Biden administration to propose narrow asylum regulation as border crisis remains top issue: report
The Biden administration is reportedly planning to announce an asylum regulation as early as Thursday that would allow officials to remove some illegal immigrants earlier in the asylum process. Although it is far short of broader changes envisioned by either the administration or Republicans. The Department of Homeland Security is planning to issue a regulation that would apply denials to eligibility for those claiming asylum at the initial screening stage at the border rather than during the interview stage, Politico reported. Should migrants fail to meet those criteria, it would allow officials to expedite their removal. Officials told the outlet it would allow officials to move more quickly on those who are national security or public safety threats. BIDEN PLAN TO EXTEND OBAMACARE ELIGIBILITY TO ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS GETS PUSHBACK IN CONGRESS: ‘MADNESS’ It is unclear to what extent the rule would change the situation at the border. The rule would likely only apply to those who are screened for an asylum claim. The Biden administration last year implemented a broader asylum rule that makes illegal immigrants ineligible for asylum if they have crossed multiple countries without claiming asylum. Since that rule was enacted, the border saw a monthly record for border crossings in December, although numbers have since decreased. The rule would also be far short of sweeping changes proposed by the Biden administration, which has called on Congress to provide additional funding and a sweeping immigration reform bill it introduced on day one to tackle what it says is a “broken” system. More recently, it has called for the passage of a bipartisan border agreement that would provide additional funding and implement an expulsion mechanism that would come into play if encounters rose above an average of 5,000 a day. Conservatives rejected the agreement, arguing it normalized already excessive levels of illegal immigration. “Look folks, it’s been a simple choice,” Biden said at the State of the Union in March. “We can fight about fixing the border, or we can fix it. I’m ready to fix it. Send me the border bill now.” It has also been reported by multiple outlets that the administration is considering the use of a law known as 212(f), which allows the president to suspend the entry of foreign nationals if he determines it is not in the best interest of the country. Republicans have said the Biden administration can fix the crisis by itself by ending its current policies and resuming Trump-era policies they believe largely solved the border crisis. They point to border wall construction, the Remain-in-Mexico policy and increased interior enforcement. Republicans in the House also passed their own sweeping border security package last year, which includes additional funding and measures to shut down parole and the entry of migrants into the interior. But that bill has failed to make progress in the Democrat-controlled Senate. House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Mark Green was unimpressed by reports of the rule and downplayed how effective it would be. MASSIVE NUMBER OF MIGRANTS FROM THIS FOREIGN ADVERSARY ARE ILLEGALLY ENTERING US “This rule appears to be an unserious, politically motivated attempt to address a significant problem the Biden administration itself created. The proposed rule will reportedly only apply to illegal aliens who are believed to be either a national security or public safety threat,” he said in a statement. “The rule will not impact or reduce the millions of illegitimate asylum claims being filed by economic migrants. The department currently cannot properly vet the vast majority of illegal aliens crossing the border, as numerous tragic reports from our communities make clear. The Biden administration, however, would have us believe that vetting under this rule will somehow be effective.” “All that migrants will have to do is say the magic words to get to their credible fear interview. Nothing will change.” Fox News’ Tyler Olson and Bill Melugin contributed to this report. Get the latest updates on the ongoing border crisis from the Fox News Digital immigration hub.
White House ‘strongly opposes’ GOP push to stop non-citizens being counted on census
The White House says it “strongly opposes” a congressional effort to put a citizenship question on the census to prevent non-citizens being counted for congressional apportionment — warning that it would be costly and “make it more difficult to obtain accurate data.” The Equal Representation Act has been introduced in the House and Senate and would require a citizenship question to be put on the decennial census asking whether the respondent is a citizen, a resident non-citizen or an illegal immigrant. The House was due to vote on the bill later Wednesday. The bill would then require that the census not count those who are non-citizens for the apportionment of congressional districts. Currently, everyone who participates in the census, including resident non-citizens and illegal immigrants, is counted for redistricting. SENATE BILL WOULD PUT CITIZENSHIP QUESTION ON CENSUS, STOP NON-CITIZENS BEING COUNTED FOR REDISTRICTING The bill would apply to the census conducted in 2030 and comes amid concerns from Republicans that Democrats will benefit from the historic migrant crisis at the southern border that has surged migrants into the U.S. and across the country — including in blue cities and states like Chicago, New York and California. But the White House’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) said in a statement this week that it ‘strongly opposes” the bill “which would preclude the Department of Commerce’s Census Bureau from performing its constitutionally mandated responsibility to count the number of persons in the United States in the decennial census.” “[The bill] would increase the cost of conducting the census and make it more difficult to obtain accurate data,” the statement said. “It would also violate the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution, which requires that the number of seats in the House of Representatives ‘be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State…,’” it read. BIDEN PLAN TO EXTEND OBAMACARE ELIGIBILITY TO ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS GETS PUSHBACK IN CONGRESS: ‘MADNESS’ Republicans who had introduced the legislation in both chambers had argued instead that the bill would prevent U.S. votes being diluted by illegal immigrants. “It is unconscionable that illegal immigrants and non-citizens are counted toward congressional district apportionment and our electoral map,” Sen. Bill Hagerty, R-Tenn., said in January. “While people continue to flee Democrat-run cities, desperate Democrats are back-filling the mass exodus with illegal immigrants so that they do not lose their seats in Congress or their electoral votes for the presidency, hence artificially boosting their political power and in turn diluting the power of other Americans’ votes.” “Incentivizing illegal immigration and exploiting our democracy to skew the number of congressional seats or electoral votes for the presidency is immoral and a sure path to the downfall of our nation. Only American citizens can vote, and only American citizens should be counted when determining federal representation,” Rep. Chuck Edwards, R-N.C., who introduced the bill in the House, said. The bill represents one of a number of measures introduced by Republicans to tackle what they fear could be the electoral consequences of the historic crisis at the border, which saw more than 2.4 million migrant encounters in FY 24, alone. On Wednesday, House Speaker Mike Johnson led a press conference to introduce legislation proposed by Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas and Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, that would require proof of U.S. citizenship in order to be able to register to vote in federal elections. Get the latest updates on the ongoing border crisis from the Fox News Digital immigration hub.
Gambling bill stalls in Alabama Legislature during session’s final hours
Gambling legislation remains stalled in the Alabama Senate with members expressing doubt that it will get another vote in the closing hours of the legislative session. The session ends Thursday and supporters have been unable to break a stalemate in the state Senate after the measure initially failed by one vote last week. Supporters had hoped to get the bill back for another vote but said that seems increasingly unlikely to happen as the session winds down. Republican Rep. Chris Blackshear, the bill sponsor, said it looks like it would take a “miracle of Biblical proportion” to get the bill taken up in the Senate in the session’s final two days. ALABAMA LAWMAKERS EYE GAMBLING COMPROMISE AS LEGISLATIVE SESSION NEARS ITS END “I just hope the senators that voted no and couldn’t get on board take time to drive around the state and see for themselves, the problems we have in all 67 counties,” Blackshear said Wednesday. The stalled conference committee proposal would authorize a state lottery and allow “electronic games of chance” including slot machines and video poker, but not table games, at seven locations. The Alabama House of Representatives voted 72-29 for the conference committee proposal, exceeding the 63 votes required to win approval in the 105-member chamber. The measure failed by one vote in the Senate, where 21 votes were required. Republican Sen. Garlan Gudger, a member of the conference committee, said Tuesday evening that the outlook is increasingly gloomy. “I don’t think it’s coming back up,” Gudger said. However, Republican Rep. Andy Whitt, who led a group of legislators who worked on the legislation, said he remains optimistic. “I always remain hopeful until the last day,” Whitt said. “It’s up to the Senate.” The conference committee opposed the compromise after the House and Senate approved different versions of the bill. The sweeping House-passed plan would have allowed a lottery, sports betting and up to 10 casinos in the state. The state Senate scaled back that proposal. Supporters were aiming for the first public vote on gambling in 25 years. Voters in 1999 rejected a lottery proposed by then-Gov. Don Siegelman.
Wife of ex-top Biden DOJ official now prosecuting Trump has donated thousands to Biden, Obama
The wife of an ex-Biden Department of Justice official, who is currently serving as a top prosecutor with Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office targeting former President Trump, donated thousands of dollars supporting President Biden’s 2020 campaign. Anne K. Small, the wife of Matthew Colangelo and a former Obama White House official, donated $2,800 to Biden’s campaign in 2020, according to FEC records reviewed by Fox News Digital. Small also supported Obama’s successful 2008 campaign and donated $500 to John Kerry’s failed 2004 presidential campaign. A 2013 press release detailed Small’s career background during the Obama administration, including Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) general counsel, Special Assistant to the President and Associate Counsel in the White House Counsel’s Office. Her legal career was preceded by clerking for now-retired Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer and graduating from Harvard Law School. “Ms. Small previously worked at the SEC as Deputy General Counsel for Litigation and Adjudication, helping to oversee enforcement matters, appellate cases, and adjudications,” the press release continued. “She becomes the first woman to be named General Counsel of the SEC.” NEW REVELATIONS IN FLORIDA DOCUMENTS TRIAL PUT TRUMP ON OFFENSE AGAINST ‘DERANGED’ SPECIAL COUNSEL Small has been serving on the board of directors at the NAACP’s Legal Defense Fund, which has been vocal against former President Trump, since early 2020, according to an archived version of the left-wing group’s website. In addition to Small, Jonathan Soros, the youngest of liberal billionaire George Soros’s three children from his first marriage, has also been serving on the board. The NAACP Legal Defense Fund earlier this year filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court calling for the disqualification of Trump from running for president, citing the 14th Amendment, according to a press release. “The Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, which was adopted during the Reconstruction period to safeguard our newly multi-racial democracy from forces who opposed the abolition of slavery and Black citizenship, prohibits government officials who engage in insurrections against the United States from serving again as officers of the United States under Section 3 of that Amendment,” the press release said. “The Colorado Supreme Court determined that this provision disqualifies former President Trump from appearing on that state’s ballot because he engaged in an insurrection in connection with the events of January 6, 2021.” While the group said the amicus brief wasn’t filed on behalf of any political party, the group’s president and Director-Counsel, Janai Nelson, fumed over the unanimous Supreme Court decision that favored Trump in the Colorado ballot disqualification dispute. EX-TOP BIDEN DOJ OFFICIAL NOW PROSECUTING TRUMP WAS ONCE PAID BY DNC FOR ‘POLITICAL CONSULTING’ “By not only ignoring the plain text and purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment but proscribing the exact manner in which Congress would have to act in order to ensure ‘oath breaking insurrectionists’ cannot hold office, the Court effectively provided constitutional immunity to insurrectionists, absent legislation from Congress,” Nelson said. “This continues a disturbing and dangerous pattern of judicial overreach and activism,” she continued. “At a time of mounting threats to the rule of law and to the preservation of our multi-racial, multi-ethnic democracy, as well as a crisis in public confidence in our judiciary, it is critical that courts adhere to their role in deciding cases and controversies. Today the Court failed to do so.” Nelson has also gone as far as opposing Trump’s First Amendment rights on social media, saying his “speech is quite strongly against the public’s interest—especially the interests of our democracy and the specific groups he has targeted that have suffered violent attack and other assaults as a result” after it was reported that his Facebook and Instagram would be reinstated last year. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) said this decision was the “right call,” which was rebuked by Nelson. BRAGG PROSECUTOR LEADING STORMY DANIELS QUESTIONING IN TRUMP TRIAL DONATED TO BIDEN, DEMOCRATS The FEC filings are the latest instance of several ties between the Colangelo family and the Democratic Party. Fox News Digital reported earlier this week that the Democratic National Committee (DNC) paid Colangelo thousands of dollars for “political consulting” in 2018. In addition to the payments, Colangelo also donated hundreds of dollars to Obama’s 2008 campaign and held several roles in the Obama administration, a Fox News Digital review found. “He has been a Distinguished Lecturer at the Georgetown University Law Center, and served in the Obama administration as a Deputy Assistant to President Obama and Deputy Director of the National Economic Council,” an archived DOJ “staff profile” said. “Prior to that, he served as Chief of Staff to Department of Labor Secretary Tom Perez for three years, and as Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights at the Department of Justice.” The DNC consulting payments were disbursed when Colangelo’s former boss, Tom Perez, was the DNC chair. White House visitor logs from the Obama administration also show Colangelo’s name dozens of times for various meetings with top officials, including several meetings with Biden’s current White House chief of staff Jeff Zients, who was serving as the director of the National Economic Council between 2014 and early 2017 when Colangelo was the deputy director of the NEC. Susan Hoffinger, another prosecutor from Bragg’s office leading the questioning of adult film actress Stormy Daniels in Trump’s criminal trial, also donated to President Biden’s campaign in 2020. The donations included a number of other Democrat politicians and organizations over the years. Hoffinger donated $500 to Biden’s presidential campaign in 2020: a donation of $250 in February 2020 and another donation of $250 in March 2020. She donated more than $900 to ActBlue during the 2020 cycle. ActBlue is an online fundraising platform for Democrat candidates, progressive organizations and nonprofits. Rep. Lance Gooden, R-Texas sent a scathing letter to the DOJ and Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg late last month demanding answers about the “cesspool of partisanship” in the DOJ, Fox News Digital reported last month. “The Department of Justice under President Biden has proven to
‘Not a chance’: Experts weigh likelihood of Trump’s Georgia case going to trial before 2024 election
With the Georgia Appeals Court decision to hear former President Trump’s bid to have District Attorney Fani Willis disqualified from the case against him, some legal experts say there is little to no chance the case will go to trial before the November election as Willis had hoped. On Wednesday, the appeals court agreed to hear arguments by lawyers for Trump and co-defendants in the sweeping racketeering case related to the 2020 election. They argue Willis had an “improper” affair with a subordinate lawyer on her team and should be disqualified. Judge Scott McAfee ruled in March that Willlis’ affair gave her team an “appearance of impropriety” and said special prosector Nathan Wade needed to be removed or Willis should step down. Wade resigned shortly following that ruling. But Trump and his co-defendants appealed that decision, which will now go before the Court of Appeals. John Malcolm, a former assistant U.S. Attorney in Atlanta, said there’s “not a chance” Trump’s Georgia election interference case will go to trial before November. GEORGIA COURT OF APPEALS TO REVIEW TRUMP’S BID TO DISQUALIFY DA FANI WILLIS “Although the odds of the Georgia case coming to trial quickly were never very good, now that the Georgia Court of Appeals has agreed to consider the recusal issue, there is not a chance the Georgia case is going to go to trial before the November election,” Malcolm told Fox News Digital. “There are still lots of pending motions that Judge McAfee will have to consider once (or if) the case is returned to him for further proceedings,” Malcolm noted. He added that the U.S. Supreme Court’s pending decision in the Trump immunity case may have an impact on some of the charges that Willis’ office has brought against the former president. Malcolm added that “by dramatically overcharging this case and by engaging in an interoffice romance with a prosecutor whom she appointed, Fani Willis has no one but herself to blame for the predicament she is in.” FANI WILLIS SUGGESTS SHE WON’T TESTIFY IN ‘UNLAWFUL’ GEORGIA SENATE INVESTIGATION Georgia State University law professor Anthony Kreis told Fox News in an interview that, according to the court’s rules, the appeals court has to hear and decide a case within two terms. “Now that’s a long period of time. We’re basically looking into early 2025 potentially if the court puts it at the end of its docket,” Kreis said. “The Court of Appeals is a pretty busy court. And so, you know, maybe they want to take the [case] sooner, maybe they don’t.” Kreis explained that it’s not guaranteed the appeals court will hold oral arguments in the case and could just decide it based on briefings by both parties. The earliest the appeals court could hear the case is August of this year. JUDGE DISMISSES SOME COUNTS AGAINST TRUMP IN FANI WILLIS ELECTION INTERFERENCE CASE John Shu, a constitutional law expert who served in both the George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush administrations, observed that “the Court of Appeals process will take weeks, and then whichever party loses the interlocutory appeal likely will file a certiorari petition to the Georgia Supreme Court, which, if they grant it, probably would take the process well into November. “This mess definitely is of DA Willis’ own making,” Shu added. Willis did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.
House squashes Marjorie Taylor Greene’s motion to oust Speaker Johnson
The House of Representatives squashed an effort by Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., and Thomas Massie, R-Ky., to force a House-wide on Speaker Mike Johnson’s ouster. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., appeared to catch most Congressional watchers by surprise when she moved to force a vote on her motion to vacate the chair, the procedural move which would allow for the vote. She noticed her resolution as “privileged,” meaning House leaders had two legislative days to take it up. But her bluff was called immediately when House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., rose to call for a vote on tabling Greene’s motion – which effectively kills it before the vote on Johnson’s ouster itself. Johnson got overwhelming Democratic and Republican support for the table vote, which passed 359 to 43, averting a vote on her motion. Just 11 Republicans voted against tabling the measure, along with 32 Democrats. On the Republican side, Johnson won the support of 196 members, while 163 Democrats also voted to shield him. The House GOP side of the chamber erupted in cheers when her move was squashed. MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE FILES MOTION TO OUST SPEAKER JOHNSON Greene, R-Ga., has been threatening to force a vote on taking Johnson’s gavel since late March in protest of his handling of government funding and foreign aid. . Her resolution, known as a motion to vacate the chair, will now have to be voted on or tabled after Greene noticed it as “privileged” on Wednesday night – meaning House leaders have two legislative days to take it up. The Republican side of the House chamber erupted in boos as Greene listed off her gripes against Johnson, prompting Democrat Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., to shout, “The House is not in order – and is about to fall into chaos,” prompting some sparse laughs from their side of the chamber. The vote is expected to be close but ultimately fail, with both Republicans and Democrats voicing opposition to a move that would effectively paralyze Congress until a new speaker is found. The vote is a culmination of six months’ worth of frustration from the most right-wing conservatives in Johnson’s conference, who have felt sidelined by him on nearly all critical legislation including foreign aid and government funding, during which they demanded he leverage a government shutdown to force the Democrats who controlled the Senate and White House to pass Republican policies. HOUSE DEMS SAY THEY’LL BLOCK MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE FROM OUSTING SPEAKER JOHNSON Greene’s push got two more backers in Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., after Johnson ushered a foreign aid bill along bipartisan lines that includes $61 billion for Ukraine. But it’s largely fallen flat among the House GOP, where even Johnson’s critics have shown little appetite for going through another three weeks of chaos like what followed the ouster of ex-Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., in October – particularly six months out from an election. With just a razor-thin majority of two seats, it would take little dissent for Johnson to lose the top House job if it fell along party lines. Eight House Republicans had voted with all Democrats to oust McCarthy in early October. Unlike McCarthy’s case, however, House Democrats have pledged to come to Johnson’s aid by voting to table the resolution if it came up – a vote to table a measure, which essentially kills it, is a procedural hurdle that allows Democrats to block Johnson’s ouster without having to actually vote on whether to fire him. Johnson’s critics seized on the left-wing support as evidence that the Louisiana Republican was not representing the interests of his own party. MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE CALLS JOHNSON’S FOREIGN AID PACKAGE HIS ‘3RD BETRAYAL’ OF AMERICAN PEOPLE “The entire Democrat Party is lining up behind Mike Johnson. First, it was the entire leadership team for the Democrats. Now, Nancy Pelosi, who impeached President Trump TWICE, has given Johnson her seal of approval. What deal has been made??” Greene wrote on X on Monday along with a video of Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., backing House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries’ decision to help Johnson. The move could save Johnson’s job, but could also cost him some Republican support. Massie told Fox News Digital last week when asked about how much GOP backing he expected, “I think it’s a kinetic situation. And Hakeem and the entire Democrat leadership team endorsing Mike Johnson is going to cause a lot of people who weren’t with us, to be with us.” Johnson, for his part, has repeatedly told reporters that he’s not afraid of Greene’s threats and has insisted his focus is on governing.
A Texas-size welcome to 14 summer fellows joining the Tribune
Fellows work with experienced professionals across the Tribune, bringing fresh perspectives, enthusiasm and valuable skills.
Arkansas cannot prevent 2 teachers from discussing critical race theory in classroom, judge rules
A federal judge has ruled Arkansas cannot prevent two high school teachers from discussing critical race theory in the classroom, but he stopped short of more broadly blocking the state from enforcing its ban on “indoctrination” in public schools. U.S. District Judge Lee Rudofsky issued a narrow preliminary injunction Tuesday evening against the ban, one of several changes adopted under an education overhaul that Republican Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders signed into law last year. ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION THROWS DOWN GAUNTLET ON CRT, DEMANDS PUBLIC SCHOOLS TURN OVER MATERIALS The prohibition is being challenged by two teachers and two students at Little Rock Central High School, site of the 1957 desegregation crisis. In his 50-page ruling, Rudofsky said the state’s arguments make it clear the law doesn’t outright “prevent classroom instruction that teaches, uses, or refers to any theory, idea, or ideology.” His ruling prohibited the state from disciplining teachers for teaching, mentioning or discussing critical race theory — an academic framework dating to the 1970s that centers on the idea that racism is embedded in the nation’s institutions. The theory is not a fixture of K-12 education, and Arkansas’ ban does not define what constitutes critical race theory. Rudofsky said, although his ruling was narrow, it “should give comfort to teachers across the state (and to their students) that Section 16 does not prohibit teachers from teaching about, using, or referring to critical race theory or any other theory, ideology, or idea so long as the teachers do not compel their students to accept as valid such theory, ideology, or idea.” Rudofsky said his decision still would bar the teachers from taking steps such as grading on the basis on whether a student accepts or rejects a theory or giving preferential treatment to students on whether they accept a theory. Both the state and attorneys for the teachers claimed the ruling as an initial victory in ongoing litigation over the law. “We are very happy that the court has acknowledged that the plaintiffs have brought colorable constitutional claims forward,” said Mike Laux, an attorney for the teachers and students who filed suit. “With this notch in our belt, we look forward to prosecuting this incredibly important case going forward.” David Hinojosa, director of the Educational Opportunities Project at the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law — also representing the plaintiffs in the case — said the ruling “has essentially gutted Arkansas’ classroom censorship law to render the law virtually meaningless.” Republican Attorney General Tim Griffin said the ruling “merely prohibits doing what Arkansas was never doing in the first place.” “Today’s decision confirms what I’ve said all along. Arkansas law doesn’t prohibit teaching the history of segregation, the civil rights movement, or slavery,” Griffin said in a statement. The lawsuit stems from the state’s decision that an Advanced Placement course on African American Studies would not count toward state credit during the 2023-2024 school year. The teachers’ lawsuit argues the state’s ban is so vague that it forces them to self-censor what they teach to avoid running afoul of it. Arkansas is among several Republican-led states that have placed restrictions on how race is taught in the classroom, including prohibitions on critical race theory. Tennessee educators filed a similar lawsuit last year challenging that state’s sweeping bans on teaching certain concepts of race, gender and bias in classroom.
Dade Phelan directs House leaders to revisit vouchers, property taxes in the next legislative session
The Beaumont Republican issued his interim charges even as it remains unclear whether he’ll be reelected.
House antisemitism hearing: NYC schools leader reveals case that has ‘troubled’ him the most
The chancellor of New York City Public Schools on Wednesday told lawmakers on Capitol Hill that there have been 281 antisemitic and Islamophobic incidents within his school system since Hamas launched its attack on Israel on Oct. 7, but one case troubles him the most. David Banks made the admission to the Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary and Secondary Education during a hearing titled “Confronting pervasive antisemitism in K-12 schools.” “We’ve had 281 incidents since October 7th — approximately 42% were antisemitic and 30% were Islamophobic,” Banks said. “We take every single one of those very, very seriously. We investigate and then we initiate the appropriate level of conduct.” But during an exchange with Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., Banks admitted that allegations surrounding behavior at Origins High School in Brooklyn have “troubled” him the most. LIVE UPDATES: ANTI-ISRAEL PROTESTS ON US COLLEGE CAMPUSES Stefanik said, “In October, 40 to 50 students marched through Origins High School chanting ‘Death to Israel’ and ‘Kill the Jews.’” “In addition, an independent investigation found that a teacher who teaches global history was told by a student, quote, ‘I wish you were killed.’ Another student called her, quote, ‘a dirty Jew.’ And the student said he wished Hitler could have hit more Jews, including her,” she continued. “What disciplinary actions have been taken against those students who chanted ‘Death to Israel’ at Origins High School and against the student who harassed with antisemitic slurs?” Banks responded by saying that “when we have done our investigation, we have found no evidence that there was any movement through the hall saying, ‘Death to the Jews.’” “We looked at, and I treat that very, very seriously. That was reported in the papers. We have found no evidence that that actually happened,” he added. “What we have found a wide range of deeply troubling antisemitic things that have happened at Origins High School. This is the one case that has troubled me the most, Congresswoman, I will tell you that.” ‘SQUAD’ MEMBER REP. TLAIB CALLS FOR NETANYAHU’S ARREST “We have, in fact, suspended a number of students at that school. But currently this case now is under litigation,” he also said. “And I’m being advised not to speak to the specific things that have happened there.” The hearing opened with Rep. Aaron Bean, R-Fla., calling the very need for it a “travesty.” “The aftermath of Oct. 7 has revealed some of the ugliest, most deprived ideas once marginalized from polite society. And our education system has failed to stop it. It’s not just anti-Israel, it’s anti-American. It’s anti-democracy,” Bean said. “Our witnesses today represent some of the largest school districts in the nation where there’s been some vile antisemitism in their districts.” Banks also said during the hearing, “Whenever an issue is brought to our attention, I can’t state that I can prevent every incident from ever happening. But our role as leaders is to make sure that once it is brought to our attention, that we respond in an appropriate fashion. And that is what we have been doing.”