Monthly Archives: October, 2023

Prosecutors don't see any reason to push back the start of former President Donald Trump's trial for allegedly mishandling classified documents.

The case is set to go to trial in May 2024. Trump's legal team wants that delayed until mid-November 2024, after the presidential election.

"None of the issues raised in the defendants' motion warrants the continuance they request," prosecutors wrote in their response.

Prosecutors disputed claims from defense attorneys that Trump and his defendants, Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, hadn't been provided discovery materials in a timely manner.

"The Government’s production of unclassified discovery has been prompt, comprehensive, thorough, and organized. The defense has complete access to it today, more than seven months before trial," prosecutors wrote. "In no way does the Government’s record of unclassified discovery production in this case support a continuance."

Trump's attorneys said they haven't had a place to review the classified documents in the case.

Prosecutors say that's not the issue either.

"That the classified materials at issue in this case were taken from the White House and retained at Mar-a-Lago is not in dispute; what is in dispute is how that occurred, why it occurred, what Trump knew, and what Trump intended in retaining them – all issues that the Government will prove at trial primarily with unclassified evidence," prosecutors wrote. "Whether the highly classified documents Trump retained at Mar-a-Lago contain national defense information is a fact Trump can try to dispute, but it will hardly be the centerpiece of the trial."

Prosecutors did acknowledge some special evidence handling requirements for classified discovery.

"A small collection of highly sensitive and classified materials that Trump retained at the Mar-a-Lago Club are so sensitive that they require special measures, including enhanced security protocols for their transport, review, discussion, and storage," prosecutors wrote. "The special measures documents constitute a tiny subset of the total array of classified documents involved, which is itself a small subset of the total discovery produced."

Those documents, prosecutors say, are so sensitive additional precautions are needed, but those precautions aren't holding up the case.

"The defendants’ allegations regarding clearances and secure facilities vastly overstate the impact on their access to classified discovery and their ability to prepare for trial, and do not justify a continuance," prosecutors said.

Prosecutors said all but a tiny portion of the evidence has already been made available to the defense.

Trump, 77, is the front-runner for the Republican nomination for president. He faces legal challenges across the country as he seeks the GOP nomination, including four criminal cases, two of which were filed in federal court by special counsel Jack Smith.

In June, Trump pleaded not guilty to 37 counts that allege he kept sensitive military documents, shared them with people who didn't have security clearance, and tried to thwart the government's efforts to get them back. In August, Trump's attorneys entered a not-guilty plea on his behalf to additional charges in the documents case. Charges in a superseding indictment allege Trump attempted to delete surveillance video at his Mar-a-Lago home in Florida.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced Monday he would run for president in 2024 as an independent.

RFK Jr., who was previously running for the Democratic nomination before Monday’s announcement, has grown in popularity through his online presence attacking both typically Democratic and Republican positions in the U.S. RFK took off in notoriety for his outspoken criticism of COVID-19 policies and the COVID vaccine.

"People stop me everywhere, at hotels, at the airport, on the street, and they remind me that this country is ready for a history-making change," RFK Jr. said during his announcement speech at Independence Mall in Philadelphia. “They are ready to reclaim their freedom, their independence.”

RFK Jr. pointed to a litany of problems facing the U.S., including suicide, mental health issues, infrastructure problems, chronic disease, political corruption and wealth inequality. He argued that people are tired of the traditional system, which has not solved those problems, and are ready for a change.

“I’m here to join you for making a new declaration of independence for our entire nation,” RFK Jr. said. “We declare independence from the corporations that have hijacked our government, and we declare independence from Wall Street, from Big Tech, from Big Pharma, from Big Ag, from the military contractors, and their lobbyists.

“And we declare independence from the mercenary media that is here to fortify all of the corporate orthodoxies from their advertisers and to urge us to hate our neighbors and to fear our friends,” he added.

RFK Jr. went on to call out the “cynical elites” and the two-party political party system.

“And finally, we declare independence from the two political parties and the corrupt interests that dominate them and the entire rigged system, of anger, of rage, of corruption, of lies that has turned government officials into indentured servants for their corporate bosses,” RFK Jr. said.

President Joe Biden is leading the Democratic presidential primary race with no substantive opposition, and former President Donald Trump is far and away the frontrunner for the Republican nomination. How RFK Jr.’s announcement will impact their support remains unclear.

Immediately, RFK Jr. came under fire from Republican leadership.

“Make no mistake – a Democrat in Independent’s clothing is still a Democrat,” Ronna McDaniel, chair of the Republican National Committee, said in a statement. “RFK Jr. cannot hide from his record of endorsing Hillary, supporting the Green New Deal, fighting against the Keystone Pipeline, and praising AOC’s tax hikes – he is your typical elitist liberal and voters won’t be fooled.”

As The Center Square previously reported, Gallup polling released earlier this month showed that 63% of surveyed Americans say both the Democratic and Republican parties do a “poor job” and that a third political party is needed.

Both Democrats and Republicans have increased their support for the idea of a third party.

“Most often, support for a third party among Democrats and Republicans is below the majority level,” Gallup said. “However, this year’s poll shows 58% of Republicans endorsing a third U.S. political party, up from 45% a year ago. The only other time more Republicans than now expressed support for a third party was in a late January/early February 2021 conducted after the Jan. 6 riots, the second impeachment of Donald Trump, and the presidential inauguration of Joe Biden.

“There has also been an uptick in support for a third party among Democrats this year, from 40% to 46%, though still less than a majority back the idea,” Gallup added.

Texas has bused more than 50,000 people who’ve illegally entered the U.S. and were unlawfully released into the U.S., Gov. Greg Abbott said Friday.

The majority have been bused to New York City, followed by Chicago, Washington, D.C., Philadelphia, Denver and Los Angeles.

Abbott began the busing strategy in April 2022. He first sent foreign nationals who illegally entered the U.S. in Texas to Washington, D.C. Since then, over 12,500 people chose to be transported to the nation’s capital.

Last year, he expanded the strategy to send people to New York City, Chicago and Philadelphia. Since last August, Texas bused more than 18,500 people to New York City and over 13,500 people to Chicago. Since last November, Texas bused over 3,200 people to Philadelphia.

This year, he began busing people to Denver and Los Angeles. So far, more than 3,200 people have arrived in Denver since May 18 and over 940 to Los Angeles since June 14.

The governor recently directed additional buses to Eagle Pass and El Paso, Texas, after a surge of people came roughly two weeks ago. He said he was sending them to self-declared sanctuary cities to provide much-needed relief to overrun Texas border towns.

“Until President [Joe] Biden upholds his constitutional duty to secure America's southern border, Texas will continue to deploy as many buses as needed to relieve the strain caused by the surge of illegal crossings,” Abbott said.

Adults must sign a waiver for themselves and minors under their care, provide their Department of Homeland Security documentation, and choose which of the six self-described sanctuary cities they want to go to.

Texas border mayors and county judges have been instructed to notify the Texas Department of Emergency Management of any DHS-facilitated drop-off in their communities so the agency can help move people out of Texas.

The majority seeking Texas-taxpayer funded transportation north are choosing to go to the cities of New York and Chicago, according to state data. The same is true for those arriving in El Paso. Chicago and New York City remain the primary destinations, however, Denver has been added as a third destination.

The Democratic-led city of El Paso began its own busing strategy over a year ago but it’s funded through money it receives from FEMA. The city says the current wave of people began arriving in April 2022; “the sudden surge began in late August.” The overwhelming majority are coming from Venezuela, roughly 70%; the remainder are from Ecuador, El Salvador, Haiti, Nicaragua and Cuba.

As of Friday, Oct. 6, the city of El Paso was releasing 1,534 border crossers into the community every day. Roughly 480 people are being bused to Chicago, New York City and Denver every day from El Paso.

Every day, five charter buses full of people are leaving El Paso and arriving in Chicago. New York City and Denver are each receiving three charter buses full of people a day, according to city data.

At least nine Americans were killed in the surprise Hamas attack on Israel over the weekend, the State Department has confirmed.

Over the weekend, Hamas terrorists fired thousands of rockets from Gaza to multiple locations in Israel as militants infiltrated Israel, killing and capturing Israelis. Israeli media reported hundreds dead and thousands wounded, and Israeli forces quickly struck back.

Among those casualties were at least nine dead Americans, State Department spokesman Matt Miller said on MSNBC Monday morning.

"We can confirm that there are nine American citizens who have lost their lives as a result of these horrific attacks," Miller said.

Miller also said there are reports of Americans who are unaccounted for, something the agency is looking into. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken said on "Meet the Press" Sunday that there could be American hostages.

Casualties are almost certain to increase as Hamas terrorists have reportedly continued to attack Israelis, and Israel has signaled a total seizure of the Gaza strip, possibly setting up a prolonged war.

Reports from multiple news outlets and governments say Hamas terrorists killed, raped and captured civilians, with at least dozens of hostages likely in Gaza.

The attack comes just weeks after the Biden administration released $6 billion to Iran, the main backer of Hamas. Those funds came as part of deal last month where the Biden administration released $6 billion of dollars that had been frozen by U.S. sanctions as well as releasing five Iranian nationals detained in the U.S. in exchange for the release of five Americans detained in Iran.

Iranian foreign ministry spokesperson Nasser Kanani praised Hamas after the attack.

Republicans quickly blasted President Joe Biden Saturday, raising questions of whether those funds could have been used for the terrorist killings.

"Just weeks ago, the Biden administration handed over $6 billion to Iran, and today, innocent Israelis were murdered by Iran-backed Hamas terrorists," Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., said in a statement over the weekend. "We must continue to support our strongest ally in the Middle East and their right to defend themselves against these unprovoked, horrific attacks. I stand with Israel and join many around the world in praying for the safety and security of its people."

As The Center Square previously reported, U.S. Treasury Under Secretary Brian Nelson said on X, formerly known as Twitter, that the funds that were part of the September deal had not yet been spent and were reserved for humanitarian purposes only. Critics quickly pointed out that the money is fungible, and Iran's knowledge of the coming money could have impacted how it spent other funds not under the U.S.' watch.

President Joe Biden addressed the attacks on Saturday.

"You know, when I spoke with Prime Minister Netanyahu this morning, I told him the United States stands with the people of Israel in the face of this terrorist assaults," Biden said. "Israel has the right to defend itself and its people. Full stop. There is never justification for terrorist acts. And my administration's support for Israel's security is rock solid and unwavering."

The Iranian-backed terrorist group Hamas killed hundreds of Israelis and injured hundreds more in a barrage of surprise attacks early Saturday morning, just weeks after the Biden administration authorized $6 billion to the group’s biggest backer: Iran.

The Hamas attack included a combination of thousands of missiles fired into Israel as well as Hamas terrorists who infiltrated Israel, killing and capturing civilians, according to reports from multiple news outlets and relevant governments.

Iranian foreign ministry spokesperson Nasser Kanani praised Hamas after the attack.

Immediately after the attacks, President Joe Biden took fire for releasing billions of dollars to Iran, a known backer of Hamas that funnels money to the terrorist group.

“Just weeks ago, the Biden administration handed over $6 billion to Iran, and today, innocent Israelis were murdered by Iran-backed Hamas terrorists,” Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., said in a statement after the attacks. “We must continue to support our strongest ally in the Middle East and their right to defend themselves against these unprovoked, horrific attacks. I stand with Israel and join many around the world in praying for the safety and security of its people.”

The Biden administration told Congress last month it released the billions of dollars that had been held up by U.S. sanctions as well as releasing five Iranian nationals detained in the U.S. in exchange for the release of five Americans detained in Iran.

“Biden's decision to release $6 billion in frozen assets to Iran serves as a stark reminder of the consequences that took place following the Iran Nuclear Agreement under the Obama/Biden administration,” Rep. Cory Mills, R-Fla., wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter. “This pattern is clear: each time funds are released to Iran, the largest state sponsor of terrorism, proxy militias in the region persistently launch attacks, aiming to destabilize and target Western allies and Americans.

“Examining the precision and coordination of the recent attack, it's highly plausible that the recent $6 billion, in addition to the many more billions made available to Iran after Biden lifted sanctions, provided the necessary funding to execute this assault,” Mills added.

U.S. Treasury Under Secretary Brian Nelson said on X that the funds that were part of the September deal had not yet been spent and were reserved for humanitarian purposes only. Critics quickly pointed out that the money is fungible, and Iran’s knowledge of the coming money could have impacted how it spent other funds not under the U.S.’ watch.

“All of the money held in restricted accounts in Doha as part of the arrangement to secure the release of 5 Americans in September remains in Doha,” he said. “Not a penny has been spent.”

President Joe Biden addressed the attacks before reporters on Saturday.

“You know, when I spoke with Prime Minister Netanyahu this morning, I told him the United States stands with the people of Israel in the face of this terrorist assaults,” Biden said. “Israel has the right to defend itself and its people. Full stop. There is never justification for terrorist acts. And my administration’s support for Israel’s security is rock solid and unwavering.”

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security is doing something prominent New Mexico politicians have opposed for years: building more border wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

The Department is waiving 26 federal laws to finish a 20-mile stretch of wall in the Rio Grand Valley; it stopped construction there more than two years ago.

In a six-page filing with the Federal Register, U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas defended the decision.

“There is presently an acute and immediate need to construct physical barriers and roads in the vicinity of the border of the United States in order to prevent unlawful entries into the United States in the project areas,” he wrote, citing sections of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996.

Border Patrol agents working in the Rio Grande Valley Sector apprehended over 245,000 foreign nationals illegally entering the country between points of entry from the start of the fiscal year through early August. Additionally, it apprehended more than 90,000 people in August and September combined, as The Center Square has previously reported.

Although New Mexico politicians have opposed building more border wall, many of them have been silent since President Joe Biden’s administration started building more border wall, including U.S. Sen. Ben Ray Lujan, D-New Mexico, U.S. Sen. Martin Heinrich, D-New Mexico, and New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham, another Democrat.

For example, Heinrich called the U.S.-Mexico border wall “an ugly symbol of hatred” in April 2021.

“President Trump’s wasteful and ineffective border wall was an ugly symbol of hatred, fear, and intolerance. Its construction, often times fast-tracked without consultation from border communities, dealt severe damage to the environment, private land, wildlife corridors, and sacred Native American sites,” Heinrich said in a press release at the time.

His Senate colleague Ben Ray Lujan is also vocally anti-border wall.

Lujan told MSNBC in 2018 that he opposed funding even one penny for the border wall.

"I'm not open to giving a penny to President Trump for this ridiculous wall of his," he told MSNBC. "I'm not open to supporting President Trump's wall in one form or another."

And Lujan Grisham released a video in February 2019 where she ran through walls and said, “Here’s what I think of Trump’s wall.”

The press offices for the U.S. Senators and governor did not respond to repeated efforts over two days to ask whether the Democratic politicians have changed their view of the wall now that a Democratic president was building it.

(The Center Square) – A lawmaker has a plan at the Wisconsin Capitol to make sure children are away from and cannot ride in Madison's Naked Bike ride.

State Sen. Chris Kapenga, R-Delafield, is shepherding the proposal. He said Wisconsin needs a new state law after a 10-year-old-girl rode her bike naked during Madison's Naked Bike Ride this summer.

“If you agree that people shouldn't be allowed to expose their genitals in public and that minor children shouldn't be paraded naked through streets and photographed then I encourage your support on these bills,” Kapenga said. “It's kind of a joke but it's not a joke. This is a pretty serious pretty serious issue.”

Dane County Commissioner Jeff Wiegand called both Madison police and the Dane County Sheriff's Office after he was told the girl's picture showed up on Facebook. Wiegand told lawmakers the authorities brushed him off.

“The sheriff refused to investigate, saying he ‘is not the primary law enforcement’ for the jurisdiction for where the bike ride occurred,” Wiegand said. “The Madison Police Department responded, initially, by saying its special victims unit consulted with the district attorney’s office about this incident. The DA’s office confirmed there are applicable statutes to support a criminal investigation.”

Kapenga has two plans. One would make it a crime to expose children to nudity. The other would spell out the law for explicit, intentional nudity.

State Sen. LaTonya Johnson, D-Milwaukee, said she's worried about the unintended consequences of a law that would punish parents for taking children to any show where there's nudity.

“It seems to me that for some concerts now, for example a Beyonce concert, buttocks are exposed. Would this prohibit parents from taking their kids to a concert or children under the age of 18 from attending concerts where but buttocks may be exposed?”

Kapenga said he is not worried about that at all.

“Having recently seen the revenues from some of these concerts, they are significant, into the 10s of millions of dollars,” Kapenga said. “A strip of cloth from JoAnne Fabric costs about 37 cents. If they have to buy 100 strips of cloth to cover their butt crack, I’m okay with that.”

Officials with Madison's Naked Bike Ride say the proposals would infringe on their right to protest and are trying to shame the naked form.

Former President Donald Trump has endorsed U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, to be speaker of the House of Representatives.

The move comes after a handful of House Republicans voted with House Democrats to oust U.S. Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., from the role after McCarthy struck a deal with Democrats to keep the federal government from partially shutting down last weekend.

“Congressman Jim Jordan has been a STAR long before making his very successful journey to Washington, D.C., representing Ohio’s 4th Congressional District. Respected by all, he is now Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee,” Trump wrote on TruthSocial. “As President, I had the honor of presenting Jim with our Country’s highest civilian award, The Presidential Medal of Freedom. So much is learned from sports, and Jim was a master! While attending Graham High School, he won State Championships all four years, a rarity, and compiled an amazing 156-1 record.”

Trump went on to list Jordan’s accomplishments before giving him a full endorsement.

“At the University of Wisconsin-Madison, Jim became a two-time NCAA Division l Wrestling Champion. He won his 1985-86 NCAA Championship Matches in his weight class. Jim has a masters degree in Education from Ohio State University & a Law Degree from Capital University,” Trump said. “He is STRONG on Crime, Borders, our Military/Vets, & 2nd Amendment. Jim, his wife, Polly, & family are outstanding - He will be a GREAT Speaker of the House, & has my Complete & Total Endorsement!”

Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La, also intends to run for speaker. He likely has a better chance of winning the nomination than Jordan, but it remains unclear if Trump’s endorsement will help change that.

Jordan sent a letter to his fellow Republicans this week asking for their support and laying out some of his plans if he were elected.

“We must address rising crime in major cities and reject soft-on-crime, pro-criminal policies,” the letter said. “We must get our fiscal house in order and reduce spending so that we can leave more to the next generation than a crushing deficit. We must do our constitutional oversight of the federal bureaucracy to ensure they work for the American people not the other way around. And we must continue working to secure the border and protect our national security.”

Judge Arthur Engoron issued an order Thursday blocking former President Donald Trump from moving his assets without informing a court monitor.

The judge's order states that Trump and the other defendants must disclose all of the entities they own and declare in advance "any anticipated transfer of assets or liabilities to any other entities."

Engoron's previously found Trump liable for fraud and ruled that New York Attorney General Letitia James had proved the core of her case.

Trump has appealed that ruling.

Trump, 77, is the front-runner for the Republican nomination for president. He faces legal challenges across the country as he seeks the GOP nomination, including four criminal cases, two of which were filed in federal court by special counsel Jack Smith.

(The Center Square) – Supporters of the plan to use taxpayer money to pay for renovations and upkeep at American Family Field are out with a new poll they say shows most people in Wisconsin agree.

Milwaukee’s tourism office, Visit Milwaukee, and the city’s Chamber of Commerce and the Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce released the poll Wednesday morning.

It shows that 66% of likely Wisconsin voters agree that “Gov. Evers and Republicans in the Legislature must work together to come up with a solution to the funding shortfall at American Family Field.”

That includes an overwhelming majority of Republicans (64%), Democrats (74%) and Independents (60%).

“The Milwaukee Brewers and American Family Field are a critical part of our tourism economy, drawing millions of attendees each year and driving spending at hospitality businesses far outside the ballpark. As an essential part of our identity as a sports destination and a source of civic pride, their impact is felt beyond baseball,” Peggy Williams-Smith, president and CEO of VISIT Milwaukee said. “This poll affirms VISIT

Milwaukee’s position that there must be a bipartisan solution that keeps the team and American Family Field in Milwaukee for generations to come.”

The poll does not delve into the specifics of the $600 million deal that would spend taxpayer money on the Brewers ballpark, though it does talk about public funding, and did ask if people are aware of the proposal at the capitol.

“Nearly 6 in 10 voters (59%) have seen, read or heard something about American Family Field and the funding shortfall. Support for the proposal currently being considered in the Legislature is higher among voters who know more about the issue, climbing to 63% among those who say they have heard something,” pollsters noted. “Voters were told ‘There is a proposal in the state legislature to cover this shortfall with a combination of funding from the state of Wisconsin, the regional Stadium District, and the Brewers organization jointly paying for these improvements.’ A 58% majority of voters support this proposal.”

The new poll comes after a poll last month that showed a majority of Voters in Milwaukee and Milwaukee County didn't want to pay for the upgrades at American Family Field.

That poll focused mainly on money from Milwaukee, and not money from across the state.

Lawmakers will hold a hearing in Milwaukee on Thursday to talk about the proposal to spend $600 million on American Family Field.

(The Center Square) – A plan at the Wisconsin capital would allow people to buy the state's voter registration list for far less money.

Rip Amy Binsfield, R-Sheboygan, introduced her plan that would shrink the cost of Wisconsin's voter rolls from $12,500 to $250.

“More or less what, we're trying to do is make sure that the voter registration list is available to our citizens. We want to make sure that it's not out of grasp when it comes to the price,” Binsfield said.

Binsfield said there's no reason for Wisconsin's voter list to cost $12,500. She said it's not like workers at the Wisconsin Elections Commission have to go and physically print the list any longer.

“But when you think of the fact that we're dealing with keystrokes I think we can all agree that over time we've come a long way from the big paper press that has happened and when we're talking about keystrokes we don't want to undermine the fact that the staff working on this is pretty competent to get these lists out fairly quickly,” Binsfield said.

Wisconsin is the fourth most expensive state in the country when it comes to buying voter lists.

“Eleven states are at $0. They give this information out to their voters publicly for $0. It does go as high as $37,000 that happens in Alabama. I'm not sure what they have going on down there but we don't want to replicate,” Binsfield said.

Binsfield said allowing voters to see who is on the list, and who is off the list, can only help to make sure the list is more accurate.

There are some concerns, however. Rep Scott Krug, R-Nekoosa, said he's not sure the $250 isn't too cheap.

“Absolutely prohibitive it is the only challenge I have is the $250. I'm just trying to figure out exactly where cost may be to create the list with the keystrokes deliver the list and if we do enough repetitive it's probably easily replicated just trying to figure out what that number might be,” Krug said.

Rep. Lee Snodgrass, D-Appleton, said she worries about what will happen to the list if Wisconsin starts to sell it cheap.

“Wisconsin has no restrictions on the use of voter data. So, as written, this bill gives every telemarketer in the world inexpensive access to the names, addresses, phone numbers and emails of every single Wisconsin voter,” Snodgrass said. “So, I guess my concern is yes transparency, but we also have to look at privacy.”

Binsfield said phone numbers are not currently included in Wisconsin's voter rolls and shouldn't be included no matter the price.

Wisconsin's voter registration list is one of the longest in the country. There are currently more than 7 million people listed, because while people are declared inactive they are never actually taken off the list.

Just hours after being voted out of his leadership position, former U.S. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy said late Tuesday he would not run for the position again.

The House of Representatives voted 216-210 earlier in the day to vacate the speakership, leaving the position open and likely kicking off a marathon of votes to replace or reinstate California Republican Kevin McCarthy.

"I believe I can continue to fight, maybe in a different manner," McCarthy said Tuesday night, after the vote. "I will not run for speaker again. I'll have the conference pick somebody else."

A handful of House Republicans joined Democrats to oust McCarthy Tuesday afternoon, despite McCarthy telling reporters earlier that he expected to survive the proceedings. As party leadership, he chose to bring the motion to vacate up quickly for a vote Tuesday afternoon.

U.S. Rep. Patrick McHenry, R-N.C., will temporarily replace McCarthy in the House leadership position until the full House, where Republicans hold a slight majority, vote in a new speaker.

McCarthy only took on the speakership earlier this year after more than a dozen votes while holdout Republicans demanded concessions.

One of those concessions was that a single lawmaker could file a motion to vacate the speakership and force a vote, something U.S. Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., started off when filing the motion to vacate late Monday.

Gaetz said McCarthy broke his promises, pointing in particular to the latest Continuing Resolution to fund the government until mid-November. That deal with House Democrats provided for disaster relief and essentially maintained spending at current levels to buy more time just hours before a government shutdown over the weekend.

McCarthy was able to whittle down the lawmakers who voted against him last time around to get the votes he needed to become Speaker, and he may be able to do it again unless another strong Republican successfully challenges him. Currently, there is no obvious choice to replace McCarthy.

“I think Matt has planned this all along,” McCarthy told reporters. “It didn’t matter what transpired. He would’ve done it if we were in shutdown or not. I firmly believe it is the right decision to keep government open, to make sure our military is still paid, our border agents are still paid, and if that makes a challenge based upon whether or not I should be Speaker, I’ll take that fight.”

Gaetz warned over the weekend that he would file the motion to vacate. He has demanded answers about an alleged side deal he says McCarthy made with the White House over more Ukraine funding, a sticking point and red line for some conservative Republicans who are unwilling to send the large sums overseas any longer.

"I rise to raise a question," Gaetz said from the House floor Monday. "What was the secret side deal on Ukraine? House Democrats and President Biden have said that as Speaker McCarthy was asking Republicans to vote for a Continuing Resolution to take up the plus-up Ukraine money, that the Speaker of the House was actually cutting a side deal to bring Ukraine legislation to this floor with President Biden and House Democrats."

As The Center Square previously reported, Gaetz and other Republicans have pushed for passing all 12 appropriations bills in the traditional procedure instead of repeated Continuing Resolutions with topline numbers decided by a handful of members.

But McCarthy says certain Republicans have slowed the appropriations process so that Congress did not meet the government shutdown deadline in time. Lawmakers passed several of those appropriations in the House already, though not enough to fully fund the government. Several were passed at the last minute last week before the shutdown.

Now, the House must continue to hold votes for a new Speaker with either McCarthy being reinstated or another taking his place all as the next shutdown deadline draws nearer.

“I have enough Republicans where at this point next week one of two things will happen: Kevin McCarthy won’t be the Speaker of the House or he will be the Speaker of the House working at the pleasure of the Democrats,” Gaetz told reporters Monday evening.

(The Center Square) – A group with ties to national Democrats filed a lawsuit challenging Wisconsin's requirement that someone sign off on absentee votes in the state.

The Elias law firm filed lawsuit on behalf of four Wisconsin voters that claims the state’s witness requirement violates both the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and the Voting Rights Act of 1970.

“When Congress enacted the Voting Rights Act in 1965, it took aim ‘at the subtle, as well as the obvious,’ discriminatory state voting regulations,” The suit begins. “One especially pernicious practice adopted by southern states after the Civil War required any would-be voter to produce a ‘supporting witness’ willing to…’vouch’ for the aspiring voter’s qualifications.”

Wisconsin law requires anyone voting absentee to have a witness sign off on their ballot envelope. Absentee ballots that don't have a full and proper witness signature are not supposed to count. The Wisconsin Supreme Court barred local election officials from curing ballots that don't have the required signatures or other information.

“Generally, Wisconsin requires a voter to procure the assistance of an adult U.S. citizen witness to cast a valid absentee ballot. The witness must observe that the ballot is unmarked and observe the voter mark it and seal it in the ballot envelope. No one else may be present when the voter marks the ballot. Both the voter and the witness must then execute attestations.

The voter must attest, among other things, they are entitled to vote, they exhibited the enclosed ballot unmarked to the witness and they then, in the witness’s ‘presence and in the presence of no other person,’ marked the ballot and sealed the ballot envelope,” the lawsuit states. “The witness, in turn, must attest that ‘the above statements’ – those made by the voter in the voter attestation—’are true.’.”

Wisconsin is not alone in requiring absentee ballot witnesses. Nine other states – Alabama, Alaska, Kentucky, Louisiana, Minnesota, North Carolina, Rhode Island, South Carolina and Virginia – also require witnesses to sign off before absentee ballots can be counted.

Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma and South Dakota require absentee ballots be notarized, or at least include a copy of a state ID.

Two of the voters named in the Wisconsin lawsuit are students who attend school out of state, another is a Wisconsin native who lives overseas and the fourth is an elderly woman who lives by herself.

Current Wisconsin law allows all four to vote absentee, and the witness signature requirements have not stopped them from voting absentee in the past several elections.

The lawsuit names the Wisconsin Elections Commission and election commissioners as defendants. The Elections Commission has not commented on the lawsuit.

(The Center Square) – A judge in Waukesha County issued a ruling that sides with parents in the debate over how school districts handle transgenderism in schools.

Judge Michael Maxwell on Tuesday sided with two parents in the Kettle Moraine School District after they sued in 2021 because the district did not tell them that school leaders and teachers were calling their middle school-aged daughter by a different name at school.

“This court has before it what modern society deems a controversial issue –

transgenderism involving minors within our schools. Clearly, the law on this issue is still developing across the country and remaining largely unsettled. However, this particular case is not about that broad controversial issue. This particular case is simply whether a school district can supplant a parent’s right to control the health care and medical decisions for their children. The well-established case law in that regard is clear – Kettle Moraine cannot,” the judge wrote. “The School District abrogated the parental rights of [the parents] on how to medically treat [their child] when the district decided to socially affirm [the child] at school despite [the parents] requesting it does not. Through its policy of disregarding parental wishes on a medical or health related decision and with how fast questioning one's gender can arise, [the parents] are at real risk of being harmed.”

Kevin Marine Schools defended the decision to keep gender decisions from parents, saying informing all parents of all children's decisions to change gender could put some students at risk.

The judge said that argument didn't cut it.

Kettle Moraine Schools said it handles things on a case-by-case basis.

The judge took issue with that.

“Rather than doing what the voters have elected them to do, the Kettle Moraine School Board abrogated their responsibility to either pass judgment on a policy regarding these serious issues or to affirm the actions of their employee, the superintendent. Instead, the School District has hidden behind claims of no parental right or unfounded Title IX issues rather than give

parents in their district what they deserve – clear guidance on how the district intends to handle these controversial issues,” the judge wrote.

Luke Berg with the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, one of the law firms that handled the case, said this is the first time a judge has come down on the side of the parents in a case like this one.

“This victory represents a major win for parental rights. The court confirmed that parents, not educators or school faculty, have the right to decide whether a social transition is in their own child’s best interests. The decision should be a warning to the many districts across the country with similar policies to exclude parents from gender transitions at school,” Berg added.

The parents in the case removed their daughter from school but have two children who remain in the school district.

A law took effect in Texas this month that bans transgender women from playing a woman's sport at the college level. It was similar to a 2021 law that banned athletes in public schools in that state from playing on any team that differed from the sex they were assigned to at birth.

This year has been the battleground for the debate on whether biological males who identify as females should be allowed to play female sports as politicians and the courts have grappled with the issue.

Many government agencies and transgender advocacy groups are pushing to allow boys who say they are girls to participate in sports previously reserved for females while polling shows that a majority of Americans are against it.

According to The Center Square Voters' Voice Poll of 2,500 registered voters across the U.S., a 2-to-1 majority oppose transgender women student-athletes competing in women's sports. The poll was released in August and conducted by Noble Predictive Insights.

A Gallup poll released in June found 69% say transgender athletes should only be allowed to compete on sports teams that align with their biological sex at birth.

At the core of the debate is the accusation of discrimination, transgender women being victims of it by those wishing to keep girls' women's sports played among women; and the accusation of fairness, girls and women being the victims when forced to compete against biological males.

“Women and young girls deserve to compete on a level playing field. When laws ignore biological reality and allow males to compete on girls’ sports teams, girls are harmed and denied athletic opportunities," Christiana Kiefer, senior counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, wrote in an email to The Center Square. "Science and common sense tell us that males are generally bigger, faster, and stronger than females. They have larger hearts and lungs, denser bones, and stronger muscles. No amount of testosterone suppression can undo all those advantages. We hope that states continue to protect fairness in women’s sports by adopting laws and policies that reflect biological reality.”

The Alliance Defending Freedom is involved in a 2020 lawsuit in which it represented four female Connecticut high school athletes. They filed a lawsuit challenging the state athletic association's policy to allow boys to play girls' sports.

U.S. District Judge Robert Chatigny ruled against the female athletes in December. The Heritage Foundation reported that Chatigny ordered attorneys for the Alliance Defending Freedom to use the term "transgender females" when referring to boys who identify as girls.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals initially ruled in favor of Connecticut's policy in 2022, but has since said it would reconsider the case; it is pending.

The Movement Advancement Project analyzes transgender sports policies across the country. It says the nation is split on the issue.

It found that 24 states and two territories have policies that are fair or favorable to transgender athletes and 26 states and three territories have policies that are not.

ESPN has tracked transgender legislation and reported that 23 states had passed laws restricting transgender athletes' ability to play sports since 2020.

In March, Democrats in the U.S. House introduced the Transgender Bill of Rights, a resolution that would "ensure" transgender athletes could participate in the sport of their choice. The Transgender Bill of Rights calls on the federal government to take action.

In April, Republicans in the U.S. House introduced House Resolution 734, the "Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act 2023." It would ban boys, who call themselves transgender women, from playing in female sports. The House passed the bill; its road in the Senate is considered uphill with a Democratic majority in place.

In August, the North Carolina House and Senate overrode Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper's veto and passed the Fairness in Women's Sports Act. The law "prohibits male students from playing on middle school, high school, or collegiate athletics teams designated for females, women, or girls." It also "requires a student's sex to be recognized solely based on reproductive biology and genetics at birth for purposes of athletic participation."

The U.S. Department of Education supports transgender athletes being able to play on the sports team gender in which they identify. The department says banning transgender athletes from playing on a sports team due to gender is discrimination.

Discussion of the issue escalated around Lia Thomas, a swimmer at Penn University who competed on the men's team as William Thomas for three years. The athlete switched to Lia for a senior season, and was allowed by the university and the NCAA to compete in 2022.

Thomas was the first openly transgender athlete to win an NCAA Division I national championship in 2022. Thomas was ranked 65th in the 500-meter freestyle in 2018-19, the last season Thomas swam for the University of Pennsylvania men's team, according to Swimming World Magazine. Thomas won the NCAA championship in the women's 500 freestyle in 2022 while competing for the Penn women's team.

Other men competing in women's categories have lifted visibility for events from volleyball, to weight lifting to cycling to running.

The website SheWon.org tracks "achievements of female athletes who were displaced by males in women’s sporting events" all over the world. As of Sept. 22, it had 608 entries.

A 2010 report conducted by authors affiliated with the Women's Sports Foundation and The National Center for Lesbian Rights called concerns that transgender females playing female sports would dominate as "not well founded." The report stated that "medically guided hormonal treatment prior to puberty" neutralized any advantage.

Thirteen years later, the polls, many women athletes and lawyers like Kiefer disagree.

In Michigan, the high school association states it will determine eligibility on a "case-by-case" basis. The Michigan High School Athletic Association does ask for documentation of a student's medical and psychological records as well as whether they have undergone hormone therapy and gender-affirmation surgery.

In Ohio, the high school athletic association allows transgender athletes to compete for girls' teams, but the athlete must be taking a medically prescribed hormone treatment related to gender transition and have completed a minimum of one year of hormone treatment. The athlete must also "demonstrate" to the high school athletic association that the athlete "does not possess physical (bone structure, muscle mass, testosterone, hormonal, etc.) or physiological advantages over genetic females of the same age group."

The Women's Sports Foundation and AthleteAlly.org didn't respond to emails seeking comment.