Politics

(WASHINGTON) — An Israeli attack on a UN school complex in central Gaza is raising alarm among U.S. officials after scores of civilians were reportedly killed, despite the apparent use of American-made precision munitions.

The Hamas-run Gaza Ministry of Health said Thursday’s airstrike on the school, which has become a makeshift shelter for thousands of displaced people inside the enclave, left at least 40 people dead, including more than a dozen children.

State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller said U.S. officials were in direct contact with the Israeli government about the strike, and its claim its forces were targeting “20 to 30 members of Hamas and other militant groups” and used a “precision strike to target only one part of the building without hitting areas where civilians were sheltering.”

But Miller expressed concern about the children reportedly among the dead.

“Certainly, if that it is accurate that 14 children were killed — those aren’t terrorists. And so the government of Israel has said that they’re going to release more information about this strike, including the names of those who died in it,” Miller said. “We expect them to be fully transparent in making that information public.”

In late May, another Israeli airstrike on two Hamas targets in Rafah sparked a fire that Gazan authorities say killed at least 45 Palestinians sheltering in a nearby encampment, marking the deadliest incident of Israel’s offensive on the enclave’s southernmost city.

In both that attack and Thursday’s strike on the school, weapons experts tell ABC News that fragments at the sites indicate that American-supplied munitions — GBU-39 small diameter bombs — were used.

Although these explosives are designed to have a more limited impact that other arms provided to Israel by the U.S., experts say small diameter munitions can still have a devastating and unpredictable impact in a densely populated area.

A spokesperson for the Israeli military, Daniel Hagari, said the strike in the early hours of Thursday was based on “concrete intelligence” that indicated that militants inside the school were involved in carrying out the Oct. 7 Hamas attack on Israel and were “planning more attacks against Israelis, some of them imminent.”

“We stopped a ticking time bomb,” Hagari said.

Miller could not confirm whether American-made weapons were used in Thursday’s attack but said that “on a number of occasions” U.S. officials had pressed Israel “to use the most precision weapon possible and the smallest weapon possible to achieve legitimate military gains.”

“If it bears true that this strike resulted in the death of 14 children, the results aren’t where they need to be,” Miller said.

A spokesperson for United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres condemned the strike, saying in a statement “UN premises are inviolable, including during armed conflict and must be protected by all parties at all times.”

Through the Israel-Hamas war, the Biden administration has acknowledged that civilian deaths are an unfortunate consequence of any armed conflict while maintaining that Israel has a right to defend itself, even in some instances involving targets like schools and hospitals that are also being used by combatants — a grey area of international humanitarian law.

However, the Biden administration’s view of what constitutes legitimate military gains may be shifting.

When the president announced the framework for cease-fire deal that would free the scores of hostages imprisoned inside Gaza, he also declared that Israel had degraded Hamas to the point that the militant group is “no longer capable of carrying out another Oct. 7.”

U.S. officials maintain that Israel must retain the ability to address imminent threats, as the Israeli government asserts it did by striking the school. Through the conflict, Israel has not made a consistent practice of sharing intelligence justifying its attacks with its allies or the public.

Still, the Biden administration has generally defended Israel’s strikes on civilian centers, noting that Hamas is known to use them as human shields for its fighters.

But Palestinians in Gaza say the end result is that they are left with no refuge from the horrors of war.

Muhammad Bahar, 42, says he was sleeping in the basement of a building in the school complex when it was hit by a missile overnight.

“I can’t believe I’m still alive,” he told ABC News as he stood beside the rubble.

“They said go to [United Nations Relief Works Agency] schools because they are safe. Since the beginning of the war we have been here,” he said. “But this is what happened.”

ABC News’ Diaa Ostaz, Morgan Winsor, Helena Skinner and Chris Looft contributed to this report. 

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Some supporters of Nikki Haley, a group President Joe Biden’s campaign has been courting following her March exit from the GOP presidential primary, are reacting to president’s executive action at the southern border with many split on if it influences how they will cast their ballots in November.

The executive action limits the number of migrants that would be allowed to claim asylum at the southern U.S. border. Also, it immediately sends them back to their country of origin to wait until the daily average — 2,500 — goes down and, once it goes down, they would be able to claim asylum.

For many of these Haley voters, action on immigration and the border were among top issues of concern in 2024 and came two weeks after the Biden campaign met with some Haley voters who expressed the issues they cared the most about heading into the general election.

Both Biden and former President Donald Trump are hoping to woo Haley supporters — a key group of voters who could help either candidate edge ahead in what is expected to be a close race in November.

ABC News spoke with seven Haley supporters to gauge their reactions to the Biden executive action. Some of these voters took part in the call that occurred between Haley voters and the Biden campaign in May. Others were found through social media.

David Hale, a 25-year-old in Fulton County, Georgia who voted for Haley, told ABC News that he welcomed Biden’s immigration executive action and that this move could help Biden with some undecided Republicans.

“While I hope this is not the sole action taken by the Biden administration to secure the border, this executive order is a welcome change and sorely needed,” Hale said to ABC News. “MAGA Republicans, under the direction of Donald Trump, torpedoed the recent bipartisan border bill, and I commend President Biden for continuing to take action despite that obstacle”

Hale added that “this move will help him with Republicans who feel disaffected by Trump.”

However, some view Biden’s rule as coming too late — a message many Republicans in Washington have expressed as well.

“Personally, I found it to be too little, too late,” said Jackson, a Haley supporter from Boca Raton, Florida, who didn’t want his last name to be used. “Biden has had three years in the White House to do something about this. I would have preferred action a long time ago, but it is better than nothing.

Jackson said he hoped the move influenced Biden’s larger border policy.

“I’m hoping that the majority of Democrats, Republicans and independents wanting border solutions will continue to push him to the center on this issue.”

Roger Stewart, 63, who served in the military and resides in North Carolina, told ABC News that he was pleased with Biden’s executive action and said it opens the possibility of voting for Biden in November.

“I’m fundamentally Republican, centrist, and I’m in a swing state, so I want my vote to count,” Stewart said.

Stewart added that Biden’s continued outreach to undecided Haley voters like him is positive, adding that Trump has not done enough to win their votes.

“He’s made that choice not to do any outreach and I personally think that’s a mistake, but it’s insulting to us, honestly,” Stewart said.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Immigration policy will be a major factor in November elections. And a few months ago, it looked like lawmakers might have a bipartisan immigration reform bill in the works.

The bill, from senators like Republican James Lankford, had a number of provisions border hawks had been wanting in place for years. In particular, they wanted to end the practice of what they call “catch and release” – where migrants are arrested at the border and released from the government’s custody to appear in court later.

The law in America is that if you reach land you can generally apply for asylum. If you’re fleeing persecution or violence, you can ask for refuge here. But a person must be on American soil to do it.

All along the southern border there are official border crossings. They are called “points of entry” and every day hundreds of people get to walk across the bridge and into an office or other location and formally ask for asylum.

However, barely a thousand people a day are invited across the border to do this. Everyone else is told “the line is too long, we’ll get back to you on our app, maybe weeks or months from now. Just wait there.”

There are thousands more people who feel they don’t have that kind of time. So every day they come across the border illegally. Through the desert, across the Rio Grande. They often present themselves to border agents and immediately say “asylum” because they know the law. They know they get to jump-start the proceedings and perhaps get the help they desperately need.

This bipartisan bill was supposed to disincentive this practice by allowing the government to turn more people away. And crucially, by funding more of these formal asylum hearings for those who wait in line. It would pay for more judges, more court staffers.

But after clamoring for it for years, House Republicans killed the bill at the request of former President Donald Trump. He apparently told them not to hand Democrats a bipartisan victory.

This week, President Biden issued an executive order, which he said now gave him the power to tell migrants that just because they made it to American soil, it doesn’t mean they get to apply for asylum. If people enter the country illegally, starting now they’ll be sent back.

This went into effect at 12:01 a.m. Tuesday morning and Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas spoke with “Start Here” to explain more about Biden’s executive action.

START HERE: This morning, we’ve got someone here to explain the administration’s thinking on this. Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas joins us now. Thanks for being with us.

MAYORKAS: Thanks very much for having me, Brad.

START HERE: First off, can you just walk us through these executive actions? How is this gonna work?

MAYORKAS: Yeah. So, here is how it works: It will be in effect immediately. And what it provides is that individuals encountered in between the ports of entry at our southern border will be barred from seeking asylum. The way in which they can seek asylum now, with this order in effect, is by using the CBP One app and making an appointment to arrive at the port of entry, at a port of entry in a safe and orderly way, or accessing one of our many other lawful pathways that we have established for people to receive humanitarian relief without placing their lives in the hands of smugglers.

So if those lawful pathways are not used and people arrive at our southern border, they will, in between the ports of entry, they will be barred from asylum. If the number of people we encounter averages, for seven consecutive calendar days, less than 1,500 then we will lift this bar and we have the right to reinstitute the bar if the numbers average 2,500 people encountered a day for seven consecutive days.

START HERE: So 2,500 is the point where you guys say, ‘we’re going to shut this, this type of asylum off,’ — and then 1,500. It needs to get down to that point before you open it up again.

MAYORKAS: If it’s below 1,500 for seven consecutive days, we will reopen 14 days after the seventh day. If the numbers climb back up for seven consecutive days to an average of 2,500 or more, we will reinstitute. We can reinstitute this asylum bar.

START HERE: When’s the last time that this country averaged 1,500 crossings a day like that?

MAYORKAS: It has been quite some time, but then again.

START HERE: But you haven’t been secretary while it’s been that low, I believe. Right? It’s never been that low.

MAYORKAS: That is correct. But Brad, what we have done over the past three years is build lawful pathways and, in fact, more than a million people have accessed those lawful pathways in the past year. So, asylum is very much still alive, but we are deterring irregular migration in between the ports of entry and trying to cut out the smugglers, which is not only a matter of criminal justice, but a humanitarian imperative.

START HERE: I get that, and I get that you guys are trying to funnel people toward the quote/unquote, like ‘right way of doing things.’ But why, how is this not just a – can’t you guys just say this is a permanent ban in effect, like the whole idea that this is temporary seems to be out of touch with what the numbers have told us for years now.

MAYORKAS: I don’t, I don’t think that’s that’s true. And I think you are, you know, frankly, Brad, predicting a landscape in the future. And that landscape is very dynamic and evolving, and it is certainly our hope that with our continued press on lawful pathways, our continued attack against the smugglers and the cartels and this bar that we will be able to drive lawful pathways successfully.

And by the way, we’re doing so not alone, but with our partners throughout the region.

START HERE: Hey, there are exceptions here, right? Can we talk about this? I believe there are exceptions for minors.

The big question right now appears to be if a minor, if an unaccompanied minor still can perhaps get into the country and apply for asylum, does that encourage more parents to send their kids across the border like it’s almost preferable in that case to send them alone?

MAYORKAS: Brad. Brad, the reality is that desperate parents are sending their unaccompanied children now, and we felt that it was, the humanitarian, correct humanitarian thing to do, adhering to our values to exclude unaccompanied children from operation of this rule. There are other exceptions as well. For example, somebody with an emergent acute medical condition. Somebody who’s suffered a severe form of trafficking. These are humanitarian measures that we have taken.

START HERE: Can we talk about the court challenges that will inevitably come with this? Are you guys invoking now the same sections of the Immigration and Nationality Act that Trump did for some of his policies, that it was President Biden that rescinded these policies? Right? So how will you defend this in court?

MAYORKAS: Brad, we will defend this in court. We do anticipate that the ACLU has indicated it intends to challenge this rule. We believe that this rule is lawful. We have only taken what we believe to be lawful actions.

This is quite different than what Trump did. Trump issued a ban across the board, an unequivocal ban, without exception. We have, as you noted correctly, there are exceptions. In addition, we have the lawful pathways that did not exist during the Trump administration.

START HERE: And then lastly, you mentioned our partners in the region. Does this put Mexico now in an impossible position? Because under President Trump, they were dealing with, like, all these people who have been told to remain in Mexico.

And we saw like the intense public support that they had to get from Mexican taxpayers. We’ve tried to be, like you said, partners with Mexico. We rely on them for so many things. Are we now telling them, ‘Hey, you’re about to have a lot more people sitting along your border, Deal with it.’?

MAYORKAS: No. The former president threatened Mexico. We are working very closely with Mexico, in partnership with Mexico and other countries, in what we anticipate and what we hope for is that fewer people will cross into Mexico, and traverse Mexico to our southern border, because of the operation of this rule.

START HERE: That’s really all I have for you unless you want to add something.

MAYORKAS: We are taking action, in the wake of congressional inaction. And what really needs to occur is the United States Congress needs to act to fix what everyone agrees is a broken immigration system.

This regulation is no substitute for legislation. The president cannot take executive action and provide this department and other departments in the government with additional resources. Only Congress can do that. The Senate’s bipartisan legislation would have provided us with much-needed resources and much-needed fixes to our statutes that underpin our immigration system.

START HERE: A lot more conversation still to be had about this policy, especially in an election year. Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, really appreciate you taking the time, really appreciate you spelling all this out. Thank you so much.

MAYORKAS: Thank you, Brad.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — President Joe Biden was adamant that U.S. weapons would not be used to strike Moscow or the Kremlin after he authorized Ukraine to use them in Russia during an exclusive interview with ABC News anchor David Muir at the Normandy American Cemetery on the 80th anniversary of D-Day.

Muir asked Biden if U.S.-made weapons have already been used in Russia since he signed off on their use, limiting use to areas near the Russian-occupied Kharkiv region. The president did not directly answer, but made clear they would not be used to target Russia’s capital city or seat of government.

“They’re authorized to be used in proximity to the border when they’re being used on the other side of the border to attack specific targets in Ukraine,” Biden told Muir of U.S. weapons. “We’re not authorizing strikes 200 miles into Russia and we’re not authorizing strikes on Moscow, on the Kremlin.”

Muir asked the president about Russian President Vladimir Putin’s comments overnight, that “the supply of high-precision weapons to Ukraine for strikes on Russian territory is direct participation in this war.”

“Does that concern you?” Muir asked Biden.

“I’ve known him for over 40 years. He’s concerned me for 40 years. He’s not a decent man,” Biden said. “He’s a dictator, and he’s struggling to make sure he holds his country together while still keeping this assault going. We’re not talking about giving them weapons to strike Moscow, to strike the Kremlin, to strike against– just across the border, where they’re receiving significant fire from conventional weapons used by the Russians to go into Ukraine to kill ra– Ukrainians.”

For more from Muir’s interview with President Biden, watch ABC’s “World News Tonight with David Muir” at 6:30 p.m. ET.

Biden is in France to commemorate the day Allied forces stormed the beaches of Normandy in 1944, setting off a chain of events that led to the fall of Nazi Germany and the end of World War II. Later Thursday, Biden plans to meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to discuss the war effort.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Former President Donald Trump’s campaign has begun the process of formally requesting information from a small handful of potential running mates, ABC News has learned, marking a significant escalation in the process that will result in Trump choosing a candidate for vice president.

Among those who have been asked by the campaign for vetting paperwork include North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum and Sens. Marco Rubio and J.D. Vance, sources tell ABC News. The quiet outreach by campaign officials intensified last month, while Trump was consumed with his criminal hush-money trial, the sources said.

Others are likely to be considered for the No. 2 job, but the initial asks reflect who tops Trump’s list at this point. Campaign officials say the final decision will be Trump’s.

“Anyone claiming to know who or when President Trump will choose his VP is lying, unless the person is named Donald J. Trump,” said Brian Hughes, a senior adviser for the Trump campaign.

Trump campaign officials have also requested information from Sen. Tim Scott, Reps. Byron Donalds and Elise Stefanik and Ben Carson, sources said. But it’s unclear how extensive the requests were.

Representatives for Burgum and Vance did not respond to ABC’s request for comment. Rubio denied that he had received any reach out from Trump campaign officials.

“I haven’t talked to them about vice president,” Rubio told ABC’s Rachel Scott on Wednesday.

While the former president hasn’t yet indicated who he will pick to be his vice president, he has said he plans to make his announcement closer to the Republican National Convention, which is in July.

Over the past few weeks, those under consideration as a possible vice president for Trump have increased their public profile by appearing on cable networks, defending the former president during his hush-money trial and with some even making an appearance at court with Trump.

Burgum was the only known potential veepstakes contender to appear at the courthouse during jury deliberations for Trump’s criminal trial, which happened only after Trump campaign representatives asked him to provide background information to be considered in the running-mate search.

Last week, following television appearances outside the courthouse, Burgum joined Trump and his son, Donald Trump Jr., as the jury deliberated. Two hours later, Trump was convicted.

Burgum’s appearance signaled a sign of loyalty in the next initial steps and strength as a partner through tumultuous waters.

Vance also appeared as a surrogate at the courthouse in Manhattan on May 13.

Often asked about the possibility of serving as vice president under Trump, Burgum, Rubio and Vance have often deflected answering the question head-on, but have said they would do what the Trump campaign asked of them, which has included being campaign surrogates and raising money for the former president’s campaign.

Discussions have taken place with the Rubio team about how to address the constitutional issue that may prevent residents from the same state from being on the same presidential ticket — including the possibility of the Florida senator relocating for the role, sources said.

When recently asked on NBC if he wanted the job of vice president, Rubio said, “I’ll do whatever the campaign asked me to do.”

During a phone interview on Newsmax on Tuesday night, Trump was asked if he was close to making a decision on picking a running mate and complimented Vance, Rubio and Burgum.

“I thought Tim Scott didn’t run as good of a race as he’s capable of running for himself, but as a surrogate for me, he’s unbelievable. He’s been incredible,” Trump said.

“Gov. Burgum from North Dakota has been incredible. Marco Rubio has been great. J.D. Vance has been great. We’ve had so many great people out there,” he said.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott is helping with an effort aimed to draw Black and Hispanic voters in battleground states — a key voting bloc as the election approaches — to former President Donald Trump through a new $14 million outreach effort.

Scott, who suspended his GOP presidential campaign last November, announced the campaign from the Great Opportunity PAC, a conservative super PAC that was formed in December 2023.

Although Scott promised $14 million in the initiative, the PAC currently has about $50,000 in its bank account, according to its most current Federal Election Commission filing. A representative for Scott did not immediately return ABC News’ request for comment regarding the funds.

While the super PAC has yet to disclose the source of its new $14 million, a big chunk of the $50,000 the group has in the bank came from a super PAC that used to support Scott’s now-suspended presidential campaign, Trust in the Mission PAC. During his presidential campaign, the pro-Scott super PAC raised more than $21 million from major GOP donors.

Scott said the funds in this new effort will go toward outreach to the Black and Hispanic community in Arizona, Nevada, Georgia, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin — considered battleground states in 2024 — in an effort to sway them to vote for Trump in November.

The campaigns of both Trump and President Joe Biden have worked to court Black and Hispanic voters — a key demographic that the candidates need to harness for a November win.

During a briefing on the initiative on Tuesday, Scott told reporters that Black and Hispanic voters “are wide open for a political shift.”

Of the $14 million budget that has been allocated for the initiative, $9 million will be dedicated to voter contact, $4.7 million will be put toward media and the rest will be dedicated to research, data and operations.

Scott and other elected officials are expected to help promote the effort.

“There was always an undercurrent of conservatism in the Black community obviously, in the social and faith spaces that we felt the most and so we knew that there was potential there for us to spread the message about conservatism,” a source familiar with Scott’s plan said.

During the 2022 midterms, the GOP saw gains from the Latino community, particularly in Florida where Miami-Dade County, once a Democratic stronghold, flipped red.

In an ABC News/Ipsos poll last month, 74% of Black people supported Biden, 13% supported Trump and 13% supported someone else. That support of Biden is down 13 percentage points from the 2020 exit poll that showed 87% of Black people voted for Biden. However, the amount of support Biden lost appears to have shifted to other candidates rather than Trump.

Scott’s initiative comes as the Biden campaign counters the narrative that he’s losing support among Black voters.

In May, Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris traveled to Philadelphia where they courted Black voters. Also last month, Trump held a rally in South Bronx to attract Black and Hispanic voters.

The South Carolina senator’s effort also comes as he reportedly continues to be considered a possible running mate for Trump.

The Biden campaign blasted the effort by Scott and said that Biden is working hard to earn the Black vote.

“President Biden is on the campaign trail showing up — himself — to earn, and not ask for, Black Americans’ support,” Biden campaign senior spokesperson Sarafina Chitika said in a statement. “That is what leadership looks like.”

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(GEORGIA) — A Georgia court of appeals has halted Donald Trump’s criminal case in Fulton County pending resolution of an appeal of the disqualification ruling that allowed District Attorney Fani Willis to stay on the case.

“The proceedings below in the Superior Court of Fulton County are hereby stayed pending the outcome of these appeals,” the order states, as it relates to the eight defendants who appealed the order.

The court previously set a tentative Oct. 4 date for oral arguments on the appeal.

The Fulton County District Attorney’s office declined to comment on Wednesday’s development.

In a statement to ABC News, the lawyer for defendant Mike Roman, who first filed the disqualification motion and unearthed the relationship between Willis and Wade, said she is “happy.”

“We are happy that the Court of Appeals agrees with us that this issue is so important to this entire case that it decided to stop the case from moving forward in the trial court until the issue of whether or not Willis must be removed from the case can be decided,” Ashleigh Merchant said in a statement to ABC News. “Mr. Roman is innocent and we hope that this misuse of the justice system will finally come to an end when a disinterested prosecutor takes over the case. “

Trump and 18 others pleaded not guilty last August to all charges in a sweeping racketeering indictment for alleged efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election in the state of Georgia. Defendants Kenneth Chesebro, Sidney Powell, Jenna Ellis and Scott Hall subsequently took plea deals in exchange for agreeing to testify against other defendants.

The former president has blasted the district attorney’s investigation as being politically motivated.

In a statement, Trump’s attorney in Georgia said the court “properly” stayed the case.

“The Georgia Court of Appeals has properly stayed all proceedings against President Trump in the trial court pending its decision on our interlocutory appeal which argues the case should be dismissed and Fulton County DA Willis should be disqualified for her misconduct,” his attorney Steve Sadow said.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s chief of staff is stepping down, the Pentagon announced Wednesday, five months after Austin and his top aide faced blowback for not telling the White House that he was in the hospital for treatment of prostate cancer.

Officials told reporters that Kelly Magsamen’s resignation had nothing to do with the hospitalization scandal in January, which remains under review by the Defense Department inspector general.

A separate internal review led by Austin’s office concluded there was no indication of “ill intent or an attempt to obfuscate” the situation and did not assign blame.

Austin was diagnosed with prostate cancer late last year and initially used personal leave to undergo what the Pentagon later said was a minimally invasive procedure. But subsequent complications from that procedure resulted in a second hospitalization on New Year’s Day. The White House didn’t learn about either event until Jan. 4, a day before he was released.

Austin has since apologized for keeping his health quiet from the White House, Congress and the public. As President Joe Biden’s top civilian military adviser, Austin oversees U.S. military policy commands U.S. forces at Biden’s behest.

Austin also insists that at each point when he was unable to perform his duties — including during surgery — that his deputy was officially in charge and had full access to communications with the White House — even if the White House didn’t know it.

“We did not handle this right. And I did not handle this right,” he told the House Armed Services Committee in February. “And as you know, I have apologized … including directly to the president. And I take full responsibility.”

Republican critics have questioned the validity of Austin’s internal review which said staff concerns about medical privacy and a rapidly changing situation were mostly to blame. The public summary did not, however, answer key questions about when individual members of his staff became aware of his condition and whether the defense secretary himself was advised to alert the White House but chose not to.

An independent investigation by the Pentagon’s inspector general has not been released, and officials said they cannot say when it might be made public.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — The Senate is poised to vote Wednesday on legislation that would codify the right to access contraceptives nationwide, as Democrats look to put reproductive care at the front of their messaging agenda in the lead up to the November elections.

The bill, put forward by a group of Senate Democrats in the aftermath of the 2022 Supreme Court decision that overturned the constitutional right to abortion, would protect a person’s right to access contraceptives and a doctor’s right to provide information and access to them.

“This is a simple bill and a simple vote: if you believe all women deserve to have contraception then you should vote for this bill. That’s all there is to it,” Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a floor speech on Wednesday morning.

The Right to Contraception Act will need 60 votes to advance during a vote scheduled for late Wednesday afternoon. It’s expected to fail, largely at the hands of Senate Republicans, who are dismissing the legislation as a political ploy by Democrats and are opposing what they see as overly broad language that could be interpreted to include some abortion-related medications.

“It’s not a serious attempt to legislate this is just a show vote in anticipation of the election,” said Sen. John Cornyn, a Texas Republican who is running to become the Senate Republican leader this fall. “Democrats think they can win this case, this election based on reproductive rights and somehow they’re suggesting that contraception is in jeopardy, which is just blatantly false.”

It is clear Democrats are looking to put the squeeze on Republicans on reproductive rights ahead of the 2024 election, after winning big on the issue in the last election cycle.

Wednesday’s vote is the first of a number of votes on reproductive rights related legislation Schumer has promised in the coming weeks.

Already, he’s teed up the chamber to take a vote next week on a bill aimed at protecting access to IVF in the aftermath of an Alabama Supreme Court ruling that threw access to the procedure into jeopardy. That will also almost certainly fail at the hands of Republicans.

Twenty-two Senate Republicans said Democrats are trying to stir up commotion over a non-existent threat in a joint statement on Tuesday.

“There is no threat to access to contraception, with is legal in every state and required by law to be offered at no cost by health insurers, and it’s disgusting that Democrats are fearmongering on this important issue to score cheap political points,” they said.

The right to access birth control was enshrined in a 1965 Supreme Court ruling.

But proponents of the Right to Contraception Act say that if the Supreme Court could overturn Roe v. Wade, which granted protections for abortions, it could also act to overturn access to birth control.

Justice Clarence Thomas, in a concurring opinion to the Supreme Court decisions that overturned Roe V. Wade, said that the court “should reconsider” some of its previous decisions, including the one that assured legal access to birth control.

“Whenever a Supreme Court justice, especially in the MAGA far right, says he wants to revisit a case, you can bet that he’s looking to overturn,” Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, said.

Schumer echoed her warning.

“A few years ago it was Roe. A few years from now it could be something else,” Schumer said in floor remarks. “We are kidding ourselves if we think the hard right is done with their attacks on reproductive rights.”

Republicans also say they’re worried that the bill includes language that could potentially violate religious freedom of providers or be interpreted to include certain kinds of drugs that some say could induce an abortion. Democrats refute that the legislation does either of those things.

Though most Republicans are expected to vote against advancing the bill, they are taking pains to assure voters they do support access to birth control.

They will offer their own legislation, led by Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst, which also protects access to contraceptives but limits certain types of medications that Republicans find objectionable.

In a memo released by the National Republican Senatorial Committee Tuesday and obtained by ABC News, Republicans were encouraged to tout their support for Ernst’s legislation and for birth control in general.

“Republicans support access to birth control. Democrats are trying to make this a campaign issue and scare voters because they can’t talk about their failed policies on every other issue. Senator Ernst’s bill lays out commonsense solutions that Republicans should strongly consider embracing on the campaign trail,” the memo concluded.

ABC News’ Tal Axelrod and Isabella Murray contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(FRANCE) — President Joe Biden arrived in France early Wednesday morning where he looks to highlight America’s world stage leadership — past and present — as conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza remain top focuses for him and allies, the White House said.

Biden will begin his “action-packed” trip commemorating the 80th anniversary of D-Day on Thursday, the day Allied forces stormed the beaches of Normandy, France, in World War II, according to the White House.

While there, he will also meet with American veterans who “exhibited remarkable bravery, skill and intrepidity” and deliver remarks touting “the continued impact of their contributions” during the war, White House national security communications adviser John Kirby told reporters Tuesday.

And, in contrast to rival Donald Trump, Biden plans to visit the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery, where thousands of American troops, many of whom fought in World War I, are buried. (Trump did not attend a ceremony there while he was in France in 2018.)

“The message is simple: that the service and the sacrifice of American troops in wars overseas should never be forgotten,” Kirby said of Biden visiting the cemetery. “And our commitment to honor that sacrifice should never waver, and our obligations to those they leave behind, even though it may be generations ago, can never be lessened.”

He said Americans have a “somber and sober” obligation to acknowledge fallen soldiers because “they didn’t sacrifice their futures for nothing.”

On Friday, Biden will deliver remarks on defending freedom and democracy at Pointe du Hoc, a 100-foot cliff Army Rangers scaled under gunfire to seize German artillery that could have been fired upon American forces landing on Omaha Beach down below.

“He’ll talk about the stakes of that moment. An existential fight between dictatorship and freedom,” White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan told reporters. “He’ll talk about the men who scaled those cliffs and how they put themselves behind — they put the country ahead of themselves.

“And he’ll talk about the dangers of isolationism and how if we back [down?] to dictators, fail to stand up to them, they keep going and, ultimately, America and the world pays a greater price,” Sullivan added.

Women veterans return to Normandy for 80th D-Day anniversary
While Biden is in France, Kirby said Russia’s war in Ukraine and Israel’s war with Hamas in Gaza will be major points of discussion.

“This visit will come at an important moment as Ukraine continues to face down Russian threats in its east and north, and as we are working to address the humanitarian crisis in the Middle East,” Kirby said.

He said that discussion will be had both in France and at the G7 Summit in Italy next week, on how the U.S. and its allies can pursue the “worthwhile endeavor” of using frozen Russian assets to help Ukraine, particularly with reconstruction.

Sullivan said Biden will meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in both Normandy and on the sidelines of the G7 and will discuss “how we can continue and deepen our support for Ukraine.”

Video: Biden gives permission to Ukraine to strike inside Russian territory with US weapons
He said the two meetings will give Zelenskyy and Biden — who will miss Ukraine’s peace summit in Switzerland this month in favor of a glitzy fundraiser with former President Barack Obama, George Clooney and Julia Roberts — the opportunity “to go deep on every aspect and every issue in the war.”

Vice President Kamala Harris and Sullivan will represent the U.S. at the peace summit.

Biden is also scheduled to go to Paris, where French President Emmanuel Macron will welcome him for a state visit, which will include a dinner and a meeting, during which they will discuss world issues, the White House said.

As part of the state visit, the two men will announce new steps they are taking to deepen Indo-Pacific cooperation, boost clean energy investments, increase nuclear energy capacity, and how the U.S. and France are working together to ensure the 2024 Paris Olympics are safe, Kirby said. He would not get into specifics.

Despite the U.S. and its allies walking in lockstep on many issues, including Ukraine, one issue where there has become some separation is the Israel-Hamas war, including with some nations unilaterally recognizing a Palestinian state, Kirby said.

“Many nations have different views, of course, about what’s going on in Gaza,” Kirby admitted, adding that Biden “respects that, he appreciates that. It’s the very idea of sovereignty, and territorial integrity and the precepts of the U.N. Charter that apply, and he respects all that. It doesn’t mean we have to agree on everything.”

“He doesn’t make national security decisions based on popularity and he doesn’t do it based on contrary opinions outside the United States,” Kirby added.

But, overall, Kirby said Biden’s engagements in France will highlight the importance of American leadership on the global stage.

“When he talks about American leadership, it’s not an arrogant leadership,” Kirby said. “It’s a humble leadership.”

“He recognizes that, for as powerful as we are, as much good as we can do, we need help,” Kirby said. “Our allies and partners bring things to the endeavor that we can’t always bring.”

Kirby added: “We send a much stronger signal about lofty words like peace and freedom and stability and security when we’re working in concert with one another.”

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.