President Donald Trump issued his first vetoes of his second term on Tuesday, rejecting two bipartisan bills in what some view as political retaliation against supporters who previously opposed his positions on other issues.

The rejected legislation included a drinking water pipeline bill sponsored by Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado, a longtime Trump ally who broke with the president in November by supporting the release of files on convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Trump also vetoed a bill that would have granted the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida greater control over their tribal lands. The tribe is among groups currently suing the administration over an immigration detention center in the Everglades nicknamed “Alligator Alcatraz.”

Both bills had enjoyed widespread bipartisan support and generated little controversy until the White House announced the vetoes late Tuesday.

In his veto message to Congress regarding the tribal legislation, Trump directly referenced the Miccosukee Tribe’s opposition to his immigration policies. “The Miccosukee Tribe has actively sought to obstruct reasonable immigration policies that the American people decisively voted for when I was elected,” Trump wrote.

While Trump did not mention Boebert in his veto of her water pipeline legislation, he cited concerns about the project’s cost. In a subsequent interview with Politico on Wednesday, Trump criticized Colorado’s Democratic Governor Jared Polis, stating, “They’re wasting a lot of money and people are leaving the state. They’re leaving the state in droves. Bad governor.”

Boebert, one of just four House Republicans who sided with Democrats to force the release of the Epstein files earlier this year, responded to the veto with a statement suggesting it may constitute “political retaliation.”

“I sincerely hope this veto has nothing to do with political retaliation for calling out corruption and demanding accountability. Americans deserve leadership that puts people over politics,” Boebert wrote on social media, adding in another post, “This isn’t over.”

The Florida legislation had been sponsored by Republican Rep. Carlos Gimenez, whom Trump has endorsed. Neither Gimenez nor representatives from the Miccosukee Tribe were immediately available for comment following the veto announcement.

When questioned about whether these vetoes represented punishment for previous opposition, the White House did not directly address the question, instead referring reporters to Trump’s veto explanations.

Congress technically has the power to override presidential vetoes with a two-thirds majority vote in both the House and Senate. However, political analysts question whether sufficient support exists in the Republican-controlled chambers to challenge Trump, particularly as many GOP lawmakers approach a midterm election year where the president’s endorsement could prove crucial for their reelection prospects.

Boebert’s legislation, titled the “Finish the Arkansas Valley Conduit Act,” aimed to improve access to clean drinking water for communities across eastern Colorado. Despite her long history as a staunch Trump supporter, Boebert found herself at odds with the president earlier this year over legislation requiring the Department of Justice to release files related to Jeffrey Epstein.

Trump initially opposed the file release before reversing course when Republican support for transparency grew. Administration officials even met with Boebert in the White House Situation Room to discuss the matter, but she maintained her position.

Republican Rep. Jeff Hurd of Colorado, a co-sponsor of the water pipeline legislation, expressed strong disappointment with Trump’s veto. “This was a bipartisan, unanimous bill passed by Congress to uphold a long-standing federal commitment to southeastern Colorado,” Hurd said in a statement.

He clarified that the legislation didn’t authorize any new construction spending or expand the federal government’s original commitment to the pipeline project, but merely adjusted the terms for repaying its costs, making the veto particularly surprising to supporters.

The unusual targeting of these specific bills has raised questions about the president’s legislative priorities in his second term and how personal political considerations might influence policy decisions moving forward.