­
The Hill | The Reporters

Measles vaccination clinics hit by funding cuts

As the country faces a deadly measles outbreak , funding cuts under the Trump administration are hitting public health offices that work to track and prevent measles.

Roughly 20 states have reported measles cases, with Texas at the center of the outbreak. Texas, the hardest-hit state, is now seeing the impact of federal cuts.

In Dallas County, three of the funding grants from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have been impacted by a federal funding freeze . Early estimates from officials say that could be in the millions of dollars.

Nationwide, there is an expected loss of about $11.4 billion from community health departments nationwide.

As a result, 50 vaccination clinics in Texas have been scrapped, places that were working to combat the outbreak that has spread largely among those who are unvaccinated.

More than 20 public health workers have also been laid off, including those who administer vaccines and lab staff who are tasked with measles surveillance and prevention.

Since January, Texas has reported more than 420 measles cases , according to the state Department of Health, and the funding cuts are hampering local efforts to contain the spread.

Public health departments have been left scrambling, with fears that the number of cases will go up as the cuts limit surveillance efforts and access to vaccines.

For now, they are relying on systems that are still in place, including networks of clinics, to administer the vaccine while also sounding the alarm about the outbreak.

Click here to see original article

Luna says Johnson called her to discuss proxy voting strictly for new moms

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) said Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) called her to discuss the possibility of allowing proxy voting only for new moms after President Trump appeared to back the Florida Republican in her efforts.

Luna, who had led the fight against GOP leaders in the House to push for proxy voting for new parents, was embraced by Trump earlier Thursday when he was asked about her effort and the recently failed procedural vote.

Trump told reporters abord Air Force One that he spoke to Luna about her effort and didn’t understand why it was controversial.

“I’m gonna let the speaker make the decision, but I like the idea. Having a baby? I think you should be able to call in and vote. I’m in favor of that,” Trump said.

Luna celebrated the news in posts on X, thanking Trump for supporting the “pro-family resolution.”

“Despite misinformation, this is *not* a return to universal proxy voting,” she said, noting that it would help the GOP maintain its majority in the House.

Luna said she heard from Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) after Trump’s statement of support and they discussed “limiting the vote to just new moms who cannot travel because of health concerns.”

The original push included new fathers, in addition to new mothers in the House. The inclusion of fathers confused Republican members , who said they weren’t aware they were signing on to anything more than new mothers being able to vote via a proxy.

“This is smart,” Luna said of the revised proposed plan. “Only 13 members of Congress have given birth while serving in US history.”

Luna also said she told Johnson that the vote on the resolution “should NOT, in any way” interfere with legislation that would help Trump’s agenda.

Earlier Thursday Luna was still pushing for fathers to be included.

“I’m confident that with President Trump’s support, my proxy voting resolution will pass and new moms and dads in Congress will be able to vote for the America First agenda we promised,” she wrote on X before speaking with Johnson.

The Florida Republican-led nine other Republican lawmakers against Johnson earlier this week, delivering a blow to the Speaker when they tanked a procedural rule that would have blocked Luna from forcing action on the measure.

The fight halted work in the House until early next week and put a spotlight on the bill for new parents who are in Congress.

The Hill has reached out to Johnson for comment.

Click here to see original article

Spanberger confirmed as Democratic nominee for Virginia governor’s race

Former Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D-Va.) was confirmed Thursday as the presumptive Democratic nominee in the 2025 gubernatorial race in Virginia.

She is the lone Democrat running to be governor, according to the Democratic Party of Virginia (DPVA), which released a full list of candidates running in the 2025 primary races Thursday evening, once the 5 p.m. EDT filing deadline had passed.

Virginia’s primary elections will take place June 17, 2025, and the general election will be held Nov. 4, 2025.

The DPVA confirmed Spanberger’s name “will appear on the general election ballot.”

“Thank you to every Virginian who has shared with me their vision for our Commonwealth’s future since I launched my campaign,” said Spanberger, a moderate Democrat who served three terms in the House after serving as a CIA case officer.

“As the Democratic nominee for Governor of Virginia, I look forward to having many more meaningful conversations with all Virginians — across our communities and regardless of who they’ve cast their votes for in the past — about the issues that matter most to them,” she continued in the statement.

The other Democratic primary races in Virginia will be more competitive.

The DPVA listed six names that will appear on the primary election ballot in June running for lieutenant governor: Alex Bastani, Senator Ghazala Hashmi, Prince William County School Board Chairman Dr. Babur Lateef, Senator Aaron Rouse, Victor Salgado and former Richmond Mayor Levar Stoney.

The DPVA confirmed two Democrats running for attorney general: former Delegate Jay Jones and Commonwealth’s Attorney of Henrico County Shannon Taylor.

On the Republican side, Virginia Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears (R) is running for governor.

It remained unclear by Thursday evening whether former state Sen. Amanda Chase (R) met the qualifications to appear on the GOP primary ballot or whether the lieutenant governor would also be the presumptive nominee for her party.

Chase said she filed the paperwork to run for governor on Thursday but did not have time before the 5 p.m. deadline to count and verify that she had the necessary number of signatures to make the primary ballot.

Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) is ineligible to run in November, as Virginia prohibits governors from serving consecutive terms.

Click here to see original article

Fox News analyst hits Vance over deportation comments: ‘Politics is overwhelming the law here’

Fox News conservative legal commentator Andy McCarthy said in a Thursday interview it seems politics is “overwhelming the law here,” in the debate surrounding the Trump administration’s efforts to deport alleged gang members.

McCarthy pushed back on Vice President Vance’s recent comments suggesting criticism of administration’s deportation strategy “is such a weird, mistaken placement of priorities,” and that, “We do not ask permission from far-left Democrats before we deport illegal immigrants. We do the American people’s business.”

“Well, I just think the politics is overwhelming the law here,” McCarthy said on Fox News, when asked to respond to Vance’s comments, which he made in an earlier interview on “Fox and Friends.”

“No one is saying they can’t deport these people,” McCarthy continued. “Nobody is saying that. But in the United States, we have due process of law.”

McCarthy, a former federal prosecutor, said most, if not all, of the alleged foreign terrorists he prosecuted received life sentences—but only after appearing before a judge.

“I couldn’t say to the agent, ‘Go arrest them, and instead of bringing them to court, put them on a plane and take them to a third country,” McCarthy said, in a nod to the government flying alleged Venezuelan gang members to El Salvador for detainment.

“We have laws about… the process that you have to go through in order to obtain that outcome,” McCarthy added.

McCarthy said he thinks the courts have been clear that they are not going to interfere much on decisions “about who gets to be in this country and who doesn’t get to be in this county,” saying judges seem to be deferring to the “political branches” for those decisions.

“They’re going to have a lot of running room on that,” he said.

“But you have comply with the due process,” McCarthy added. “They’re very clear on that.”

Click here to see original article

Trump sued over China tariffs

President Trump was sued Thursday over the 20 percent tariffs he imposed on Chinese goods in the weeks leading up to Wednesday’s broader announcement.

It marks the first known legal challenge against Trump’s tariffs, which have fulfilled a campaign promise and rattled financial markets.

The lawsuit contests Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (IEEPA), arguing the law authorizes asset freezes and similar economic sanctions, but not tariffs. 

“Congress passed the IEEPA to counter external emergencies, not to grant presidents a blank check to write domestic economic policy,” the lawsuit states. 

The suit was brought by the New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA), a conservative legal advocacy group, on behalf of Simplified, a Florida-based small business that sells planners and purchases products from China. 

Filed in federal court in Pensacola, Fla., the suit asks a judge to declare Trump’s Chinese tariffs unlawful and block their implementation. 

Trump first imposed a 10 percent tariff on Chinese goods in a Feb. 1 executive order and then doubled it in another order issued March 3. 

Both came before Trump’s broader tariff announcement on Wednesday, which imposes a 10 percent general tariff on imports to the U.S. and higher rates for dozens of countries . It slapped China with an additional 34 percent tariff, creating a combined total of 54 percent.

“But in the IEEPA’s almost 50-year history, no previous president has used it to impose tariffs. Which is not surprising, since the statute does not even mention tariffs, nor does it say anything else suggesting it authorizes presidents to tax American citizens,” the lawsuit states. 

The Hill has reached out to the White House for comment.

Click here to see original article

Democratic AGs join legal fight over Trump’s election order 

Nineteen Democratic attorneys general sued Thursday over President Trump’s executive order that aims to strengthen proof of citizenship requirements in voting and prevent states from tabulating mail-in ballots received after Election Day. 

The new lawsuit adds to three existing cases filed by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and separate coalitions of private groups , who accuse Trump of going beyond his authority and violating the separation of powers.

“It bears emphasizing: the President has no power to do any of this,” the states’ complaint reads. “Neither the Constitution nor Congress has authorized the President to impose documentary proof of citizenship requirements or to modify State mail-ballot procedures.”

Trump’s order, signed March 25, directs the attorney general to target states that count absentee or mail-in ballots that are received after Election Day, a practice that conservatives have increasingly targeted in recent years. Court battles over whether it is legal commenced long before Trump’s inauguration. 

The president also directed that the federal mail voter registration form and the postcard application used by voters overseas require citizenship proof.  

“If instead Plaintiff States choose not to comply with the President’s blatantly unconstitutional attempt to legislate-by-fiat, they will suffer severe cuts in federal funding that will throw the national electoral system into disarray. The Framers carefully crafted a federal compact that protects the States from this Hobson’s choice,” the lawsuit states. 

The White House has previously pushed back on the legal challenges, saying Trump’s order is “an effort to protect the integrity of American elections” and that “Democrats continue to show their disdain for the Constitution.” 

Led by California and Nevada, the states suing are Massachusetts, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin. 

The new case adds to three separate challenges filed earlier this week that include plaintiffs like the DNC, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and the League of United Latin American Citizens. 

Click here to see original article

NSC staff ousted

{beacon}