Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, on Thursday called for Republicans to drop support for a must-pass military funding bill after his office obtained an Air Force memo declaring June to be LGBTQ+ Pride Month.

The May 3 memo, shared with Fox News, approves observance of Pride Month in June and empowers installation commanders to ‘plan and conduct appropriate activities in honor of Pride Month.’ Roy’s office also shared a flyer advertising Pride Month events at Robins Air Force Base in Georgia, including a ‘Pride Game Night’ on June 10, a Unity in Diversity Color Run on June 16, and a panel discussion titled ‘Our History, Our time!’ on June 28th. The advertisement states ‘ALL ARE WELCOME!!’ 

‘Each June, the Department of the Air Force recognizes Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer (LGBTQ+) Pride Month. During this time, we celebrate the progress we have made towards inclusivity, commemorate the contributions of LGBTQ+ Americans, and recognize the obstacles they have faced and overcome along the way,’ the memo reads.

‘This is a time to reaffirm our commitment to equality and reinforce the importance of a cohesive and diverse Total Force. One Team; One Fight,’ Assistant Secretary of the Air Force Alex Wagner and Diversity and Inclusion Director Marianne P. Malizia wrote. 

‘Our people are our strategic advantage,’ the memo continues. ‘During Pride Month — and every month — the DAF will continue our efforts to remove barriers to service, while advancing a respectful and inclusive culture, so our team can apply their talents to their mission and stay focused on the defense of our Nation. Our Airmen, Guardians, and their families deserve no less than to work and thrive in an environment worthy of their service and sacrifice.’ 

In a statement to Fox News, Roy ridiculed the proposed celebrations and lambasted the Defense Department for encouraging pro-LGBTQ+ events with taxpayer dollars. 

‘What’s next, rainbow uniforms during pride month?’ Roy said. ‘The Air Force and Defense Department sanctions this ridiculous use of taxpayer dollars and then expects members of Congress who represent Americans who are livid about this stuff to green light an $800 billion plus DOD budget. If DOD doesn’t put a stop to these kinds of divisive – and frankly embarrassing – DOD events, Republicans should pull support for this year’s [National Defense Authorization Act].’

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) is an annual defense spending bill that outlines military policy and spending priorities. Last year’s bill was a whopping $847 billion that authorized sending $800 million to the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative and repealed the miltiary’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate. 

Defense spending is a top priority for lawmakers each year. Hawkish lawmakers will bristle at any suggestion that Republicans should pull funding from the military with Russia and China taking increasingly aggressive action abroad.

The Air Force did not respond to a request for comment. 

The Biden administration this week updated its guidance on prayer and other religious expression in public schools, warning school employees not to encourage or endorse such activity.

‘Teachers, school administrators, and other school employees may not encourage or discourage private prayer or other religious activity,’ the Education Department writes in its new guidance, which adds that the U.S. Constitution permits school employees to engage in private prayer during the workday.

However, the Education Department warns, school employees can’t ‘compel, coerce, persuade, or encourage students to join in the employee’s prayer or other religious activity.’ The guidance goes on to say that schools may take ‘reasonable measures’ to ensure that students aren’t pressured or encouraged to join in the private prayers of their teachers or coaches.

The guidance comes at a time of year when many graduation ceremonies are taking place across the country. According to the Education Department, public school officials ‘may not mandate or organize prayer at graduation or select speakers for such events in a manner that favors religious speech such as prayer.’

But if a speaker’s comments are not attributable to the school, their expression can’t be restricted because of its religious content and can include prayer. In such circumstances, school officials ‘may choose to make appropriate, neutral disclaimers to clarify that such speech (whether religious or nonreligious) is the speaker’s and not the school’s speech.’

The Education Department includes thoughts on how public schools should address a range of religious expression other than prayer. For example, students have the right to distribute religious literature to their classmates. Schools may impose ‘reasonable’ restrictions on its distribution but ‘may not target religious literature for more permissive or more restrictive regulation.’

The guidance distinguishes between providing religious instruction and teaching about religion, describing the former as a way of promoting a particular belief system and the latter as a regular part of the curriculum.

‘Philosophical questions concerning religion, the history of religion, comparative religion, religious texts as literature, and the role of religion in the history of the United States and other countries are all permissible public school subjects,’ the guidance states. ‘Similarly, it is permissible to study religious influences on philosophy, art, music, literature, and social studies.’

For example, the Education Department says student choirs at public schools can perform music inspired by or based on religious themes or texts as part of school-sponsored events, so long as the music ‘is not performed as a religious exercise and is not used to promote or favor religion generally, a particular religion, or a religious belief.’

As for extracurricular activities, students may organize prayer groups and religious clubs just as they’re permitted to organize other, secular activity groups. In the classroom, meanwhile, students may pray and engage in other religious activity to the same extent as non-religious activity when they’re not involved in school activities or instruction in order to prevent disruptions in education.

‘Although school authorities may impose rules of order and pedagogical restrictions on student activities, they may not discriminate against student prayer or religious perspectives in applying such rules and restrictions,’ the Education Department writes.

The Biden administration’s updated guidance on prayer in school comes after the Supreme Court ruled last year that a public school district couldn’t stop a football coach from praying on the 50-yard line after games. In Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, the Supreme Court held that preventing someone from engaging in such prayer as a personal religious observance violated the First Amendment’s protections of free speech and the free exercise of religion.

The organization American Atheists praised the Biden administration’s guidance, arguing the measures ‘protect the religious freedom of families whose children are in the public school system.’

The group referenced bills in some state legislatures that would increase the role of religion in schools — such as legislation in Texas that would require public schools to display the Ten Commandments in classrooms — decrying them as attacks on religious freedom meant to promote ‘hateful’ ideas.

‘We all see through Christian nationalists’ lies. They constantly scream ‘indoctrination’ whenever LGBTQ students affirm who they are. Yet they are actively seeking to indoctrinate students in their hateful ideology,’ Nick Fish, president of American Atheists, said in a statement. ‘The Biden administration’s guidance protects families from Christian nationalists’ hypocritical attempts to foster coercive religious exercise in schools.’

Other groups such as Americans United, the Freedom From Religion Foundation, and the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty similarly applauded the Biden administration’s guidance for protecting students of all beliefs and forbidding from leading students in religious exercises.

In contrast, many voices say religion needs a prominent role in public schools, arguing negative forces fill the vacuum in its absence.

‘When we took prayers out of schools, guns came into schools,’ New York City Mayor Eric Adamas, a Democrat, said earlier this year while speaking to religious leaders at the annual Interfaith Breakfast in Manhattan. ‘Don’t tell me about no separation of church and state. State is the body. Church is the heart. You take the heart out of the body, the body dies.’

Other critics say that schools are promoting far-left gender ideology in place of religion.

Rev. John Amanchukwu, a North Carolina pastor, said this week on ‘Fox & Friends First’ that a sexually explicit book available to children in school libraries ‘glorifies masturbation while speaking against religion.’ 

Meanwhile, a seventh-grade student in Massachusetts filed suit against his school, alleging it censored his ability to exercise his First Amendment rights after he was told to take off a shirt saying, ‘There are only two genders.’

Nearly every House Democrat has endorsed an effort to make an end run around House Speaker Kevin McCarthy and bring a clean debt ceiling increase forward for a vote that doesn’t include spending cuts for the federal government.

At the direction of House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., Democrats began collecting signatures for a discharge petition on Wednesday morning. Discharge petitions can force a vote on legislation even if the majority party objects, but a majority of House lawmakers needs to sign it.

As of Thursday afternoon, 210 House Democrats had signed the discharge petition in the hopes of forcing a vote on a debt ceiling increase. The three Democrats who have not yet put their names to it are Reps. Mary Peltola of Alaska, Ed Case of Hawaii and Jared Golden of Maine.

Republicans have rejected the idea of a clean debt ceiling increase without preconditions. They passed the Limit, Save, Grow Act, which would lift the borrowing limit by $1.5 trillion while also rolling back key Biden administration initiatives and cutting the federal government’s discretionary levels back to what they were in 2022.

Peltola’s office confirmed to Fox News Digital that she will sign the petition and pointed to a statement to explain that the delay was due to a family tragedy.

‘I continue to support the ongoing negotiations by all parties, and believe a discharge petition to bring a clean debt ceiling solution to the floor can provide a valuable backup option. I am currently grieving the loss of my mother, but I intend to sign the discharge petition as soon as I am able to return to D.C.,’ Peltola said.

Golden’s office referred Fox News Digital to an earlier report where the congressman criticized the discharge petition.

Case’s office has not responded to a request for comment.

A discharge petition requires a simple majority of 218 votes, but Democrats only have 213 seats. Republicans across the spectrum have thus far been united behind their call for spending cuts to pair with any debt limit hike.

Jeffries called on every Democrat to sign it in a letter to colleagues sent Wednesday morning, despite expressing some optimism about the prior day’s meeting with congressional leaders and the White House on the debt limit.

‘Emerging from the White House meeting, I am hopeful that a real pathway exists to find an acceptable, bipartisan resolution that prevents a default,’ Jeffries said. ‘However, given the impending June 1 deadline and urgency of the moment, it is important that all legislative options be pursued in the event that no agreement is reached.’

McCarthy dismissed the effort during a press conference later that afternoon.

‘I don’t think it’s going anywhere,’ McCarthy said, referencing the fact that nearly every Republican senator has voiced support for his stance.

‘So, is that even sensible? Is that even being productive? Is that even reasonable? Is that responsible? It seems to me that would be playing into a Biden default.’

A ballot question seeking to make it more difficult to amend the Ohio Constitution was cleared for an August ballot on Thursday, and teams of Republican and Democratic lawmakers assigned to write pro and con arguments, respectively, to be presented to voters.

The process before the Ohio Ballot Board followed the raucous legislative floor session and months of drama leading up to approval of the measure, which is aimed at thwarting an effort to enshrine abortion rights in the state’s constitution this fall. Abortion is currently legal in Ohio, up to 20 weeks’ gestation, as a lawsuit against a near-ban enacted in 2019 is argued.

On this August’s ballot, voters will be asked whether or not they support raising the threshold for passing future constitutional amendments from the simple majority Ohio has had in place since 1912 to a 60% supermajority. As a constitutional amendment itself, the 60% question will only need to pass by a simple majority of 50%-plus-one.

The bipartisan panel, chaired by Republican Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose, voted along party lines to certify the ballot language, which Democrats attacked as unfair and inaccurate. The arguments that voters see on their ballots are due to LaRose’s office by Monday.

Issue 1’s Republican backers are expected to characterize the effort as a constitutional protection act aimed at keeping deep-pocketed special interests out of Ohio’s foundational documents. Among groups supporting the higher bar are anti-abortion, pro-gun rights and business groups opposed to a burgeoning amendment that would raise Ohio’s minimum wage.

Democrats will use their arguments to paint the 60% threshold as an assault on Ohio’s long history of direct democracy. Some Democratic lawmakers led a ‘one person, one vote’ chant and march after last week’s vote from the floor of the Ohio House — echoing cries of a large crowd of protesters gathered outside.

Should either side object to the others’ phrasing, they could file suit in the Ohio Supreme Court, which holds exclusive power to settle disputes in cases where lawmakers forward an ballot question straight to voters.

Democratic lawyer Don McTigue, representing the One Person One Vote Campaign, disagreed with the title LaRose’s office gave to the issue, which describes it as ‘elevating the standards’ to qualify constitutional amendments of Ohio’s ballot. McTigue suggested ‘modifying’ as more neutral, noting that it’s against Ohio law for ballot language to bias voters in one way or another.

It was too soon to say Thursday whether his client will file a legal challenge, McTigue said.

McTigue and Democrats on the board also argued for including the current 50%-plus-one standard in the ballot language, so that voters know what they’re changing, but the board rejected that idea.

The proposal also calls for doubling the number of Ohio counties — from 44 to all 88 — where backers of future initiative petitions would need to gather signatures in order to qualify for the ballot. As phrased by LaRose’s office, the question also appears to significantly raise the percentage of voters needed in each county, from 5% of those who voted in the last gubernatorial election to 5% of ‘all eligible voters.’

LaRose said his intention was to keep the ballot language simple, which Democratic state Sen. Bill DeMora said was disingenuous. ‘It’s sneaky and it’s illegal,’ he said.

<!–>

–>

FIRST ON FOX — A bill has been introduced to stop federal funds from being given to nonprofit entities unless they comply with human trafficking or alien smuggling laws.

Lance Gooden, R-Texas, introduced the ‘Protecting Federal Funds from Human Trafficking and Smuggling Act of 2023’ to set standards for nonprofit organizations as they gather in border towns to assist with the migrant surge.

‘By ensuring that federal funds are not awarded to organizations that engage in these heinous activities, we can safeguard taxpayer dollars and hold bad actors accountable,’ Gooden told Fox News Digital.

Gooden’s bill proposes that NGOs certify federal law compliance with the Office of Management and Budget.

The House Judiciary Committee member also called on Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas to produce a strategy to help NGOs with ‘deterring, detecting, reporting and removing aliens.’

The bill comes on the heels of an investigation launched by House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, Tuesday into DHS-funded NGOs that ‘receive hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars through federal grants to provide free food, lodging, and transportation for illegal aliens to be released anywhere they want in the United States.’

Asylum-seekers are arriving primarily from Guatemala, Cuba and Venezuela by the thousands since the end of the Title 42 rapid expulsion policy on May 11. As a result, nonprofit organizations are stepping up to transport, shelter and feed migrants in border towns.

Health and Human Services (HHS) whistleblower Tara Lee Rodas testified during a House hearing in April that migrant children in particular were victims of a ‘sophisticated network’ of labor trafficking. The government places unaccompanied minors with sponsors throughout the U.S., some of whom ‘view children as commodities and assets to be used for earning income – this is why we are witnessing an explosion of labor trafficking,’ Rodas said.

If enacted, Gooden’s bill would apply to nonprofit groups that have been awarded federal funding or an ‘agreement, contract, award, or relationship with the Federal Government.’

The bill’s introduction follows a Heritage Foundation report that found many NGOs ‘apply for, and receive, taxpayer money to provide processing and transportation services and infrastructure to facilitate the migration of illegal aliens into the interior of the country.’

The Heritage Foundation tracked more than 30,000 mobile devices from NGO facilities to 431 separate U.S. congressional districts across the country during January 2022.

Gooden’s office said that while the Judiciary and Oversight committees are collecting evidence, ‘We know through whistleblowers and migrants themselves that this funding is going toward federal handouts including lodging, transportation, debit cards, and free legal advice.’

The congressman also sent letters to Catholic Charities, Jewish Family Services and the Lutheran Immigration Services, requesting full amounts of federal funds. However, no response was given. 

Customs and Border Protection sources tell Fox News that migrant encounters are dropping since the expiration of the Title 42 policy, with less than 4,000 illegal border crossings on Monday. Prior to that, migrant encounters were topping 10,000 a day.

A special committee of the Vermont House of Representatives has formed to investigate the potential impeachments of two top Franklin County officials — Sheriff John Grismore and State’s Attorney John Lavoie.Grismore is being investigated for his finances, as well as for an incident where he was recorded kicking a detainee in the groin as a sheriff’s office captain. Lavoie faces allegations of harassment and workplace discrimination.Vermont requires two-thirds votes in the House and Senate to impeach and remove so-called ‘state criminals.’

A special committee of the Vermont House of Representatives formed to investigate the possible impeachment of the Franklin County sheriff and state’s attorney will be meeting over the summer, the speaker of the Vermont House says.

Democratic Speaker Jill Krowinski says if the committee she named earlier this week determines the House should hold an impeachment vote she will call the chamber back into session.

‘That is a committee of seven, with Democrats, Republicans and an independent with each a different background that they bring that I really think helps to form a really thoughtful group of members to lead this investigation,’ Krowinski said Wednesday.

She promised a public process that will be scheduled over the next week or so.

Franklin County State’s Attorney John Lavoie is accused of harassing and discriminating against employees. Franklin County Sheriff John Grismore is facing an assault charge for kicking a shackled detainee, as well as a financial investigation.

Lavoie has acknowledged some inappropriate humor but doesn’t think his actions warrant him stepping down. Grismore has defended his actions.

Emails were sent Thursday to Lavoie and Grismore.

The Vermont Constitution gives the House of Representatives the power to impeach ‘state criminals.’ If someone is impeached by a two-thirds vote in the House, that person would be tried in the Senate, which also requires a two-thirds vote for removal from office.

The Vermont Secretary of State says the last time impeachment proceedings took place in the Vermont House was in 1976 when the Washington County Sheriff was impeached by the House but, acquitted in the Senate. The last impeachment to end in a conviction and removal from office was in 1785.

<!–>

–>