Tag

Featured

Browsing

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell lambasted a proposal from Vice President Kamala Harris to eliminate the filibuster to pass abortion rights legislation — warning Democrats that they will rue the move when Republicans next control Washington.

“What they want to do is break the institution in order to achieve what they want to achieve,” he said in an interview Thursday.

McConnell spoke two days after Harris told Wisconsin Public Radio that “we should eliminate the filibuster for Roe” — in other words, changing the Senate’s rules to exempt a vote to restore the abortion rights guarantee under Roe v. Wade from the chamber’s usual 60-vote threshold for legislation.

Such a scenario would be likely only if Harris wins the presidency and Democrats keep the Senate and retake the House majority — currently a tall order for a party facing a tough Senate map. Notably, two former Democrats who blocked prior attempts to undermine the 60-vote rule — Sens. Joe Manchin (I-W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.) — are retiring.

But McConnell, delivering some of his most pointed and substantial criticism of a Harris proposal since she became a presidential candidate, said that the proposal would spell the end of the filibuster altogether, explaining that her suggested exemption for Roe would put the chamber down a steep and slippery slope.

“There’s no way you can have a minor carve-out” for one issue, he said. “Because then you’ll come up with the next idea that’s more important than the rule — then, practically it’s over.”

Democrats last tried to break the filibuster to pass voting rights legislation in the early years of President Joe Biden’s administration, when they had control of both the House and Senate. Manchin and Sinema’s opposition tanked that effort, but the 2022 Supreme Court ruling overturning Dobbs has focused new attention on the rule — with Harris, then a senator, joining many other Democrats in backing filibuster changes in the immediate aftermath of the decision.

Such a move, Harris said Tuesday, would “get us to the point where 51 votes would be what we need to actually put back in law the protections for reproductive freedom and for the ability of every person and every woman to make decisions about their own body and not have their government tell them what to do.”

McConnell said that would permanently change the nature of the Senate, for the worse.

“The Senate was designed to do one of two things: Kill bad stuff or force a reasonable compromise — and that’s what it’s done all along,” he said.

The Harris campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

McConnell warned that if they adjusted the filibuster rules Democrats would then use simple-majority votes to entrench their power by admitting D.C. and Puerto Rico as states, likely adding four additional Democratic senators. “Then,” he said, they’ll “go after the Supreme Court.”

“So it would fundamentally, in my view, turn America to California,” he continued. “And I think that is a major structural change to the country.”

McConnell has long been a fierce defender of the Senate’s legislative filibuster, withstanding public pressure to change the rules during Donald Trump’s presidency and then openly encouraging Manchin and Sinema as they stood athwart their fellow Democrats’ recent push.

If Democrats do go nuclear, McConnell said Thursday, Republicans will also take advantage of the new system: “They never think about what might happen when the shoe is on the other foot.”

Asked what bills Republicans would pass without the filibuster, McConnell said, “I don’t know, but I’m sure they wouldn’t like it.”

Over the past decade, a similar dynamic played out over the use of the filibuster for Senate confirmations. In 2013, McConnell cautioned then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) not to break the filibuster for lower-level court nominations, which Republicans had been blocking.

“You’ll regret this, and you may regret this a lot sooner than you think,” McConnell said at the time.

When Republicans took the chamber a few years later, McConnell cited Reid’s rule change to justify going nuclear for Supreme Court nominations — helping Trump confirm three conservative justices in what’s become the most sweeping overhaul to the court in a generation.

Asked if he has any regrets about that move, McConnell said he did not.

“I said to my members, if a candidate like [Neil] Gorsuch — who is so obviously totally qualified — can’t get 60 votes, there’s nobody we can pick that we’re comfortable with that can get confirmed,” he said. “And so we lowered the threshold for the Supreme Court.”

Like this content? Consider signing up for POLITICO’s Playbook newsletter.

The Secret Service didn’t testify Thursday before a House task force investigating the two assassination attempts against former President Donald Trump. But it’s the main focus of the panel’s first public hearing.

The House panel used a hearing with state and local law enforcement, as well as a former Secret Service official, to drill down into the decisions made in the lead-up to and during the July 13 shooting at Trump’s rally in Butler, Pennsylvania.

Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.) set the tone during his opening statement, saying the shooting was not prevented “because of failures by the Secret Service.”

“The Secret Service was not assertive on key decisions,” Kelly said, comparing communications and messages through the various layers of law enforcement to “the old children’s game, telephone.”

State and local law enforcement officials described a lack of communication and guidance from the Secret Service, and said the agency appeared to lack key resources during the event. John Herold, who is with the Pennsylvania State Police, contrasted the resources for a Trump 2020 rally with the event earlier this year.

“The Secret Service did not have a lot of the resources that were in Butler for 2020, and this event on July 13 they seemed like they had a lot less resources,” Herold said.

The task force heard from two other local law enforcement officials who were in Butler on July 13: Drew Blasko and Edward Lenz, as well as Ariel Goldschmidt, the Allegheny County medical examiner, and Patrick Sullivan, a former Secret Service agent.

The officials were grilled on what communications they had with the Secret Service ahead of the rally. Both Lenz and Herold told the panel that they did a walk through of the rally site with the Secret Service in advance of July 13. The agency did not bring up how to secure the building where the gunman, Thomas Crooks, was able to access the roof, the witnesses said.

Lenz also told the committee that local law enforcement snipers didn’t receive guidance from the Secret Service about how to cover the building where the gunman ultimately was, and that he did not believe Secret Service agents could hear their radio communications on that day. The law enforcement officials also told the committee that they were not made aware of foreign threats against Trump, a reference to Iranian assassination threats.

Lenz also told the committee that, at 6:11 p.m., he ordered a quick-reaction force to deploy to the building where the gunman was and, prior to finishing that transmission, “you can hear the shots being fired through my open microphone.”

The task force has until mid-December to wrap up its work and issue a report on its findings and recommendations to prevent future violence against candidates. Its purview now also includes the second attempted assassination against Trump in West Palm Beach, Florida. The task force was expected to travel to Florida on Friday, but the trip was canceled as the state braces for Hurricane Helene.

The hearing comes a day after a Senate committee released an interim report that found sweeping errors by the Secret Service in the lead-up to and during the July 13 rally.

Reps. Eli Crane (R-Ariz.) and Cory Mills (R-Fla.) also testified to the committee on Thursday. The two GOP lawmakers have been part of a group of House Republicans who have been running their own investigation into the July 13 shooting after they weren’t tapped by leadership to join the task force. Unlike the task force, they do not have subpoena power, but said they would share any information they get with the House panel.

Crane, during his statement, said that they believe then-Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle lied when she testified before Congress earlier this year about why law enforcement was not placed on the roof, where Crooks ultimately fired his shots.

Crane added that he believed Trump should not go back to Butler, Pennsylvania, for a planned rally next month, and that the Secret Service should have tried to dissuade the campaign in the lead-up to July 13.

“I strongly suggest that he and his campaign avoid this site on Oct. 5 and in the future,” Crane said.

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) said Thursday he will no longer voluntarily cooperate with a House Ethics Committee investigation into his conduct, calling the probe “uncomfortably nosey.”

In a lengthy letter to the committee posted to social media platform X, Gaetz said he’s aware of a subpoena from the committee but that it has not yet been served to him. He “unequivocally” denied sexual activity with anyone under the age of 18 and said he had “not used drugs which are illegal, absent some law allowing use in a jurisdiction of the United States.”

Gaetz has denied wrongdoing. The Justice Department conducted its own investigation as part of a sex trafficking probe and, according to Gaetz’s lawyers and DOJ officials, decided not to bring criminal charges.

The lawmaker said the investigation seeks to remove him from office and smear his name. “Asking about my sexual history as a single man with adult women is a bridge too far,” he said.

Gaetz is an outspoken supporter of former President Donald Trump and represents a deep red seat in northwest Florida.

Rep. Clay Higgins (R-La.) infuriated many of his House colleagues with his since-deleted racist X post about Haitian migrants, prompting a top Black Democrat to introduce a measure to formally reprimand him that will likely see a floor vote.

Congressional Black Caucus Chair Rep. Steven Horsford (D-Nev.) is expected to force action on the censure resolution when the House returns after the November election. Disciplinary measures like censure can be “privileged,” meaning they can bypass committee on a fast track to the House floor.

And while it is unclear how many Republicans would back the resolution, at least one House Republican told POLITICO they plan to support it. Others said they were flabbergasted that Higgins refused to admit fault and that Speaker Mike Johnson side-stepped a public reprimand.

While Congressional Black Caucus members — and House Democrats, broadly — have voiced anger with Higgins’ social media language, the House can’t act on the censure resolution while the chamber is out of session. It’s also unclear if Democrats are going to use the post in the final month of the campaign to tie his words to other Republicans or make the post a campaign issue more broadly.

But Democrats still say they are incensed and want to seek punishment for him in Congress. Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) urged the bloc to support the censure against Higgins.

“We urge all of our colleagues in Congress to support the Congressional Black Caucus’ resolution censuring Representative Higgins and holding him accountable for his dangerous comments when the House returns in November,” she said in a statement.

Higgins had written a now-deleted post on the platform X — using his official congressional account — that called Haitians “wild” and added: “Eating pets, vudu, nastiest country in the western hemisphere, cults, slapstick gangster … but damned if they don’t feel all sophisticated now, filing charges against our President and VP. All these thugs better get their mind right and their ass out of our country before January 20th.”

He later doubled down that “it’s all true,” when asked by CNN about his now-deleted post. When asked for comment, Higgins’ office pointed to comments to reporters Thursday morning where Higgins said “you never want to intentionally hurt someone’s feelings” and said the post was “intended for Haitian gangs. I mean Haiti is a country, not a color.”

Higgins, who hails from the same state as the top two Republicans in House leadership, has seen a series of promotions with Johnson holding the gavel, including being named a GOP impeachment manager and a member of the highly-sought after Trump assassination task force, among other leadership nods.

If the effort falters when the House returns, Democrats might resurface it or find other ways to punish Higgins if control of the House flips. House censures have become more common in recent years. House Democrats censured Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.) last Congress after he posted an anime video depicting him committing violence against Democrats, and Republicans issued the formal reprimand to Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.) this Congress.

Rep. Rashida Tlaib called on Secretary of State Antony Blinken to resign in a Thursday social media post, citing a ProPublica story alleging he had rejected internal government findings about Israel blocking aid to Gaza.

“[Blinken] lied. People went hungry, and some died. He needs to resign now,” she wrote on X. Tlaib (D-Mich.), a progressive and the only Palestinian American in Congress, has been a vocal critic of the U.S. government’s policy towards Israel.

ProPublica reported earlier this week that Blinken had delivered a toned-down message to Congress in May that had contradicted internal government findings that Israel had blocked deliveries of humanitarian aid into Gaza amid the Israel-Hamas war. The internal findings, ProPublica reported, could have implications for U.S. military aid to Israel because of U.S. laws — which require an end to weapons shipments to countries that block U.S.-backed humanitarian aid.

The State Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Many lawmakers left Washington on Wednesday evening after funding the government through Dec. 20, but a bipartisan group of senators is due to meet Thursday morning with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Capitol Hill.

The session will include Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. Zelenskyy will meet with other top officials separately, like House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and House Foreign Affairs ranking member Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.).

The timing is delicate for Zelenskyy, as he faces GOP criticism over comments in which he called Republican vice presidential nominee Sen. JD Vance (Ohio) “too extreme” and investigations of a Pennsylvania weapons factory visit.

Zelenskyy is trying to shore up support and sell Washington on his strategy for victory in the conflict with Russia. For now, many lawmakers say the Ukrainian leader seems to have what he needs to keep up the fight. “Right now, he said he has what he needs,” said Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), who met with Zelenskyy earlier in the week.

Senate floor recap: Schumer announced the next Senate vote would be Nov. 12 — and moved to end debate on two more judicial nominees. (Two judges for federal tax courts were confirmed by voice vote.)

In addition, senators cleared a bill renaming a federal building in San Francisco after the late Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.).

Senate Democrats keep talking about Texas and Florida.

As they look for alternative paths to keep the majority — with polling growing dismal for them in Montana — more and more Democrats are pointing to the two southern states as possible offensive targets.

Polls suggest tight races as incumbent Sens. Rick Scott of Florida and Ted Cruz of Texas fight for reelection. But ad spending is a zero-sum game, and both Florida and Texas are massive states with pricey media markets. Seriously competing in either would mean less for Democratic candidates in key battleground races that are sure to tighten in the final weeks.

And dividing spending between both Texas and Florida could mean failing to reach a critical mass in either place. But few Democrats are willing to provoke consternation by publicly picking one over the other. They want to have it all — a “two-state strategy,” as Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) called it.

“We should go for the gold, reach for the stars,” he said.

“I’m glad that we’re looking at not just one or the other, but both,” said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) “I don’t think it’s a matter of choosing,” declared Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), a former chair of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

“We should take a positive view in both and invest in both,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.).

“I’m bullish on Florida and Texas, and I want you to publish that,” Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.).

But behind the unified optimism, there’s little clarity on how to actually go after the two states. Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.), the chair of Senate Democrats’ campaign arm, has said he is looking at investing in both — but is quick to note that those decisions will be driven by a number of metrics, and there are plenty of other competing races Democrats need to fund.

“We’re looking at numbers, and we’re making investments where we think we get our best bang for our dollar,” Peters said. “They’re both great opportunities for us.”

Both states are large and heavily populated, with several of the country’s most expensive media markets — which will only get more costly as the election nears. That means Democrats would need to spend huge sums to launch credible offensives in Florida or Texas, especially if they try for both.

And even then money is no guarantee for success. Then-Rep. Val Demings spent some $49 million on ads in Florida in the 2022 midterms, according to AdImpact, a media tracking firm, and lost by double-digits. In Texas in 2020, Democrats collectively spent $43.8 million on ads, and MJ Hegar lost by 10 points.

When asked whether the party had sufficient resources to play in both states, the Democratic senators’ answers were less confident. Many said they weren’t sure what it would take to be truly competitive or that they trusted the DSCC and Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer to figure it out.

“It’s a resource issue,” Sen. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) said. “We’re trying to raise more money.”

Pressure is mounting on Democrats to figure out a strategy for going on offense in Texas or Florida — or, they claim, both — as Sen. Jon Tester’s (D-Mont.) reelection bid looks increasingly difficult. Polling has turned against him, and the state’s media markets are effectively maxed out. National Democrats have made no serious effort to flip any Republican seats, given the number of states they’re trying to defend. If Tester loses, Senate Republicans would almost certainly have an outright majority.

The sudden scramble to look at Texas or Florida is inspired by both the states themselves and the candidates. Democrats are excited about both Rep. Colin Allred of Texas and former Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell of Florida, and Allred in particular has become a fundraising dynamo. And Cruz and Scott only narrowly beat back their opponents in 2018.

But national Democrats have largely stayed out of the two states this cycle. In Florida, for example, Scott has spent or booked almost $13 million on ads, while the Mucarsel-Powell campaign has put in $8 million, according to AdImpact. The Scott-supporting super PAC, Project Rescue America, has spent just under $3 million. In Texas, Cruz has millions in help from Club for Growth’s PAC, the state Republican Party and others — while Allred is effectively fending for himself.

The late attention is prompting some frustration from Democrats who wanted to see it months ago, when ad rates were more affordable.

“Late cash is inefficient cash. Democrats have not figured out the lesson that $100 million in the last 30 days isn’t as important as $20 million five months ago,” said Democratic Miami-based pollster Fernand Amandi. “We have seen this movie before.”

Kimberly Leonard, Nicholas Wu, Anthony Adragna and Katherine Tully-McManus contributed to this report.

Ukraine’s president is in the fight of his life. Again.

Volodymyr Zelenskyy is racing to secure more U.S. military aid — and broader authorization to use Western-supplied weapons — as Russia makes slow-but-steady progress on the battlefield, his country’s energy grid nears the point of collapse, and Ukraine confronts the possibility of the reelection of a hostile Donald Trump.

All that makes the stakes of Zelenskyy’s visit this week to the U.S. and the U.N. incredibly high — even for someone Trump derided as “the greatest salesman in history” for his ability to persuade the U.S. to provide aid.

The Biden administration will announce new funding for Ukraine but does not appear ready to agree to one of Zelenskyy’s main requests: that the U.S. lifts restrictions on American-made missiles, allowing Kyiv to strike deeper into Russia.

President Joe Biden has been reluctant to grant that request. The administration isn’t convinced it would change the trajectory of the war and believes it could cause Putin to further escalate, according to two senior administration officials. Both were granted anonymity to publicly discuss private deliberations.

And that ask — which has also divided Ukraine’s European allies — appears to be at the centerpiece of the much-hyped “victory plan” that Zelenskyy is expected to present to Biden at the White House on Thursday, according to one of the officials.

Zelenskyy is also expected to discuss the plan with Vice President Kamala Harris in a separate meeting Thursday. And he will present it to prominent lawmakers on Capitol Hill, including the top Democrats and Republicans on the Armed Services Committees and the foreign policy committees.

In general, much of Washington is still on board with helping Ukraine fend off Russia in a 2 ½-year-old war that has left an estimated 1 million people killed or wounded on both sides.

The Biden administration is preparing a few big spending packages for Ukraine, including a $375 million drawdown of U.S. military equipment to send to Kyiv right away, and a $2.4 billion package expected to be announced Thursday while Zelenslyy is visiting the White House.

The larger package, confirmed by two U.S. officials granted anonymity to speak publicly about upcoming aid for Ukraine, will be spent on U.S. defense manufacturers to build new weapons and equipment for Ukraine, as opposed to pulling it from existing U.S. stockpiles.

The $375 million is part of a remaining $5.9 billion in presidential drawdown authority authorized by Congress in April as part of a wider $61 billion Ukraine aid package.

A preview of the new funding package came Wednesday. The White House said in a statement following a meeting between Biden and Zelenskyy on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly that the U.S. had “directed a surge in U.S. security assistance to Ukraine, which will help Ukraine win.”

Zelenskyy’s appeals to congressional leaders will likely add to the pressure the Biden administration is facing to relax restrictions on Kyiv’s use of donated weapons against targets in Russian territory.

But there’s also selling for Zelenskyy’s Capitol Hill backers to do.

“At this point, we need to make the case more strongly to the administration that they need to provide permission for him to strike deeper into Russia. I’ve been advocating it for weeks and months now. I’m immensely frustrated by the short leash that’s been put on Ukraine,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.). “And I’m just going to continue pounding and pummeling every official who has anything to do with the decision.”

Zelenskyy now has to beat back controversy about his Sunday visit to a munitions factory in Scranton, Pennsylvania, where he was flanked by two of the state’s vulnerable Democratic lawmakers. House Republicans have opened an investigation into whether taxpayer funds were misused in providing security to the event and Speaker Mike Johnson called on him to fire his ambassador to Washington, Oksana Markarova, over her role in planning the appearance.

The timing couldn’t be more delicate for Zelenskyy, as the election looms and a Trump victory calls into question the future of U.S. support for Ukraine. His visit also comes as Russia’s relentless attacks on Ukraine’s energy grid raise the threat of even more hardship for the people of Ukraine.

Ukraine’s supporters on Capitol Hill hope Zelenskyy’s visit could spur a breakthrough on loosening the rules of engagement and give Kyiv a free hand to hit Russian targets with the Army Tactical Missile System and other long-range weapons provided by the West.

“The history here is that President Biden has done all the right things, just a little bit later than I would like,” Blumenthal said. “So, there’s more than ample reason for hope.”

Senate Foreign Relations Chair Ben Cardin (D-Md.), who met with Zelenskyy on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly and has urged the White House to approve Ukraine’s use of U.S.-donated weapons to strike deeper inside Russia, said it remains “an active discussion.”

“So our objective is to keep bipartisan support, and do what we need to do to help him, recognizing that it’s a struggle, and he’s done incredible things,” Cardin said in an interview. “I think he probably wants to get the [White House’s] sign off on the arms he needs, particularly as relates to defense, longer-range missiles.”

Top House Republicans, meanwhile, are also putting pressure on the Biden administration to release an unclassified strategy for the war, required by Congress as part of the April aid package. The administration sent lawmakers a classified version, but six House Republican chairs of national security panels argued in a joint statement Wednesday that “all of Congress and the American people deserve to understand how their hard-earned tax dollars are being spent.”

Biden has expressed a commitment to keep helping Ukraine, vowing at his farewell address to the United Nations that he would stand with the war-torn nation. But while U.S. officials are still publicly expressing the belief that Ukraine can fend off Russia, they no longer publicly voice the idea of regaining all its territory.

Biden and his inner circle are aware that time may not be on their side, according to the two officials. Biden fears that U.S. aid to Ukraine would likely end if Trump wins in November, destabilizing the conflict and likely emboldening Putin, according to the officials. Still, the president’s aides have long noticed a correlation between high-profile Zelenskyy media moments and a rise in polling support among Americans for Ukraine and hope this week will deliver that again.

Zelenskyy is also drawing Republican fire for an interview with The New Yorker published Sunday, in which he called Trump running mate Sen. JD Vance — who has called for ending U.S. support for Ukraine and for Kyiv to surrender territory to Russia — “too radical.”

Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) condemned Zelensky’s actions, saying, “It’s the height of stupidity and arrogance for Zelenskyy to be weighing in on our elections and campaigning for candidates. As Americans, this is our election, and we don’t need foreign leaders on U.S. soil interfering and taking sides.”

Meanwhile, as the House tackles a stopgap spending patch to avert a government shutdown, Johnson said he didn’t have time to meet with Zelenskyy.

“I had a very busy schedule this week. If you hadn’t noticed,” he told reporters.

Asked if it would be tougher for Ukraine to secure future U.S. support if Markarova, the Ukrainian ambassador, stays in place, Johnson demurred.

“I’m not going to even project what any of this may mean, but I do hope that Zelenskyy does the right thing,” he said. “I think it was wildly inappropriate what happened. And we cannot have foreign nations interfering in our elections.”

As recently as this weekend, it sounded like Zelenskyy would have a meeting with Trump. But the former president’s campaign now says a meeting is not on the books. In the rally Monday, when Trump called Zelenskyy “the greatest salesman in history” he also said the Ukrainian leader wants Harris “to win this election so badly.”

Still, some Republican allies of Ukraine are sticking up for its president. Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) said he hadn’t seen Zelenskyy’s comments about Vance and waved off criticism about the factory visit.

“It strikes me as appropriate for Americans to realize how many U.S. jobs are involved in manufacturing ammunition and weaponry for Ukraine,” Wicker told reporters.

Asked about Trump’s characterization of Zelenskyy as a salesman, Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) said Ukraine’s fight isn’t about any one individual. Despite early U.S. estimates that Russia would conquer Ukraine within days, Ukrainians never backed down.

“They stood and fought,” Sullivan said. “That’s the most compelling reason, I think why people’s support them — not how articulate you may or may not be.”

Rep. Clay Higgins deleted a social media post Wednesday with racist tropes about Haitians after swift backlash from his congressional colleagues, including a call to censure him on the House floor.

Higgins (R-La.) wrote a post on the platform X — using his official congressional account — that called Haitians “wild” and added: “Eating pets, vudu, nastiest country in the western hemisphere, cults, slapstick gangster … but damned if they don’t feel all sophisticated now, filing charges against our President and VP. All these thugs better get their mind right and their ass out of our country before January 20th.”

He included a screenshot of a news story about a Haitian group filing charges against former President Donald Trump and Vice Presidential nominee JD Vance in response to false claims the Republican nominees had spread about migrants in Springfield, Ohio.

Higgins took down the post within a couple of hours, after several lawmakers confronted him on the House floor Wednesday and said it was inappropriate. That group included Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.) one of a handful of Black Republicans in Congress.

“I told him my thoughts. I thought it was not a good statement. I thought he should take it down, and we just talked it through, and he went ahead and did that, and that’s to his credit,” Donalds said.

Higgins’ office did not respond to a request for comment.

Rep. Steven Horsford (D-Nev.), chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, was also part of the group who spoke with Higgins. Shortly after, he took to the House floor surrounded by members of his bloc to denounce Higgins’ post, call for the House Ethics Committee to look into the matter and demand that Higgins be formally reprimanded on the House floor.

“These words on an official post do not reflect credibly on the House. in fact, they are inciting hate. They are inciting fear. And because of that it is time for this body to stand with one voice and to ensure that there’s accountability,” he said.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries slammed Higgins’ post as “disgusting and dangerous.”

Top Republicans said Higgins did the proper thing by deleting the post and that lawmakers needed to move on.

“He prayed about it, and he regretted it, and he pulled the post down. That’s what you want the gentleman to do. I’m sure he probably regrets some of the language he used. But you know, we move forward,” said Speaker Mike Johnson.

Higgins, a conservative Republican, has previously courted controversy on social media, and Facebook had once removed a post for “incitement” after he called for using force against armed protesters.

Anthony Adragna, Katherine Tully-McManus and Daniella Diaz contributed to this report.