Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom took time during a weekend trip to deep-red Idaho to celebrate a bookstore claiming it sells ‘banned’ books.

‘Book bans are at a record high – there have been over 1,200 challenges in the last year, nearly double the (then-record) total from 2021,’ Newsom tweeted on Sunday, including a video of his visit to Rediscovered Books in Boise.

‘Couldn’t leave Boise without dropping by this incredible bookstore. The owners of Rediscovered Books are doing everything they can to push back against these insane bans happening across the country,’ he added.

The video Newsom posted included shots of him browsing through the store, an image of what appeared to be a bumper sticker reading, ‘Stick it to the ban. Read banned books,’ and an image of sign reading, ‘Read these banned books.’

According to an April report, nearly 1,500 books were ‘banned’ in the first half of the 2022-2023 school year across the country as conservatives push back against what many view as attempts to indoctrinate children with books on the themes of race, racism and LGBTQ ideology. The book ‘bans’ – which consist of removing sexually-explicit books from public school libraries, or restricting access to older students – have been largely prevalent in red states.

Newsom, who has been a frequent critic of such ‘bans,’ visited Idaho to campaign for President Biden. It was his latest visit to a red state to share his liberal message that many Americans view as the source of what’s driving many Californians to pick up and move.

Despite his campaigning in support of Biden, Newsom has been seen as a potential rival to the president in the 2024 presidential race. Polls have shown that a majority of Americans, including Democrats, don’t want Biden to run for a second term.

It’s unclear what Newsom’s future presidential aspirations might be, but he did tell Fox News’ Sean Hannity last month that he had ‘great confidence’ in Biden’s leadership.

Fox News’ Joshua Q. Nelson contributed to this report.

The California Reparations Task Force is asking the Democrat-controlled state legislature to eliminate interest on past-due child support, as well as any back child support debt for Black residents of the state.

In its final report released last week, the group claimed ‘discriminatory’ laws ‘have torn African American families apart,’ and that one effect of that is the ‘harms’ caused by ‘the disproportionate amount of African Americans who are burdened with child support debt.’ 

The nearly 1,100-page document stated that Black Californians represent a larger percentage of those who owe child support debt than their proportion of the state’s population. 

It also claimed the 10% interest the state charges on back child support ‘hinders’ their ability to finance further education, attend job training, find employment and maintain housing because of the legal consequences of not paying such debt.

The report cited a 2003 California Department of Child Support Services study that estimated 27% of owed child support in the state was unpaid interest, that those who owed child support had lower incomes than ‘the typical California worker’ and that such interest required a larger portion of their income to actually pay the debt.

‘The Task Force recommends that the Legislature enact legislation to terminate all interest accrued on back child support, requiring only the payment of the principal owed. At a minimum, the proposal recommends that the Legislature eliminate the prospective accrual of interest on child support debt for low-income parents,’ the report said. 

‘The Task Force further recommends that the Legislature amend Family Code section 17560, the ‘offers in compromise’ provision, to allow for offers in compromise and forgiveness of child support debt based solely on a parent’s fnancial (sic) circumstances and ability to pay,’ it added.

The report is a culmination of two years of research done by the task force into what it says is the historical discrimination faced by Black Californians and their ancestors in the state. 

It also offers a broad account of the ways it accuses the state of wronging descendants of Black slaves.

The state legislature will now determine what aspects of the report, including monetary compensation for Black residents, it will approve or deny.

EXCLUSIVE: A coalition of pro-life groups is calling on House Republicans to rescind the Department of Defense’s policy allowing service members time off and travel reimbursements for abortions through the annual National Defense Authorization Act.

In a letter obtained exclusively by Fox News Digital, nearly 50 think tanks and activist organizations accused the Biden administration of politicizing the DoD by using taxpayer money to fund elective abortions for service members.

The letter, which was sent to lawmakers on Thursday, asked Republicans on Capitol Hill to fully repeal the department’s ‘illegal’ policy through the NDAA ‘in order for a ‘clean’ bill to move forward.’

Organizations that signed the plea include the Heritage Foundation, Heritage Action for America, Students for Life Action, Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, Family Research Council and the American Cornerstone Institute.

‘The Pentagon firmly entered the political space when it opted to change policy and start granting paid vacation and funding of travel expenses for service members to obtain abortions,’ Thomas​ Spoehr, Director at the Center for National Defense at the Heritage Foundation told Fox News Digital. ‘This despite longstanding laws prohibiting federal support for abortions. The NDAA, where Congress provides the annual direction for [the] DoD to operate, is the most appropriate vehicle for Congress to direct the Pentagon to return to its previous policies on abortion.’

The letter was addressed to House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, Calif.; House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, La.; House Majority Whip Tom Emmer, Minn.; House Republican Conference Chair Elise Stefanik, N.Y.; House Republican Policy Committee Chair Gary Palmer, Ala.; House Rules Committee Chair Tom Cole, Okla.; House Armed Services Committee Chair Mike Rogers, Ala.; and House Appropriations Committee Chair Kay Granger, Texas.

None of the House Republicans who received the letter responded to Fox News Digital’s request for comment before publication.

The House Armed Services Committee passed the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2024 last month, and House Republicans could take up the bill as early as next week. GOP lawmakers filed numerous amendments last week that they hope to be included in the NDAA for 2024.

‘Clear language defunding Biden’s abortion travel policy has passed the Appropriations Committee in the Department of Defense Appropriations bill, but the NDAA is the legislative vehicle to reassert Congress’ authority over policymaking and ensure that our nation’s laws and policies reflect the will of the American people,’ the groups wrote in the letter. ‘Now that the House Armed Services Committee has passed the FY24 NDAA, it is imperative that this policy be fully repealed in any NDAA that passes on the House floor.’

The Pentagon’s policy allowing service members time off for an elective abortion and reimbursing them for travel costs related to the procedure was put in place last year following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, which gave states the authority to determine their own abortion laws.

After the ruling, Biden affirmed his position that his administration was committed to protecting access to abortion.

‘After the Supreme Court decision in Dobbs, President Biden declared his intent to further his pro-abortion agenda through every means possible,’ the coalition wrote in the letter. ‘Four days after the decision, on June 28, 2022, Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, Gilbert Cisneros Jr. released a memo detailing the department’s existing authority on paying for abortions stating clearly that travel for non-covered abortions would be paid ‘at the service member’s own expense.”

The letter continued: ‘However, continued pressure from the Biden Administration’s Taskforce on Reproductive Healthcare Access led the Department of Defense to reconsider their stance to follow all applicable laws on performing and paying for abortions. An October 22, 2022, memo from Secretary Lloyd Austin outlined new policies that use taxpayer funds to pay for time off, lodging and travel for elective abortions, and these policies were made official on February 16, 2023.’

Heritage Action for America Acting Executive Director Ryan Walker told Fox News Digital that Austin bypassed Congress and the federal rulemaking process with the October memo.

‘This not only violated longstanding federal law prohibiting taxpayer funding for abortions, but it also heavily politicized the traditionally bipartisan NDAA process,’ Walker said. ‘Now, as the coalition points out, the only way Congress can ensure a bipartisan NDAA moves forward is by rescinding this DOD policy through amendments on the floor.’

Representatives now have their first opportunity to reauthorize the DoD and its policies since the decision went into effect. 

House Republicans have put forward amendments in the NDAA bill in support of rescinding this policy and have also included provisions to shut down the Biden administration’s ‘woke’ policies related to gender and diversity, equity and inclusion.

The Pentagon has faced criticism throughout the Biden administration for pushing social issues into the military that Republicans argue distract from war preparedness.

The groups began to wrap the letter up by saying Americans expect the military to ‘focus on winning actual wars, not fighting culture wars’ and ‘the majority (60%) do not approve of using taxpayer money to fund abortions.’

‘Rather than focusing on confronting the serious challenges facing our country, President Biden and Secretary Austin have unnecessarily dragged the military into the middle of a divisive political issue and attempted to co-opt military resources in furtherance of an unrelated, partisan, ideological agenda,’ the organizations concluded. ‘The House of Representatives now has an opportunity to remedy these egregious actions and pass a truly clean NDAA.’

–>

California’s reparations task force wants state lawmakers to ban the arrest and prosecution of people who violate laws against public urination and other ‘public disorder offenses,’ the task force said in its final report released last week. 

The call to end police enforcement of laws, including those that prohibit public urination, is among the official policy recommendations listed in the final report, which contains 40 chapters and runs well over 1,000 pages. 

‘A signification [sic] proportion of law enforcement contact with the public relates to low-level, non-violent offenses. Thus, for example, law enforcement is frequently tasked with enforcing public disorder offenses, such as illegal camping, public intoxication, disorderly conduct, minor trespass, and public urination. Although the subjects of these contacts are often experiencing homelessness, a mental health crisis, or both, the responding officers typically possess neither training nor expertise in working with these vulnerable populations,’ the report charges. 

‘This disconnect often results in the use of excessive and sometimes fatal force that falls disproportionately on Black individuals. Given the devastating impacts of this kind of over-policing, the Task Force recommends that the Legislature prohibit law enforcement from criminally enforcing public disorder infractions and other low-level crimes,’ the report continues. 

‘Instead, a public health and safety institution, without criminal arrest or prosecution powers, would enforce prohibitions such as sleeping on the sidewalk, fare evasion, and similar transit-related or other public disorder violations that criminalize poverty. People arrested or criminally prosecuted for these administrative violations should be granted a private right of action to sue for damages or should automatically receive a damages payout.’

The report stops short of giving an exact dollar amount it wants for descendants of slaves who live in the state, though it makes clear the task force thinks the dollar amount should be significant. It also includes dozens of policy recommendations, including the ban on prosecution of ‘public disorder offenses.’ 

This is not the first time that Californian left-wing voices have said law enforcement should turn a blind eye to publicly emptying one’s bladder. 

Former San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin, whose parents were part of the domestic terrorist Weather Underground group, promised during his 2019 campaign that he would not prosecute ‘cases involving quality-of-life crimes. Crimes such as public camping, offering or soliciting sex, public urination, blocking a sidewalk, etc., should not and will not be prosecuted. Many of these crimes are still being prosecuted; we have a long way to go to decriminalize poverty and homelessness.’

Boudin was recalled in June 2022, less than three years after he was elected, in a campaign that was marked by public outrage over Boudin’s soft-on-crime approach. 

The reparations task force did not immediately return Fox News Digital’s request for further clarification on why police officers shouldn’t enforce public urination laws. 

Republican presidential candidate and Miami Mayor Francis Suarez has called the arguments by some of his presidential rivals to end American birthright citizenship ‘really idiotic,’ and suggested he might not have become a U.S. citizen without the existence of the 14th Amendment.

‘Our Founding Fathers decided that people born here were immediately citizens. Cracking open the Constitution to eliminate that right seems really idiotic,’ Suarez, whose parents were both immigrants from Cuba, told the Daily Caller last week. 

‘My parents both came here to escape communism. They came legally, but I became a citizen because I was born here. We need to close our borders to illegal immigration not open up the Constitution. One out of every five Americans is Hispanic. We can get their votes, but this isn’t a way to do it,’ he added.

The 14th Amendment, which was ratified in July 1868, grants citizenship to anyone ‘born or naturalized in the United States,’ and has become a point of contention amid the migrant crisis at the U.S. border with Mexico.

Former President Donald Trump first promised to end birthright citizenship in 2018 in response to massive migrant caravans made up of largely Central and South Americans heading to the border by traversing through Mexico. He ultimately didn’t follow through, but vowed in May to do so again if elected to another term.

A number of other Republican presidential candidates have also signaled they would look to end certain aspects of birthright citizenship, including former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley, businessman Vivek Ramaswamy, and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.

Former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson has sided with Suarez, telling the Daily Caller last week that such vows to end birthright citizenship through executive order were ’empty promises’ and ‘disrespectful to our Constitution.’ 

FIRST ON FOX – The National Rifle Association of America slapped the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives with a lawsuit over a rule that regulates stabilizing braces for pistols.

In a lawsuit filed Monday, the NRA aims to expose ‘the failings of the new rule – which subjects law-abiding gun owners to penalties, fines, and potential prison sentences for the use of an otherwise legal plastic apparatus on some firearms.’

‘The NRA has ramped up its offense on this arbitrary and unconstitutional rule,’ NRA Executive Vice President & CEO Wayne LaPierre said. ‘We are confident in our ability to confront the ATF and [the Department of Justice] – and preserve freedom for NRA members.’

The NRA previously submitted comments in opposition to the rule, filed a motion to intervene in another legal action and supported a lawsuit by several state attorneys general filed in North Dakota. 

Pistol braces are accessories that can be attached to the rear of a gun to make it easier to aim and fire with one hand. The accessories are often used by disabled veterans. 

The ATF rule categorizes pistols with braces as short-barreled rifles, which require a federal license to own.

NRA argues in its complaint that the rule is unconstitutional, as the ATF reverses its long-standing position that pistol braces do not transform pistols into rifles subject to onerous registration and taxation requirements under the National Firearms Act.

The NRA is asking a district court in Texas for a preliminary, and ultimately permanent, injunctive relief restraining ATF from enforcing the rule against law-abiding NRA members. ATF Director Steven Dettelbach and U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland are also named defendants in the lawsuit.

First announced in January 2023, the final rule was set to go into effect June 1, 2023. Gun rights groups and the state of Texas sued the government and have now been granted preliminary injunctive relief from that final rule. The NRA now seeks ‘recognition of the irreparable harm its members also face’ from the rule. The NRA has approximately 350,000 members in Texas.

According to the complaint, many NRA members are being irreparably harmed by the final rule because they are forced to modify their firearms, destroy them, register them or surrender them to the federal government under threat of criminal prosecution.

‘The NRA is pursuing every possible avenue in defense of its law-abiding members and their constitutional freedoms,’ said William A. Brewer III, counsel to the NRA. ‘Our members should be free of the threat of enforcement of this presumptively unlawful rule. We are confident that we will prevail in obtaining the same relief for them that has already been granted to members of other gun rights groups.’

In June, House Republicans, with the help of two Democrats, passed a resolution that would nullify ATF’s final rule and prevent the ATF from reintroducing the same rule in the future. 

The resolution is now headed to the Senate. If passed by the Senate – an unlikely scenario given the political makeup – and subsequently vetoed by Biden, the House and Senate would need a two-thirds majority vote to override the presidential veto. 

The ATF declined to comment on pending litigation.

MANCHESTER, N.H. – White House hopeful Marianne Williamson doesn’t care about precedent or political history as she takes aim at President Biden and the Democratic National Committee.

The best-selling author and spiritual adviser, who’s making her second straight bid for the Democratic presidential nomination, charges that moves this year by the DNC and the president fly in the face of ‘democratic principle.’

The DNC is fully backing behind Biden as the president campaigns for a second four-year term in the White House and at its winter meeting in February unanimously passed a resolution committing its ‘full and complete support’ for the re-election of Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris. And the DNC has said there will be no primary debates between Biden and his two nationally known challengers, Williamson and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., the environmental lawyer and high-profile vaccine critic, who’s a scion of arguably the nation’s most famous family political dynasty.

‘I don’t think it’s good for democracy. I think it’s very important that the Democratic electorate get a chance to weigh in. I look at the campaign season as a long job interview process and the voters should have a chance to interview all of the candidates for the job and that does include the president,’ Williamson argued Monday in an interview with Fox News Digital.

While Williamson, Kennedy, and others in the party are criticizing the DNC and Biden, there’s political precedent for their move. No incumbent president has engaged in a primary debates in modern times. Last presidential election cycle, the Republican National Committee didn’t schedule any primary debates as then-President Donald Trump faced a couple of long-shot GOP challengers.

‘I do think they should recognize that people are watching. And people don’t like this,’ Williamson emphasized as she pointed towards the DNC. ‘It’s kind of outrageous how overt they are about absolutely admitting that they are doing what they can in the primary season to support the president.’

Williamson stands at 10% support in the latest Fox News national poll in the Democratic presidential nomination race, with Kennedy at 17% and the president at 64%. While he’s the commanding front-runner for his party’s nomination, the 80-year-old Biden has faced plenty of concerns from Democrats over his age and physical and mental stamina.

‘It’s just against democratic principle. Those of us that are running should be heard. And it’s not even just what we deserve — those of us that are running. It’s what the people deserve. It’s what the voters deserve,’ Williamson said.

Williamson was interviewed as she campaigned in New Hampshire, the state that for the past century held the first presidential primary in both major parties nominating calendars.

‘I think anyone running for president has a game plan which is New Hampshire, New Hampshire, New Hampshire, because New Hampshire,’ she told Fox News.

While the Republican National Committee didn’t make any changes to their nominating schedule, the DNC made major alterations. The party voted earlier this year on a proposal by Biden to oust Iowa — whose caucuses have topped the calendar — and New Hampshire from their lead-off positions. New Hampshire will now vote second in the DNC’s calendar, along with Nevada, three days after South Carolina, under the DNC’s new schedule.

The DNC changed the nominating calendar in an effort to reflect more diversity in the Democratic Party. But New Hampshire is unlikely to agree to the DNC’s primary date — due to a state law that mandates the state hold the first presidential primary. That would set up an earlier than scheduled unsanctioned primary in New Hampshire — a contest that the president would probably avoid. Biden’s potential absence could allow Kennedy or Williamson to cause some political headaches for the president’s re-election. Iowa may also move up it’s contest.

‘The American people are pesky group — aren’t we. So it’s pretty typically traditionally American to not like that kind of manipulation. To not like that kind of control. So, I’m not surprised that these states are saying ‘wait a minute, we’re not going to just do what the DNC says.’ There’s something bigger at stake here than what the DNC wants and that’s the democratic process itself,’ Williamson charged.

Williamson entered the race a month and a half ahead of Kennedy, but he’s topped her in many recent polls. ‘I think that’s beginning to even out now,’ Williamson said as she pointed to the latest survey in New Hampshire, which indicated they were ‘neck and neck.’

‘I think the clouds are clearing and people are seeing more clearly what each of us stands for on the issues,’ Williamson added. And she said that Kennedy’s stance on some issues and his vaccine skepticism as ‘obviously’ out-of-line with many Democratic voters.

Asked about her standing in the polls, Williamson said, ‘This is very early in the process and if you look at Obama at this point in the process, when he first ran for president, or even Bernie, I’m right in there with where people are at the beginning.’

And pointing to what she charged was ‘manipulation brought about by the DNC’ and ‘smears,’ she said ‘I think I’m actually doing pretty good.’

‘When I’m actually talking to people… I just do fine… Because I am talking about the actual visceral experience of the American people,’ she added. 

‘I am saying what a majority of American say they want, which she said was universal health care and ‘much more serious robust efforts made against the ravages of climate change.’

Last week Williamson named New Hampshire based progressive activist Carlos Cardona as her campaign manager — her third since launching her bid four months ago.

Asked what the turnover of managers says about her campaign, she answered, ‘It says nothing. When you give as much scrutiny to everybody else’s campaign as to mine, then we can start talking.’

‘The first one was an interim. The second one should have been named an interim. These are both still friends. You can look at their social media and that’s clear. It takes a while that you get it all together that you have the right team. But this kind of lens is purposeful — this narrative that’s created to make things unlike what they actually are,’ Williamson claimed.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has declined to approve Amneal Pharmaceuticals’ drug for Parkinson’s disease due to inadequate safety data on the treatment to help control symptoms in patients for a longer duration, the company said on Monday.

Shares of Amneal Pharmaceuticals fell 13.1% to $2.7 in choppy after-market trading.

The FDA in a complete response letter said while the company established the safety of one ingredient, levodopa, based on some studies, it was not able to adequately establish safety for the other ingredient, carbidopa.

The health regulator has requested additional information on the safety of the drug, while it did not identify any efficacy or manufacturing issues with the drug.

Amneal’s drug is a new formulation of carbidopa-levodopa, the standard of care for Parkinson’s, and is designed in a way that allows it to remain in a certain area of the small intestine for a longer period, helping in its consistent absorption.

The company said it will work closely with the health regulator to address the issues and plans to meet with the agency.

The health regulator’s decision is a potential hurdle to the company, which has been looking to grow its portfolio of branded drugs, expecting over $500 million in revenues from its specialty business by 2027.

The drugmaker said the decision does not impact its 2023 financial forecast as it did not include the revenue from the drug.

Amneal currently has another Parkinson’s drug, Rytary, which was approved in 2015 in the market but had been struggling to gain a foothold in the treatment space, with only 4% of patients using it.

Parkinson’s is a brain disorder that causes unintended or uncontrollable movements and is the second most-deadly neurodegenerative disease after Alzheimer’s. There is no cure for Parkinson’s currently, but medicines and other therapies can help relieve symptoms.

<!–>

–>