Committee discourages impeachment of Vermont sheriff accused of kicking suspect

A special legislative committee recommended against impeachment Tuesday of a Vermont sheriff charged with assault for kicking a shackled prisoner but said the sheriff is doing a disservice by remaining in office.

A resolution to be introduced in the House by committee members on Wednesday urges Franklin County Sheriff John Grismore to resign "for the good of the people of Franklin County."

"While the Committee is not recommending articles of impeachment for Sheriff Grismore, they made it clear that Mr. Grismore remaining in office is a detriment to the citizens of Franklin County," House Speaker Jill Krowinski said in a statement. "The Committee heard from many individuals, and while the report lays out a list of concerning actions that are completely unacceptable of an elected official, it does not meet the high bar for impeachment."

VERMONT SHERIFF ACCUSED OF KICKING SHACKLED PRISONER PRESSURED TO RESIGN

Grismore did not immediately return an email seeking comment. He told WCAX-TV that the recommendation not to pursue articles of impeachment is a vindication of what he knew all along.

Grismore was elected sheriff in November 2022, a few months after he was fired from his position as a captain in the sheriff’s department for kicking a shackled prisoner. He pleaded not guilty to a simple assault charge.

Grismore was the only candidate on the ballot after winning both the Republican and Democratic nominations in the Aug. 9, 2022, primary. Just before he took office in February 2023, state police said they were investigating the finances of the Franklin County Sheriff’s Department and Grismore.

In December, the Vermont Criminal Justice Council found that he violated the state’s use of force policy and voted 15-1 that he permanently lose his law enforcement certification, which means he is unable to enforce the law in Vermont. A special legislative committee was formed last May to investigate possible impeachment.

The committee said in the report released Tuesday that it believes it's important for a sheriff to be able to fulfill law enforcement duties and should get ongoing law enforcement training, which is not available to a decertified officer. It also said it believes that a sheriff should show and uphold "the highest standards of honesty, integrity, conduct, and service."

"Through his conduct prior to taking office and his continued insistence that his use of force was appropriate, Mr. Grismore demonstrates none of these," the committee said.

Biden rolls out new endorsements for controversial judicial nominee as Dem support dwindles

The White House is moving forward with its campaign to confirm judicial nominee Adeel Mangi and pushing back on claims that he is antisemitic or against law enforcement, despite several Democratic senators expressing concern over the nominee's organizational ties and casting doubt on his chances of garnering enough votes. 

According to a White House official, Biden's team is keeping the pressure on senators to confirm Mangi, who is nominated to serve on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, dismissing attacks on him as false. The official said those focused on lobbying senators to support the nominee are White House chief of staff Jeff Zients, White House Director of Legislative Affairs Shuwanza Goff, Deputy Assistant to the President and Deputy Director of the Office of Legislative Affairs Ali Nouri, White House Counsel Ed Siskel, and White House senior counsel in charge of nominations Phil Brest.

Zients said in a statement to Fox News Digital, "Some Senate Republicans and their extreme allies are relentlessly smearing Adeel Mangi with baseless accusations that he is anti-police."

TRUMP CAMPAIGN REVEALS BATTLEGROUND PLANS AMID 2024 CONCERNS

"That could not be further from the truth and the close to a dozen law enforcement organizations that have endorsed him agree," he said, pointing to several new endorsements of Mangi by three former attorneys general in New Jersey, two former U.S. attorneys who served in the state, the International Law Enforcement Officers Association, the Italian American Police Society of New Jersey and the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives. 

"The Senate must confirm Mr. Mangi without further delay," Zients said. 

DEMS TARGET FOUR COMPETITIVE HOUSE SEATS TO WRESTLE BACK MAJORITY FROM GOP

Chances of Mangi being confirmed have appeared grim in recent weeks as allegations of antisemitism have been spotlighted due to his previous role on the board of advisers for the Rutgers University Center for Security, Race and Rights (CSRR). The center has sponsored events, including one on the 20th anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, with controversial speakers like Hatem Bazian, who in 2004 called for an "Intifada," according to video from an anti-war protest in San Francisco, and Sami Al-Arian, who in 2006 pleaded guilty to "conspiring to provide services to the Palestinian Islamic Jihad," according to the Justice Department. 

The CSRR has also hosted an event with Noura Erakat, who had previously been advertised as a panelist for a separate event alongside Hamas commander Ghazi Hamad.

Mangi has also been accused of being against law enforcement because of his role as a current advisory board member for the Alliance of Families for Justice (AFJ). The alliance's founding board member, Kathy Boudin, pleaded guilty to the felony murder of two police officers in 1981 after they died during the robbery of an armored truck. The robbery was carried out by Boudin's group, the Weather Underground Organization, which was recognized as a domestic terrorist organization by the FBI. 

Neither the CSRR nor AFJ provided comments to Fox News Digital. 

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, told Fox News Digital in a statement, "It is unsurprising that Mangi’s record has split Senate Democrats, and the White House should recognize their error, withdraw Mangi’s nomination, and instead nominate a candidate who can garner widespread bipartisan support."

Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., said Mangi's "well-known ties to this extreme organization that supports terrorists and cop killers makes him wholly unqualified to serve as an appellate judge."

JOHNSON TO FORMALLY HAND MAYORKAS IMPEACHMENT ARTICLES TO SENATE, URGES TRIAL 'EXPEDITIOUSLY'

Biden's White House has previously hit back at criticism of Mangi, calling it a "malicious and debunked smear campaign" prompted by the nominee's potential to become the first Muslim appellate judge. 

While Judiciary Republicans had already sounded alarm bells over Biden's pick last year after probing Mangi about his connections to the groups, Democratic senators appeared likely to fall in line behind the president's choice. 

However, after a recent report indicated Biden was being privately warned that Mangi may not have enough votes for confirmation, Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, D-Nev., revealed she was one of the lawmakers to reach out to the White House with concerns. 

The senator previously confirmed her stance against the nominee to Fox News Digital, citing his connection to AFJ.

Several other Democratic senators recently refused to say whether they would support Mangi.

The office of Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., confirmed to Fox News Digital that he is also committed to voting against Biden's pick. 

Cortez Masto and Manchin were recently joined by Sen. Jacky Rosen, D-Nev., who said in a statement, "Given the concerns I’ve heard from law enforcement in Nevada, I am not planning to vote to confirm this nominee."

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP, the law firm at which Mangi is a partner, did not provide comment to Fox News Digital. 

The loss of any Democratic support is a concern for Mangi's confirmation prospects, given the Senate's close 51-49 split in favor of the Democratic caucus.

MAN SENTENCED TO 11 MONTHS IN PRISON FOR THREATENING PHONE CALLS TO PELOSI AND MAYORKAS

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., called on Biden last week to withdraw the nomination, and now Republicans are reinforcing their campaign against Mangi's confirmation. 

"The White House can’t defend Adeel Mangi’s record. So, they’re launching personal attacks against anyone who notices the ties to cop-killers and antisemites that Mr. Mangi has forged of his own free will," Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., said in a statement. 

He added, "It’s not Islamophobic for senators to recognize" a nominee's failure to meet qualifications. 

"Now even his own Democrat party is rebelling against [Biden]," Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., remarked in a statement, attributing it to the president's "push for radical, anti-Israel nominees."

On Thursday, the Senate Judiciary GOP revealed three additional law enforcement groups were opposing Biden's choice, bringing the total to 17. The Pennsylvania Fraternal Order of Police, Philadelphia Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 5 and Pennsylvania State Troopers Association penned a joint letter to Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.; Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.; Judiciary Chairman Dick Durbin, D-Ill.; Ranking Member Graham; and Pennsylvania Sens. Bob Casey and John Fetterman, who are both Democrats. 

The court that Mangi has been nominated to serve on is located in Philadelphia. 

The Pennsylvania-based groups noted their letter is on behalf of over 40,000 members requesting that the Senate "reject the nomination" of Mangi, citing his AFJ affiliation. 

Biden fuzzy on dates, fumbled details in interviews with Special Counsel Hur

Transcripts of President Biden's interviews with former Special Counsel Robert Hur show the president repeatedly told prosecutors he did not know how classified documents ended up in his home and offices. 

More than five hours of Biden's interviews were turned over to Congress by the Justice Department on Tuesday, hours before Hur is set to testify to the House Judiciary Committee on his investigation into the Democratic president's handling of classified documents. The interview transcripts show Biden was at times fuzzy about dates as he recalled decades-old stories. 

"I have no idea," Biden said when asked how classified information ended up at his Delaware home and former Penn Biden Center office in Washington, D.C. The president added that had he known the documents were there, he would have returned them to the government.

The president did acknowledge that he intentionally kept his personal diaries — which officials said contained classified information. Biden insisted they were his own property, a claim also asserted by previous presidents and vice presidents, and that he had a right to keep them.

SPECIAL COUNSEL ROBERT HUR TO TESTIFY PUBLICLY ON FINDINGS FROM BIDEN CLASSIFIED RECORDS PROBE

Biden said that he left it to his staff to safeguard classified information that was presented to him, often leaving papers on his desk in heaps for aides to sort through and secure.

"I never asked anybody," Biden said. He noted that many of his staff had worked with him for years, to the point where they didn't need direction from him. "It just — it just got done. I don’t know. I can’t remember who."

Hur, in his report on President Biden’s alleged improper retention of classified records, did not recommend criminal charges against Biden. 

"We conclude that no criminal charges are warranted in this matter," said the report, which was released in early February. "We would reach the same conclusion even if the Department of Justice policy did not foreclose criminal charges against a sitting president." 

The special counsel infamously described Biden as "a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory."  

Hur stood by those remarks in his prepared testimony to the Judiciary Committee. He will say his report "reflects my best effort to explain why I declined to recommend charging President Biden."

BIDEN RETAINED RECORDS RELATED TO UKRAINE, CHINA; COMER DEMANDS 'UNFETTERED ACCESS' AMID IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY

"My assessment in the report about the relevance of the President’s memory was necessary and accurate and fair," Hur wrote in a copy of the remarks obtained by Fox News. "Most importantly, what I wrote is what I believe the evidence shows, and what I expect jurors would perceive and believe. I did not sanitize my explanation. Nor did I disparage the President unfairly. I explained to the Attorney General my decision and the reasons for it. That’s what I was required to do."

Confusion over the timing of the death of Biden's adult son Beau — who died May 30, 2015 — was highlighted by Hur in his report as an example of the president's memory lapses. But the transcript shows that Hur never asked Biden about his son specifically, as a visibly angry Biden had suggested in comments to reporters the day the report was released.

"How in the hell dare he raise that," Biden said of Hur. "Frankly, when I was asked the question, I thought to myself it wasn’t any of their damn business."

However, the transcript shows that Biden recalled the interview incorrectly.

SPECIAL COUNSEL CALLS BIDEN 'SYMPATHETIC, WELL-MEANING, ELDERLY MAN WITH A POOR MEMORY,' BRINGS NO CHARGES

Hur asked Biden about where he kept the things that he was "actively working on" while he was living in a rental home in Virginia immediately after leaving the vice presidency in January 2017. And in that context, it was Biden himself who brought up Beau's illness and death as he talked about a book he'd published later in 2017 about that painful time.

"What month did Beau die?" Biden wondered aloud, adding, "Oh God, May 30th." 

A White House lawyer who was present supplied the year, 2015.

"Was it 2015 he died?" Biden said.

The president went on to tell a story about how his late son had encouraged him to remain involved in public life after the Obama administration ended.

Several portions of the transcript were redacted by the Justice Department, National Security Council and State Department to hide sensitive intelligence and details of foreign affairs matters. 

Fox News Digital's Greg Norman, Brooke Singman and Fox News' Tyler Olson, as well as the Associated Press contributed to this report.

Texas AG Ken Paxton sues 5 cities over marijuana amnesty policies, cites drug’s reported links to ‘psychosis’

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has filed lawsuits against five Texas cities – Austin, Denton, San Marcos, Killeen and Elgin – over their marijuana amnesty and non-prosecution policies. 

The litigation charges that the five municipalities adopted ordinances or policies instructing police not to enforce Texas drug laws concerning possession and distribution of marijuana, which the state attorney general's office describes as "an illicit substance that psychologists have increasingly linked to psychosis and other negative consequences."

"I will not stand idly by as cities run by pro-crime extremists deliberately violate Texas law and promote the use of illicit drugs that harm our communities," Paxton said in a statement Wednesday. "This unconstitutional action by municipalities demonstrates why Texas must have a law to ‘follow the law.’ It’s quite simple: the legislature passes every law after a full debate on the issues, and we don’t allow cities the ability to create anarchy by picking and choosing the laws they enforce."

The ordinances notably prevent city funds from going toward or personnel from even testing suspected marijuana seized by police officers, with limited exceptions. 

The attorney general's office said Paxton "remains committed to maintaining law and order in Texas when cities violate the lawful statutes designed to protect the public from crime, drugs, and violence. He continues to seek accountability for the rogue district attorneys whose abuse of prosecutorial discretion has contributed to a deadly national crimewave." 

LAWYER FOR CALIFORNIA WOMAN AVOIDING JAIL IN MARIJUANA STABBING STANDS BY 'PSYCHOTIC' DEFENSE: 'NOT A CON JOB'

The lawsuits stress that Texas Local Government Code forbids any political subdivision from adopting "a policy under which the entity will not fully enforce laws relating to drugs." Further, the Texas Constitution notes that it is unlawful for municipalities to adopt ordinances that are inconsistent with the laws enacted by the Texas Legislature (Article 9, Section 5). 

Namely, with the Democratically-run city of Austin, Paxton's lawsuit takes issue with an order that became effective on July 3, 2020, instructing the Austin Police Department not to make an arrest or issue a citation for marijuana possession unless in the investigation of a violent felony or high priority felony-level narcotics case. 

A ballot measure known as Proposition A to further eliminate low-level marijuana enforcement later won the vote in 2022, and the City Council codified it into law as the Austin Freedom Act. 

In addition to limiting police from filing marijuana possession charges unless they come as part of a high-level probe or at the direction of a commander, the measure also states that no city funds or personnel shall be used to request, conduct, or obtain tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) testing of any cannabis-related substance, except in some limited circumstances. It adds the caveat that the prohibition shall not limit the ability of police to conduct toxicology testing to ensure public safety, nor shall it limit THC testing for the purpose of any violent felony charge.

ALARMING NEW TREND IS EMERGING AS YOUNGER AMERICANS ESCHEW ALCOHOL ON DATES, GO MORE FOR CANNABIS

Austin, Denton, San Marcos, Killeen and Eligin are all considered "home-rule" jurisdictions, meaning they have the "full power of self-government" and do not need grants from the state legislature to enact local ordinances.

In Killeen, located next to the once embattled Fort Hood, since renamed Fort Cavazos, voters approved a Proposition A of their own in 2022. 

It similarly states that officers should not make arrests for marijuana possession or drug residue alone. If there is probable cause to believe a substance is marijuana, officers can seize the substance. But the ordinance requires that police then also write a detailed report and release the individual if possession of marijuana is the sole charge. 

In Denton, located in the Dallas Fort-Worth metro area, another similar measure enacted by City Council known as Proposition B says officers cannot issue citations or make arrests for Class A or B misdemeanor marijuana possession. Elgin, considered a suburb of Austin, and San Marcos, which sits on the corridor between Austin and San Antonio, also both adopted similar ordinances designed to stifle marijuana enforcement in conflict with state law, according to Paxton's lawsuits.

The litigation comes after headline-making news out of California, where a judge recently ruled a woman who stabbed her boyfriend 108 times before slicing her own neck as police tried to stop her will not serve any prison time because she had fallen into a pot-fueled psychosis after getting high on drugs at the time. 

Though unrelated, the marijuana lawsuits were filed just a day after the Texas Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to temporarily halt Paxton's scheduled testimony in a whistleblower lawsuit that was at the heart of the impeachment charges brought against him in 2023, delaying what could have been the Republican’s first sworn statements on corruption allegations. 

Texas lawmaker calls for AG Ken Paxton impeachment inquiry to be reopened

A Texas state senator wants to reopen the impeachment case against state Attorney General Ken Paxton.

State Sen. Drew Springer, a Republican from Muenster, urged his colleagues in the Texas Senate to take a second look at impeachment charges against Paxton after the attorney general said he would not contest allegations in a whistleblower lawsuit. 

"He cannot admit guilt while claiming innocence," Springer wrote on X. "I urge the Lt. Gov & my Senate colleagues to consider reopening Paxton's impeachment. Paxton has not only admitted to violating the articles of impeachment, but he is exposing Texas taxpayers to a settlement of WELL OVER $3.3M. Texans deserve the truth!"

Paxton was acquitted in September of all impeachment articles filed against him for corruption and unfitness for office. He had faced accusations that he misused his political power to help real estate developer Nate Paul — allegations that stemmed from a lawsuit filed by four former employees who reported him to the FBI. 

TEXAS AG PAXTON ACQUITTED ON ALL IMPEACHMENT CHARGES: ‘THE TRUTH PREVAILED’

The whistleblowers — Blake Brickman, Ryan Vassar, Mark Penley and David Maxwell — claimed that they were unjustly terminated for reporting Paxton. 

Springer voted for Paxton's acquittal on 16 impeachment charges at trial in September. However, he now says that "recent developments have made me question whether AG Paxton and his legal team misled the Senate." 

TRUMP WEIGHS IN ON TEXAS AG KEN PAXTON IMPEACHMENT TRIAL, ARGUES ‘ESTABLISHMENT RINOS’ WANT TO ‘UNDO’ ELECTION

What happened? Last week, the Office of the Attorney General said in a court filing it could "obtain a verdict in this case in its favor," but instead moved to settle the lawsuit to "stop the self-aggrandizing political weaponization of our State’s courts by rogue employees who have what seems to be a monomaniacal goal to undermine the will of the voters," FOX 7 Austin reported.

"Doing so precludes further unwarranted expense to the people of the State of Texas as well as the disruption to the State’s principal law enforcement arm — the time and personnel of which are more appropriately dedicated to the business of the State of Texas and not the personal, political agenda of four rogue, former employees," the filing states.

EXTRAMARITAL AFFAIR DETAILS SURFACE IN HISTORIC IMPEACHMENT TRIAL OF TEXAS AG KEN PAXTON

In the filing, Paxton stated, "OAG hereby elects not to contest any issue of fact in this case, as to the claim or damages." 

Springer argues this amounts to an admission of guilt that should be reviewed by the legislature.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

"While AG Paxton claims this decision is not an admission of guilt, the fact of the matter is it is an admission of guilt. He can't accept the whistleblower's claims against him while touting that he's innocent against those very claims," Springer said. 

The Office of the Attorney General did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

NRA prepares for legal battles against blue state governor ‘torching the Constitution’ with gun control

New Mexico is kicking off its 2024 legislative term with a number of gun control bills that the NRA is already teeing up to battle in court, Fox News Digital has learned. 

"Extremist Governor Lujan Grisham and her allies have unleashed a barrage of gun control proposals that punish the lawful … while ignoring criminals. Last year, Lujan Grisham effectively suspended the Second Amendment by denying citizens their right to carry and self-defense," NRA Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) Executive Director Randy Kozuch told Fox News Digital. 

"Now, she's doubling down on her attacks, effectively torching the Constitution with her latest gun control insanity."

Lujan Grisham held her State of the State address Tuesday afternoon and called for the passage of a gun safety package she said would better protect residents from crime and violence, especially children. 

NRA GETS UNANIMOUS GOP BACKING IN SUIT TO DISMANTLE GOVERNOR’S ‘UNLAWFUL’ GUN ORDER

"I'm calling for a gun safety package. It bans assault weapons, raises the legal purchase for all guns to 21, institutes a 14-day waiting period, increasing penalties for felons in possession of a firearm, keeps guns out of parks and playgrounds and allows law enforcement officers to now file extreme risk protection orders," Lujan Grisham said Tuesday.

"I want to be very clear: No responsible gun owner should be punished or prevented from exercising their right. And no child should ever be put in danger by a weapon of war, especially one wielded by a person who can't pass a background check or can't wait two weeks to get a firearm." 

NRA SLAMS DEMOCRATIC GOVERNOR'S GUN ORDER, ISSUES HARSH ADVICE

Lujan Grisham's remarks came after the governor was repeatedly interrupted by protesters with videos on social media showing protesters wearing "cease-fire now" shirts, referring to the war in Israel. 

There are six gun control bills filed in the state House and Senate this legislative season and an "assault weapons ban" that has not yet been introduced but is detailed in a recent press release from the governor as a bill aimed at regulating "the manufacture, possession and sale of weapons of war, most often the gun used in mass casualty event." 

Lujan Grisham announced her "public safety legislative agenda" last week, which she described as the "largest" safety package in New Mexico history, while pinning blame on gun violence for recent crime trends. 

"This is, without a doubt, the largest and most comprehensive public safety package in our state’s history," Lujan Grisham said last week of the package, according to a press release. "Gun violence is a significant contributor to the cycles of crime in our communities, and we will continue to use every tool at our disposal to end this epidemic. 

"Likewise, we will strengthen our support for law enforcement, increase penalties for violent crimes and, once again, pursue legislation to keep violent offenders behind bars pending trial. All of this will build upon the progress and investments we’ve made in previous years."

GOP ASKS UNLIKELY BIDEN ADMIN ALLY TO STEP IN TO STOP NM'S 'UNCONSTITUTIONAL POWER GRAB'

In the New Mexico House, four bills have already been filed, including House Bill 27, which would expand the state’s red flag confiscation laws to allow law enforcement and health officials to report a person’s potentially harmful behavior, which could require the individual to surrender guns to authorities. 

House Bill 114, if passed, would allow the New Mexico attorney general or local district attorneys to file lawsuits against the gun industry for injunctive relief and civil penalties. 

NEW MEXICO GOV. GRISHAM SWIPES AT FELLOW DEMOCRAT WHO CALLED HER GUN CARRY BAN UNCONSTITUTIONAL

The other two bills, House Bill 127 and House Bill 129, would prohibit anyone under the age of 21 from purchasing and possessing a semi-automatic weapon and increase the waiting period on gun purchases to 14 business days, respectively. The NRA-ILA notes on its website that if House Bill 129 passes, New Mexico would have the longest gun purchase waiting period in the nation. 

The Senate has introduced its own version of a bill that would impose a 14-business day waiting period on gun purchases and a bill that would impose an 11% excise tax on guns, gun parts, suppressors and ammunition. The tax bill, styled after a similar California law that takes effect later this year, would collect the tax from gun retailers and place the funds in a victims reparation fund and a fund for abused children and families. 

NEW MEXICO REPUBLICAN LEGISLATORS CALL FOR DEM GOV. GRISHAM'S IMPEACHMENT AFTER GUN ORDER: 'SHE'S ROGUE'

"As a clear enemy of the Second Amendment and our self-defense rights, Governor Lujan Grisham is already being challenged by the NRA in the New Mexico Supreme Court. We remain on the front lines, ready to combat each and every one of her new oppressive gun control measures. The NRA stands with freedom-loving New Mexicans against Lujan Grisham's assault," Kozuch said. 

Lujan Grisham came under fierce condemnation last year after signing an emergency public health order that temporarily suspended open and concealed carry across Albuquerque and the surrounding county. 

NEW MEXICO DEMOCRAT GOVERNOR SLAMMED FOR 'ANTI-2ND AMENDMENT' PUSH: 'ILLEGALLY TRYING TO SNATCH GUNS'

The NRA responded with a lawsuit in the state's Supreme Court, arguing the order was unconstitutional, which earned unanimous support from GOP state House and Senate members and retired law enforcement officers, the Republican Party of New Mexico and the Libertarian Party of New Mexico.

As the number of lawsuits increased over the order, New Mexico Attorney General Raul Torrez, a Democrat, distanced himself from the governor, telling her he would not defend her administration in court. Other Democrats also spoke critically of the measure, as did gun control activist and Parkland school shooting survivor David Hogg.

Lujan Grisham said when she announced the order she anticipated legal challenges and raised eyebrows over her remarks on the Constitution. 

"No constitutional right, in my view, including my oath, is intended to be absolute," Lujan Grisham responded to a reporter in September when asked whether it’s "unconstitutional" to prevent Americans from exercising their right to bear arms.

Boebert responds to reports of fight with ex-husband at Colorado restaurant after police called

Rep. Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., responded to reports about the congresswoman fighting with her ex-husband at a Colorado restaurant after the police were called. 

"This is a sad situation for all that keeps escalating and another reason I’m moving," Boebert said in a statement provided to Fox News Digital. "I didn’t punch Jayson in the face and no one was arrested. I will be consulting with my lawyer about the false claims he made against me and evaluate all of my legal options."

The Silt Police Department confirmed to outlets, including The Denver Post and The Washington Post, that officers responded to Miner’s Claim restaurant, located within Boebert's district, on Saturday evening regarding an incident involving the congresswoman and her ex-husband, Jayson Boebert, but declined to provide more details at this stage of the investigation. 

In a brief phone call with The Denver Post, Jayson Boebert reportedly said he called the Silt Police Department on Sunday morning and told police he did not want to press charges.

"I don’t want nothing to happen," Jayson Boebert reportedly said. "Her and I were working through a difficult conversation."

LAUREN BOEBERT ADDRESSES THEATER INCIDENT: 'I MESSED UP'

Fox News Digital reached out to the Silt Police Department early Monday morning but did not immediately hear back. 

Silt Police Chief Mike Kite also confirmed the investigation to The Associated Press, but declined to release details, including who called police.

Officers planned to talk with witnesses and ask the restaurant owners for any video that might have captured what happened, Kite told the AP. 

According to The Denver Post, the incident was first exposed by American Muckrakers, a group that says it's vying to "Fire Boebert" and has been calling for her resignation. 

On X, American Muckrakers alleged that a physical altercation had ensued and said the group was filing a public information request for the surveillance tapes of the incident. 

LAUREN BOEBERT SWITCHES DISTRICTS, ANNOUNCING RUN FOR COLORADO SEAT BEING VACATED BY KEN BUCK

Boebert's personal life received media attention in September, and the congresswoman apologized, after she and a date were asked to leave a Denver theater over inappropriate behavior. Infrared CCTV footage showing Boebert and her date apparently vaping and engaging in romantically inappropriate behavior during a performance of "Beetlejuice" had gone viral. 

A Republican who has served two terms in the U.S. House representing the western side of the state, Boebert announced on Dec. 27 that she was switching congressional districts this year to run for a seat representing the eastern side of Colorado. The 4th Congressional District seat is open with the retirement of Republican U.S. Rep. Ken Buck.

CLICK TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

In her current 3rd District, Boebert probably would have faced a tough Democratic challenge from Adam Frisch, who nearly defeated her in the 2022 general election. 

Boebert filed for divorce from her husband in April, and the divorce was finalized in October. 

In her relatively short time in Washington, Boebert built a national profile and has aligned with the right wing of the GOP. Her assertive style has grabbed headlines, most famously when she heckled President Biden during his 2022 State of the Union address.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Texas AG Ken Paxton, wife targeted by home ‘swatting’ on New Year’s Day

FIRST ON FOX: Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and his wife are the latest elected Republicans to fall victim to "swatting" after a false report using their home's address was made to authorities.

Addressing the swatting incident in a statement to Fox News Digital, Paxton and his wife, Texas state Sen. Angela Paxton, said they were not at their McKinney home on New Year's Day when first responders arrived on the scene. The couple described the false report to police as being a "life-threatening" situation.

"On New Year’s Day, a currently unidentified caller made a false report to 911 describing a life-threatening situation at our home in McKinney," the couple said. "As a result, the City of McKinney Police and Fire Departments quickly and bravely responded to what they believed could be a dangerous environment. We were not home at the time and were made aware of the false report when a state trooper, who was contacted by McKinney police, informed us of the incident."

"Making false reports to 911 is a crime which should be vigorously prosecuted when this criminal is identified. These fake calls divert resources from actual emergencies and crimes and could endanger our first responders," the couple continued. "We are grateful for the bravery and professionalism of the men and women serving in the McKinney police and fire departments."

WHAT IS 'SWATTING,' THE 'CRIMINAL HARASSMENT' HOAX THAT'S HIT 3 GOP LAWMAKERS SINCE CHRISTMAS?

"It is also important to acknowledge that this 'swatting' incident happened weeks after the disgraced Speaker of the House Dade Phelan, his lieutenants, and the Dallas Morning News doxed our family by publicly posting our address," they added. "We understand some people may not agree with our strong conservative efforts to secure the border, prevent election fraud, and protect our constitutional liberties, but compromising the effectiveness and safety of law enforcement is completely unacceptable."

The McKinney Police Department did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment on the matter.

"Swatting" is a crime that has become prominent in recent years, gaining more steam in the social media age when people's addresses are easily accessible.

George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley told Fox News Digital recently that swatting is a crime that could be "charged as a form of criminal threats."

"Swatting constitutes a false police report that can be criminally charged," Turley said. "Virginia recently passed a new law making swatting specifically a criminal misdemeanor. It can also be charged as a form of criminal threats."

The incident involving Paxton comes after three Republican lawmakers – Sen. Rick Scott of Florida, Rep. Marjorie Taylor-Greene of Georgia, and Rep. Brandon Williams of New York – reported "swatting" incidents at their homes after the Christmas holiday.

"This is a crime that flourishes because there is insufficient deterrent," Turley added. "The anonymity and rare prosecutions combine to fuel this form of criminal harassment. … There is no mystery to how to address these crimes. There must be greater detection and penalties to achieve deterrence."

The crime targets an individual by calling in a false police report for a violent crime — such as a murder, a hostage situation or other crimes that would require a greater law enforcement response — to the home of the target.

The goal of the false police report is to elicit a SWAT team response by the police to the target's home. Consequently, swatting draws police resources away from real crimes while the state becomes the unwitting arm to terrorize a person at their own home.

MTG TO INTRODUCE BILL AIMED AT 'SWATTERS' AS RICK SCOTT BECOMES LATEST TARGET

Greene, who has been a victim of the move multiple times herself, announced last week on X that she would be "introducing legislation to make it much easier for law enforcement to arrest and prosecutors to prosecute these criminals" who engage in the false reports.

Over the course of the last year, Paxton has faced an onslaught of accusations from officials in the state, primarily Texas Democrats, who have accused the attorney general of being unfit for office.

Last May, the Texas House of Representatives voted to impeach Paxton over charges of bribery, disregard of official duties and abuse of public trust after hours of debate in an afternoon session – sending the case to the state Senate. The Texas Senate, however, acquitted Paxton of all impeachment articles filed against him for corruption and unfitness for office in September 2023.

Though there was support for impeachment on both sides of the aisle, votes to convict on each charge did not clear the required 21-vote threshold in the Senate. Republican Sens. Robert Nichols and Kelly Hancock joined all 12 Democrats to vote in favor of conviction on several charges.

"Today, the truth prevailed. The truth could not be buried by mudslinging politicians or their powerful benefactors," Paxton said in a statement at the time, thanking his supporters after the verdict was delivered. "The sham impeachment coordinated by the Biden Administration with liberal House Speaker Dade Phelan and his kangaroo court has cost taxpayers millions of dollars, disrupted the work of the Office of Attorney General and left a dark and permanent stain on the Texas House."

"Now that this shameful process is over, my work to defend our constitutional rights will resume. Thank you to everyone who has stood with us during this time," he added.

Prior to his acquittal, Paxton faced accusations that he misused his political power to help real estate developer Nate Paul. Paxton's opponents have argued that the attorney general accepted a bribe by hiring Paul.

Paxton was also previously indicted in June for allegedly making false statements to banks.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Paxton, who was suspended from office pending the trial's outcome, was not required to attend the proceedings. Paxton's wife, who has represented the state's eight district in the Senate since 2019, was required to be present for the whole trial but was prohibited from participating in debate or voting on the outcome of her husband's trial.

Paxton, who previously served as a member of both the Texas House and Senate, was first elected to serve as the Lone Star State's attorney general in 2014. He was re-elected to the position in 2018 and 2022.

Fox News' Chris Pandolfo, Houston Keene, and the Associated Press contributed to this report.

Vermont sheriff accused of kicking shackled suspect loses certification

A Vermont sheriff charged with assault for kicking a shackled prisoner is losing his law enforcement certification.

After hearing two days of testimony, the Vermont Criminal Justice Council on Wednesday found that Franklin County Sheriff John Grismore violated the state’s use of force policy and voted 15-1 that he permanently lose his ability to enforce the law in Vermont.

VERMONT LEGISLATURE FORMS IMPEACHMENT COMMITTEE FOR FRANKLIN COUNTY OFFICIALS

"Hopefully, law enforcement officers who might think of engaging in this kind of conduct will think not just twice, but many more times before engaging in this way," said Bill Sorrell, the chair of the Vermont Criminal Justice Council, WCAX-TV reported.

Grismore will not lose his job as sheriff but he will no longer be able to issue tickets, make arrests, and investigate crimes. He said he plans to appeal.

"Demonstrating to law enforcement officers that they will lose their career by going out of their way to try to assist and intervene with unruly and dangerous individuals is going to have an extreme chilling effect," his attorney, Robert Kaplan, said, according to mynbc5.

Grismore was elected sheriff in November of last year even though he was fired from a job as a captain in the Franklin County sheriff’s department that August after video surfaced of him kicking a shackled prisoner. He pleaded not guilty to a simple assault charge.

Just before he took office in February, state police said they were investigating the finances of the Franklin County Sheriff’s Department and Grismore. He is also facing the results of an investigation by a special committee of the Vermont Legislature formed to investigate his possible impeachment. The committee is scheduled to meet on Monday.

New Mexico sheriff says he won’t enforce ‘unconstitutional’ gun ban: ‘Protecting the Second Amendment’

Democratic New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham is facing widespread pushback from state law enforcement officials following her attempt to ban concealed and open carry permits.

Bernalillo County Sheriff John Allen described Grisham's 30-day "public health order" as "unconstitutional" during a press conference this week despite standing beside the governor during her rollout of the policy.

"It’s unconstitutional, so there’s no way we can enforce that order," the sheriff said in a Monday news conference. "This ban does nothing to curb gun violence."

NEW MEXICO REPUBLICANS BELIEVE DEMOCRATS WILL BACK IMPEACHMENT OF LEFT-WING GOVERNOR OVER 'ROGUE' GUN ORDER

"We must always remember not only are we protecting the Second Amendment, but at the same time, we have a lot of violence within our community. Let me be clear, I hold my standards high, and I do not or never will hedge on what is right."

Grisham issued an emergency order on Friday suspending the right to carry guns in public across Albuquerque and the surrounding Bernalillo County for at least 30 days following recent instances of gun violence.

The governor said she expects the order to face legal challenges, but she believes she needed to act in response to recent gun-related deaths, such as an 11-year-old boy who was shot and killed outside a minor league baseball stadium earlier this week.

NEW MEXICO GOVERNOR TEMPORARILY SUSPENDS OPEN, CONCEALED CARRY ACROSS ALBUQUERQUE: 'VIOLENCE AT EVERY TURN'

The suspension was classified as an emergency public health order and applies to open and concealed carry in most public places, excluding police and licensed security guards. The restriction is connected to a threshold for violent crime rates met only by the Albuquerque area.

Allen claims he pressured against the public health order, saying "[Grisham] knew we as law enforcement did not agree with the order, and as a result, this was solely her decision."

Grisham fired back at Allen following his press conference, ordering the law enforcement official to "stop being squeamish" about enforcing the order.

LIBERALS TURN ON NEW MEXICO GOVERNOR OVER GUN SUSPENSION: 'VIOLATES THE US CONSTITUTION'

"I don’t need a lecture on constitutionality from Sheriff Allen: what I need is action," Grisham said in a statement responding to Allen. "What we need is for leaders to stand up for the victims of violent crime. We need law enforcement, district attorneys, public officials, school leaders and state agencies to use every single tool at their disposal to stop this violence. Period."

She continued, "We’ve given you the tools, Sheriff Allen — now stop being squeamish about using them. I will not back down from doing what’s right and I will always put the safety of the people of New Mexico first."

Violators could face civil penalties and a fine of up to $5,000, according to the governor's spokeswoman Caroline Sweeney. The governor said state police are responsible for enforcing the order, but she acknowledged not all law enforcement officials – including the district attorney for the Albuquerque area – agree with it.

Lujan Grisham cited several recent shootings in Albuquerque when issuing the order, including the Wednesday shooting outside the Albuquerque Isotopes' field that left 11-year-old Froyland Villegas dead and a woman critically wounded. The two were inside a vehicle that was sprayed with bullets as people were leaving the game.

On Aug. 13, 5-year-old Galilea Samaniego was shot and killed as she slept when four teens entered a mobile home community in two stolen vehicles and opened fire on the home. The girl was shot in the head and died from her injuries at a hospital.

Another deadly shooting took place in August in Taos County when a 14-year-old boy used his father's gun to shoot and kill his friend, 13-year-old Amber Archuleta, while they were at the boy's home.

Fox News Digital's Landon Mion contributed to this report.