April 9, 2026
Sequestration, Iran Ceasefire, Stablecoin, Day 53 of Democrat Shutdown, Layoffs, Another Lawsuit On Election Integrity EO
On April 8, 2026, the White House published the Presidential Memoranda Sequestration Order for Fiscal Year 2027 Pursuant to Section 251A of the Balanced Budget And Emergency Deficit Control Act, As Amended signed April 3, 2026. This memo is basically the same as last year's memo (discussed in my June 5, 2026 ANP Article).
As I wrote in my June 5, 2026 ANP Article, the Peter G Peterson Foundation tells us a sequestration order is
. . . a budget procedure used by lawmakers to cancel or limit funding in order to meet budget goals. It can be intended as an enforcement mechanism to discourage lawmakers from violating a specific budgetary goal or to encourage lawmakers to enact legislation that achieves a desired budgetary outcome. A potential sequestration was most recently included in the Fiscal Responsibility Act (FRA) and could be triggered depending on when Congress completes the appropriation process for [the] fiscal year. . . . Sequestration is a blunt tool used to hold lawmakers accountable to reach their budgetary goals and reduce deficits. However, when used as a long-term budgeting mechanism instead of the failsafe that it is designed to be, there are significant limitations to sequestration’s effectiveness with unpredictable or undesired impacts on government spending and the economy at-large. For lasting fiscal sustainability, lawmakers will need to target drivers of the debt to address the long-term, structural imbalance between spending and revenues.
Last year, we did not hear about this budget procedure because of the "Elon Musk steps down" saga (discussed in my May 31, 2025 ANP Article). This year, sequestration is overshadowed by the Iran Conflict (that is currently in a tentative ceasefire).
Speaking of the Iran Conflict, on April 8, 2026, the White House published the release Peace Through Strength: Operation Epic Fury Crushes Iranian Threat as Ceasefire Takes Hold refers to President Trump's Clear and Unchanging Objectives (discussed in my April 2, 2026 ANP Article) stating these objectives have been achieved in just 38 days. The release goes on to list how many bombs were used and how many targets were struck during the operation but no where do they mention how many American service members lost their lives or were injured during this conflict.
On April 8, 2026, the White House published the research Effects of Stablecoin Yield Prohibition on Bank Lending summarizing the 21 page research document as:
The GENIUS Act, signed into law in July 2025 (discussed in my July 19, 2025 ANP Article), requires stablecoin issuers to maintain reserves backing outstanding stablecoins on at least a one-to-one basis. Reserves may only consist of certain specified assets, including US dollars, federal reserve notes, funds held at certain insured or regulated depository institutions, certain short-term Treasuries and Treasury-backed reverse repurchase agreements, and money market funds. It also prohibits stablecoin issuers from offering any form of interest or yield to stablecoin holders, but does not explicitly prohibit affiliate or third-party arrangements that might offer interest-bearing products. Some variants of the proposed CLARITY Act would close this channel. One rationale for prohibiting yield is that if stablecoins were to offer competitive returns, households may shift dollars out of traditional bank accounts and into tokens. Since stablecoin reserves are fully backed rather than fractionally lent, this could reduce bank lending. Some analyses estimate the effect on lending in the trillions of dollars (Nigrinis 2025). We build a simple model to evaluate these claims.
At baseline calibration of CEA’s model, eliminating stablecoin yield:
- Increases bank lending by $2.1 billion and has a net welfare cost of $800 million. That translates into an increase in lending of 0.02% and a cost-benefit ratio of 6.6.
- Large banks would conduct 76% of this additional lending, while community banks—which have assets below $10 billion—would lend the remaining 24%. In our baseline, that adds up to $500 million in additional lending from community banks, meaning their lending rising by 0.026%.
Even stacking every worst-case assumption, the model produces only $531 billion in additional aggregate lending, which corresponds to a 4.4% increase in bank loans as of 2025Q4. That figure requires the stablecoin market to grow to roughly six times its current size as a share of deposits, all reserves to be locked in unlendable cash rather than treasuries, and the Federal Reserve to abandon its current monetary framework. Even under those implausible conditions, community bank lending only rises by $129 billion, corresponding to an increase of 6.7%. The conditions for finding a positive welfare effect from prohibiting yield are similarly implausible. In short, a yield prohibition would do very little to protect bank lending, while forgoing the consumer benefits of competitive returns on stablecoin holdings.
The research concludes:
The yield prohibition in the GENIUS Act—and its proposed reinforcement through the CLARITY Act—may be motivated by the concern that competitive stablecoin returns will draw deposits out of the banking system and contract lending. Our model shows that this concern is quantitatively small. Most stablecoin reserves recirculate through the banking system as ordinary deposits: only the 12% held in bank accounts is truly locked >out of the credit multiplier (if banks apply a 100% reserve requirement), and even that fraction is further attenuated by prudential reserve requirements and voluntary bank liquidity buffers. At baseline calibration, eliminating stablecoin yield increases bank lending by $2.1 billion, which represents a net increase of 0.02% of total loans. Producing lending effects in the hundreds of billions requires simultaneously assuming the stablecoin share sextuples, all reserves shift into segregated deposits, and the Federal Reserve abandons its ample-reserves framework. It takes similarly implausible assumptions for the welfare effect of yield prohibition to turn positive.
As I wrote in my July 19, 2025 ANP Article:
We already have a variety of digital payment options with which to pay for what we want to buy. We already do the majority of our transactions digitally. I do not see how "Stablecoin" is any better than anything we already have and in a lot of ways it's worse because it's backed by the unbacked USD. In addition, there will be fees to 'buy' and 'use' stablecoin (i.e., obtain them then use them for payments or return them for cash). As to not-trackable transactions. Well, I think there's no such thing as "not-trackable" in the digital world.
On April 8, 2026, Day 53 of the Democrat's Partial Federal Government Shutdown, Congress is still closed for "vacation." However, some Congressional lawmakers have been getting together to produce an amnesty law allowing illegals who entered the country before 2021 to become automatic citizens. President Trump has said he won't sign it but it does have 20 sponsors from each side of the aisle (40 total). Thing is, they've been trying to make illegals citizens INSTEAD of working to fix the DHS budget, pay Federal employees the pay they have earned over this last 53 days, and fully re-open government. Priorities. Theirs is illegals. Ours is American Citizens. I sure hope people remember this come November!
The Layoff Tracker 2026 – Recent Layoffs update:
- April 08, 2026: GoPro cutting workforce by 23% as part of restructuring.
- April 07, 2026: Pendo, Raleigh tech unicorn, cuts 10% of workforce.
- April 06, 2026: Bolt cuts workforce by 30%.
- April 04, 2026: 220 workers have been laid off after xAI bought the Southaven facility.
- April 03, 2026: Oracle slashes 30,000 jobs.
LAWFARE lawsuit tracker to date:
- 226 active cases
- 22 suits filed by the Trump Administration
- 17 SCOTUS stays or motions to vacate of lower court orders
- 2 SCOTUS affirmation of lower court order
- 10 suits where judges ruled for the federal government
- 10 suits where judges ruled against the federal government
- 6 criminal prosecutions by the DOJ:
- Representative McIver,
- former FBI Director James Comey, dismissed without prejudice 11/24/2025,
- former National Security Advisor John Bolton,
- (illegal alien) Kilmar Abrego Garcia, ordered released 12/11/2025;
- New York AG Letitia A James, dismissed without prejudice 11/24/2025,
- Congressional candidate Katherine Abughazaleh
A new lawsuit NAACP [additional plaintiffs include Common Cause, Common Cause Education Fund, Black Voters Matter Fund, Inc., and BVM Capacity Building Institute, Inc.] v. Trump docket # 1:26-cv-01151 filed in District Court, District of Columbia on April 3, 2026 about Election Integrity Executive Order where the NAACP sued the Trump administration over the new executive order titled “Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections," which purports to exert federal control over election administration and limit mail-in ballots. The lawsuit seeks the following relief:
- Declare that the President’s orders in Exec. Order §§ 2(a), 3(b), 4(a), and 4(c) are ultra vires and legally void;
- Declare that the President’s orders in Exec. Order §§ 3(b) and 4(a) violate the constitutional separation of powers and are not enforceable;
- Declare that the President’s orders in Exec. Order §§ 3(b) and 4(a) violate the vertical separation of powers and the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and are not enforceable;
- Declare that the President’s orders in Exec. Order §§ 2(a), 3(b), 4(a), and 4(c) violate the First and Fifth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and are not enforceable;
- Declare that the President’s orders in Exec. Order §§ 2(a), 4(a), and 4(c), and any agency action taken to implement those provisions, violate the Administrative Procedure Act and the Privacy Act, and are “not in accordance with law,” “in excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations,” and “without observance of procedure required by law,” 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A), (C), (D), including because they require the unlawful collection, use, and disclosure of records in violation of 5 U.S.C. § 552a;
- Preliminarily and permanently enjoin implementation of the Executive Order;
- Award attorney’s fees, costs, and expenses in accordance with law, including the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412, and any other applicable laws; and
- Grant all such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
Plaintiffs are represented by Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP (DC); Lawyer's Committee for Civil Rights Under Law (WA); and National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (MD).
This makes the 4th lawsuit against President Trump's EO Ensuring citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections (discussed in my April 1, 2026 ANP Article). The first 3 were discussed in my April 4, 2026 ANP Article. They are:
- DSCC [additional plaintiffs include DCCC, Democratic National Committee, Democratic Governors Association, Senate Minority Leader Schumer, and House Minority Leader Jeffries] v. Trump docket # 1:26-cv-01114
- League of Women Voters of Massachusetts [additional plaintiffs include League of Women Voters of Massachusetts, League of Women Voters Lotte E. Scharfman Memorial Education Fund, League of Women Voters of the United States, League of Women Voters Education Fund, Association of Americans Resident Overseas, U.S. Vote Foundation, OCA-Asian Pacific American Advocates, and Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc.] v. Trump docket # 1:26-cv-11549
- League of United Latin American Citizens [additional plaintiffs include Secure Families Initiative, and Arizona students' Association] v. Executive Office of the President docket # 1:26-cv-01132
It's amazing how many groups are claiming that proving they are a legal Citizen of the US is oppressive and designed to keep them from voting, yet ALL of them can provide ID to do the following (and more!):
In addition, look how many demand mail-in voting (which was done nationwide for the first time in the 2020 election) as if it were not only a right but a necessity! Democrats used to be against mail-in balloting because it was "too easy to cheat" using mail-in ballots. We saw that in the 2020 results when compared to 2016 and 2024, where 2020 had around 20 MILLION more votes than the year before or the year after (all for democrats, of course).
Some states even counted more votes in 2020 than they had registered voters!
Congress needs to pass the SAVE America Act. And they need to codify this EO!
ANP Fundraiser:
‘Dangerous, Derogatory, Harmful, Unreliable!’
Those are some of the exact words used by Google’s censors, aka 'Orwellian content police,' in describing many of our controversial stories. Stories later proven to be truthful and light years ahead of the mainstream media. But because we reported those 'inconvenient truths' they're trying to bankrupt ANP.
