&w=3840&q=100)
US Speaker cuts short House session to avoid vote on releasing Epstein file
He made the move to deny Democrats the chance to try to force procedural votes on measures that would call on the Justice Department to make the information public. It reflected how deep divisions among Republicans on the matter have now paralyzed the House, as Republicans seek to avoid a politically perilous vote on a matter that is confounding President Trump and roiling their MAGA base.
'We're done being lectured on transparency,' Johnson said at a news conference, where the typically unflappable speaker appeared frustrated.
He complained about 'endless efforts to politicize the Epstein investigation' and added: 'We're not going to play political games with this,' as he wrapped up his final news conference before September.
Republicans had planned votes this week on an immigration measure, a permitting bill and a rollback of some Biden-era regulations. But the House Rules Committee, the powerful panel controlled by the speaker that determines which legislation reaches the floor, has been upended by the Epstein issue, with Democrats repeatedly demanding votes on it.
Democrats on the committee vowed to force such a vote again this week as part of a routine measure to allow debate on unrelated legislation. But Republicans did not want to go on the record on the matter, for fear of retribution from angry supporters who are demanding the release of Epstein files.
The result is that the House cannot move ahead on any substantive legislation. Republicans now plan to wrap up votes Tuesday and early Wednesday on some noncontroversial bills and call their recess by midafternoon on Wednesday.
After initially saying the material should come out, Johnson on Monday vowed that he would not schedule a vote this summer on whether to release the Epstein files, saying that Trump needed 'space' to determine how to proceed. On Tuesday, he claimed that House Republicans were united on the issue. But they appeared to be far from it.
'Crimes have been committed,' said Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, Republican of Georgia. 'If there's no justice and no accountability, people are going to get sick of it. That's where people largely are.'
Representative Ralph Norman, Republican of South Carolina and a member of the Rules panel, criticized his leaders for 'stalling' on the matter. 'The American people deserve action, not excuses,' he wrote on social media on Tuesday. 'Let's vote on it before August recess and get it DONE!!'
And Representative Thomas Massie, Republican of Kentucky, said he still planned to circumvent House Republican leaders and force a vote on releasing the Epstein files in September, with the help of Democrats, using a maneuver known as a discharge petition.
'He just told us in there to stick their heads in the sand about this Epstein thing,' Massie said after a Republican conference meeting, noting that Johnson had offered members no clear explanation of why a vote on the matter needed to be delayed.
'Some here are much more frustrating than others,' Johnson said, referring to Massie. 'I don't know how his mind works, I don't know what he's thinking. He could have brought his discharge petition any time. Now he's clamoring as if there's any sort of timeline.' He ended with some Southern pique: 'Bless his heart.'
On Tuesday, the House Oversight Committee also voted to subpoena Ghislaine Maxwell, the longtime partner of Epstein who is serving a 20-year sentence on a sex-trafficking conviction, for a deposition. Representative Tim Burchett, a Tennessee Republican who has pushed for more transparency in the Epstein case, introduced the motion to subpoena Maxwell, and several Republican members supported it.
Greene also expressed skepticism about Maxwell's testimony, noting that she was likely 'bartering for something,' like a presidential pardon.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
15 minutes ago
- Mint
US pauses visa processing at embassy in Niger, State Dept says
WASHINGTON, July 26 (Reuters) - The United States is pausing all routine visa services at U.S. embassy in Nigerien capital Niamey until further notice, according to a State Department spokesperson and an internal State Department cable seen by Reuters on Saturday. The July 25-dated cable did not provide a reason for the move but a State Department spokesperson said the pause, which would cover all immigrant and non-immigrant visa categories, was in place until Washington addressed "concerns with the Government of Niger." The spokesperson did not provide further details on the reason, but said that most diplomatic and official visas were excepted from the pause. "The Trump Administration is focused on protecting our nation and our citizens by upholding the highest standards of national security and public safety through our visa process," the Department spokesperson said. The diplomatic cable also instructed consular officers in other visa processing posts to apply "heightened scrutiny" when assessing non-immigrant visa applications for Nigerien nationals, whose overstay rates it said were 8 percent for visitor visas and 27 percent for student and exchange visas. Consular managers should make an effort to reduce the number of overstays by nonimmigrant visa holders in the United States, the cable said and added: "In this regard, particular vigilance is needed in adjudicating Nigerien NIV applicants." The U.S. embassy in Niamey has informed all individuals impacted, the spokesperson added. As part of his hardline stance on immigration, President Donald Trump has ordered a nationwide campaign to arrest migrants who are in the country illegally and has vowed to deport millions of people, executing raids at work sites including farms that were largely exempted from enforcement during his first term. Trump administration officials have said student visa and green card holders are subject to deportation over their support for Palestinians and criticism of Israel's conduct in the war in Gaza, calling their actions a threat to U.S. foreign policy and accusing them of being pro-Hamas. Rubio in May said the number of visas he has revoked was probably in the thousands. The State Department under his leadership significantly tightened social media vetting for U.S. visa applicants. The U.S. military in September said it had completed its withdrawal from Niger, after the West African nation's ruling junta in April 2024 ordered Washington to withdraw its nearly 1,000 military personnel from the country. It was an embarrassing setback for Washington that followed a coup last year in the West African nation. Before the coup, Niger had been a key partner in the U.S. fight against insurgents in the Sahel region of Africa, who have killed thousands of people and displaced millions more. (Reporting by Humeyra Pamuk, Editing by Nick Zieminski)
India.com
15 minutes ago
- India.com
Big setback for Donald Trump as Federal Court strikes down birthright citizenship order across US; how will it affect Indians?
(Image: Reuters) New Delhi: A federal court in America has again stayed President Donald Trump's order which said that if a child's parents are living illegally in America, then that child will not get American citizenship. This is the third time that the court has stopped Trump's order from being implemented. The court also said that the final decision on this matter will be taken by the Supreme Court, but until any order comes from there, this rule of Trump will not be implemented. When was the order passed? Trump had banned Birthright Citizenship by signing an executive order on January 20, the day of his swearing-in. A few days after this, the US Federal Court had stayed President Donald Trump's decision to end the right to birthright citizenship for 14 days. Earlier on June 28, the US Supreme Court had given a decision in favour of President Trump. The Supreme Court had said that the judges of the lower courts cannot stop Trump's birthright citizenship order across the country. They should reconsider their order. What did the US Supreme Court say? The Supreme Court had said with a majority of 6-3 that a federal judge alone cannot decide to stop policies across the country. Now if a case like Trump's order has to be stopped, then many people will have to sue together, not just one state or person. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who wrote the decision, had said – the job of federal courts is not to monitor government orders. Their job is to resolve matters according to the powers given by Parliament. However, the court did not give any immediate decision on Trump's order and also ordered not to allow Trump's order to be implemented for 30 days i.e. till July 28. This means that for now, children born in America will continue to get citizenship, as they used to get earlier. Under which 3 situations citizenship is not granted by Trump's order? The executive order by which Trump abolished the birthright citizenship law is named 'Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship'. This order refuses to grant American citizenship in 3 situations. If the mother of a child born in America is living there illegally. At the time of the child's birth, the mother is a legal but temporary resident of America. The father should not be a US citizen or a legal permanent resident at the time of the child's birth. The 14th Amendment to the US Constitution gives the right to birthright citizenship. Through this, children of immigrants living in the US also get the right to citizenship. What will be the effect on Indians? According to the data of the US Census Bureau till 2024, about 54 lakh Indians live in America. This is about one and a half percent of the US population. Two-thirds of these people are first generation immigrants. That is, they went to America first in the family, but the rest are citizens born in America. If the Supreme Court gives an order in favour of Trump's bill, then it will become difficult for first generation immigrants to get American citizenship. However, if it gives an order against it, then citizenship will remain as before.
NDTV
20 minutes ago
- NDTV
Fired Immigration Judges Vow To Fight Back Against Trump Administration Terminations
Chicago: Federal immigration judges fired by the Trump administration are filing appeals, pursuing legal action and speaking out in an unusually public campaign to fight back. More than 50 immigration judges - from senior leaders to new appointees - have been fired since Donald Trump assumed the presidency for the second time. Normally bound by courtroom decorum, many are now unrestrained in describing terminations they consider unlawful and why they believe they were targeted. Their suspected reasons include gender discrimination, decisions on immigration cases played up by the Trump administration and a courthouse tour with the Senate's No. 2 Democrat. "I cared about my job and was really good at it," Jennifer Peyton, a former supervising judge told The Associated Press this week. "That letter that I received, the three sentences, explained no reason why I was fired." Peyton, who received the notice while on a July Fourth family vacation, was appointed judge in 2016. She considered it her dream job. Peyton was later named assistant chief immigration judge in Chicago, helping to train, mentor and oversee judges. She was a visible presence in the busy downtown court, greeting outside observers. She cited top-notch performance reviews and said she faced no disciplinary action. Peyton said she'll appeal through the Merit Systems Protection Board, an independent government agency Trump has also targeted. Peyton's theories about why she was fired include appearing on a "bureaucrat watchdog list" of people accused by a right-wing organization of working against the Trump agenda. She also questions a courthouse tour she gave to Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois in June. Durbin blasted Peyton's termination as an "abuse of power," saying he's visited before as part of his duties as a publicly-elected official. The nation's immigration courts - with a backlog of about 3.5 million cases - have become a key focus of Trump's hard-line immigration enforcement efforts. The firings are on top of resignations, early retirements and transfers, adding up to 106 judges gone since January, according to the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, which represents judges. There are currently about 600 immigration judges. Several of those fired, including Peyton, have recently done a slew of interviews on local Chicago television stations and with national outlets, saying they now have a platform for their colleagues who remain on the bench. "The ones that are left are feeling threatened and very uncertain about their future," said Matt Biggs, the union's president. Carla Espinoza, a Chicago immigration judge since 2023, was fired as she was delivering a verdict this month. Her notice said she'd be dismissed at the end of her two-year probationary period with the Executive Office for Immigration Review. "I am personally committed to my career. We're not political appointees," she told AP. "I'm entitled to a reason." She believes the firings have disproportionately affected women and ethnic minorities, including people with Hispanic-sounding surnames like hers. She plans to take legal action before the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which has also shifted focus under Trump. "There's a very strong pattern of discriminatory factors," she said. Espinoza thinks another reason could be her decision to release a Mexican immigrant falsely accused of threatening to assassinate Trump. Ramon Morales Reyes was accused of a writing a threatening letter by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. But the claims quickly fell apart as Wisconsin authorities determined that Morales Reyes was actually framed by a man who had previously attacked him. Espinoza said she felt pressure with public scrutiny, media coverage and Noem's statements about Morales Reyes, which weren't corrected or removed from social media. "It's hard to silence the noise and just do your job fairly when there's so much distraction," she said. "I think I did. And I stand by my decision as having been a fair one to release an individual who I believe was twice victimized." The Executive Office for Immigration Review, part of the Justice Department that oversees the immigration courts, declined to comment on the firings through an agency spokesperson. Peyton said she isn't sure that working as an immigration judge is still her dream job. "It's important that everyone in our country knows what's happening in our immigration courts," she said. "The Department of Justice that I joined in 2016 is not the same one now."
