WASHINGTON (AP) —&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/hunter-biden">Hunter Biden</a>&nbsp;was indicted Thursday on federal firearms charges, the latest and weightiest step yet in a long-running investigation into the president’s son.

<a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ded.82797/gov.uscourts.ded.82797.40.0.pdf">CLICK here</a> to read the indictment

Biden is accused of lying about his drug use when he bought a firearm in October 2018, a period when he has acknowledged struggling with addiction to crack cocaine, according to the indictment filed in federal court in Delaware.

President Joe Biden's son has also been under investigation for his business dealings.&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/hunter-biden-investigation-justice-garland-ad1034e274570d65032f8e4f47c0c8f6">The special counsel</a>&nbsp;overseeing the case has indicated that charges of failure to pay taxes on time could be filed in Washington or in California, where he lives.

<a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23977714-hunter-biden-indictment">The indictment</a>&nbsp;comes as congressional Republicans pursue&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/mccarthy-biden-impeachment-shutdown-house-republicans-b187202be8814f7acbdd6e2e937e23d4">an impeachment inquiry</a>&nbsp;into the Democratic president, in large part over Hunter Biden’s business dealings. Republicans have obtained testimony about how Hunter Biden used the “Biden brand” to drum up work overseas, but they have not produced hard evidence of wrongdoing by the president.

The indictment says Hunter Biden lied on a form required for every gun purchase when he bought a Colt Cobra Special at a Wilmington, Delaware, gun shop in October 2018. He’s accused of checking a box falsely saying he was not a user of or addicted to drugs and of illegally possessing the gun as a drug user.

A felony gun charge against Hunter Biden, 53, had previously been part of a plea deal that also included guilty pleas to misdemeanor tax charges, but&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/hunter-biden-plea-deal-congress-republicans-investigation-ad80b195c8c0f48241740881cf9b9bce">the agreement imploded</a>&nbsp;during a court hearing in July when a judge raised questions about its unusual provisions.

Defense attorneys have argued that a part of the deal sparing Hunter Biden prosecution on the gun count if he stays out of trouble remains in place. It includes immunity provisions against other potential charges. Attorneys indicated they would fight additional charges filed against him, but did not immediately respond to a request for comment Thursday.

Prosecutors, though, maintain the agreement never took effect and is now invalid. They telegraphed charges were coming earlier this month.

Republicans had denounced the plea agreement as a “sweetheart deal.” It would have allowed Hunter Biden to serve probation rather than jail time after pleading guilty to failing to pay taxes in both 2017 and 2018.

His personal income during those two years totaled roughly $4 million, including business and consulting fees from a company he formed with the CEO of a Chinese business conglomerate and the Ukrainian energy company Burisma, prosecutors have said.

Congressional Republicans have continued their own investigations into the Justice Department's handling of the case as well as nearly every aspect of&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/united-states-presidential-election-9d4595ba4f3140c6bb6a3473a91f4a4c">Hunter Biden’s business dealings</a>, seeking to connect his financial affairs directly to his father. They have failed to produce evidence that the president directly participated in his son’s work, though he sometimes had&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/hunter-biden-congress-oversight-republicans-devon-archer-4b706443a04e0c40a80c65e24d7d69dc">dinner with his son's clients</a>&nbsp;or said hello to them on calls.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/9/1694714360672.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) —&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/hunter-biden">Hunter Biden</a>&nbsp;was indicted Thursday on federal firearms charges, the latest and weightiest step yet in a long-running investigation into the president’s son.<a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ded.82797/gov.uscourts.ded.82797.40.0.pdf">CLICK here</a> to read the indictmentBiden is accused of lying about his drug use when he bought a firearm in October 2018, a period when he has acknowledged struggling with addiction to crack cocaine, according to the indictment filed in federal court in Delaware.President Joe Biden's son has also been under investigation for his business dealings.&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/hunter-biden-investigation-justice-garland-ad1034e274570d65032f8e4f47c0c8f6">The special counsel</a>&nbsp;overseeing the case has indicated that charges of failure to pay taxes on time could be filed in Washington or in California, where he lives.<a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23977714-hunter-biden-indictment">The indictment</a>&nbsp;comes as congressional Republicans pursue&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/mccarthy-biden-impeachment-shutdown-house-republicans-b187202be8814f7acbdd6e2e937e23d4">an impeachment inquiry</a>&nbsp;into the Democratic president, in large part over Hunter Biden’s business dealings. Republicans have obtained testimony about how Hunter Biden used the “Biden brand” to drum up work overseas, but they have not produced hard evidence of wrongdoing by the president.The indictment says Hunter Biden lied on a form required for every gun purchase when he bought a Colt Cobra Special at a Wilmington, Delaware, gun shop in October 2018. He’s accused of checking a box falsely saying he was not a user of or addicted to drugs and of illegally possessing the gun as a drug user.A felony gun charge against Hunter Biden, 53, had previously been part of a plea deal that also included guilty pleas to misdemeanor tax charges, but&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/hunter-biden-plea-deal-congress-republicans-investigation-ad80b195c8c0f48241740881cf9b9bce">the agreement imploded</a>&nbsp;during a court hearing in July when a judge raised questions about its unusual provisions.Defense attorneys have argued that a part of the deal sparing Hunter Biden prosecution on the gun count if he stays out of trouble remains in place. It includes immunity provisions against other potential charges. Attorneys indicated they would fight additional charges filed against him, but did not immediately respond to a request for comment Thursday.Prosecutors, though, maintain the agreement never took effect and is now invalid. They telegraphed charges were coming earlier this month.Republicans had denounced the plea agreement as a “sweetheart deal.” It would have allowed Hunter Biden to serve probation rather than jail time after pleading guilty to failing to pay taxes in both 2017 and 2018.His personal income during those two years totaled roughly $4 million, including business and consulting fees from a company he formed with the CEO of a Chinese business conglomerate and the Ukrainian energy company Burisma, prosecutors have said.Congressional Republicans have continued their own investigations into the Justice Department's handling of the case as well as nearly every aspect of&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/united-states-presidential-election-9d4595ba4f3140c6bb6a3473a91f4a4c">Hunter Biden’s business dealings</a>, seeking to connect his financial affairs directly to his father. They have failed to produce evidence that the president directly participated in his son’s work, though he sometimes had&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/hunter-biden-congress-oversight-republicans-devon-archer-4b706443a04e0c40a80c65e24d7d69dc">dinner with his son's clients</a>&nbsp;or said hello to them on calls.

Read: Hunter Biden indictment on federal firearms charges

WASHINGTON (AP) — President&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/joe-biden">Joe Biden</a>&nbsp;late Wednesday brushed off the House Republicans'&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/mccarthy-biden-impeachment-shutdown-house-republicans-b187202be8814f7acbdd6e2e937e23d4">impeachment inquiry</a>, saying the way he sees it, they launched the investigation against him because they want to shut down the federal government.

(click below to listen to White House statement on impeachment)

Biden, speaking at a Democratic fundraiser in Virginia, said that instead of being concerned about the probe, “I’m focused on the things the American people want me focused on.”

The president's remarks were the first since Speaker&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/kevin-mccarthy">Kevin McCarthy</a>&nbsp;announced the launch of a Biden impeachment inquiry while the Republican House leader is also struggling to shore up votes to fund the government and&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/government-shutdown-impeachment-congress-funding-048dee639bb0dcb6604f05ba2f0782a8">prevent a federal shutdown</a>.

“The best I can tell is they want to impeach me because they want to shut down the government,” Biden said.

He also made a reference to Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., a top ally of his chief rival heading into the 2024 election,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/donald-trump">Donald Trump.</a>&nbsp;“The first day she was elected, the first thing she wanted to do was impeach Biden,” he said.

“Look, I’ve got a job," Biden told his audience. "I’ve got to deal with the issues that affect the American people every single, solitary day.”

McCarthy's sudden decision to direct an&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/hunter-biden-congress-oversight-republicans-impeachment-57c5b1b40d19ede4ecf7fde08c027cee">impeachment inquiry</a>&nbsp;into Biden over the business dealings of his son, Hunter, and the family finances has won over even the most reluctant Republicans, with some GOP lawmakers pushing for swift action while others expect it to drag into the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-trump-2024-poll-old-corrupt-12b806876e2072790f9a67793761c688">2024 election year</a>.

McCarthy opened and closed a private meeting Wednesday of House Republicans justifying his reasoning for the inquiry sought by former President Trump.

The moment is a politically pivotal one for the embattled McCarthy, whose job is being targeted by Trump’s right-flank allies. He has already signaled potential charges of abuse of power, corruption and obstruction for possible articles of impeachment.

“There’s a lot of accusations out there you just want the answers to,” McCarthy told reporters at the Capitol.

The White House mobilized to fight what it called the “unprecedented, unfounded claims” against&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/joe-biden">the president</a>&nbsp;regarding his son, Hunter, and family finances.

In the inquiry, House Republicans are trying to link Biden to the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/hunter-biden">business dealings of his son</a>&nbsp;and deflect attention away from&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-investigations-other-charges-b8b064a00caad4306fb54d2f6a320468">Trump's own legal peril</a>.

The White House has said that Joe Biden was not involved in his son's business affairs. And so far, Republicans have unearthed no significant evidence of wrongdoing by the elder Biden, who spoke often to his son as vice president and did stop by a business dinner with his son's associates.

In a 14-page memo to news media leaders, the White House urged them to hold Republicans “accountable for the fact that they are lurching toward impeachment over allegations that are not only unfounded but, in virtually all cases, have been actively disproven.”

Biden did not respond early in the day to shouted questions about impeachment during a White House event on cancer research.

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre called it “a political stunt.”

The Republican front-runner for the White House in 2024, Trump is the only president to be twice impeached — acquitted both times — and he is the first to face criminal charges in four separate indictments, including for trying to overturn the 2020 election he lost to Biden.

The sooner the better to go after Biden, some GOP lawmakers feel.

“I hope we can get it through as quickly as possible," said Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., the chairman of the Oversight Committee leading the impeachment inquiry.

Comer and the other House chairmen involved in the impeachment inquiry headed across the Capitol later Wednesday and spent nearly an hour walking Senate Republicans through the evidence they said they had gathered in the past eight months.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell has warned the House off impeachment. And GOP Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah, after&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/politics/massachusetts-utah-general-news-e80ae66f9572ddcdcc63a666913be886">announcing he would not seek reelection in 2024</a>, told reporters Wednesday afternoon, “I haven’t heard any allegation of something that would rise to the level of a high crime and misdemeanor.”

But John Thune of South Dakota, the No. 2 Senate Republican, said the briefing by House members left him feeling “there’s enough smoke there that there are legitimate questions.”

Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham and other senators said they urged the House chairmen to solidify the process by holding a House vote to move forward with the inquiry.

“I think they’d be better off having a vote. It does give it more legitimacy,” Graham of South Carolina said.

With no vote to launch the inquiry, the impeachment probe is being done without formal House-passed ground rules. That allows Republicans to conduct the investigation in ways the Democrats say are not always transparent, releasing only partial information to the public.

On another front, McCarthy's decision to launch the impeachment inquiry appears to have done little to appease conservative lawmakers he needs to win over for his more immediate task: persuading the GOP majority to pass the federal spending bills needed to avoid a government shutdown in just over two weeks.

Hard-right Republicans still want McCarthy to slash federal spending below the levels he and Biden agreed to as part of a budget deal earlier this year. And that stand risks a federal shutdown if they don't fund the government by Sept. 30, when current money runs out.

Democrats are expected to oppose those Republican efforts as well as fight Biden's impeachment.

Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., who led the first impeachment of Trump, said McCarthy's failure to bring the inquiry before the full House for a vote was “an acknowledgement that he lacks the support in his conference to move forward.”

“He is beholden to the more extreme elements,” Schiff said as lawmakers returned to Washington late Tuesday. "It is yet another indication of the weakness in the speakership and the degree by which he is manipulated by Donald Trump.”

Yet moderate Republicans representing districts that Biden won in 2020 over Trump and who are most at risk in next year's election generally were supportive of McCarthy’s decision to launch the impeachment probe.

“I would have voted for it,” Rep. Mike Garcia, R-Calif., said about the impeachment inquiry.

Garcia said, “There’s smoke there so we have a requirement to go investigate that and see if there’s fire there.”

Rep. Nick LaLota of New York, another one of the Republicans from districts Biden won, said he wasn’t worried about any backlash back home. "I think my constituents deserve some answers,” he said.

The freshmen lawmaker and other potential holdouts like Rep. Ken Buck, R-Colo., were offered private briefings from leadership this week in order to assuage any concerns.

On the government-funding issue, McCarthy does not appear to have a viable plan to keep the government open, several lawmakers said.

The chamber came to a standstill Wednesday. A massive House Republican bill to fund the Defense Department and related military affairs was scheduled for a vote, but it was shelved amid the clash over spending levels.

Conservative Republicans are demanding that McCarthy commit to a total spending amount for the coming fiscal year, which begins Oct. 1, a request he is not likely to be able to fulfill.

WASHINGTON (AP) — President&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/joe-biden">Joe Biden</a>&nbsp;late Wednesday brushed off the House Republicans'&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/mccarthy-biden-impeachment-shutdown-house-republicans-b187202be8814f7acbdd6e2e937e23d4">impeachment inquiry</a>, saying the way he sees it, they launched the investigation against him because they want to shut down the federal government.(click below to listen to White House statement on impeachment)<div><iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?height=314&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FWhiteHouse%2Fvideos%2F1027568138602560%2F&show_text=false&width=560&t=3423" width="560" height="314" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="true" allow="autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowFullScreen="true"></iframe></div>Biden, speaking at a Democratic fundraiser in Virginia, said that instead of being concerned about the probe, “I’m focused on the things the American people want me focused on.”The president's remarks were the first since Speaker&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/kevin-mccarthy">Kevin McCarthy</a>&nbsp;announced the launch of a Biden impeachment inquiry while the Republican House leader is also struggling to shore up votes to fund the government and&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/government-shutdown-impeachment-congress-funding-048dee639bb0dcb6604f05ba2f0782a8">prevent a federal shutdown</a>.“The best I can tell is they want to impeach me because they want to shut down the government,” Biden said.He also made a reference to Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., a top ally of his chief rival heading into the 2024 election,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/donald-trump">Donald Trump.</a>&nbsp;“The first day she was elected, the first thing she wanted to do was impeach Biden,” he said.“Look, I’ve got a job," Biden told his audience. "I’ve got to deal with the issues that affect the American people every single, solitary day.”McCarthy's sudden decision to direct an&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/hunter-biden-congress-oversight-republicans-impeachment-57c5b1b40d19ede4ecf7fde08c027cee">impeachment inquiry</a>&nbsp;into Biden over the business dealings of his son, Hunter, and the family finances has won over even the most reluctant Republicans, with some GOP lawmakers pushing for swift action while others expect it to drag into the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-trump-2024-poll-old-corrupt-12b806876e2072790f9a67793761c688">2024 election year</a>.McCarthy opened and closed a private meeting Wednesday of House Republicans justifying his reasoning for the inquiry sought by former President Trump.The moment is a politically pivotal one for the embattled McCarthy, whose job is being targeted by Trump’s right-flank allies. He has already signaled potential charges of abuse of power, corruption and obstruction for possible articles of impeachment.“There’s a lot of accusations out there you just want the answers to,” McCarthy told reporters at the Capitol.The White House mobilized to fight what it called the “unprecedented, unfounded claims” against&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/joe-biden">the president</a>&nbsp;regarding his son, Hunter, and family finances.In the inquiry, House Republicans are trying to link Biden to the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/hunter-biden">business dealings of his son</a>&nbsp;and deflect attention away from&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-investigations-other-charges-b8b064a00caad4306fb54d2f6a320468">Trump's own legal peril</a>.The White House has said that Joe Biden was not involved in his son's business affairs. And so far, Republicans have unearthed no significant evidence of wrongdoing by the elder Biden, who spoke often to his son as vice president and did stop by a business dinner with his son's associates.In a 14-page memo to news media leaders, the White House urged them to hold Republicans “accountable for the fact that they are lurching toward impeachment over allegations that are not only unfounded but, in virtually all cases, have been actively disproven.”Biden did not respond early in the day to shouted questions about impeachment during a White House event on cancer research.White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre called it “a political stunt.”The Republican front-runner for the White House in 2024, Trump is the only president to be twice impeached — acquitted both times — and he is the first to face criminal charges in four separate indictments, including for trying to overturn the 2020 election he lost to Biden.The sooner the better to go after Biden, some GOP lawmakers feel.“I hope we can get it through as quickly as possible," said Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., the chairman of the Oversight Committee leading the impeachment inquiry.Comer and the other House chairmen involved in the impeachment inquiry headed across the Capitol later Wednesday and spent nearly an hour walking Senate Republicans through the evidence they said they had gathered in the past eight months.Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell has warned the House off impeachment. And GOP Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah, after&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/politics/massachusetts-utah-general-news-e80ae66f9572ddcdcc63a666913be886">announcing he would not seek reelection in 2024</a>, told reporters Wednesday afternoon, “I haven’t heard any allegation of something that would rise to the level of a high crime and misdemeanor.”But John Thune of South Dakota, the No. 2 Senate Republican, said the briefing by House members left him feeling “there’s enough smoke there that there are legitimate questions.”Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham and other senators said they urged the House chairmen to solidify the process by holding a House vote to move forward with the inquiry.“I think they’d be better off having a vote. It does give it more legitimacy,” Graham of South Carolina said.With no vote to launch the inquiry, the impeachment probe is being done without formal House-passed ground rules. That allows Republicans to conduct the investigation in ways the Democrats say are not always transparent, releasing only partial information to the public.On another front, McCarthy's decision to launch the impeachment inquiry appears to have done little to appease conservative lawmakers he needs to win over for his more immediate task: persuading the GOP majority to pass the federal spending bills needed to avoid a government shutdown in just over two weeks.Hard-right Republicans still want McCarthy to slash federal spending below the levels he and Biden agreed to as part of a budget deal earlier this year. And that stand risks a federal shutdown if they don't fund the government by Sept. 30, when current money runs out.Democrats are expected to oppose those Republican efforts as well as fight Biden's impeachment.Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., who led the first impeachment of Trump, said McCarthy's failure to bring the inquiry before the full House for a vote was “an acknowledgement that he lacks the support in his conference to move forward.”“He is beholden to the more extreme elements,” Schiff said as lawmakers returned to Washington late Tuesday. "It is yet another indication of the weakness in the speakership and the degree by which he is manipulated by Donald Trump.”Yet moderate Republicans representing districts that Biden won in 2020 over Trump and who are most at risk in next year's election generally were supportive of McCarthy’s decision to launch the impeachment probe.“I would have voted for it,” Rep. Mike Garcia, R-Calif., said about the impeachment inquiry.Garcia said, “There’s smoke there so we have a requirement to go investigate that and see if there’s fire there.”Rep. Nick LaLota of New York, another one of the Republicans from districts Biden won, said he wasn’t worried about any backlash back home. "I think my constituents deserve some answers,” he said.The freshmen lawmaker and other potential holdouts like Rep. Ken Buck, R-Colo., were offered private briefings from leadership this week in order to assuage any concerns.On the government-funding issue, McCarthy does not appear to have a viable plan to keep the government open, several lawmakers said.The chamber came to a standstill Wednesday. A massive House Republican bill to fund the Defense Department and related military affairs was scheduled for a vote, but it was shelved amid the clash over spending levels.Conservative Republicans are demanding that McCarthy commit to a total spending amount for the coming fiscal year, which begins Oct. 1, a request he is not likely to be able to fulfill.__

🎥Biden addresses impeachment inquiry for the first time 

HOUSTON (AP) — A federal judge on Wednesday declared illegal a revised version of a federal policy that prevents the deportation of&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/california-los-angeles-united-states-immigration-deferred-action-for-childhood-arrivals-program-91c885ea7c2b59dd327d0cdbe76b7cdb">hundreds of thousands of immigrants</a>&nbsp;brought to the U.S. as children.

U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen agreed with Texas and eight other states suing to stop the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, program. The judge’s ruling was ultimately expected to be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, sending the program’s fate before the high court for a third time.

Hanen barred the government from approving any new applications, but left the program intact for existing recipients during the expected appeals process. Hanen said his order does not require the federal government to take any actions against DACA recipients.

The states have argued the Obama administration didn’t have the authority to first create the program in 2012 because it circumvented Congress.

<a href="https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-immigration-f01fc0f485a8983b5f072e7af324c43f">In 2021, Hanen had declared</a>&nbsp;the program illegal, ruling it had not been subject to public notice and comment periods required under the federal Administrative Procedures Act.

The Biden administration tried to satisfy Hanen’s concerns with&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/immigration-united-states-george-w-bush-deferred-action-for-childhood-arrivals-program-d54fc8e80d19406c6642e9c2c3d1ff10">a new version of DACA</a>&nbsp;that took effect in October 2022 and was subject to public comments as part of a formal rule-making process.

But Hanen, who was appointed by then-President George W. Bush in 2002, ruled the updated version of DACA was still illegal. He had previously said DACA&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/11326880d55b41e7965f386b3d3886ec">was unconstitutional</a>&nbsp;and it would be up to Congress to enact legislation shielding people under the program, often known as “Dreamers.”

Hanen also had previously ruled the states had standing to file their lawsuit because they had been harmed by the program.

The states have claimed they incur hundreds of millions of dollars in health care, education and other costs when immigrants are allowed to remain in the country illegally. The states that sued are Texas, Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, South Carolina, West Virginia, Kansas and Mississippi.

Those&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/daca-lawsuit-court-hearing-dreamers-5f77f76eaa9b96dbb7d8123103f240de">defending the program</a>&nbsp;— the federal government, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund and the state of New Jersey — had argued the states failed to present evidence that any of the costs they allege they have incurred have been tied to DACA recipients. They also argued Congress has given the Department of Homeland Security the legal authority to set immigration enforcement policies.

Despite previously declaring the DACA program illegal, Hanen had left the Obama-era program intact for those already benefiting from it. But he had ruled there could be no new applicants while appeals were pending.

There were 578,680 people enrolled in DACA at the end of March, according to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

The program has faced a roller coaster of court challenges over the years.

In 2016, the Supreme Court deadlocked 4-4 over an expanded DACA and a version of the program for parents of DACA recipients. In 2020, the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-ap-top-news-elections-courts-immigration-4901a69e2fb198705ab4f5370b28810a">high court ruled 5-4</a>&nbsp;that the Trump administration improperly ended DACA, allowing it to stay in place.

In 2022, the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/new-orleans-united-states-immigration-government-and-politics-b05499ef2d0d999c045079204d42be84">5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals</a>&nbsp;in New Orleans upheld Hanen’s earlier ruling declaring DACA illegal, but sent the case back to him to review&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/immigration-united-states-george-w-bush-deferred-action-for-childhood-arrivals-program-d54fc8e80d19406c6642e9c2c3d1ff10">changes made to the program by the Biden administration</a>.

President Joe Biden and advocacy groups have called on Congress to pass permanent protections for “&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/california-los-angeles-united-states-immigration-deferred-action-for-childhood-arrivals-program-91c885ea7c2b59dd327d0cdbe76b7cdb">dreamers</a>.” Congress has failed multiple times to pass proposals called the DREAM Act to protect DACA recipients.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2020/6/1592490581956.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>HOUSTON (AP) — A federal judge on Wednesday declared illegal a revised version of a federal policy that prevents the deportation of&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/california-los-angeles-united-states-immigration-deferred-action-for-childhood-arrivals-program-91c885ea7c2b59dd327d0cdbe76b7cdb">hundreds of thousands of immigrants</a>&nbsp;brought to the U.S. as children.U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen agreed with Texas and eight other states suing to stop the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, program. The judge’s ruling was ultimately expected to be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, sending the program’s fate before the high court for a third time.Hanen barred the government from approving any new applications, but left the program intact for existing recipients during the expected appeals process. Hanen said his order does not require the federal government to take any actions against DACA recipients.The states have argued the Obama administration didn’t have the authority to first create the program in 2012 because it circumvented Congress.<a href="https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-immigration-f01fc0f485a8983b5f072e7af324c43f">In 2021, Hanen had declared</a>&nbsp;the program illegal, ruling it had not been subject to public notice and comment periods required under the federal Administrative Procedures Act.The Biden administration tried to satisfy Hanen’s concerns with&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/immigration-united-states-george-w-bush-deferred-action-for-childhood-arrivals-program-d54fc8e80d19406c6642e9c2c3d1ff10">a new version of DACA</a>&nbsp;that took effect in October 2022 and was subject to public comments as part of a formal rule-making process.But Hanen, who was appointed by then-President George W. Bush in 2002, ruled the updated version of DACA was still illegal. He had previously said DACA&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/11326880d55b41e7965f386b3d3886ec">was unconstitutional</a>&nbsp;and it would be up to Congress to enact legislation shielding people under the program, often known as “Dreamers.”Hanen also had previously ruled the states had standing to file their lawsuit because they had been harmed by the program.The states have claimed they incur hundreds of millions of dollars in health care, education and other costs when immigrants are allowed to remain in the country illegally. The states that sued are Texas, Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, South Carolina, West Virginia, Kansas and Mississippi.Those&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/daca-lawsuit-court-hearing-dreamers-5f77f76eaa9b96dbb7d8123103f240de">defending the program</a>&nbsp;— the federal government, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund and the state of New Jersey — had argued the states failed to present evidence that any of the costs they allege they have incurred have been tied to DACA recipients. They also argued Congress has given the Department of Homeland Security the legal authority to set immigration enforcement policies.Despite previously declaring the DACA program illegal, Hanen had left the Obama-era program intact for those already benefiting from it. But he had ruled there could be no new applicants while appeals were pending.There were 578,680 people enrolled in DACA at the end of March, according to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.The program has faced a roller coaster of court challenges over the years.In 2016, the Supreme Court deadlocked 4-4 over an expanded DACA and a version of the program for parents of DACA recipients. In 2020, the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-ap-top-news-elections-courts-immigration-4901a69e2fb198705ab4f5370b28810a">high court ruled 5-4</a>&nbsp;that the Trump administration improperly ended DACA, allowing it to stay in place.In 2022, the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/new-orleans-united-states-immigration-government-and-politics-b05499ef2d0d999c045079204d42be84">5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals</a>&nbsp;in New Orleans upheld Hanen’s earlier ruling declaring DACA illegal, but sent the case back to him to review&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/immigration-united-states-george-w-bush-deferred-action-for-childhood-arrivals-program-d54fc8e80d19406c6642e9c2c3d1ff10">changes made to the program by the Biden administration</a>.President Joe Biden and advocacy groups have called on Congress to pass permanent protections for “&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/california-los-angeles-united-states-immigration-deferred-action-for-childhood-arrivals-program-91c885ea7c2b59dd327d0cdbe76b7cdb">dreamers</a>.” Congress has failed multiple times to pass proposals called the DREAM Act to protect DACA recipients.

Federal judge again says Biden immigration program illegal

By JACOB FISCHLER,&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/03/30/u-s-judge-rules-insurers-dont-have-to-cover-many-free-preventive-health-services/">States Newsroom</a>

WASHINGTON — The development of artificial intelligence presents far-reaching challenges for virtually every aspect of modern society, including campaigns, national security and journalism, members of a U.S. Senate panel said at a Tuesday hearing.

Technology experts invited to testify at a hearing of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee said Congress should pursue comprehensive standards for companies developing and deploying AI to ensure consumers are protected.

AI has the potential to help with a host of tasks, subcommittee Chair John Hickenlooper said, but could also be misused by bad actors.

“AI is a transformative technology that has both benefits and risks,” the Colorado Democrat said. “Congress will play a role in setting reasonable rules of the road to inform and protect consumers.”

Victoria Espinel, the CEO of the industry group BSA | The Software Alliance, told the panel that using “impact assessments” to identify the biggest risks from AI and how to mitigate them would be vital to gaining consumer trust. Congress should legislate a requirement to continuously assess the risks from AI, she said.

“Consumers need to have confidence that if AI is being used in a way that will have an impact on their rights, or have significant consequences for their life, that that AI is being vetted and that it is being continuously monitored,” Espinel said. “Having a strong national law from the United States I think is very important in terms of protecting consumers and our economy.”

The hearing touched on myriad challenges related to the technology.

Minnesota Democrat Amy Klobuchar said she was concerned about AI “deep fakes” being used in campaign advertising. Political operatives could use AI to impersonate opposing candidates, she said.

Klobuchar introduced a bill Tuesday with Republicans Josh Hawley of Missouri and Susan Collins of Maine and Delaware Democrat Chris Coons to address fraudulent AI-generated campaign content, she said.

Using watermarks to authenticate ads and labeling AI-generated content could help, Klobuchar said.

Other senators and witnesses said they also favored disclosure of AI use in contexts beyond campaign ads. Consumers messaging chatbots, for example, should be told that they are interacting with an AI device instead of a human, they said.

Kansas Republican Jerry Moran asked Rob Strayer, the executive vice president of policy at the industry group Information Technology Industry Council, about the risks to national security if the United States falls behind China or other adversarial countries in developing AI.

“We really need to have a strong discussion with the private sector about how you can do the minimal amount of damage to future (research and development) and revenues for U.S.-based companies while ensuring that none of these tools end up in the hands of adversaries who are going to use those for military purposes,” Gregory said.

Washington Democrat Maria Cantwell said she was concerned about the impact AI could have on journalists.

Sam Gregory, the executive director of the human rights organization WITNESS, told Cantwell journalists might lack the “digital literacy” to identify AI-generated fraud, which could lead to spreading misinformation.

The hearing and a simultaneous meeting of the Senate Judiciary Committee were among the first steps Congress is taking to address AI, which is perhaps the dominant policy focus in Congress this week.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer is hosting a closed-door forum Wednesday for senators to discuss the issue with leading industry and advocacy groups. Participants are expected to include leaders of Google, Microsoft, Meta, X and labor groups.

Earlier Tuesday, the White House said the Biden administration has extracted voluntary commitments from eight leading AI companies on how they would proceed with developing the technology.

The companies, Adobe, Cohere, IBM, Nvidia, Palantir, Salesforce, Scale AI, and Stability, agreed to test their AI systems before deploying them, sharing best practices, investing in cybersecurity and researching societal risks, according to&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/09/12/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-secures-voluntary-commitments-from-eight-additional-artificial-intelligence-companies-to-manage-the-risks-posed-by-ai/">a White House fact sheet</a>.

The House Oversight Committee will also hold a hearing on the issue Thursday.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/9/1694620541099.png" alt="Image from the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee during the hearing on Tuesday" />
 <figcaption>Image from the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee during the hearing on Tuesday</figcaption>
 </figure>By JACOB FISCHLER,&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/03/30/u-s-judge-rules-insurers-dont-have-to-cover-many-free-preventive-health-services/">States Newsroom</a>WASHINGTON — The development of artificial intelligence presents far-reaching challenges for virtually every aspect of modern society, including campaigns, national security and journalism, members of a U.S. Senate panel said at a Tuesday hearing.(click below to watch the hearing)<div><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/zgczHh5qA7k?si=0wQkBmJ9bz5TUuaU&amp;start=779" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen></iframe></div>Technology experts invited to testify at a hearing of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee said Congress should pursue comprehensive standards for companies developing and deploying AI to ensure consumers are protected.AI has the potential to help with a host of tasks, subcommittee Chair John Hickenlooper said, but could also be misused by bad actors.“AI is a transformative technology that has both benefits and risks,” the Colorado Democrat said. “Congress will play a role in setting reasonable rules of the road to inform and protect consumers.”Victoria Espinel, the CEO of the industry group BSA | The Software Alliance, told the panel that using “impact assessments” to identify the biggest risks from AI and how to mitigate them would be vital to gaining consumer trust. Congress should legislate a requirement to continuously assess the risks from AI, she said.“Consumers need to have confidence that if AI is being used in a way that will have an impact on their rights, or have significant consequences for their life, that that AI is being vetted and that it is being continuously monitored,” Espinel said. “Having a strong national law from the United States I think is very important in terms of protecting consumers and our economy.”<h2>Worries about ‘deep fakes’</h2>The hearing touched on myriad challenges related to the technology.Minnesota Democrat Amy Klobuchar said she was concerned about AI “deep fakes” being used in campaign advertising. Political operatives could use AI to impersonate opposing candidates, she said.Klobuchar introduced a bill Tuesday with Republicans Josh Hawley of Missouri and Susan Collins of Maine and Delaware Democrat Chris Coons to address fraudulent AI-generated campaign content, she said.Using watermarks to authenticate ads and labeling AI-generated content could help, Klobuchar said.Other senators and witnesses said they also favored disclosure of AI use in contexts beyond campaign ads. Consumers messaging chatbots, for example, should be told that they are interacting with an AI device instead of a human, they said.Kansas Republican Jerry Moran asked Rob Strayer, the executive vice president of policy at the industry group Information Technology Industry Council, about the risks to national security if the United States falls behind China or other adversarial countries in developing AI.“We really need to have a strong discussion with the private sector about how you can do the minimal amount of damage to future (research and development) and revenues for U.S.-based companies while ensuring that none of these tools end up in the hands of adversaries who are going to use those for military purposes,” Gregory said.Washington Democrat Maria Cantwell said she was concerned about the impact AI could have on journalists.Sam Gregory, the executive director of the human rights organization WITNESS, told Cantwell journalists might lack the “digital literacy” to identify AI-generated fraud, which could lead to spreading misinformation.<h2>Recent focus on AI</h2>The hearing and a simultaneous meeting of the Senate Judiciary Committee were among the first steps Congress is taking to address AI, which is perhaps the dominant policy focus in Congress this week.Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer is hosting a closed-door forum Wednesday for senators to discuss the issue with leading industry and advocacy groups. Participants are expected to include leaders of Google, Microsoft, Meta, X and labor groups.Earlier Tuesday, the White House said the Biden administration has extracted voluntary commitments from eight leading AI companies on how they would proceed with developing the technology.The companies, Adobe, Cohere, IBM, Nvidia, Palantir, Salesforce, Scale AI, and Stability, agreed to test their AI systems before deploying them, sharing best practices, investing in cybersecurity and researching societal risks, according to&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/09/12/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-secures-voluntary-commitments-from-eight-additional-artificial-intelligence-companies-to-manage-the-risks-posed-by-ai/">a White House fact sheet</a>.The House Oversight Committee will also hold a hearing on the issue Thursday.

🎥Congress starts trying to figure out how to set AI ‘rules of the road’

WASHINGTON (AP) — House Speaker Kevin McCarthy said he is&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/mccarthy-biden-impeachment-shutdown-house-republicans-b187202be8814f7acbdd6e2e937e23d4">launching an impeachment inquiry against President Joe Biden</a>, yielding to mounting pressure from former President Donald Trump and his allies in what's shaping up as an election-year clash between Congress and the White House.

In a statement Tuesday, McCarthy said the House investigations into the Biden family this year have uncovered a “culture of corruption” that demands deeper review.

"These are allegations of abuse of power, obstruction and corruption," McCarthy said.

McCarthy said he will direct the chairmen of the House Judiciary, Oversight and Ways and Means committees to lead the impeachment inquiry. The panels have been&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/hunter-biden-irs-whistleblowers-oversight-joe-biden-1db3aadcdf7f544c16df681a25853827">working together</a>&nbsp;for months on various probes related to the Biden family and have yet to directly connect the president to any of it.

The White House called the effort “extreme politics at its worst.”

“House Republicans have been investigating the President for 9 months, and they’ve turned up no evidence of wrongdoing," Ian Sams, a White House spokesperson said in a statement. “His own Republican members have said so.”

Here's a look at what happens next as House Republicans inch closer to possible impeachment charges against Biden:

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXZQAPTyn1s">An impeachment inquiry</a>&nbsp;is an investigation of possible wrongdoing by a federal official, such as the president of the United States, Cabinet officials or judges. The process is written into the Constitution and is the most powerful check that Congress has on the executive branch.

While the House of Representatives wields the power to impeach a federal official, only the Senate has the ability to convict and remove an individual from office.

To date, no president has ever been forced from the White House through impeachment. But former Republican President Richard Nixon resigned in 1974 as the House was preparing to take a vote on impeachment articles against him.

WHY ARE REPUBLICANS PURSUING IT AGAINST BIDEN?

Since gaining the House majority in January, House Republicans have&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-inflation-donald-trump-business-9af868065b776b21f81fa73e7bafb97d">aggressively investigated Biden and his son</a>, claiming without evidence that they engaged in an influence-peddling scheme. The allegations echo those that former President Donald Trump has made for years against Biden and his family.

Republicans have focused&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-fbi-congress-christopher-wray-comer-0492df31356ddb171dfeee2e4c324bdb">much attention on an unverified tip to the FBI</a>&nbsp;that alleged a bribery scheme involving Biden when he was vice president. The bribery claim, which emerged in 2019 and was part of Trump's first impeachment, relates to the allegation that Biden pressured Ukraine to fire its top prosecutor in order to stop an investigation into Burisma, the oil-and-gas company where Hunter Biden was on the board.

Democrats have reiterated that the Justice Department investigated the Burisma claim when Trump was president and closed the matter after eight months, finding “insufficient evidence” to pursue it further. Other countries were also pushing for the firing of the Ukrainian official, viewing him as corrupt. And a former business partner of Hunter Biden's has testified to Congress that the bribery allegation is untrue.

Nonetheless, three House committees have been pursuing lines of inquiry related to the president and his son, including the ways that Hunter used the “Biden brand” to advance his business with foreign clients. They've also delved deeply into the Justice Department investigation into the younger Biden,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/hunter-biden-irs-justice-department-irs-congress-d242a84d4d6d8e90db68febab168fef7">citing whistleblower testimony</a>, to suggest that Hunter has received special treatment.

And while Republicans have sought to directly connect Hunter Biden's financial affairs to his father, they have failed to produce evidence that the president directly participated in his son's work, though he&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/hunter-biden-congress-oversight-republicans-devon-archer-4b706443a04e0c40a80c65e24d7d69dc">sometimes had dinner with Hunter Biden's clients or said hello</a>&nbsp;to them on calls.

DOES THIS MEAN THAT BIDEN WILL BE IMPEACHED?

Not necessarily. While all inquiries opened in recent history have resulted in the impeachment of a president, Republicans have been treading carefully around the term and its potential political implications.

To impeach Biden, the House would have to approve at least one impeachment charge against him, which requires a majority vote. An impeachment inquiry can also be closed without charges being brought.

McCarthy has said an impeachment inquiry is necessary to ensure Congress can use the full weight of its oversight authority to pursue its investigation of the Biden family.

“Everyone should understand, impeachment is not the goal,” Rep. Darrell Issa, a senior Republican on House Judiciary Committee, one of the panel's tasked with investigating Biden, told reporters recently. “Impeachment is a way of saying this is not a legislative oversight, but in fact an oversight of possible wrongdoing.”

Regardless, the inquiry will loom over Biden as the probe potentially drags into next year when the president, who is running for reelection, confronts a Republican field led by Trump, who was impeached twice.

House Republicans — led by Rep. James Comer, the chairman of the House Oversight Committee — have obtained thousands of pages of financial records from various members of the Biden family and their associates through subpoenas to the Treasury Department and various financial institutions.

Comer has repeatedly claimed — without substantial evidence — that there is enough in those documents to draw a clear line between Hunter Biden trading on his father's name and policy decisions Biden made while vice president. No such connection has been proven.

Comer also joined forces in June with the Republican chairmen of the Judiciary, and Ways and Means committees to launch a larger investigation into the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/hunter-biden-plea-deal-congress-republicans-investigation-ad80b195c8c0f48241740881cf9b9bce">yearslong Justice Department probe of Hunter Biden</a>. The FBI and IRS have been investigating Hunter Biden for years and the case appeared headed toward a plea deal this summer until a judge rejected the terms of that agreement.

The breakdown happened after two IRS agents claimed in congressional testimony that the Justice Department improperly interfered in the case, which was first opened in 2018.

Attorney General Merrick Garland last month&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/hunter-biden-investigation-justice-garland-ad1034e274570d65032f8e4f47c0c8f6">appointed</a>&nbsp;the prosecutor investigating Hunter Biden as a special counsel, likely extending the investigation further.

McCarthy said he's asked Comer to take the lead on the impeachment inquiry, working alongside House Judiciary chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and House Ways and Means Chairman Jason Smith, R-Mo.

While McCarthy had previously said the House would hold a vote to launch the inquiry, he made no such promise on Tuesday.

The Constitution does not require a vote to start an impeachment inquiry, and neither do the rules governing the House. But authorizing resolutions have been passed in previous presidential impeachments.

It's not clear McCarthy would have enough votes in the House to approve an impeachment resolution. Some House Republicans are opposed to launching an inquiry, saying there is insufficient evidence against the president.

Once an impeachment inquiry is complete, the House has traditionally tasked the Judiciary Committee — the panel authorized to introduce articles of impeachment — to hold hearings and draft impeachment charges.

There are no rules to how long an impeachment inquiry can or must last. The probe into Biden could last as short as a few months or as long as a year, depending on what McCarthy and Republican leadership believe is the right time to conclude or move to articles of impeachment.

The only real deadline would be the end of this Congress, which is Jan. 2, 2025.

WHAT HAPPENS IF REPUBLICANS DO DECIDE TO IMPEACH?

If Republicans decide there is enough evidence of wrongdoing and abuse of power by Biden to move forward, the Judiciary Committee would likely mark up the articles of impeachment. If those articles are voted out of committee by a simple majority, it would come to the House floor where a majority vote would be required to impeach Biden.

Only three other presidents have been impeached: Andrew Johnson, Bill Clinton and Trump, who was impeached twice.

The impeachment charges would then move to the Senate, where Democratic leaders would likely have no choice but to hold a trial.

The trial is similar to what's seen in the legal system, with the senators acting as jurors and select House members acting as prosecutors, or impeachment managers. The chief justice of the Supreme Court presides over that process. If the Senate approves an article of impeachment with a two-thirds vote of “guilty,” the president is convicted and removed from office. If all the articles are rejected, the president is acquitted.

If Biden were convicted by the Senate, he would be the first president to ever be removed from office. But such an outcome seems far-fetched, given that Democrats have a 52-48 majority.

WASHINGTON (AP) — House Speaker Kevin McCarthy said he is&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/mccarthy-biden-impeachment-shutdown-house-republicans-b187202be8814f7acbdd6e2e937e23d4">launching an impeachment inquiry against President Joe Biden</a>, yielding to mounting pressure from former President Donald Trump and his allies in what's shaping up as an election-year clash between Congress and the White House.In a statement Tuesday, McCarthy said the House investigations into the Biden family this year have uncovered a “culture of corruption” that demands deeper review."These are allegations of abuse of power, obstruction and corruption," McCarthy said.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">I am directing our House committees to open a formal impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden. Over the past several months, House Republicans have uncovered serious and credible allegations into President Biden’s conduct—a culture of corruption. <a href="https://t.co/3uoDlUB3Sy">https://t.co/3uoDlUB3Sy</a>&mdash; Kevin McCarthy (@SpeakerMcCarthy) <a href="https://twitter.com/SpeakerMcCarthy/status/1701616470793547969?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 12, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>McCarthy said he will direct the chairmen of the House Judiciary, Oversight and Ways and Means committees to lead the impeachment inquiry. The panels have been&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/hunter-biden-irs-whistleblowers-oversight-joe-biden-1db3aadcdf7f544c16df681a25853827">working together</a>&nbsp;for months on various probes related to the Biden family and have yet to directly connect the president to any of it.The White House called the effort “extreme politics at its worst.”“House Republicans have been investigating the President for 9 months, and they’ve turned up no evidence of wrongdoing," Ian Sams, a White House spokesperson said in a statement. “His own Republican members have said so.”Here's a look at what happens next as House Republicans inch closer to possible impeachment charges against Biden:WHAT IS AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY?<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXZQAPTyn1s">An impeachment inquiry</a>&nbsp;is an investigation of possible wrongdoing by a federal official, such as the president of the United States, Cabinet officials or judges. The process is written into the Constitution and is the most powerful check that Congress has on the executive branch.While the House of Representatives wields the power to impeach a federal official, only the Senate has the ability to convict and remove an individual from office.To date, no president has ever been forced from the White House through impeachment. But former Republican President Richard Nixon resigned in 1974 as the House was preparing to take a vote on impeachment articles against him.WHY ARE REPUBLICANS PURSUING IT AGAINST BIDEN?Since gaining the House majority in January, House Republicans have&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-inflation-donald-trump-business-9af868065b776b21f81fa73e7bafb97d">aggressively investigated Biden and his son</a>, claiming without evidence that they engaged in an influence-peddling scheme. The allegations echo those that former President Donald Trump has made for years against Biden and his family.Republicans have focused&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-fbi-congress-christopher-wray-comer-0492df31356ddb171dfeee2e4c324bdb">much attention on an unverified tip to the FBI</a>&nbsp;that alleged a bribery scheme involving Biden when he was vice president. The bribery claim, which emerged in 2019 and was part of Trump's first impeachment, relates to the allegation that Biden pressured Ukraine to fire its top prosecutor in order to stop an investigation into Burisma, the oil-and-gas company where Hunter Biden was on the board.Democrats have reiterated that the Justice Department investigated the Burisma claim when Trump was president and closed the matter after eight months, finding “insufficient evidence” to pursue it further. Other countries were also pushing for the firing of the Ukrainian official, viewing him as corrupt. And a former business partner of Hunter Biden's has testified to Congress that the bribery allegation is untrue.Nonetheless, three House committees have been pursuing lines of inquiry related to the president and his son, including the ways that Hunter used the “Biden brand” to advance his business with foreign clients. They've also delved deeply into the Justice Department investigation into the younger Biden,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/hunter-biden-irs-justice-department-irs-congress-d242a84d4d6d8e90db68febab168fef7">citing whistleblower testimony</a>, to suggest that Hunter has received special treatment.And while Republicans have sought to directly connect Hunter Biden's financial affairs to his father, they have failed to produce evidence that the president directly participated in his son's work, though he&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/hunter-biden-congress-oversight-republicans-devon-archer-4b706443a04e0c40a80c65e24d7d69dc">sometimes had dinner with Hunter Biden's clients or said hello</a>&nbsp;to them on calls.DOES THIS MEAN THAT BIDEN WILL BE IMPEACHED?Not necessarily. While all inquiries opened in recent history have resulted in the impeachment of a president, Republicans have been treading carefully around the term and its potential political implications.To impeach Biden, the House would have to approve at least one impeachment charge against him, which requires a majority vote. An impeachment inquiry can also be closed without charges being brought.McCarthy has said an impeachment inquiry is necessary to ensure Congress can use the full weight of its oversight authority to pursue its investigation of the Biden family.“Everyone should understand, impeachment is not the goal,” Rep. Darrell Issa, a senior Republican on House Judiciary Committee, one of the panel's tasked with investigating Biden, told reporters recently. “Impeachment is a way of saying this is not a legislative oversight, but in fact an oversight of possible wrongdoing.”Regardless, the inquiry will loom over Biden as the probe potentially drags into next year when the president, who is running for reelection, confronts a Republican field led by Trump, who was impeached twice.WHAT EVIDENCE DO THEY HAVE?House Republicans — led by Rep. James Comer, the chairman of the House Oversight Committee — have obtained thousands of pages of financial records from various members of the Biden family and their associates through subpoenas to the Treasury Department and various financial institutions.Comer has repeatedly claimed — without substantial evidence — that there is enough in those documents to draw a clear line between Hunter Biden trading on his father's name and policy decisions Biden made while vice president. No such connection has been proven.Comer also joined forces in June with the Republican chairmen of the Judiciary, and Ways and Means committees to launch a larger investigation into the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/hunter-biden-plea-deal-congress-republicans-investigation-ad80b195c8c0f48241740881cf9b9bce">yearslong Justice Department probe of Hunter Biden</a>. The FBI and IRS have been investigating Hunter Biden for years and the case appeared headed toward a plea deal this summer until a judge rejected the terms of that agreement.The breakdown happened after two IRS agents claimed in congressional testimony that the Justice Department improperly interfered in the case, which was first opened in 2018.Attorney General Merrick Garland last month&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/hunter-biden-investigation-justice-garland-ad1034e274570d65032f8e4f47c0c8f6">appointed</a>&nbsp;the prosecutor investigating Hunter Biden as a special counsel, likely extending the investigation further.HOW WILL THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY WORK?McCarthy said he's asked Comer to take the lead on the impeachment inquiry, working alongside House Judiciary chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and House Ways and Means Chairman Jason Smith, R-Mo.While McCarthy had previously said the House would hold a vote to launch the inquiry, he made no such promise on Tuesday.The Constitution does not require a vote to start an impeachment inquiry, and neither do the rules governing the House. But authorizing resolutions have been passed in previous presidential impeachments.It's not clear McCarthy would have enough votes in the House to approve an impeachment resolution. Some House Republicans are opposed to launching an inquiry, saying there is insufficient evidence against the president.Once an impeachment inquiry is complete, the House has traditionally tasked the Judiciary Committee — the panel authorized to introduce articles of impeachment — to hold hearings and draft impeachment charges.HOW LONG WILL THE INQUIRY TAKE?There are no rules to how long an impeachment inquiry can or must last. The probe into Biden could last as short as a few months or as long as a year, depending on what McCarthy and Republican leadership believe is the right time to conclude or move to articles of impeachment.The only real deadline would be the end of this Congress, which is Jan. 2, 2025.WHAT HAPPENS IF REPUBLICANS DO DECIDE TO IMPEACH?If Republicans decide there is enough evidence of wrongdoing and abuse of power by Biden to move forward, the Judiciary Committee would likely mark up the articles of impeachment. If those articles are voted out of committee by a simple majority, it would come to the House floor where a majority vote would be required to impeach Biden.Only three other presidents have been impeached: Andrew Johnson, Bill Clinton and Trump, who was impeached twice.The impeachment charges would then move to the Senate, where Democratic leaders would likely have no choice but to hold a trial.The trial is similar to what's seen in the legal system, with the senators acting as jurors and select House members acting as prosecutors, or impeachment managers. The chief justice of the Supreme Court presides over that process. If the Senate approves an article of impeachment with a two-thirds vote of “guilty,” the president is convicted and removed from office. If all the articles are rejected, the president is acquitted.If Biden were convicted by the Senate, he would be the first president to ever be removed from office. But such an outcome seems far-fetched, given that Democrats have a 52-48 majority.

🎥What to expect in impeachment inquiry of President Biden

By JENNIFER SHUTT&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/03/30/u-s-judge-rules-insurers-dont-have-to-cover-many-free-preventive-health-services/">States Newsroom</a>

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Justice asked the Supreme Court to decide whether the abortion pill should remain on the market after two lower courts issued differing opinions about its use.

The case, Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, will likely be the second time the conservative-leaning Supreme Court rules on access to abortion since former President Donald Trump nominated three new justices, shifting the balance of power.

“The loss of access to mifepristone would be damaging for women and healthcare providers around the Nation,” the DOJ wrote in the 42-page document. “For many patients, mifepristone is the best method to lawfully terminate their early pregnancies. They may choose mifepristone over surgical abortion because of medical necessity, a desire for privacy, or past trauma.”

“Surgical abortion is an invasive medical procedure that can have greater health risks for some patients, such as those who are allergic to anesthesia,” DOJ added.

The DOJ called on the Supreme Court to take up the case by arguing that lower courts erred in several ways, including by making “serious legal errors.”

“The court scarcely acknowledged FDA’s detailed analysis of the available scientific evidence,” DOJ wrote. “Instead, it faulted FDA for failing to cite studies that do not exist and for failing to explicitly respond to unfounded objections that were not raised during the administrative process.”

Alliance Defending Freedom, an anti-abortion legal organization,&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/federal-judge-could-decide-soon-february-yank-abortion-pill-nationwide">filed the lawsuit in November</a>&nbsp;on behalf of four anti-abortion medical organizations and four anti-abortion doctors.

The case argued the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas should overturn the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s 2000 approval of mifepristone, the first of two drugs used in medication abortion.

The original filing in the case said that if the judge didn’t end legal access to mifepristone, the court should revert prescribing and dosage to what was approved before 2016.

District Court Judge Matthew Joseph Kacsmaryk&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/biden-administration-appeals-judges-ruling-ordering-abortion-pill-us-market">issued a ruling in April</a>&nbsp;that essentially overturned the FDA’s 2000 approval of mifepristone, which is also commonly used in miscarriage treatment.

The U.S. Supreme Court later&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/us-supreme-court-preserves-access-abortion-pill-lawsuit-continues">issued a temporary stay of that ruling,</a>&nbsp;keeping mifepristone on the market until the justices decide whether to take up the case as part of the appeals process.

The district court ruling from Kacsmaryk was appealed to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, which&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/three-judge-panel-us-appeals-court-hears-arguments-abortion-pill-case">heard oral arguments&nbsp;</a>in May and&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/abortion-pill-stay-market-until-us-supreme-court-ruling-after-appeals-court-order-0">issued its ruling&nbsp;</a>in August.

The three-judge panel, made up of Republican-nominated judges, rejected the district judge’s decision to overturn the FDA’s 2000 approval of mifepristone. But the appeals court ruled the FDA should revert prescribing and dosage to what was in place before 2016.

The 5th Circuit wrote in its opinion that in “loosening mifepristone’s safety restrictions, FDA failed to address several important concerns about whether the drug would be safe for the women who use it.”

“It failed to consider the cumulative effect of removing several important safeguards at the same time. It failed to consider whether those ‘major’ and ‘interrelated’ changes might alter the risk profile, such that the agency should continue to mandate reporting of non-fatal adverse events,” the appeals judges wrote. “And it failed to gather evidence that affirmatively showed that mifepristone could be used safely without being prescribed and dispensed in person.”

That ruling remains on hold until the Supreme Court issues its own opinion, or refuses to hear the case. That means mifepristone remains an FDA-approved drug that health care providers can continue prescribing in line with current standards.

If the Supreme Court orders the FDA to revert to pre-2016 use and dosage of mifepristone, it would lead to several changes.

Mifepristone could only be used to end a pregnancy in patients up to seven weeks gestation, not the current 10-week benchmark.

Only doctors, not other healthcare providers with the authority to prescribe medications, would be able to administer mifepristone.

Patients would need to attend three in-person doctor’s office visits, removing the option to prescribe the drug via telehealth and send it to patients through the mail.

The dosage of mifepristone would revert to what was used before 2016, as would the timing of when patients take a second medication known as misoprostol.

A Department of Justice spokesperson said following the appeals court’s ruling in August that the “Department strongly disagrees with the Fifth Circuit’s decision in Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. FDA and will be seeking Supreme Court review of that decision.”

In the writ of certiorari the Department of Justice sent to the Supreme Court on Friday asking the justices to hear the case, its attorneys argued that the 5th Circuit decision could have “especially disruptive implications for the pharmaceutical industry and those who depend upon the drugs it supplies.”

“Indeed, a wide range of industry participants have warned that the lower courts’ approach would ‘result in a seismic shift in the clinical development and drug approval processes, erecting unnecessary and unscientific barriers to the approval of lifesaving medicines, chilling drug development and investment, threatening patient access, and destabilizing the rigorous, well-established, and long-standing drug approval process.’”

The Department of Justice lawyers also wrote the 5th Circuit decision “did not conclude that mifepristone is unsafe.”

“Instead, the court held that FDA did not adequately explain its 2016 and 2021 actions,” DOJ attorneys wrote. “Even if that were true, those asserted failures of explanation would at most have justified a direction to FDA to further consider the relevant issues, without additional relief that would bar distribution of mifepristone as presently approved.”

If the U.S. Supreme Court decides to take up the case, the justices could issue a ruling as soon as next summer, just months before the 2024 presidential election.

The Supreme Court&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/us-supreme-court-overturns-right-abortion-landmark-decision-16">ruled in June 2022</a>&nbsp;that Americans no longer had the constitutional right to abortion that was established nearly 50 years before in the landmark Roe v. Wade case.

The Supreme Court&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf">wrote</a>&nbsp;that “the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/4/1680967457500.png" alt="In 23 years, the FDA has reported out of more than 5 million medication-abortion patients, 28 deaths, but not all necessarily because of mifepristone. -AP photo" />
 <figcaption>In 23 years, the FDA has reported out of more than 5 million medication-abortion patients, 28 deaths, but not all necessarily because of mifepristone. -AP photo</figcaption>
 </figure>By JENNIFER SHUTT&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/03/30/u-s-judge-rules-insurers-dont-have-to-cover-many-free-preventive-health-services/">States Newsroom</a>WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Justice asked the Supreme Court to decide whether the abortion pill should remain on the market after two lower courts issued differing opinions about its use.The case, Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, will likely be the second time the conservative-leaning Supreme Court rules on access to abortion since former President Donald Trump nominated three new justices, shifting the balance of power.“The loss of access to mifepristone would be damaging for women and healthcare providers around the Nation,” the DOJ wrote in the 42-page document. “For many patients, mifepristone is the best method to lawfully terminate their early pregnancies. They may choose mifepristone over surgical abortion because of medical necessity, a desire for privacy, or past trauma.”“Surgical abortion is an invasive medical procedure that can have greater health risks for some patients, such as those who are allergic to anesthesia,” DOJ added.The DOJ called on the Supreme Court to take up the case by arguing that lower courts erred in several ways, including by making “serious legal errors.”“The court scarcely acknowledged FDA’s detailed analysis of the available scientific evidence,” DOJ wrote. “Instead, it faulted FDA for failing to cite studies that do not exist and for failing to explicitly respond to unfounded objections that were not raised during the administrative process.”Alliance Defending Freedom, an anti-abortion legal organization,&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/federal-judge-could-decide-soon-february-yank-abortion-pill-nationwide">filed the lawsuit in November</a>&nbsp;on behalf of four anti-abortion medical organizations and four anti-abortion doctors.The case argued the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas should overturn the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s 2000 approval of mifepristone, the first of two drugs used in medication abortion.The original filing in the case said that if the judge didn’t end legal access to mifepristone, the court should revert prescribing and dosage to what was approved before 2016.District Court Judge Matthew Joseph Kacsmaryk&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/biden-administration-appeals-judges-ruling-ordering-abortion-pill-us-market">issued a ruling in April</a>&nbsp;that essentially overturned the FDA’s 2000 approval of mifepristone, which is also commonly used in miscarriage treatment.The U.S. Supreme Court later&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/us-supreme-court-preserves-access-abortion-pill-lawsuit-continues">issued a temporary stay of that ruling,</a>&nbsp;keeping mifepristone on the market until the justices decide whether to take up the case as part of the appeals process.The district court ruling from Kacsmaryk was appealed to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, which&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/three-judge-panel-us-appeals-court-hears-arguments-abortion-pill-case">heard oral arguments&nbsp;</a>in May and&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/abortion-pill-stay-market-until-us-supreme-court-ruling-after-appeals-court-order-0">issued its ruling&nbsp;</a>in August.The three-judge panel, made up of Republican-nominated judges, rejected the district judge’s decision to overturn the FDA’s 2000 approval of mifepristone. But the appeals court ruled the FDA should revert prescribing and dosage to what was in place before 2016.The 5th Circuit wrote in its opinion that in “loosening mifepristone’s safety restrictions, FDA failed to address several important concerns about whether the drug would be safe for the women who use it.”“It failed to consider the cumulative effect of removing several important safeguards at the same time. It failed to consider whether those ‘major’ and ‘interrelated’ changes might alter the risk profile, such that the agency should continue to mandate reporting of non-fatal adverse events,” the appeals judges wrote. “And it failed to gather evidence that affirmatively showed that mifepristone could be used safely without being prescribed and dispensed in person.”That ruling remains on hold until the Supreme Court issues its own opinion, or refuses to hear the case. That means mifepristone remains an FDA-approved drug that health care providers can continue prescribing in line with current standards.If the Supreme Court orders the FDA to revert to pre-2016 use and dosage of mifepristone, it would lead to several changes.Mifepristone could only be used to end a pregnancy in patients up to seven weeks gestation, not the current 10-week benchmark.Only doctors, not other healthcare providers with the authority to prescribe medications, would be able to administer mifepristone.Patients would need to attend three in-person doctor’s office visits, removing the option to prescribe the drug via telehealth and send it to patients through the mail.The dosage of mifepristone would revert to what was used before 2016, as would the timing of when patients take a second medication known as misoprostol.A Department of Justice spokesperson said following the appeals court’s ruling in August that the “Department strongly disagrees with the Fifth Circuit’s decision in Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. FDA and will be seeking Supreme Court review of that decision.”In the writ of certiorari the Department of Justice sent to the Supreme Court on Friday asking the justices to hear the case, its attorneys argued that the 5th Circuit decision could have “especially disruptive implications for the pharmaceutical industry and those who depend upon the drugs it supplies.”“Indeed, a wide range of industry participants have warned that the lower courts’ approach would ‘result in a seismic shift in the clinical development and drug approval processes, erecting unnecessary and unscientific barriers to the approval of lifesaving medicines, chilling drug development and investment, threatening patient access, and destabilizing the rigorous, well-established, and long-standing drug approval process.’”The Department of Justice lawyers also wrote the 5th Circuit decision “did not conclude that mifepristone is unsafe.”“Instead, the court held that FDA did not adequately explain its 2016 and 2021 actions,” DOJ attorneys wrote. “Even if that were true, those asserted failures of explanation would at most have justified a direction to FDA to further consider the relevant issues, without additional relief that would bar distribution of mifepristone as presently approved.”If the U.S. Supreme Court decides to take up the case, the justices could issue a ruling as soon as next summer, just months before the 2024 presidential election.The Supreme Court&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/us-supreme-court-overturns-right-abortion-landmark-decision-16">ruled in June 2022</a>&nbsp;that Americans no longer had the constitutional right to abortion that was established nearly 50 years before in the landmark Roe v. Wade case.The Supreme Court&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf">wrote</a>&nbsp;that “the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives.”<figure>
 <img src="https://kansasreflector.com/wp-content/plugins/states-newsroom/republisher/assets/img/ccwhite.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>

Justice Department wants Supreme Court to take up abortion pill case

The Nebraska State Patrol is investigating a crash that involved a school bus on Tuesday morning on Highway 2 east of Palmyra. Several students were injured in the crash. 

At approximately 7:35 a.m. Tuesday, NSP received a report of a crash involving a school bus approximately one mile east of Palmyra. Troopers, Otoe County Sheriff’s Deputies, and rescue crews from Palmyra, Douglas, Syracuse, and Nebraska City all responded. 

Upon arrival, several students were found with mostly minor injuries. All nine students aboard the bus were transported to Bryan Health Center West Campus with what are believed to be non-life-threatening injuries. The students were all between ages 5 and 14. Parents were reunited with their kids at the hospital. Both drivers involved were also transported with non-life-threatening injuries.

Preliminary investigation shows that the bus was westbound on Highway 2 when it was slowing to turn onto a driveway. A westbound Ford F-150 then failed to slow down and rear-ended the bus causing it to roll onto its side. NSP is investigating the crash. That investigation is ongoing. 

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/9/1694549876083.png" alt="Photo courtesy KWCH TV" />
 <figcaption>Photo courtesy KWCH TV</figcaption>
 </figure>By Nebraska State PatrolThe Nebraska State Patrol is investigating a crash that involved a school bus on Tuesday morning on Highway 2 east of Palmyra. Several students were injured in the crash. At approximately 7:35 a.m. Tuesday, NSP received a report of a crash involving a school bus approximately one mile east of Palmyra. Troopers, Otoe County Sheriff’s Deputies, and rescue crews from Palmyra, Douglas, Syracuse, and Nebraska City all responded. Upon arrival, several students were found with mostly minor injuries. All nine students aboard the bus were transported to Bryan Health Center West Campus with what are believed to be non-life-threatening injuries. The students were all between ages 5 and 14. Parents were reunited with their kids at the hospital. Both drivers involved were also transported with non-life-threatening injuries.Preliminary investigation shows that the bus was westbound on Highway 2 when it was slowing to turn onto a driveway. A westbound Ford F-150 then failed to slow down and rear-ended the bus causing it to roll onto its side. NSP is investigating the crash. That investigation is ongoing.

NSP investigating crash involving school bus

WASHINGTON (AP) — Speaker&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/kevin-mccarthy">Kevin McCarthy</a>&nbsp;said Tuesday he is&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/mccarthy-speaker-biden-impeachment-republicans-shutdown-4d8c314763252429a6f87e7d13ad2b43">directing a House committee</a>&nbsp;to open an impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden over his family's business dealings, launching historic proceedings ahead of the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-trump-2024-poll-old-corrupt-12b806876e2072790f9a67793761c688">2024 election.</a>

McCarthy said the House Oversight Committee's investigation so far has found a “culture of corruption” around the Biden family as Republicans probe the business dealings of Biden's son,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/hunter-biden">Hunter Biden</a>, from before the Democratic president took office.

“These are allegations of abuse of power, obstruction and corruption, and they warrant further investigation by the House of Representatives,” McCarthy, R-Calif., said outside the speaker's office at the Capitol. "That’s why today I am directing our House committee to open a formal impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden.”

The announcement comes as the Republican leader faces mounting pressure from his right flank to take action against Biden while he also is struggling to pass legislation needed to avoid a federal government shutdown at the end of the month.

An inquiry is step toward impeachment, and McCarthy essentially outlined potential charges. He is is planning to convene lawmakers behind closed doors multiple times this week, including for a meeting to discuss the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/joe-biden">Biden</a>&nbsp;impeachment.

The Republican leader is once again at a political crossroads — trying to keep his most conservative lawmakers satisfied and prevent his own ouster. It’s a familiar political bind for McCarthy,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/joe-biden">who is juggling</a>&nbsp;the impeachment inquiry and the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/government-shutdown-impeachment-congress-funding-048dee639bb0dcb6604f05ba2f0782a8">government shutdown threat</a>&nbsp;with no clear end game.

Government funding is to run out on Sept. 30, which is the end of the federal fiscal year, and Congress must pass new funding bills or risk a shutdown and the interruption of government services.

Biden’s White House has dismissed the impeachment push as politically motivated.

“Speaker McCarthy shouldn’t cave to the extreme, far-right members who are threatening to shut down the government unless they get a baseless, evidence-free impeachment of President Biden. The consequences for the American people are too serious,” White House spokesman Ian Sams has said.

The impeachment push comes as Trump, who was&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-impeachment-vote-capitol-siege-0a6f2a348a6e43f27d5e1dc486027860">twice impeached</a>&nbsp;by the House but acquitted by the Senate, faces more serious charges in court. Trump has been indicted four times this year, including for trying to overturn the 2020 election Biden won.

"This is a transparent effort to boost Donald Trump’s campaign by establishing a false moral equivalency between Trump — the four time-indicted former president" and Biden, who faces “zero evidence of wrongdoing whatsoever,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin, the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee.

House Republicans are probing the business dealings of&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/hunter-biden">Hunter Biden</a>&nbsp;but so far have not produced hard evidence linking them and the president. They have shown a few instances largely during the time the elder Biden was Barack Obama's vice president when he spoke by phone with his son and stopped by dinners his son was hosting with business partners.

An impeachment inquiry would provide more heft to the House investigation, especially as it battles in court for access to Biden family financial records.

Republicans contend the Justice Department has not fully probed the allegations against Hunter Biden, and say he received preferential treatment in what they call a sweetheart plea deal that recently collapsed. The Department of Justice has appointed a special prosecutor in that probe.

"We will go wherever the evidence takes us,” McCarthy said.

The White House has insisted Biden was not involved in his son’s business dealings. And Democrats on the Oversight Committee are stepping up to fight against what they view as unfounded claims against him ahead of the 2024 election.

Rep. James Comer, the Republican chairman leading the Oversight Committee, is digging into the Biden family finances and is expected to seek banking records for Hunter Biden as the panel tries to follow the flow of money.

On Tuesday, Comer demanded the State Department produce documents about the work Biden did as vice president during the Obama administration to clean up corruption in Ukraine. Comer wants to understand the State Department's views of former Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin, whom Biden and many Western allies wanted removed from office because of allegations of corruption.

This comes as federal government funding is set to run out on Sept. 30, which is the end of the federal fiscal year, and Congress must pass new funding bills or risk a shutdown and the interruption of government services.

Conservatives who power McCarty's majority want to slash spending, and the hard right is unwilling to approve spending levels the speaker negotiated with Biden earlier this year.

McCarthy is trying to float a 30-day stopgap measure to keep government running to Nov. 1, but conservatives are balking at what's called a continuing resolution, or CR, as they pursue cuts.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., said late Monday exiting McCarthy's office she has “red lines" against any new money being spent for COVID-19 vaccines or mandates or Russia's war in Ukraine.

Another Republican, Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida, a top Trump ally, is warning that McCarthy could face blowback from conservatives if he does not push hard for spending cuts.

At the start of the year, Gaetz and other Republicans secured agreements from McCarthy as he struggled to win their votes to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/politics-united-states-house-of-representatives-kevin-mccarthy-us-republican-party-0938c7358f41c83759246f8949ac7c15">become House speaker</a>.

Under the House rules, McCarthy's opponents are able to call a vote at any time to try to oust the speaker from office.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Speaker&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/kevin-mccarthy">Kevin McCarthy</a>&nbsp;said Tuesday he is&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/mccarthy-speaker-biden-impeachment-republicans-shutdown-4d8c314763252429a6f87e7d13ad2b43">directing a House committee</a>&nbsp;to open an impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden over his family's business dealings, launching historic proceedings ahead of the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-trump-2024-poll-old-corrupt-12b806876e2072790f9a67793761c688">2024 election.</a><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">House Speaker McCarthy: &quot;I am directing our House committee to open a formal impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/ynjJXEZ5fT">pic.twitter.com/ynjJXEZ5fT</a>&mdash; CSPAN (@cspan) <a href="https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1701626243404157141?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 12, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>McCarthy said the House Oversight Committee's investigation so far has found a “culture of corruption” around the Biden family as Republicans probe the business dealings of Biden's son,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/hunter-biden">Hunter Biden</a>, from before the Democratic president took office.“These are allegations of abuse of power, obstruction and corruption, and they warrant further investigation by the House of Representatives,” McCarthy, R-Calif., said outside the speaker's office at the Capitol. "That’s why today I am directing our House committee to open a formal impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden.”<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Biden Crime Family, LLC.&mdash; Dr. Roger Marshall (@RogerMarshallMD) <a href="https://twitter.com/RogerMarshallMD/status/1701661375754322261?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 12, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>The announcement comes as the Republican leader faces mounting pressure from his right flank to take action against Biden while he also is struggling to pass legislation needed to avoid a federal government shutdown at the end of the month.An inquiry is step toward impeachment, and McCarthy essentially outlined potential charges. He is is planning to convene lawmakers behind closed doors multiple times this week, including for a meeting to discuss the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/joe-biden">Biden</a>&nbsp;impeachment.The Republican leader is once again at a political crossroads — trying to keep his most conservative lawmakers satisfied and prevent his own ouster. It’s a familiar political bind for McCarthy,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/joe-biden">who is juggling</a>&nbsp;the impeachment inquiry and the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/government-shutdown-impeachment-congress-funding-048dee639bb0dcb6604f05ba2f0782a8">government shutdown threat</a>&nbsp;with no clear end game.Government funding is to run out on Sept. 30, which is the end of the federal fiscal year, and Congress must pass new funding bills or risk a shutdown and the interruption of government services.Biden’s White House has dismissed the impeachment push as politically motivated.“Speaker McCarthy shouldn’t cave to the extreme, far-right members who are threatening to shut down the government unless they get a baseless, evidence-free impeachment of President Biden. The consequences for the American people are too serious,” White House spokesman Ian Sams has said.The impeachment push comes as Trump, who was&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-impeachment-vote-capitol-siege-0a6f2a348a6e43f27d5e1dc486027860">twice impeached</a>&nbsp;by the House but acquitted by the Senate, faces more serious charges in court. Trump has been indicted four times this year, including for trying to overturn the 2020 election Biden won."This is a transparent effort to boost Donald Trump’s campaign by establishing a false moral equivalency between Trump — the four time-indicted former president" and Biden, who faces “zero evidence of wrongdoing whatsoever,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin, the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee.House Republicans are probing the business dealings of&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/hunter-biden">Hunter Biden</a>&nbsp;but so far have not produced hard evidence linking them and the president. They have shown a few instances largely during the time the elder Biden was Barack Obama's vice president when he spoke by phone with his son and stopped by dinners his son was hosting with business partners.An impeachment inquiry would provide more heft to the House investigation, especially as it battles in court for access to Biden family financial records.Republicans contend the Justice Department has not fully probed the allegations against Hunter Biden, and say he received preferential treatment in what they call a sweetheart plea deal that recently collapsed. The Department of Justice has appointed a special prosecutor in that probe."We will go wherever the evidence takes us,” McCarthy said.The White House has insisted Biden was not involved in his son’s business dealings. And Democrats on the Oversight Committee are stepping up to fight against what they view as unfounded claims against him ahead of the 2024 election.Rep. James Comer, the Republican chairman leading the Oversight Committee, is digging into the Biden family finances and is expected to seek banking records for Hunter Biden as the panel tries to follow the flow of money.On Tuesday, Comer demanded the State Department produce documents about the work Biden did as vice president during the Obama administration to clean up corruption in Ukraine. Comer wants to understand the State Department's views of former Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin, whom Biden and many Western allies wanted removed from office because of allegations of corruption.This comes as federal government funding is set to run out on Sept. 30, which is the end of the federal fiscal year, and Congress must pass new funding bills or risk a shutdown and the interruption of government services.Conservatives who power McCarty's majority want to slash spending, and the hard right is unwilling to approve spending levels the speaker negotiated with Biden earlier this year.McCarthy is trying to float a 30-day stopgap measure to keep government running to Nov. 1, but conservatives are balking at what's called a continuing resolution, or CR, as they pursue cuts.Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., said late Monday exiting McCarthy's office she has “red lines" against any new money being spent for COVID-19 vaccines or mandates or Russia's war in Ukraine.Another Republican, Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida, a top Trump ally, is warning that McCarthy could face blowback from conservatives if he does not push hard for spending cuts.At the start of the year, Gaetz and other Republicans secured agreements from McCarthy as he struggled to win their votes to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/politics-united-states-house-of-representatives-kevin-mccarthy-us-republican-party-0938c7358f41c83759246f8949ac7c15">become House speaker</a>.Under the House rules, McCarthy's opponents are able to call a vote at any time to try to oust the speaker from office.