The White House Friday stood behind its assertions that Republicans seriously want to impeach President Obama, even though House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, has repeatedly dismissed the possibility.
“Prominent voices in the Republican Party” want to proceed with impeachment against Obama, White House press secretary Josh Earnest said, when asked about senior Obama adviser Dan Pfeiffer’s claim that impeachment talk should not be ignored.
Sign Up for the Politics Today newsletter!
“Some Republicans, including some Republicans who are running for office, hope they can get into office so that they can impeach the president,” Earnest insisted.
The Obama administration is preparing to effectively “nullify” the immigration laws of the United States through an executive action, says one Republican senator. As Time reported Thursday, President Obama appears prepared to provide millions of illegal immigrants living in the U.S. work authorization via executive orders:
When President Obama issues executive orders on immigration in coming weeks, pro-reform activists are expecting something dramatic: temporary relief from deportation and work authorization for perhaps several million undocumented immigrants. If the activists are right, the sweeping move would upend a contentious policy fight and carry broad political consequences.
The activists met privately with the President and his aides June 30 at the White House, and say in that meeting Obama suggested he will act before the November midterm elections. They hope his decision will offer relief to a significant percentage of the estimated 11.7 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S. “He seems resolute that he’s going to go big and go soon,” says Frank Sharry, executive director of the pro-reform group America’s Voice.
But Alabama senator Jeff Sessions, a Republican, says in a statement that the “temporary relief from deportation” would be a de facto ending of immigration enforcement:
The recent efforts of Manassas police and Prince William County prosecutors to photograph the erect genitalia of a 17-year-old boy for evidence in a “sexting” case has revived a debate in Virginia over whether such conduct between minors should be illegal at all.
Legislation introduced in Richmond this year would have made it a misdemeanor instead of a felony for one minor to send electronically an explicit photo of him or herself to another minor or for a minor to possess up to 10 such images of another minor. But the bill failed, with defenders of the current law arguing that nightmare scenarios of law enforcement overreach were unlikely.
Opponents of the current law have pointed to the response of authorities in the Manassas case — in which a 17-year-old male sent explicit photos of himself to his teenage girlfriend — as an example of why the law should be changed.
The case “helps people to understand prosecutorial discretion is not always exercised like we think it’s going to be,” said Del. Scott A. Surovell (D-Fairfax), an attorney and sponsor of the sexting bill. “If there was a misdemeanor alternative, it would be a lot easier for schools or churches to deal with this on their own.”
A D.C. police officer accused of trying to murder his wife was sent to jail Friday after a judge ruled he had violated the terms of his bond.
Samson Lawrence III, 46, was detained at the end of a bond hearing held hours after his first trial ended in a hung jury Thursday. Lawrence will remain in jail until his retrial, which has been scheduled for November.
A Prince George’s County judge ruled Lawrence had violated orders demanding the officer stay away from his wife after it was discovered that he had been texting and calling her. Lawrence’s wife testified Friday that he wrote to tell her he loved her and to talk her out of testifying against him in court. He had also come to the couple’s home despite the stay-away order.
Eleanor Holmes Norton, the non-voting congressional delegate for the District of Columbia, angrily sputtered during a congressional hearing Friday that the White House should not be held up to scrutiny, saying that there was no right to know what it was doing behind closed doors.
“You don’t have a right to know everything in a separation-of-powers government, my friend. That is the difference between a parliamentary government and a separation-of-powers government,” Norton said during a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing.
It was, to put mildly, a significant departure from the more traditional liberal stance that openness and transparency are must to prevent abuses of power by government officials. Instead the leading advocate for statehood for the District of Columbia literally argued that even the congressional committee charged with oversight shouldn’t be asking questions in the first place.
Gov. C.L. “Butch” Otter has sent a letter to federal officials telling them not to send any of the unaccompanied young migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border to Idaho — but it turns out the feds already have, albeit a tiny number.
Otter sent the letter Wednesday to U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Mathews Burwell, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director Leon Rodriguez. On Thursday, federal authorities released data on the number of children sent to various states, including eight to Idaho.
Otter’s press secretary, Jon Hanian, said no one from the federal government had informed the state.
“We are working now to determine the veracity of this report,” Hanian wrote in an email. “Should it prove to be true, it underscores the importance of the letter the governor released yesterday putting the federal government on notice, that Idaho will not be used as a staging area or a destination for the crisis the federal government has created.
Barely a month after federal regulations for school cafeterias kicked in, states are already pushing back.
Specifically, they’re fighting nutrition standards that would considerably alter one of the most sacred rituals of the American public school system: bake sales.
Twelve states have established their own policies to circumvent regulations in the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 that apply to “competitive snacks,” or any foods and beverages sold to students on school grounds that are not part of the Agriculture Department’s school meal programs, according to the National Association of State Boards of Education. Competitive snacks appear in vending machines, school stores, and food and beverages, including items sold at bake sales.