(TALLAHASSEE, Fla.) — As Florida schools face a growing number of book ban attempts, Gov. Ron DeSantis is scaling back policies that made it easier for people to challenge materials in schools.
In 2022, DeSantis signed HB 1467, which required elementary schools to provide a searchable list of the books accessible to students in libraries or classrooms and allow for public comment on all new materials.
Other recent legislation signed by DeSantis, including the Parental Rights in Education Bill and the Stop WOKE Act, restricts content on race and LGBTQ identities in schools and has further impacted access to classroom materials.
Florida law also allows parents and residents to object to books and have them reviewed and potentially removed from schools.
Since the implementation of these laws, Florida has seen a rise in book banning attempts across the state, according to the American Library Association (ALA) and free speech advocacy group PEN America.
Now, DeSantis has signed HB 1285, which he said will limit the amount of book objections that can be made by people who don’t have a child who is accessing school materials. Parents of children in the school districts or using district materials will still be able to object to an unlimited amount of material.
According to DeSantis, the book transparency efforts were aimed at removing “explicit” material from schools. Critics of these policies argued their vague restrictions would lead to censorship.
In the first half of this school year alone, PEN America found that Florida experienced the highest number of ban cases with 3,135 attempts across 11 school districts.
More than 1,600 of those book banning attempts took place in Escambia County Public Schools, which is currently being sued by book publisher Penguin Random House, authors and PEN America for removing hundreds of books off shelves for review.
These groups found that political groups like Moms for Liberty and politicized individuals are behind large swaths of book challenges nationwide, sometimes demanding the censorship of multiple titles — often dozens or hundreds at a time.
The vast majority of the books impacted by these banning efforts are written by or about people of color and the LGBTQ community, according to the ALA.
DeSantis’ office said the recent change to these policies “protects schools from activists trying to politicize and disrupt a district’s book review process.”
“What’s happened though, is you have some people who are taking the curriculum transparency and are trying to weaponize that for political purposes that involves objecting to normal books,” said DeSantis in a Tuesday press conference. “Some of the books I saw in the teachers lounge, the classic books, there’s people that will try to get to that because they wanna create a narrative. It’s like, ‘oh, all these books, we don’t know what’s lawful or not to have.’ That’s nonsense.”
(WASHINGTON) — Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas faced an icy reception from Senate Republicans on Thursday, one day after the swift dismissal of the GOP impeachment case brought against him over his handling of immigration policy and the southern border.
Mayorkas was on Capitol Hill to testify about President Joe Biden’s 2025 budget proposal and make the case to lawmakers for additional funding for the Department of Homeland Security.
But what unfolded on Wednesday was still top of mind for some Republican senators, who blasted the secretary’s leadership and scorned Democrats for voting down the impeachment articles against Mayorkas as unconstitutional.
“Yesterday, your impeachment trial ensued in the Senate,” Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said in his opening statement. “I don’t see this as a happy day, or a day I take relish or pleasure in. But it’s a sad day. A sad day in the sense that it’s come to this. This isn’t a debate over policy, it’s a debate over malfeasance, a debate over whether you’ve been telling the truth and whether you’ve been enforcing the law.”
Paul later added, “All I can express is disappointment and bewilderment that the Democrats let you get away with it.”
House Republicans impeached Mayorkas in February, accusing him of willful and systemic refusal to comply with the law as well as breach of public trust.
The Senate, in party-line votes, discarded the charges as not rising to the level of “high crime or misdemeanor” as required under Article II of the Constitution.
All Democrats and independent Sen. Bernie Sanders voted to kill the articles and adjourn in the span of three hours after a Republican senator rejected Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s offer for some debate time on the matter. Later, Schumer pushed back on GOP criticism of the dismissal stating their impeachment case was “hallow, frivolous, political” and amounted to policy disputes rather than impeachable offenses.
Mayorkas had called the impeachment charges “baseless” but largely kept his head down as the proceedings unfolded in the House and Senate.
On Thursday, he told lawmakers he hadn’t read the text of the specific allegations brought against him by GOP lawmakers.
“I have not read the articles of impeachment,” Mayorkas said as he faced questioning from Sen. Mitt Romney, who responded: “I’d probably want to do that.”
Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., asserted Democrats set a “new precedent” on Wednesday by quashing the trial and asked Mayorkas, “Do you think you’re being silenced because Democrats are terrified of your record and unable to defend you, or because they don’t trust you?”
“Neither, senator,” Mayorkas responded.
In addition to swiping at Mayorkas over impeachment, Republicans pressed him on high numbers of migrant encounters at the southern border and some migrants committed crimes, often pointing to the killing of Laken Riley. Mayorkas declined to comment on the case specifically but said that migrants who “pose a public safety threat or national security are our highest priority for detention” but like administration’s past, the number of encounters at the border have exceeded the number of detention beds available.
Democrats often countered Republicans complaints about Mayorkas and the border by criticizing them for blocking a bipartisan deal that included some of the most comprehensive immigration reforms in decades.
“It’s interesting the nature of my colleagues’ energy and attention when that same energy and attention seemed to lapse when there was an opportunity to do something to provide the kinds of supports, resources and technologies that were requested [and] negotiated in a bipartisan way,” said Sen. Laphonza Butler, a California Democrat.
Sen. Jon Ossoff, D-Ga., also took issue with Republicans blocking the legislation from coming to the floor for debate or a vote.
“The American people are smart, so all of the performative chest-pounding today on border security is utterly disingenuous,” Ossoff said.
Arizona state capitol building. Via KingWu/Getty Images
(PHOENIX) — Arizona’s Republican lawmakers made clear on Wednesday, despite the controversy engulfing their state with the revival of a strict, Civil War-era abortion ban — roiling the politics of the key battleground and drawing criticism from top conservatives like Donald Trump — that it’s not the time to move too quickly.
“Legislatures are not built for knee-jerk reactions,” state House Speaker Ben Toma said during a floor session as the GOP majority, with one exception, blocked a Democratic-led effort to fast-track a bill to repeal the 1864 abortion ban that the Arizona Supreme Court recently ruled is enforceable.
“The last thing we should be doing today is rushing a bill through the legislative process to repeal a law that has been enacted and reaffirmed by the Legislature several times,” Toma said.
The 1864 ban, which supersedes a 15-week abortion ban that was enacted in 2022 after a state Supreme Court ruling last week, blocks all abortions except to save the life of the pregnant woman.
Anyone found guilty of violating it will face two to five years in state prison, but Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes, a Democrat, said she would not prosecute providers under the law.
Though the ban remains temporarily on hold, Mayes said this week that the earliest it could take effect is June 8, “absent any additional litigation” or legislative action.
While the ban was celebrated by abortion opponents like Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser — who called the state Supreme Court decision an “enormous victory for unborn children and their mothers” — it was denounced by abortion access advocates and Democrats.
On Wednesday, as lawmakers reconvened and Democrats sought to move forward on their repeal proposal, advocates on both sides of the issue gathered inside and outside of the state Capitol.
“This is a stain on history that this ban even exists — from a time when the age of consent was 10, from a time when women didn’t have the right to vote,” Arizona state Sen. Eva Burch, a Democrat, told ABC News’ Elizabeth Schulze.
Burch’s GOP colleague Dave Farnsworth took another view.
“We have the best law possible on the books right now,” the state senator told Schulze.
Pressed about the ban’s lack of exceptions, Farnsworth said, “Arizona’s a pro-life state and that law was put into place by people that believe in the sanctity of life.”
Toma, the House speaker, said during Wednesday’s floor session that “abortion is a complicated topic — it is ethically, morally complex. I understand that we have deeply held beliefs, and I would ask everyone in this chamber to respect the fact that some of us who believe that abortion is in fact the murder of children.”
That position cuts against some of the most prominent voices in the GOP, who have staked out a more careful position in an election year in which abortion is expected to be a major issue for voters — and as abortion access has won out in races elsewhere in the country.
Leading Republicans like Trump, former Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey and Senate candidate Kari Lake touted their general support for abortion restrictions but said the 1864 ban goes too far.
“It’s all about states’ rights and it needs to be straightened out,” Trump said last week during a campaign stop in Atlanta. “And I’m sure that the governor and everybody else will bring it back into reason and that will be taken care of.”
The state’s Democratic governor, Katie Hobbs, has called on state lawmakers to repeal the ban — but shot back at Trump.
“I’m kind of tired of cleaning up Donald Trump’s messes,” Hobbs said on “GMA3” last week. “But, look, this is just political opportunism from these politicians who this is they are getting exactly what they wanted. Donald Trump bragged about getting rid of Roe v. Wade. And this is the consequence of that.”
Since Roe was overruled in 2022 by the U.S. Supreme Court’s 6-3 conservative majority, including three justices named by Trump, as he often notes, 21 states have banned or severely restricted abortion access.
However, since 2022, voters across the country have also repeatedly cast ballots protecting abortion rights, and exit polling showed that it was top of mind for some voters, as in Michigan’s midterm races.
The Arizona for Abortion Access campaign is working to get a potential constitutional amendment on the state’s ballot in November to enshrine abortion access, which Democrats believe could boost voter enthusiasm and turnout for their candidates. The campaign has said that they have gathered more than 500,000 signatures — surpassing the necessary threshold, but will continue to gather signatures “until the wheels fall off,” a spokesperson told ABC News.
The inititiave would amend Arizona’s Constitution to prohibit the state from legislating against abortion up until fetal viability, which is around 24 weeks into pregnancy; and it enshrines other abortion protections into law.
The Republican-led House counsel in Arizona has, separately, internally proposed a plan to rival the state’s abortion rights ballot initiative by adding ballot initiatives of their own in the wake of what they call “court chaos” on abortion policy, according to a presentation leaked Monday and shared with ABC News. Those plans could be publicly announced as soon as this week, a Republican lawmaker said Wednesday.
Democratic lawmakers also plan to keep pushing repeal.
State senators on Wednesday began the process of taking up another bill to undo the 1864 ban, though the earliest that proposal would likely see a vote is on May 1, as it requires two other readings before a vote can be taken and the Legislature is on a once-a-week meeting schedule.
Arizona voter Desiree Mayes, a Republican at the Capitol on Wednesday to help apply pressure on lawmakers not to repeal the ban, called Trump’s stance on abortion “inconsistent.”
“If you really if you really believe that babies in the womb are precious and valuable, they deserve equal protection,” she said, explaining she doesn’t support exceptions for rape or incest.
Her message to Arizona Republicans like Lake and others distancing themselves from the 1864 ban? “You’re saying you’re pro-life. If you work to repeal this ban, we’re going to make sure all your constituents know.”
Republican strategist Barrett Marson said the failure of a quick repeal showed that Trump and Lake “only have so much sway over far-right politicians,” noting that not one vote changed since they weighed in.
House Democrats will try again, next week, for another vote on their bill.
Arizona state Rep. David Cook, a Republican who voted against fast-tracking the repeal legislation on Wednesday, told ABC News’ Phil Lipof in an interview on “ABC News Live Prime” that conservatives do intend to get behind repeal in the future. He felt the rules weren’t followed Wednesday and he refused to “roll the speaker,” or neutralize the speaker’s objections to move to a final vote.
“We made tremendous progress … in moving forward,” Cook said of internal deliberations in the GOP state House caucus.
“The bottom is that the 1800 law will be repealed,” he said, with a successful vote likely as soon as next week.
Republican state Rep. Matt Gress, who backed repeal on Wednesday, agreed. “There are enough votes in this chamber to repeal the territorial law. It will happen, it’s just a matter of time,” he said on the floor.
But after that, Cook told Lipof, more exceptions need to be enacted in the state’s abortion restrictions, including for rape and incest.
He defended the timeline so far, telling Lipof, “We don’t need knee-jerk reactions to bypass the rules and the normal order of business. This is not an emergency.”
State Rep. Alexander Kolodin, another Republican, said during Wednesday’s floor session that Republicans will roll out their own abortion plan, indicating that action may be through a ballot initiative.
“The ultimate folks who are going to make the call will be the people of the state of Arizona,” he said.
Speaking with ABC News’ Elizabeth Schulze, Kolodin suggested he’s not worried that the politics of abortion will imperil his party at the ballot box.
“Voters are smart,” he said. “They would rather vote for somebody that they respect and disagree with than somebody that doesn’t believe in anything.”
Meanwhile, for the women of Arizona seeking abortions, the clock is ticking, providers say.
“We are having conversations with them, letting them know that we’re going week by week,” Dr. DeShawn Taylor told Schulze. “Because there will come a time when we’ll have to stop.”
ABC News’ Isabella Murray contributed to this report.
(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden is wrapping up a three-day Pennsylvania campaign swing in Philadelphia on Thursday with an endorsement by 15 members of the politically famous Kennedy family — a counter to the political threat from RFK Jr.
In speech excerpts released by the Biden campaign from Kerry Kennedy, a daughter of former Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, she will say another Donald Trump presidency would “horrify” her father.
“We can say today, with no less urgency, that our rights and freedoms are once again in peril,” Kennedy is expected to say. “That is why we all need to come together in a campaign that should unite not only Democrats, but all Americans, including Republicans, and independents, who believe in what Lincoln called the better angels of our nature.”
She along with several of her family members have denounced her brother Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s bid for president. The Independent candidate, who officially launched his presidential bid last fall is famously known for espousing conspiracy theories about the efficacy of vaccines.
The endorsement comes as no real surprise. Although he is the fourth Kennedy to run for president, RFK Jr. is the only one to have broken from the Democratic Party. Many of his relatives, like Kerry Kennedy, argue that not only is his run an “embarrassment” but that it could swing a close race in Trump’s come November.
“I’ve listened to him, I know him, I have no idea why anyone thinks he should be president,” Jack Scholossberg, the grandson of John F. Kennedy, said in a video on Instagram last summer. “What I do know is his candidacy is an embarrassment.”
Rory Kennedy, RFK Jr.’s sister, told ABC’s Good Morning America a couple of weeks ago that she’s “concerned” voting for her brother will “take votes away from Biden and lead to a Trump election.”
Realistically the candidate, who is currently polling at 7%, according to 538’s average, has a longshot path to getting into the White House. Although his campaign has claimed he has enough signatures to appear on the ballots of eight states, including battleground states North Carolina and Nevada, only Utah has confirmed that he has qualified.
But in a race that is expected to see small margin wins, any votes siphoned away from the president could lead to another Trump presidency.
Biden, who has a close friendship with the Kennedy family, has steered away from commenting on RFK Jr.’s bid, but in a show of force against the candidate, the Democratic National Committee has hired a communications team to combat the legitimacy of Kennedy.
They’ve filed a federal complaint alleging RFK Jr.’s super PAC is working too closely with his campaign. And on a call with reporters in March, DNC surrogates called him “dangerous” and a “spoiler.”
“A vote for Joe Biden is a vote to save our democracy and our decency. It is a vote for what my father called for, in his own presidential announcement in 1968,” Kerry Kennedy is expected to say at Thursday’s announcement. “Our right to the moral leadership of this planet.”
Sarah Huckabee Sanders, governor of Arkansas, speaks during the Milken Institute Global Conference in Beverly Hills, May 2, 2023. (Patrick T. Fallon/AFP via Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — The little-seen, $19,000 lectern at the center of a controversy in Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders’ office was made available for viewing on Tuesday night — after a monthslong audit into how the lectern was procured and paid for found that Sanders’ staff potentially violated several state laws.
The governor’s office responded by characterizing the investigation as “a waste of taxpayer resources and time” and called the audit report “deeply flawed.”
“The facts outlined in the report demonstrate what the governor’s office said all along: we followed the law, and the state was fully reimbursed with private funds for the podium, at no cost to the taxpayers,” Sanders’ spokesperson Alexa Henning said in a statement.
A Republican state senator had requested the probe last year after the lectern’s high price tag sparked scrutiny and captured the national spotlight, including a jab from late-night host Jimmy Kimmel.
The purchase only came to light when Matt Campbell, a Little Rock attorney and progressive blogger, called attention to Sanders’ office using a state-issued credit card in June 2023 to make a $19,029.25 payment to Beckett Events, a boutique event planning company whose owners are close with the governor.
Lawmakers questioned Sanders’ staff about the audit’s findings in a nearly three-hour hearing at the state Capitol on Tuesday, after the report was sent Monday to prosecuting attorneys.
“I was really hoping that you all would have brought the lectern with you today so we could see it,” Republican state Rep. Julie Mayberry said at that hearing. “We all can agree that $19,000 was spent on an item and no one has really seen it.”
Sanders’ deputy chief of staff, Judd Deere, told lawmakers that she plans to use the lectern now that the audit is complete, previously having not wanted it to be a distraction.
Despite seven “areas of noncompliance” identified in the audit report where the governor’s office potentially violated state laws regarding purchasing, state property and government records, Deere also said no members of the governor’s staff were disciplined for their actions — “nor should they be,” he added.
What’s next then for the dispute also known as #LecternGate?
Arkansas’ Attorney General Tim Griffin, a Republican, has already indicated he won’t pursue charges — enraging critics — when last week he said that state purchasing laws don’t apply to the governor or other executive branch officials, only to state agencies.
That means the potential for any criminal charges to be filed would likely fall to Will Jones, the 6th Judicial District prosecuting attorney in Little Rock.
Jones said his office is assessing the audit and that their “review is no different than any other file review” sent to them.
Sanders, a former Trump White House official and daughter of former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, has been seen as a rising star in the Republican Party.
She was defiant in dismissing the findings, posting a 20-second video edit of the lectern to social media this week that said “COME AND TAKE IT.”
Here are key takeaways from the audit:
Potential violations include tampering with public records
Auditors identified seven “areas of potential noncompliance with state law” that the governor’s office engaged in — including a member of the governor’s office staff shredding the bill of lading for the lectern, which contained details of the shipment and was attached to the delivery crate, potentially violating document retention laws.
They were told in interviews that the shredding was inadvertent.
Auditors also reported that, at the direction of the governor’s deputy chief of staff, an executive assistant added handwritten notes that read “to be reimbursed” on two invoices after Campbell, the blogger, asked for documents surrounding the lectern’s purchase in a Freedom of Information Act request. State Republicans ultimately repaid the cost of the lectern — after Campbell called attention to it.
According to the audit, other potential violations of budgeting and accounting laws include the purchase being applied to operating expenses, though state law prevents equipment that must be capitalized from being expensed, as well as the lectern being paid for before it was delivered.
The governor’s office further failed to notify a state agency of the lectern’s delivery, as required, and did not create a business expense justification statement on the day it was purchased.
Sanders has previously maintained that the lectern’s purchase “went through standard protocol in our office.”
Lectern has no electronic components, despite special features touted
When Sanders came under fire last fall for the lectern’s price tag, relative to other such furniture and equipment, she told reporters it was custom made for her height, was designed “to get the best sound quality” and that it incorporated components to allow multiple media outlets to plug in at the same time.
Auditors reported the lectern features no microphone or any electronic elements.
It does include a light, they said.
The report included a breakdown of the total cost as follows: $11,575 for the lectern itself, $2,500 for a consulting fee, $2,200 for a travel case, $1,225 for freight shipping for the lectern, $975 for freight shipping for the travel case and $554 for a credit card processing fee.
The $2,500 consulting fee had not been previously reported but attracted scrutiny on social media when coupled with a detail from the report that the governor’s office was considering returning the lectern shortly after its delivery because its height did not meet order specifications.
The total $19,000 cost for the podium is notably higher than could be purchased via standard retail means. One retailer previously wrote online that their own lecterns sell for around $7,000. And two political sources outside of Sanders’ office with experience producing podiums and the costs associated with them has told ABC News that $19,029.25 is more than they would have charged or spent on the procurement.
Sanders herself didn’t participate in the audit, nor did the lectern’s vendors
Neither Sanders, who previously said she welcomed the audit, nor the lectern vendors cooperated with the probe, according to the audit report.
Virginia Beckett and Hannah Stone of Beckett Events did not respond to repeated attempts from auditors to contact them via telephone, certified mail and email, the report said, nor did New York-based Miller’s Presentation Furniture, which manufactured the lectern, according to the audit.
Beckett and Stone were previously hired by Sanders’ office to help with advance planning on her gubernatorial inauguration and the 2023 GOP response to the State of the Union address. They were also at the Paris Air Show last June, which Sanders also attended, the same month the lectern was purchased.
Auditors recruited Sanders’ office for help reaching out to the vendors during their investigation. Chief legal counsel for the governor’s office told lawmakers Tuesday she sent two emails to Beckett Events.
Moving forward, an aide to the governor said Tuesday that she doesn’t plan on using the vendors again.
Neither of the vendors immediately responded to ABC News’ request for comment.
No evidence state party planned to reimburse state before FOIA request
Only after Campbell sought additional information about the five-figure purchase with taxpayer dollars was it reimbursed by the state’s Republican Party, with auditors reporting “there was no indication the governor’s office was seeking reimbursement for the cost of the podium and the road case” before the requests.
Sanders’ spokesperson said last fall that use of a state credit card for the purchase was “an accounting error.”
The governor’s deputy chief of staff, however, told lawmakers Tuesday that it was decided later on it would be “preferable” for the lectern to be paid for with private funds via the state Republican Party.
“This body appropriated money that was available for us to use to purchase items. Later on we determined it was preferable that private funds the governor raised be used to reimburse the state,” Deere said. “No taxpayer has been used to purchase this item. So we do not view it as a mistake.”
Notably, the governor’s office had also sought approval before the lectern purchase to increase the state credit card’s spending limit, as opposed to having the Arkansas Republican Party make the purchase themselves.
Campbell, in a statement to ABC News, applauded the auditors’ work which he said proved “what we already knew: that the lectern purchase was illegal and done in the shadiest way imaginable.”
The audit also determined, because of broken protocols, that the lectern belongs to the state of Arkansas.
One Arkansas vendor contacted and quoted a far lower lectern price
Staffers in Sanders’ office told auditors they “could not recall any other quotes being obtained” for the lectern.
However, auditors found that in March 2023, a staff member contacted an Arkansas-based audio and visual equipment dealer and received quotes for podiums up to $1,500, lighting systems up to $1,000 and sound systems up to $3,000.
While auditors said they were ultimately unable to determine the reasonableness of the cost of the podium due to the “custom specifications,” “lack of vendor responses” and “lack of documentation,” they hinted at its high price when compared to similar-style lecterns on the market.
“It should be noted that similar non-customized falcon style podiums can be purchased from online vendors starting at approximately $7,000, as opposed to the $11,575 amount allocated to the custom falcon podium,” the report said.
Arkansas lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have expressed doubt about the lectern’s value.
“I don’t think the lectern’s worth $19,000 or $11,500,” Republican state Sen. John Payton said on Tuesday. “But I do think the lesson learned could be worth far more than that if we would just accept the fact that it was bad judgment and it was carelessness.”
(WASHINGTON) — Speaker Mike Johnson and other House Republican leaders released a $95 billion foreign aid package Wednesday that provides funding for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan – as Congress continues to grapple with a response to actions taken by Russia, Iran and China that have defied the international community.
The package includes $26.4 billion for Israel aid, including $4 billion to replenish Israel Iron Dome defense system, $60.8 billion for Ukraine aid, including $23 billion for replenishing weapons and $8.1 billion for Indo-Pacific aid.
Johnson, who is facing a small revolt within his own conference and will need to rely on Democratic votes to advance the package, told members to expect a final passage vote on the package Saturday evening. But the path to getting there will be an uphill battle and could potentially cost the speaker his gavel.
Far-right Republicans are mocking Johnson’s plan as the #AmericaLast Act – complaining, for example, that it includes $481 million to pay for housing, medical bills and legal fees for Ukrainian refugees coming to the United States.
“The Republican Speaker of the House is seeking a rule to pass almost $100 billion in foreign aid – while unquestionably, dangerous criminals, terrorists, & fentanyl pour across our border. The border “vote” in this package is a watered-down dangerous cover vote. I will oppose,” Chip Roy, R-Texas, said in a statement on X.
Georgia Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, who is threatening to oust Johnson, said in a statement on X, “Speaker Johnson, voted against $300 million for Ukraine before we gave you the gavel along with the majority of Republicans, no one understands why it is now your top priority to give Ukraine $60 billion more dollars. You are seriously out of step with Republicans by continuing to pass bills dependent on Democrats.”
Greene’s motion to vacate the speakership hangs over Johnson’s head — though he has moved forward with his plan undeterred.
While several Republicans are coming out strongly against the plan, President Joe Biden and top Democrats are urging lawmakers to support the bills.
Biden urged the House to pass the package this week, adding that the Senate should “quickly follow.”
“I will sign this into law immediately to send a message to the world: We stand with our friends, and we won’t let Iran or Russia succeed,” Biden wrote in a statement Wednesday.
Rep. Rosa DeLauro — the top Democratic appropriator in the House – announced her support for the three bills, noting they “mirror” the Senate’s bipartisan national security package that passed through the upper chamber on Feb. 13.
“After House Republicans dragged their feet for months, we finally have a path forward to provide support for our allies and desperately needed humanitarian aid,” DeLauro, D-Conn., stated. “We cannot retreat from the world stage under the guise of putting ‘America First.’ We put America first by demonstrating the power of American leadership – that we have the strength, resolve, and heart to fight for the most vulnerable people, protect their freedom, and preserve their dignity. I urge swift passage of these bills.”
Republicans are expected to unveil a fourth measure later Wednesday, including the REPO Act, sanctions, the Tik Tok bill, and other measures to “confront Russia, China and Iran.”
And to appease hardliners, the House will also introduce a separate bill on the border that includes “the core components of H.R.2, under a separate rule that will allow for amendments.”
If the package clears the House this weekend, the Senate will have a one-week recess to consider how to handle the legislation when the upper chamber returns on April 29.
(PITTSBURGH) — President Joe Biden on Wednesday continued his 2024 campaign swing through Pennsylvania, speaking to the United Steelworkers union as he proposed tripling tariffs on Chinese steel and aluminum and denouncing the sale of Pittsburgh-based U.S. Steel, promising union workers he will keep it a “totally American company.”
“U.S. Steel has been an iconic American company for more than a century, and it should remain a totally American company,” he said in Pittsburgh. “American-owned, American-operated by American union steel workers, the best in the world. And it’s — that’s going to happen, I promise you.”
The acquisition by Japan’s Nippon Steel took one more step last week when U.S. Steel shareholders approved the $14.9 billion sale, despite opposition from the United Steelworkers union.
The president also accused the Chinese government of “cheating” by overproducing steel and subsidizing the cost, leading to “unfairly low prices” in the global market.
“The prices are unfairly low because China’s steel companies don’t need to worry about making a profit because the Chinese governor subsidizes them so heavily, they’re not competing, they’re cheating. They’re cheating. And we’ve seen the damage here in America,” he said.
Biden promised the crowd that he would not let American workers lose their jobs due to the import of Chinese steel, which he noted happened in the early 2,000s in Pennsylvania and Ohio.
While Biden courts the critical voting bloc, his likely GOP presidential opponent — former President Donald Trump — faced a criminal trial in a Manhattan courtroom, which Biden made a veiled reference to in his remarks.
“Under my predecessor — who’s busy right now — Pennsylvania lost 275,000 jobs. I mean, just look at the facts,” Biden said.
(PHOENIX) — Arizona Republicans on Wednesday again blocked a Democratic-led effort to repeal a controversial 19th-century ban on almost all abortions in the state, which the Arizona Supreme Court has ruled is enforceable.
Democrats in the state House failed to overcome procedural obstacles to advance House Bill 2677, introduced by Democratic state Rep. Stephanie Stahl Hamilton, to repeal the 1864 abortion law, which predates Arizona’s statehood and only provides exceptions to save the life of the pregnant woman.
Only one of the Republican representatives joined with the Democratic minority, leaving them one vote short of pushing the bill forward.
“The last thing we should be doing today is rushing a bill through the legislative process to repeal a law that has been enacted and reaffirmed by the Legislature several times,” Speaker Ben Toma, a Republican, said during Wednesday’s state House session.
“Abortion is a complicated topic — it is ethically, morally complex,” said Toma. “I understand that we have deeply held beliefs.”
Assistant Minority Leader Oscar De Los Santos, speaking after Toma, said, “This issue is very simple: Do we support or do we oppose an 1864 territorial abortion ban that includes no exceptions for rape, no exceptions for incest?”
He continued: “We heard the speaker mention that we shouldn’t be rushing this process. Members, we have had since 1864 to repeal this abhorrent law,”
Arizona lawmakers had reconvened on Wednesday after a week’s recess, with much attention was on the repeal bill and whether it would move forward.
It’s unclear how Democrats will next attempt to roll back the strict ban, though members in the state Senate have said they plan to act quickly to take up such efforts in their chamber later Wednesday.
The Arizona Supreme Court’s ruling reviving the 1864 ban immediately roiled the politics of the key swing state — being celebrated by abortion opponents and denounced by abortion access advocates and Democrats, while top Republicans, including Donald Trump, said it went too far.
The ban remains temporarily on hold but Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes said this week that the earliest it could take effect is June 8 — “absent any additional litigation” or legislative action.
Anyone found guilty of violating it will face two to five years in state prison. Mayes previously said she would not prosecute providers under the law.
Arizona Right to Life, an anti-abortion group, on Wednesday planned to hold rally outside the state Capitol in support of the 1864 ban.
The Arizona for Abortion Access coalition was also set to hold a rally outside of the state Capitol.
If Arizona lawmakers attempt repeal again, how would it work?
Hamilton’s repeal bill, which failed to advance on Wednesday, already passed two readings in the Arizona House, setting it up for another attempt at a floor vote — after one more step.
A member will need bring up a motion to waive the normal procedures to consider the bill, since it has not yet been heard in a committee.
That waive motion was opposed by nearly all Republicans in the state House majority on Wednesday. But if it ever succeeds, the repeal ban could then go up for a full House vote and would need 31 votes to pass — a simple majority of legislators in the 60-member chamber.
As there are 29 Democratic members in the Arizona House, the bill needs just two Republican votes to succeed. The GOP members to watch are Reps. Matt Gress, David Cook and Tim Dunn.
Toma, the Arizona House speaker, said last week that lawmakers will not “rush legislation on a topic of this magnitude without a larger discussion,” and Republican lawmakers quashed an earlier, Democratic-led effort to quickly repeal the ban.
“We as an elected body are going to take the time needed to listen to our constituents and carefully consider appropriate actions,” Toma said last week.
The Center for Arizona Policy, which has led the fight against abortion rights at the Legislature and successfully lobbied for myriad restrictions, has called on GOP lawmakers not to repeal the 1864 ban.
If the Arizona House votes yes on the bill, however, there are still more steps and procedures before the ban is formally repealed and off the books.
The proposal, after passing the state House, would then go to the state Senate for yet another vote to waive rules on the bill.
Two Republicans are needed to join Democrats in the state Senate as well, and Sens. Shawnna Bolick and T.J. Shope have said they’d support the repeal.
The legislation may have to go through further procedural steps given that it has not yet been read in the state Senate. That includes a rule requiring bills be heard on three separate days, so it will likely take at least three more days.
To repeal the 1864 ban immediately, lawmakers would have to include an emergency clause in their language but get a two-thirds majority vote for passage. Otherwise, anything approved by the Legislature and signed by the governor does not take effect until 90 days after the end of the legislative session.
Gov. Katie Hobbs, a Democrat, opposes the ban.
“A law passed in 1864 by 27 men is the reason why my 22-year-old daughter now has fewer rights than I did at her age,” she wrote on X on Tuesday. “It’s absolutely outrageous. I’m committed to ensuring that future generations have the essential freedoms they deserve.”
She has reiterated that an executive order she signed in 2023 prohibits county attorneys from going above Mayes, the Arizona attorney general, who has said her office is still analyzing legal options and is continuing plans over what to do if litigation efforts are unsuccessful, including how Arizona can support abortion providers.
Potentially dueling ballot measures on abortion
The Arizona for Abortion Access campaign is working to get a potential constitutional amendment on the state’s ballot in November enshrining abortion access. The campaign has said that they have gathered more than 500,000 signatures – surpassing the necessary threshold.
The proposed amendment would amend Arizona’s Constitution to prohibit the state from legislating against abortion up until fetal viability, which is around 24 weeks into pregnancy; and it enshrines other abortion protections into law.
The Republican-led House counsel in Arizona has, separately, internally proposed a plan to rival the state’s abortion rights ballot initiative by adding ballot initiatives of their own in the wake of what they call “court chaos” on abortion policy, according to a presentation leaked Monday and shared with ABC News.
That proposal includes potentially legislatively-referred ballot initiatives that would compete with the Arizona for Abortion Access measure — to either return to a 15-week ban that had been in effect before the 1864 ruling or offer a six-week ban, with exceptions in both cases for rape, incest, fetal abnormalities and to save the life of “the woman” in the language presented.
(WASHINGTON) — The Senate on Wednesday dismissed both impeachment articles against Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, deeming them “unconstitutional.”
The trial against Mayorkas, long a target of Republican criticism over his handling of immigration policy and the southern border, lasted just three hours after senators were sworn in as jurors.
The votes to dismiss both articles and adjourn the trial were along party lines, 51-49.
House Republicans, back in February, approved two articles over what they called Mayorkas’ failed leadership. The first article alleged Mayorkas willfully and systemically refused to comply with the law on immigration policy and the second accused him of breaching public trust. The Cabinet secretary, the first to be impeached in nearly 150 years, had called both allegations “baseless.”
Leading up to the trial, Republicans were demanding a thorough consideration of the articles of impeachment take place while Democrats said they would seek to dismiss them quickly.
Such back-and-forth was apparent as proceedings kicked off in the Senate after lawmakers were sworn in as jurors.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., first asked for unanimous consent on a plan that would have allowed for debate time and for Republicans to raise various points of order before Democrats moved toward a motion to dismiss the charges.
Republicans quickly objected.
“Never before in the history of our republic has the Senate dismissed or tabled articles of impeachment when the impeached individual was alive and had not resigned,” Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., said as he rose to reject what Schumer proposed.
“I will not assist Senator Schumer in setting our Constitution ablaze and bulldozing 200 years of precedent,” Schmitt added.
Schumer responded that the first of the articles of impeachment “does not allege conduct that rises to the level of a high crime or misdemeanor” and “therefore is unconstitutional.”
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., tried to aside Schumer’s motion that the first article of impeachment against Mayorkas is unconstitutional.
“Our colleagues know that we are obligated to take these proceedings seriously,” McConnell said. “This is what our oath prescribes. It is what the history and precedent require and I would urge each of our colleagues to consider that this is what our framers actually envisioned.”
McConnell added, “This process must not be abused, it must not be short circuited. History will not judge this moment well.”
Republican senators tried several times to move into a closed session or adjourn the court of impeachment, but such efforts failed along party lines.
“The Senate Majority Leader has argued that Secretary Mayorkas’ defiance of federal immigration law and active aiding and abetting of the worst illegal alien invasion in American history does not constitute a high crime or misdemeanor,” Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said as he tried to move debate behind closed doors.
“He has presented no argument on that question. He has presented no briefing on that question … the only rational way to resolve this question is actually to debate it, to consider the Constitution and consider the law,” Cruz added.
All senators present for Wednesday’s proceedings were seated at their desks. At some points, lawmakers could be seen handing out candy or huddling in groups for conversation.
Mayorkas previously called the allegations “false” and “politically motivated.” Asked about the proceedings earlier Wednesday as the department rolled out a new campaign to child exploitation, the secretary said he was focused on his work.
“The Senate is going to do what the Senate considers to be appropriate as that proceeds,” Mayorkas said. “I’m here in New York City on Wednesday morning, fighting online child sexual exploitation and abuse. We are focused on our mission. Our mission is an imperative to keep everyone safe and secure.”
(NEW YORK) — Though he remains confined to a court room on most weekdays for his New York hush money trial, which began on Monday, former President Donald Trump is adapting his schedule and his message to try and boost his bid to return to the White House.
On Tuesday evening, at the end of the second day of jury selection in his trial, Trump visited a bodega in Harlem, the scene of a fatal stabbing two years ago, to criticize what he said were Democratic failures in public safety.
Trump singled out the Manhattan district attorney by name, echoing his repeated accusations that Democrats are soft on crime and that the charges against him are motivated by partisanship, which prosecutors reject, saying they are following the law. Trump denies all wrongdoing.
“It’s Alvin Bragg’s fault,” he claimed at the bodega. “He does nothing. He goes after guys like Trump, who did nothing wrong. Violent criminals, murderers — they know there are hundreds of murderers all over the city.”
He used his stop after court not only to take a jab at Bragg and his criminal trial, one of four he faces, but also to repeat his rhetoric about what he often describes on the trail as “crime-ridden” cities largely run by Democrats — like New York, his hometown, where he built his national profile before moving to Florida.
He has made similar claims about crime in Atlanta as he’s railed against Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, who is prosecuting him in Georgia related to his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss in the state.
The shop that Trump visited in Harlem on Tuesday, at the invitation of the Bodega Association, he said, was the scene of a homicide in 2022 when the shop’s then-clerk Jose Alba fatally stabbed someone whom Alba later said was attacking him and he was acting in self-defense.
Surveillance footage from inside the bodega showed the other man, Austin Simon, confronting Alba behind the cash register and shoving him before the two were drawn into a fight.
Alba was initially charged with murder. The case was controversial, and Bragg’s office later dropped the case against Alba, reportedly saying they had insufficient proof to proceed.
Despite Trump’s rhetoric about crime, statistics from New York City police show violent crime in the city has been falling.
Through March 17, homicides were down 19% from the same period in 2023, according to the data — though homicides previously surged 30% in 2020, during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Crime and public safety are key parts of Trump’s pitch to voters on the trail, along with attacking President Joe Biden for high inflation and immigration.
With the first of his criminal trials now underway, the former president has both complained about how his obligations in court are interfering with his campaign schedule and he has insisted he plans to campaign “all over” on the weekends, with rallies “all over the place.”
The Biden campaign isn’t directly commenting on the trial, though they have issued thinly veiled attacks through press releases and sought a contrast by having the president actively campaign in battlegrounds like Pennsylvania this week while Trump sits in court.
At his own campaign stop on Tuesday, Biden went after Trump for previously supporting tax cuts on the wealthy and said Trump “embodies” the “failure” of so-called trickle-down economics.
Biden’s team has also said that his campaign has been more active across swing states, even before Trump’s trial began.
“This is a trial that should have never been brought. … I should be right now in Pennsylvania, in Florida, in many other states — North Carolina, Georgia — campaigning,” Trump told reporters as he headed back to court on Tuesday, taking advantage of the omnipresent news coverage outside.
Speaking with the press at the Harlem bodega later on Tuesday, Trump repeated his frequent, baseless criticism that it’s an “election interference” to keep him off the trail.
In New York, he faces 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree related to money paid to adult film actress Stormy Daniels during his 2016 presidential bid, in order to stop Daniels from going public about what she claimed was a sexual encounter with him, which he denies. He has pleaded not guilty.
As jury selection is underway, Trump said at the bodega that “anybody that’s fair” is his ideal juror.
Asked how he feels about the seven jurors selected so far, he responded, “I’ll let you know in about two months.”
He dodged a question about whether he believes the jurors seated are fair, instead saying there shouldn’t be a jury in the first place.
Trump also claimed he has not violated the limited gag order imposed by Judge Juan Merchan overseeing the case — after the prosecution on Monday argued he did so by posting social media attacks on Daniels and his former attorney Michael Cohen, who are potential key witnesses.
“There shouldn’t be a gag order,” Trump said, calling it “unconstitutional.”
At his bodega stop, he was also asked about recent efforts by two GOP hard-line lawmakers to oust House Speaker Mike Johnson over Johnson’s support for voting on foreign aid.
“We’ll see what happens with that,” Trump said. “I think he’s a very good person.”
ABC News’ Gabriella Abdul-Hakim, Mary Bruce, Peter Charalambous, Bill Hutchinson and Molly Nagle contributed to this report.
