“Yet we have to go and condemn the Russians, of course, when no one lost their life in an attempt to make sure the people of Crimea had a right to control their destiny and their own self-determination,” California Republican Rep. Dana Rohrabacher said. Rohrabacher was speaking at the mark-up of H.R. 4278, the Ukraine Support Act.

View Video ›

Rohrabacher also said Russia was "wrong" to send in a military force, but slammed "many people I worked with over the years" who "are still stuck in the Cold War." He added, "It is clear the people of Crimea would rather be part of Russia."

View Video ›

Ronan Farrow’s “Battle of the Day” poll was about whether a group of guys who parachuted off Freedom Tower in New York were “heroes” or “zeroes.” But the text on the screen looked pretty bad.

The question was about this video that was posted last night. In it, two guys BASE jump from One World Trade Center, the tallest building in the Western hemisphere. (They were later arrested.)

youtube.com

Here's the actual segment:

View Video ›

“Guys. Guys. Just was at rite aid with mitt romney.”

View Entire List ›

“The denial is an affront not only to this journalist, but to the entire White House press corps and to the principle of freedom of the press that we hold so dear,” said Steve Thomma, president of the White House Correspondents Association.

Larry Downing / Reuters / Reuters

WASHINGTON — The White House Correspondents Association sent a stern condemnation to Saudi Arabia Tuesday after government officials there denied a visa to the Jerusalem Post's White House reporter who planned to travel there and cover President Obama's upcoming visit.

"It is outrageous that the Saudi government has refused to allow a White House reporter entry to the country to cover this week's visit of President Barack Obama," WHCA president and McClatchy reporter Steve Thomma said in a statement. "The denial is an affront not only to this journalist, but to the entire White House press corps and to the principle of freedom of the press that we hold so dear."

Thomma joined the Obama administration in criticizing the Saudi visa denial.

"We are deeply disappointed that this credible journalist was denied a visa," an administration spokesperson told The Huffington Post. "We will continue to register our serious concerns about this unfortunate decision."

The Jerusalem Post reported its White House correspondent, Michael Wilner, was denied a visa to enter Saudi Arabia "despite firmly-worded requests from U.S. National Security Advisor Susan Rice and assistant to the president Tony Blinken to Saudi Arabia's ambassador to the US, Adel bin Ahmed Al-Jubeir."

In the WHCA statement, Thomma said that Wilner was the only White House reporter to be denied a Saudi visa to cover Obama's visit.

"Michael Wilner, who covers the White House for the Jerusalem Post, had signed up to cover the visit and sought a visa along with the rest of the White House Press corps," he said. "On Monday, he was the only one denied a visa. He had planned to travel straight to Saudi Arabia to cover that part of the president's trip."

“We GRANT Michigan’s motion to stay the district court’s order pending final disposition of Michigan’s appeal by this court.”

Mary Black, left, and her wife Sarah Weinstein hug after being married in a group wedding by Oakland County Clerk Lisa Brown at the Oakland County Courthouse in Pontiac, Michigan March 22, 2014.

Rebecca Cook / Reuters

WASHINGTON — Same-sex couples in Michigan will remain unable to marry during the appeal of last week's trial court ruling striking down the state's ban on such marriages.

The federal appeals court hearing the appeal of the lawsuit challenging Michigan's ban ruled Tuesday in a brief order, "We GRANT Michigan's motion to stay the district court's order pending final disposition of Michigan's appeal by this court."

The three-judge panel to consider the state's request was split 2-1 on the request, with Circuit Judge John Rogers and U.S. District Court Judge Karen Caldwell ruling in favor of the stay and Circuit Judge Helene White opposing the stay.

Referencing the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in January to halt same-sex couples' marriages in Utah with a stay during the appeal of the marriage case there, the court opinion stated, "There is no apparent basis to distinguish this case or to balance the equities any differently than the Supreme Court did in [the Utah case]. Furthermore, several district courts that have struck down laws prohibiting same-sex marriage similar to the Michigan amendment at issue here have also granted requests for stays made by state defendants."

White, however, wrote that in her examination of the factors to consider when deciding whether to grant a stay, she concluded that "a stay is not warranted."

The Hobby Lobby case has raised all sorts of explosive claims. What questions are the justices actually considering? Here’s what you need to know.

Chris Geidner/BuzzFeed

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court heard oral arguments Tuesday for the explosive Hobby Lobby case, often covered as a case only about whether employers must provide their employees with contraception coverage.

But the case — which has prompted heated arguments about religious liberty, women's rights, and more from all sides — is actually a complex case about how the Affordable Care Act and federal health care regulation interact with a 1993 religious freedom law. And depending on how the court decides to rule, it could have major ramifications for corporations looking for exemptions from laws on religious grounds.

The 1993 law, called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), states government "shall not substantially burden a person's exercise of religion" unless that burden is the "least restrictive means" to further a "compelling governmental interest."

When the Department of Health and Human Services issued regulations, as part of the Affordable Care Act, mandating that employer-provided health insurance must include contraceptive coverage, for-profit companies had three options:

1. Providing health care coverage that includes contraceptive coverage.

2. Providing health care coverage without contraceptive coverage and paying a steep fine.

3. Not providing health care coverage, sending employees to the health care exchanges created by the Affordable Care Act, and paying a tax.

After issuing those regulations, two companies — Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood — sued, seeking protections under RFRA.

Based on the questioning Tuesday, the Supreme Court appeared split on the case: The justices seemed inclined to give corporations the ability to seek religious exemptions from certain laws, but they also — in a closer question — seemed inclined against finding that the government's plan to ensure contraception coverage merited such an exemption.

On Tuesday, Paul Clement argued for the companies and Solicitor General Donald Verrilli Jr. argued for the government.

Here are the four questions the justices are considering:

Individuals can seek religious exemptions from laws under RFRA. Whether for-profit corporations can do so is not established.

The government argues there can be an across-the-board rule: If your company has for-profit corporation status, the company automatically cannot claim such a religious exemption under RFRA — even if the exemptions would be otherwise valid. This issue of whether companies could even bring their claims to court seemed to be one that most justices, including Justice Stephen Breyer, were open to considering.

At one point, Chief Justice John Roberts noted that this issue in these cases could be decided narrowly, as only applying to a kind of corporation — in this case, closely held, Chapter S corporations. "Whether it applies in the other situations is," Roberts went on, "is a question that we'll have to await another case when a large publicly traded corporation comes in and says, 'We have religious principles,' the sort of situation I don't think is going to happen."

Even if the court were to decide the broader issue — whether any for-profit corporation can seek RFRA's protections — it would not solve the follow-up question of whether those corporations would receive the protections for any given claim.

Justice Elena Kagan repeatedly raised concerns about that expansion on Tuesday, though. Allowing such claims would mean "you would see religious objectors come out of the woodwork with respect to all of these laws," she said, including religious-based challenges to sex discrimination bans, minimum wage, family leave, and child labor laws.

Referencing an opinion by retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the lawyer for the companies, Clement, responded, "Just because free exercise claims are being brought doesn't mean that the courts can't separate the sheep from the goats."

The main issue here is whether the mandate is actually a mandate.

Justice Anthony Kennedy joined with Justices Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor on Tuesday in questioning whether the provision is actually a mandate, since the employer is given the option of paying a tax instead of providing health insurance coverage. As Kagan put it, "It's not saying you must do something that violates your religion. It's giving you a choice."

Although Clement pressed that the choice was a "penalty," even the chief justice — who joined with the court's four more liberal members in 2012 in upholding the Affordable Care Act's employer mandate — interjected that it was not a "penalty."

Kennedy then asked Clement this: What would your case be if paying the tax cost the same as providing health insurance with the required contraception coverage? Clement responded that "by not providing health insurance it would have a huge burden on my client and their ability to attract workers."

If the court decides that the law does not place a substantial burden on the companies' religious exercise, however, then the case ends there.

View Entire List ›

As firefighters battled the blaze at a Houston apartment complex, someone in a nearby building caught footage of a construction worker caught in the blaze. A close call.

Onlookers captured the video as a construction worker made a harrowing escape while flames engulfed the building.

LINK: Massive Fire Destroys Apartment Building In Downtown Houston

Twenty-five years ago his job was to destroy the Clintons. Now David Brock, the onetime political hit man who returned to Arkansas for the first time on Tuesday, is the de facto spokesman for Hillary’s potential presidential campaign.

Danny Johnston / Associated Press

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. — Alone on the second-floor balcony, his whicker chair turned to face the podium below, Bruce Lindsey watched the strange homecoming of an old political adversary.

Lindsey, a close friend of Bill and Hillary Clinton and the chairman of their family foundation, was one of about 200 people who came to the Clinton School of Public Service on Tuesday afternoon to see David Brock's return to Little Rock.

Back in the state for the first time in 19 years, the 51-year-old Brock delivered a speech about his conversion from a fierce Clinton antagonist to a central player in the bid to put Hillary Clinton back in the White House.

As a former counsel to the Clinton administration, Lindsey lived through the scandals Brock helped ignite two decades ago in the pages of the conservative magazine, the American Spectator. Lindsey, whose office overlooks the main floor of the Clinton School where Brock delivered his speech, remembers those times as painful — a fact he acknowledged on Tuesday.

But like most friends of the Clintons today, Lindsey now sees Brock differently. "He said all the right things, I thought," he said in a brief interview after the speech. "Obviously, I share his enthusiasm for Secretary Clinton."

The night before, Brock met Lindsey and Skip Rutherford, the dean of the Clinton School, for the first time at the Capital Hotel, the bar where he once worked stories. With Brock this time were staffers from Correct the Record, a group he founded last year to respond to attacks on Clinton as she decides whether to run for president.

That a drink shared between Lindsey, Rutherford, and Brock seemed normal enough highlights just how much — how drastically — Brock's orientation to the Clintons has shifted since the '90s.

When Bill and Hillary were on the rise, Brock was at the Capital bar, "plotting a campaign of dirty tricks," as he put it in his speech. "All in the service of one goal: to make sure that Bill and Hillary Clinton would never make it to the White House."

On Tuesday, Brock returned to Arkansas as an even stronger advocate for them. In the last year, Brock has, oddly enough, become one of the most accessible figures in Hillary Clinton's orbit, emerging as a de facto spokesperson for her campaign-in-waiting through his many roles.

In the network of outside groups coalescing around Clinton's possible candidacy, Brock is the common link. While running his research-focused group, Brock sits on the board of Priorities USA Action, the super PAC planning to fund Clinton's campaign with high-dollar contributions, and he serves as an advisor to Ready for Hillary, another PAC set on building Clinton a vast list of supporters.

When a close Clinton confidante, Minyon Moore, was linked to a federal campaign finance violations case last week, it was Brock's group that defended Moore. For reporters looking for a comment on a political story about Clinton, better to go to Correct the Record than to Clinton's actual communications staff, who largely ignore requests from the press or respond with the great restraint.

Brock is also friends with a number of prominent donors these days, including Steve Bing and Susie Tompkins Buell, one of the people closest to Hillary Clinton.

And on Tuesday, he spoke to a room full of old Clinton associates. Marsha Scott, a former White House aide during the Clinton years, sat with Paul Berry, a Little Rock lobbyist and longtime Clinton supporters, in the front row. Don Ernst, who worked for Clinton in the governor's office, took notes as Brock spoke. David Pryor, the former senator and Arkansas governor, also made an appearance at the event.

Brock has also developed relationships with both Clintons. What remains unclear is how those friendships started and flourished, even after the public apologies Brock made, first in Esquire magazine and later in his book, Blinded by the Right. Brock is wary to discuss his personal relationship with Bill or Hillary Clinton.

"It's something that I never really get into with people," he said in an interview after his speech. "It's all private and it's going to stay that way."

A profile of Brock in the New York Times, which sat on the front page of newspaper's site the morning before the speech, seemed to make complete the transformation from political hit man to protector.

Still, a sign outside the Clinton School's double doors — "Welcome David Brock"— is probably not one he thought he'd ever see.

When Brock worked as an investigative reporter for the Spectator, his stories stoked the scandals that ended up dogging the Clintons for years. He was a central player in what the magazine called "The Arkansas Project," a dirt-digging operation funded by a Republican billionaire. It was Brock's job to hang around Arkansas looking for whatever he could dig up on the Clintons. He remembers following the widow of Vince Foster around town and spending hours with the state troopers who alleged they'd arranged sexual liaisons for Bill Clinton, then governor.

Later, while researching a biography of Hillary Clinton, published in 1996, Brock began one of the most famous transformations in recent political history, breaking ranks with the right-wing that helped make his name. He wrote about the "slow and tortuous" conversion in Blinded by the Right before founding the liberal groups Media Matters, a nonprofit that tracks conservative media, and American Bridge, a prominent research-focused political action committee.

The Arkansas Project was an era Brock now calls "the bad old days."

"I was part of what Hillary Clinton would later call 'the vast right-wing conspiracy,'" Brock said in his speech. One block away, in the William Jefferson Clinton Presidential Center, a display case on the second floor is dedicated to that right-wing conspiracy, outlining the projects Brock worked on for the Arkansas Project, which he said "eventually encompassed a whole kitchen sink full of preposterous allegations, from financial fraud, to drug running, and even murder."

The research project, Brock said, was "a rough model of things to come."

In the 20-minute address, Brock took aim at a number of current Republican figures and projects, including what he called "the right-wing noise machine," the Koch brothers, Rush Limbaugh, "Rupert Murdoch's Orwellian Fox News channel," and Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, whom he called a "poster boy" for the right.

Asked after his speech whether the visit had been a strange one, Brock said that for the most part, it wasn't. "It was a little spooky in the Capital bar last night," he said, after guests had filed out. "I didn't know whether Sheffield Nelson was going to walk in and ring my neck or something," he joked, referring to an old Clinton nemesis.

"It's just another step on the journey."

Bipartisan legislation being introduced Wednesday would implement new training and oversight rules over the troubled U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency.

Border patrol agents outside of Sasabe, Ariz.

John Stanton

WASHINGTON — House lawmakers Wednesday will introduce new legislation aimed at curbing the growing violence along the U.S.-Mexico border that has left dozens of Mexicans, Americans, and others dead or injured as a result of murky use-of-force policies at the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency.

Rep. Beto O'Rourke, a Texas Democrat and one of the co-authors of the bill, said as federal spending on border control has skyrocketed, congressional oversight of CBP has fallen behind while charges of human rights violations have soared.

"The why is, we've stepped up total border spending from 10 years ago from $7 billion to $18 billion today. We've doubled the size of the border patrol. We have millions of [border] crossings just in El Paso," O'Rourke said in an interview Tuesday. "So you have this big build up in enforcement and spending and you're not even keeping pace on transparency, governance on the committees of jurisdiction … [while] individually and anecdotally you have case after case of alleged violations of human rights, civil rights, civil liberties, protections."

In fact, violence by CBP agents along the border has become an increasing problem under the Obama administration. According to the American Civil Liberties Union, since January 2010 at least 28 people have died during encounters with CBP agents along the Mexican border, including a number of deaths of Mexican nationals as the result of cross-border shootings. Nine others were seriously injured. To date, no agent has been charged in any of the deaths.

The bipartisan legislation, authored by O'Rourke and New Mexico Republican Rep. Steve Pearce, would, among other things, create new transparency within the CBP for the public and media, establish a new ombudsman to address complaints of excessive use of force by agents and provide additional training for agents.

Transparency has been a particular problem with CBP, which for years repeatedly brushed off requests for its use of force policies not only by journalists and activists, but even by lawmakers including O'Rourke and Sen. Robert Menendez, and only released it last month after a copy leaked.

"You the press, members of Congress, the public don't have any information … [about] a place where many Americans don't realize your constitutional protections are temporarily suspended," O'Rourke said.

The bill will also create a new system for evaluating and addressing complaints of civil and human rights abuses, something that doesn't exist on a practical level now. "They won't always be resolved in the complainants' favor. But they're going to be resolved, which doesn't happen today," O'Rourke said.

Whether the bill will see much action is unclear. Speaker John Boehner has made clear comprehensive immigration reform isn't happening this year and that if the House addresses the issue at all, it will be on a piece by piece basis. That could give the Pearce-O'Rourke measure a chance, albeit a slim one.

"We'll have to take the piecemeal approach," O'Rourke said.

LINK: After Intense Pressure, Border Patrol Use Of Force Guidelines Released

LINK: Alleged Mexican Military Incursion Into Arizona May Point To Cartel Collusion

View Entire List ›

With a trial court ruling on hold, Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder says that the same-sex couples who married over the weekend have legal marriages but that the state will not recognize them currently.

Michigan's Governor Rick Snyder acknowledges the assembly as he begins his annual State of the State address at the State Capitol in Lansing, Michigan January 16, 2014.

Rebecca Cook / Reuters

WASHINGTON — Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder announced Wednesday that the state will not be recognizing the marriages of the same-sex couples granted by four county clerks' offices over the weekend.

The more than 300 marriages, which followed a federal trial court ruling Friday finding Michigan's ban on same-sex couples' marriages to be unconstitutional, were conducted on Saturday before the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals put the ruling on hold while it considered whether to issue a stay of the trial court ruling during the course of the state's appeal.

On Tuesday, the 6th Circuit decided to put the trial court ruling on hold for longer, issuing a stay throughout the course of the appeal.

On Wednesday, Snyder stated that those marriages are legal but that, because the state's amendment banning recognition of such marriages is back on the books while the stay is in place, "the rights tied to these marriages are suspended" for the time being.

Snyder announced his view — which tracks the response of Utah Gov. Bob Herbert following a stay issued by the U.S. Supreme Court in that state's marriage case — Wednesday afternoon in a statement:

"After comprehensive legal review of state law and all recent court rulings, we have concluded that same-sex couples were legally married at county clerk offices in the time period between U.S. District Judge Freidman's ruling and the 6th U. S. Circuit Court of Appeals temporary stay of that ruling.

"In accordance with the law, the U.S. Circuit Court's stay has the effect of suspending the benefits of marriage until further court rulings are issued on this matter. The couples with certificates of marriage from Michigan courthouses last Saturday were legally married and the marriage was valid when entered into. Because the stay brings Michigan law on this issue back into effect, the rights tied to these marriages are suspended until the stay is lifted or Judge Friedman's decision is upheld on appeal."

Patrick Cannon allegedly took over $48,000 in bribes from undercover FBI agents. Details on what exactly the mysterious feminine hygiene product did remain unknown.

Charlotte mayor Patrick Cannon.

The Associated Press

Democratic Charlotte Mayor Patrick Cannon was arrested Wednesday and accused of taking bribes totaling more than $48,000 from FBI agents who posed as real estate developers doing business in Charlotte.

Cannon stands accused of accepting a bribe of $12,500 dollars from an undercover FBI agent, which Cannon wanted to use to develop a feminine hygiene product called "Hers." Cannon agreed to accept the "zero percent return-on-investment" money for "Hers" in exchange for offering the FBI agent assistance with zoning and obtaining a permit to open up a nightclub.

Cannon and the FBI agent had dinner together in December of 2012. At the dinner Cannon asked the FBI agent to invest in "Hers." The agent said he would do so in return for help with zoning and getting a nightclub permit, according to the FBI.

DOJ / Via big.assets.huffingtonpost.com

View Entire List ›

Amazing America is premiering April 3 on the Sportsman Channel.

youtube.com

“It cannot be said the employer’s scholarship players are ‘primarily students,’” the ruling said. Northwestern University will appeal.

Kain Colter

AP Photo/Paul Beaty

WASHINGTON — A regional director for the National Labor Relations Board ruled Wednesday that college football players at Northwestern University are employees and have the right to unionize.

The precedent-setting ruling could mean major changes in college sports, as the National Collegiate Athletic Association has worked hard to maintain the view that their athletes are amateurs.

Wednesday's ruling argues that the relationship between players and the university is primarily an economic one, in which the players often work more hours than other full-time employees have to, and are subject to control and regulations of their day-to-day activities that the rest of the student population is not.

"It cannot be said the Employer's scholarship players are 'primarily students,'" the ruling, written by Region 13 Director Peter Sung Ohr, reads.

But the ruling is only a first step. Northwestern University said in a statement it will appeal, sending the decision to the NLRB headquarters in Washington, D.C. It could take another several months before a final ruling is made.

"While we respect the NLRB process and the regional director's opinion, we disagree with it," Alan Cubbage, vice president for university relations said in a statement. "Northwestern believes strongly that our student-athletes are not employees, but students. Unionization and collective bargaining are not the appropriate methods to address the concerns raised by student-athletes."

Donald Remy, the NCAA's chief legal officer, echoed Northwestern's dissatisfaction.

"While not a party to the proceeding, the NCAA is disappointed that the NLRB Region 13 determined the Northwestern football team may vote to be considered university employees," Remy said in a statement. "We strongly disagree with the notion that student-athletes are employees. "We frequently hear from student-athletes, across all sports, that they participate to enhance their overall college experience and for the love of their sport, not to be paid."

The complaint began when Northwestern players attempted to join the College Athletes Players Association, which has been spearheaded by former Northwestern quarterback Kain Colter. Colter has participated in the NLRB hearings and argued in the past that he was forced to drop his pre-med courses because of his football schedule.

The athletes have also received assistance from the United Steelworkers and the National College Players Association during their efforts.

Read the full decision here:

Last year, the Senate majority leader’s campaign purchased nearly $17,000 in “holiday gifts” for supporters and staffers from his granddaughter’s jewelry business. The FEC has inquired about the expenditure. It’s unclear when her business’ website was last online: the website is no longer online and appears to have last been updated in 2012.

This is Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. His granddaughter's name is Ryan Elisabeth Reid.

The Associated Press

She has her own line of jewelry called "Ryan Elisabeth."

Via dardame.blogspot.com

Why is this relevant? Because Reid's campaign spent nearly $17,000 on Ryan Elisabeth jewelry using campaign funds in October 2013, without disclosing that "Ryan Elisabeth" was Reid's granddaughter.

Reporter Jon Ralston first reported the connection. Reid said the jewelry was used for Christmas gifts for staffers and supporters.

Larry Downing / Reuters

After a Federal Elections Commission inquiry about the gifts and media reports about who the gifts were purchased from, Reid announced he would reimburse the campaign the jewelry money.

View Entire List ›

How the U.S. Supreme Court rules in the Hobby Lobby religious freedom case will likely impact the next stage of the debate over state-level religious protection laws like the one recently vetoed in Arizona.

Opponents of Arizona's religious freedom bill protest outside the state capitol Feb. 21, 2014.

AP Photo/The Arizona Republic, Cheryl Evans

Advocates from LGBT, civil liberties, and religious groups battling for and against "religious freedom" bills in several states this year say they are keeping a close eye on the Hobby Lobby case before the U.S. Supreme Court, saying its implications for religious liberty laws could influence the next leg of the debate over state legislation.

"A Supreme Court decision could influence how state courts interpret the scope of existing [state Religious Freedom Restoration Act] laws," said Eunice Rho, advocacy and policy counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union. "In addition, this case may influence the types of legislation we see in 2015 and beyond, as advocates on all sides parse the opinions of the justices."

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Tuesday for the Hobby Lobby case, in which the company's owners argue that following provisions for covering contraception costs in the health insurance mandate of the Affordable Care Act violates the exercise of their religious beliefs and conflict with protections established in the 1993 federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).

The complex case has set off debates over the health care law, religious liberties, and women's reproductive rights. Depending on how the court rules, the case could potentially affect the debate over religious freedom legislation introduced in several states this year, according to the ACLU and the Human Rights Campaign.

The Kansas Family Policy Council, a Wichita, Kan.-based Christian group, said it too is monitoring the case, especially considering the debate over religious freedom legislation that stalled in the state last month. "There are many groups, including us, watching the case very closely," said Robert Noland, executive director of the organization.

The group helped the bill, HB 2453, sail to passage in the state's House, but Senate leadership blocked the bill from advancing in the chamber over concerns it would lead to discrimination.

The ACLU and HRC — among many other local and national groups — have railed against legislation proposed in many states, including Kansas and Arizona, where a bill that would add protections for people and businesses who wish to deny services to others if doing so violated their religious beliefs was ultimately vetoed by Gov. Jan Brewer after facing an avalanche of opposition from citizens, religious groups, and businesses. Opponents have been successful in preventing similar bills from becoming law so far this year in several states like Georgia, South Dakota, Idaho, Maine, and several others.

Many of the bills introduced this year seek to expand on or establish laws modeled off the federal RFRA, partly in response to the sweeping marriage equality movement throughout the country, but often specifically in response to instances in which businesses owners were sued for refusing goods or services to same-sex couples. Eighteen states already have religious freedom restoration acts modeled along the lines of the federal version, but critics of the bills proposed in recent months said they are broader and would lead to discrimination justified by religious beliefs — and that more could be on the way.

"Both the Hobby Lobby case and the bills we've seen in the states are an attempt by private individuals and corporations to insert their beliefs in the private lives of Americans and go well beyond where they've traditionally been permitted and utilize their religious and moral beliefs to justify their actions against others," said Sarah Warbelow, state legislative director at HRC. "When the next [legislative] sessions roll around, we might see revised versions of these bills."

As to how a Supreme Court may rule in the cases, advocates like Rho wouldn't hazard a guess prior to a Supreme Court ruling, and subsequently couldn't say exactly how it would alter the debate over state legislation.

"I definitely think that the legal interpretation of this case will influence how the state supreme courts consider these laws and then how it affects state legislatures in terms of considering these laws," she said. "All sides are going to watch the the Supreme Court incredibly closely."

The Kansas Family Policy Council's Noland agreed, saying, "I do think the case is a bellwether for the Supreme Court as to on what side of religious liberty they are going to fall. It all depends on how the ruling is written." He, too, declined to speculate on specifics of potential outcomes.

Rho, though, predicts proponents of the bills will likely regroup and return in the fall and 2015 sessions with refined versions of the bills, saying, "I don't have any doubt they're going to back to the drawing board and figuring out next steps."

A decision in the Hobby Lobby case is expected before the end of June.

In the meantime, the battle over these bills has quieted for now, but isn't over. The ACLU, HRC, and the Campaign for Southern Equality are monitoring a bill under consideration in the Mississippi General Assembly which lawmakers punted to a study committee. Additionally, Rho said advocates are watching states where legislators haven't started session, such as North Carolina, which convenes in mid-May.

In audio obtained by BuzzFeed, Republican Rep. Bill Cassidy spoke at the Louisiana Oil and Gas Association’s annual meeting last week about an alternative health care plan with catastrophic insurance and HSA plans for the uninsured.

Speaking about his health care plan, Cassidy, who is also a physician, said it "actually reflects the reality of who the uninsured are: relatively less sophisticated, less comfortable with forms, less educated."

View Video ›

"That I think actually reflects the reality of who the uninsured are relatively less sophisticated, less comfortable with forms, less educated. Those are the folks that — not all — there’s a guy who goes to my church who’s uninsured, who’s middle-class but couldn’t get it because he has Type I diabetes. So it’s not all, but it is the folks who I think are going to have the hardest time reaching."

"We were fortunate growing up in the south. The president is a community organizer. You wonder if he ever worked with a poor person...Insurance people they will tell you that they will go to a company and an employer will pay for everything, and there are some people who will not sign up. Turns out, those are my patients. They're illiterate. I'm not saying that to be mean. I say that in compassion. They cannot read. The idea they're going to go on the internet and work through a 16-page document to put in their data and sign up does not reflect on understanding of who is having the hardest time in our economy."

San Francisco Democrat Sen. Leland Yee was arrested and charged Wednesday with conspiracy to traffic in firearms and scheme to defraud citizens of honest service. He is the third California senator to face charges this year.

California State Senator Leland Yee poses for a portrait in his office in San Francisco in 2009.

Robert Galbraith / Reuters

LOS ANGELES — A California state senator was arrested and accused of conspiracy to deal firearms Wednesday, and was among the more than two dozen charged in connection with an undercover FBI investigation.

Sen. Leland Yee, a San Francisco Democrat, allegedly raised money for his failed 2011 mayoral campaign and current secretary of state campaign with Keith Jackson, owner of Jackson Consultancy, a San Francisco consulting firm. The two sought donations from undercover agents "in exchange for multiple official acts" and were involved in a firearms trafficking conspiracy, a federal criminal complaint alleges.

According to the complaint, Jackson was allegedly introduced to an undercover agent who infiltrated a San Francisco gang called Chee Kung Tong organization, or CKT, led by Raymond "Shrimpboy" Chow. Over the course of the undercover agent's relationship with "Shrimpboy," the agent indicated he was "interested in generating income from illegal schemes" and was introduced to individuals for the purpose of money laundering, narcotics and firearms trafficking, and murder-for-hire schemes.

Yee had at least $70,000 in debt following his mayoral bid, the complaint states, and he allegedly accepted a $10,000 cash donation a month after calling a California Department of Public Health manager about a contract with a second undercover agent's "client" in exchange for the donation. According to the AP, Yee and his campaign staff also accepted more than $40,000 for official favors.

Senate President pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, a Democrat who represents the Sacramento area, called for Yee's suspension unless he immediately resigned.

Yee is the third California Democratic lawmaker to face charges this year. Sen. Rod Wright, who represents portions of the South Bay area and Los Angeles, was convicted of perjury and voter fraud in January. Sen. Ron Calderon, who represents portions of downtown Los Angeles and areas to the southwest, was indicted in connection with a bribery scheme in February.

Yee was charged with one count of conspiracy to traffic in firearms without a license and to illegally import firearms and six counts of scheme to defraud citizens of honest service. Jackson and "Shrimpboy" were among the 25 others charged.

LINK: 10 Times The California Lawmaker Accused Of Trading Guns For Money Supported Gun Control

State Sen. Leland Yee, who fought for gun control in California, was arrested Wednesday for alleged conspiracy to illegally import firearms.

State Sen. Leland Yee (D-San Francisco) was arrested and charged Wednesday for allegedly accepting contributions in exchange for introducing an undercover agent to an arms dealer.

Randall Benton/Sacramento Bee / MCT

According to an affidavit, Yee discussed with the undercover agent how to obtain weapons worth $500,000 to $2.5 million from a Muslim separatist group in the Philippines and bring them to the United States.

Randall Benton/Sacramento Bee / MCT

But other than that, he was pretty opposed to firearms.

Robert Galbraith / Reuters / Reuters

Like the time he wrote an op-ed in The Sacramento Bee about gun violence.

sd08.senate.ca.gov

View Entire List ›

With the Hobby Lobby case in front of the Supreme Court, Republicans debate whether they should move legislatively. “I don’t think there is any reason to wait to see what the Supreme Court is going to do. We write the laws not the Supreme Court,” said Rep. Michele Bachmann.

Reps. Diane Black and Michele Bachmann.

Win McNamee / Getty Images

WASHINGTON — Practically every Republican member of Congress believes something needs to be done about the Affordable Care Act's requirement that employer-based health care include coverage for contraceptives.

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments this week in the Hobby Lobby's challenge on religious grounds to the contraceptive coverage requirement.

But the GOP is split on how exactly to proceed. Some members insist that House Republicans should move forward — and quickly — on a bill to exempt any individual or employer from having to purchase a health plan that covers things they find objectionable on religious grounds. Others don't see the point in taking a vote before the court rules.

When the contraceptives policy was announced in 2012, House leadership spoke out strongly against it. House Speaker John Boehner went to the floor promising, through regular legislative order, Congress would work to overturn it. But then a few things happened: A religious exemption bill from Sen. Roy Blunt failed in the Senate, and a big firestorm was set off when conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh called activist Sandra Fluke a slut after she spoke out in support of the contraceptive coverage requirement. The House never ended up moving the bill and the issue died down.

And some members would rather wait for the court to decide before putting the issue front and center in the House again.

"It's obviously in front of the Supreme Court and I don't see how it's in our best interest to weigh in on that right now," said Republican Rep. Shelley Moore-Capito, who is running for Senate in West Virginia.

But the prominence of the Hobby Lobby case has provoked staunch arguments from both sides — about women's rights from supporters of the requirement, and about religious freedom from detractors. How narrowly or broadly the court decides the case could have major implications for legal defenses based on the principle of religious freedom. And that leaves some Republicans arguing now is the right time to act.

"I don't think there is any reason to wait to see what the Supreme Court is going to do. We write the laws not the Supreme Court; the Supreme Court is supposed to interpret the laws that we write," Rep. Michele Bachmann said. "The Supreme Court does not bind our hands in any way and that's why it's very important for us to put this forward."

Rep. Steve King, a conservative member from Iowa, was insistent that the House should be doing everything it could be in advance of the court ruling.

"All the messages we can send in are good. The court reads press clippings. I would want to make sure they are hearing all sides of the argument, especially the one on religious liberty," King said. "I would be interested in moving legislation and having a debate on the floor and in the media. It's part of the messaging lexicon that helps make sure we have fully informed jurists."

Rep. Diane Black, a Republican from Tennessee, is the lead co-sponsor of the House bill that would ensure religious conscious exemptions for individuals and businesses. She said on Tuesday she had received personal assurances from House leadership that the bill would come up in committee — and move to the floor for a full vote — soon.

"We have spoken to the leadership directly and they are very supportive of it. We have just under 200 co-sponsors and it is a bipartisan co-sponsorship and it is in committee, and we would hope that it would move through the committee now that we have that many supporters of the bill," she said. "I have that personally from our leadership, that they are committed to this bill."

But the timing is still unclear. An aide to Majority Leader Eric Cantor said that there were "no scheduled updates to announce." Both Cantor and Boehner issued strong statements of support for Hobby Lobby owners, hopeful that the court would rule in their favor.

"It depends on how the court rules," said Rep. Joe Pitts, a supporter of Black's bill. "If they rule the wrong way then we'll need it, but we may not. I think leadership will wait to see how the court rules."

LINK: What You Should Know About The Hobby Lobby Case

LINK: Advocates Fighting Over State "Religious Freedom" Bills Are Keeping A Close Eye On The Supreme Court

View Entire List ›

Immigration, religious freedom exemptions, Syria, and Ukraine were discussed. “I’m a great admirer,” Obama says.

Kevin Lamarque / Reuters

VATICAN CITY — President Barack Obama and Pope Francis met for the first time on Thursday for a private discussion that touched on international conflicts in Syria and Ukraine, as well as U.S. domestic issues, including the concept of religious freedom and immigration policy.

After a ceremonial procession through the Apostolic Palace, led by Swiss Guards and attendants known as the Papal Gentlemen, President Obama enthusiastically greeted the leader of the Catholic Church.

"It is a great honor," he said, bowing as he shook hands with Pope Francis. "I'm a great admirer. Thank you so much for receiving me."

The pope and the president continued to exchange greetings as they walked into the papal library with two interpreters (the pope speaks English, but not fluently). After a brief photo op, press and staff were escorted out of the room so the leaders could talk privately.

The White House has yet to comment on what was discussed Thursday, but a statement from the Vatican confirmed that the topics included specific areas where the Obama administration and Catholic leaders in America remain divided.

Francis and Obama talked about "the exercise of the rights to religious freedom, life and conscientious objection, as well as the issue of immigration reform," all of which were described as "questions of particular relevance for the Church."

The Catholic Church in America has fiercely opposed the Affordable Care Act's mandate for contraception coverage on the grounds of religious liberty. The Supreme Court will soon decide whether employers will be able to use such an argument to deny insurance that covers birth control to their employees.

The "cordial" meeting also touched on the ongoing turmoil in Syria and Ukraine. Human trafficking was also discussed and both leaders affirmed their common commitment to ending the practice. The meeting was scheduled to last for 30 minutes, but Pope Francis and Obama continued their discussion and emerged after 52 minutes to exchange gifts and greet the diplomatic delegations.

Obama presented the pope with with a custom-made seed chest made of wood from the oldest Catholic church in America, the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary in Baltimore, Md. The chest contained fruit and vegetable seeds used in the White House garden and an inscription of the date of their meeting.

"If you have a chance to come to the White House, we can show you our garden as well," the president said.

"Why not?" the pope responded in Spanish. Pope Francis gifted the president with two medallions, one of which symbolizes the need for solidarity and peace between the northern and southern hemispheres. He also gave Obama a bound copy of his first apostolic exhortation, "Evangelii Gaudium" or "The Joy of the Gospel."

"You know, I actually will probably read this when I'm in the Oval Office, when I am deeply frustrated and I am sure it will give me strength and will calm me down," Obama said. After his remarks were translated, the pope chuckled and said, "I hope."

As the two leaders shook hands good-bye, Obama expressed his disappointment that his family wasn't able to meet the pontiff. "My family has to be with me on this journey," he said. "They've been very strong. Pray for them. I would appreciate it." Pope Francis nodded his assent.

Pool / Reuters

Watch President Obama greet Pope Francis:

vimeo.com / Via whispersintheloggia.blogspot.it

View Entire List ›