Connect with us

Politics

Republicans unite to block White House and Schumer backed 'fake border bill'

Published

on

Republicans unite to block White House and Schumer backed 'fake border bill'

Republicans in both chambers of Congress are preparing to band together to block any hope of a Democrat-backed border bill getting to the finish line. 

In a letter to senators dated Sunday evening, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., revealed his plan to bring an immigration bill to the floor once again after it was rejected primarily by Senate Republicans in February. 

“We are hopeful this bipartisan proposal will bring serious-minded Republicans back to the table to advance this bipartisan solution for our border,” he wrote. 

DUELING IVF BILLS TAKE CENTER STAGE AS PARTIES BUTT HEADS ON REPRODUCTIVE TECH REGULATION

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer revealed his plan to bring back a Democrat-backed border bill, but Republicans are uniting to block the attempt. (Getty Images)

Advertisement

He noted that he doesn’t expect to get full support from either party, but described the border measure negotiated by Sens. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., Kyrsten Sinema, I-Ariz., and James Lankford, R-Okla., as “a tough, serious-minded, and – critically, bipartisan – proposal to secure our border.”

The White House promptly backed Schumer’s plan, with press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre calling on “every senator to put partisan politics aside and vote to secure the border.”

BALANCE OF POWER: VULNERABLE DEMS LOOK TO DIFFERENTIATE THEMSELVES FROM UNPOPULAR BIDEN

Sens. Lankford and Sinema were designated negotiators for the border bill. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

Republicans were quick to push back on the majority leader’s characterization of the bill. “The fake border bill will fail, again, because it does nothing to seriously secure the border – just cement outrageous levels of illegal immigration,” wrote Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter. 

Advertisement

“Ironically, some Democrats will vote against it, because even pretending to limit illegal immigration is a step too far for them,” he added. 

The bill failed a test vote in February, by a vote of 49-50, short of the 60 votes needed to proceed. 

Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., slammed Democrats reviving the bill as “political theatre.” 

“He thinks this vote will make you think Republicans are to blame for Biden’s border crisis,” he wrote on X. 

Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., similarly labeled Schumer’s plan as “kabuki theater.” 

Advertisement

Republicans were quick to reject the negotiated legislation after hearing some of the elements and seeing the bill text, which many described as weak and even counterproductive. 

SEN DURBIN DEMANDS JUSTICE ALITO RECUSE FROM TRUMP CASES AFTER FLYING UPSIDE-DOWN US FLAG

Immigration has become a top issue for voters going into the election. (James Breeden for New York Post/Mega)

Lankford, who notably helped craft the bill, denounced last week the then-speculation of Schumer bringing the measure back to the floor. “Listen, if we’re going to solve the border issues, it’s not going to by doing competing messaging bills. If we’re going to solve this, let’s sit down like adults and let’s figure out how we’re going to actually resolve this together,” he said in floor remarks.

Lankford was one of only four in his party to vote in favor of moving forward with the negotiated bill in February. It’s unclear if he would support it again. 

Advertisement

His fellow negotiator, Murphy, has led the charge to reconsider the bill. “Republicans don’t care about fixing the border,” he wrote Monday on X. “They want the border a mess because it helps them politically.”

It’s unlikely that the measure will be able to get 60 votes in order to move forward, spelling doom for the bill a second time. But if it were to get past the upper chamber, House Republican leadership made it clear it would be “dead on arrival” in its lower counterpart. 

AOC RIPS FETTERMAN FOR COMPARING HOUSE TO ‘JERRY SPRINGER’ SHOW: ‘I STAND UP TO BULLIES’

House leadership preemptively warned that the bill would be “dead on arrival.” (Getty Images)

In a statement, Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., Majority Whip Tom Emmer, R-Minn., and Republican conference Chairwoman Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., said, “Leader Schumer is trying give his vulnerable members cover by bringing a vote on a bill which has already failed once in the Senate because it would actually codify many of the disastrous Biden open border policies that created this crisis in the first place.”

Advertisement

They further highlighted several tougher illegal immigration and border bills that have been passed by the Republican-majority House. “If Senate Democrats were actually serious about solving the problem and ending the border catastrophe, they would bring up H.R. 2 and pass it this week,” they said. 

H.R.2 includes nearly all Republican priorities and has been disregarded by Democratic leaders. Schumer previously remarked that the bill was full of “hard-right border policies” and said it would never be able to pass through Congress. 

Politics

Video: Fed Chair Responds to Inquiry on Building Renovations

Published

on

Video: Fed Chair Responds to Inquiry on Building Renovations

new video loaded: Fed Chair Responds to Inquiry on Building Renovations

transcript

transcript

Fed Chair Responds to Inquiry on Building Renovations

Federal prosecutors opened an investigation into whether Jerome H. Powell, the Federal Reserve chair, lied to Congress about the scope of renovations of the central bank’s buildings. He called the probe “unprecedented” in a rare video message.

“Good evening. This new threat is not about my testimony last June or about the renovation of the Federal Reserve buildings. This is about whether the Fed will be able to continue to set interest rates based on evidence and economic conditions, or whether instead, monetary policy will be directed by political pressure or intimidation.” “Well, thank you very much. We’re looking at the construction. Thank you.”

Advertisement
Federal prosecutors opened an investigation into whether Jerome H. Powell, the Federal Reserve chair, lied to Congress about the scope of renovations of the central bank’s buildings. He called the probe “unprecedented” in a rare video message.

By Nailah Morgan

January 12, 2026

Continue Reading

Politics

San Antonio ends its abortion travel fund after new state law, legal action

Published

on

San Antonio ends its abortion travel fund after new state law, legal action

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

San Antonio has shut down its out-of-state abortion travel fund after a new Texas law that prohibits the use of public funds to cover abortions and a lawsuit from the state challenging the city’s fund.

City Council members last year approved $100,000 for its Reproductive Justice Fund to support abortion-related travel, prompting Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton to sue over allegations that the city was “transparently attempting to undermine and subvert Texas law and public policy.”

Paxton claimed victory in the lawsuit on Friday after the case was dismissed without a finding for either side.

WYOMING SUPREME COURT RULES LAWS RESTRICTING ABORTION VIOLATE STATE CONSTITUTION

Advertisement

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton claimed victory in the lawsuit after the case was dismissed without a finding for either side. (Hannah Beier/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

“Texas respects the sanctity of unborn life, and I will always do everything in my power to prevent radicals from manipulating the system to murder innocent babies,” Paxton said in a statement. “It is illegal for cities to fund abortion tourism with taxpayer funds. San Antonio’s unlawful attempt to cover the travel and other expenses for out-of-state abortions has now officially been defeated.”

But San Antonio’s city attorney argued that the city did nothing wrong and pushed back on Paxton’s claim that the state won the lawsuit.

“This litigation was both initiated and abandoned by the State of Texas,” the San Antonio city attorney’s office said in a statement to The Texas Tribune. “In other words, the City did not drop any claims; the State of Texas, through the Texas Office of the Attorney General, dropped its claims.”

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said he will continue opposing the use of public funds for abortion-related travel. (Justin Lane/Reuters)

Advertisement

Paxton’s lawsuit argued that the travel fund violates the gift clause of the Texas Constitution. The state’s 15th Court of Appeals sided with Paxton and granted a temporary injunction in June to block the city from disbursing the fund while the case moved forward.

Gov. Greg Abbott in August signed into law Senate Bill 33, which bans the use of public money to fund “logistical support” for abortion. The law also allows Texas residents to file a civil suit if they believe a city violated the law.

“The City believed the law, prior to the passage of SB 33, allowed the uses of the fund for out-of-state abortion travel that were discussed publicly,” the city attorney’s office said in its statement. “After SB 33 became law and no longer allowed those uses, the City did not proceed with the procurement of those specific uses—consistent with its intent all along that it would follow the law.”

TRUMP URGES GOP TO BE ‘FLEXIBLE’ ON HYDE AMENDMENT, IGNITING BACKLASH FROM PRO-LIFE ALLIES

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed a law in August that blocks cities from using public money to help cover travel or other costs related to abortion. (Antranik Tavitian/Reuters)

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The broader Reproductive Justice Fund remains, but it is restricted to non-abortion services such as home pregnancy tests, emergency contraception and STI testing.

The city of Austin also shut down its abortion travel fund after the law was signed. Austin had allocated $400,000 to its Reproductive Healthcare Logistics Fund in 2024 to help women traveling to other states for an abortion with funding for travel, food and lodging.

Continue Reading

Politics

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta opts against running for governor. Again.

Published

on

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta opts against running for governor. Again.

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta announced Sunday that he would not run for California governor, a decision grounded in his belief that his legal efforts combating the Trump administration as the state’s top prosecutor are paramount at this moment in history.

“Watching this dystopian horror come to life has reaffirmed something I feel in every fiber of my being: in this moment, my place is here — shielding Californians from the most brazen attacks on our rights and our families,” Bonta said in a statement. “My vision for the California Department of Justice is that we remain the nation’s largest and most powerful check on power.”

Bonta said that President Trump’s blocking of welfare funds to California and the fatal shooting of a Minnesota mother of three last week by a federal immigration agent cemented his decision to seek reelection to his current post, according to Politico, which first reported that Bonta would not run for governor.

Bonta, 53, a former state lawmaker and a close political ally to Gov. Gavin Newsom, has served as the state’s top law enforcement official since Newsom appointed him to the position in 2021. In the last year, his office has sued the Trump administration more than 50 times — a track record that would probably have served him well had he decided to run in a state where Trump has lost three times and has sky-high disapproval ratings.

Advertisement

Bonta in 2024 said that he was considering running. Then in February he announced he had ruled it out and was focused instead on doing the job of attorney general, which he considers especially important under the Trump administration. Then, both former Vice President Kamala Harris and Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) announced they would not run for governor, and Bonta began reconsidering, he said.

“I had two horses in the governor’s race already,” Bonta told The Times in November. “They decided not to get involved in the end. … The race is fundamentally different today, right?”

The race for California governor remains wide open. Newsom is serving the final year of his second term and is barred from running again because of term limits. Newsom has said he is considering a run for president in 2028.

Former Rep. Katie Porter — an early leader in polls — late last year faltered after videos emerged of her screaming at an aide and berating a reporter. The videos contributed to her dropping behind Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, a Republican, in a November poll released by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies and co-sponsored by The Times.

Porter rebounded a bit toward the end of the year, a poll by the Public Policy Institute of California showed, however none of the candidates has secured a majority of support and many voters remain undecided.

Advertisement

California hasn’t elected a Republican governor since 2006, Democrats heavily outnumber Republicans in the state, and many are seething with anger over Trump and looking for Democratic candidates willing to fight back against the current administration.

Bonta has faced questions in recent months about spending about $468,000 in campaign funds on legal advice last year as he spoke to federal investigators about alleged corruption involving former Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao, who was charged in an alleged bribery scheme involving local businessmen David Trung Duong and Andy Hung Duong. All three have pleaded not guilty.

According to his political consultant Dan Newman, Bonta — who had received campaign donations from the Duong family — was approached by investigators because he was initially viewed as a “possible victim” in the alleged scheme, though that was later ruled out. Bonta has since returned $155,000 in campaign contributions from the Duong family, according to news reports.

Bonta is the son of civil rights activists Warren Bonta, a white native Californian, and Cynthia Bonta, a native of the Philippines who immigrated to the U.S. on a scholarship in 1965. Bonta, a U.S. citizen, was born in Quezon City, Philippines, in 1972, when his parents were working there as missionaries, and immigrated with his family to California as an infant.

In 2012, Bonta was elected to represent Oakland, Alameda and San Leandro as the first Filipino American to serve in California’s Legislature. In Sacramento, he pursued a string of criminal justice reforms and developed a record as one of the body’s most liberal members.

Advertisement

Bonta is married to Assemblywoman Mia Bonta (D-Alameda), who succeeded him in the state Assembly, and the couple have three children.

Times staff writer Dakota Smith contributed to this report.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending