Harris interview with ‘The View’ delayed after co-hosts test positive for COVID-19

Harris interview with ‘The View’ delayed after co-hosts test positive for COVID-19
Harris interview with ‘The View’ delayed after co-hosts test positive for COVID-19
ABC

(NEW YORK) — Vice President Kamala Harris’ interview on “The View” on Friday was delayed after two co-hosts tested positive for COVID-19.

Harris, who was supposed to appear in-studio with the co-hosts of the show, instead appeared remotely from another room after Ana Navarro and Sunny Hostin were said to have tested positive.

Speaking with the two remaining co-hosts, Joy Behar and Sara Haines, the vice president said the treatment of Haitian migrants on the southwest U.S. border was “horrible and deeply troubling.”

“Human beings shouldn’t be treated that way,” Harris said. “And as we all know, it also evoked images of some of the worst moments of our history, where that kind of behavior has been used against the indigenous people of our country, has been used against African Americans during times of slavery.”

The show began with the four co-hosts sitting at the host’s table for the start of the show; Navarro and Hostin were quickly ushered off the set before Harris’ intended appearance. The other co-hosts said Navarro and Hostin had been vaccinated against the virus.

“This is going to be a major news story in a minute now,” Behar said when she first announced the news. “Sunny and Ana apparently just tested positive for COVID.”

Harris’ deputy press secretary, Sabrina Singh, said in a statement that the vice president “did not have contact with the hosts before the show” and that Harris’s Friday schedule would “continue as planned.”

But the interview was delayed for much of the show as producers and the U.S. Secret Service took precautions to make sure the vice president would remain safe.

When Harris did appear for her interview, she noted the effectiveness of the vaccines since the anchors did not appear to have any noticeable, or severe, symptoms.

“Sunny and Ana are strong women and I know they’re fine,” Harris said. “But it really does speak to the fact that they’re vaccinated and vaccines really make all the difference…”

Harris also answered questions about COVID-19, Afghanistan and abortion access — with sharp words about Haitians at the border.

When asked about asylum applications from migrants, she said she and Biden believe the administration has to do more to support Haiti itself.

“Haiti is our neighbor,” Harris said. “The United States has to help and we have to do more and our administration feels strongly about that.”

On Friday morning, President Joe Biden told ABC News Congressional Correspondent Rachel Scott that, as president, he took responsibility for the photos and videos coming from the border of mounted police units confronting Haitian migrants.

“It’s an embarrassment, beyond an embarrassment. It’s dangerous. It’s wrong,” Biden said. “It sends the wrong message around the world, sends the wrong message at home.”

On Thursday, the U.S. Border Patrol announced it would put a pause on agents on horseback.

The president earlier this year tasked Harris with serving as his point person on stemming the flow of migration from Central America to the United States.

Earlier in the week, the vice president had condemned the ways Border Patrol agents were shown to be treating migrants.

ABC News’ Molly Nagle contributed reporting.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Biden harshly criticizes Border Patrol agents for confronting Haitian migrants

Biden harshly criticizes Border Patrol agents for confronting Haitian migrants
Biden harshly criticizes Border Patrol agents for confronting Haitian migrants
Official White House Photo by Cameron Smith

(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden on Friday harshly criticized the action of some Border Patrol agents, mounted on horseback, who confronted Haitian migrants crossing the border into Texas, calling their actions “horrible.”

“It’s outrageous, I promise you, those people will pay,” Biden said.

Biden’s blunt statements came as the situation and the agents’ conduct are still under investigation and the agents have been placed on administrative leave. The use of horses has been suspended in the meantime.

Biden was responding to a question from ABC News Congressional Correspondent Rachel Scott, who asked, “You said on the campaign trail that you were going to restore the moral standing of the U.S., that you are going to immediately end Trump’s assault on the dignity of immigrant communities. Given what we saw at the border this week, have you failed in that promise? And this is happening under your watch–do you take responsibility for the chaos that’s unfolding?”

“Of course, I take responsibility,” Biden said, but he then quickly shifted to the controversial images of the agents on horseback. “I’m president but it was horrible to see what you saw to see people treat it like they did — horses family nearly running over people being strapped. It’s outrageous, I promise you, those people will pay. They will be — there is investigation underway now, and there will be consequences. There will be consequences. It’s an embarrassment, beyond an embarrassment. It’s dangerous. It’s wrong, it sends the wrong message around the world, sends the wrong message at home. It’s simply not who we are,” he said.

Democrats, including members of the Congressional Black Caucus, have demanded an end to the Haitians being expelled and the ACLU and other migrant advocates have had the administration is illegally removing them through the use of Title 42, claiming they are justified in doing so for public health reasons because of the pandemic.

The U.S. special envoy for Haiti, Daniel Foote, has resigned in protest over the administration policy, calling the treatment of the Haitian migrants “inhumane.”

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

House passes abortion rights bill but little chance of becoming law

House passes abortion rights bill but little chance of becoming law
House passes abortion rights bill but little chance of becoming law
stockcam/iStock

(WASHINGTON) — The House on Friday passed a bill to uphold abortion rights for women, taking swift action in response to a new Texas law that bans nearly all abortions in the state.

The final tally was 218-211 with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announcing the vote.
Recent Stories from ABC News

The House bill has little chance of becoming law and is largely symbolic given Republican opposition in the Senate.

The House bill would codify protections provided by the Supreme Court’s landmark Roe v. Wade ruling, which legalized women’s right to an abortion.

The Texas law that passed in September prohibits abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy and allows “any person, other than an officer or employee of state or local government,” to bring a civil suit against someone believed to have “aided or abetted” an unlawful abortion.

People who successfully sue an abortion provider under this law could be awarded at least $10,000.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed the so-called “heartbeat ban” on May 19 and it went into effect on Sept. 1.

The U.S. Supreme Court voted 5-4 on Sept. 1 to allow SB8 to take effect on procedural grounds, despite what the majority acknowledged as “serious questions” about constitutionality. The justices did not address those questions.

Pelosi has said taking congressional action would make a “tremendous difference” in Democrats’ efforts to maintain access to abortion rights. She called the Supreme Court’s decision “shameful.”

Ahead of Friday’s vote, Pelosi said the House legislation should “send a very positive message to the women of our country — but not just the women, to the women and their families, to everyone who values freedom, honors our Constitution and respects women.”

Since Texas’s abortion ban went into effect, lawmakers in 11 states, including Florida, have announced intentions or plans to model legislation after the state’s law, according to NARAL Pro-Choice America.

The Supreme Court is set to hear oral arguments in a Mississippi abortion case in early December. The high court is expected to consider the legality of Mississippi’s ban on most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, a law that is intended to challenge Roe v. Wade.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Jan. 6 select committee sends first subpoenas to former Trump aides, advisers

Jan. 6 select committee sends first subpoenas to former Trump aides, advisers
Jan. 6 select committee sends first subpoenas to former Trump aides, advisers
krblokhin/iStock

(WASHINGTON) — The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol riot issued its first subpoenas Thursday to four former senior Trump administration officials, including former President Donald Trump’s longest-serving aide and last chief of staff.

The committee is seeking documents and depositions from Dan Scavino — Trump’s caddy-turned-social media guru and senior White House aide — former chief of staff Mark Meadows, conservative activist Steve Bannon and Kash Patel, who was the chief of staff for the acting defense secretary on Jan. 6.

In the letters, the panel said it was seeking information about Trump’s actions before, during and after the Capitol riot regarding his campaign to overturn the election results.

The committee is demanding records be delivered by Oct. 7, and for all four witnesses to appear for closed-door depositions on Oct. 14 and 15.

“The Select Committee has reason to believe that you have information relevant to understanding the important activities that led to and informed the events at the Capitol on January 6, 2021,” Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., wrote in letters to Bannon and Scavino.

The panel’s members have vowed to move aggressively to obtain documents and records from witnesses in Trump’s orbit, many of whom have a history of stonewalling congressional investigators.

“That is a concern, but we have additional tools that we didn’t before, including a Justice Department that may be willing to pursue criminal contempt when people deliberately flout the compulsory process,” Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., told reporters Thursday about the possibility of Trump aides defying congressional investigators.

Trump, in a statement, pledged to fight the subpoenas “on executive privilege and other grounds,” though not every recipient was a White House or administration official.

Meadows, who was Trump’s last chief of staff, was close to Trump before, during and after Jan. 6, and was involved in efforts to challenge the election results — participating in Trump’s call with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensberger when he repeatedly urged him to reverse the presidential election results.

A Meadows aide declined to comment on the subpoena and whether Meadows would cooperate.

Patel, a former GOP congressional aide who worked in the Trump National Security Council before joining the Pentagon, was involved in security preparations for the Jan. 6 counting of the electoral vote on Capitol Hill and mobilizing the response to the riot, according to the committee, citing records obtained from the Defense Department.

Bannon, who remained an outside adviser to the president after helping to lead his first presidential campaign and a short stint in the White House, was at a meeting at the Willard Hotel where lawmakers were encouraged to challenge the election results, the committee claimed in its letter.

He was quoted as saying, “All hell is going to break loose tomorrow,” the panel wrote in its letter, citing a Jan. 5 episode of his podcast, “War Room.”

Scavino, Trump’s longest-serving aide and one of his fiercest defenders on social media, was with Trump before and after rioters stormed the Capitol, the committee claimed in its letter, citing reporting from Peril, the new book by Washington Post reporters Bob Woodward and Robert Costa.

He also used his Twitter feed to promote the Jan. 6 demonstration in Washington in support of Trump. Some attendees of that event outside the White House later marched on the Capitol and stormed Congress as lawmakers attempted to officially affirm the election results.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

More than a year after George Floyd’s killing, Congress can’t agree on police reform

More than a year after George Floyd’s killing, Congress can’t agree on police reform
More than a year after George Floyd’s killing, Congress can’t agree on police reform
drnadig/iStock

(WASHINGTON) — Talks of bipartisan police reform legislation in Congress are officially over as Republicans and Democrats can’t agree on key issues.

Democrats, after more than a year of negotiations, made a final offer, but despite “significant strides,” said Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., there weren’t any more concessions to be made.

“I just want to make it clear that this is not an end — the efforts to create substantive policing reform will continue,” Booker told reporters at the Capitol.

“It is a disappointment that we are at this moment,” Booker continued, adding that having participation from nation’s largest police union and the International Association of Chiefs of Police shows that “this is a bigger movement than where we were just a year or two ago.”

Lead Republican negotiator Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., said he’s concerned about high crime rates in some cities.

“When you’re talking about making progress in the bill, and your definition of progress is to make it punitive — or take more money away from officers if they don’t do what you want them to do — that’s defunding the police,” Scott told ABC News. “I’m not going to be a part of defunding the police.”

More than a year after the start of a racial reckoning in the United States, the movement to address brutality and racism in policing continues to dominate political discourse.

George Floyd’s death prompts reform

The George Floyd Justice in Policing Act was introduced in June 2020, very soon after Floyd, a Black man, was killed by then-Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin during an arrest. Floyd was accused of using a fake $20 bill at a local store.

Chauvin pinned Floyd on the ground, with his knee on the back of Floyd’s neck and upper back until he went unconscious. Videos taken by bystanders sparked a national movement against police brutality and racism, and legislators, including Rep. Karen Bass, D-Calif., and Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas, sought to answer calls for justice and end the current system of policing.

The Justice in Policing Act aimed to establish a national standard for policing practices, collect better data on police use of force and misconduct, ban the use of tactics such as no-knock warrants, and limit qualified immunity, which protects officers against private civil lawsuits.

It passed the House in March on a party-line vote, but the Republican-majority Senate didn’t move it forward. The legislation was reintroduced in 2021.

Senate Republicans also proposed a reform bill in June 2020, but Democrats blocked it, saying it didn’t do enough.

The Justice Act proposed using federal dollars to incentivize police departments to ban controversial practices, like the chokehold that killed Floyd, make lynching a federal hate crime, increase training and enforce the use of body cameras. The effectiveness of no-knock warrants also was to be studied.

Democrats and Republicans agree on ‘framework’

In summer 2021, both sides settled on a shared “framework” from which to pursue legislation.

“After months of working in good faith, we have reached an agreement on a framework addressing the major issues for bipartisan police reform,” Scott, Booker and Bass said in a joint statement. “There is still more work to be done on the final bill, and nothing is agreed to until everything is agreed to. Over the next few weeks we look forward to continuing our work toward getting a finalized proposal across the finish line.”

Many Republicans said they believed the proposed legislation put law enforcement under attack, while most Democrats held firm in holding accountable officers accused of abusing suspects.

Qualified immunity

Both sides still agreed to pursue change, but qualified immunity quickly became a sticking point for Republicans, and it ultimately led to the legislation’s demise.

Qualified immunity protects officers in cases where they’ve been individually accused of violating a person’s civil rights.

Some congressional Republicans said they feared a rise in frivolous lawsuits if qualified immunity were to be eradicated, but officers still would’ve had the same constitutional protections, and civil cases still would’ve been reviewed by courts before moving forward.

Sources told ABC News that Scott would get on board with a proposal if police unions could agree on a plan, but they’ve been very reluctant to do so.

Two police unions, the Fraternal Order of Police and the International Association of Chiefs of Police, were involved in negotiations with legislators. Though they came close to an agreement with Booker, other police unions such as the National Association of Police Organization, spoke out against Booker’s proposals because they weren’t included in earlier discussions.

Now, it’s back to square one. Booker said he and Congressional Democrats will find other pathways to achieving extensive police reform , but those pathways likely won’t include Republican colleagues.

Vice President Kamala Harris, who was in the Senate at the start of these negotiations, denounced Republican efforts to quash reform.

“We learned that Senate Republicans chose to reject even the most modest reforms. Their refusal to act is unconscionable,” Harris said in a statement. “Millions of people marched in the streets to see reform and accountability, not further inaction. Moving forward, we are committed to exploring every available action at the executive level to advance the cause of justice in our nation.”

White House press secretary Jen Psaki said President Joe Biden was disappointed.

“In the coming weeks,” she said, “our team will consult with members of Congress, the law enforcement, civil rights communities and victims families to discuss a path forward, including potential executive actions the president can take to ensure we live up to the American ideal of equality and justice under law.”

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Florida lawmaker introduces abortion bill similar to Texas’ controversial ban

Florida lawmaker introduces abortion bill similar to Texas’ controversial ban
Florida lawmaker introduces abortion bill similar to Texas’ controversial ban
MivPiv/iStock

(FLORIDA) — A state legislator in Florida has introduced an abortion restriction bill similar to a controversial law that took effect in Texas earlier this month.

The new bill, HB 167, introduced Wednesday in the Florida House of Representatives by Rep. Webster Barnaby, would ban most abortions in the state and would allow people to file civil lawsuits against doctors who violate the law.

Specifically, HB 167 would require physicians to test for a “fetal heartbeat” on a pregnant person seeking an abortion.

Under the proposed legislation, a physician may not perform an abortion if there is a “detectable fetal heartbeat.”

The bill also puts the enforcement of the law on private citizens, versus the state, in allowing people to bring lawsuits against physicians. It calls for damages of at least $10,000 per abortion for the physician who performs the procedure and any defendants that “aided or abetted” the procedure.

People would have up to six years after an illegal abortion is performed to file a lawsuit.

The Texas law, Senate Bill 8, bans nearly all abortions after six weeks of pregnancy, specifically once the rhythmic contracting of fetal cardiac tissue can be detected.

Similar to the newly introduced bill in Florida, the Texas law is unusual in that it prohibits the state from enforcing the ban but allows anyone to sue a person they believe is providing an abortion or assisting someone in getting an abortion after six weeks.

People who successfully sue an abortion provider under this law could be awarded at least $10,000.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed the so-called “heartbeat ban” on May 19 and it went into effect on Sept. 1.

Like the Texas law, the Florida legislation does not include exceptions for pregnancies that occur from rape or incest, but makes an exception if a physician believes a “medical emergency” exists.

The bill’s language about “fetal heartbeat” is controversial because many medical experts say that early-stage cardiac activity isn’t a heartbeat.

Cardiac activity is typically first detected five to six weeks into pregnancy, or three to four weeks after the embryo starts developing.

Most of the abortions performed nationwide are after six weeks of pregnancy.

When a person is six weeks pregnant, it typically means the embryo started developing about four weeks prior, based on the formula doctors use to figure out when a person will give birth. People don’t often realize they are pregnant until after the six-week mark.

The U.S. Supreme Court voted 5-4 on Sept. 1 to allow SB8 to take effect on procedural grounds, despite what the majority acknowledged as “serious questions” about constitutionality. The justices did not address those questions.

Texas is one of 13 states that have passed laws banning abortion in the first trimester of pregnancy; legal challenges have so far prevented all from taking effect.

Since Texas’s abortion ban went into effect, lawmakers in 11 states, including Florida, have announced intentions or plans to model legislation after the state’s law, according to NARAL Pro-Choice America.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ office said the new proposed abortion legislation in his state will be reviewed, according to The Associated Press.

“Governor DeSantis is pro-life. The Governor’s office is aware that the bill was filed today and like all legislation, we will be monitoring it as it moves through the legislative process in the coming months,” DeSantis spokesperson Taryn Fenske said in an email to the AP.

Democratic leaders in Florida have vowed to fight the legislation.

“This bill is dangerous, radical, and unconstitutional. The hypocrisy of this attempt by Governor (Ron) DeSantis and Republicans in the state legislature to take away our rights while at the same time preaching ’my body, my choice’ when it comes to wearing masks is absolutely disgusting,” Agriculture Commissioner Nikki Fried, also a Democratic candidate for governor, said in a statement, according to the AP.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Schumer, Pelosi announce ‘framework’ to pay for $3.5T infrastructure bill

Schumer, Pelosi announce ‘framework’ to pay for .5T infrastructure bill
Schumer, Pelosi announce ‘framework’ to pay for .5T infrastructure bill
Flickr

(WASHINGTON) — Democratic House and Senate leaders on Thursday announced they and the White House have reached agreement on a “framework” that will pay for most, if not all, of the massive $3.5 trillion human infrastructure bill — a move meant to mitigate concerns from moderate and centrist Democrats opposed to the hefty price tag.

But the leaders provided very little details on the framework a day after President Joe Biden met with Democratic leaders, moderates and progressives at the White House in an effort to save his agenda from Democratic infighting.House Speaker Nancy Pelosi also did not provide a clear outline about when the reconciliation bill will be ready for a vote.

She also did not commit to putting the bipartisan infrastructure bill on the floor for a vote next Monday, which she had promised moderates would happen.

Pelosi was joined by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen at her weekly press conference, as Democrats also face a looming possible government shutdown on Oct. 1 and still need to deal with the debt ceiling, which Republicans will not support.

“The White House, the House and the Senate have reached agreement on a framework that will pay for any final negotiated agreement. So, the revenue side of this, we have an agreement on,” Schumer told reporters.

“We know that we can cover the provisions the president has put forward,” Pelosi added. “It’s all good.”

This announcement is meant to provide some relief to those moderate, centrist Democrats like Sens. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, who do not support that $3.5 trillion number.

But Pelosi and Schumer provided very little on actual details. As of right now, leaders are no closer to having a reconciliation bill — which means the fate of the bipartisan infrastructure bill hangs in the balance.

“We came to terms as to a framework of an array of agreements that we have, depending on what the need is. Now at the same time, we’re finalizing on the outlay side, so if we need more, we need less — that will impact the choices we make there,” Pelosi said.

Pelosi also did not commit to putting the bipartisan infrastructure bill that has already passed in the Senate on the floor next week.

“We take it one day at time,” Pelosi told reporters. “I am confident that we will pass both bills.”

Pelosi also did not make clear if $3.5 trillion will remain the topline, or if that figure could change and drop lower.

“This is not about price tag. This is about what is in the bill,” Pelosi said.

Following the press conference, reporters caught up with Pelosi and pressed for more details on the framework.

When reporters suggested they had too few details, Pelosi responded, “well that’s your problem, not mine.”

Following the press conference, many senators close to the negotiation table say they are in the dark about the new framework agreement.

Senate Budget Committee Chairman Bernie Sanders said he has “no idea” what the agreement is. He told reporters he hopes to be briefed on it soon “if there is a framework.”

“We’ve been through this a million times. There are many many approaches as to how you can raise money in a fair and progressive way and raise at least 3.5 trillion dollars,” Sanders said. “If that’s what the menu is there is nothing then nothing particularly new I think.”

Sen. Mark Warner, a moderate Democrat on the Budget committee who has been intimately involved in negotiations with the president on the reconciliation plan told reporters he has not the “foggiest idea” what is in the framework.

Warner told reporters he was “as interested in getting those details as you are.”

Senate Finance Committee Chair Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said he was in meetings over the framework, but declined to give many details about what was discussed or decided upon.

“It went right to the heart of what we need in terms of tax fairness in America and that’s where we are this morning,” Wyden said while dodging questions about a topline or any agreed to “payfors.”

Senators said they expected to receive more information from leadership Thursday on what the framework is.

Democratic leaders also have to contend with a potential shutdown on Oct. 1, but Pelosi insisted a shutdown would be avoided.

Pelosi told reporters Republicans could cave on raising the debt ceiling because “public sentiment is everything.”

But she indicated that both chambers will do everything they can to keep the government open via a so-called “continuing resolution” that maintains current funding levels, which may mean they will have to deal with the debt ceiling at a later time.

“We will keep the government open by September 30 … and continue the conversation about the debt ceiling. Whatever it is, we will have a CR that passes both houses by September 30,” Pelosi said.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

US special envoy to Haiti resigns in protest over deportations

US special envoy to Haiti resigns in protest over deportations
US special envoy to Haiti resigns in protest over deportations
alexis84/iStock

(WASHINGTON) — The U.S. special envoy to Haiti, Daniel Foote, has resigned in protest over the Biden administration deportations of Haitians from the southern border, calling them “inhumane.”

“Ambassador Daniel Foote, who had been serving as Special Envoy for Haiti since July 22, 2021, submitted his resignation to Secretary Blinken yesterday. We thank Ambassador Foote for his service in this role,” a State Department spokesman told ABC News on Thursday.

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Democrats lash out at Biden administration over handling of Haitian migrants

Democrats lash out at Biden administration over handling of Haitian migrants
Democrats lash out at Biden administration over handling of Haitian migrants
uschools/iStock

(WASHINGTON) — Even as the Biden administration makes progress toward dispersing the large group of mostly Haitian nationals gathered in Del Rio, Texas, government officials are facing internal divisions over how the migrants have been treated.

“As we speak out against the cruel, the inhumane, and the flat out racist treatment of our Haitian brothers and sisters at the southern border we cannot and we must not look away in this moment,” Democratic Rep. Ayanna Pressley said Wednesday.

Joined by a growing chorus of Democratic leaders in Congress, Pressley was referring to the striking images of Border Patrol agents on horseback confronting migrants and snapping their reins aggressively.

Some Democrats are also calling on the Biden administration to immediately stop repatriating the Haitians back to their island nation, citing concerns about safety. As of Wednesday afternoon, officials report there were just over 5,547 migrants left in the encampment under an international bridge in the South Texas town of Del Rio, as the Biden administration scrambles to track, process and remove the group that at one point ballooned to more than 14,000 people.

“Despite the Administration’s rapid deployment of personnel and resources in response to this crisis, much of the strategy to address the care of these vulnerable individuals is deeply concerning,” Democratic Reps. Bennie Thompson and Gregory W. Meeks said in a joint statement on Wednesday. “Specifically, we urge the Administration to halt repatriations to Haiti until the country recovers from these devastating crises.”

The Department of Homeland Security has a limited number of options after agents encounter unauthorized migrants in the border region. Some are referred to ICE custody for detention or deportation while many are released to U.S. resettlement organizations and given a future date to report or appear in court.

DHS extended temporary protections for Haitian nationals over the summer. But it only moved the deadline to apply to July 29. That means those who have arrived more recently do not qualify for the Temporary Protected Status designation even if they fled Haiti before the deadline, and thay are subject to removal under what’s called Title 42.

“We have looked at the country conditions and made a determination that in fact we can return individuals who’ve arrived,” Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said.

DHS provided a statement to ABC News Wednesday evening saying removal flights from Texas to Haiti will continue, noting that more than 1,000 migrants have already been flown back.

Since the beginning of the pandemic, the government has rapidly expelled hundreds of thousands of migrants from the U.S. under a decades-old part of the public health code known as Title 42. These expulsions have gravely concerned immigrant advocates who say the process cuts off access to the humanitarian protections some migrants are due.

Immigration officials have cited the protocols as a necessary tool in managing the migration challenges, but resources on the border have remained strained and agents have been pushed to their limits in an attempt to manage the influx in Del Rio.

At the same time, images of the tactics used by Border Patrol agents on horseback have stirred outrage from Democrats, with some drawing connections to extremist views.

“Congress must do the work of investigating and ensuring accountability of the egregious and white supremacist behavior of border patrol agents in Del Rio Texas,” Pressley said at the Wednesday press conference.

Mayorkas addressed the images of the horse mounted patrol at the beginning of Wednesday’s House Homeland Security Committee hearing and reiterated that the agents in question won’t be interacting with migrants while the agency investigates.

“The facts will drive the actions that we take,” Mayorkas said. “We ourselves will pull no punches, and we need to conduct this investigation thoroughly, but very quickly.”

He said he expects the investigation to wrap up “in days and not weeks.”

Mayorkas was pressed again Wednesday about providing data that explains what has happened to migrants after they’ve been arrested or detained by border officials. When asked repeatedly by Republican Rep. Carlos Gimenez of Florida, he declined to provide specifics or estimations, citing concerns over accuracy.

“Congressman, I want to be precise in my communication of data to the United States Congress and to you specifically having posed the question,” Mayorkas said.

White House Press Secretary Jenn Psaki was also questioned Wednesday on the lack of information coming out of DHS about where the Haitian nationals are ending up, including how many have been released into the U.S.

“I certainly understand why you’re asking and understand why people have been asking Secretary Mayorkas,” Psaki said. “Those are numbers that are — the secretary — the Department of Homeland Security would have the most up-to-date numbers.”

“But why is it so hard to keep track of a simple number like that?” asked ABC News White House Correspondent Cecilia Vega. “Why can’t you give it? Why can’t he give it? It’s been two days now he’s been asked that.”

“I’m certain they will provide it. It’s an absolutely fair question to ask, and I’m certain he just wanted to have the most up-to-date numbers to provide,” Psaki responded.

Vice President Kamala Harris spoke to Mayorkas on Tuesday, expressing her concerns about the treatment of migrants at the hands of agents for Border Patrol, a subdivision of the Department of Homeland Security.

Mayorkas promised her an update on the investigation into the incident involving Border Patrol agents on horseback and said the department is taking its obligations to provide humanitarian support seriously, according to a readout of the conversation from the vice president’s office.

ABC News’ Kenneth Moton, Luke Barr, Sarah Kolinovsky contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

House committee probing Jan. 6 attack could subpoena Trump aides: Sources

House committee probing Jan. 6 attack could subpoena Trump aides: Sources
House committee probing Jan. 6 attack could subpoena Trump aides: Sources
DouglasRissing/iStock

(WASHINGTON) — The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol could issue its first subpoenas in the coming days, possibly targeting several former high-level aides to President Donald Trump for records and information, sources tell ABC News.

Former GOP congressman and Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows and White House aides Dan Scavino and Stephen Miller are among those of interest to the committee, sources familiar with the matter have told ABC News.

Trump’s former campaign manager Brad Parscale, who, like the other aides, remains close to the former president, could also be subpoenaed by the panel, sources said.

Sources also said that John Eastman, a lawyer who worked with Trump’s legal team last year, could also be subpoenaed for records and testimony by the committee.

Eastman was the author of a controversial memo obtained by Washington Post reporters Bob Woodward and Robert Costa that encouraged Vice President Mike Pence to overturn the election results on Jan. 6 to keep Trump in office by rejecting the electors in nearly a dozen states.

A spokesperson for the committee declined to comment when reached by ABC News.

Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., told reporters on Monday that the first subpoenas could be issued “within a week.”

Lawmakers were briefed on the status of the probe by committee staff for more than five hours Monday night in the Capitol, meeting in person for the first time in weeks to walk through the complex inquiry via PowerPoint slides.

Thompson said the committee has scheduled testimony with persons of interest, but would not say who those people are and whether they have officially accepted the invitations from the committee.

Committee investigators are in the process of reviewing thousands of pages of documents obtained in response to requests issued in recent weeks to federal government agencies and 35 social media and communications companies.

The panel has also requested documents from the National Archives, which maintains and preserves White House records. National Archives officials said they’re in the process of reviewing the request and have yet to turn over any documents to the committee for their review.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.