Rep. Xiong responds to ‘disrespectful' remarks from Michigan House Speaker
While speaking with reporters during his weekly press briefing on Wednesday, Michigan House Speaker Matt Hall (R-Richland Township) launched into a string of insults leveled at state Rep. Mai Xiong (D-Warren), after she criticized Hall for canceling a legislative session set for Tuesday, the same day President Donald Trump came to Michigan for a rally attended by Hall to mark the President's first 100 days in office.
'We have this very low IQ representative named Mai Xiong, probably one of the dumbest ones in the Legislature, and I saw this video of her, and she's like 'the House Speaker is not here today. We need to have session. You know? We need to work for the people of Michigan, Macomb County,'' Hall said. 'Well, where was I? While she's doing nothing for her county and for her district. I was in Macomb County, right near her district, delivering a new mission with President Trump for Selfridge Air Force Base. So I hope she thanks me. That would be nice. Wouldn't it be nice if Mai Xiong made a video thanking me because she's not doing anything anyway.'
Hours after the press conference concluded, Xiong responded, posting a video which included Hall's remarks and releasing a statement shortly after.
'I am deeply disheartened and disappointed by the recent remarks made by the Speaker of the Michigan House…These words weren't just disrespectful — they were meant to demean, belittle, and devalue,' Xiong said in her statement before criticizing Hall's leadership decisions.
'Let me be clear: What's truly dumb is passing a state House bill to rename the Gulf of Mexico, a body of water thousands of miles away from Michigan and a waste of taxpayer dollars,' Xiong said. 'What's truly dumb is violating the Michigan Constitution by hijacking nine bills passed by the legislature, including one I authored to support our public workers, and blocking them from reaching the governor's desk while pretending to hold veto power he simply doesn't have.'
Following a tumultuous lame duck session — where Senate Democrats worked through a record-setting 29 hour session to advance policies before House Republicans took control of the chamber, ending Democrats trifecta in Lansing — nine bills passed during that session have been held in limbo, after former House Speaker Joe Tate (D-Detroit) failed to present the votes to the governor.
Senate Democrats have since taken legal action against the House to compel Hall to present the bills. While Court of Claims Judge Sima Patel determined that the state Constitution requires House leadership to submit the bills to the governor, she declined to order Hall to do so, as state courts have previously declined to enforce legislative rules.
Senate Majority Leader Winnie Brinks (D-Grand Rapids) sought to bring the case directly to the Michigan Supreme Court. However, the Court declined to hear the case, instead ordering the Michigan Court of Appeals to 'expedite its consideration and resolution of this case.'
Xiong's bill, House Bill 6058, would increase the amount public employers can contribute towards employees' health insurance plans.
In her statement, Xiong further criticized Hall for taking credit for securing additional fighter jets at Selfridge Air National Guard Base.
'While the Speaker uses the press and platform of the Speakership to tear others down, let me remind him, and the people of Michigan — who I am,' Xiong said. 'I am a mother of four young children who will one day ask me why the highest elected official in the House called their mom dumb and 'low IQ.' I am a refugee and immigrant who came here seeking freedom. I am a daughter, sister, a wife, a friend. I am the first Hmong American elected — and currently only Asian American woman in the Michigan House of Representatives.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
24 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Trump has said abortion is a state issue. His judicial picks could shape it nationally for decades
CHICAGO — One called abortion a 'barbaric practice.' Another referred to himself as a 'zealot' for the anti-abortion movement. Several have played prominent roles in defending their state's abortion restrictions in court and in cases that have had national impact, including on access to medication abortion . As President Donald Trump pushes the Senate to confirm his federal judicial nominees, a review by The Associated Press shows that roughly half of them have revealed anti-abortion views, been associated with anti-abortion groups or defended abortion restrictions.
Atlantic
26 minutes ago
- Atlantic
Give the Moon a Big, Beautiful Base
No one can say that the Trump administration is entirely against alternative energy. In his first bold policy stroke as NASA's interim head, Sean Duffy has directed the agency to put a 100-kilowatt nuclear reactor on the moon by decade's end. This is not a lark. If humanity means to establish a permanent settlement on the moon, nuclear power will almost certainly be essential to its operation. And a lunar base may well be the most wondrous achievement in space exploration that people reading this will see during their lifetime. The moon has gone unvisited, except by robots, for more than 50 years, and as of several months ago, it seemed as though Americans would be staying away from it for a good while longer. President Donald Trump was taking cues from Elon Musk, who seemed inclined to shelve the plan to put Americans back on the lunar surface and focus instead on an all-out sprint to Mars. But Musk has since fallen out of favor, and last month, congressional Republicans secured a funding boost for the moon program. NASA astronauts are now scheduled to return to the moon in 2027, and if all goes well, they will be landing on it regularly, starting in the early 2030s. Each crew will carry parts of a small base that can grow piece by piece into a living space for a few people. The astronauts will also take a pair of vehicles for expeditions—a little rover that they can use for local jaunts in their space suits, and a larger, pressurized one that will allow them to go on 500-mile regolith road trips in street clothes. A base on the moon would be more democratic than those that Musk and his acolytes have advocated building on Mars. Given shorter travel times, a greater number of people would be able to experience its otherworldly ashen plains. Their homesick calls to Earth would have only second-long delays, as opposed to minutes for a call from Mars. But even a small encampment on the lunar surface is going to require considerable energy. Temperatures dip to –410 degrees Fahrenheit in the shade, and human bodies will need to keep cozy amid that deep chill. The International Space Station runs on solar power, but that won't be enough on most of the moon, where nights last for 14 days. Some of the agency's other off-world projects are powered by raw plutonium. Hunks of it sit inside the Mars rovers, for instance, radiating heat that the wheeled robots convert into electricity. These hot rocks are also encased inside NASA's probes to the outer planets and their moons. Without plutonium, the two Voyager spacecrafts couldn't continue to send data back to Earth as they recede from the solar system. The moon base will need more than a radioactive rock. It will need a reactor that actually splits atoms, like the one that Duffy has proposed this week. Even if that reactor were to fail, the resulting meltdown wouldn't present the same risks to humans that it would on Earth. The moon is already a radiation-rich environment, and it has no wind to blow the reactor's most dangerous effluvia around; the material would simply fall to the ground. Duffy framed his push to get the reactor in place as a matter of national security. NASA's program to return to the moon, called Artemis, will be an international effort, with several countries contributing pieces of the final base. (Japan's space agency has tapped Toyota to design the large, pressurized lunar vehicle.) But when the United States invited Russia to join, Vladimir Putin declined. He has instead opted to help out with a larger Chinese lunar base, which is supposed to include a nuclear reactor 10 times as powerful as the one that Duffy announced. Last month, Bhavya Lal, who served as an associate administrator at NASA during the Biden administration and is now a professor at RAND, and her fellow aerospace expert Roger Myers released a report arguing that a county could sneakily establish a sovereign zone on the moon in defiance of the Outer Space Treaty just by building a reactor. For instance, the Chinese could insist on a buffer around theirs for the sake of nuclear safety, and use that to keep Americans away from desirable ice-rich craters nearby. Lal and Myers seem to have captured the new administration's attention: Duffy's new directive ordering the development of the reactor specifically mentioned this risk. If worry over Chinese lunar land grabs is the motivation for a moon base, so much the better. Space exploration often requires a geopolitical spur. And if NASA can build this first small lunar settlement, something grander could follow close behind. Once the agency has mastered the construction of a 100-kilowatt lunar nuclear reactor, it should have little trouble scaling up to larger ones that can support tens, or even hundreds, of people—in bases of the size that now exist on Antarctica. Some space agencies have reportedly discussed building hydroponic greenhouses and other elaborate structures inside the voluminous caves that run beneath the moon's Sea of Tranquility. All of this infrastructure could enable some serious lunar dystopias. The moon's surface could become an industrial hellscape, pocked with mining operations where robots and human serfs extract platinum and titanium for use in advanced electronics back on Earth. Or the Outer Space Treaty could break down and the moon could become a heavily militarized zone—even a staging ground for nuclear weapons. But an inhabited moon could also be a global commons for research. Both the U.S. and China have developed designs for large radio telescopes on the lunar dark side, where they'd be shielded from Earth's radio noise and would greatly aid the search for signals from distant civilizations. In one design, robots would spread a metal mesh from a crater's center to its rim, turning its concave surface into a natural radio dish. One can imagine an astronomer at a lunar base, peering out from a porthole, seeing the Earth shining in the sky, picking out its individual oceans and continents, and knowing that on the moon's opposite side, a giant ear would be listening for messages from other Earths and other moons, all across the Milky Way and far beyond.
Associated Press
26 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Trump has said abortion is a state issue. His judicial picks could shape it nationally for decades
CHICAGO (AP) — One called abortion a 'barbaric practice.' Another referred to himself as a 'zealot' for the anti-abortion movement. Several have played prominent roles in defending their state's abortion restrictions in court and in cases that have had national impact, including on access to medication abortion. As President Donald Trump pushes the Senate to confirm his federal judicial nominees, a review by The Associated Press shows that roughly half of them have revealed anti-abortion views, been associated with anti-abortion groups or defended abortion restrictions. Trump has offered shifting positions on the issue while indicating he wants to leave questions of abortion access to the states. But his court nominees will have lifetime appointments and be in position to roll back abortion access long after the Republican president leaves the White House. Bernadette Meyler, a professor of constitutional law at Stanford University, said judicial nominations 'are a way of federally shaping the abortion question without going through Congress or making a big, explicit statement.' 'It's a way to cover up a little bit what is happening in the abortion sphere compared to legislation or executive orders that may be more visible, dramatic and spark more backlash,' she said. Trump is having an enduring impact on the federal courts Of the 17 judicial nominees so far in Trump's second term, at least eight have argued in favor of abortion restrictions or against expanded abortion access. No such records could be found for the other nine, nor did the AP review find evidence that any of Trump's judicial nominees support increased access to abortion. 'Every nominee of the President represents his promises to the American people and aligns with the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark ruling,' a White House spokesman, Harrison Fields, said in a statement that referenced the 2022 decision overturning the constitutional right to abortion established in Roe v. Wade. 'The Democrats' extreme position on abortion was rejected in November in favor of President Trump's commonsense approach, which allows states to decide, supports the sanctity of human life, and prevents taxpayer funding of abortion.' Trump's first term also had an enduring impact on the courts, appointing 234 judges. By the end of that term, more than one-quarter of active federal judges were nominated by Trump, including three Supreme Court justices who helped overturn Roe v. Wade. Challenging abortion care, medication, Planned Parenthood In his second term, all but five of his 17 nominees are from states that went for Trump in 2024 and where Republicans have pushed severe abortion restrictions. Among them, four nominees are from Missouri and five are from Florida. Here is a look at the nominees who have tried to reduce abortion access or have advocated for restrictions. They did not respond to requests for comment: — Whitney Hermandorfer, who has been confirmed to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, has built much of her relatively short career as a lawyer around challenging former President Joe Biden's policies related to abortion and transgender rights. She challenged a federal law requiring employers to provide workers with reasonable accommodations to get abortion care, as well as Title X regulations that required providers who receive funding through the program to give information about abortions to patients if asked. Hermandorfer defended Tennessee's abortion ban, one of the strictest in the country, in court and tried to dismiss a lawsuit from doctors seeking clarification on exemptions to the ban. She said abortion deserves special scrutiny because 'this is the only medical procedure that terminates a life.' — Maria Lanahan, a district court nominee in Missouri, helped write the state's complaint in a lawsuit that had sweeping national implications for access to medication abortion. The case challenged the FDA approval of the abortion pill mifepristone despite decades of evidence showing the drug is safe and effective. The lawyer supported Missouri's effort to strip Planned Parenthood of state Medicaid funding and defended the state's abortion ban after a group of clergy sued, arguing it violated the state constitution's protections for religious freedom. — Jordan Pratt, a nominee for the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, called abortion a 'barbaric practice' and 'one of the most severe invasions of personal rights imaginable' in an amicus brief supporting Florida's 15-week abortion ban. The state now bans the procedure at six weeks. In 2025, Pratt struck down a Florida law that created a judicial waiver program for minors seeking to have abortions without parental consent. The lawyer also worked for the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal organization that opposes abortion and has sued to reverse the FDA approval of mifepristone. — John Guard, also nominated to fill for the same district, defended Florida's then-15-week abortion ban in court as the state's chief deputy attorney general. — Joshua Divine, a deputy solicitor general of Missouri who is nominated to be a district judge in the state, is currently representing Missouri in a case challenging the FDA approval of mifepristone. Divine co-authored the lawsuit, which includes misinformation about medication abortion, including that it 'starves the baby to death in the womb.' In his college newspaper, Divine described himself as a 'zealot' for the anti-abortion movement, referred to abortion as 'the killing of an innocent, genetically unique human being' and argued that life begins at fertilization. He also stepped into a prominent role in the fight over abortion rights in the state after Missouri voters approved an abortion rights amendment in 2024. That amendment did not immediately override state laws. It left it up to abortion rights groups to ask courts to knock down abortion restrictions they believed were now unconstitutional. During the ensuing legal battles, Divine represented the state in defending a host of abortion restrictions. — Chad Meredith, Trump's nominee to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, defended the state's abortion ban and other restrictions while he was the state's chief deputy general counsel. That included a law requiring doctors to perform ultrasounds and describe images to abortion patients. — Bill Mercer, a Republican state lawmaker in Montana who is nominated for a U.S. District Court judgeship in the state, has repeatedly supported anti-abortion bills. Those include ones that sought to ban abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy; require a 24-hour waiting period and mandatory ultrasounds for abortion patients; require parental notification for minors to get an abortion; prohibit the use of state funding for abortions; prohibit certain insurance policies from covering abortions; and restrict what types of medical professionals can dispense medication abortion. — Jennifer Mascott, a lawyer in the White House Counsel's Office and a Trump nominee to the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, has spoken repeatedly about abortion law in panels and interviews. After the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, Mascott in an interview on 'Fox News Live' disagreed with the argument that the decision undermined the court's legitimacy. She said abortion issues are 'more appropriately decided' by the states, elected officials in Congress and people in their local communities. Anti-abortion groups are optimistic based on Trump's early nominees Anti-abortion groups said it is premature to make broad conclusions about whether the nominees would help carry out their policy goals but that they were optimistic based on the names they have seen so far. 'We look forward to four more years of nominees cut from that mold,' said Katie Glenn Daniel, director of legal affairs for the national anti-abortion organization SBA Pro-Life America. Kristi Hamrick, spokesperson for Students for Life, said she was hopeful the administration will continue nominating those 'who will respect the rule of law.' Abortion rights advocates said Trump is embedding abortion opponents into the judiciary one judge at a time. Mini Timmaraju, president of the national abortion rights organization Reproductive Freedom for All, said the courts, until now, have largely been an effective option for advocates to challenge state abortion bans and restrictions. 'This just feeds into this larger strategy where Trump has gotten away with distancing himself from abortion — saying he's going to leave it to the states while simultaneously appointing anti-abortion extremists at all levels of government,' she said. ___ Associated Press writer Ali Swenson in New York contributed to this report.
