EXCLUSIVE: The ex-husband of California Democrat Senate candidate Rep. Katie Porter said he does ‘not recant’ his domestic abuse allegations against the congresswoman after her campaign said that he did.

The allegations against Porter include claims that she dumped hot potatoes on her then-husband’s head and smashed a glass that led to him being cut by shards of glass. Porter has separately faced accusations of running a toxic, emotionally abusive workplace by former staffers.

According to divorce documents received by Fox News Digital, Porter and her ex-husband, Matt Hoffman, both filed domestic violence restraining orders against each other after an April 2013 altercation at the home they shared while legally separated.

Hoffman alleged that Porter hit him ‘in the arm, causing a large bruise,’ dumped boiling potatoes on his head and ridiculed him as ‘too dumb’ to have a cellphone. He said that the congresswoman ‘waited all day, then called the police’ and ‘made false allegations’ against him 11 hours after a confrontation while brushing their teeth the day the police were called to their residence.

Police arrested Hoffman on battery charges at the residence after the confrontation in April 2013. Porter requested the temporary restraining order the next day.

Documents obtained by Fox News Digital state that Hoffman regretted making the allegations against Porter in a court-ordered child custody evaluation, but it doesn’t specify whether his regret was due to a lack of veracity or another reason.

Porter’s campaign told Fox News Digital that Hoffman had ‘retracted’ his statement, but Hoffman said he did ‘not recant’ his allegations against the congresswoman.

Hoffman said he did not ‘recall stating I regretted making the allegations but, again, it’s been a long time.’

‘I do not recant the allegations,’ Hoffman added.

Porter’s spokesperson, Lindsay Reilly, told Fox News Digital that on ‘the morning of the hearing on Porter’s request for a temporary restraining order following documented violence by her then-husband, her then-husband’s lawyer filed a reciprocal request for protection.’

‘This common defensive tactic is designed to intimidate a victim. Her then-husband later admitted, as evidenced by the attached document, that ‘he regretted making these allegations,’’ Reilly said.

‘Porter’s then-husband’s allegation was not supported by any evidence, other than his false and later retracted statement,’ she continued.

‘Porter’s account was supported by police accounts, a doctor’s recommendation after a child custody evaluation, her sole request for a move-out order and property control, and ultimately a judge’s decision granting her majority physical custody,’ Reilly added.

Porter has repeatedly denied the abuse allegations, which Hoffman made amid a contentious separation and divorce process in 2012 and 2013. But the accusations bubbled back to the surface after multiple former Porter staffers blew the whistle on what they described as Porter’s toxic, emotionally abusive management style.

Porter and Hoffman separated in March 2013 and continued to live with each other until their divorce was finalized in December of that year, but the two alleged abuse from each other while living together during their separation.

Divorce filings obtained by Fox News Digital included 2012 allegations from Hoffman that Porter shattered a glass coffee pot after becoming angry over their dirty house, causing him to cut his hands and arms.

Hoffman also alleged that, while married, the congresswoman frequently berated him as a ‘f—ing idiot’ and ‘f—ing incompetent’ and dumped ‘steaming hot potatoes’ on his head during a 2006 confrontation.

‘She would not let me have a cellphone because she said, ‘You’re too f—ing dumb to operate it,” Hoffman said in comments first resurfaced by the Daily Mail this week.

In her restraining order, Porter alleged Hoffman swore at her and called her names and ‘grabbed both [of her] hands and squeezed’ during the April 2013 confrontation that led to his arrest.

The congresswoman also alleged that Hoffman had used his elbow to push her aside after rushing toward her, causing her to stumble and catch herself on a nearby bookshelf.

Porter said she went to find her daughter during the altercation and that Hoffman had yelled at her that she ‘was ruining’ their family with the divorce.

‘He would not let me leave. It seemed like five minutes or more that I was trapped in the laundry room with him,’ Porter said in the divorce documents.

‘He told me that I better not call the police, because if I did, our children would go to foster care,’ Porter said. ‘More terrifying, respondent then said, ‘Do you want me to kill myself? Is that what you are trying to make happen here?”

Hoffman was the primary caretaker of the couple’s three children while Porter was the breadwinner for the family.

On April 30, 2013, Hoffman filed a restraining order with Orange County Superior Court the day before Porter’s temporary order was set to expire.

If you or someone you know is a victim of domestic violence, call the National Domestic Violence Hotline at 1-800-799-7233.

A Missouri Republican state lawmaker on Tuesday said children as young as 12 years old should be able to get married as he defended a proposed bill banning gender-affirming care for minors.

Sen. Mike Moon, a Republican from Ash Grove, sat before a panel on Tuesday to defend and debate a bill that would ban all gender transition procedures for anyone under the age of 18.

The bill passed the Missouri Senate in March and is now before the House.

During the questioning, Rep. Peter Meredith, a Democrat, called Moon out for his stance on marriage of 12-year-olds if parental consent were given.

‘You voted ‘no’ on making it illegal for kids to be married to adults at the age of 12 if their parents consented to it,’ Meredith said to Moon. ‘You said, actually, that should be the law because it’s the parents’ right and the kid’s right to decide what’s best for them. To be raped by an adult.’

Moon did not deny supporting the measure. In fact, he defended it, to a degree.

‘Do you know any kids who have been married at age 12?’ he asked Meredith.

‘I don’t need to,’ Meredith said.

‘I do,’ Moon said. ‘And guess what? They’re still married.’

Video of the senator making the statements made the rounds on social media, catching the eye of California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, who tweeted about them on Wednesday.

‘Meanwhile, in Missouri: State Senator Mike Moon is advocating for 12-year-old kids to be married off to adults,’ Newsom tweeted.

Moon retweeted Newsom’s post with a statement of his own.

‘To be clear, I did not advocate for minors to be married off to adults,’ he tweeted, directing followers to a video he made to help clear the air. ‘Keep your California politics out of Missouri. Democrats will say whatever they can to make sure they can keep mutilating children.’

A spokesman for Moon spoke to Fox News Digital on Thursday, who said the one-hour committee meeting had strict time constraints and the senator did not have time to clear up his comments before Meredith moved on to the next.

Had he been given the time, the spokesman explained, Moon would have clarified he did not support 12-year-old children getting married to adults.

Moon does support, though, 12-year-olds getting married to people closer in age, like another 12-year-old.

During the debate, Moon said he knew kids who were 12 years old when they got married. According to the spokesman, one of the 12-year-olds got pregnant, and the parents encouraged them to get married.

The two children got married but were raised in two different states. Once they became adults, the spokesman said, they got back together, and they have been happily married ever since.

When asked how old the married couple is today, the spokesman said they are in their 50s.

Moon also addressed the issue on YouTube on Thursday.

‘If there’s an instance in which an adult has recently married a minor in this state of Missouri, I’ll make it a priority to remove and prohibit adults from marrying minors,’ he said. ‘Furthermore, if a person is raped, no matter the age, the rapist should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.’

The question referred to a state law that looked to raise the age that minors can get married from 15 to 17, which Moon voted against.

EXCLUSIVE — A group of Republican attorneys general is demanding that Democrats retract their suggestion that the Biden administration should defy a court order aimed at stopping the distribution of the abortion pill mifepristone.

Last week, a federal judge in Texas signed an injunction that directed the FDA to halt its more than 20-year-old approval of mifepristone while a lawsuit challenging its safety and approval works its way through court.

Democrats were incensed by the ruling, including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., who said that the Biden administration should ‘ignore’ it. She said ‘deeply partisan’ judges have ‘engaged in unprecedented and dramatic erosion of the legitimacy of the courts.’

‘The interesting thing when it comes to a ruling is that it relies on enforcement,’ Ocasio-Cortez said on CNN. ‘And it is up to the Biden administration to enforce, to choose whether or not to enforce a ruling.’

Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., issued a similar statement that called on President Biden and the FDA to ignore the ruling that he said has no ‘basis in law’ but is ‘rooted in conservatives’ dangerous and undemocratic takeover of our country’s institutions.’

Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra said on CNN last week, ‘What you saw — by that one judge, in that one court, in that one state — that’s not America.’

Nine Republican AGs say those statements are so egregious, the Democrats need to retract them ‘or resign.’

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey, along with eight other Republican AGs who filed briefs in support of the ruling, sent a letter to those outspoken Democrats that scolded them for their statements, which they said are ‘akin to a call to overthrow the Constitution.’

‘This is the most anti-rule of law administration we’ve had in recent history. The fact that Becerra is even considering this means he should resign immediately,’ Bailey told Fox News Digital in a statement.

‘Expressing mere disagreement with a court order, as all attorneys have done, is nothing like your call for the FDA not to comply with a court order. The difference between the two is enormous. For a party to defy a court order simply because one does not like it is an attack on our very system of government and the rule of law,’ the AGs stated in the letter exclusively reviewed by Fox News Digital.

‘You ought to know better,’ the AGs wrote. ‘Like each of us, you have sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution. Your anti-Constitution rhetoric is more than just wrong. It also erodes the culture of the rule of law that has taken centuries to build.

‘Other nations have fallen into tyranny quickly when those who should have been upholding the rule of law chose instead to lead mobs against it. Your rash, inflammatory, anti-Constitution statements are unacceptable.

‘You must retract or resign.’

On Wednesday, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans ruled 2-1 to keep mifepristone available only to be dispensed up to seven weeks, not 10, and not by mail, a decision that partially overturned the Texas ruling.

On Thursday, the Justice Department weighed in by asking the Supreme Court to issue a stay on the entire injunction issued by the Texas judge.

‘The Justice Department strongly disagrees with the Fifth Circuit’s decision in Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. FDA to deny, in part, our request for a stay pending appeal,’ Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a statement. ‘We will be seeking emergency relief from the Supreme Court to defend the FDA’s scientific judgment and protect Americans’ access to safe and effective reproductive care.’

Representatives for AOC, Wyden and Becerra did not immediately respond to Fox New Digital’s request for comment on the letter.

Fox News Digital’s Adam Sabes contributed to this report.

California Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom took aim at a Florida college that he called ‘ground zero’ for what Republicans want to do to education nationwide.

The progressive champion singled out the Sarasota-based New College of Florida, whose board of trustees was revamped by Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis, in a Wednesday message to his 2 million Twitter followers. Newsom said the institution is banning books, among other allegations of limiting speech.

‘Last week, I went to New College in Florida – ground zero for what the [Republicans] are trying to do to education in this country,’ Newsom said on Wednesday.

‘Take a moment to watch this. Books are banned. Speech is limited. Faculty are scared. Students are bullied. This is just a small dose of what’s to come.’

Fox News Digital reached out to Newsom’s office asking them to provide a list of the alleged banned books at the institution. However, they failed to do so and did not respond to the inquiry.

Newsom’s attacks further add to the speculation he may be exploring a future presidential run. DeSantis, also a likely presidential contender, appointed six members to New College of Florida’s board of trustees in January. The college has since taken a rightward turn in pushing back against educational policies, including abolishing its diversity office.

Meanwhile, one of the college’s DeSantis-appointed trustees, Christopher Rufo, responded to Newsom’s message by saying he’s spreading falsehoods.

‘Gavin Newsom is spreading lies and falsely claiming that ‘books are banned’ at New College of Florida,’ Rufo said. ‘He wants to put all Americans under the boot of DEI commissars and California’s failed policies.’

Rufo, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, later said that Newsom visited the college to ‘spread lies about Ron DeSantis’ higher-education reforms’ and that ‘no amount of hair gel’ could stop them from ‘restoring classical liberal arts education in Florida.’

GAVIN NEWSOM CAMPAIGN DONORS RECEIVED BILLIONS IN CA STATE CONTRACTS, INVESTIGATION FINDS 

During Newsom’s visit, he met with students and faculty who were reportedly upset with the school’s current trajectory, the Tampa Bay Times reported.

‘I’m crawling out of my skin for you guys,’ Newsom said during his visit. ‘I want you to know you’re not alone. You matter, we care. This is the ‘why I’m here.’ I’m not your governor. But I’m a member of the larger community all bound together.’

The California Democrat also took direct shots at DeSantis while at the college.

‘Weakness, Ron DeSantis – weakness masquerading as strength,’ Newsom said. ‘So, I want you to know you’re on the right side of history. You have something he’ll never have: moral authority.’

New College of Florida did not respond to a Fox News Digital request for comment.

MANCHESTER, N.H. – EXCLUSIVE – Republican Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina said there’s ‘no question’ he would support a 20-week federal ban on abortion and would potentially consider a 15-week limit.

Scott, a rising star in the GOP and the only Black Republican in the Senate, made news early Thursday in New Hampshire as he told local TV station WMUR that if elected president, he would support a 20-week ban on abortion. He reiterated that position a couple of hours later in an interview with Fox News at a café in Manchester — the state’s most populous city — but went a step further.

‘At least 20 weeks. There’s no question that I think the 15 weeks — there’s a lot of reasons for us to understand that, the viability,’ Scott told Fox News on his second day of campaigning in the crucial early presidential nominating states of Iowa and New Hampshire after launching a presidential exploratory committee.

Abortion, always an important issue on the campaign trail, took center stage following the blockbuster move last June by the Supreme Court’s conservative majority to overturn the landmark nearly half-century old Roe v. Wade ruling, which allowed for legalized abortions nationwide. The decision by the high court moved the divisive issue of abortion back to the states. Last year, following the Supreme Court ruling, Scott’s GOP colleague from South Carolina, Sen. Lindsey Graham, proposed a 15-week federal ban on abortions.

‘There’s no question that the health of the child, the viability of the child, 20 weeks in my opinion is a no question. But the 15-week threshold is something that I believe is a place where you find a national limit that says ‘no more.’ States can do less. That’s got to be a state’s opportunity to do what they want to do.’

Taking questions from reporters after a stop at the Red Arrow Diner in Manchester, a longtime must stop for White House hopefuls from both major political parties, Scott criticized Democrats for being hypocrites on the abortion issue and took aim at Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen for suggesting at a Senate Banking hearing that participation in the workforce by African American women in poverty could be increased by having abortions.

‘The most egregious form of restrictions are the lack of restrictions that our friends on the other side of the aisle have been voting for. They voted for late-term abortions up until the time of birth,’ Scott argued in his Fox News interview. 

The senator charged that ‘the most egregious form of this conversation gets so little coverage and so there’s no doubt that we have to find a threshold where we know that while the issue allows the states to be as aggressive or permissive as they want to be, I think there is the need for some kind of threshold that says we’re going to limit access to abortions for x number of weeks because we continue to see the rise of the far radical left wanting abortions up to the day of birth.’

And he emphasized that ‘we can’t be a country aligned with North Korea and China,’ which allow abortions for any reasons even after 15 weeks of pregnancy.

Scott, who’s co-sponsored restrictive abortions bills during his tenure in the Senate, including the 2021 Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which called for jail time for physicians who perform abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. The senator, who’s reiterated when asked about abortion that he’s ‘100% pro-life,’ on Thursday declined to answer when asked whether he would support legislation to prosecute doctors who performed late-term abortions.

Speaking with reporters, Scott declined to weigh in on whether medication abortions should remain legal, in the wake ruling this week by a federal appeals court that preserved access to the abortion pill mifepristone for now reduced the period of pregnancy when the drug can be used, and said it could not be dispensed by mail. The Justice Department says it will ask the Supreme Court for an emergency order to put any action on hold.

‘The courts are on their way to solving the problem,’ Scott said.

Democrats spent millions attacking Republicans over abortion ahead of last year’s midterm elections, and it was a contributing factor in turning the hoped for red wave by Republicans into a trickle. Democrats increased their razor-thin Senate majority by one seat, and while they lost control of the House, they kept their losses to a minimum. Democrats also won a number of crucial gubernatorial contests and flipped a handful of GOP controlled state house chambers. And Democrats last week won a crucial state supreme court election in battleground Wisconsin — where abortion was a top issue — by double digits.

Scott has long highlighted his faith and has been a champion to social conservative voters, who overwhelming oppose abortion rights. He’s likely to heavily court evangelical voters, who play an outsized role in Republican politics in Iowa and his home state of South Carolina, which votes third in the GOP presidential nominating calendar. 

Among his stops on Wednesday in Iowa was a roundtable discussion with homeschool families. And following his visit to the Red Arrow Diner in Manchester, New Hampshire, Scott privately met with a group of pastors.

Asked if that’s his path to victory in the GOP nomination race, Scott told Fox News: ‘I think my path to victory is just talking to people about commonsense. Commonsense conservatism works in New Hampshire as much as it does in South Carolina.’ 

Walter Reed National Military Medical Center says it is reviewing a Catholic pastoral care contract given to a secular defense contracting firm after the Catholic Archdiocese for the Military Services accused the center of denying Catholic service members the right to practice their religion.

‘At this time, the pastoral care contract is under review to ensure it adequately supports the religious needs of our patients and beneficiaries,’ Walter Reed said in a statement Tuesday.

The Catholic archdiocese objected last week after it said a cease-and-desist order had been issued against Holy Name College Friary, a Franciscan community of priests and brothers that had served at the center nearly two decades.

That came after a contract for Catholic pastoral care had ended at the end of March. And the archdiocese said the contract had been switched for a contract with a secular defense contracting firm that the archbishop says would not be able to provide adequate care.

‘It is incomprehensible that essential pastoral care is taken away from the sick and the aged when it was so readily available,’ Archbishop Timothy Broglio said in a statement.

‘This is a classic case where the adage, ‘If it is not broken, do not fix it,’ applies. I fear that giving a contract to the lowest bidder overlooked the fact that the bidder cannot provide the necessary service,’ he added. ‘I earnestly hope that this disdain for the sick will be remedied at once and their First Amendment rights will be respected.’

Two dozen Republican lawmakers sent a letter to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin this week decrying what they saw as an ‘attack on the Christian faith.’

Walter Reed, however, has stressed it is able to provide Catholic pastoral care without a contract and said that Holy Week and Easter services conducted by a Catholic priest were provided and that three priests in the region are able to provide services, as well as access to Red Cross volunteers and active-duty chaplain’s assistants. 

The center also said that it has an active-duty ordained Catholic priest on staff and that the awarded contract is to provide coverage in case staff cannot. It also said that, as part of the National Capital Region Health Market, it can bring on priests assigned to other defense organizations in the region.

‘With the assigned staff and regional support, WRNMMC has sufficient resources to provide for the religious needs of our Catholic beneficiaries,’ the statement said.

The Defense Health Agency also stressed that there was ‘no cancellation of Catholic services at Walter Reed, especially during Holy Week.’ 

Both the agency and the center also emphasized that the contract was not terminated, but that it expired on March 31 and that the contract had been up for renewal and rebidding. That contract is now being reviewed, the center said.

However, it confirmed that it had issued the cease-and-desist order April 4 after Holy Name College continued to provide services beyond the expiration of the contract. Catholic liturgies for Holy Week were offered at the center by the priest on staff.

Separately, senior defense officials told Fox News that Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mark Milley was not involved or consulted in any way in the decision as had been suggested in social media posts, and the issues were handled in Army channels.

‘Thanks in large part to the excellent news coverage on Fox News Channel, Fox Digital and other media exposure, as well as attention in Congress, the administration is now working hard behind the scenes to resolve the matter,’ the Archdiocese’s director of public affairs told Fox News.

Fox News’ Brooke Singman, Jennifer Johnson and Jennifer Griffin contributed to this report.
 

Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine on Wednesday announced $2.9 million in federal funding to help those affected by large-scale traumatic events such as natural disasters or mass shootings. 

The funding comes from the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act and in the wake of the Feb. 3 train derailment in East Palestine, Ohio, which forced the evacuation of roughly half of the town’s residents. 

Though no one was injured, many residents have complained of headaches, rashes, and other health problems. Government officials have insisted that air and water testing hasn’t found dangerous pollution. 

In announcing the funding, DeWine said it was essential that the state’s behavioral health system ‘is able to quickly respond to the immediate and long-term behavioral health care needs of those adversely affected by trauma.’ 

The Republican governor said Ohio MHAS would use the funding to help local and state agencies coordinate the deployment of resources to communities. 

This includes the development and enhancement of multidisciplinary mobile crisis teams that can be deployed rapidly 24/7 for swift crisis support and response after a traumatic event. 

‘Preparing for, responding to, and recovering from disasters and traumatic events is essential to the behavioral health of individuals and communities alike,’ OhioMHAS Director Lori Criss said in a press release. 

‘Although everyone reacts differently to disasters and most will return to normal, some of those affected may suffer from serious and prolonged mental or emotional distress. Finding support in a timely fashion will help people minimize negative outcomes.’

The White House has quietly corrected a claim made Tuesday by press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre that President Biden has taken more questions from the press than former Presidents Donald Trump, Barack Obama and George W. Bush combined.

Without alerting the public to the changes, the White House corrected the official transcript of Jean-Pierre’s gaggle with reporters aboard Air Force One to read ‘question-and-answer sessions’ rather than ‘questions,’ despite her making the claim four times.

The topic was brought up during the gaggle when a reporter asked Jean-Pierre whether the administration had decided Biden would hold a press conference during his trip to Ireland this week, prompting her to share data she promised a day earlier she would share when questioned on the president’s lack of availability to the press. 

‘The President regularly — and takes questions from the press informally — informally as well at different locations and different formats. Right before he got on Air Force One, he took about five very newsy questions for all of you, which I think was very important for all of you,’ Jean-Pierre said, according to the transcript of the gaggle shared by the White House.

‘The informal and informative Q&A that the President Biden engages in the — in with the press corps is more than — more than the last three Presidents… If you think about the informal questions and the formal questions. And I told — I mentioned to all of you yesterday that we actually had some — some data to share. It’s more than Presidents Trump; it’s more than Obama — Obama — combined —,’ she added.

A reporter then questioned Jean-Pierre on the measurement used to determine that Biden had taken more questions than Trump and Obama, who had a combined 12 years in office prior to his presidency.

‘We’re happy to share that. I’m just letting you know,’ she responded, before the reporter then asked if it was based on the ‘minutes spoken’ by Biden.

‘It’s questions. I just said questions,’ Jean-Pierre said.

The reporter clarified that she meant the ‘number of questions’ Biden has answered, to which Jean-Pierre repeated two more times that it was.

Jean-Pierre stated a fourth time that Biden had taken more questions than Trump and Obama combined, but this time added former President Bush as well, who served for eight years prior to Obama’s presidency.

‘And here you go. To your question, he has answered over 320 questions, and that’s not even including more — more formal press conference and interviews. So look, we’re going to try and — we’re going to keep — be consistent in his engagement with reporters,’ she said.

In addition to replacing each instance Jean-Pierre said ‘questions’ with ‘question-and-answer sessions’ when the White House published the transcript on its website, it also added ‘in the first 20 months of their presidencies’ where she claimed Biden had taken more questions than Trump, Obama and Bush. 

Fox News Digital reached out to the Biden administration for comment but did not immediately receive a response.

Prosecutors rested their side of the trial Wednesday against four people accused of seeking favors for Illinois’ largest electric utility by arranging $1.3 million in contracts and payments for associates of a powerful state politician.

Michael Madigan, the former House speaker, is not in court and faces his own separate trial. But he’s been a key part of the evidence presented over 17 days.

Longtime Madigan ally Ed Moody got more than $300,000 between 2012 and 2018 through ComEd’s contracts with various firms. He testified Tuesday that he believed the money was a reward for him to keep doing political work for the Chicago Democrat.

Moody denied doing much work for ComEd, the Chicago Sun-Times reported.

Defense attorneys tried to diminish Moody’s testimony by suggesting he was trying to please prosecutors and avoid being charged.

The four people on trial are former Madigan confidant Michael McClain, former ComEd CEO Anne Pramaggiore, former ComEd lobbyist John Hooker and former ComEd consultant Jay Doherty. All have pleaded not guilty to multiple charges, including bribery conspiracy.

Jurors heard a 2019 recorded phone call in which Pramaggiore suggested she wanted to end payments to Madigan’s allies but not until the end of the Legislature’s session.

‘We do not want to get caught up in a, you know, disruptive battle where, you know, somebody gets their nose out of joint,’ she said.

Pramaggiore said she plans to testify in her own defense.

Madigan was charged in 2022 with racketeering, bribery and other crimes. He’s denied wrongdoing. A year earlier, he resigned from the Legislature as the longest-serving House speaker in modern U.S. history amid speculation that he was a federal target.

The indictment accused Madigan, among other things, of reaping the benefits of private legal work illegally steered to his law firm.

Democratic Gov. Janet Mills’ bill to expand abortion access in Maine will generate emotional debate in coming weeks, but its eventual passage is virtually assured.

There were enough co-sponsors on her bill, formally introduced this week, to ensure passage with a majority. All told, there were 76 sponsors and co-sponsors in the House and 20 in the Senate, all Democrats or independents.

The governor’s bill would change the standard for women to get abortions later in pregnancy in Maine. It also would change reporting requirements and strengthen legal protections for medical providers.

‘This bill will help make sure every person who needs abortion care in Maine can get the care they need, when they need it,’ said Nicole Clegg, acting CEO of Planned Parenthood of Northern New England.

Maine’s current state law allows abortions until a fetus becomes viable outside the womb, at roughly 24 weeks, but there’s an exception allowing late abortions to preserve the life or health of the mother. The governor’s bill would change the exception to allow abortions after viability if it’s necessary in the professional judgment of a physician.

Republicans lashed out on Wednesday in a press conference, arguing that current law is sufficient and attacking the governor for reneging on a campaign vow to leave the state’s abortion law alone.

Republican Rep. Reagan Paul, of Winterport, called the bill ‘depraved.’

‘This gives the word ‘extreme’ new meaning. It would allow the abortion of a baby up to full term, one that could survive outside the womb. That is extreme,’ state Sen. Lisa Keim, R-Oxford, told reporters.

The bill’s printing came days after a federal judge in Texas issued a ruling that could make the nation’s most common drug for medication abortions unlawful. The Food and Drug Administration approved mifepristone 23 years ago.

In pressing for the bill, the governor cited the example of a Maine woman who had to travel out of state to end her pregnancy after an ultrasound showed her son had a deadly condition. In this case, the mother’s life was not in peril so she couldn’t get an abortion in Maine, even though her doctor recommended an abortion because her son would’ve been unable to breathe.

‘All medical care, including the very personal and private decision of abortion, is best determined in an office by patients and trusted health care providers focused on consensus, evidence-based medical decision-making,’ said Dr. Erik Steele, president of the Maine Medical Association, which supports the governor’s bill.