President Donald Trump announced on Thursday that he intends to nominate Jay Clayton, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, to serve as the next director of national intelligence. This move follows significant bipartisan opposition to Trump’s earlier decision to appoint Bill Pulte, a senior housing official with no intelligence background, as acting director.

Pulte was named to succeed Tulsi Gabbard, who declared last month that she would step down as acting director on June 19. However, his appointment drew sharp criticism from both Republican and Democratic lawmakers, who questioned his qualifications to oversee the nation’s intelligence community. Critics also expressed concern over Pulte’s previous use of his position to target some of the president’s political adversaries.

In a social media message, Trump praised Clayton, emphasizing his respect within the legal community and encouraging the Senate to expedite his confirmation. Clayton, 59, comes highly regarded and was reportedly recommended for the role by John Ratcliffe, the current CIA director.

According to sources familiar with internal discussions, Pulte is expected to assume the acting director position on June 19 and serve temporarily while Clayton’s nomination undergoes Senate review. During his brief tenure, Pulte plans to pursue further reductions in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence’s (ODNI) size beyond those implemented under Gabbard’s leadership. The administration envisions a streamlined ODNI with a more concentrated focus on coordinating activities among the nation’s 18 intelligence agencies.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, who said he was not forewarned of the nomination, offered a cautiously supportive response. He described Clayton as a qualified professional well-equipped to handle the complexities associated with managing the intelligence apparatus and pledged to expedite the confirmation process.

The nomination underscores the Trump administration’s emphasis on reshaping the ODNI to reflect a more limited and coordinated structure. It also highlights ongoing tensions within Washington regarding the qualifications necessary for key intelligence leadership amid evolving national security challenges.