The right and the left don’t agree on how they’d like to change the Constitution, but they do agree that changes need to be made.

President Joe Biden, in his farewell address, called for an amendment “to make clear that no president, no president is immune from crimes that he or she commits while in office.”

That’s a clear nod to the Supreme Court’s granting of new immunity to presidents at the request of President-elect Donald Trump in 2024 when he was facing federal prosecution.

Separately, CNN has previously reported that Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York made a last-minute push to convince Biden to certify an Equal Rights Amendment as the 28th Amendment. The amendment passed in the needed three-quarters of US state legislatures, but it took too long — decades instead of the seven years the amendment’s authors originally allowed.

Trump, meanwhile, has promised to challenge the 14th Amendment with an executive order rescinding the principle of birthright citizenship. He’s admitted that ending birthright citizenship could require going “to the people.”

And there are several distinct efforts to call a full-on convention of the states, the first in American history, to propose amendments. Conservative efforts have targeted a Balanced Budget Amendment they’ve long envisioned or, more generally, to limit the power of the federal government. Supporters of new gun laws have called for a convention to consider an amendment related to firearms.

What does it actually take to amend the Constitution? Here’s a breakdown:

President Donald Trump is acting on his campaign promises at the fastest clip in modern memory — sending almost hourly shockwaves through the government, the legal system, the science community and around the world.

Trump’s three-day sprint through his to-do list contrasts sharply with the disarray and empty fights that marred the start of his underperforming first term.

In his zeal to make good on his pledges, Trump is delivering gift after gift to his most loyal supporters, making progress toward conservative goals developed, in some cases, over many years, in an extraordinary display of populist, nationalist, right-wing ideology.

Pete Hegseth’s ex-wife recently gave a new statement to the FBI about the defense nominee’s alcohol use, according to two sources familiar with the matter, an issue that has become a source of controversy during his confirmation process.

Senate Armed Services Chairman Roger Wicker and the ranking Democratic member Jack Reed were briefed on Samantha Hegseth’s statement, which has not been previously reported, on January 16, two days after the committee held Pete Hegseth’s confirmation hearing, the sources said. Wicker and Reed were initially briefed about the FBI’s background check before the confirmation hearing, according to another source familiar with the matter. Since then, the FBI has interviewed Samantha Hegseth and has included her statement in its supplemental review.

Wicker said in a statement late Wednesday night that reports “regarding a confidential briefing on the FBI background investigation of Pete Hegseth that I received last week are starkly and factually inaccurate” and that he stands by Hegseth’s nomination.

“It is disturbing that a sensitive, longstanding process used by committee leadership to vet presidential personnel is being litigated in the press by anonymous sources with ulterior motives,” Wicker said, noting that he has been briefed three times by the FBI about their background check into Hegseth.

On Thursday, following CNN’s report, Reed disputed Wicker’s characterization of the FBI briefing process.

“As a rule, I do not publicly discuss the contents of an FBI background investigation,” the ranking Democrat said in a statement. “However, two things are true in this case: one, during my time in the Senate, the FBI has never before needed to deliver multiple briefings on a Defense Secretary nominee, and, two, the recent reports about the contents of the background briefings on Mr. Hegseth are true and accurate.”

Democrats pressed Hegseth during his confirmation hearing about allegations of both sexual misconduct and excessive drinking. Hegseth has repeatedly denied all allegations of misconduct, including having a drinking problem, but has said he would not drink while serving as secretary of defense if he’s confirmed.

The FBI connected with Samantha Hegseth and she gave a statement in which she discussed concerns about Pete Hegseth’s drinking, the two sources said. One source familiar with the statement said Samantha Hegseth told the FBI, “He drinks more often than he doesn’t.”

The source familiar noted that Samantha and Pete Hegseth have been divorced since 2017.

“There’s nothing new here and we look forward to the confirmation vote,” Tim Parlatore, Pete Hegseth’s lawyer, told CNN.

Samantha Hegseth has not responded to CNN’s request for comment. The FBI declined to comment.

Reed and Wicker received the briefing days before the committee vote to advance Hegseth’s nomination to the floor of the Senate. The vote was along party lines with Reed voting against Hegseth’s nomination and Wicker voting to advance him to the floor.

Hegseth’s former sister-in-law, Danielle Hegseth, submitted an affidavit to the Senate about Pete Hegseth’s conduct that became public Tuesday, accusing Hegseth of being “abusive” toward his second wife, Samantha Hegseth.

Danielle Hegseth, who was married to Pete Hegseth’s brother from 2011 to 2019, did not specify the nature of the abuse in the affidavit, writing that she did “not personally witness physical or sexual abuse by Hegseth” but that Samantha Hegseth at times feared for her safety and had a code word if she needed help to get away from her husband.

Danielle Hegseth also alleged that she witnessed Hegseth abusing alcohol at multiple family gatherings, and that she witnessed him drinking to excess in public twice during 2013.

Parlatore said in a statement to CNN Tuesday that Danielle Hegseth “hates Pete and there is no truth to any of this. Most of what she is saying are things she didn’t in fact witness.”

During his confirmation hearing last week, Hegseth acknowledged he was “not a perfect person” but claimed that the allegations against him, including a claim he sexually assaulted a woman in 2017, were part of a “coordinated smear campaign.”

Democrats pressed Hegseth during the hearing on allegations of both sexual misconduct and excessive drinking.

Following the disclosure of Danielle Hegseth’s affidavit Tuesday, Democrats complained that the information was not part of the FBI’s background investigation that was briefed to the leaders of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Danielle Hegseth submitted the affidavit after a request from Reed.

This story has been updated with a statements from committee members