Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) will hold another meeting today to continue discussions on Greene’s ongoing threat to bring a motion to vacate to the floor.
That comes after Greene and the speaker met for two hours in Johnson’s office yesterday about the threat she made last week, when she said she was “absolutely bringing” a vote on the motion to vacate this week.
“We’re going to be meeting again tomorrow based on the discussion that we’ve had. And so we really don’t have any news to report,” Greene, joined by Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), said during brief remarks to reporters after the closed-door meeting.
Greene declined to answer questions about what happened in the meeting, including whether she still planned to force a vote on the measure. She also declined to answer a question about whether Mr. Johnson had offered concessions to avoid a vote.
The remarks indicate a tone shift from her fiery speech outside the Capitol last week, when she vowed to put both Republicans and Democrats on the record on the issue.
After the meeting, it’s unclear whether Johnson will face a vote to strip him of the gavel in the coming days.
House Democrat leaders have said they would vote to shelve a motion to vacate advanced by Greene, effectively ensuring its defeat on the House floor.
While Johnson could claim a victory from this scenario, he may also face further scrutiny from the right flank for having to rely on Democrats to save his speakership.
Greene, who is publicly supported by two Republicans, Mr. Massie and Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.), first offered the motion to vacate in March to serve as a “warning” after the speaker advanced a $1.2 trillion government funding bill with broad Democrat support.
Since then, Johnson’s vote against adding a warrant requirement to a bill reauthorizing controversial surveillance powers and his move to take up a $95 billion foreign aid bill funding Ukraine, Israel, and the Indo-Pacific that didn’t include border security measures stirred outrage among some conservatives, including Greene.
—Joseph Lord and Stacy Robinson
ANTI-SEMITISM BILL DEBATE
A House-passed bill designed to expand protections under the law for Jewish Americans has ignited debates on both sides of the political aisle about the impact critics say it could have on free speech.
The legislation, dubbed the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act, would expand the definition of antisemitism to that set by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) in the enforcement of federal anti-discrimination laws.
Critics of the legislation say that, due to ambiguities in the IHRA definition, it could have a chilling effect on freedom of speech, and effectively work to silence criticism of Israel.
Conservative lawmakers have pointed to a clause in IHRA’s definition of anti-Semitism that describes “claims that Jews killed Jesus” as anti-Semitism.
Because this claim is stated in The Bible, these conservative critics have expressed concerns that the legislation could be used to target or pull funding from Christian schools that teach The Bible.
This criticism was echoed by Reps. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) and Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.).
Supporters of the bill have described this as a “mischaracterization,” saying it “promotes the age-old anti-Semitic myth of deicide.”
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), meanwhile, had other concerns.
He dismissed the bill as a threat to First Amendment rights, but said that the even larger concern is that the definition of “anti-Semitism” is not written in the actual bill itself, and instead relies on IHRA’s definition online—a definition that could theoretically be altered later on.
Left-wing lawmakers have cited clauses of IHRA’s definition of anti-Semitism that they say could be used to penalize those critical of Israel.
Specifically, these clauses say that “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor,” “drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis,” and “applying double standards by requiring of [Israel] a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation” constitute anti-Semitism.
Reps. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) expressed concerns that the vague language of the bill could be used to prohibit criticism of Israel itself or its leaders—a concern echoed by many Democrats.
“My concern is that it violates First Amendment speech,” Khanna said. “I mean, I think we have to have space for the criticism of government, but we can absolutely condemn the vile threats and toxic rhetoric against Jewish or Muslim students.”
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) also came out in opposition to the legislation on April 26. It called the definition in the bill “overbroad,” and saying it “equates protected political speech with unprotected discrimination.”
Supporters of the bill have argued to The Epoch Times that these free speech concerns are “deeply overblown.”
Proponents of the legislation say that it functions largely as an extension of existing civil rights protections, and poses no threat to free speech.
Though it’s been passed by the House, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has been ambivalent about bringing it to the floor in the upper chamber.
As anti-Israel protests continue nationwide, posing a threat to President Joe Biden’s reelection aspirations, the issue is a thorny one that many Democrats may not want to touch.
—Joseph Lord and Jackson Richman
BOOKMARKS
The judge overseeing Trump’s so-called “hush-money” trial in New York on May 6 found the former president in contempt of court for alleged gag order violations, The Epoch Times’ Jack Phillips reported. The ruling comes after the judge ruled that Trump’s comments to the press about the case violated a gag order. He threatened the former president with jail time for further violations.
With the Republican majority dwindling, Jeffries says that the House GOP’s “chaos” and “dysfunction” has “effectively” given Democrats the majority, The Epoch Times’ Savannah Hulsey Pointer reported. It comes after Democrats said they’d bail Johnson out if Republicans bring a motion to vacate against him.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) has announced that he is running for reelection, The Epoch Times’ Jackson Richman and Emel Akan reported. Sanders, whose 2016 and 2020 presidential campaigns made him a household name, will be running for his fourth term in the upper chamber, where he’s served since 2006.
Universities across the nation are giving student protestors an ultimatum to remove encampments or face criminal consequences, The Epoch Times’ John Haughey reported. Pro-Palestinian activists and students remain entrenched in ad hoc encampments on more than 80 campuses across the United States.