperature around the vetoes. In an interview later with Politico, he criticized Colorado Democratic Gov. Jared Polis and said that he issued the veto because, “They’re wasting a lot of money and people are leaving the state. They’re leaving the state in droves. Bad governor.”
Colorado Republican Rep. Jeff Hurd, a co-sponsor of Boebert’s legislation, said he was “deeply disappointed” by the veto. In his statement, Hurd said the bill was a bipartisan, unanimous measure meant to uphold a long-standing federal commitment to southeastern Colorado, adding that it did not authorize new construction spending or expand the federal government’s original commitment, but instead adjusted how the project’s costs would be repaid.