Tag: weighs

Conservative Texas judge weighs challenge to abortion pills

[ad_1]

Mifepristone, when combined with a second pill, has become the most common method of abortion in the U.S. and has been increasingly prescribed since Roe was overturned.
Acknowledging the significance of the case, Kacsmaryk, who was appointed by then-President Donald Trump, asked Baptist if he could cite a prior example of a court removing an FDA-approved drug after many years on the market.
Baptist acknowledged that there are no prior examples, but he blamed the drug’s longevity on the FDA’s “stonewalling” of his group’s prior requests to remove the drug. The group petitioned the FDA in 2002 and in 2019 seeking to curb access to the pill.
Lawyers for the FDA are expected to argue that pulling mifepristone would upend reproductive care for U.S. women and undermine the government’s scientific oversight of prescription drugs.
Kacsmaryk gave each side two hours to make their arguments — with time for rebuttal — in the high-stakes case. Mifepristone’s manufacturer, Danco Laboratories, will join the FDA in arguing to keep the pill available.
A ruling could come any time after arguments conclude. A decision against the drug would be swiftly appealed by U.S. Department of Justice attorneys representing the FDA, who would also likely seek an emergency stay to stop it from taking effect while the case proceeds.
One of the alliance’s chief arguments against the FDA is that it misused its authorities when it originally approved the pill.
The FDA reviewed the drug under its so-called accelerated approval program, which was created in the early 1990s to speed access to the first HIV drugs. Since then, it’s been used to expedite drugs for cancer and other “serious or life-threatening diseases.”

The alliance, which was also involved in the lawsuit that led the Supreme Court to overturn Roe, argues that pregnancy is not a disease and therefore mifepristone should not have been considered for accelerated approval.
“The contrast between these illnesses and the FDA jamming pregnancy into … the FDA regulations could not be more stark,” Baptist told Kacsmaryk.
But the FDA says the group’s argument is flawed on multiple counts. First, FDA regulations make clear that pregnancy is considered a “medical condition” that can be serious and life-threatening in some cases.
Second, while the FDA reviewed the drug under its accelerated approval regime, it didn’t expedite the drug’s review. In fact, approval only came after four years of deliberation. Instead, the FDA used regulatory powers under the accelerated program to add extra safety restrictions to mifepristone, including requiring physicians to be certified before prescribing it.
The hearing is the first in the case and is being closely watched by groups on both sides of the abortion issue in light of the reversal of Roe. Removing mifepristone from the market would curtail access to abortion even in states where it’s legal.
If Kacsmaryk rules against the FDA, it’s unclear how quickly access to mifepristone could be curtailed or how the process would work. The FDA has its own procedures for revoking drug approvals that involve public hearings and scientific deliberations, which can take months or years.
If mifepristone is sidelined, clinics and doctors that prescribe the combination say they would switch to using only misoprostol, the other drug used in the two-drug combination. That single-drug approach has a slightly lower rate of effectiveness in ending pregnancies but is widely used in countries where mifepristone is illegal or unavailable.
In addition to challenging mifepristone’s approval process, the lawsuit takes aim at several later FDA decisions that loosened restrictions on the pill, including eliminating a requirement that women pick it up in person.
Lawyers for the FDA have pointed out that serious side effects with mifepristone are rare, and the agency has repeatedly affirmed the drug’s safety by reviewing subsequent studies and data. Pulling the drug more than 20 years after approval would be “extraordinary and unprecedented,” the government stated in its legal response.
[ad_2]
#Conservative #Texas #judge #weighs #challenge #abortion #pills
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

March 16, 2023
China weighs sending drones, ammunition to Russia for Ukraine war

[ad_1]
“We haven’t seen them provide lethal aid to Russia yet but we also have noticed that they haven’t taken it off the table,” Gen. Pat Ryder told reporters Friday.
If China sends Russia weapons, it could alter the fighting on the ground, tipping the fight in favor of Moscow — a reality the U.S. and its European allies have worked to avoid with hundreds of billions of dollars in weapons shipments.
The news comes after U.S. officials in recent days downgraded the classification level of intelligence on China’s thinking to share it with allies across the world, in an attempt to pressure Beijing to back off any plans to send weapons to Russia. Since then, officials inside the Biden administration have debated releasing that intelligence to the public, a third person familiar with the matter said. All of the individuals were granted anonymity to speak freely about sensitive national security matters.
The Wall Street Journal was the first to report the details of China weighing sending drones and ammunition.
The U.S. has previously warned China about sending lethal aid to Russia. In a meeting with China’s top diplomat at the Munich Security Conference, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said he told Wang Yi that such a move would severely impair the diplomatic relationship between Washington and Beijing. Washington has sent other warnings in diplomatic conversations over the last several weeks, as POLITICO previously reported.
The National Security Council declined to comment on the record for this story.
“We have said publicly and privately that there have been indications that the Chinese were considering the potential lethal assistance but we’ve also said that we haven’t seen them make that decision or move in that direction,” John Kirby, spokesperson for the NSC said in a briefing with reporters Friday. “And we certainly don’t want them to.”
U.S. officials have for months tracked China’s shipment of non-lethal, dual-use items to Russia, Blinken said in a conversation with The Atlantic last week. He did not provide details of those shipments. Dual-use items could range from anything from laptops and telecommunications equipment to aircraft parts typically used for civilian purposes.

“There has been some … dual-use type support coming from quote-unquote Chinese companies, that almost certainly was approved by the state,” Blinken said.
The U.S. earlier this month sanctioned a slew of Chinese companies for supporting Russia’s aggression in Ukraine, including a satellite company, Spacety, that the administration says provided imagery to Moscow for use by the Wagner Group.
Alex Ward and Lara Seligman contributed to this report.
[ad_2]
#China #weighs #sending #drones #ammunition #Russia #Ukraine #war
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

February 25, 2023
Appeals court weighs Rep. Perry’s immunity from Jan. 6 probe

[ad_1]
The contours of the clause’s protection have remained ill-defined for generations. Only a handful of court cases, each with intricate and distinguishing features, have set rough parameters, and none of them neatly match up with Perry’s case, which is at the center of special counsel Jack Smith’s criminal probe into Trump’s effort to derail the transfer of power.
The most notable came in 2006, when the FBI raided the office of Rep. William Jefferson for evidence of financial crimes. Another arose in the 1990s, when a tobacco company sought to compel Congress to return documents that it claimed were stolen by a paralegal before they were delivered to lawmakers. And a third occurred in 1979, when a lawmaker — who had testified 10 times to a grand jury — was nevertheless found by the Supreme Court to be immune from having his legislative activities introduced during a subsequent criminal prosecution.
At the heart of the matter is whether Perry’s efforts — including a bid to help Trump replace the leadership of the Justice Department with allies sympathetic to his bid to overturn the election results — fit within his “legislative” responsibilities. The speech or debate clause has been interpreted to cover actions taken by members of Congress that help them perform a legislative act, and the Justice Department contends Perry’s actions fall outside of that framework.
Perry’s lawyer John Rowley, on the other hand, said the congressman’s outreach in the days before Jan. 6 was part of an “informal” fact-gathering process meant to guide two legislative tasks: his vote to support or oppose certification of the election results on Jan. 6, and his vote on sweeping election reform legislation proposed by Democrats that passed the House on Jan. 3, 2021. If that’s the case, Rowley said, the speech or debate clause protects the communications on his cell phone from compelled disclosure to the Justice Department.
“This fact-finding was not hypothetical. It was within the legislative sphere,” Rowley told the panel.
Justice Department attorney John Pellettieri sharply disputed Rowley’s broad conception of speech or debate protection, contending that Perry’s fact-gathering was not authorized by any committee or by the House itself and therefore wasn’t covered by speech or debate privilege, which the department said only applies to those discretely authorized inquiries. That suggestion prompted sharp rebuttals from the panel.
Judges Greg Katsas and Neomi Rao, both Trump appointees, hammered away at Pelletieri’s claim that only members of Congress involved in committee-led investigations can claim the privilege for their fact-finding activities.
“Why wouldn’t an individual member’s fact-finding be covered?” Rao asked.

“It’s a little bit of an odd line,” Katsas said. “You’re putting a lot of weight on this formal authorization.”
Later, Rowley noted that such a conception of the speech or debate clause would ensure that no members of the House or Senate minority would enjoy its protections during their own efforts to research legislation.
Pellettieri warned that accepting such a broad privilege for lawmakers would allow them to claim that almost anything they were doing was related to legislative work. “Not everything in a congressman’s life is protected,” the DOJ lawyer said, adding that such a move would amount to “a huge extension” of the privilege beyond its established bounds.
“Every facet of American life goes before the Congress,” Pellettieri added. “It has never been the case that every communication with anyone, anywhere about a vote would be covered….There has to be a balance.”
The judges appeared to be considering two possibilities that could allow them to bless a broad sweep for speech-or-debate privilege while still allowing investigators to evidence on Perry’s phone.
Rao suggested the court might rule that Perry couldn’t be prosecuted or interrogated in court over his fact-finding activities, but the information could still be obtained by Justice Department investigators probing potential crimes related to the 2020 election.
Katsas suggested that the court might conclude that discussions with people outside the legislative branch aren’t confidential. The appeals court is also considering whether Perry’s conversations with people in the executive branch, such as Trump, are covered by the legislative privilege.
While the appeals court did not rule Thursday, the arguments did reveal for the first time the legal basis of U.S. District Court Chief Judge Beryl Howell’s sealed ruling in December rejecting Perry’s bid to keep investigations from accessing his phone. It emerged at the arguments that Howell concluded that Perry’s activities related to certification of the election were not shielded by the speech or debate clause because they were not part of any formally authorized Congressional inquiry.
The third judge on the appeals panel, Karen Henderson, presided over the arguments remotely. The judge, an appointee of President George H.W. Bush, did not ask any questions before she was disconnected about halfway through the public session. Katsas said the court planned to reconnect her for a subsequent argument that the judges heard under seal about the specifics of Perry’s case.
While the morning’s events left Henderson’s views on the Perry case a mystery, Henderson was among the judges who ruled on the 2007 Jefferson dispute and broke with colleagues. In that case, Henderson favored greater power for Justice Department criminal investigators than the other appeals judges who considered the matter.
[ad_2]
#Appeals #court #weighs #Rep #Perrys #immunity #Jan #probe
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

February 24, 2023
Blinken: Crimea a ‘red line’ for Putin as Ukraine weighs plans to retake it

[ad_1]

According to four people with knowledge of Blinken’s response, he conveyed that the U.S. isn’t actively encouraging Ukraine to retake Crimea, but that the decision is Kyiv’s alone. The administration’s main focus is helping Ukraine advance where the fight is, mainly in the east.
That assessment echoes comments from Pentagon officials in recent weeks, who have spoken about the grinding fight still raging in the Donbas and in the country’s south, and who have questioned Ukraine’s ability to take Crimea in the near future.
Blinken, according to two of the people, gave the impression that the U.S. doesn’t consider a push to retake Crimea to be a wise move at this time. He didn’t say those words explicitly, they underscored.
Two other people didn’t take Blinken’s comments that way. The secretary remarked that it is solely the Ukrainians’ decision as to what they try to take by force, not America’s. That signaled to them that Blinken was more open to a potential Ukrainian play for Crimea.
While U.S. and NATO diplomats and military officials have never wavered from publicly stating that Crimea is part of Ukraine, since 2014 they have done little to contest Russia’s invasion and occupation of the peninsula.
“Overall the message is that there is a lot of uncertainty on how things will go from here with real questions about capacity of either side to make big gains,” one of the people said.
The four people spoke to POLITICO on the condition of anonymity to discuss the contents of an off-the-record conversation. The State Department declined to comment on the Zoom call, similar to others the secretary has had with experts to get outside perspectives on the conflict.
Blinken will join foreign dignitaries, including Ukrainian officials, at the Munich Security Conference this week. The diplomat will speak to them about how to coordinate future security assistance to the country as the war enters its second year.

Blinken, who was accompanied by Under Secretary of State Victoria Nuland in the session, is the latest senior Biden administration official to throw some cold water on Ukrainian designs on Crimea. Two weeks ago, senior Pentagon officials told members of the House Armed Services Committee that they didn’t think Ukraine could recapture the peninsula in the near future.
That assessment followed comments by Gen. Mark Milley, the Joint Chiefs chair, who has long signaled skepticism about the prospects of a Ukrainian advance.
“I still maintain that for this year it would be very, very difficult to militarily eject the Russian forces from all — every inch of Ukraine and occupied — or Russian-occupied Ukraine,” he said during a meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group in Germany on Jan. 20. “That doesn’t mean it can’t happen. Doesn’t mean it won’t happen, but it’d be very, very difficult.”
Some experts don’t believe Ukraine will try to retake Crimea, but instead will attempt to isolate it. “There are three critical points: the land bridge to Russia, the Kerch Strait bridge, and the naval base at Sevastopol. They should knock out all three,” said Kurt Volker, the former U.S. special envoy for Ukraine, who wasn’t on the call. “This would leave a lot of Russian forces without adequate support, without Ukraine actually trying to overrun Crimea, and it would still be a severe blow to Russia’s military effort.”
Occupied Crimea is bristling with air defenses, ammunition depots, and tens of thousands of troops. Many of those infantry forces are dug into fortified positions stretching hundreds of miles facing off against Ukrainian troops along the Dnipro River.
Punching through those Russian lines would be difficult for Ukrainian troops, even with the influx of artillery and armored vehicles arriving from Western donors.
The Ukrainian government has for months called for long-range artillery to begin hitting positions far behind Russia’s front lines, including in Crimea, where Russian forces have moved their headquarters and critical depots out of the 50-mile range of the rockets the U.S. has provided.
Kyiv has said that Army Tactical Missile Systems, fired from existing launchers, could hit those targets. The Biden administration has so far refused to provide them, initially claiming they were concerned Ukraine would launch attacks into Russia. U.S. officials have also said recently that there aren’t enough ATACMS in U.S. stockpiles to spare.
Speaking in Brussels Tuesday after another meeting of the Contact Group, Milley said “the Ukrainians are holding. They’re fighting the defense. The Russians, primarily the Wagner Group, are attacking, but there’s … a very significant grinding battle of attrition with very high casualties, especially on the Russian side.”
Meanwhile, the White House is privately up in arms over a Washington Post story on Monday featuring comments from an unnamed senior official questioning U.S. weapons aid through the end of the war. Officials say the comment didn’t reflect administration policy, reiterating that America’s support will proceed for “as long as it takes.”
[ad_2]
#Blinken #Crimea #red #line #Putin #Ukraine #weighs #plans #retake
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

February 16, 2023
Hispanic Caucus weighs ousting its chair over top staffer’s firing

[ad_1]

Barragán’s actions surrounding the Usyk firing are prompting anger from within the group and skepticism that she will be able to lead it going forward, according to more than a dozen people interviewed. Both people who confirmed the Hispanic Caucus’ imminent meeting on its chair described it as a potential step toward seeking her removal after Barragán’s axing of its top adviser left the influential Democratic group without any staffers at the start of a new Congress — alarming lawmakers and aides alike.
The turmoil also threatens to hurt the Hispanic Caucus’ engagement on issues important to the communities its members represent, because the executive director works with the chair to set the group’s priorities. In addition, the staffing change and resulting controversy over Barragán’s move could also distract the group from working on policy at a time when its members are preparing for intense negotiations this Congress on immigration in the Republican-controlled House.
“Jacky is no longer with the CHC. We wish her well in her future endeavors. We do not comment on internal confidential personnel matters,” Barragán told POLITICO in a statement on Thursday. Asked on Friday to comment on the news of a virtual meeting to discuss her leadership of the caucus, Barragán’s office did not respond.
The Hispanic Caucus’ vice chair, Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.), is considered next in line to run the CHC. His office did not respond to a request for comment on Barragán’s alleged management issues.
Usyk, a well-respected Hill veteran who declined to comment for this story, rose up through the ranks of Democratic offices before coming to the Hispanic Caucus. She served most recently as a top leadership aide to Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and worked previously for Rep. Tony Cárdenas (D-Calif.), who’s now in Hispanic Caucus leadership as well.
The harsh scrutiny of Barragán comes at the outset of her tenure as CHC chair, a position that she won unopposed after its previous chair, Rep. Raul Ruiz (D-Calif.), was term-limited out of the job. Her personal office ranked third for highest turnover rate of any House office from 2001 to 2021, according to the nonpartisan tracking site Legistorm.
Dear White Staffers, an Instagram account popular with Hill aides, first posted about Usyk being fired Thursday night and POLITICO confirmed the news shortly after.
After its former policy director recently departed to run another Hill group that represents younger Americans, Usyk’s firing leaves the CHC with no employed staffers as of Friday. The group had been set to bring on a new communications director next week, but it is unclear whether that aide, Bianca Lugo Lewis, will start the job as planned. Lugo Lewis did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

There is some ambiguity in the group’s bylaws about its chair’s ability to unilaterally fire staffers. One of the people familiar with the group’s dynamics who confirmed its meeting on Barragán also told POLITICO that the chair is given authority to hire staff but less clear power over dismissals.
Another two people familiar with the situation said Barragán sought counsel from the House’s lawyers before making the decision.
Barragán has a reputation of being a strict boss who struggles with high turnover in her office, a dozen current and former Hill staffers told POLITICO. Just a few years ago, during her first term, she had conversations with party leadership because of her staff churn, according to two separate people familiar with that situation.
The office of then-Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), who likely took part in those conversations with Barragán, declined to comment, citing its policy on addressing private member-to-member conversations.
CORRECTION: Due to an editing error, Rep. Barragán’s first name was misspelled in an earlier version.
[ad_2]
#Hispanic #Caucus #weighs #ousting #chair #top #staffers #firing
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

February 11, 2023
Old Bay melee: Maryland Dems circle as Cardin weighs reelection

[ad_1]
In an interview, Cardin made clear he’s not calling it quits yet. He cracked about those raising money with the Senate in mind: “If they raise money now, they can turn it over to me, can’t they?”
“I guess they’re ahead of themselves,” Cardin said, reiterating his end of March timeline. “I’m not concerned about what other people might be doing.”
Sens. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) and Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) are getting most of the attention in the latest edition of the chamber’s biennial retirement watch. Yet blue states like Maryland can earn even more scrutiny than battlegrounds within the Democratic Party, because a primary win in an open race can turn into a long and cushy Senate tenure. And Cardin is hardly the only one under pressure.
Two members of the California House delegation are launching Senate bids without bothering to wait for a retirement announcement from 89-year-old Sen. Dianne Feinstein, with a third on the way. Rep. Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.) is open to succeeding Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) if he decides to retire. And though Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) is running for a third term, everyone’s quietly keeping an eye on Vacationland — just in case.
That jockeying is drawing particular attention in Maryland — because Cardin might actually run again.
“There’s a lot of people talking about it,” said Rep. Glenn Ivey, a freshman Democrat who represents part of Prince George’s County. “You got a deep bench in Maryland, too. So there’s a lot of people who could, I think, be strong candidates.”
First elected to Congress in 1986, Cardin has drawn notice after raising less than $30,000 over the last three months and ending December with just over $1 million in the bank. That has many Maryland politicos betting that his deep-blue seat will open up.
“He’s a mentor to me. And I’ve been here a long time,” quipped Democratic Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger about Cardin, adding that he hoped the senator wouldn’t retire.

An early frontrunner could be the 51-year-old Alsobrooks, the first woman ever to serve as executive of her native Prince George’s County and the youngest person ever to be elected as state’s attorney there.
Alsobrooks is a proven fundraiser who considered running for governor in 2022 but chose instead to seek reelection to her county post. Asked about a Senate run in a WJLA interview that aired Thursday, Alsobrooks said she would consider it if the seat was open: “It would be an amazing opportunity to represent the state.”
She has taken perhaps the most concrete steps toward a run. Dave Chase, who managed former Rep. Tim Ryan’s 2022 Ohio Senate campaign, has joined Alsobrooks’ political operation, which has also begun engaging with consultants.
Trone is having conversations with potential senior staff hires who could help him mount a statewide campaign, according to three sources familiar with his preparations.
The owner of the Total Wine & More empire, Trone would bring nearly unlimited cash to any race, after investing over $13 million of his largesse in a failed 2016 House bid. Raskin ultimately won that seat and Trone ran and won a different district in 2018, which he has held since.
Both Trone and Alsobrooks declined to comment through spokespeople.
Raskin, a constitutional law scholar, gained national prominence for his lead role in former President Donald Trump’s second impeachment. But he is also currently battling lymphoma and is undergoing chemotherapy treatments. In an interview with POLITICO, he said he would not rule out a Senate run but that his focus is on his health.
“When people call me, I tell them, ‘Thank you,’” Raskin said. “But I just got to get through this. And then I’ll be able to think about the future.”
He may decline the statewide run for another reason: His recent ascension as the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee.
The current shadow field lacks geographic diversity. All three Democrats are from the D.C.-area — and some will want a Charm City Democrat to succeed Cardin, who speaks with a notable Baltimore accent. Johnny Olszewski Jr., the Baltimore County executive, has been floated for a Senate bid but is seen as more likely to eventually replace Ruppersberger in the House, should he retire.
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) advised other Democrats to buzz off while Cardin decides: “Everyone should give him room.”
One state away on I-95, Carper says he’s doing everything he needs to win reelection. He raised about $180,000 in the final quarter of 2022, significantly more than Cardin, Feinstein or King. A fourth-term senator, Carper has served in politics since the 1970s. And he’s not super eager to start his next campaign — or talk about it.
“Campaigns are too long and too expensive,” Carper said. “I shorten the campaigns as much as I can. So, I’m doing what I need to do to be able to run. That’s all I’m going to say.”
Carper, 76, faced a primary challenge in 2018, winning the nominating contest with 64 percent of the vote. His state is much smaller than Maryland, and thus there are fewer people jockeying to succeed him. But there are obvious contenders: Democratic Gov. John Carney and Blunt Rochester, who in 2016 became the first woman to represent Delaware in Congress.
“If the seat was open, I would definitely consider it,” Blunt Rochester said. She said she was focused on serving Delaware in the House but would “be prepared for whatever comes.”
Maine, meanwhile, has small benches for both parties. And King’s $56,000 in fundraising has raised eyebrows. But the 78-year-old senator is batting away any suggestion he might not run.
“I could be struck by lightning. But I am running,” King said of those who say his slow fundraising points to a possible retirement. “I’m doing all the mechanical things. It is two years away. Olympia Snowe once said, ‘there are only two ways to run: Scared and unopposed.’”
Snowe, of course, blindsided the GOP with her retirement in 2012 and opened the door for King’s election.
And while shadow races often form in states where an aging senator seems ripe for retirement, California has been the most active.
Democratic Reps. Adam Schiff and Katie Porter launched bids for Feinstein’s seat, which she has held since 1992. The incumbent has not said whether or not she will step down at the end of her term. A third colleague, Rep. Barbara Lee, is preparing to join the field.
“It is definitely awkward, but I believe that people are predicting what could happen in the future,” said Rep. Judy Chu (D-Calif.).
It’s all a little much for Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.), who runs Democrats’ campaign arm. Given that even primary elections are more than a year away, he said: “Folks should be respectful to the person who is in office.”
[ad_2]
#Bay #melee #Maryland #Dems #circle #Cardin #weighs #reelection
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

February 3, 2023
Florida weighs allowing concealed carry guns without permit

[ad_1]

“Florida led the nation in allowing for concealed carry, and that extends today as we remove the government permission slip to exercise a constitutional right,” Renner said Monday during a news conference, where he was flanked by a handful of county sheriffs.
Renner spearheaded the press conference, a signal it’s a clear top priority for the speaker, but the bill is being sponsored by state Rep. Chuck Brannan (R-Lake City) and state Sen. Jay Collins (R-Tampa). Lawmakers did not formally file a bill at the time of the news conference but are expected to by Monday afternoon.
Under the proposal, the state will no longer require individuals to get a permit from Florida to own a gun. The state also won’t mandate other provisions, including a training requirement needed to get a permit. Permits would still be an option for gun owners who want to get them, something needed to be able to legally carry a gun in states that do not have permitless carry.
The proposal does not address whether people will be allowed to openly carry firearms in public. Under current Florida law, gun owners are not allowed to carry guns in the open.
In 2021, Texas approved a similar “open carry” law that allows most gun owners 21 and over to carry a handgun in a holster without a permit. The Texas law allows citizens to carry the gun in the open or concealed.
Democrats blasted the bill that they say will flood the state with gun owners who are not properly trained. Shortly after Renner’s press conference, Democrats pledged to fight to defeat it during the 2023 session — but Republicans have supermajorities in both the House and Senate, giving them near unchecked power.
“We are united in opposition to this policy proposal,” said Rep. Christine Hunschofsky (D-Parkland), whose district includes the scene of the 2018 Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School mass school shooting that left 17 people dead.
Democrats also see the proposal as another in a long line of culture war-infused bills DeSantis will champion during the legislative session to further energize his conservative base as he prepares to run for president. In the past few week alone, DeSantis has asked lawmakers for a sweeping criminal justice bill packed with policies generally supported by conservatives, rejected an Advanced Placement course focused on African-American history, a move that has gotten him national criticism from those who think he is whitewashing American history and signaled he will push for legislation cracking down on teacher’s unions, which are the last bastion of reliable political support for Florida Democrats.

“This is another effort to appeal to his conservative base as he runs for president,” said state Rep. Anna Eskamani (D-Orlando).
DeSantis was not at the Tallahassee press conference, instead holding his own at the same time in Orlando focused on transportation budget requests.
CORRECTION: A previous version of this report misstated one of the cosponsors of the bill. State Rep. Chuck Brannan is co-sponsoring the bill.
[ad_2]
#Florida #weighs #allowing #concealed #carry #guns #permit
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

January 31, 2023
Borrow the opposition playbook? House GOP weighs the ultimate ‘tit for tat’

[ad_1]
“They’ve almost changed the rules,” House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) told POLITICO. “[Are] we going to continue that pattern? Look, we want to get as much information as we can get, and they’ve written a new playbook, so we’ll have to talk about it as a committee and as a conference.”
Republican leaders are already navigating intra-party tensions over which tactics to embrace. They are under fierce pressure from their right flank and the party’s base to go scorched-earth against the Biden administration — with some already agitating for impeachments. But centrists and institutional-minded Republicans, fresh off the sting of a disappointing midterm, are warning that carbon-copying Democrats isn’t the way to go.
“I think mostly what the Democrats did as precedent is weaken Congress … I don’t think they did a very good job,” said Rep. Kelly Armstrong (R-N.D.), who is joining the Oversight Committee. “If we get into a tit for tat — I don’t think that will serve Republicans, Congress or the American people well.”
In some ways, it’s a challenge Congress faces every time the House changes hands. Lawmakers intensely rely on precedent, taking inspiration from their predecessors regardless of party or even if they previously railed against it. To Hill veterans, it’s almost a cliche: when one Congress deploys an oversight tactic, it becomes part of the toolbox for every subsequent Congress — particularly if it is tested and approved by federal courts in D.C.
“Turnabout is fair play, and they were warned this at the time — on everything from kicking members off committees … two impeachment efforts, everything else,” Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.) said about the possibility that Republicans use Democrats’ tactics against them.
Democrats acknowledge that they approached, and even expanded, the outer limits of Congress’ investigative powers. But they say investigating an attempt by Trump and his allies to derail the transfer of presidential power, and the violent attack on the Capitol that followed, called for them to push the boundaries.
Doug Letter, the top lawyer for the House under former Speaker Nancy Pelosi and an architect of the legal battles to empower the Jan. 6 select committee, defended the panel’s investigative tactics that lawmakers had previously used only sparingly.
“It’s hard to think of a whole lot of congressional investigations that are going to be like the January 6th one, that are going to need that kind of stuff,” Letter said in an interview, pointing specifically to the panel’s voluminous subpoenas for phone records from third-party carriers like Verizon and T-Mobile.

But he also said that he anticipated Republicans would seek to deploy their own battery of oversight tools, some likely aided by the battles Letter himself won on behalf of the Democratic House.
“We obviously live in a democracy,” Letter said. “Those are the people in power.”
In court filings, Letter emphasized Congress’ broad ability to conduct investigations into matters of national significance. He frequently defended the panel against dozens of lawsuits brought by figures like former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, the Republican National Committee and Trump himself.
Time and again, judges agreed that the panel was operating properly on matters of grave national significance.
That included last year, when then-Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) unsuccessfully argued in an amicus brief for Trump ally Steve Bannon that the committee shouldn’t be granted certain powers as he had not appointed any members to it — a result of McCarthy’s decision to boycott the panel after Pelosi tossed some of his original picks.
Republicans’ tactical options aren’t limited to those the Jan. 6 committee deployed: Democrats booted Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) and Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.) from committees for incendiary rhetoric aimed at colleagues. (Both Greene and Gosar will sit on the Oversight panel this Congress.) Democrats also subpoenaed and won a legal fight to obtain Trump’s tax returns.
A House Democratic aide, granted anonymity to speak candidly, predicted Republicans will use some tactics against them but warned the “flip side is true as well.”
“Republicans set the playbook, and Trump set the playbook, for how to defend against some of this, get it in court and tie it up. … That sword cuts both ways from them. I’ve been around the Hill long enough to know what goes around comes around,” the aide added.
So far, Republicans have embraced two plays Democrats used: First, McCarthy is vowing to prevent Reps. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) from getting Intelligence Committee seats, something he can do unilaterally as speaker due to the nature of that panel. He’s also promised to keep Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) from getting a Foreign Affairs Committee seat, which will likely spark a House floor showdown.
Secondly, Republicans green-lit a sprawling select subcommittee that will probe the “weaponization” of the federal government, including current federal investigations, the Justice Department, the FBI and the intelligence community. The controversial panel, a demand by some of McCarthy’s hardline detractors during the 15-ballot speakership fight, will be under the stewardship of Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio).
McCarthy, for now, says Democrats will get to pick their members for that panel. Under the rules for the “weaponization” panel, Jordan and New York Rep. Jerry Nadler — the top Democrat on Judiciary — automatically get seats. Then of the 13 additional members McCarthy names, five are in consultation with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.).
“The other side will get to name their members on the committee. It won’t be handpicked by me and denying the Democrats their voice,” McCarthy has told reporters.
Another area to watch will be how Republicans use their subpoena power, both in compelling witnesses and obtaining records from third parties.
Comer noted that he thought Democrats have “set a lot of precedents,” pointing to both their use of subpoenas and their use of contempt of Congress.
Both Bannon and former Trump trade adviser Peter Navarro faced federal charges for defying subpoenas from the Jan. 6 select committee. DOJ declined to prosecute two others held in contempt by the House: Meadows and Trump social media adviser Dan Scavino.
While Democrats focused on phone records, Comer has his own target: bank records, which he noted it’s “very likely” he will need to subpoena. He’s already re-upped his request to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen for so-called suspicious activity reports tied to the president’s son, Hunter, and a network of associates. The financial reports, filed routinely by banks, often don’t indicate wrongdoing but can be a basis for further investigation.
“We want specific [financial] transactions,” Comer said. “I don’t want this thing to keep growing and growing and they never end.”
[ad_2]
#Borrow #opposition #playbook #House #GOP #weighs #ultimate #tit #tat
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

January 23, 2023