Politics

(WASHINGTON) — A federal judge has rejected former President Donald Trump’s claims of executive privilege and has ordered Mark Meadows and other former top aides to testify before a federal grand jury investigating Trump’s efforts to overturn the election leading up to the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, multiple sources familiar with the matter tell ABC News.

Meadows, Trump’s former chief of staff, was subpoenaed along with the other former aides by Special counsel Jack Smith for testimony and documents related to the probe.

Trump’s legal team had challenged the subpoenas by asserting executive privilege, which is the right of a president to keep confidential the communications he has with advisers.

In a sealed order last week, Judge Beryl Howell rejected Trump’s claim of executive privilege for Meadows and a number of others, including Trump’s former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe, his former national security adviser Robert O’Brien, former top aide Stephen Miller, and former deputy chief of staff and social media director Dan Scavino, according to sources familiar with the matter.

Former Trump aides Nick Luna and John McEntee, along with former top Department of Homeland Security official Ken Cuccinelli, were also included in the order, the sources said.

Trump is likely to appeal the ruling, according to sources briefed on the matter.

“The DOJ is continuously stepping far outside the standard norms in attempting to destroy the long accepted, long held, Constitutionally based standards of attorney-client privilege and executive privilege,” a Trump spokesperson said in a statement. “There is no factual or legal basis or substance to any case against President Trump. The deranged Democrats and their comrades in the mainstream media are corrupting the legal process and weaponizing the justice system in order to manipulate public opinion, because they are clearly losing the political battle.”

Meadows did not respond to ABC’s request for comment and neither did an attorney representing him. Ratcliffe, O’Brien, Miller, Luna, McEntee and Cuccinelli did not respond to ABC’s request for comment. An attorney representing Scavino also did not respond.

Some of the aides that have been ordered to testify have already appeared before the grand jury but did not answer some questions related to interactions with the former president, sources familiar with the matter told ABC News, and thus would now be required to return for additional testimony. The grand jury proceedings are being held under seal.

It’s not clear the amount of information each of them would have, or the scope of what prosecutors want to question them on, the sources said.

ABC News previously reported that in February, prosecutors investigating Jan. 6 moved to compel testimony from a number of top Trump aides, including Meadows, Ratcliffe and O’Brien.

Previously, Judge Howell had rejected Trump’s claim of executive privilege to block the testimony of two top aides to Vice President Mike Pence, Greg Jacob and Marc Short. In rejecting Trump’s motion to block the testimony of Jacob and Short, the judge ruled that it is up to the current president to assert executive privilege, not a former president, according to sources familiar with the proceedings.

The judge also previously ruled that former White House counsel Pat Cipollone, along with his deputy Pat Philbin, also had to return to the grand jury to answer additional questions after Trump previously argued they were protected by privilege.

Howell is being succeeded by a new chief judge on the D.C. district court, who will now oversee grand jury matters related to the special counsel’s probes.

Smith, a longtime federal prosecutor and former head of the Justice Department’s public integrity section, was tapped in November by Attorney General Merrick Garland to oversee the Justice Department’s investigation into efforts to overturn the 2020 election and Trump’s handling of classified materials after leaving office.

Meadows, who according to sources was subpoenaed in January, was one of the only aides around Trump on Jan. 6 as the attack unfolded. He was also party to the infamous January 2021 phone call that Trump had with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger in which Trump asked Raffensperger to “find” him enough votes to win the state.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — House Republicans narrowly passed H.R. 5, the Parents Bill of Rights Act on Friday, sending the proposal along to the Senate, where it is likely to fail.

The House bill, which has few champions among Democrats and advocacy groups, passed in a 213-208 vote Friday morning. Rep. Julia Letlow, R-La., the bill’s sponsor, shook hands and fist bumped rejoicing members upon the bill’s passage.

“Today was a win for every mother or father, but most importantly for every student in America,” Speaker Kevin McCarthy said at a press conference following the vote, noting thousands of parents signed on to the bill.

Backers of the bill say H.R. 5 has five core principles: Parents have the right to know what their children are being taught, to be heard, to see the school budget and spending, to protect their children’s privacy and to keep their children safe.

“It is not an attempt to have Congress dictate their [schools] curriculum, or determine the books in the library,” Letlow explained. “Instead, this bill aims to bring more transparency and accountability to education, allowing parents to be informed and when they have questions and concerns to lawfully bring to their local school board.”

Letlow, a former educator, had over 70 co-sponsors originally, including McCarthy.

“I couldn’t imagine someone would oppose a Parents Bill of Rights,” McCarthy, who called education the great equalizer, told ABC News.

House Education and the Workforce Committee Chairwoman Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., has been a vocal advocate for the issue since gaveling in her first hearing in February. More recently, Foxx, who said the proposal “will help parents steer the educations of their children back onto the correct path where they can learn the skills they need for a lifetime of success,” said she feels good about the bill despite Democrats’ stated opposition.

“It had a good response in the Rules Committee [despite] the Democrats trying to demonize the bill saying it’s ‘banning books,'” Foxx told ABC News. “It has nothing to do with that, so, no, I feel really good about it.”

Parents who support the bill suggest the legislation was needed in response to widespread virtual instruction amid pandemic-fueled school closures.

“Parents have the fundamental right to direct the upbringing of their children. This includes their education, medical care, morality and religion,” Tiffany Justice, co-founder of Moms for Liberty, said at a House subcommittee hearing. “I want to be clear: These are inherent natural rights. Parental rights do not stop at the classroom door.”

But the bill was criticized by Democratic leadership.

“Their educational agenda is pretty simple: They want to ban books, they want to bully the LGBTQ+ community [and] they want to bring guns into classrooms, kindergarten and above,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said after the bill passed.

Democratic Caucus Chairman Pete Aguilar, D-Calif., said he respects parents’ voices but worries Republicans’ H.R. 5 has become a “highly partisan” issue.

“They [Republicans] want to bring, you know, partisan rhetoric and fighting into the classroom,” Aguilar said. “We don’t think that’s right. We think that they continue to put politics over parents and that that is the focus of this bill and this piece of legislation.”

National Parents Union President Keri Rodrigues led a coalition of nearly 50 parent protesters to Washington this week. Her organization traversed the halls of Congress, knocking on members’ doors to make their voices heard in opposition to the bill.

“It [H.R. 5] has made a mockery out of what we are trying to do for our children,” Rodrigues said. “None of our priorities have been reflected in H.R. 5 because they’re attempting to do this to us without us.”

Rodrigues’ top educational priorities include making sure children are safe at school amid the threats of gun violence, bullying and mental health struggles.

“H.R. 5 is a bill that has been created by politicians in Washington instead of parents that it says they’re here to protect,” Rodrigues said, donning the group’s signature “Nothing About Us Without Us” shirts. “So, again, you’re trying to do something to us without our input. We’re saying, ‘No, thanks.'”

Meanwhile, Rep. Suzanne Bonamici, D-Ore., has also proposed a countermeasure to the GOP bill. Her Bill of Rights for Students and Parents has several sponsors from leading members of the House’s education committee and dozens of advocacy groups.

Neither bill seems to have drawn interest from the Senate, and Republicans on the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) committee told ABC News it’s not on the agenda.

“The House Republicans’ school control bill is Orwellian to the core,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said. “It will not see the light of day here in the Senate.”

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Republican members of the House Oversight Committee, including chairman James Comer, say they plan to tour a Washington, D.C., jail on Friday where some Jan. 6 defendants are being held.

The congressional delegation is being led by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., one of the most vocal critics of the detainment of individuals charged in connection with the attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Speaking with ABC News earlier this week, Greene said the visit would focus on the conditions of those being jailed, including what Greene claimed to be “reports of abuse.”

Greene claimed those being held pretrial are “not allowed to see their families, many times are not allowed to see their attorneys” and that “the food has been a major complaint. There’s been complaints of it tasting like cleaner.”

GOP members of the panel are expected to hold a news conference following the tour.

Two Democrats on the panel are expected to join 14 Republican members on the tour, according to a list of participants provided by Greene’s office: Rep. Summer Lee of Pennsylvania and Rep. Jasmine Crockett of Texas.

Crockett framed her participation as a check on her Republican colleagues in a series of Twitter posts on Friday morning.

“Today, I will visit the jail where insurrectionists are being held as a member of the Oversight committee to ensure that the Truth is told & not another revisionist alternative reality. As a former PD & civil rights lawyer, I’ve seen inhumane conditions,” she wrote. “It’s important we don’t conflate their less than 5 star stay w/ the truly inhumane conditions that mostly black & brown folk have suffered through for decades.”

Most people charged with a crime in relation to the Jan. 6 attack have been released as they await trial. A spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s Office in D.C. told ABC News earlier this month that there were “approximately two dozen defendants” in pre-trial detention and nearly all of them were charged with assaultive conduct.

Comer, R-Ky., told reporters on Wednesday members are “gonna try and see what it looks like” inside the facility.

“That’s part of what the Oversight Committee does with everything pertaining to the federal government, so we have some members that are going to hopefully tour that prison,” he said.

Greene and Comer sent a letter to D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser pressing her for documents and communications regarding Jan. 6 detainees’ complaints.

The jail tour comes amid a wave of activity from House Republicans regarding Jan. 6 since they took over the chamber in January. They’ve created a committee to investigate alleged security failures and the previous House Jan. 6 committee’s work.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Former President Donald Trump’s election team is downplaying the impact of a possible indictment on his campaign, insisting it will not force him cut back, including on his travel.

At the same time, associates boast they’re ready to launch a full-throated response to what they cast as a partisan fishing expedition by a Democratic prosecutor.

“This is the new normal, the president has been battle-tested. This operation has been fine-tuned since 2016. Dealing with these types of news cycles, you learn to get good at it. We have a full-spectrum response operation on the campaign that can deal with anything that comes our way,” Trump campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung told ABC News.

Manhattan District Attorney Bragg’s office has been investigating a hush money payment sent to porn actress Stormy Daniels during Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign to cover up an alleged affair. The possible indictment could center on whether the payment amounted to a violation of campaign finance law.

Trump denies any wrongdoing and says the two never had a relationship, though he has admitted Daniels was paid $130,000.

Operatives working on Trump’s campaign and in touch with his team said a sense of inevitability has crept into the former president’s orbit but that the prospect of an indictment is not viewed internally as a significant new challenge for someone who has spent his political career batting away a string of investigations.

“I haven’t spoken to him directly on this since it since it popped up, but I’ve been in touch with the key staff around him, and they treated it all along like it was going to happen,” said one GOP operative working on Trump’s campaign.

“The Trump mentality is, you always expect that the worst is going to happen. That’s just how they live,” added one former campaign staffer who is still in touch with Trump’s team but was not authorized to speak on the record. “So, is this a war footing? I think he’s been on war footing since 2015.”

As the impact of a possible indictment plays out in the long term, sources said Trump might have to stay flexible to ensure he can appear in court or address unforeseen circumstances.

“The only thing is, if he, for legal requirements, has to defend himself, I’m sure he’ll adjust his schedule appropriately,” said the operative working with the Trump campaign.

In the near-term, the ex-staffers and others who spoke to ABC News forecasted that Trump will maintain his travel schedule — including a rally this coming Saturday in Waco, Texas — while viewing the potential indictment as an opportunity to further rile up his base.

And, unlike his 2016 campaign, his 2024 bid is staffed by veteran politicos who allies say stand ready to spin an indictment, if issued.

“It’s four paragraphs in every rally speech through the general election,” said a second former campaign aide still in touch with Trump’s team. “I think they’ll double down on his commitment to get out there.”

“While being arrested is a humbling experience, there’s probably no better way for the Trump campaign to move into overdrive,” the person added. “You couldn’t ask for a better gift if you understand how to take advantage of it. And he’s surrounded by people who know how to do it.”

Bragg Thursday indicated he would not give in to external pressure from Trump’s allies, lashing out at House Republicans’ demand he provide documents and testimony about his investigation.

Leslie Dubeck, Bragg’s general counsel, said in a response to House Republicans Thursday that their request marks “an unprecedented inquiry into a pending local prosecution” and came “only came after Donald Trump created a false expectation that he would be arrested the next day and his lawyers reportedly urged you to intervene.”

“Neither fact is a legitimate basis for congressional inquiry,” Dubeck wrote.

And Trump’s detractors suggest an indictment could undercut his support, with former New Jersey GOP Gov. Chris Christie, an ally-turned-critic, saying Sunday on ABC’s “This Week” that any “profits” Trump gains from “chaos and turmoil” don’t negate the political downside.

“At the end, being indicted never helps anybody,” he added. “It’s not a help.”

Still, those in Trump’s orbit said they didn’t expect any pause in Trump’s well-worn playbook of lambasting his perceived enemies.

“It’s the same as it always been, as it was with Mueller, as with all these other investigations. It’s just attack,” the first former aide said. “Once you punch, you just don’t stop.”

More punches could be thrown as soon as Saturday in Texas, with Cheung saying Thursday, “I’d watch the Waco rally if I were you.”

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The Republican-led House failed on Thursday to override President Joe Biden’s veto of a resolution that would have prevented retirement fund managers from accounting for certain social factors when making investment decisions.

The vote was 219-200 in favor of overcoming the veto, but a two-thirds majority vote is needed.

The House initially passed H.J. Res. 30 on Feb. 28 with the support of all Republicans and one Democrat, Rep. Jared Golden of Maine. It took on the issue of environmental, social and governance (ESG), specifically whether retirement fund managers covered under federal law may include that strategy in their calculus.

ESG — labeled by critics as “woke capitalism” — has become a major target by conservatives who say it is unfair to certain companies, including in the oil and gas industry, and can be bad for investors. Supporters of the policy say it guides them to invest in issues they believe help society and reflects changing trends.

Following Biden’s veto on Monday, the first of his presidency, House Republicans took up the issue again. House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., said his conference would continue to fight against ESG.

“House Republicans will keep fighting to overturn this rule allowing ESG investing and to make sure Americans are getting the best retirement they can, not the most woke,” the leader wrote in his weekly floor lookout.

But the vote to override Biden’s veto — the House GOP’s first attempt to do so in the new Congress — was always unlikely to succeed. The measure needed two-thirds of the lower chamber’s support to advance to the Senate, where it would also need a two-thirds majority vote.

While there is a slim Republican majority in the House, the GOP is in the minority in the Senate.

Legislative action on the ESG issue came after a Labor Department rule under Biden took effect at the beginning of February allowing retirement fund managers to consider ESG factors. But it is an issue Republicans in Congress oppose because they say it is wrong to consider non-financial variables, like climate change.

House Republicans quickly introduced a resolution to block the Biden administration’s rule, which gained sufficient support in both chambers of Congress. After H.J. Res. 30 passed the House, it passed the Senate on March 1 with the bipartisan support of Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Jon Tester of Montana.

Biden vetoed the measure on Monday, saying then that the Department of Labor’s rule “protects the hard-earned life savings and pensions of tens of millions of workers and retirees across the country.”

ABC News’ Lauren Peller contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden marked the 13th anniversary of the passage of the Affordable Care Act in the same room where he once whispered in President Obama’s ear that enacting the legislation was a “big f—— deal.”

Biden cheekily recalled the hot-mic moment on Thursday, saying he stands by the terminology he used years ago in describing the sweeping health care reform.

“Many of you joined us that day after fighting for decades to make it happen, and I remember three words I used at the time, I thought it was –” Biden said, smiling to invited guests in the White House East Room. “I thought it was a big deal. And I stand by the fact, it was a big deal.”

The landmark health care law was passed in 2010 when Biden was vice president, and he gave high praise to former President Barack Obama for his leadership in securing the “extraordinary achievement.”

“While the Affordable Care Act has been called a lot of things, ‘Obamacare’ is the most fitting description,” Biden said to applause.

But Biden mostly used the event to hammer Republicans over health care policy, making the event resemble more a campaign speech than an anniversary celebration.

“Folks, our MAGA Republican friends — and by that way, I want to be clear: There are some good decent Republicans out there,” Biden said. “But this new crowd, this ain’t your father’s Republican Party.”

The president touted the progress his administration has made to advance health care policy though legislation like the Affordable Care Act and Inflation Reduction Act and warned that Republicans in Congress have not supported the same policies in a divided Washington.

“Folks, look, we’re making health care more affordable in many other ways as well. Last year, I proposed and the Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) which no Republican voted for, even the good ones. I don’t mean ‘good’ in the moral sense. I mean the normal Republican,” he said.

Biden also highlighted recent moves by several pharmaceutical companies to cap the price of insulin — something he called for during his State of the Union address — as well as provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act that will allow for Medicare to negotiate the price of some prescription drugs.

He also repeatedly focused on the fact that Republicans have yet to release their budget proposal and argued that the White House releasing its proposal earlier this month shows where they stand.

“Don’t tell me what you value. Show me your budget, and I will tell you what you value,” he said. “Well, I value everyone having a decent shot. It’s about fairness. It’s about dignity. My budget continues to build on the progress we made in the Affordable Care Act.”

“We still haven’t seen the House Republican budget. They want to negotiate. I say, ‘I’ve laid down my budget on the 9th, you lay down yours, let’s negotiate.’ I don’t know where their budget is. No, I’m serious,” Biden added to laughter.

After his remarks, Biden took time to hold up Democratic Rep. Jimmy Gomez’s son, Hodge, who has become a familiar sight in Washington, including getting on TV during the week-long votes for House speaker.

The president held Hodge close for a few moments, with the seven-month-old baby putting his hands on Biden’s face.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The father of a student killed in the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School mass shooting was pinned to the ground and briefly arrested at the U.S. Capitol on Thursday afternoon after he loudly protested during a House hearing on what Republicans called federal government “overreach” regarding gun ownership.

Manuel Oliver and his wife, Patricia Oliver, were removed from the House oversight subcommittee hearing by Capitol Police officers at the direction of Chairman Pat Fallon.

The Olivers’ 17-year-old son, Joaquin, was murdered along with 16 other students, faculty and staff in Parkland, Florida, in 2018.

The Olivers have become advocates against gun violence in the years since. Manuel Oliver was previously removed from the White House last year after shouting at President Joe Biden for, he said, not doing enough on the issue.

Patricia Oliver spoke first during Thursday’s proceeding, interrupting Fallon, R-Texas. Manuel Oliver also shouted out, using an expletive as he criticized Republicans on the panel about halfway through the hearing.

Moments after police were directed to remove the Olivers, yelling and a loud thud were heard just outside the hearing room and Manuel Oliver was pinned to the ground by multiple officers, as seen in video captured by ABC News.

It wasn’t immediately clear what happened prior to Manuel Oliver being taken to the ground. One officer told ABC News that he was “resisting” and “moving around.” But his wife told ABC News that he “kept saying the truth” and that officers “didn’t like the way he speaks out.”

Freshman Democratic Rep. Maxwell Alejandro Frost of Florida — formerly of the group March For Our Lives, founded in the wake of the Parkland shooting — asked the officers what they were doing as they pinned Manuel Oliver and informed them that his son was killed in Parkland.

Capitol Police confirmed to ABC News that Manuel Oliver was arrested, and Patricia Oliver told ABC News within hours that he had been released.

She said that her husband did not lunge or get physical with officers before they took him down. But Capitol Police said in a statement that Manuel Oliver was detained for allegedly crowding, obstructing or incommoding “after he disrupted a hearing, refused to stop shouting, and then attempted to go back inside the hearing room.”

Patricia Oliver denied to ABC News that her husband tried to go back into the hearing.

Manuel Oliver was issued a citation as part of his arrest and wasn’t booked into jail, police said. They noted that his wife wasn’t detained because she “followed the lawful directions of our officers.”

The altercation appears to have begun after Patricia Oliver yelled during the hearing, leading Fallon to call for officers. Frost tweeted afterward that while “Patricia said one thing,” Fallon “escalated the entire situation.”

“You’re breaching protocol and distributing the committee room,” Fallon said at the hearing.

Fallon also scolded his critics in the gallery: “See, this is exactly what we have to avoid, which is some minority of folks trying to silence dissent. Dissent shouldn’t be kryptonite.”

Soon after, he cracked, “Is this an insurrection? So will they be held to the same– I don’t want another Jan. 6, do we?”

As the disruptions continued, Fallon said, “Does the Capitol Police not do their jobs? What in the hell’s going on?”

He then sent the hearing into recess, during which Manuel Oliver was taken into custody, he said. When the proceeding resumed, he addressed the incident.

“Unfortunately, we had some folks that were disruptive during the hearing,” he said. “We asked Capitol Police to remove them, they were then removed and then one decided to come back in while we were still gaveled in … Capitol Police were overwhelmed outside in the hallway and now we’re back in session.”

Rep. David Cicilline, a Rhode Island Democrat who also sits on the subcommittee, told ABC News afterward, “We had people in the room who had become had become activists because they were personally touched by gun violence, and for them to hear elected officials that our answer to gun violence is to get rid of the ATF — I think it was difficult for member of the public to hear.”

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(CHEYENNE, Wyo.) — A Wyoming judge temporarily blocked a state abortion ban, prohibiting the state and its employees from enforcing the ban. The temporary restraining order will remain in effect unless it is dissolved or modified by a court order, according to court documents.

The ban prohibits nearly all abortions, with exceptions for rape, incest and to save a woman’s life or prevent irreversible bodily harm, according to the law. The law makes violating the ban a felony punishable by up to five years in prison and a fine of up to $20,000.

Under the ban, abortions would be permitted for ectopic pregnancies, fetuses with fatal anomalies and women who need cancer treatment, among other exceptions.

Wyoming also became the first state to ban abortion pills, separate from all abortion services, last week in a bill signed into law by Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon.

In her decision, Teton County District Court Judge Melissa Owens said the temporary injunction will “preserve the status until the merits of an action can be determined,” court documents show.

Gov. Gordon allowed the ban to become law last week without his signature.

In a statement last week, Gordon said he believes that if the state legislature seeks to settle the issue of abortion, it may have to come through a constitutional amendment.

“If the legislature wants to expressly address how the Wyoming Constitution treats abortion and defines healthcare, then those issues should be vetted through the amendment process laid out in Article 20 of the Wyoming Constitution and voted on directly by the people,” Gordon said.

Wyoming was one of 13 states that had enacted trigger bans on abortion that were set to go into effect when the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. The trigger ban, which prohibits abortions in all circumstances except rape, incest or if the mother is at serious risk of death or injury, was blocked by a court as litigation to determine its legality under the state constitution continues.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The fraught politics of immigration have largely focused on the land border between the U.S. and Mexico, but on Thursday afternoon a panel of lawmakers will turn to Florida’s maritime border and what government data shows is a sharply rising wave of migration from the Caribbean.

The House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Transportation and Maritime Security is hearing from U.S. Customs and Border Protection as well as U.S. Coast Guard officials to learn about resource and policy needs to better secure the Florida coast.

Republican lawmakers are expected to press the officials on ways the Biden administration could strengthen policy and deter migrants. Democrats are likely to point to recent declines in migrants from certain countries recently included in the dual-track strategy of the administration cracking down on unlawful claims while opening narrow avenues for relief.

But conservatives aren’t swayed.

“I think they’re both out of control,” Subcommittee Chairman Carlos Gimenez, R-Fla., told ABC News. “I wouldn’t say that the southern border is more in control.”

Gimenez cited the recent acknowledgement from Border Patrol Chief Raul Ortiz that the U.S. was not currently maintaining “operational control” of the border — defined under federal law as the complete prevention of unlawful entries, a feat no administration has ever achieved.

“Regardless of the technical terms, and whether you think that any president can actually meet that or not, this president has failed miserably,” Gimenez said, echoing broad Republican criticism of the Biden administration. “A greater failure than any other president in history.”

Experts say a number of factors have contributed to the protracted diaspora of populations across the Western Hemisphere, including the build-up of migration demand due to the COVID-19 pandemic and widespread instability in Haiti and deteriorating authoritarian regimes in South America.

In response to concerns about the border, President Joe Biden last year requested the largest-ever increase in Border Patrol personnel, with lawmakers ultimately approving funding for 300 additional agents.

Another 350 would be added under the president’s latest budget proposal, which is likely to be ignored by the divided Congress.

Most Republicans have opposed Biden’s funding proposals, saying solutions should start with apprehension and removal policies. While the White House has maintained some strict Trump-era measures, drawing the ire of immigration advocates, they have rolled others back and argued they want to be more humane.

Republicans have pointed to the reversal of restrictions including international agreements that facilitated the return of some asylum-seekers as well as the “Remain in Mexico” policy, which made asylum-seekers wait outside the U.S. between immigration appointments. Mexico has since opposed such policies after the Biden administration showed a willingness to pull them back.

Gimenez, who said Biden is not being tough enough on Mexico, represents southern Florida and the Keys, a region that has seen an overall spike this year in unauthorized migrant dockings and other migrant apprehensions despite recent declines.

Border Patrol agents in the Miami region apprehended migrants 328 times last month, down from 1,357 apprehensions in January, according to CBP data.

So far this fiscal year, total Miami-area apprehensions have topped 5,000 for the first time since the Bush administration, with more than half the fiscal year to go.

Meanwhile, people without official travel documents have attempted to make legal entry more than 43,000 times this fiscal year at Miami ports, according to CBP data which includes Miami International Airport.

The U.S. Coast Guard has also found elevated numbers of migrants — mainly Cubans and Haitians — often on rafts and small boats not outfitted to handle the Atlantic Ocean. Such crossings can be deadly.

Coast Guard teams off the Florida coast have disrupted unauthorized Haitian maritime travel 3,567 times so far this budget year, far beyond the 419 encounters recorded in all of budget year 2017, the oldest year immediately available, or any year since except 2022.

Unauthorized migration from Cuba has also hit the highest levels seen in recent years. The vast majority of migrants found at sea are swiftly returned to their home countries by the Coast Guard.

“They come across on very flimsy boats and rafts and inner tubes — any way they can to seek freedom and seek a better opportunity here in the United States,” Gimenez said. “I don’t blame the folks trying to reach the United States. I’m a migrant myself. What I do blame — it needs to be done in a legal manner and it needs to be done in a safe manner.”

Outside experts have said broader forces are pushing people toward these journeys, regardless of the risk.

“Cuba is not far from the United States. The inability to migrate by land, the difficulty of accessing humanitarian parole for those lacking passports or sponsors, and historic levels of economic misery in Cuba have combined to cause an immediate spike in maritime migration across the Florida Straits,” analyst Adam Isaacson wrote last month.

South Florida has also long been a hub for international drug trafficking, and while the steady pace of CBP seizures continues, it appears uncorrelated to recent spikes in migration, based on a review of publicly accessible data.

Additionally, the vast majority of drugs seized by CBP are found at federal ports of entry.

ABC News’ Conor Finnegan contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The White House COVID-19 team will wind down as the country moves out of the emergency phase of the pandemic, multiple administration officials confirmed to ABC News.

The public health emergency is set to expire on May 11 after being in place since early 2020. The end will impact public health measures afforded by the pandemic, like expanded Medicaid enrollment, subsidized costs of COVID tests, and data gathering on cases and deaths across the country.

It will also mark a “new phase” of COVID response, an administration official said, which will be mirrored by a restructuring within the White House.

“The COVID team size will reflect the new phase that we’re in as the public health emergency ends,” an administration official said.

And Dr. Ashish Jha, the White House COVID coordinator, is also likely to leave, according to another administration official.

His departure is expected around the time the emergency ends, a member of the White House COVID team said. Many members of the current response team have already returned to their original agencies or other jobs, the team member added.

The Washington Post was the first to report the news on the team winding down.

In a statement, a senior administration official told ABC News that “COVID no longer disrupts our lives because of investments and our efforts to mitigate its worst impacts.”

“COVID is not over, fighting it remains an administration priority, and transitioning out of the emergency phase is the natural evolution of the COVID response,” the official said.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.