(WASHINGTON) — The department of Veterans Affairs will soon provide in vitro fertilization to eligible veterans who are single or in same-sex marriages — coming after criticism of the agency’s lack of reproductive benefits for some veterans.
The VA announced Monday that it will also provide IVF to veterans using donated sperm or eggs.
This announcement comes after lawsuits filed against the Department of Defense and VA in New York and Boston last year argued that some VA policies, including IVF care, were exclusionary to LGBTQ+ members of the military.
VA Secretary Denis McDonough said in a statement that the expansion of care has long been a priority for the VA. He added that “raising a family is a wonderful thing.”
“I’m proud that VA will soon help more Veterans have that opportunity,” McDonough said in the statement.
Before Monday’s announcement, the VA only provided IVF care to veterans who were legally married and could biologically produce their sperm and eggs. Federal law states that all veterans who receive IVF must have fertility issues because of a health condition caused by their military service.
Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., has worked to ensure more inclusive reproductive assistance for veterans. She previously introduced the Veteran Families Health Services Act of 2023 intended to improve the reproductive assistance offered under DOD and VA health care for veterans.
Following the VA’s announcement, Murray applauded the VA for its decision. Murray said she will seek unanimous consent to push legislation forward to ensure IVF care and family-building assistance for all U.S. service members.
“VA’s announcement is an important step forward that will help more veterans start and grow their families — and it’s especially timely as IVF is under attack from the far right,” Murray said in a statement.
Under current policy, VA health care covers up to $2,000 in adoption expenses, but does not cover surrogacy for veterans who have a service-connected disability that caused infertility.
McDonough said they are “working urgently” to implement these new policies as soon as possible.
“VA is taking immediate steps to implement this policy and expects to be ready to deliver this care to Veterans nationwide in the coming weeks,” the VA said in its statement.
(WASHINGTON) — With new aid for Ukraine stalled in Congress since December, the White House on Tuesday announced it had cobbled together another $300 million in military assistance to use as a stopgap measure.
“The package includes munitions and rounds to help Ukraine hold the line against Russia’s brutal attacks for the next couple of weeks,” President Joe Biden said in a meeting with Polish President Andrzej Duda and Prime Minister Donald Tusk at the White House, adding, “we must act before it literally is too late.”
National security adviser Jake Sullivan detailed the package at White House briefing, saying that the aid comes as Ukraine “does not have enough ammunition to fire back.”
“So today, on behalf of President Biden, I’m announcing an emergency package of security assistance of $300 million worth of weapons and equipment to address some of Ukraine’s pressing needs,” Sullivan said.
The package will include anti-aircraft missiles, ammunition, artillery rounds, and anti-armor systems.
“It is assistance that Ukraine desperately needs to hold the line against Russian attacks and to push back against the continuing Russian onslaught in the East and in other parts of,” Sullivan said.
When pressed by ABC News’ Karen Travers about how quickly this aid could get to Ukraine, Sullivan said “we can move this stuff fast.”
“We have proven that over time, we have built a logistical pipeline and backbone to be able to do that,” Sullivan said. “I can’t give you a precise estimate for operational reasons, but it’s going to move very quickly.”
This funding comes as a $95 billion foreign aid package that includes nearly $60 million in funds for Ukraine has been stalled in the House for nearly a month. That bill passed the Democrat-controlled Senate in early February, but House Speaker Mike Johnson has not brought the package to the floor for a vote.
Sullivan said that past contracts were negotiated “well,” leaving more savings on the table for this new aid package.
“And to put a fine point on it, we’re able to use these cost savings to make this modest amount of new security assistance available right now without impacting U.S. military readiness, and the president has directed his team to use these cost savings.”
But Sullivan also made clear that this package did not supplant further funding that would come from congressional action.
“It goes without saying, this package does not displace and should not delay the critical need to pass the bipartisan national security bill,” Sullivan said.
One official told ABC News that this package was one calling this drawdown package a “one-time shot.”
Sullivan also told Karen that the administration does not anticipate another opportunity like this.
“Well, as my friends at DOD like to remind me, we can’t plan on cost savings. So, we can’t plan on any future drawdowns being available on the basis of cost savings. So, we’re not anticipating that. It’s not built into what we’re looking for.”
ABC News’ Alexandra Hutzler contributed to this report.
(WASHINGTON) — Former President Donald Trump says one of his first acts if elected to a second term would be to “free” people convicted for their roles in the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, whom Trump continues to claim are “wrongfully imprisoned.”
He made that promise, presumably about using the presidential pardon power, on his social media platform on Monday night. It’s the latest example of how he has repeatedly defended those charged and convicted of crimes for their conduct at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
Trump didn’t specify how many of the rioters he would pardon, though he said last year that “I am inclined to pardon many of them. I can’t say for every single one, because a couple of them, probably they got out of control.”
The Department of Justice announced last week that, to date, nearly 1,400 people have been arrested and charged in connection with Jan. 6, with nearly 800 of them pleading guilty.
Of those charged, 127 people are accused of using a deadly or dangerous weapon or causing serious bodily injury to an officer, according to the DOJ.
Nearly 500 of the defendants have received prison sentences so far, though most of those sentenced to periods of incarceration will have already been released by January 2025, when Trump would return to the White House if reelected.
Trump has downplayed the violence that ensued that day, referring to the defendants as “J6 hostages,” calling for their release and appearing at fundraisers supporting them.
At recent events, right before Trump walks on stage, his campaign has been playing “Justice for All” by the so-called “J6 Prison Choir” — a group of men incarcerated for their roles on Jan. 6 — singing the “Star Spangled Banner” as Trump recites the Pledge of Allegiance.
The DOJ continues to arrest additional defendants accused of committing violence at the Capitol on a near-daily basis.
Among those that have received the highest sentences for their involvement in Jan. 6 Capitol attack are former Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio, sentenced to 22 years in prison, far-right group Oath Keepers leader Stewart Rhodes, sentenced to 18 years in prison for seditious conspiracy, Peter Schwartz of Pennsylvania who was sentenced to more than 14 years, including on assault and civil disorder, and retired New York City police officer Thomas Webster, who was sentenced to 10 years in prison after assaulting a Washington, D.C., officer that day.
The Biden campaign criticized Trump’s latest support for Jan. 6 defendants, claiming he’s “encouraging political violence” to “hold on to power.”
“The American people haven’t forgotten the violent attack at our Capitol on January 6 – they know Trump is too dangerous to be let anywhere near the Oval Office again, and they’ll turn out to protect our democracy and keep Trump out of the White House this November,” Biden campaign spokesperson Sarafina Chitika wrote in a statement.
ABC News’ Libby Cathey and Alexander Mallin contributed to this report.
(WASHINGTON) — Republican Rep. Ken Buck, who already announced he would not be seeking reelection, announced Tuesday he will leave Congress at the end of next week.
“It has been an honor to serve the people of Colorado’s 4th District in Congress for the past 9 years,” Buck said in a statement. “I want to thank them for their support and encouragement through the years.”
Buck’s departure will narrow House Speaker Mike Johnson’s already razor-thin majority.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
(WASHINGTON) — Both Joe Biden and Donald Trump may well earn enough delegates to clinch the nominations for their respective parties on Tuesday, when four states and one territory will report election results.
Should Trump be able to mathematically cross the Republican National delegate threshold then, the 2024 Republican race would be one of the shortest highly contested presidential primaries since the modern nomination process took shape in the 1970s.
Biden and Trump becoming the presumptive presidential nominees will also officially begin a nearly eight-month-long general election battle that has, in some ways, already been underway for several weeks.
The rematch between the president and former president is expected to revolve around the same swing states and similar issues as in 2020, with Biden arguing that Trump is an anti-democratic candidate who would pull the country back from its progress and erode rights like abortion access, corruption the nation’s “soul” — as Trump, running again on a MAGA message, hammers Biden over high inflation and immigration and contends his style would ensure more stability.
But first, both candidates have to finish winning their nominations, which is done by earning delegates based on the amount of votes they receive.
Presidential primary elections are being held in three states on Tuesday: Georgia, Mississippi and Washington. Hawaii will hold its GOP caucuses after earlier holding its Democratic caucus.
Biden could be declared the presumptive nominee first, after polls close in Mississippi at 8 p.m. EST.
For Democrats, 254 delegates are at stake on Tuesday. Thus far, Biden has won 1,868 delegates (including six allocated earlier in the day from the Northern Mariana Islands) according to ABC News’ current estimate. To win the nomination, 1,968 delegates are needed — and Biden just needs to win 100 more delegates to reach that threshold.
The earliest Trump could mathematically be declared the presumptive nominee is after polls close in Washington state later in the night, at 11 p.m. EST.
A Republican candidate needs to earn 1,215 delegates to earn the party’s nomination. Trump had 1,078 delegates heading into Tuesday’s round of contests, according to ABC News’ current estimate, so he needs 137 more to cross the threshold.
For Republicans, 161 delegates are up for grabs on Tuesday.
Trump’s last major remaining rival for the GOP nomination, former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley, suspended her campaign one day after Super Tuesday last week, when she lost 14 contests but won the Vermont primary. Haley had also won the Washington D.C. contest, which put her at 91 delegates earned, according to ABC News estimates.
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and tech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy also have a small share of delegates, both from Iowa’s GOP caucuses, the only contest each participated in before they suspended their primary campaigns. DeSantis has nine delegates and Ramaswamy has three.
Both the Democratic and Republican nominations will officially be awarded at their party conventions this summer, in August and July, respectively.
Biden’s path to his nomination has faced fewer challengers than Trump did, though he has been running against long shot candidates including author and speaker Marianne Williamson, who also ran in 2020, and Minnesota Rep. Dean Phillips.
Neither of them has won delegates. Williamson suspended and then unsuspended her campaign, while Phillips, who ran against Biden by arguing that the president is too old and too weak against Trump to seek another term, left the race after Super Tuesday.
Biden’s only loss in a nominating contest so far has been in American Samoa, when little-known entrepreneur Jason Palmer beat him, 51 votes to 40.
More notably, an anti-Biden “uncommitted” campaign protesting his stance on Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza has had some success in a few states after being launched in Michigan in February.
To date, the uncommitted option is estimated to have earned 20 delegates total from Hawaii, Michigan and Minnesota.
Washington is the only state with an uncommitted option on their ballot on Tuesday. In Georgia, however, some anti-Biden organizers have initiated a “Leave It Blank Primary Campaign” that encourages Democrats to request a ballot but submit it without choosing Biden or another candidate as a vote.
Democrats abroad, whose voting ends Tuesday, are also able to cast their ballots for an uncommitted option.
(WASHINGTON) — Robert Hur, who as special counsel conducted the yearlong probe into President Joe Biden’s handling of classified documents that ultimately absolved the president of legal culpability, will face questions on Tuesday from members of the House Judiciary Committee.
Hur, who was previously nominated by then-President Donald Trump as U.S. attorney for the District of Maryland, wrote in his 388-page report published last month that he would not recommend charges against President Biden despite uncovering evidence that Biden “willfully retained” classified materials.
In the course of explaining his rationale for that conclusion, Hur said that a potential jury would likely find Biden to be a “sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.”
Here’s how the news is developing:
Mar 12, 9:37 AM ‘I needed to show my work,’ Hur plans to tell panel
In his opening statement to Congress, former special counsel Robert Hur plans to explain how he characterized Joe Biden’s memory in his report on the president’s handling of classified documents released in February, which found that no charges were warranted because the evidence wasn’t sufficient to support a conviction.
According to his opening statement obtained by ABC News, Hur will address his criticism of Biden’s memory in the report: “I understood that my explanation about this case had to include rigorous, detailed, and thorough analysis. In other words, I needed to show my work.”
Hur, who will testify before the House Judiciary Committee, plans to say, “I knew that for my decision to be credible, I could not simply announce that I recommended no criminal charges and leave it at that. I needed to explain why.”
Hur will argue that the purpose of his investigation was to determine whether or not Biden “willfully” retained or disclosed classified information and that he “could not make that determination without assessing the President’s state of mind.”
Mar 12, 9:31 AM Transcript contradicts Biden’s account of exchange over son’s death
A transcript of President Biden’s interview with special counsel Robert Hur, released to lawmakers prior to Hur’s testimony and obtained by ABC News, contradicts the president’s characterization of an exchange about the death of his son, Beau Biden, from brain cancer.
“There’s even a reference that I don’t remember when my son died,” a visibly irate Biden told reporters hours after special counsel Robert Hur’s report was made public last month. “How in the hell dare he raise that? Frankly, when I was asked the question, I thought to myself: It wasn’t any of their damn business.”
But according to an ABC News review of the transcript, it was Biden, not Hur, who first invoked his son’s death — and the president indeed struggled to recall the exact year it occurred.
“And so I hadn’t, I hadn’t at this point … I hadn’t walked away from the idea that I may run for office again,” Biden said during a line of questioning about his activities after leaving the vice presidency in 2017.
“But if I ran again, I’d be running for president,” he said, per the transcript. “And, and so what was happening though — what month did Beau die? Oh, God, May 30th–“
After two others present reminded him that Beau passed away in 2015, Biden said: “Was it 2015 he had died?”
“It was May of 2015,” another person said, according to the transcript.
The incident is cited by Hur, who characterized Biden in his 388-page report as a “sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” — a description that Biden and his legal team sharply criticized in the aftermath of the report’s publication.
While the transcript showed moments of memory lapses on Biden’s part, his testimony also included detailed descriptions of events that happened many years prior, including policy debates and his own foreign travel.
Mar 12, 9:23 AM Hur scheduled to appear at 10 a.m. ET
Former special counsel Robert Hur is scheduled to appear before the House Judiciary Committee at 10 a.m. ET.
Republicans on the committee summoned him to testify in a public setting to examine the findings of his yearlong probe. The panel also subpoenaed the Justice Department for recordings, transcripts, notes, and other documents pertinent to the investigation.
Hur’s report said investigators searching Biden’s home found documents marked classified from as far back as the 1970s — but that he would not recommend charges against the president, saying the “evidence does not establish Mr. Biden’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.”
U.S. President Joe Biden speaks on the Senate’s recent passage of the National Security Supplemental Bill, which provides military aid to Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan, in the State Dining Room of the White House on Feb. 13, 2024 in Washington, DC. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — A transcript of President Joe Biden’s interview with the special counsel who investigated his handling of classified information contradicts the president’s characterization of an exchange about the death of his son, Beau Biden, from brain cancer.
“There’s even a reference that I don’t remember when my son died,” a visibly irate Biden told reporters hours after special counsel Robert Hur’s report was made public last month. “How in the hell dare he raise that? Frankly, when I was asked the question, I thought to myself: It wasn’t any of their damn business.”
But according to an ABC News review of the transcript, it was Biden, not Hur, who first invoked his son’s death — and the president indeed struggled to recall the exact year it occurred.
During a line of questioning about Biden’s activities after leaving the vice presidency in 2017, a period in which he was writing a book about the loss of his son, the president reminded investigators that Beau Biden’s death weighed heavily on his decision to run for president.
Recalling that period in his life, Biden, according to the transcript, appeared to get confused about when Beau died, getting the date correct, but not the year.
“And so I hadn’t, I hadn’t at this point … I hadn’t walked away from the idea that I may run for office again. But if I ran again, I’d be running for president,” he said, per the transcript. “And, and so what was happening though — what month did Beau die? Oh, God, May 30th–“
After two others present reminded him that Beau passed away in 2015, Biden said: “Was it 2015 he had died?”
“It was May of 2015,” another person said, according to the transcript.
The incident is cited by Hur, who characterized Biden in his 388-page of report as a “sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” — a description that Biden and his legal team sharply criticized in the aftermath of the report’s publication.
And while Hur declined to press forward with criminal charges against the president — despite finding some evidence that he “willfully retained” classified records — the damning descriptions of Biden’s recall have presented fodder for the president’s critics.
The Justice Department provided the transcript to lawmakers in the House Judiciary and Oversight Committees in response to their subpoena, hours before Hur was scheduled to testify before the House Judiciary Committee Tuesday morning. ABC News reviewed a copy of the roughly 250-page interview transcript, which shed fresh light on the five hours Biden voluntarily spent with investigators over the course of two days last October.
The president’s testimony included detailed descriptions of events that happened many years prior, including policy debates and his own foreign travel.
The image of Biden that emerges in the lengthy interview largely mirrors his public persona: at times steadfastly defensive, but in other moments jocular, conversational, and prone to lengthy tangents.
At the beginning of the interview, for example, after Hur instructed Biden to share his best recollection of events that were in some cases decades in the past, Biden quipped: “I’m a young man, so it’s not a problem.” He later joked that he hoped investigators “didn’t find any risqué pictures of my wife in a bathing suit” during their search of his Wilmington, Delaware, home.
“She’s beautiful,” he said.
For his part, Hur acknowledged that his line of inquiry could at times be “unclear or badly phrased,” and in one instance apologized for framing a question “clunkily.”
“I sometimes do that; I often do that,” Hur conceded.
Biden repeatedly insisted that he never intentionally kept classified material and that if he had found them, he would have returned them.
“I had no purpose for them, and I think it would be inappropriate for me to keep clearly classified documents,” the president said.
Biden did, however, admit to keeping personal notes from his time as vice president: “They’re my notes and they’re my property,” he said, referencing precedent set under previous administrations.
He also stressed repeatedly that he relied on staff to pack and move his belongings and papers when he left the White House.
“I don’t want to hold them responsible or get them in trouble, but I believe they were the ones who were packing up … and were deciding, you know, where, where things were going, to the best of my knowledge,” he said.
At one point, Biden described handling the boxes kept in the garage of his home in Wilmington — but without knowing what was in them.
“I remember moving boxes, literally physically moving them, with help, one side to the other so I could get the Corvette in that garage on the left,” Biden told investigators.
He also, according to the transcript, demonstrated signs of vitality — repeatedly declining offers to take a break, opting instead to power through hours of questioning.
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are expected to scrutinize Hur’s handling of the investigation during Tuesday’s hearing. Democrats and allies of Joe Biden have called Hur’s reference to Biden’s age and memory gratuitous and irrelevant, while Republicans are expected to question Hur’s decision to absolve Biden of criminal conduct.
Hur’s testimony before the House Oversight Committee begins at 10 a.m. ET.
(WASHINGTON) — Robert Hur on Tuesday will face lawmakers eager to question the findings of his yearlong probe into President Joe Biden’s handling of classified documents, an investigation that ultimately absolved the president of legal culpability but left him with a trail of political liabilities.
Hur wrote in a 388-page report published last month that he would not recommend charges against the president despite uncovering evidence that Biden “willfully retained” classified materials. In the course of explaining his rationale for that conclusion, Hur also included language critical of Biden’s mental acuity, saying that a potential jury would likely find him to be a “sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.”
President Biden and his allies welcomed Hur’s decision not to bring charges, but forcefully pushed back on his characterizations of the president’s age and memory.
Biden himself slammed prosecutors for including an anecdote about his failure to recall when his son, Beau Biden, passed away. And Bob Bauer, an attorney for Biden, called the report a “shoddy work product” that presented its conclusions in a “very misleading way.”
According to sources close to Hur, he is expected to address his decisions to include the specific anecdotes about Biden’s memory and dispute any suggestion that he violated Department of Justice policies by doing so.
Hur’s position was bolstered by a senior career official at the Justice Department, who — in a letter sent to Biden’s personal attorneys last month — pushed back on accusations that the language used by Hur was “gratuitous” and violated DOJ’s norms of not discussing the conduct of uncharged individuals.
“The identified language is neither gratuitous nor unduly prejudicial because it is not offered to criticize or demean the President,” Associate Deputy Attorney General Bradley Weinsheimer wrote to Biden’s legal team. “Rather, it is offered to explain Special Counsel Hur’s conclusions about the President’s state of mind in possessing and retaining classified information.”
Rod Rosenstein, a former deputy attorney general and Hur ally who spoke with Hur in advance of Tuesday’s hearing, said he expected the special counsel’s commentary during the hearing “will be tied pretty closely to the substance of his report.”
“My advice to Rob was, just tell the truth and let the chips fall where they may,” Rosenstein said. “And these congressional hearings are partly directed at uncovering relevant information, but they’re mostly for show, and you need to recognize that you’re going to be criticized and might not have a fair opportunity to respond. And that’s just the way the process works.”
Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee summoned Hur to testify in a public setting to examine his findings. The panel also subpoenaed the Justice Department for recordings, transcripts, notes and other documents pertinent to the investigation.
Hur and his team of investigators interviewed 147 witnesses and collected more than seven million documents as part of their probe. Investigators interviewed Biden for approximately five hours over the course of two days in early October, the same weekend of Hamas’ invasion of Israel.
Investigators ultimately found evidence that Biden knowingly retained classified documents — including military records about Afghanistan and personal notebooks with entries about sensitive intelligence matters — and relied on those records to pen his 2017 memoir, Promise Me, Dad.
At one point, Hur wrote, Biden told the ghostwriter who helped him craft his memoir, that he had “just found all the classified stuff downstairs.”
Hur’s report said investigators found documents marked classified from as far back as the 1970s, including a box labeled “International Travel 1973-1979” containing materials from Biden’s trips to Asia and Europe that included “roughly a dozen marked classified documents that are currently classified at the Secret level.”
According to the report, among the classified documents Biden retained were materials documenting his opposition to the troop surge in Afghanistan, including a classified handwritten memo he sent then-President Barack Obama over the 2009 Thanksgiving holiday.
The materials were found in “the garage, offices, and basement den in Mr. Biden’s Wilmington, Delaware home,” the report said.
Despite his critical language about Biden’s ability to recall some basic details, Hur drew “several material distinctions” between Joe Biden’s conduct and that of former President Donald Trump, who has pleaded not guilty to a 40-count indictment filed by special counsel Jack Smith over his handling of classified materials after leaving the White House.
“Most notably, after being given multiple chances to return classified documents and avoid prosecution, Mr. Trump allegedly did the opposite,” Hur wrote in his report. “In contrast, Mr. Biden turned in classified documents to the National Archives and the Department of Justice, consented to the search of multiple locations including his homes, sat for a voluntary interview, and in other ways cooperated with the investigation.”
Lara Trump, daughter-in-law of former US President Donald Trump, speaks at the Republican National Committee (RNC) Spring meeting on March 8, 2024, in Houston, Texas. (CECILE CLOCHERET/AFP via Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — A new Donald Trump-backed Republican National Committee leadership team has started the process of cleaning house among national party personnel.
Staff is being cut in political and data departments along with senior positions, with no fundraising positions expected to be reduced, sources tell ABC News. In addition, a source with direct knowledge said the RNC is cutting off contracts with some vendors.
The plan is part of efforts to merge the Trump presidential campaign with the RNC to effectively make them the same operation.
Around 60 RNC staffers are being let go under the merger, the source said.
Another source familiar with the changes occurring at the Republican National Committee under the new Trump-aligned leadership told ABC News certain staffers are being asked to resign and reapply for positions at the organization.
Chair Michael Whatley and Co-Chair Lara Trump were voted into their new roles on Friday at an RNC meeting in Houston where now-former Chair Ronna McDaniel and former Co-Chair Drew McKissick stepped down.
On Friday, both Whatley and Lara Trump vowed to trim some fat at the RNC, an organization that has long suffered from fundraising lulls and controversy surrounding spending.
“The RNC will work hand in glove with President Trump to campaign President Trump’s campaign to deliver on these core missions. If $1 that we have is not directed towards winning this November, that dollar will not be spent,” Whatley said at the party’s spring training meeting on Friday.
The news of the RNC staff cuts was first reported by Politico.
Sen. Chuck Grassley is seen during votes in the U.S. Capitol, Dec. 5, 2023. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley is accusing the Biden administration of improperly attempting to silence immigration judges who frequently highlight shortcomings in the immigration court system, calling a recent Justice Department decree a “blatant attempt” to “discourage and obstruct” federal workers from exercising legally protected speech.
The Justice Department last month informed the National Association of Immigration Judges that they must seek supervisor approval before engaging in any public remarks or press interviews, according to a copy of the email obtained by ABC News.
Sheila McNulty, the newly appointed chief immigration judge, acknowledged in her email that “the agency understands this is a point of contention” for the judges’ union, but ordered leaders to consult with the department before agreeing to participate “in writing engagements (e.g., articles; blogs) and speaking engagements (e.g., speeches; panel discussions; interviews).”
The policy change reverses more than 50 years of precedent, according to Matt Biggs, the president of the International Federation of Professional & Technical Engineers (IFPTE), a broader organization that includes the judges’ union. Immigration judges, who are federal employees housed within the Justice Department, have for decades been entitled to speak publicly at forums, before Congress, and in press interviews.
McNulty, who was appointed chief immigration judge in January, did not expressly restrict the judges from speaking to Congress, but invoked “recent awareness of [the judges’] public engagements” in her letter — a reference interpreted by Biggs as a nod to union president’s testimony before Congress in late 2023.
In a letter addressed to Attorney General Merrick Garland on Friday, Grassley suggested the move was intended to quell dissent from government officials about backlogs in the immigration court system amid scrutiny of the Biden administration’s handling of the influx of migrants entering the country through Mexico.
“It’s critically important that immigration judges communicate with Congress particularly when the Biden administration’s leadership and policy failures have created an unprecedented immigration crisis at our Southern Border,” Grassley wrote.
Judge Mimi Tsankov, the president of the judges’ union and a recipient of McNulty’s email decree, has been a vocal critic of the backlog of some three million cases pending resolution in the immigration court system.
In an October 2023 interview with ABC News — prior to the Justice Department’s updated policy — Tsankov highlighted several deficiencies in the immigration court system, including a lack of resources and pressure from the department to resolve cases quickly.
Tsankov described how she and her colleagues “can be fired for failing to meet performance metrics” handed down by the Justice Department — an arrangement she said poses a “due process-denying imposition on the court.”
“We end up getting pressure that ordinarily is not the type of thing that you would see a court experience,” she said. “A judge should never feel pressure to complete a case any faster than it’s supposed to be addressed from a fairness standpoint.”
“That’s why we need to be able to push back” on the administration’s handling of immigration policy and the structure of the immigration courts, Tsankov said in the October interview.
Reached by ABC News over the weekend, Tsankov said she could not comment, citing the updated DOJ policy.
“Following receipt of an email from the Chief Immigration Judge on February 15, I’m not permitted to participate in writing or speaking engagements, including any interviews in my capacity as president of the National Association of Immigration Judges without prior supervisory approval,” she said. “So, for this reason, I need to decline this interview at this time.”
The Justice Department did not respond to a request for comment from ABC News.
In his State of the Union address last week, President Joe Biden advocated for the passage of a bipartisan immigration bill that would allow funding for 100 additional immigration judges.
The Federal Labor Relations Board during the Trump administration voted to revoke the judges’ union of their collective bargaining rights, effectively busting their union, amid scrutiny from the union of the growing backlog of cases.
But until McNulty’s February email, Tsankov continued to speak publicly — often in terms critical of the Justice Department’s oversight of the immigration courts.
Biggs, the IFPTE president, told ABC News that the policy shift is an “embarrassment” for the Biden administration and cuts against his reputation as a pro-union leader.
“Who knows better about what’s going on in the immigration courts than the frontline judges themselves?” said Biggs. “This gag order denies policymakers and the public from the valuable feedback these judges can provide.”
According to IFPTE, Tsankov recently sought permission from the department to attend a series of speaking engagements in March and April — including long-scheduled educational programs and judicial conferences — but has not yet received a response.
One of those conferences, according to IFPTE, is a First Amendment symposium at Columbia University.
In his letter to Garland, Grassley asked the Justice Department to “fully review” the updated policy to ensure that it adheres to whistleblower rights and to share details of the order with his office by March 25.
“Federal agencies cannot conceal their misconduct behind illegal nondisclosure policies and related actions,” Grassley wrote.
