Jeffries presses Johnson for more funds to protect lawmakers
Why it matters: The plea comes as a growing number of House Democrats are revealed to have been named in documents allegedly belonging to Vance Boelter, the suspect in the shooting of two Minnesota lawmakers and their spouses.
Jeffries and House Administration Committee ranking member Joe Morelle (D-N.Y.) wrote to Johnson urging him to direct the House sergeant-at-arms to "take all necessary steps to protect House members throughout the country."
They also called for Congress to "substantially increase" the Members' Representational Allowance — funds given to each congressional office for salaries, supplies and security.
The big picture: The map of possible targets is growing increasingly far flung, with the names of lawmakers from Ohio and even Texas found in the papers.
The shooting has alarmed members of Congress in both parties and reignited efforts to secure more security resources for rank-and-file lawmakers.
A spokesperson for Johnson did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the letter.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Appeals court rules Trump clamp-down on spending data defies Congress' authority
A federal appeals court panel shot down a Trump administration bid to make secret a public database of federal spending that researchers say is crucial to ensure the administration is not flouting Congress' power of the purse. In an order issued Saturday evening, the three-judge D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals panel voted unanimously to give the administration until Friday to put the data back online. Two of the three appeals judges assigned to the matter also signed onto a forceful opinion declaring that the administration's bid to conceal the data was an affront to Congress' authority over government spending, one that threatened the separation of powers and defied centuries of evidence that public disclosure is necessary for the public good. 'No court would allow a losing party to defy its judgment. No President would allow a usurper to command our armed forces,' Judge Karen Henderson, a George H.W. Bush appointee, wrote in support of the decision to deny the Trump administration's request to keep the data under wraps while litigation over the issue goes forward. 'And no Congress should be made to wait while the Executive intrudes on its plenary power over appropriations.' The Trump administration ignited the legal battle when it decided in March to abruptly shut down the database, claiming the widely available public data threatened the president's ability to manage federal spending. Henderson noted that the decision came amid a torrent of lawsuits questioning whether the administration was preparing to illegally 'impound' — or withhold — congressionally mandated spending required by law to disburse. The administration claimed the database also forced the disclosure of information meant to be shielded from public view. U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan rejected that view out of hand last month, in a lawsuit brought by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and the Protect Democracy group. The Clinton-appointed judge ordered the administration to immediately restore the website. The Justice Department quickly appealed and won a short-term pause of Sullivan's decision. But Saturday's ruling by the appeals court panel ends that pause. Henderson agreed with Sullivan, saying Congress' power is 'at its zenith' when it comes to both approving federal spending and requiring details of that spending to be publicly disclosed. In other words, only Congress — not the administration — could decide to shut down the database. Judge Robert Wilkins, an Obama appointee, joined Henderson's 25-page opinion. The third judge on the panel, Biden appointee Bradley Garcia, voted with Henderson and Wilkins but did not join her opinion. The ruling lands just as a simmering fight over Trump's authority to dictate federal spending has been ramping up on Capitol Hill. Trump has long flirted with the notion that the president has the power to impound funds that he views cut against Executive Branch priorities, and courts have eyed warily his administration's decision to mass-terminate federal grants and contracts representing billions of dollars in congressionally required spending. The Justice Department has argued that the funds for those terminated programs could be reissued in plenty of time to satisfy Congress' requirements, but Trump budget officials have floated workarounds that have made some lawmakers uncomfortable. The decision Saturday is not a final ruling on the underlying legal question about whether the administration is obliged to make the data public. But unless the full bench of the appeals court steps in or the administration gets relief from the Supreme Court, the ruling means the data is likely to be public within days. The panel agreed to give the administration until Aug. 15 to restore the database.
Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
Appeals court rules Trump clamp-down on spending data defies Congress' authority
'No court would allow a losing party to defy its judgment. No President would allow a usurper to command our armed forces,' Judge Karen Henderson, a George H.W. Bush appointee, wrote in support of the decision to deny the Trump administration's request to keep the data under wraps while litigation over the issue goes forward. 'And no Congress should be made to wait while the Executive intrudes on its plenary power over appropriations.' The Trump administration ignited the legal battle when it decided in March to abruptly shut down the database , claiming the widely available public data threatened the president's ability to manage federal spending. Henderson noted that the decision came amid a torrent of lawsuits questioning whether the administration was preparing to illegally 'impound' — or withhold — congressionally mandated spending required by law to disburse. The administration claimed the database also forced the disclosure of information meant to be shielded from public view. U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan rejected that view out of hand last month, in a lawsuit brought by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and the Protect Democracy group. The Clinton-appointed judge ordered the administration to immediately restore the website. The Justice Department quickly appealed and won a short-term pause of Sullivan's decision. But Saturday's ruling by the appeals court panel ends that pause. Henderson agreed with Sullivan, saying Congress' power is 'at its zenith' when it comes to both approving federal spending and requiring details of that spending to be publicly disclosed. In other words, only Congress — not the administration — could decide to shut down the database. Judge Robert Wilkins, an Obama appointee, joined Henderson's 25-page opinion. The third judge on the panel, Biden appointee Bradley Garcia, voted with Henderson and Wilkins but did not join her opinion. The ruling lands just as a simmering fight over Trump's authority to dictate federal spending has been ramping up on Capitol Hill. Trump has long flirted with the notion that the president has the power to impound funds that he views cut against Executive Branch priorities, and courts have eyed warily his administration's decision to mass-terminate federal grants and contracts representing billions of dollars in congressionally required spending. The Justice Department has argued that the funds for those terminated programs could be reissued in plenty of time to satisfy Congress' requirements, but Trump budget officials have floated workarounds that have made some lawmakers uncomfortable. The decision Saturday is not a final ruling on the underlying legal question about whether the administration is obliged to make the data public. But unless the full bench of the appeals court steps in or the administration gets relief from the Supreme Court, the ruling means the data is likely to be public within days. The panel agreed to give the administration until Aug. 15 to restore the database.
NBC News
an hour ago
- NBC News
Texas Democrats rally against redistricting effort
People in Austin rallied against Texas Republicans on Saturday, as the party pushes forward with a plan to add five GOP congressional seats, and potentially cement Republicans' control of Congress in Washington. It comes as Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton ramps up his legal battle against Democrats who fled the state to stop the effort. NBC News' Ryan Chandler has moreAug. 10, 2025
