Georgia legislature passes controversial religious freedom bill amidst partisan tensions
The Brief
Mounting tensions between Republican and Democratic lawmakers have characterized the last days of the 2025 legislative session.
Republicans passed controversial bills in the House and Senate, Wednesday, over the objection of Democratic colleagues.
Friday is Sine Die, the last day of the session.
ATLANTA - The final two days of the 2025 legislative session in Georgia have once again proved to be active, if not controversial.
The penultimate day proved to be full of partisan tensions under the Gold Dome.
What they're saying
Senate Bill 36, the Religious Freedom and Restoration Act, is now headed to Governor Brian Kemp's desk despite efforts by House Democrats to kill the bill. Rep. Stacey Evans (D-Atlanta) opposes the legislation. She told House members, "I want to protect religion, and luckily I don't need to pass a law to do that. The federal constitution and the state constitution do that for me."
Wednesday's vote was a victory for the Georgia Baptist Mission Board and other conservative religious groups lobbying for the bill's passage. Supporters insist the 'Religious Freedom Restoration Act' ensures people of faith basic religious protections at the state and local level. "We want to make sure that freedom of religion has the same standard that freedom of the press, freedom of speech, and freedom of assembly have," Georgia Baptist Mission Board spokesman Mike Griffin told FOX 5.
The other side
Georgia Equality Executive Director Jeff Graham and others who oppose the legislation insist it would allow people to use their religion as a free pass to discriminate against the LGBTQ community and others. "In other states where we have seen this, we have seen it used by Christian adoption agencies to turn away Catholic and Jewish couples who want to adopt children. We've seen it used in Texas to hold access to contraception and HIV prevention services. We've heard of instances where police officers have said they don't want to provide security to mosques and synagogues, and of course, there are numerous examples of gay and lesbian couples as they seek basic everyday services."
Dig deeper
Also this week, Senate Republicans advanced a DEI bill, over the objection of Democrats, that would ban diversity, equity, and inclusion programs in all state public schools and universities. "The Republican party said they are going to take Georgia backwards to days when people didn't have full rights, and that's exactly what it was; it cannot be any clearer than that," Sen. Harold Jones II (D-Augusta) told reporters following the vote.
The Source
FOX 5's Deidra Dukes has been covering everything under the Gold Dome this legislative session in Georgia. Details in this article were gathered from the proceedings in the Georgia House and Georgia Senate.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Black America Web
5 minutes ago
- Black America Web
Cory Booker Responds To Ridiculous MAGA Republicans Accusations of Doing A 'Nazi Salute'
Source: Getty Images / Cory Booker / Elon Musk Cory Booker is shutting down claims he was out here throwing up a Nazi salute. MAGA Republicans and Elon Musk are losing their sh*t and doing their best to compare a moment where Cory Booker put his hand on his heart and waved goodbye to the crowd at the Democratic National Convention in California to when Musk clearly did a Nazi salute. Through a spokesperson, Booker shut down those ridiculous claims. 'Cory Booker was obviously just waving to the crowd. Anyone who claims his wave is the same as Elon Musk's gesture is operating in bad faith,' Maya Krishna-Rogers, spokesperson for Booker, said to Newsweek in a statement sent via email on Sunday. 'The differences between the two are obvious to anyone without an agenda.' Musk also doubled down on his acceptance of th use of the word 'retard' as an insult. 🤨 — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 1, 2025 MAGA Republicans going hard trying to make something out of nothing about Cory Booker waving goodbye to the crowd, comes after Musk and Steve Bannon both were both accused doing nazi salutes during events. Musk was accused of doing a Nazi salute during Trump rally during his second inauguration following his unfortunate election win. Elon Musk has gone full mask off Nazi. He is actively promoting Nazism. Tesla is now a hate symbol. — James Jansson (@jamesjansson) January 20, 2025 Still despite Booker's statement and the video evidence, you can't tell these MAGA fools a damn thing as continue to take photos of other elected officials clearly waving bye, and using them as evidence of them doing Nazi salutes in order to vindicate the alleged ketamine abuser Elon Musk. 🤨 — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 1, 2025 SMH. You can see more stupid reactions in the gallery below. Cory Booker Responds To Ridiculous MAGA Republicans Accusations of Doing A 'Nazi Salute' was originally published on Here's a list of all the news networks who have not covered Cory Booker's salute:- NYTimes- CNN- Washington Post- MSNBC- NPR- USA Today- Reuters- Axios- ABC NewsEvery single one of them wrote stories on Elon Musk's salute. do you get it yet? — kekius tees (@kekmaximusk) June 1, 2025 I'm literally shaking right now. Cory Booker is literally Hitler. I can't wait for fake news to cover this as extensively as they did Elon when gave his heart out to everyone! — Sara Rose 🇺🇸🌹 (@saras76) May 31, 2025 Hello, @NewsHour — will you be making a post comparing Cory Booker's apparent 'fascist salute' to the 'Sieg Heil?"Your post about Elon Musk making a very similar gesture amassed over 36M views. Since you assure US taxpayers that PBS is a non-partisan organization, and all. — Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) June 1, 2025 It's most amusing to watch all the people who branded @elonmusk a Nazi now tying themselves in tortured knots trying to explain why Cory Booker isn't… for doing the EXACT SAME THING. Of course, neither is.. but the hypocrisy stinks. — Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) June 1, 2025 Black America Web Featured Video CLOSE
Associated Press
6 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Opioid settlement plan allows millions to be spent on purposes other than the public health crisis
In the fallout of over 9,000 Mississippians dying of overdoses since 2000, lawyers and lawmakers have set up a plan to distribute the hundreds of millions of dollars from corporations that catalyzed the crisis. But public health advocates and Mississippians closest to the public health catastrophe worry the setup could enable these dollars to be spent on purposes other than ending the overdose epidemic. Mississippi is expected to receive $370 million from pharmaceutical companies that profited while people struggled with addiction. That payout is set to be split between the state and local governments, with 85%, or about $315 million, being controlled by the Legislature. For years after the state attorney general's office helped finalize the first settlements in 2021, it was unclear how the state would distribute its share and how much would be used to prevent the crisis from persisting. State senators and representatives took a major step toward answering these questions earlier this year. They nearly unanimously passed Senate Bill 2767, a law that outlines a general framework for how about $259 million of the funds will be distributed. A 15-person advisory council — made up of representatives for state government agencies, elected officials and law enforcement officials — will develop a grant application process for organizations focused on addressing the opioid addiction crisis. After evaluating the applications and making a list of which grants should be funded, the Legislature will decide whether to approve or deny each of the council's recommendations. The state lawmakers can spend the remaining $56 million they control for any purpose — related or unrelated to addressing addiction. House Speaker Jason White and Lt. Gov. Delbert Hosemann, who wield massive power over lawmakers and how state funds are spent, did not respond to questions from Mississippi Today about their priorities for the funds. Sen. Nicole Boyd, a Republican from Oxford and the bill's lead sponsor, said she and other senators borrowed some ideas from surrounding states to determine how these funds could best prevent more fallout from the opioid crisis. 'It involves everything, from child welfare services to the judicial system to medical care to mental health services,' she said. 'It is a crisis that has affected every aspect of society, and we needed a comprehensive group of people making those recommendations.' However, the bill leaves some questions unanswered, like how the application process will work, when it will open to the public and how grants will be evaluated. Public health advocates and Mississippians impacted by addiction expressed concern about the advisory council's makeup, the $56 million carveout for expenses unrelated to the opioid crisis and the Legislature's final decision-making power. They said those provisions could cause some of the corporate defendants' dollars to be spent on issues other than addressing and preventing overdoses. Jane Clair Tyner, a Hattiesburg resident, lost her 23-year-old son Asa Henderson in 2019 after he struggled for years with substance use disorder. Until last month, through her former job with the Mississippi overdose prevention nonprofit End It For Good, she worked to ensure that fewer parents have to go through the pain her family experienced. She said the only ways these state settlement dollars should be spent are on improving Mississippi public health and keeping people who are at risk of overdosing safe. 'That's what it should go towards, but not to the Legislature,' she said. 'This is not a rainy day slush fund.' An evolving plan It wasn't always the plan for the Legislature to control so much of the settlement dollars. In 2021, when Mississippi and other states were in the midst of negotiating settlements, State Attorney General Lynn Fitch published an agreement between the state and local governments that would send only 15% to the Legislature's general fund. The agreement said that the bulk of the money – 70% – would be sent to the University of Mississippi Medical Center to build a new addiction medicine institute. But Mississippi law says the Legislature is the ultimate decision maker for how this type of state settlement money gets spent, according to Fitch's Chief of Staff Michelle Williams. So lawmakers passed their bill to change the plan. The Legislature changed the arrangement to make sure the money goes to where the state's most pressing addiction needs are, said Boyd. The advisory council, which will be supplemented by at least 22 additional nonvoting members, is a good way to have those needs captured, she said. As for the Legislature having final approval power, Boyd said that and other provisions were put into the bill to keep some power with lawmakers if the council becomes ineffective or political. It's the highest percentage of any state's opioid settlement share that will be controlled by a Legislature, according to the Vital Strategies Overdose Prevention Program and state guides. Dr. Caleb Alexander, an epidemiology professor at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, served as one of the plaintiffs' expert witnesses for some of the opioid lawsuits. Alexander has also helped U.S. cities and counties develop blueprints for how to use the settlements to quell their opioid crises. He said using the money on a variety of prevention, treatment and recovery strategies, rather than one big project, is likely a better way to save lives and prevent more addiction. But having the Legislature, rather than an apolitical body of addiction experts, play such a large role is not the setup he would suggest. 'I would have some concerns that it may gum things up,' he said. Additionally, Alexander said creating ways for funds to not be used to address the opioid epidemic, as the 2025 bill does, is 'a shame.' While the settlement agreements say that 70% of the funds must be spent on addressing addiction, there is nothing that prevents all the money from being used for the crisis, and most statesare doing that. He said the settlements define a wide variety of uses as addressing the epidemic — from first responder training to medication research and development — and he doesn't see a scenario where it makes sense to spend the money on other uses. 'The costs of abatement far outweigh the available funds for every city or county that I've examined,' he said. Boyd said she believes her colleagues in the House and Senate are all motivated to use this money to address addiction as a mental health condition. She said the new bill categorizes some funds as 'nonabatement' to free them up for ways to address addiction that may not fit neatly into the settlements' list of uses. The attorney general's original plan was the first to categorize a percentage of the funds as not needing to be used to stop the opioid crisis. Williams said it was written that way to match the terms of the national settlement agreements, although the settlement for the largest payout says spending on purposes other than addressing the opioid crisis is 'disfavored by the parties.' She said Fitch would love to see all the funds be spent on addiction response and prevention, like the One Pill Can Kill campaign the office runs. 'But it's the Legislature's prerogative,' she said. 'Where are the people in recovery?' Jason McCarty, the Mississippi Harm Reduction Initiative's former executive director, said he's glad the plan is no longer to send such a large portion of the settlement funds to UMMC. Organizations like the Initiative, he said, also could use additional support to keep Mississippians from dying. And he's concerned that while a peer recovery specialist will serve as a nonvoting member, none of the committee's 15 voting members must be people who've experienced addiction. 'Where are the people in recovery?' he asked. 'We're the subject matter experts.' Boyd said many of the voting committee roles are representatives of state agencies that she expects will help administer the settlement grants, like the Department of Mental Health. And there were only so many people who the Legislature can assign spots. 'It was no slight to anybody,' she said. 'It's just, this is a completely complex issue.' The Mississippi governor, lieutenant governor and speaker of the house will each assign two people to the committee, and Boyd said it's possible they will choose people in recovery. The bill says council members need to be appointed by early June. However the process plays out, McCarty hopes all the state's funds go to reputable organizations focused on preventing more opioid-related harm. In Mississippi, he sees a lack of housing and treatment options, especially for new parents, as areas that this money can help address. And as hundreds of Mississippians continue to die from overdoses each year, he said the state government has to move quickly and responsibly to make these funds available. 'We don't have a year to wait. It needs to go out quicker.' ___ This story was originally published by Mississippi Today and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.
Fox News
6 minutes ago
- Fox News
After Ukraine's surprise drone assault on Russia, new attention drawn to sensitive sites stateside
After Ukraine launched a sudden drone assault on Russian installations, it brought new attention to the U.S.' own vulnerabilities, regardless of which side the U.S. stood on Kyiv's attack. In recent years, Chinese Communist Party-linked entities have commercially targeted land around the U.S., including in the vicinity of sensitive installations like the Grand Forks Air Force Base in North Dakota. The Fufeng Group's 300-acre farmland purchase in 2021 first raised the collective antennae of Congress to such under-the-radar transactions – and even Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis swiftly banned them in his state as a result, among other efforts around the country. On Tuesday, North Dakota's senators agreed that the U.S. must remain vigilant for any malign activity, whether it be from relatively novel drone assaults to potential espionage through real estate transactions. "When adversaries can buy our land, attend our universities, photograph silos in our prairies, perform aerial surveillance, park their ships near our military bases, or even just join our PTAs, they have more opportunities to be nefarious," Republican Sen. Kevin Cramer told Fox News Digital. "Our posture must always be vigilant, never assuming foreign actors are benign or have the best intentions," he said. "Whether it's directly spying, indirectly influencing, or sending drones to blow up aircraft, the ability of the enemy increases when we allow them easy access near our national interests." Cramer's Flickertail State counterpart, Sen. John Hoeven, joined an effort to prevent such land-buys and has worked with federal partners to update the process in which foreign investment is analyzed for approval and decided upon. "We need to remain vigilant against China and other adversaries," said Hoeven, who is co-sponsoring South Dakota Sen. Mike Rounds' bill banning individuals and entities controlled by China, Russia, Iran and North Korea from purchasing farmland or commercial land near sensitive federal sites. "At the same time, we're working to update the CFIUS process [which governs federal approval of foreign investments] to ensure proper reviews are taking place as well," Hoeven said. "We also are working to develop the technology we need to protect our domestic military bases from potential drone threats." Rounds' bill also has bipartisan support, including from Sen. Catherine Cortez-Masto, D-Nev., whose state also hosts sensitive government sites like Nellis Air Force Base and Area 51. "It is common sense that we should not allow our foreign adversaries to buy agricultural land next to these locations," Masto said in a statement. Rounds added in a statement that America's "near-peer adversaries… are looking for any possible opportunity to surveil our nation's capabilities and resources." Even private-sector entities have expressed concern, including the South Dakota Soybean Association, which said farmland must be protected from foreign purchase for both agricultural and national security purposes.
