Sen. Reid: 'Not Going to Give Up' on Gun Legislation

Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call(WASHINGTON) -- Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says Congress will not give up the fight on gun legislation. He put on notice the Republicans -- and Democrats -- who voted against the bill.

"The writing is on the wall," Reid said Thursday, taking the rare move of calling out the four Democrats in his party, along with the Republicans, who opposed the background check proposal. "I'm here to tell you: We're not going to give up the fight."

Nearly sixth months after the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, family members read a roll call of the victims’ names Thursday at the Capitol. Some in the crowd wept when the age of the slain students -- 6 -- was read over and over.

"Sometimes people have very short memories," Reid said, sounding an apologetic note to the families about the lack of progress in Congress on the gun debate. "We can never take those names out of our hearts and minds."

Gilles Rousseau, whose daughter was a first grade teacher at Sandy Hook, traveled to Washington to press lawmakers for action. He has spent time over the last six months visiting town meetings of Sen. Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, who voted against the bill, and lobbying state legislatures like Nevada, where gun bills passed both chambers.

But he is upset at the inaction in Congress.

"It's so disappointing," Rousseau told ABC News. "How can they forget these 20 first graders? It should be a no-brainer. It is common sense."

Even though Senate leaders have pledged to hold another vote, the path forward remains a difficult one. Even if five more votes could be found in the Senate, the Republican-controlled House has shown little intention of taking up any gun measures.

"Congress cannot continue to allow these guns to be in the hands of madmen," said Jillian Soto, whose sister was killed in Newtown. "We will continue to fight until Congress makes us safe from gun violence."

President Obama and Vice President Biden are meeting with families of the victims of the Sandy Hook shooting Thursday, White House press secretary Jay Carney announced at the daily press briefing.

“We commend the families' courage and perseverance in continuing to press for common-sense legislation to reduce gun violence. And we want them to know that as we approach the six-month anniversary of that terrible day, we will never forget, and we will continue to fight alongside them,” Carney said.

Six months after the Newtown massacre the state police investigation is still unfinished.  State police had expected to release a comprehensive report about the shootings this month but say the magnitude of the crime and the depth of the investigation make meeting that goal impossible.

When the report is finished state police say they’re “hopeful we’ll be able to turn over to the families and to the public a complete overview of what happened.”

Copyright 2013 ABC News Radio

Supreme Court Affirmative Action Ruling Hinges on Justice Kennedy

iStockphoto/Thinkstock(WASHINGTON) -- The college admissions process has ended for many relieved high school seniors and anxious parents this year, but the Supreme Court -- after 8 months -- is still considering a major affirmative action case that could change how public universities formulate future incoming freshman classes.

At issue is a challenge to the admissions plan of the University of Texas.  Abigail Fisher, a white Texan, is challenging the program, arguing that she was denied admission to the school in 2008 based on the color of her skin.

Only eight justices will consider whether UT's plan violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution after Justice Elena Kagan recused herself, presumably because she dealt with the case in her previous job as solicitor general.

Newly released polls show that 76 percent of Americans are opposed to the consideration of an applicant's race as a factor in deciding admissions.

The Texas legislature passed the "Top Ten Percent Law" in 1997 that requires all Texas high school seniors in the top 10 percent of their class be automatically admitted to any Texas state university.  In addition to that program, the school considers race along with several socioeconomic factors for admission.

Fisher did not qualify for automatic admission.  Instead she competed with other non-Top-10 state applicants, some of whom were entitled to racial preferences.  She argues she was denied a fair chance at admission because of her race.

In court, her lawyers argued that "the Fourteenth Amendment requires an admissions process untainted by racial preferences absent a compelling, otherwise unsatisfied, government interest and narrow tailoring to advance that interest without undue infringement on the rights of non-preferred applicants."

They also argue that the top 10 percent plan has made UT one of the most diverse public universities in the nation and that the school did not need to overlay the successful race-neutral program with another one that considers race.

Lawyers for the University of Texas counter that the admissions plan is constitutional under the court's precedents.  Race is only "one modest factor among many" for the individualized considerations of applicants and that the program works to offset drawbacks of the 10 percent law to achieve the university's interest in a diverse student body.

U.S. Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli supports the UT plan.  He told the justices in court, "I think it is important, you honors, not just to the government, but to the country, that our universities have the flexibility to shape their environments and their educational experience to make a reality of the principle, that our strength comes from people of different races, different creeds, different cultures, uniting in a commitment to freedom, and to a more perfect union."

Court Precedent:

It was only in 2003 -- in a case called Grutter v. Bollinger -- that the Supreme Court took up a similar affirmative action case and narrowly upheld the limited use of race as a factor in law school admissions.  Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote the decision, but she has since been replaced by Justice Samuel Alito, who is more skeptical of racial classifications.

Although lawyers for Fisher say they are not asking for the court to directly overrule Grutter, Sotomayor expressed skepticism at oral arguments.

"So you don't want to overrule Grutter, you just want to gut it," she said.

Outcomes:

It seemed likely after arguments that at least four of the conservatives were poised to strike down UT's program.  But how broadly?  All eyes will be on Justice Anthony Kennedy, seen as a key vote on the issue.

He has said in the past that there is "no constitutional objection" to considering race as one modest factor among many others to achieve diversity.  But he has never voted in favor of a race-conscious plan.

Among the possibilities, the court could limit the ruling by saying that UT didn't need to overlay a race-conscious program over a race-neutral program (top 10 percent plan) that was already working.  Or it could rule more broadly and say, for example, that the lower court was wrong to defer to the university on the question of when it has reached sufficient diversity.

If the court rules by the end of the month to uphold UT's program, it will come as a relief to supporters of affirmative action.  Because Kagan is recused from the case, a 4-4 tie would leave the lower court decision in favor of the program intact, but have no broad precedential value.

The University of Texas is also challenging whether Fisher, who has now graduated from another university, has the legal right, or "standing," to bring the case.

Copyright 2013 ABC News Radio

Senate Panel Rejects Bid to Remove Commanders from Sexual Assault Cases

Win McNamee/Getty Images(WASHINGTON) -- The Senate Armed Services Committee has voted against Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand’s bill that would have taken military commanders out of the process of reviewing sexual assault cases.

Instead, the committee voted for an alternative proposal by Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., calling for automatic reviews of a commander’s decision not to prosecute a sexual assault case.

Last week, the Joint Chiefs of Staff came out against the proposal by Gillibrand, D-N.Y., saying it would undermine good order and discipline.

Earlier Wednesday, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel told the Senate Budget Committee that he was opposed to the legislation.

Hagel said he is a firm believer in accountability, and ”if you don’t hold people accountable then you’re not going to fix the problem. You can pass all the laws you want and that isn’t going to work.”

On Wednesday, Gillibrand made impassioned pleas in favor of her bill at Wednesday’s markup of the National Defense Authorization Act.   She told members of the committee that victims have repeatedly said that they fear retaliation in their units if they report a sexual assault.  

“So we can believe them or we cannot believe them,” Gillibrand said. "Many here don’t believe the victims...They don’t believe chain of command is the problem. I urge support of our original markup."

Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., responded by saying everyone on the committee “believes the victims....I don’t think that distinguishes anyone on this committee from each other.”

Kaine added, “When our heroes have this problem that is so serious, it’s not just a stain on our military, it’s a stain on our country.”

Though her bill eventually was defeated 17-9, one of the bill’s supporters, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said he’d changed his vote as a result of Gillibrand’s arguments.

He said he was swayed by her arguments that removing commanders from the process in the British and Israeli militaries had led to an increase in reporting of sexual assault cases. He suggested that if Levin’s amendment passed and the level of reporting remains “abysmal,” then Gillibrand’s proposal should be revisited.

But even some of the most outspoken critics of sexual assault in the military said they could not vote for Gillibrand’s legislation.

Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., a former prosecutor, said she respected Gililbrand “with all of my heart” and wanted to do away with sexual assault in the military, but she said she couldn’t vote for Gillibrand’s bill.

She pointed out that military commanders will often proceed with a criminal case where civilian prosecutors might not because of the of the “he said-she said” nature of cases. She added that there was not any data to support the assertion that removing commanders from sexual assault cases is going to have a positive impact on retaliation in units.

However, McCaskill said she agreed with Gillibrand on one thing: “We are not going to give up focusing on this problem. We aren’t going anywhere.”

She cautioned military leaders against thinking that the debate over sexual assault would end with congressional votes.

“This has just begun,” she said, warning senior commanders that Congress would “hold your feet to the fire.”

Copyright 2013 ABC News Radio

Rep. Franks Clarifies Rape Comment, Blames Dems for Distortion

Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call(WASHINGTON) -- Rep. Trent Franks, who has come under fire on Wednesday for comments he made during a committee markup on his bill to ban all abortions after 20 weeks without exception, worked to clarify that his point, however jumbled, was that “pregnancies from rape that result in abortion after the sixth month are very rare.”

During the committee markup Wednesday morning, Franks, R-Ariz., said, “The incidence of rape resulting in pregnancy are very low.”

Democrats quickly pounced on the comments.

“Keep in mind the comments taken completely out of context,” Franks told three reporters in the Speaker’s Lobby Wednesday evening during votes. “This had nothing to do with the way that they tried to portray it. This bill doesn’t do anything to protect the unborn child until they enter the sixth month. By then all questions related to rape or incest are pretty much long since dealt with.”

Franks blamed Democrats for distorting his comment for their political advantage, complaining that Democrats will “talk about anything except six-month babies being tortuously murdered.”

“It’s still a distortion and they know it, and there’s not much I can do with it,” he said. “Unfortunately, perhaps I assisted them a little bit in the phraseology that allowed them to do it, but I will say without any hesitation that the question, the issue that I was responding to was how many pregnancies from rape result in a decision to abort the sixth month or after.”

“Most of the time when a mother has carried a baby to the sixth month, the notion that they abort because they were raped at that point is very rare. Very rare,” he explained. “I don’t know of any, but to say very rare is a very safe and accurate statement.”

Asked whether he believes the rate of pregnancy resulting from rape, about five percent, is rare, Franks said it is a separate question but he thought “that’s about the same as if it weren’t rape.”

“Those pregnancies from rape that result in the mother deciding to abort after the sixth month begins are very rare, and that is what we were trying to say,” he maintained. “That was the context. That was the debate we were having, that was the discussion that was being had there.”

Franks, 55, acknowledged that he talked to the “highest echelons” of House Republican leadership about the hullabaloo, but declined to elaborate on the discussion or reveal to whom he spoke about it.

“They understand,” he said. “They’re not persuaded by the false characterization of my comments.”

A spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner declined to divulge whether Boehner talked to Franks about the comments, saying, “We don’t tend to discuss the speaker’s conversations with members.”

A spokesman to House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, however, confirmed that the leader spoke to Franks on Wednesday about the comment.

Copyright 2013 ABC News Radio

Secretary Kerry Defends NSA Program, 'Welcomes' Dept. Scrutiny

State Department photo/ Public Domain(WASHINGTON) -- At a joint press conference Wednesday with United Kingdom Foreign Secretary William Hague, Secretary of State John Kerry defended the National Security Agency, saying that Congress understands the program, passed it and voted for it several times. He also said the judiciary branch has also reviewed it and the program and has been actively engaged.

“This is a three-branch-of-government effort to keep America safe. And in fact, it has not read emails or looked at or listened to conversations, and -- the exception of where a court may have made some decision, which was predicated on appropriate evidence,” said Kerry.

Kerry called the efforts of the domestic and international law enforcement community “valiant” and said the program has protected Americans “in remarkable ways to prevent some very terrible events from taking place.”

“I think they have done so in a remarkable balance of the values of our nation with respect to privacy, freedom and the Constitution. And I think, over time, this will withstand scrutiny, and people will understand that,” said Kerry.

The secretary also spoke about the controversy over the independent investigator memo and draft report accusing the State Department of interfering with investigations of serious or criminal wrongdoing by State employees, including a sitting ambassador. Kerry said he “welcomes” the scrutiny.

“I can tell you, as a former prosecutor, I take very seriously an investigative process, and I am confident that the OIG's process, where he has invited outsiders to come and review whatever took place a year ago, will be reviewed. And I welcome that. I think the department welcomes that, because we do want the highest standards applied," he said.

Copyright 2013 ABC News Radio

Obama Stumps for Ed Markey in Massachusetts Senate Run

The Guardian via Getty Images(ROXBURY CROSSING, Mass.) -- Seven months after winning re-election, President Obama is back on the campaign trail. This time, he’s lending his political prowess to stump for Senate hopeful Rep. Ed Markey.

“Ed has a track record, and that's why you know what he's going to do when he's a senator from the commonwealth of Massachusetts. He's not somebody who comes out of nowhere and says he's for something, and then maybe he's for something else,” Obama said in his campaign cadence at a rally in Roxbury Crossing, Mass.

“He's been steady, and he's been constant, working on your behalf. He's been strong, and he's been principled. And that's the kind of leader we need right now,” he said.

Markey is running against private equity executive and political newcomer Gabriel Gomez in the special election to fill now-Secretary of State John Kerry’s seat, a race that is critical for both parties as they try to claim the traditionally Democratic-leaning state.

“I need folks in the United States Senate who every day are waking up thinking about the people who sent them there and trying to figure out, how do I make sure that they are getting a brighter future? That's who Ed Markey is. I need Ed Markey in the United States Senate,” Obama said to applause.

“We've got a whole lot of Democrats in this state, and a whole lot of Obama voters,” Obama said, his shirt sleeves rolled up. “But you can't just turn out during a presidential election. You've got to turn out in this election. You can't think, oh, I did my work in 2012. You've got some work to do right now in 2013. You can't just pat your back and say, well, I knocked on some doors back in November. I need you knocking on some doors right now in June.”

Before the rally, the president and Markey made time for some retail politics, making a surprise stop for lunch at Charlie's Sandwich Shoppe, "where hash rules,” in Boston's south end.

After shaking hands and posing for pictures, the president urged diners to get to the polls and send Markey to the Senate. “This guy’s been fighting for Massachusetts for a very long time,” he said.

“It seems like there’s an election every other week, but this one’s important,” he said. “You guys remember to vote now.”

Copyright 2013 ABC News Radio

Activist Who Secretly Recorded Mitch McConnell Still in Limbo

Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call(WASHINGTON) -- It has been nearly two weeks since a liberal activist and freelance journalist named Curtis Morrison publicly admitted to secretly recording Sen. Mitch McConnell earlier this year. But federal authorities have yet to say whether he is being prosecuted.

“Earlier this year, I secretly made an audio recording of Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., the most powerful Republican on the planet, at his campaign headquarters in Kentucky,” Morrison wrote in a May 31 Salon.com article. “The released portion of the recording clocks in at less than 12 minutes, but those few minutes changed my life.”

Morrison said he leaked the recording to Mother Jones, which published it in April.

McConnell called the recording of a Feb. 2 strategy session at his campaign office in Kentucky a ”Watergate-style bugging,” and FBI spokesman Paul Bresson told ABC News in early April that the bureau was looking into the matter.

The FBI declined to comment Wednesday, as did the McConnell campaign.

The recording features McConnell and his aides devising tactics for discrediting actress Ashley Judd, who, at the time, was considering entering the U.S. Senate race against McConnell. She ultimately decided not to run.

“I assume most of you have played the game Whac-A-Mole?” McConnell is heard saying on the tape. “This is the Whac-A-Mole period of the campaign, when anybody sticks their head up, do them out.”

Federal law prohibits individuals from conducting electronic recordings of others unless the recorder is either part of the conversation or they obtain the consent of at least one person being recorded. A similar law is on the books in Kentucky.

But in an interview with a local Kentucky television station earlier this month, Morrison said he could make a case for his innocence.

“I did not feel like I was breaking the law when I did what I did,” he told ABC News affiliate WHAS11 News in Louisville.  “From my understanding of both Kentucky statutes and federal law, I think the case can be made that I did not break the law.”

In his Salon article, Morrison, a former operative for liberal group Progress Kentucky, said an assistant U.S. attorney called his lawyer in late May to arrange a meeting and to say that the case had been referred to a grand jury. Morrison, 44, also disclosed that he had left Kentucky for California, planning to attend law school starting this fall.

Morrison also suggested that he was willing to face the consequences of his actions: “If I get whacked in the process, so be it,” he wrote.

And he even went a step further: “If given another chance to record him, I’d do it again.”

The Department of Justice has not responded to a request for comment on where the Morrison investigation stands.

Copyright 2013 ABC News Radio

Manchin Wishes Bloomberg Would Help Educate Gun Owners

Chris Maddaloni/CQ Roll Call(WASHINGTON) -- Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, the Democratic architect of the failed gun legislation, said Wednesday he wishes New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and others would educate gun owners and voters about background check legislation to help correct misimpressions that he believes were planted by the gun lobby, rather than criticizing Democratic senators for opposing the bill.

“I need help in getting that message out,” Manchin said, surrounded in his office by Newtown families.

“There’s going to be an election in 2014. That’s the time, when we’ve exhausted every other avenue, of getting the message out. Then do what you’ve got to do,” Manchin said. “Now, we just need a little bit of help. We need a little bit of help.”

Several Newtown family members stopped by Manchin’s office Wednesday during their lobbying trip to the Capitol. Nearly six months after the shooting, they all pledged to keep fighting for the gun legislation.

“We’re not going away,” said Nicole Hockley, whose son, Dylan, was killed in the shooting, echoing the sentiment of other family members in the room.

Manchin said the legislation remains on the “front burner,” but conceded the pathway forward in the Senate was challenging. He said the bill would likely be brought up for another vote later this year.

Copyright 2013 ABC News Radio

Boehner Calls Immigration Overhaul ‘Important Project’

JEWEL SAMAD/AFP/Getty Images(WASHINGTON) -- House Speaker John Boehner on Wednesday once again expressed support for an overhaul the nation’s immigration laws, but maintained that the House will consider its own ideas rather than accept outright the Senate’s final product on which the upper chamber began working this week.

The Judiciary committee would “certainly yield a product that we expect to bring to the floor” and he indicated the House bipartisan Gang of Seven’s “really good work” would also be incorporated into the lower chamber’s efforts to change the law, Boehner said.

“Reforming our immigration system is an important project of this Congress. We’ve got big problems, and they’ve gone on far too long, and it’s time for us to address them,” Boehner, R-Ohio, said. “This is the wheels of Congress working. [It's] not glamorous, but a lot of people putting a lot of effort in to address a problem in our country, and I’m glad they’re doing it.”

Rep. Xavier Becerra, one of four Democrats in the House Immigration Group, told reporters Tuesday that he believed the group would finish drafting its proposal by the end of next week.

“We feel pretty good that in the next week we can finish our language working with legislative counsel and all the rest to just get a bill out there,” Becerra, D-Calif., said. “It is important that we get it done.”

“With regard to the speaker, I think the speaker sees the same time horizon that most of us do,” he continued. “You really got to work something that’s as important and as difficult as immigration – fixing a broken immigration system – you have to give it time.”

Copyright 2013 ABC News Radio

ACLU Files Lawsuit over Phone Record Collection Program

Photos.com/Thinkstock(WASHINGTON) -- The American Civil Liberties Union sued the federal government on Tuesday, alleging the National Security Agency violates Americans' Fourth Amendment privacy rights by harvesting phone records in the name of preventing terrorists attacks.

In a statement, Jameel Jaffer, the ACLU's deputy legal director, said, "The program goes far beyond even the permissive limits set by the Patriot Act and represents a gross infringement of the freedom of association and the right to privacy."

The program came to light last week after NSA contractor Edward Snowden leaked documents to The Guardian and Washington Post about an NSA order requiring Verizon to turn over phone records that includes names of the caller, the person being called and when and where the call was made.

The ACLU made note that it is also a customer of Verizon Business Network Services.

Alex Abdo, a staff attorney for the ACLU's National Security Project, added, "The crux of the government's justification for the program is the chilling logic that it can collect everyone's data now and ask questions later."

President Obama and various lawmakers have defended the program, saying no one monitors conversations and that the program it is under strict oversight from Congress and the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

Copyright 2013 ABC News Radio