Alexander Soros, son of liberal billionaire George Soros, has made frequent visits to the White House since President Biden took office in 2021, meeting with top officials on behalf of his 92-year-old father.

Soros — who has worked to carry his father’s torch as he has assisted with fundraising efforts for the Democratic Party — traveled to the White House at least 14 times since October 2021 and had meetings with multiple officials in 2022, according to White House visitor logs reviewed by Fox News Digital.

The logs detailing visits by Soros to the White House were first reported by the New York Post on Saturday and revealed that the billionaire’s son made a trip to the White House on December 1, 2022, the day he met with then-Chief of Staff Ron Klain’s assistant, Nina Srivastava, who also served on Biden’s presidential campaign.

That December visit to the White House, according to the Post, took place on the same day a state dinner attended by Alexander Soros was held by the first family to honor French President Emmanuel Macron and his wife, Brigitte.

One day later, on December 2 of last year, records showed that Soros had meetings with Mariana Adame, advisor to the counselor to the president, and Deputy National Security Advisor Jonathan Finer.

Records showed previous trips to the White House by Soros, who serves as chair of the Open Society Foundations, founded by his father in the 1990s, included earlier 2022 meetings with Adame on Oct. 14, Srivastava on Sept. 14, and Finer on three different occasions (Dec. 15, Oct. 6 and Sept. 15).

The updated visitors log also revealed that Soros had meetings at the White House with Kimberly Lang, then a National Security Advisor executive assistant, on October 6, as well as former Klain advisor Madeline Strasser on Oct. 29, 2021, and April 22, 2022.

Heritage Foundation Oversight Project director Mike Howell told Fox News Digital that the visits by Alexander Soros to the White House are concerning, as the Soros family ‘has done incalculable damage to our country.’ He continued, ‘The death and destruction of their policies are evident at our borders and in our crime-infested cities. The left is addicted to their money, and they don’t even bother hiding it anymore.’

Alexander Soros’ social media accounts document numerous meetings with high-profile leaders from around the world, featuring photos of the liberal billionaire’s son with former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Cindy McCain, who served as the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Agencies for Food and Agriculture from Nov. 2021 to April 2023 and is the widow of the late former Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.

Other photos shared to his Instagram account showed Alexander Soros standing alongside former President Barack Obama, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Macron.

The Soros family recently came under fire for its involvement in pushing to prominence Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, whose investigations into Trump led to an indictment of the former president last week.

Fox News Digital previously reported that in May 2021, George Soros pushed $1 million to the Color of Change PAC, which turned around and spent big, backing Bragg’s candidacy.

Soros’ son Jonathan Soros, and Jonathan’s wife, Jennifer Allan Soros, also donated directly to Bragg’s campaign, according to New York campaign finance records reviewed by Fox News Digital.

On April 26, 2021, Jonathan Soros sent a $10,000 check to the now-district attorney’s coffers, state filings show. Three days later, on April 29, Jennifer Allan Soros added a $10,000 contribution to the campaign. While other individuals provided more direct cash to his committee, the couple were among its biggest donors. 

The contributions were also uncommon for the pair, as they generally do not get financially involved with district attorney races, though they have donated to other New York political campaigns and issue groups. Jonathan Soros did not respond to a Fox News Digital request for comment on the Bragg donations.

George Soros, on the other hand, has targeted numerous prosecutor races with millions of dollars in recent years.

Soros’ district attorney operation usually involves his longtime treasurer, Whitney Tymas, establishing ‘pop-up’ political action committees in states where he targets the races. Once set up, the financier injects money into the PACs, which tend to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars backing his preferred candidates. The PACs typically dissolve after the elections.

In Bragg’s case, that did not happen. Instead, Soros donated $1 million in May 2021 to the Color of Change PAC, which in the following weeks spent cash backing Bragg’s candidacy. The timing of the money makes it likely that it aided the efforts.

Fox News’ Joe Schoffstall and Jessica Chasmar contributed to this article.

The U.S. Navy has launched a submarine capable of carrying a large payload of missiles into the Middle East in an apparent warning directed toward Iran.

The nuclear-powered submarine is deployed to the U.S. 5th Fleet, which has a patrol that includes the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, the Red Sea and the Suez Canal.

‘It is capable of carrying up to 154 Tomahawk land-attack cruise missiles and is deployed to U.S. 5th Fleet to help ensure regional maritime security and stability,’ said Cmdr. Timothy Hawkins.

US-Iranian relations have further soured in recent years following former President Donald Trump’s successful order to kill Iran’s top military commander, Qasem Soleimani — as well as his decision to end a deal that curbed sanctions on Iran in exchange for a reduction in nuclear weapons development.

The heightened aggression from Iran extends also to U.S. allies — namely the United Kingdom and Israel — who along with the US have reported unusual amounts of aggression and even attacks from Iranian forces.

Iran has denied the reports.

In February, Iran renewed threats to target Trump and top members of his former Cabinet, including former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, for the 2020 killing of Soleimani.

‘God willing, we are looking to kill Trump [and] Pompeo … and military commanders who issued the order should be killed,’ Amir Ali Hajizadeh, head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps aerospace force, told Iranian state television.

Last month, American naval forces teamed up with UK counterparts to seize ‘anti-tank guided missiles’ and missile components from a boat that originated from Iran.

The joint operation – in which the U.S. provided ‘airborne intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance support for an interdiction in the Gulf of Oman conducted by the United Kingdom Royal Navy’ – occurred on Feb. 23.

Iran has expanded its missile program in recent years, ramping up what it claims are defensive arms as a show of defiance to the West in the wake of the collapsed nuclear arms treaty.

While Western officials are concerned over Iran’s growing arms programs, it has also urged caution when it comes to the viability of Iran’s capabilities, including in November when the Pentagon said it was skeptical of Hajizadeh’s claims that Iran had added hypersonic ballistic missile to its stockpiles.

Fox News’ Caitlin McFall and Greg Norman contributed to this report.

House and Senate Democrats are demanding that Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts launch an inquiry into Associate Justice Clarence Thomas and the luxury vacations he received as gifts from a GOP mega donor over more than 20 years.

Sixteen lawmakers led by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., and Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Ga., sent a letter to Roberts on Friday requesting an investigation into ‘allegations of unethical, and potentially unlawful, conduct.’ A ProPublica report published this week found that Thomas’ close friendship with real estate developer Harlan Crow allowed him to accompany the Texas billionaire on luxury vacations on his private jet and yacht, as well as free stays on Crow’s vast vacation property, among other benefits.

Democrats have alleged that Thomas breached ethics rules by failing to disclose these trips as gifts, some of which were valued at more than $500,000, according to ProPublica. The letter chastises the court for having ‘barely acknowledged’ the allegations before.

‘We believe that it is your duty as Chief Justice ‘to safeguard public faith in the judiciary,’ and that fulfilling that duty requires swift, thorough, independent and transparent investigation into these allegations,’ the letter states. 

Thomas issued a rare written statement responding to ProPublica’s report Friday, insisting that he has always followed Supreme Court guidance on gift disclosures.

‘Harlan and Kathy Crow are among our dearest friends, and we have been friends for over twenty-five years,’ Thomas said. ‘As friends do, we have joined them on a number of family trips during the more than quarter century we have known them. Early in my tenure at the Court, I sought guidance from my colleagues and others in the judiciary, and was advised that this sort of personal hospitality from close personal friends, who did not have business before the Court, was not reportable.’ 

‘I have endeavored to follow that counsel throughout my tenure, and have always sought to comply with the disclosure guidelines,’  he said. ‘These guidelines are now being changed, as the committee of the Judicial Conference responsible for financial disclosure for the entire federal judiciary just this past month announced new guidance. And, it is, of course, my intent to follow this guidance in the future.’

In a statement to ProPublica, Crow denied ever trying to influence Thomas or put him in positions where other influential people could do the same.

‘The hospitality we have extended to the Thomas’s (sic) over the years is no different from the hospitality we have extended to our many other dear friends,’ part of the statement reads. ‘We have never asked about a pending or lower court case, and Justice Thomas has never discussed one, and we have never sought to influence Justice Thomas on any legal or political issue. More generally, I am unaware of any of our friends ever lobbying or seeking to influence Justice Thomas on any case, and I would never invite anyone who I believe had any intention of doing that.’

Last month, the Judicial Conference of the United States, which creates and oversees policies for federal courts, revised its ethics and financial disclosure guidelines to require the justices to disclose things like traveling by private jet and staying in resorts.

The Democrats’ letter notes that financial disclosure laws require top government officials to report gifts annually. It states there are ‘limited exceptions’ for personal friendships, but argues, ‘these exceptions are not meant to allow government officials to hide from the public extravagant gifts by wealthy political interests. 

The undersigned lawmakers said the Supreme Court should investigate who accompanied Thomas on the undisclosed trips and whether they have any connections to cases pending before the court. ‘We have reason to believe that Mr. Crow himself is connected to multiple groups that have filed amicus briefs with the Court,’ the Democrats wrote. ‘Yet the public has no way of knowing who else with interests related to Justice Thomas’ official duties joined these trips.’

The Democrats said that if the court fails to act, they will push Congress to impose ‘a proper code of ethics’ on the Supreme Court to ‘restore accountability’ to the body. 

READ THE LETTER BELOW. APP USERS, CLICK HERE:

Fox News’ Brianna Herlihy, Shannon Bream, Elizabeth Elkind and Bill Mears contributed to this report.

Former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo is facing another lawsuit over nursing home deaths in the state during the COVID-19 pandemic, with the plaintiff alleging that Cuomo’s pride and ‘unmitigated greed’ had led to needless deaths. 

The lawsuit alleges that Cuomo and other top officials had exhibited ‘deliberate indifference’ toward nursing home residents and caused 15,000 avoidable COVID-19 deaths,’ the New York Post reports.

The lawsuit was filed by Sean Newman in a Brooklyn federal district court. Newman is married to Janice Dean, who works for Fox News Channel as a senior meteorologist. Newman’s parents died in early 2020 at nursing homes in the state amid the COVID-19 outbreak. 

Cuomo was at the center of an ongoing scandal over the state’s handling of nursing homes at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. The controversy focused on a state order that required nursing homes to receive patients who had been treated for COVID-19.

The policy was later rescinded, but that emerged again in 2021 when Attorney General Letitia James announced that the death toll had been undercounted by as much as 50%. Cuomo would later resign over unrelated sexual misconduct allegations.

The new lawsuit alleges: ‘It was not only Governor Cuomo’s pride that was leading to thousands of needless deaths, but his unmitigated greed as well.’ 

Specifically, Newman alleges that the former governor ‘tailored his policies and actions to generate material’ for a $5 million book deal, according to the Post. That book ‘American Crisis’ would highlight ‘leadership lessons’ from the pandemic and appeared as many in the media were making comparisons between Cuomo’s leadership during the pandemic and then-President Donald Trump’s.

It is the second such lawsuit that the former governor is facing over the state’s nursing home policy.

Cuomo spokesperson Rich Azzopardi called the lawsuit ‘meritless.’

‘It’s unfortunate that people’s pain continues to be politicized and weaponized in order to distort the truth, which is that the DOJ, the AG, the Manhattan DA and the Assembly all critically examined this and found no there there,’ he said. ‘This suit is meritless, and we expect any fair hearing in a court of law will also bear this out.’  

He added that the allegations regarding the book are ‘false, wrong and the product of the furthest depths of right-wing paranoia.’

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., railed against a Texas judge’s decision to halt Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of the abortion pill mifepristone, warning that it ‘could throw our country into chaos.’ 

‘This right-wing MAGA judge, in his zeal to impose his own views on the American people, has suspended this long time FDA-approved medication over the agency and the drug manufacturer’s opinion,’ Schumer told reporters on a press call Saturday.

In a highly controversial ruling, Trump-appointed U.S. District Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk issued an injunction against the FDA’s approval of mifepristone while a lawsuit challenging the drug’s safety and approval proceeds through federal court. The order is set to take effect seven days from the ruling. 

‘Before Plaintiffs filed this case, FDA ignored their petitions for over sixteen years, even though the law requires an agency response within ‘180 days of receipt of the petition,’’ Kacsmaryk wrote in his opinion. ‘Plaintiffs have credibly alleged past and future harm resulting from the removal of restrictions for chemical abortion drugs.’

The order was received with shock and indignation from the drug’s manufacturer, Danco Laboratories, as well as abortion rights groups and Democratic lawmakers. The Department of Justice took immediate action to appeal Kacsmaryk’s ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

Democrats said the ruling was part of a Republican-led plot to ban abortion nationwide and strip away women’s rights. Schumer claimed that the court’s decision opened the door for other FDA-approved medications to be taken away by ‘extreme plaintiffs’ who come before any ‘extreme judge’ and ‘get their way.’ 

‘What could come next if some fringe radical group brings a lawsuit? Cancer drugs? Insulin? Mental health treatment?’ he asked. 

‘Make no mistake, the decision could throw our country into chaos. It’ll set a dangerous new precedent, and it will put lives in jeopardy,’ the Democratic leader said.

Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., who was also present on the call, added that the Texas ruling was part of an overarching Republican-led effort to capture the courts and ban abortion nationwide. 

‘This ruling is not about science, it is about ideology,’ she said. ‘It is not about protecting women. It’s about controlling their bodies. It is cruel, and it flies completely in the face of all reason and logic. And let’s not forget, this dangerous ruling threatens to absolutely upend FDA’s ability to approve all kinds of other safe medications, everything from insulin to chemotherapy drugs.’ 

Mifepristone, under the brand name Mifeprex, is part of a two-drug regimen that first blocks hormones needed to keep an unborn baby alive and then causes cramps and contractions to expel the dead fetus from the mother’s womb.

The drug was approved by the FDA in 2000. Since then, medication abortions, also called ‘chemical abortions,’ have grown in popularity and now make up nearly 60% of all abortions in the United States. More than five million women in the United States have used mifepristone to abort their pregnancies, according to the drug’s manufacturer. 

In the Texas case, four pro-life national medical associations and four doctors, represented by attorneys from the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), argue that the FDA ‘chose politics over science’ when it granted approval to mifepristone. Their lawsuit contests the FDA’s decision to define pregnancy as an ‘illness’ and its finding that mifepristone provides a ‘meaningful therapeutic benefit’ to women seeking an abortion, which expedited the drug’s approval. 

‘The FDA never studied the safety of the drugs under the labeled conditions of use, ignored the potential impacts of the hormone-blocking regimen on the developing bodies of adolescent girls, disregarded the substantial evidence that chemical abortion drugs cause more complications than surgical abortions, and eliminated necessary safeguards for pregnant girls and women who undergo this dangerous drug regimen,’ according to ADF. 

Nancy Northup, the CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said the lawsuit and Kacsmaryk’s decision have ‘zero basis in law or fact.’ 

‘The judge relied on junk scientists who have been repeatedly discredited by many other courts as unreliable. His predetermined views are reflected throughout the opinion in his use of stigmatizing rhetoric of the anti-abortion rights movement,’ Northup asserted. 

‘This legal ruling is unprecedented. No medicine has ever been removed from the market over the FDA’s scientific objections. And while baseless, this decision could have a devastating impact if allowed to go into effect,’ she said. 

Pro-life groups applauded the decision as life-saving for unborn children and mothers. Texas Right to Life pointed to studies that show one in five women experience an adverse event after taking the abortion pill and that the rate of complications for medication abortions is four times higher than surgical abortions. Danco Laboratories, which sells Mifeprex, acknowledges that 3% of women who take the pill will ‘require surgical intervention for ongoing pregnancy, heavy bleeding, incomplete expulsion, or other reasons such as patient request.’

‘The FDA exists to protect Americans from dangerous drugs, yet it repeatedly ignored its legislative purpose in order to promote elective abortion at the expense of pregnant women and their preborn children,’ Texas Right to Life President Dr. John Seago said in a statement.

Physicians have said medication abortions are safe and effective. 

‘They are incredibly safe,’ Dr. Emily Godfrey, an associate professor of family medicine and obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Washington School of Medicine, told The Associated Press in 2022. ‘Less than 1% of people who have sought a medication abortion have had complications.’

Fox News’ Adam Sabes and the Associated Press contributed to this report.

The Catholic Archdiocese for the Military Services is accusing Walter Reed National Military Medical Center of denying Catholic service members and veterans their right to practice their religion after it canceled a contract for pastoral care and issued a ‘cease and desist’ order to a community of Catholic priests just days before Holy Week.

The Catholic archdiocese says in a statement that Walter Reed issued the order against Holy Name College Friary, a Franciscan community of priests and brothers that has served at the center for nearly 20 years.

Instead, it says the contract for Catholic Pastoral Care was terminated at the end of March, just as Holy Week was about to begin. Walter Reed replaced the contract with a secular defense contracting firm that the archdiocese says will not be able to provide the adequate care needed.

The archdiocese condemned the move as an encroachment upon the right of free exercise of religion under the First Amendment and said its requests to have the ministry reinstated through Easter have not received a response. 

‘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 said. ‘I earnestly hope that this disdain for the sick will be remedied at once and their First Amendment rights will be respected.’

While the Archdiocese acknowledged that the chaplain’s office said Catholic care is being provided during Holy Week, it said that without Catholic priests, service members and veterans are being denied their right to practice their religion. Certain central Catholic practices — such as the celebration of the Mass and the administration of Confession — can only be carried out by an ordained Catholic priest.

In a statement on Saturday, Walter Reed said the center is a ‘welcoming and healing environment that honors and supports a full range of religious, spiritual, and cultural needs.’ 

‘Tomorrow, Catholic Easter Services will be provided to those who wish to attend. Services will include a celebration of Mass and the administration of Confession by an ordained Catholic Priest,’ the statement said. ‘For many years, a Catholic ordained priest has been on staff at WRNMMC providing religious sacraments to service members, veterans and their loved ones. There has also been a pastoral care contract in place to supplement those services provided.’

‘Currently a review of the pastoral care contract is under review to ensure it adequately supports the religious needs of our patients and beneficiaries,’ the statement said. ‘Although at this time the Franciscan Diocese will not be hosting services on Sunday parishioners of the Diocese while patients at our facilities may still seek their services.’

The AMS was created by St. Pope John Paul II to provide the Church’s services to veterans and service members in the U.S. and overseas. The archdiocese, which does not have geographical boundaries, is responsible for the care of 1.8 million Catholics across the globe. 

Walter Reed was most recently in the headlines after Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., checked into the center on Feb 15 for clinical depression. He was released at the of March, and his office said that he is now in remission after his treatment.
 

The Biden administration will soon begin holding ‘credible fear’ screenings for migrants claiming asylum at Customs and Border Protection (CBP) facilities as the Department of Homeland Security gears up for a potential surge in migrants next month when the Title 42 public health order ends.

DHS confirmed to Fox News Digital that the agency is working with legal service providers ‘to provide access to legal services for individuals who receive credible fear interviews in CBP custody.’

‘This is part of a planning effort underway to initiate a process that would allow migrants to receive credible fear interviews from specially trained U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services [USCIS] officers while still in [CBP] custody,’ spokesperson Marsha Espinosa said.

The credible fear interview is the first step for migrants claiming asylum and is a significantly lower bar than the ultimate asylum decision, which can take years to be decided in immigration court. It requires that migrants show there is a ‘significant possibility’ they could establish before an immigration judge a credible fear of persecution if they were returned to their country of origin.

While the ultimate decision is made by a federal judge, credible fear screenings are typically carried out by USCIS. Some Republicans have expressed concern that many migrants are being released into the U.S. without even being referred for a credible fear hearing.

CNN first reported the development, which it said would take place on a pilot basis. 

DHS stressed that that would still be the case in the new program, but that they will just be in CBP custody.

DHS said the process is designed to ensure that migrants have access to legal service providers, and said the efforts would inform best practices if credible fear interviews are expanded.

However, it is likely to upset some immigration activists as it is similar in some ways to a Trump-era policy — the Prompt Asylum Claim Review (PACR) pilot program — which was intended to hold screenings in custody quickly and remove those who are ineligible. However, this program will differ in that migrants will be offered legal services — something the PACR program was faulted for failing to provide adequately.

The move marks the latest policy move by the administration as it prepares for the end of Title 42 on May 11. The COVID-era order has been used to quickly expel hundreds of thousands of migrants at the border due to the pandemic and will expire with the end of the federal public health emergency.

DHS officials have previously predicted a dramatic increase in migrant traffic when the order ends and have taken a number of steps to counter any such surge.

Most notably, the administration has proposed a rule that would make migrants ineligible for asylum if they cross the border illegally and have also passed through a third country without claiming asylum there first. That move has also drawn criticism from the left for what they see as an attack on the right to asylum.

Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas recently defended his agency’s handling of the border crisis amid a barrage of criticism from Republicans at multiple House and Senate hearings. His agency has called for additional funding for ports of entry and processing capabilities, among other requests.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said Saturday that he intends to seek a pardon for an Army Sergeant recently convicted of murder for shooting a Black Lives Matter protester during an anti-police demonstration in 2020.

‘I am working as swiftly as Texas law allows regarding the pardon of Sgt. Perry,’ the Texas Republican tweeted Saturday along with a statement on how his office will go about a pardon.

Abbott said in his tweet that pardons in Texas must be recommended by the Board of Pardons and Paroles.

‘I have made that request and instructed the board to expedite its review,’ Abbott said. 

The governor said he looks forward to signing the pardon as soon as it reaches his desk. 

Army Sergeant Daniel Perry was convicted of murder on Friday for shooting and killing a Black Lives Matter protester holding an AK-47 after the gun was raised toward him. The Austin Police Department concluded at the time that Perry acted in self-defense. 

Perry, who was stationed at Fort Hood at the time of the shooting, was driving for Uber to make extra money in downtown Austin on the night of July 25, 2020, when he encountered a large crowd of protesters. They were illegally blocking city streets that night, according to police, as protesters in Austin and elsewhere had done during the weeks of rioting.

Among the protesters was 28-year-old Garrett Foster, who was carrying an AK-47. Perry’s defense team says that the demonstrators encircled and starting pounding on his vehicle and that Foster raised the firearm at Perry, prompting him to open fire with a handgun he legally carried for self-defense.

‘When Garrett Foster pointed his AK-47 at Daniel Perry, Daniel had two tenths of a second to defend himself. He chose to live,’ Doug O’Connell, an attorney for Perry, told Fox News Digital in a statement last year.

‘It may be legal in Texas to carry an assault rifle in downtown Austin. It doesn’t make it a good idea. If you point a firearm at someone, you’re responsible for everything that happens next.’

Abbott explained that Texas has one of the ‘strongest stand your ground’ laws in the country that ‘cannot be ‘nullified by a jury or a progressive District Attorney.’  

Travis County District Attorney Jose Garza, the George Soros-backed prosecutor who brought the case, has been widely criticized for pursuing charges against Perry for political clout rather than the merits of the case.

‘Self-defense is a God-given right, not a crime. Unfortunately, the Soros-backed DA in Travis County cares more about the radical agenda of dangerous Antifa and BLM mobs than justice,’ Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said in a statement to Fox News Digital following the Perry verdict.

Garza’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital. 

‘Right now we are completely focused on preparing for Daniel’s sentencing hearing,’ O’Connell told Fox News Digital following Abbott’s tweet.

‘I visited Daniel in jail this morning. As you might expect he is devastated. He spoke to me about his fears that he will never get to hug his Mother again. He’s also crushed that this conviction will end his Army service; he loves being a Soldier.’

The terms ‘open rule,’ ‘structured rule’ and ‘modified open-rule’ don’t mean much to people who don’t toil on Capitol Hill.

But those phrases speak volumes if you want to understand how House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., finally ascended to the Speaker’s suite after a raucous five days of balloting in the Speaker’s race.

Most major pieces of legislation to hit the House floor require a ‘rule.’ The powerful House Rules Committee establishes how the House will debate any given piece of legislation. The Rules Committee sets time limits for debate on the bill and if any amendments are in order.

For years, under both Republican and Democratic control, the House Rules Committee often locked down bills which came to the House floor. Very few bills hit the House floor with the opportunity for rank-and-file members to offer amendments.

HOUSE LAWMAKERS REIMBURSED FOR RENT, FOOD, OTHER EXPENSES AS NEW POLICY TAKES EFFECT

But most lawmakers prefer a more ‘open’ process. That allows them to have their say on the House floor.

However, if the Rules Committee – usually under the direction of the Speaker – says no amendments or only a few, that’s it. Lawmakers have a take it or leave it proposition. Leaders from both parties often designed the bills in such a way that they were streamlined to pass. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and former House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wisc., tailored legislation to block ‘poison pills.’ They knew that certain ideas were popular. But they also knew those ideas – if adopted as an amendment – would detonate the bill.

That’s why they battened down the hatches on ‘must pass’ bills.’ Measures to fund the government. Lift the debt ceiling. Tax reform.

McCarthy promised something different.

That’s why the House considered 140 proposed amendments and alterations to a bill in January dealing with the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Republicans also allowed amendments to a bill setting a federal ‘parents bill of rights’ for education. The same with an energy package to expedite drilling.

A ‘closed rule’ crafted by the Rules Committee forbids any amendments. A ‘structured rule’ permits a few, pre-ordained amendments. A ‘modified open rule’ usually grants lawmakers the right to prep any amendment – so long as it’s done ahead of time. Some forms of ‘open rules’ means pretty much anything goes.

So, while lawmakers may embrace a more open amendment process, the gambit could also pose headaches for McCarthy.

‘Ultimately the job of the majority leadership is to pass its agenda,’ said Tom Kahn, a longtime former House Budget Committee Staff Director and now a professor at American University. ‘But you’ve got critical bills like the debt ceiling. Like spending bills. Like the defense bill. And if they get so bogged down (with amendments) then ultimately the agenda won’t pass.’

In fact, one of the objectives of House leaders to lock down bills wasn’t so much to prevent the minority party from offering amendments – but to block some of the more exigent proposals by the majority.

In essence, the Rules Committee functioned like a computer firewall. The goal was to keep the ‘spyware’ and ‘worms’ out of the bill.

Abortion was a great case study when it came to crafting a closed rule for floor debate.

HOUSE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE SUBPOENAS BANKS, BIDEN FAMILY ASSOCIATES IN PROBE OF FINANCES

When in the majority, House Republicans always wanted to vote on an abortion-related bill around the anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision. Pro-choice members and liberals took a dim view of these pro-life bills. But the House Republican leadership always made sure that the bill was something which could pass. The brass might lock down a rule to prevent what even some pro-life Republicans would interpret as ‘too extreme.’ Say an amendment to outright ban all abortions.

The key was greasing the skids so a bill would pass.

House Republicans feature a big agenda on energy policy and social issues. But there are really only a few ‘must pass’ bills this year. There’s a bill to reauthorize the Federal Aviation Administration. There’s the farm bill. Then, the annual defense policy bill. A measure to fund the government and avoid a shutdown is due this fall. Finally, there will be legislation to lift the debt ceiling. So, if a bill isn’t going to make it through the Senate let alone earn President Biden’s signature, the House can pass any bill it wants. That makes good on the Republican agenda.

But it’s another story when you have to craft a bill which can make it through the Senate and score the President’s signature.

House Republicans touted their ‘Commitment to America’ to voters while campaigning in the fall of 2022.

One plank of that policy platform was the ‘parents bill of rights.’ The measure would mandate that parents have the right to be heard at school board meetings, understand the curriculum taught in the classroom and require schools release reading lists from libraries. The House approved that measure 213-208. Five GOPers voted nay: Reps. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., Ken Buck, R-Colo., Matt Gaetz, R-Fla, Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., and Matt Rosendale, R-Mont. No Democrats voted yea. Had all Democrats been present and voting, the roll call tally would have been 213-212. One more GOP defection would have killed the bill.

Fast forward to last month. The House approved the marquee of their legislative agenda – an energy package – 225-204. Only one Republican voted nay. But four Democrats crossed party lines to vote aye: Reps. Henry Cuellar, D-Tex., Vicente Gonzalez, D-Tex., Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, D-Wash., and Jared Golden, D-Maine.

The House considered several dozen amendments. One senior source in the House GOP leadership structure remarked that it was hard to track who was for or against the bill. With so many amendments in play, the bill is organic. Its contents morphs in real time on the floor. That’s because someone’s vote could hinge on whether an amendment they liked or disliked made it into the bill or was euthanized.

‘It’s like ‘Whac-A-Mole,’’ said the source. ‘You just don’t know until the end.’

Gonzalez explained why he supported the package.

‘We should be leading the world in energy production,’ said Gonzalez. ‘We shouldn’t rely on the Middle East and other countries to produce energy.’

But Democratic leaders said their defectors should explain themselves.

‘Every member who either votes for or against a bill that, in my view, puts polluters over people, will articulate their perspective to the constituents that they represent back home,’ said House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y.

McCarthy dismissed questions about if it was harder to pass bills with an open amendment process. 

‘I think you’re overthinking it,’ said McCarthy. ‘You might analyze a lot and worry about what you think we’re doing. We don’t do that. We just focus on policy. Make good policy.’

Still some GOPers believe more amendments inhibits the viability of legislation.

‘The downside is that some of these rules become more partisan through the amendments,’ said Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb. ‘I’m looking to pass things that have a chance to go through the Senate.’

So what happens on a bill which could spark a financial crash like the debt ceiling? Or prompt a potential government shutdown this fall?

The concepts of ‘open rules’ and ‘modified open-rules’ boosted McCarthy to the Speakership in January.

But on a must pass bill?

Like an open rule, that remains an ‘open question’ for McCarthy.

Or, at the very least, a ‘modified open question.’

Faced with heavy workloads and short staffing, Wisconsin’s probation and parole program has been falling short on monitoring offenders and offering them rehabilitation resources, according to a nonpartisan legislative audit published Friday.

Auditors found that the Department of Corrections, which also oversees the state’s substantially understaffed prisons, has not completed required risk assessments or investigations of people on release or probation quickly enough. The agency also did not adequately review the penalties it imposed on people who violated the terms of their release to see which consequences were most effective at preventing re-offense, auditors said.

More than 63,000 people are part of Wisconsin’s community corrections program. Most are on probation, meaning they were sentenced to supervision instead of prison time, or on extended supervision, which is served after release from prison.

Some people receive services such as housing assistance or treatment for substance abuse through the program, but corrections agents said they believed many people under their supervision weren’t getting the help they needed — especially in areas including child and health care, education and mental health.

According to the audit, corrections staff didn’t have a central database to track whether people fulfilled the treatments or programs they were required to complete, and check-in programs were administered inconsistently across the state.

In a news release Friday, Republican Sen. Eric Wimberger, co-chair of the Legislature’s audit committee, laid blame on Democratic Gov. Tony Evers for the issues the nonpartisan audit discovered. Conservative groups attempted to brand Evers as soft on crime during his bid for reelection last year, and Evers and Republicans have disagreed on how to address crime rates and problems in prisons.

Evers’ spokesperson, Britt Cudaback, did not immediately respond Friday to an email asking for comment.

Between 2019 and 2022, the time period auditors examined, the Department of Corrections cited roughly 57,000 participants for more than 380,000 violations of the terms of their supervision, including broad restrictions against possessing drugs or alcohol, visiting certain places or people, or failing to attend required treatment.

More than half the violations were non-criminal, and most were for using drugs or alcohol. Less than 7% were violent criminal offenses.

Corrections agents were most likely to address violations with short jail stays, according to the audit. The next most popular options revoked someone’s release altogether or issued a warning.

Consequences varied based on the seriousness of the violation, but most corrections agents said they were frustrated by a push to use methods other than revoking someone’s release, since they didn’t believe those options protected the public or held offenders accountable.

The corrections agents overseeing the release program also overwhelmingly voiced unhappiness with their high workloads and low pay. As of July 2022, the program had more than 250 unfilled positions — nearly 13% of its total staffing. It’s a problem the corrections department faces across its workforce as lawmakers consider whether to increase wages for prison guards and other criminal justice workers.