Category: fox-news/politics/executive/law

Gov Kemp says special session to remove DA Willis isn’t going to happen

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp says ill-fated attempts by state Republicans to call a special session to remove Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis are not going to work.

Kemp made the comments during a press conference on Thursday, saying it has nothing to do with his personal feelings surrounding the district attorney's case against former President Trump.

"Up to this point, I have not seen any evidence that DA Willis's actions or lack thereof warrant action by the prosecuting attorney oversight commission. As long as I'm governor, we are going to follow the law and the Constitution — regardless of who it helps politically," Kemp said.

GOV. BRIAN KEMP HASN'T RECEIVED 'ANY EVIDENCE' STATE SEN. MOORE HAS MAJORITY NECESSARY FOR WILLIS IMPEACHMENT

In a letter to the governor filed earlier this month, State Sen. Colton Moore claimed to have the support of "3/5 of each respective house" in the state legislature regarding his efforts to impeach Willis.

Moore, in a statement to Fox News Digital, later admitted that the statement in the letter alluding to having a majority in both houses was not accurate.

"We have a law in the state of Georgia that clearly outlines the legal steps that can be taken if constituents believe their local prosecutors are violating their oath by engaging in unethical or illegal behavior," Kemp said Thursday at the press conference.

HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE PROBING DA FANI WILLIS REGARDING MOTIVATIONS FOR TRUMP PROSECUTION

Since Moore's stunt, other state Republicans have demanded similar obstructions to the Georgia case against Trump with similar lack of success.

Willis filed a motion Tuesday afternoon asking the Fulton County, Georgia, judge presiding over the case against former President Trump and 18 others to expedite the trial.

All 19 defendants – Trump, former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, his former attorneys Rudy Giuliani, Sidney Powell, Jenna Ellis, Kenneth Chesebro, and others – are being tried together on charges related to Georgia’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. 

Willis’ motion asks that the defendants be given a deadline to be able to sever themselves from the larger case.

"The State of Georgia further respectfully requests that the Court set a deadline for any Defendant wishing to file a motion to sever, allow the parties, including the State of Georgia, sufficient time to brief the severance issue, and hold a hearing on any filed motion to sever so that the Court may consider the factors set forth in Cain and its progeny, as required by Georgia law," the motion states.

Fox News Digital's Jessica Chasmar contributed to this report.

Georgia Judge blocks provision prohibiting the distribution of water at voting polls

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

A federal judge in Georgia temporarily blocked a provision in the state's voting law barring people from giving food and water to voters waiting in line to vote on election day, and stopped a requirement that voters include their date of birth on their absentee ballots.

U.S. District Judge J.P. Boulee is still allowing the enforcement of penalties against people who provide food and water to voters waiting in line if they are within 150 feet of the building where voting is taking place. But the judge paused enforcement of the ban in other areas within 25 feet of a voter standing in line.

"Central to this conclusion was the fact that, unlike the Buffer Zone’s reasonable 150-foot radius, the Supplemental Zone has no boundary," he wrote. "S.B. 202 prohibits organizations (such as Plaintiffs) from engaging in line relief activities in the Supplemental Zone, i.e., if they are within twenty-five feet of a voter—even if the organizations are outside the 150-foot Buffer Zone."

Boulee also blocked a part of the law requiring voters to provide their date of birth on the outer envelopes of absentee ballots. He wrote that the state "did not present any evidence that absentee ballots rejected for failure to comply with the Birthdate Requirement were fraudulent ballots."

GEORGIA EARLY VOTING SETS ALL-TIME RECORD FOR MIDTERM ELECTION DESPITE CLAIMS OF VOTER SUPPRESSION

But the judge rejected the groups' claims that certain restrictions imposed by the law deny voters with disabilities meaningful access to absentee voting.

The Election Integrity Act was passed by state lawmakers and signed into law by GOP Gov. Brian Kemp in the spring of 2021. Other provisions in the law include requiring identification to vote, extending the early voting period and ensuring a ballot drop box will be available in every county.

The controversial election law seeking to strengthen voting rules came shortly after the 2020 election and prompted criticism from Democrats and large corporations, including Major League Baseball and Coca-Cola. The MLB moved its 2021 All-Star Game from Atlanta to Denver in response to the election law.

Critics of the law, including President Biden and twice-failed Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, claimed it would restrict voting access, particularly for people of color. But Georgia saw record turnout in the primary and general elections in 2022, leading Republicans to argue the criticism was not justified.

Several civil rights and voting rights groups filed a lawsuit challenging the law.

DESANTIS MEETS WITH KEMP AMID TRUMP CASE, IMPEACHMENT CALLS AGAINST FANI WILLIS

Both sides declared victory after Boulee's mixed ruling on Friday.

NAACP Legal Defense Fund assistant counsel John Cusick said in a statement that the decisions "are important wins for our democracy and protecting access to the ballot box in Georgia."

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger said the Peach State "continues to have one of the most secure and accessible voting systems in the country for all voters, including voters with disabilities." 

"I am glad that the court upheld Georgia's common sense rules banning ballot harvesting and securing absentee ballot drop boxes," he said in a news release. "Georgia's voting system is accessible to all voters, with multiple options for voters to choose how they want to exercise their right to vote."

A ruling on Texas' election law, which is similar to the one in Georgia, was also handed down Friday from a federal judge.

U.S. District Judge Xavier Rodriguez struck down a provision of Texas' law requiring mail voters to provide the same identification number they used when they registered to vote. He ruled the requirement violated the U.S. Civil Rights Act because it prevented people from being able to cast ballots over an issue irrelevant to whether they are registered.

The provision led to skyrocketing mail ballot rejections in the first election after the law was passed in September 2021, and the U.S. Department of Justice challenged the provision.

"This ruling sends a clear message that states may not impose unlawful and unnecessary requirements that disenfranchise eligible voters seeking to participate in our democracy," Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke said in a statement after the ruling.

Several election integrity bills have passed in GOP-controlled states since 2020 after the election that year.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

5th Circuit deals blow to federal gun statute used in Hunter Biden case

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit on Wednesday voided a federal law that prevents unlawful drug users from possessing firearms.

The statute, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3), bars anyone who is an "unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance," including marijuana, from possessing a gun. Violators can face up to 10 years in prison. However, a three-judge panel, citing the Supreme Court's landmark gun rights decision last year, unanimously found the statute unconstitutional as applied to defendant Patrick Daniels. 

Daniels, an admitted habitual marijuana user, was arrested in April 2022 after police searched his car and found marijuana and two loaded firearms. He was convicted in July 2022 and sentenced to nearly four years in prison and three years of probation — a conviction the 5th Circuit panel has now thrown out. 

Though the decision is limited to Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas, it could potentially impact the ongoing federal case against Hunter Biden, who is charged in Delaware under the same statute. Former Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew McCarthy told Fox News the Justice Department could use the 5th Circuit's opinion as a rationale for a new plea agreement.

COURT CUTS DOWN HAWAII KNIFE BAN IN CONTROVERSIAL SECOND AMENDMENT CASE

"Even though Hunter Biden’s situation is readily distinguishable from that of Patrick Daniels, it’s possible the Justice Department could rationalize that the 5th Circuit’s ruling supports its exercise of discretion to give Biden deferred-prosecution treatment (as currently proposed, two years of probationary conditions followed by dismissal if the conditions are met) in a plea agreement," McCarthy said. 

The 5th Circuit case, known as U.S. v. Daniels, was decided by Judges Jerry Smith, Stephen Higginson and Don Willett. Together, they held that the 922(g)(3) restriction was too broad as applied to Daniels and unsupported by a "historical tradition of firearm regulation," as required by the Supreme Court in Bruen. 

"Just as there was no historical justification for disarming a citizen of sound mind, there is no tradition that supports disarming a sober citizen who is not currently under an impairing influence," Smith wrote. "Indeed, it is helpful to compare the tradition surrounding the insane and the tradition surrounding the intoxicated side-by-side."

The statute's language does not distinguish between a person who is intoxicated or a person who is sober but in possession of drug paraphernalia at the time of their arrest.

The court observed that the founding-era law "institutionalized the insane and stripped them of their guns; but they allowed alcoholics to possess firearms while sober." 

NRA NOTCHES LEGAL WIN IN BATTLE WITH ELECTION COMMISSION OVER HIDDEN DOCUMENTS

"In short, neither the restrictions on the mentally ill nor the regulatory tradition surrounding intoxication can justify Daniels' conviction," Smith wrote. Further, the court said there was no historical tradition of stripping away gun rights from persons who are non-violent, drug users or otherwise. 

"The government asks us to set aside the particulars of the historical record and defer to Congress' modern-day judgment that Daniels is presumptively dangerous because he smokes marihuana multiple times a month. But that is the kind of toothless rational basis review that Bruen proscribes. Absent a comparable regulatory tradition in either the 18th or 19th century, § 922(g)(3) fails constitutional muster under the Second Amendment." 

The 5th Circuit has now declared two federal gun statutes unconstitutional under Bruen's precedent. In a previous case, U.S. v. Rahimi, the court struck down a federal statute that made it a crime for a person with a domestic violence restraining order to be in possession of a gun — a decision that has been appealed to the Supreme Court. 

In a concurring opinion, Higginson criticized Bruen for causing "uncertainty and upheaval" in how the government can apply public safety laws, which he said "face inconsistent invalidation." He observed that lower courts have wildly differed in their interpretations of Bruen, leading to disparate outcomes for individuals across the country charged with the same federal crime. 

SUPREME COURT ALLOWS CONTINUED REGULATION OF SO-CALLED ‘GHOST GUNS’

"Already, as courts work through the impact of Bruen, defendants guilty of a gun crime in one jurisdiction are presently innocent of it in another," the judge said.

Such is the case for Hunter Biden, who is charged with violating 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3) because he was a crack cocaine user when he bought a Colt Cobra .38 Special from StarQuest Shooters, a gun store in Wilmington, Delaware, in 2018. 

McCarthy said that while there are essential differences between Biden and Daniels, the Justice Department could still use the 5th Circuit's decision to go easy on Biden.

"The 5th Circuit panel unanimously ruled that the 922(g)(3) restriction was too broad as applied to Daniels. Historically, the law has permitted gun possession prohibitions against people who were actively under the influence of drugs or alcohol, but not against people who were sometimes under the influence but apparently sober at the time they possessed guns," he explained. 

FEDERAL JUDGE IN COLORADO BLOCKS LAW RAISING AGE REQUIREMENT FOR GUN PURCHASES

"Unlike Daniels, who by his own admission is a regular marijuana user, Biden was a cocaine addict who was provably binging on cocaine in the October 2018 time-frame when he possessed at least one firearm," McCarthy continued. "Marijuana is now legal in many states (even though it is still deemed a prohibited substance under federal law that is not enforced); cocaine is an illegal substance under state and federal law — it is more addictive, more debilitating, and consequently its possession and distribution are punished more severely in penal statutes.

"So the cases can be distinguished," McCarthy said. "Nevertheless, it would not be unreasonable for the Justice Department to say it needed to rethink prosecution standards for 922(g)(3) in light of the Daniels decision. Of course, the question would then be whether Hunter Biden was being given favorable treatment — i.e., was he being given a pass when the Biden Justice Department would still prosecute similarly situated people? It’s too early to answer that question."

Gun rights activists celebrated the 5th Circuit's opinion, denouncing 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3) as an unconstitutional restriction on the Second Amendment. 

However, Higginson warned that "further reductionism" under Bruen "will mean systematic, albeit inconsistent, judicial dismantling of the laws that have served to protect our country for generations." 

"This state of affairs will be nothing less than a Second Amendment caricature, a right turned inside out, against freedom and security in our State," Higginson wrote.

Report on Clarence Thomas’ travel habits is ‘politics plain and simple’: expert

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

A report released last week accusing Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas of improperly receiving lavish gifts from a wealthy friend is nothing more than a political hit job, one expert claimed.

"This is just grasping at straws by the left that is desperate to tear down Justice Thomas because he now has a working originalist majority on the court," said Roger Severino, vice president of domestic policy and The Joseph C. and Elizabeth A. Anderlik Fellow at The Heritage Foundation.

"This is politics. Plain and simple."

Severino's comments to Fox News Digital came in response to a ProPublica report on Thursday accusing Thomas of improperly receiving lavish vacations from Republican mega donor Harlan Crow.

The ProPublica report accuses Thomas of taking trips across the world on Crow's yacht and private jet without disclosing them and Crow acknowledged extending "hospitality" to Thomas but insisted he never asked for it and that the two families have been friends for decades.

DEMOCRATS PRESS SUPREME COURT CHIEF JUSTICE TO INVESTIGATE CLARENCE THOMAS' TRIPS WITH GOP MEGADONOR

The ProPublica report claimed that trips taken by Thomas "have no known precedent in the modern history of the U.S. Supreme Court," which Severino flatly rejected.

"There is no 'there' there because the justices have received gifts of hospitality from friends forever," Severino said. "And many of the justices have taken far more trips than Justice Thomas on somebody else's dime, including Justice Breyer, who we know has taken at least 233 trips when he was on the bench."

Severino explained that justices are permitted to accept invites to properties of friends for dinner or vacations without paying for it or disclosing it.

JUSTICE THOMAS DEFENDS TRIPS TAKEN WITH ‘DEAREST FRIENDS’ AFTER REPORTS SAY HE ACCEPTED GIFTS

"There's nothing to see here because there's been no allegation whatsoever that accepting travel to a friend's property somehow influenced Justice Thomas's decision-making," Severino said. "That's absurd. If you know anything about Justice Thomas, it's that he's not influenced by outside pressures one whit. He's guided by the law and the Constitution. Period."

Severino accused liberals of giving a "pass" to perceived bias on the left, pointing out that the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg officiated a same-sex wedding before the Obergefell decision that federally recognized gay marriage.

"Did that perhaps indicate bias where she should have recused herself?" Severino asked. "The media was fairly silent about that and that sort of thing is much closer to the heart of impropriety in judging."

Justices are not required to disclose invitations and travel that are considered "personal hospitality" and the Supreme Court is not subject to an ethics code.

The Washington Post reported that the Judicial Conference, the policymaking body of the court, decided last month that judges must report travel by private jet, which Severino says is further proof Thomas was abiding by the rules.

AOC SAYS SHE MAY DRAFT CLARENCE THOMAS IMPEACHMENT ARTICLE IF NO ONE ELSE DOES

"It actually further reinforces the fact that he'd been acting within the rules and according to the practice that has been understood for decades. Hospitality includes when somebody picks you up to take you to their house or to their property. That's what hospitality is. It just happened to be a friend that has made it in the world that's been quite successful, doesn't change the fact that he's a friend."

Constitutional law professor and Fox News contributor Jonathan Turley told Fox News Digital that until recently, "even lower court judges were not required to report such trips under a personal hospitality exception."

"Justice Thomas would not have been required to report the trips under the prior rule," Turley said. "Once again, the Democrats and the media appear to be engaging in the same hair-triggered responses to any story related to Thomas. This includes the clearly absurd call for an impeachment by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez."

SUPREME COURT ALLOWS 12-YEAR-OLD TRANSGENDER GIRL TO RUN GIRLS' TRACK IN WEST VIRGINIA

In terms of the ProPublica implication that Thomas’s relationship with Crow somehow affected his rulings from the bench, Severino said, "Nobody with a straight face can say Justice Thomas has been influenced by anybody except by the Constitution and his best reading of it."

Many liberals on social media referred to the ProPublica report as a "bombshell" and some called for a resignation.

At the same time, conservatives on Twitter echoed Severino’s conclusion that there is no "there there" with the report.

"Laughably stupid," author Dinesh D’Souza wrote. "He vacations with a rich friend, who also pays for dinner! Is this the best they’ve got? Clarence Thomas’ real offense is being black and conservative."

"I read the latest high tech lynching of Clarence Thomas for going on vacation with his rich friend," conservative communications director Greg Price tweeted. "I also read the disclosure laws for judges linked in the story that says they don't have to report gifts from personal friends. ProPublica mysteriously left that out of their story."

SUPREME COURT REJECTS APPEAL FROM LOUISIANA DEATH ROW INMATE SEEKING NEW HEARING

The ProPublica article cited multiple experts who blasted Thomas’ actions, including a retired judge appointed by former President Bill Clinton who called the justice’s actions "incomprehensible."

Other experts, including legal ethics expert Stephen Gillers at NYU School of Law, adopted a tone more similar to Severino’s.

"Justice Thomas could plausibly claim, and I think has claimed (as have others) that so long as an invitation itself came from a ‘person,’ not a corporation or business entity, it was ‘personal hospitality’ and he did not need to report it," Gillers told the Washington Post.

On Friday, Thomas released a lengthy statement saying just that.

PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRATS CALL FOR CLARENCE THOMAS IMPEACHMENT AFTER REPORTED UNDISCLOSED GIFTS FROM GOP MEGADONOR

"Harlan and Kathy Crow are among our dearest friends, and we have been friends for over twenty-five years," Thomas said in a statement. "As friends do, we have joined them on a number of family trips during the more than quarter century we have known them.

"Early in my tenure at the Court, I sought guidance from my colleagues and others in the judiciary, and was advised that this sort of personal hospitality from close personal friends, who did not have business before the Court, was not reportable. I have endeavored to follow that counsel throughout my tenure, and have always sought to comply with the disclosure guidelines."

Thomas acknowledged that the guidelines were changed last month and it is his "intent to follow this guidance in the future."

Turley told Fox News Digital that Thomas was "right to release a public statement."

"Justices have long been guests of private hosts," Turley said. "They are allowed to have friends and accept their hospitality. There is no evidence that Crow had business before the court. Nevertheless, expensive gifts or benefits should be disclosed, in my view, in the interests of court integrity."

"I have also long argued for a code of ethics that applies to the court. The question is where to draw the line so that judges are not constantly forced to treat every friend like a lobbyist or influence seeker."

Democrats press Supreme Court chief justice to investigate Clarence Thomas’ trips with GOP megadonor

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

House and Senate Democrats are demanding that Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts launch an inquiry into Associate Justice Clarence Thomas and the luxury vacations he received as gifts from a GOP mega donor over more than 20 years.

Sixteen lawmakers led by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., and Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Ga., sent a letter to Roberts on Friday requesting an investigation into "allegations of unethical, and potentially unlawful, conduct." A ProPublica report published this week found that Thomas’ close friendship with real estate developer Harlan Crow allowed him to accompany the Texas billionaire on luxury vacations on his private jet and yacht, as well as free stays on Crow’s vast vacation property, among other benefits.

Democrats have alleged that Thomas breached ethics rules by failing to disclose these trips as gifts, some of which were valued at more than $500,000, according to ProPublica. The letter chastises the court for having "barely acknowledged" the allegations before.

"We believe that it is your duty as Chief Justice ‘to safeguard public faith in the judiciary,’ and that fulfilling that duty requires swift, thorough, independent and transparent investigation into these allegations," the letter states. 

CLARENCE THOMAS REPORT SPURS NEW CALLS FROM DEMOCRATS FOR SUPREME COURT CODE OF ETHICS

Thomas issued a rare written statement responding to ProPublica's report Friday, insisting that he has always followed Supreme Court guidance on gift disclosures.

"Harlan and Kathy Crow are among our dearest friends, and we have been friends for over twenty-five years," Thomas said. "As friends do, we have joined them on a number of family trips during the more than quarter century we have known them. Early in my tenure at the Court, I sought guidance from my colleagues and others in the judiciary, and was advised that this sort of personal hospitality from close personal friends, who did not have business before the Court, was not reportable." 

"I have endeavored to follow that counsel throughout my tenure, and have always sought to comply with the disclosure guidelines," he said. "These guidelines are now being changed, as the committee of the Judicial Conference responsible for financial disclosure for the entire federal judiciary just this past month announced new guidance. And, it is, of course, my intent to follow this guidance in the future."

JUSTICE THOMAS DEFENDS TRIPS TAKEN WITH ‘DEAREST FRIENDS’ AFTER REPORT SAYS HE ACCEPTED GIFTS

In a statement to ProPublica, Crow denied ever trying to influence Thomas or put him in positions where other influential people could do the same.

"The hospitality we have extended to the Thomas’s (sic) over the years is no different from the hospitality we have extended to our many other dear friends," part of the statement reads. "We have never asked about a pending or lower court case, and Justice Thomas has never discussed one, and we have never sought to influence Justice Thomas on any legal or political issue. More generally, I am unaware of any of our friends ever lobbying or seeking to influence Justice Thomas on any case, and I would never invite anyone who I believe had any intention of doing that."

Last month, the Judicial Conference of the United States, which creates and oversees policies for federal courts, revised its ethics and financial disclosure guidelines to require the justices to disclose things like traveling by private jet and staying in resorts.

PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRATS CALL FOR CLARENCE THOMAS IMPEACHMENT AFTER REPORTED UNDISCLOSED GIFTS FROM GOP MEGADONOR

The Democrats' letter notes that financial disclosure laws require top government officials to report gifts annually. It states there are "limited exceptions" for personal friendships, but argues, "these exceptions are not meant to allow government officials to hide from the public extravagant gifts by wealthy political interests. 

The undersigned lawmakers said the Supreme Court should investigate who accompanied Thomas on the undisclosed trips and whether they have any connections to cases pending before the court. "We have reason to believe that Mr. Crow himself is connected to multiple groups that have filed amicus briefs with the Court," the Democrats wrote. "Yet the public has no way of knowing who else with interests related to Justice Thomas' official duties joined these trips."

The Democrats said that if the court fails to act, they will push Congress to impose "a proper code of ethics" on the Supreme Court to "restore accountability" to the body. 

Fox News' Brianna Herlihy, Shannon Bream, Elizabeth Elkind and Bill Mears contributed to this report.

Mike Pence responds to Trump indictment: It’s an ‘outrage’

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

Former Vice President Mike Pence called the Manhattan grand jury's decision to indict former President Trump on a campaign finance issue an "outrage" in an interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer that aired on Thursday night.

Pence, who would face his former boss in the GOP primary if he decides to run for president, said Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's investigation into Trump for alleged hush money payments to porn star Stormy Daniels appears to be a "political prosecution." 

"I think the unprecedented indictment of a former president of the United States on a campaign finance issue is an outrage," Pence said.

In a historic development on Thursday, Trump became the first former U.S. president to face criminal charges. The charges concern a $130,000 payment made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels, and another $150,000 payment made to former Playboy model Karen McDougal.

TRUMP INDICTED AFTER MANHATTAN DA PROBE FOR HUSH MONEY PAYMENTS

Hush money payments made to both McDougal and Daniels were revealed and reported by Fox News in 2018. Those payments had been investigated by the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Southern District of New York and by the Federal Election Commission.

Federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York opted out of charging Trump related to the Stormy Daniels payment in 2019, even as Trump's former attorney Michael Cohen implicated him as part of his plea deal for making an unlawful campaign contribution. Cohen claims that he arranged those payments to McDougal and Daniels at Trump's behest. The Federal Election Commission also tossed its investigation into the matter in 2021. Trump has denied any wrongdoing. 

TRUMP TARGETED: A LOOK AT THE INVESTIGATIONS INVOLVING THE FORMER PRESIDENT; FROM RUSSIA TO MAR-A-LAGO

"This evening we contacted Mr. Trump’s attorney to coordinate his surrender to the Manhattan D.A.’s Office for arraignment on a Supreme Court indictment, which remains under seal," a spokesperson for the Manhattan District Attorney's Office said in a statement Thursday. "Guidance will be provided when the arraignment date is selected."

Reactions to Trump's indictment have mostly fallen on predictably partisan lines. Republicans have expressed various forms of outrage. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., accused Bragg of doing irreparable damage to the nation and said he has "weaponized our sacred system of justice against President Donald Trump." Democrats welcomed the criminal charges as long-time coming, with Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., the lead Democrat in Trump's first impeachment trial, saying the charges were just. 

RON DESANTIS SAYS HE WILL REFUSE ANY EXTRADITION REQUEST AFTER TRUMP INDICTMENT: ‘QUESTIONABLE CIRCUMSTANCES’

"If justice demanded that Michael Cohen go to jail for a scheme directed by someone else, justice also requires that the person responsible for directing the scheme must answer for their offenses against the law — and that person is Donald Trump," Schiff said. 

Pence said that charging Trump is a "disservice to the country" and warned that the charges will divide Americans, noting that millions still support Trump.

"I think the American people will look at this and see it as one more example of the criminalization of politics in this country," he said.

Fox News' Brooke Singman and Marta Dhanis contributed to this report.

Supreme Court Justice Jackson gets support from conservatives in first majority ruling

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson issued her first majority opinion Tuesday since joining the U.S. Supreme Court.

Jackson wrote the opinion in the case of Delaware vs. Pennsylvania Et. Al — a case concerning a dispute between multiple states on escheatment of unclaimed money.

CNN RIDICULED FOR SUGGESTING 'WEALTHY' SUPREME COURT IS BIASED AGAINST STUDENT LOAN DEBTORS: 'WORST TWEET'

The court overruled objections from Delaware and greenlighted the continued authority of a Special Master in the proceedings consistent with the court opinion.

The eight other justices unanimously supported Parts I, II, III, and IV-A of the opinion. She was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Brett Kavanaugh in her opinion regarding Part IV-B. Justices Neil Gorsuch, Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Amy Coney Barrett did not concur with Part IV-B.

Jackson wrote her first opinion in November 2022, a short dissenting opinion that supported Ohio death row inmate Davel Chinn's motion.

REPUBLICAN LAWMAKERS FILE APPEAL REGARDING THE LEGALITY OF THE PA LEGISLATURE'S IMPEACHMENT OF LARRY KRASNER

The justice's November dissenting opinion was at odds with the rest of the court, save fellow Justice Sotomayor.

Justices on the Supreme Court have attested to a good working environment between colleagues despite perceived ideological differences.

Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh offered praise for Jackson last month, telling an audience at the University of Notre Dame Law School that she has "hit the ground running."

Kavanaugh was present for a keynote Q&A session at the 2023 Notre Dame Law Review Federal Courts Symposium, where he addressed the perception that the Supreme Court is sharply divided on ideological grounds after a series of controversial decisions that went in favor of conservatives. 

"There are great relations among all nine justices both personally and professionally. We only get tough cases, and we disagree on some of those. I think that's more nuanced than it is sometimes portrayed," Kavanaugh said.

Fox News' Chris Pandolfo contributed to this report.

Kentucky Senate committee advances bill to expand address confidentiality program

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

A Kentucky Senate committee advanced a bill Thursday to expand an address confidentiality program intended to protect domestic violence victims from their abusers.

The measure builds on a limited, little-utilized program that shields victims' home addresses from voter rolls. The program would be broadened to mask their addresses on other publicly available government records if the bill becomes law.

The proposal heads to the full Senate next after clearing the Senate Veterans, Military Affairs and Public Protection Committee. It would still need House passage if it wins Senate backing.

KENTUCKY SENATE PASSES BILL TO BAN TIKTOK FROM STATE-ISSUED DEVICES

Kentucky Secretary of State Michael Adams said Thursday that the greater protections are needed in a state plagued by one of the nation's highest rates of domestic violence. The Secretary of State's office would administer the expanded program.

"When a victim decides to leave and find a safe place, often her abuser is able to find her, sometimes by finding her new location through easily accessible and free public records," Adams said in promoting the bill. "We can and must do more to protect victims."

The bill also aims to expand the program's accessibility.

KY PROSECUTOR WHO IS FACING IMPEACHMENT FOR OFFERING FAVORS IN EXCHANGE FOR NUDE PHOTOS SUBMITS RESIGNATION

Currently, victims who obtain court-issued protective orders can have their addresses hidden when registering to vote. Many victims don't obtain those orders, Adams said. Under the bill, victims who sign a sworn statement would have their addresses shielded from the broader list of records.

"I think that we will broaden the pool of people who can access this program," said Republican Sen. Julie Raque Adams, the bill's lead sponsor,

The measure would bring Kentucky’s efforts in line with 38 other states that offer comprehensive programs for masking the home addresses of domestic abuse victims on public records. The Secretary of State's office runs Kentucky's address confidentiality program related to voter rolls.

The program, created a decade ago, has fewer than 50 people participating, Michael Adams said.