State lawmakers move to delete addresses online after Minnesota shootings
State lawmakers in at least three states are taking steps to hide their addresses from public view following the targeted killing of a prominent Minnesota state lawmaker this weekend.
Investigators on Sunday arrested Vance Boetler, who has been charged in the alleged murder of Rep. Melissa Hortman and her husband, as well as the attempted murder of Sen. John Hoffman and his wife. Both politicians were Democrats.
Prosecutors say Boetler, accused of carrying out the attacks early Saturday morning after months of planning, also had a hit list of names of Democratic officials, abortion providers and advocates.
On Saturday, the North Dakota Legislature's staff agency removed lawmakers' addresses from their biographical webpages, Legislative Council Director John Bjornson told the Associated Press.
Home addresses for New Mexico legislators were removed from the Statehouse website as an immediate precaution, said Shawna Casebier, director of the Legislature's legal office, confirmed to the AP.
Colorado has temporarily taken down its public campaign finance database after at least 31 elected officials requested to have their information removed from the platform, Axios reported.
Lawmakers in Wisconsin have also requested increased security at the state capital. Typically, the legislature is open to the public seven days a week with little security or screening for metal devices prior to admittance.
A day before the Minnesota shooting, Oregon passed a law that would prevent the Secretary of State from publishing the residential addresses of individuals involved in political campaigns.
Georgia, Maryland, Illinois, New Jersey and Louisiana passed similar laws in recent years.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
29 minutes ago
Lawmakers aim to stop U.S. from joining Israel's military campaign against Iran
As Israel and Iran continue to trade strikes in the Middle East, lawmakers are set to introduce bills and resolution aimed at preventing the United States from getting involved in Israel's military campaign against Iran. While the efforts are in their early stages, the legislation is unlikely to garner sufficient support to override the will of President Donald Trump and his supportive Republican majorities in both chambers of Congress. Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Monday introduced a resolution he says will "prevent war with Iran" as he expresses concern at the idea that the U.S may get involved in Israel's campaign against Iran. 'It is not in our national security interest to get into a war with Iran unless that war is absolutely necessary to defend the United States. I am deeply concerned that the recent escalation of hostilities between Israel and Iran could quickly pull the United States into another endless conflict,' Kaine, D-Va., said. 'The American people have no interest in sending service members to fight another forever war in the Middle East. This resolution will ensure that if we decide to place our nation's men and women in uniform into harm's way, we will have a debate and vote on it in Congress.' Separately, Vermont independent Sen. Bernie Sanders introduced the No War Against Iran Act on Monday to "prohibit the use of federal funds for any use of military force in or against Iran absent specific Congressional authorization." Sanders has several co-sponsors including Democratic Sens. Peter Welch of Vermont, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Jeff Merkley of Oregon, Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, Ed Markey of Massachusetts, Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, and Tina Smith of Minnesota. '[Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu's reckless and illegal attacks violate international law and risk igniting a regional war. Congress must make it clear that the United States will not be dragged into Netanyahu's war of choice,' Sanders wrote in a statement. 'Our Founding Fathers entrusted the power of war and peace exclusively to the people's elected representatives in Congress, and it is imperative that we make clear that the President has no authority to embark on another costly war without explicit authorization by Congress.' Senate Majority Leader John Thune avoided saying whether he would put Kaine's resolution on the Senate floor when asked on Tuesday. He said that any action on the matter would be 'getting the cart ahead of the horse,' but that there could be a more 'fulsome discussion' later on what the role of Congress should be amid the conflict. 'This is something that's happened the last few days. I think the President is perfectly within his authority in the steps that he has taken. You know clearly, if this thing were to extend for some period of time, there could be a more fulsome discussion about what the role of Congress should be, and and and whether or not we need to take action,' Thune said. A resolution is a statement or expression of a sentiment that, if passed, has no legal authority. An act has legal authority, but even if passed by the Republican-controlled Congress, it would have to be signed into law by Trump. In the House, Kentucky Republican Thomas Massie joined California Democrat Ro Khanna to introduce a bipartisan War Powers resolution on Tuesday meant to ensure that Congress asserts its constitutional authority to declare war under 50 U.S. Code Ch. 33. "This is not our war. But if it were, Congress must decide such matters according to our Constitution," Massie said. "I'm introducing a bipartisan War Powers Resolution tomorrow to prohibit our involvement. I invite all members of Congress to cosponsor this resolution." Khanna, one of the bill's initial cosponsors, quote tweeted Massie's post, calling for "No war in Iran," and equating the current situation in Iran to Operation Iraqi Freedom, the 2003 invasion of Iraq. "No war in Iran. It's time for every member to go on record. Are you with the neocons who led us into Iraq or do you stand with the American people?" Khanna posted. "I am proud to co-lead this bipartisan War Powers Resolution with Rep. Massie that is privileged and must receive a vote," Shortly after Massie's and Khanna's posts, New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and fellow Squad member Rashida Tlaib of Michigan expressed their support for the effort. Ocasio-Cortez, in a reply to Massie, said that she would be "signing on," to the resolution. In her post, Tlaib, said that the American people wouldn't fall for "it" again, contrasting today's debate on Iran's nuclear capabilities to October of 2002, when Congress approved a bipartisan Authorization for the Use of Military Force ahead of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. "I look forward to supporting this War Powers Resolution. The American people aren't falling for it again," Tlaib said. "We were lied to about "weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq that killed millions (plus) forever changed lives. It's (unconstitutional) for Trump to go to war without a vote in Congress."
Hamilton Spectator
35 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Appeals court hears arguments in National Guard deployment in Los Angeles
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A federal appeals court in San Francisco heard arguments Tuesday afternoon on whether the Trump administration should return control of National Guard troops to California after they were deployed following protests in Los Angeles over immigration raids. The hearing comes after the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals granted a request by the administration last week to temporarily pause a lower court order that directed President Donald Trump to return control of the soldiers to Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, who filed a lawsuit over the deployment. Judge Mark Bennett, who was appointed by Trump, started the hearing held via video by asking the federal government's attorney, Brett Shumate, whether the Department of Justice's position is that the courts have no role in reviewing the president's decision to call the National Guard. 'No, there's no role for the court to play in reviewing that decision,' Shumate answered. 'The statute says the president may call on federal service members and units of the Guard of any state in such numbers that he considers necessary,' Shumate said, adding that 'couldn't be any more clear.' Shumate pointed out the ongoing protests in Los Angeles and said the Guard is necessary to protect federal officers and buildings. U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco ruled last week that the Guard deployment was illegal and exceeded Trump's authority. He granted Newsom a temporary restraining order to take control of the Guard while his lawsuit proceeds. It applied only to the National Guard troops and not the Marines, who were also deployed to LA but had not been sent to the streets at the time of the ruling. The Trump administration argued the deployment was necessary to restore order and protect federal buildings and officers. In his lawsuit, Newsom accused the president of inflaming tensions, breaching state sovereignty and wasting resources. The governor calls the federal government's decision to take command of the state's National Guard 'illegal and immoral.' Newsom filed the suit following days of unrest as demonstrators protested against federal immigration raids across the city. Newsom said ahead of the hearing that he was confident in the rule of law and encouraged by a federal judge's order last week that Trump return control of the National Guard to California, before that ruling was halted. 'I'm confident that common sense will prevail here: The U.S. military belongs on the battlefield, not on American streets,' Newsom said in a statement. Breyer ruled the Trump violated the use of Title 10, which allows the president to call the National Guard into federal service when the country 'is invaded,' when 'there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government,' or when the president is unable 'to execute the laws of the United States.' Breyer, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton, said in his ruling that what has been happening in Los Angeles does not meet the definition of a rebellion. 'The protests in Los Angeles fall far short of 'rebellion,'' he wrote. 'Individuals' right to protest the government is one of the fundamental rights protected by the First Amendment, and just because some stray bad actors go too far does not wipe out that right for everyone.' The National Guard hasn't been activated without a governor's permission since 1965, when President Lyndon B. Johnson sent troops to protect a civil rights march in Alabama, according to the Brennan Center for Justice. ___ This story has been updated to correct the spelling of the judge's last name to Bennett, not Benett. ___ Associated Press writer Sophie Austin contributed from Sacramento, California. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Chicago Tribune
43 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Los Angeles mayor lifts downtown curfew she imposed during protests against immigration raids
LOS ANGELES — Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass lifted a curfew in downtown Los Angeles on Tuesday that was first imposed in response to clashes with police and vandalism amid protests against President Donald Trump's immigration crackdown in the city. The curfew imposed June 10 provided 'successful crime prevention and suppression efforts' and protected stores, restaurants, businesses and residents from people engaging in vandalism, Bass, a Democrat, said. On Monday, she trimmed back the hours after fewer arrests during evening demonstrations, noting a reduction in violence and vandalism in downtown that followed the protests. When the curfew was imposed, Bass said the city 'reached a tipping point' after 23 businesses were broken into and robbed, which was blamed on agitators looking to cause trouble. The curfew covered a relatively tiny slice of the sprawling city — a 1-square-mile (2.5 square kilometer) section of downtown that includes the area where protests have occurred. Last week, Trump ordered the deployment of roughly 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines to the second-largest U.S. city following protests over his stepped-up enforcement of immigration laws. On Sunday, Trump directed federal immigration officials to prioritize deportations from Democratic-run cities, a move that comes after large protests erupted in Los Angeles and other major cities against his administration's immigration policies.
