Democrats’ top opposition research group is setting its sights on suppressing third-party presidential challenges they fear could hamper President Biden’s re-election effort.

The group, American Bridge, recently hired Mark Elias, a veteran Democratic operative and lawyer, in part to prevent such a challenger from succeeding, Reuters reported. The move comes as the group No Labels is pushing an independent candidacy for Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

So far, American Bridge’s efforts have taken the form of legal challenges over technical issues in the immense network of red tape required to run for office nationally.

‘We’re keeping an eye out to make sure they’re dotting all their i’s and crossing their t’s, and we are not ruling out legal action with our attorneys if we identify a problem – and that applies for all third-party threats to President Biden,’ American Bridge President Pat Denis told Reuters.

Top Democrats widely fear that a third-party candidate would harm Biden far more than former President Trump, who is currently dominating the Republican primary race.

Jim Messina, a former top aide to former President Obama, argued last month that a ‘third-party candidate can’t win in 2024’ and would likely guarantee a Trump victory.

‘With a rematch between President Joe Biden and Donald Trump almost set in stone, it’s time to put a farce to rest: The notion that a third-party candidate could actually win the presidency in 2024,’ Messina wrote in an op-ed for Politico.

‘No Labels is pushing a dangerous lie that would simply serve to put Donald Trump back in the White House,’ he continued.

A Reuters poll in December found that Trump’s lead over Biden expanded by 5 points when respondents were given the option to vote for Kennedy.

The founder of No Labels, former Democratic Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, has repeatedly pushed back on claims that his group is working as a spoiler. The same Reuters poll from December found that 6 in 10 Americans want a third option beyond Republicans and Democrats.

‘That’s not our goal here,’ Lieberman told Fox News Digital last year. ‘We’re not about electing either President Trump or President Biden.’

Fox News’ Jeffrey Clark contributed to this report.

Vice President Kamala Harris spoke extensively about racism and United States history this week during a television appearance. 

Harris appeared on ABC’s ‘The View,’ where she was asked to react to GOP presidential candidate Nikki Haley’s assertion that the U.S. has ‘never been a racist country.’

‘It’s unfortunate that there are some who would deny fact, or overlook it, when in fact, moving toward progress requires that we speak truth,’ the vice president told the panel of ‘The View.’

Harris’s comments are a response to comments made by Haley, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.

‘We’re not a racist country, Brian. We’ve never been a racist country,’ Haley, who is of Indian descent, said in an interview with CNN’s Brian Stelter. ‘Our goal is to make sure that today is better than yesterday. Are we perfect? No. But our goal is to always make sure we try and be more perfect every day that we can.’

She later clarified her comments in a statement to CNN, stating that the U.S. ‘has always had racism,’ but that America ‘has never been a racist country.’

The former ambassador’s comments sparked a national discussion regarding how Americans should conceptualize the country’s past.

‘I think we all would agree that while it is part of our past, and that and we see vestiges of it today, we should also be committed collectively to not letting it define the future of our country,’ Harris said on ‘The View.’

She added, ‘But we cannot get to a place of progress on the issue of race by denying the existence of racism, by denying the history of racism.’

Congressional leaders left a meeting at the White House on Wednesday signaling cautious but fresh hope that a bipartisan deal could be reached to fund Ukraine and overhaul policies at the southern border.

Both Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., told reporters after the meeting that a deal on supplemental security funding could come for a vote soon.

‘I am more optimistic now that we can come to an agreement on border and Ukraine in one package, along with aid to Israel, along with humanitarian aid for the Palestinians in Gaza, and along with helping Indochina,’ Schumer said. ‘I put the chances a little bit greater than half now. And that’s the first time I can say that.’

McConnell called it a ‘constructive discussion’ and added a deal could ‘be on the floor next week.’

‘We’ve been talking about this for a very long time. It’s time to try to act,’ he said upon returning to the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday.

President Biden expressed similar optimism on Thursday.

Asked by Fox News’ Jacqui Heinrich whether there were any ‘sticking points’ left in coming to an agreement, Biden said, ‘I don’t think we have any sticking points left.’

Wednesday’s meeting was intended to be focused on Democrats’ $110 billion supplemental aid request for Ukraine, Israel and others. But Republicans have insisted on border and immigration policy reforms for their support, as the border crisis becomes an increasingly bipartisan issue.

But while the Senate has been discussing a bipartisan path forward on border policy, the House GOP majority has been steadfast in calling for nothing short of the provisions in H.R.2, which passed the House last year and includes Trump administration-era border policies like Remain in Mexico and construction of a border wall.

Democrats who control the Senate and White House have called the bill a nonstarter.

A top House Republican who emerged from the meeting, Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Mike McCaul, R-Texas, was cautiously encouraged that President Biden was receptive to border policy changes – and suggested his conference could be flexible as well.

‘He said that I am ready to make significant changes to the border. He said it’s broken, he knows that, and it needs to be fixed,’ McCaul said of Biden. 

He said he and Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., specifically pushed for the Remain In Mexico provision.

‘I think that would be a significant policy change, that would get to the heart of the problem. That is what drives the cartels,’ McCaul said. ‘You stop that, you stop the flow and you solve the problem.’

McCaul said of the current status of talks, ‘Of course, we’re making the pitch for all of H.R.2. I also live in a realistic world.’

Johnson called the meeting ‘productive’ upon leaving the White House.

Later on the ‘Ingraham Angle,’ he signaled Republicans were still pushing for H.R.2 provisions but said of Biden at the meeting, ‘He said we’re ready to do big things on the border.’

Rep. Jim Himes, D-Conn., the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, told reporters that Johnson never specifically said it was H.R.2 or nothing during the meeting.

He did say Johnson insisted ‘the most important issue for the American people is the border’ and that he defended specific measures of the bill. 

The White House said of the meeting, ‘The President also made clear that we must act now to address the challenges at the border. He said he is encouraged by the progress being made in the bipartisan negotiations happening in the Senate. He expressed his commitment to reaching a bipartisan agreement on border policy and the need for additional resources at the border. The President called on Congress to swiftly pass his full national security supplemental.’

Fox News’ Brianna O’Neil contributed to this report

Senate Democrats voted down an amendment on Thursday to freeze aid to any Palestinian government until hostages held by Hamas are released and the Palestinian Authority renounces the terrorist group. 

The measure, proposed by Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., failed to reach the required 60 votes needed. The final tally was 44 in favor and 50 against the measure. 

A total of 47 Democrats, plus the three independent senators, voted against the amendment. Only one Democrat — Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.V. — cast a vote in favor of the amendment. 

Six Republicans — Sens. Lindsey Graham, John Barrasso, John Kennedy and Rick Scott — did not cast a vote. 

Hamas is currently holding 130 of the 240 hostages captive, including six Americans, whose conditions are unknown.

The amendment would have barred aid to the Palestinian Authority, or any other Palestinian governing entity in the West Bank and Gaza, until certain conditions were met — like formally renouncing the Ot. 7 terror attacks on Israel. 

‘We speak of human rights but reward those who violate them,’ Paul said on the floor. ‘We can no longer afford empty rhetoric. It makes no sense to borrow money from China and turn around and give that money away to foreign countries. It is fiscally irresponsible, and it is weakening our national security. America must demand a change, a change in behavior from those who do not accept Israel’s right to exist from those who actively seek the destruction of the State of Israel and murder innocent Israelis.’

Paul proposed the amendment to the short-term spending bill that extends funding for government agencies until March. Congress is anticipated to pass the bill by the end of Thursday before sending it to President Biden’s desk.

The amendment would have been subject to exceptions if the president certified certain conditions, including the recognition of Israel as a nation and renunciation of terrorism. Additionally, the amendment would require a report on human rights practices of the Palestinian Authority or other governing entities, including violations.

The Palestinian Authority ‘won’t recognize Israel, they won’t even condemn the massacre where 1,200 people were killed October 7,’ Paul told the Senate. ‘American resources should always promote American security interests and values, and any recipient of our tax dollars should be more than willing to adopt the principles that recognize the liberty and dignity of the individual, but we cannot expect the recipient of aid to change their behavior if America does not demand it.’

According to the amendment, the Department of State’s West Bank and Gaza 2022 Human Rights Report identified significant human rights issues with the Palestinian Authority, ‘including credible  reports of unlawful or arbitrary killings.’ 

Other offenses include ‘torture or cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment or punishments by Palestinian Authority officials, arbitrary arrest or detention of political prisoners and detainees, and significant problems with the independence of the judiciary.’

‘The report found that the Palestinian Authority did not adequately investigate or hold accountable gender-based violence, and crimes, violence, and threats of violence motivated by anti-Semitism,’ the amendment text read.

Speaking against the amendment on Thursday, Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Md., said it was important to ensure a future for the Palestinian people.

‘We know the tragedy of this war with Hamas, but we hope coming out of it will give us a new opportunity for peace in the region,’ Cardin said on the floor. ‘And that will require us to be able to help deal with the crisis that’s been created through Hamas’s attack, particularly with the Palestinian people, and to work to make sure there’s a future for the Palestinian people living in peace with Israel.’

Paul has consistently taken a hawkish stance against foreign aid that he believes lacks proper oversight, particularly expressing strong opposition to ongoing assistance for Ukraine in its conflict with Russia as well. 

Earlier this week, Paul voted alongside Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., as the lone Republican on a resolution that would have halted U.S. aid to Israel unless the Biden administration reports to Congress within 30 days about whether Israel committed human rights violations during its war with Hamas. The measure failed in a 72-11 vote. 

This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.

FIRST ON FOX: Republican House and Senate leaders filed an amicus brief in support of former President Donald Trump’s case against the Colorado Supreme Court for removing him from the state’s 2024 ballot. More than 170 lawmakers signed the brief. 

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., filed the brief on Thursday, arguing the court’s decision ‘encroaches’ on Congress’ powers and that Congress must pass authorizing legislation to enforce the 14th Amendment, which the Colorado Supreme Court cited as the basis for removing Trump. 

‘The radical left consistently does what they claim their opponents are doing. While President Biden and his allies claim they are defending democracy, their supporters are working to undermine democracy by banning Biden’s likely general election opponent from appearing on the ballot,’ Cruz said in a statement to Fox News Digital. ‘The American people see through this, and I’m confident the Supreme Court will as well.’

Scalise said in a statement that the Colorado court is ‘setting a dangerous precedent’ and ‘subverting the will of the American people.’

‘Not only does the Colorado Supreme Court have no authority to remove President Trump from the ballot in the 2024 presidential election, but the broad and ill-defined justifications they use can easily be abused in the future to block political opponents from assuming office,’ he said. 

House Majority Whip Tom Emmer, R-Minn., one of the lawmakers who signed the brief, said ‘liberal activist judges’ are weaponizing the legal system against Trump ‘solely because they despise him.’

Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., another signer, said the Colorado Supreme Court ‘mis-stepped and overstepped.’

Lawmakers assert in the 29-page amicus brief that it infringes on the prerogatives of Congress members and argue the court overlooked various textual and structural limitations in Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which says no one shall assume office if they have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the U.S. government.

Additionally, they criticized the court for adopting a broad interpretation of what it means to ‘engage in insurrection,’ which they believe could result in the widespread misuse of the 14th Amendment against political opponents.

‘The Colorado Supreme Court’s decision severely intrudes on those congressional powers first by allowing enforcement of Section 3 without congressional authorization, and then by concluding that Section 3 authorizes a state to de-ballot a candidate,’ the brief states. ‘The Fourteenth Amendment expressly gives Congress the ‘power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.’’ 

‘In other words, Section 3 enforcement mechanisms are left to Congress, not to a patchwork of state officials and courts,’ lawmakers wrote. 

The brief states that if Congress decides to approve enforcement legislation outside of criminal contexts, it has the option to narrow down the scope by providing more specific definitions for terms like ‘engaging in’ and ‘insurrection.’ 

‘Congress could even require a factfinding process and standards of proof that accord with the gravity of the consequence,’ the brief read.

The brief contends that ‘in polarized times, it is easy to cast an opponent’s rhetoric about the outcome of elections as encouraging others to obstruct the peaceful transfer of power.’

‘According to President Biden, a sizable portion of the Republican electorate, if not all of it, is determined to destroy democracy,’ the brief read. ‘When partisan state officials believe so much is at stake, they may go to great lengths to interfere with the ordinary democratic process. That makes it all the more critical to minimize the partisan incentive to boot opponents off the ballot using the incredible sanction of Section 3.’ 

In December, the Colorado Supreme Court disqualified Trump from appearing on the state’s ballots in 2024.

The disqualification, which was made under the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, is related to the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021.

‘We do not reach these conclusions lightly,’ the court’s majority wrote. ‘We are mindful of the magnitude and weight of the questions now before us. We are likewise mindful of our solemn duty to apply the law, without fear or favor, and without being swayed by public reaction to the decisions that the law mandates we reach.’

In a previous ruling, Colorado District Judge Sarah B. Wallace allowed Trump to stay on the ballot, but found that Trump ‘engaged in insurrection’ for his role in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold said in a statement that she would ‘continue to follow court guidance on this important issue.’

‘The Colorado Supreme Court has ruled that Donald Trump is barred from the Colorado ballot for inciting the January 6 insurrection and attempting to overturn the 2020 Presidential Election. This decision may be appealed,’ Griswold wrote.

Fox News’ Bill Mears and Adam Sabes contributed to this report.