BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/ashley-murray/">ASHLEY MURRAY</a>

ALEXANDRIA, Va. — Former FBI Director James Comey pleaded not guilty to two felony charges Wednesday in federal court in Virginia, in response to an indictment that followed an extraordinary pressure campaign from President Donald Trump.

A federal grand jury in Alexandria, Virginia,&nbsp;<a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vaed.582136/gov.uscourts.vaed.582136.1.0_3.pdf" target="_blank">indicted</a>&nbsp;Comey&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/former-fbi-director-comey-indicted-2-federal-charges-after-trump-urged-prosecution" target="_blank">in September</a>&nbsp;on one charge of making false statements to Congress during testimony in 2020 and another of obstructing a proceeding of Congress. Prosecutors had sought an additional charge of making false statements, but the grand jury&nbsp;<a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vaed.582136/gov.uscourts.vaed.582136.3.0.pdf" target="_blank">returned</a>&nbsp;only the two charges.&nbsp;

Comey faces up to five years in prison and a fine of $250,000 for each charge.

<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/comey-says-hes-standing-donald-trump-while-trump-calls-more-retribution" target="_blank">The indictment</a>&nbsp;came just days before the statute of limitations ran out.

A trial is set for early January.&nbsp;Comey’s lawyer, Patrick Fitzgerald, said he plans to file two batches of motions this month, including one alleging vindictive and selective prosecution.&nbsp;

“Our view is this prosecution was brought by President Trump,” Fitzgerald said.

Trump told his AG: ‘We can’t delay any longer’

Trump has long targeted Comey for his role leading the FBI during an investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.

Trump fired him after pressuring him to end the investigation and failing.&nbsp;

Trump and Comey have publicly sparred since his dismissal. Comey has denied wrongdoing.

Trump in September&nbsp;<a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/115239044548033727" target="_blank">posted</a>&nbsp;on social media urging Attorney General Pam Bondi to take action against Comey and other political enemies, demanding retribution for his own prosecutions.

“Pam: I have reviewed over 30 statements and posts saying that, essentially, ‘same old story as last time, all talk, no action. Nothing is being done,’” Trump wrote. “We can’t delay any longer, it’s killing our reputation and credibility. They impeached me twice, and indicted me (5 times!), OVER NOTHING. JUSTICE MUST BE SERVED, NOW!!! President DJT.”

The president then forced out the acting U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia when he declined to pursue charges against Comey. Trump replaced the office’s top prosecutor with former personal lawyer Lindsey Halligan, who swiftly obtained an indictment.

Comey’s legal team plans to fight Halligan’s appointment as unlawful.

Classified information expected to be included

U.S. District Judge Michael S. Nachmanoff for the Eastern District of Virginia agreed to Comey’s request for a trial in January, after there were no objections from the government to schedule the proceeding beyond the Dec. 17 speedy trial deadline.

Fitzgerald’s challenge to Halligan’s appointment will be heard by a judge outside the Eastern District of Virginia according to standard protocol, Nachmanoff said, adding the separate track will have no bearing on Comey’s case schedule.

Nachmanoff, who was nominated by former President Joe Biden, ordered the parties to swiftly agree on obtaining security clearances for Comey and Fitzgerald, as the government contends some of the evidence may be classified.

“We haven’t seen a single piece of discovery to date,” Fitzgerald told Nachmanoff, adding he had not received communication from government prosecutors until Tuesday.

Government prosecutor Nathaniel Lemons said he expects a “large amount” of discovery will be classified. Discovery is the process of exchanging information about witnesses and evidence in a legal case.

“We’re just getting our hands around the discovery as well,” Lemons said.

Nachmanoff responded he is “a little skeptical.”

“This does not appear to be a particularly complex case,” Nachmanoff said during the roughly 30-minute arraignment.

Fitzgerald told the judge the defense is “a bit confused” about the government’s slow movement on producing discovery.

“Frankly, we feel in this case the cart has been put before the horse,” Fitzgerald said.

Nachmanoff ordered the parties to come to a discovery agreement by week’s end, or risk the court setting one for them.

“I want to get this resolved promptly. … There should be no reason this case gets off track because of the existence of classified information,” he said.

Fitzgerald, who served as the U.S. attorney in Chicago for over a decade during the George W. Bush administration, is known for his&nbsp;<a href="https://www.justice.gov/archive/osc/documents/2005_10_28_fitzgerald_press_conference.pdf" target="_blank">role</a>&nbsp;as Special Counsel in 2005 during the CIA leak case against Lewis “Scooter” Libby.

Fitzgerald told Nachmanoff that representing Comey is “the honor of my life.”

Several of Comey’s family members attended the arraignment at the Eastern District’s Albert V. Bryan Courthouse, including his daughter, Maureen Comey, who was fired earlier this year from her role as a federal prosecutor in Manhattan.&nbsp;

Comey’s son-in-law, Troy Edwards Jr., was also in attendance. Edwards resigned from his position as prosecutor for the Eastern District of Virginia immediately after Comey was indicted last month.&nbsp;

Oral arguments are set for Nov. 19 and Dec. 9. A trial is set for Jan. 5.

Fitzgerald initially argued for a Jan. 12 trial date, but Nachmanoff denied the request.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/10/1759946542778.png" alt="Protesters demonstrated outside the Eastern District of Virginia federal courthouse in Alexandria ahead of the arraignment of former FBI Director James Comey on Wednesday, Oct. 8, 2025. (Photo by Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)" />
 <figcaption>Protesters demonstrated outside the Eastern District of Virginia federal courthouse in Alexandria ahead of the arraignment of former FBI Director James Comey on Wednesday, Oct. 8, 2025. (Photo by Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)</figcaption>
 </figure>BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/ashley-murray/">ASHLEY MURRAY</a>ALEXANDRIA, Va. — Former FBI Director James Comey pleaded not guilty to two felony charges Wednesday in federal court in Virginia, in response to an indictment that followed an extraordinary pressure campaign from President Donald Trump.A federal grand jury in Alexandria, Virginia,&nbsp;<a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vaed.582136/gov.uscourts.vaed.582136.1.0_3.pdf" target="_blank">indicted</a>&nbsp;Comey&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/former-fbi-director-comey-indicted-2-federal-charges-after-trump-urged-prosecution" target="_blank">in September</a>&nbsp;on one charge of making false statements to Congress during testimony in 2020 and another of obstructing a proceeding of Congress. Prosecutors had sought an additional charge of making false statements, but the grand jury&nbsp;<a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vaed.582136/gov.uscourts.vaed.582136.3.0.pdf" target="_blank">returned</a>&nbsp;only the two charges.&nbsp;<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/9/1758848907803.png" alt="Comey from his Instagram message responding to the indictment" />
 <figcaption>Comey from his Instagram message responding to the indictment</figcaption>
 </figure>Comey faces up to five years in prison and a fine of $250,000 for each charge.<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/comey-says-hes-standing-donald-trump-while-trump-calls-more-retribution" target="_blank">The indictment</a>&nbsp;came just days before the statute of limitations ran out.A trial is set for early January.&nbsp;Comey’s lawyer, Patrick Fitzgerald, said he plans to file two batches of motions this month, including one alleging vindictive and selective prosecution.&nbsp;“Our view is this prosecution was brought by President Trump,” Fitzgerald said.<h2>Trump told his AG: ‘We can’t delay any longer’</h2>Trump has long targeted Comey for his role leading the FBI during an investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.Trump fired him after pressuring him to end the investigation and failing.&nbsp;Trump and Comey have publicly sparred since his dismissal. Comey has denied wrongdoing.Trump in September&nbsp;<a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/115239044548033727" target="_blank">posted</a>&nbsp;on social media urging Attorney General Pam Bondi to take action against Comey and other political enemies, demanding retribution for his own prosecutions.“Pam: I have reviewed over 30 statements and posts saying that, essentially, ‘same old story as last time, all talk, no action. Nothing is being done,’” Trump wrote. “We can’t delay any longer, it’s killing our reputation and credibility. They impeached me twice, and indicted me (5 times!), OVER NOTHING. JUSTICE MUST BE SERVED, NOW!!! President DJT.”The president then forced out the acting U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia when he declined to pursue charges against Comey. Trump replaced the office’s top prosecutor with former personal lawyer Lindsey Halligan, who swiftly obtained an indictment.Comey’s legal team plans to fight Halligan’s appointment as unlawful.<h2>Classified information expected to be included</h2>U.S. District Judge Michael S. Nachmanoff for the Eastern District of Virginia agreed to Comey’s request for a trial in January, after there were no objections from the government to schedule the proceeding beyond the Dec. 17 speedy trial deadline.Fitzgerald’s challenge to Halligan’s appointment will be heard by a judge outside the Eastern District of Virginia according to standard protocol, Nachmanoff said, adding the separate track will have no bearing on Comey’s case schedule.Nachmanoff, who was nominated by former President Joe Biden, ordered the parties to swiftly agree on obtaining security clearances for Comey and Fitzgerald, as the government contends some of the evidence may be classified.“We haven’t seen a single piece of discovery to date,” Fitzgerald told Nachmanoff, adding he had not received communication from government prosecutors until Tuesday.Government prosecutor Nathaniel Lemons said he expects a “large amount” of discovery will be classified. Discovery is the process of exchanging information about witnesses and evidence in a legal case.“We’re just getting our hands around the discovery as well,” Lemons said.Nachmanoff responded he is “a little skeptical.”“This does not appear to be a particularly complex case,” Nachmanoff said during the roughly 30-minute arraignment.Fitzgerald told the judge the defense is “a bit confused” about the government’s slow movement on producing discovery.“Frankly, we feel in this case the cart has been put before the horse,” Fitzgerald said.Nachmanoff ordered the parties to come to a discovery agreement by week’s end, or risk the court setting one for them.“I want to get this resolved promptly. … There should be no reason this case gets off track because of the existence of classified information,” he said.<h2>Comey’s family accompanies him</h2>Fitzgerald, who served as the U.S. attorney in Chicago for over a decade during the George W. Bush administration, is known for his&nbsp;<a href="https://www.justice.gov/archive/osc/documents/2005_10_28_fitzgerald_press_conference.pdf" target="_blank">role</a>&nbsp;as Special Counsel in 2005 during the CIA leak case against Lewis “Scooter” Libby.Fitzgerald told Nachmanoff that representing Comey is “the honor of my life.”Several of Comey’s family members attended the arraignment at the Eastern District’s Albert V. Bryan Courthouse, including his daughter, Maureen Comey, who was fired earlier this year from her role as a federal prosecutor in Manhattan.&nbsp;Comey’s son-in-law, Troy Edwards Jr., was also in attendance. Edwards resigned from his position as prosecutor for the Eastern District of Virginia immediately after Comey was indicted last month.&nbsp;Oral arguments are set for Nov. 19 and Dec. 9. A trial is set for Jan. 5.Fitzgerald initially argued for a Jan. 12 trial date, but Nachmanoff denied the request.

Former FBI director faces a judge on federal charges of lying to Congress

On Wednesday the U.S. Department of Justice announced the arrest of  29-year-old Jonathan Rinderknecht on a criminal complaint charging him with maliciously starting what became the Palisades Fire in January.

The complaint alleges that Rinderknecht's started a fire in Pacific Palisades on New Year's Day -- a blaze that eventually turned into one of the most destructive fires in Los Angeles history, causing death and widespread destruction.

Among the evidence that was collected from his digital devices was an image he generated on ChatGPT depicting a burning city.

While we cannot undo the damage and destruction that was done, we hope his arrest and the charges against him bring some measure of justice to the victims of this horrific tragedy.

Rinderknecht's initial appearance is scheduled for Wednesday afternoon in the U.S. District Court in Orlando. Rinderknecht is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/10/1759939153486.png" alt="Palisades fire -photo FAA" />
 <figcaption>Palisades fire -photo FAA</figcaption>
 </figure>On Wednesday the U.S. Department of Justice announced the arrest of 29-year-old Jonathan Rinderknecht on a criminal complaint charging him with maliciously starting what became the Palisades Fire in January.The complaint alleges that Rinderknecht's started a fire in Pacific Palisades on New Year's Day -- a blaze that eventually turned into one of the most destructive fires in Los Angeles history, causing death and widespread destruction.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/10/1759941697774.png" alt="Rinderknecht photo U.S. Dept. of Justice" />
 <figcaption>Rinderknecht photo U.S. Dept. of Justice</figcaption>
 </figure>Among the evidence that was collected from his digital devices was an image he generated on ChatGPT depicting a burning city.While we cannot undo the damage and destruction that was done, we hope his arrest and the charges against him bring some measure of justice to the victims of this horrific tragedy.Rinderknecht's initial appearance is scheduled for Wednesday afternoon in the U.S. District Court in Orlando. Rinderknecht is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

Man arrested, accused of starting wildfire that leveled LA neighborhood

Rep. Sharice Davids seeks extension of health tax credit used by 160K Kansans

By&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/author/tim-carpenter/">TIM CARPENTER</a> <a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2025/02/24/gov-laura-kelly-skeptical-kansas-houses-anti-tenure-legislation-will-reach-her-desk/">Kansas Reflector</a>

TOPEKA — U.S. Sen. Roger Marshall diagnosed the ongoing shutdown of the federal government as a malignancy infecting Democratic lawmakers.

The Kansas Republican, who was a physician in an obstetrics practice before elected to Congress, said Democrats at the Capitol were infected with “Trump derangement syndrome.”

“They have a hatred for President Trump that I’ve never seen,” Marshall said on a speech on the floor of the U.S. Senate.

Marshall, who was among lawmakers skeptical of President Joe Biden’s victory over Trump in 2020, said an underlying issue was Democrats had yet to accept outcome of 2024 elections that placed Republicans in control of the House, Senate and White House.

“If you want to continue your liberal socialist policies, Democrats, win an election,” Marshall said.

He accused Democrats of using the shutdown that began Oct. 1 to play hypocritical games with U.S. health care policy. The most “failed system” and “biggest waste of money” is the Medicaid system that has enrolled about 400,000 Kansans, he said. The senator said Democrats were complicit in creating financial challenges that threaten rural hospitals in Kansas and other states.

The six-person Kansas congressional delegation — five Republicans, one Democrat — have shared views on the weeklong shutdown tied to failure to pass a short-term funding bill to finance government operations. Democrats conditioned support for a bill on extension of health subsidies that lowered the consumer cost of Affordable Care Act plans. Republicans say the shutdown must end before working on the tax credits for health insurance.

The House adopted a temporary funding bill, but the Senate hasn’t voted for a comparable bill allowing the government to function until Nov. 21.

“This is not a shutdown that makes any sense at all,” said U.S. Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kansas. “The American people — Kansans — deserve something different from the U.S. Senate. Every city council or commission, every school board, every local government office in my state passes a budget and then lives within that budget every year. Every local unit of government can figure this out, and the U.S. Senate is failing one more time.”

Moran, who has voted with Marshall to break the Senate’s deadlock, said the federal government shutdown “means uncertainty. A shutdown means dysfunction.”

U.S. Rep. Sharice Davids, the lone Democrat in the delegation, said Democrats in Congress were fighting to extend availability of ACA tax credits to keep health care affordable. More than 160,000 Kansans relied last year on tax credits the 3rd District representative said should be made permanent.

“Because congressional Republicans have refused to extend them, premiums could rise by $700 next year, putting thousands of Kansans at risk of paying more or losing coverage,” Davids said.

She said the shutdown would harm hardworking Kansans and the moment called for Republicans and Democrats to work together on a solution.

U.S. Rep. Derek Schmidt, a Republican serving the 2nd District in eastern Kansas, said the Senate ought to get behind the House-passed bipartisan bill. The approach would get the wheels of government moving and create time for the House and Senate to work on full-year appropriations bills, he said.

“Regrettably,” Schmidt said, “Senate Democrats are insisting on the inclusion of a $1.5 trillion wish list of additional reckless spending instead of passing the House’s continuing resolution. This shutdown is entirely the result of those unreasonable demands.”

U.S. Rep. Tracey Mann, a Republican in the mostly rural 1st District, said the shutdown was triggered by Democrats who wanted taxpayers to “pay for health care for illegal immigrants and authorize trillions of new dollars in federal spending.”

He complained Democrats would rather see Trump fail than work in a bipartisan manner to operate government.

“I understand that some in Washington prefer to grandstand and try to score political points rather than do what’s best for the country, but it is time to stop the political theater and work together to get our fiscal house in order,” Mann said.

U.S. Rep. Ron Estes, the 4th District congressman serving the Wichita area, said he had his congressional pay withheld due to the shutdown. He blamed U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-New York, and his allies for the impasse.

“Republicans have done our job,” Estes said. “I hope my Democrat colleagues will put Americans first and end this shutdown soon.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/9/1759235271107.png" alt="U.S. Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kansas, says Democrats interrupted federal government operations due to a "derangement syndrome" tied to opposition of President Donald Trump.&nbsp;Marshall referred to the weeklong shutdown as a "cynical political" effort to comply with "radical left-wing extremists." (Anna Kaminski/Kansas Reflector" />
 <figcaption>U.S. Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kansas, says Democrats interrupted federal government operations due to a "derangement syndrome" tied to opposition of President Donald Trump.&nbsp;Marshall referred to the weeklong shutdown as a "cynical political" effort to comply with "radical left-wing extremists." (Anna Kaminski/Kansas Reflector</figcaption>
 </figure><h2>Rep. Sharice Davids seeks extension of health tax credit used by 160K Kansans</h2>By&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/author/tim-carpenter/">TIM CARPENTER</a> <a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2025/02/24/gov-laura-kelly-skeptical-kansas-houses-anti-tenure-legislation-will-reach-her-desk/">Kansas Reflector</a>TOPEKA — U.S. Sen. Roger Marshall diagnosed the ongoing shutdown of the federal government as a malignancy infecting Democratic lawmakers.The Kansas Republican, who was a physician in an obstetrics practice before elected to Congress, said Democrats at the Capitol were infected with “Trump derangement syndrome.”“They have a hatred for President Trump that I’ve never seen,” Marshall said on a speech on the floor of the U.S. Senate.Marshall, who was among lawmakers skeptical of President Joe Biden’s victory over Trump in 2020, said an underlying issue was Democrats had yet to accept outcome of 2024 elections that placed Republicans in control of the House, Senate and White House.“If you want to continue your liberal socialist policies, Democrats, win an election,” Marshall said.He accused Democrats of using the shutdown that began Oct. 1 to play hypocritical games with U.S. health care policy. The most “failed system” and “biggest waste of money” is the Medicaid system that has enrolled about 400,000 Kansans, he said. The senator said Democrats were complicit in creating financial challenges that threaten rural hospitals in Kansas and other states.The six-person Kansas congressional delegation — five Republicans, one Democrat — have shared views on the weeklong shutdown tied to failure to pass a short-term funding bill to finance government operations. Democrats conditioned support for a bill on extension of health subsidies that lowered the consumer cost of Affordable Care Act plans. Republicans say the shutdown must end before working on the tax credits for health insurance.The House adopted a temporary funding bill, but the Senate hasn’t voted for a comparable bill allowing the government to function until Nov. 21.“This is not a shutdown that makes any sense at all,” said U.S. Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kansas. “The American people — Kansans — deserve something different from the U.S. Senate. Every city council or commission, every school board, every local government office in my state passes a budget and then lives within that budget every year. Every local unit of government can figure this out, and the U.S. Senate is failing one more time.”Moran, who has voted with Marshall to break the Senate’s deadlock, said the federal government shutdown “means uncertainty. A shutdown means dysfunction.”U.S. Rep. Sharice Davids, the lone Democrat in the delegation, said Democrats in Congress were fighting to extend availability of ACA tax credits to keep health care affordable. More than 160,000 Kansans relied last year on tax credits the 3rd District representative said should be made permanent.“Because congressional Republicans have refused to extend them, premiums could rise by $700 next year, putting thousands of Kansans at risk of paying more or losing coverage,” Davids said.She said the shutdown would harm hardworking Kansans and the moment called for Republicans and Democrats to work together on a solution.U.S. Rep. Derek Schmidt, a Republican serving the 2nd District in eastern Kansas, said the Senate ought to get behind the House-passed bipartisan bill. The approach would get the wheels of government moving and create time for the House and Senate to work on full-year appropriations bills, he said.“Regrettably,” Schmidt said, “Senate Democrats are insisting on the inclusion of a $1.5 trillion wish list of additional reckless spending instead of passing the House’s continuing resolution. This shutdown is entirely the result of those unreasonable demands.”U.S. Rep. Tracey Mann, a Republican in the mostly rural 1st District, said the shutdown was triggered by Democrats who wanted taxpayers to “pay for health care for illegal immigrants and authorize trillions of new dollars in federal spending.”He complained Democrats would rather see Trump fail than work in a bipartisan manner to operate government.“I understand that some in Washington prefer to grandstand and try to score political points rather than do what’s best for the country, but it is time to stop the political theater and work together to get our fiscal house in order,” Mann said.U.S. Rep. Ron Estes, the 4th District congressman serving the Wichita area, said he had his congressional pay withheld due to the shutdown. He blamed U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-New York, and his allies for the impasse.“Republicans have done our job,” Estes said. “I hope my Democrat colleagues will put Americans first and end this shutdown soon.”

U.S. Senator Marshall points to ‘Trump derangement syndrome’ as culprit in shutdown

The proposed constitutional amendment set to go before voters next year would ban nearly all abortions, with limited exceptions for medical emergencies and survivors of sexual assault

BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/annaspoerre/">ANNA SPOERRE</a> <a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2023/02/20/state-senator-throws-first-punches-of-2024-missouri-governors-campaign/">Missouri Independent</a>

After two revisions, a Cole County judge has approved the language for&nbsp;<a href="https://www.senate.mo.gov/25info/bts_web/bill.aspx?SessionType=R&amp;BillID=13399177" target="_blank">a proposed abortion ban&nbsp;</a>that will go before voters in November 2026.

Circuit Judge Daniel Green ruled Tuesday that the latest language drafted by Missouri Secretary of State Denny Hoskins and approved by Attorney General Catherine Hanaway is now “fair and sufficient.” It was Hoskins’ second attempt to write a summary that will appear on the ballot, and the approved version still doesn’t specifically mention that most abortions would be banned.&nbsp;

The language approved Tuesday by Green states:

“Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to:

Until this week, the fourth bullet was the sticking point for Green, who said that Hoskins had to be more explicit in stating that a current constitutional amendment would be repealed. The previous ballot language used the word “amend” rather than “repeal,” which Green called an&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/briefs/missouri-judge-orders-revised-ballot-language-repeal-abortion-rights/">“insufficient and unfair”</a>&nbsp;characterization of the measure.

But attorneys representing abortion-rights organizations said even with the inclusion of the word “repeal,” the current language continues to be misleading, in part because it does not include the name of the amendment that would be repealed, instead assuming voters know that it’s a reference to “The Right to Reproductive Freedom Initiative.”&nbsp;

“The secretary’s new bullet point four also still implies that (the amendment) gives rights to Missourians for the first time,” attorneys Chuck Hatfield with Stinson LLP and Tori Schafer with the ACLU of Missouri, wrote in a court filing opposing the language on Monday. “Voters should not be made to believe that, for the first time, Missourians will have access to abortions in certain circumstances.”

The passage of the reproductive rights amendment, which was listed as Amendment 3 on the 2024 ballot,&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/11/05/missouri-voters-overturn-states-near-total-abortion-ban/">enshrined the right to abortion up to the point of fetal viability&nbsp;</a>in the state constitution. This legalized broader access to abortion than Missourians had seen in years.&nbsp;

Before November 2024, almost all abortions were illegal in Missouri, with limited exceptions for medical emergencies.&nbsp;

The&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2025/05/14/missouri-republicans-shut-down-senate-debate-to-pass-abortion-ban-repeal-sick-leave-law/">proposed new ban,</a>&nbsp;which will also be listed as Amendment 3 on the 2026 ballot, would be slightly less restrictive than the near-total ban implemented in June 2022. It would allow abortions for survivors or rape or incest up to 12 weeks gestation, though it is not clear if or how a survivor would need to prove the assault in order to receive medical care.

Hoskins was tasked with rewriting the ballot language<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2025/09/24/judge-rules-unconstitutional-law-missouri-attorney-general-special-appeal-power/">&nbsp;in keeping with a new law</a>&nbsp;after Green determined the initial wording by lawmakers failed to alert voters that&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/briefs/judge-orders-revisions-to-ballot-language-for-missouri-abortion-ban-proposal/">the amendment would ban most abortions</a>.

Today’s decision confirms that our office is following the law and protecting the integrity of Missouri’s ballot,” Hoskins said in a statement Tuesday.&nbsp;

Hoskins was also responsible for writing the fair ballot statement that appears in polling places and on the office’s website that summarize what both a “yes” and “no” vote mean.

This approved fair ballot statement lays out that a “yes” vote would guarantee women’s medical care under specific scenarios, including ectopic pregnancies and miscarriages, and allow abortions in the first 12 weeks festation in cases of rape or incest. It would also ban gender-affirming health care for minors.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;

A “no” vote, Hoskins wrote, in part, would “limit abortion” to specific scenarios.

Attorneys for abortion-rights groups also took issue with this language, arguing in court filings Monday that it doesn’t make clear that “instead of enshrining a right for the first time,” the proposed amendment “reduces the protections currently existing in the constitution.”

The judge also weighed whether the inclusion of a ban on gender-affirming care for minors violates the constitution’s prohibition on ballot questions containing more than one subject. Critics say the provision targeting transgender care&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2025/08/27/missouri-abortion-amendment-3-ballot-ban-cole-county-trial/">&nbsp;is nothing more than “ballot candy” designed to trick voters.</a>&nbsp;

Green disagreed, giving the amendment approval for the ballot after concluding that&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/briefs/judge-orders-revisions-to-ballot-language-for-missouri-abortion-ban-proposal/">abortion and gender-affirming health care were related enough</a>&nbsp;to meet constitutional requirements for a single subject.&nbsp;

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/10/1759924113972.png" alt=" A surgical room is prepped for patients on Friday, June 21, 2024, at Planned Parenthood Great Plains in Overland Park, Kansas (Anna Spoerre/The Missouri Independent)." />
 <figcaption> A surgical room is prepped for patients on Friday, June 21, 2024, at Planned Parenthood Great Plains in Overland Park, Kansas (Anna Spoerre/The Missouri Independent).</figcaption>
 </figure><h2>The proposed constitutional amendment set to go before voters next year would ban nearly all abortions, with limited exceptions for medical emergencies and survivors of sexual assault</h2>BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/annaspoerre/">ANNA SPOERRE</a> <a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2023/02/20/state-senator-throws-first-punches-of-2024-missouri-governors-campaign/">Missouri Independent</a>After two revisions, a Cole County judge has approved the language for&nbsp;<a href="https://www.senate.mo.gov/25info/bts_web/bill.aspx?SessionType=R&amp;BillID=13399177" target="_blank">a proposed abortion ban&nbsp;</a>that will go before voters in November 2026.Circuit Judge Daniel Green ruled Tuesday that the latest language drafted by Missouri Secretary of State Denny Hoskins and approved by Attorney General Catherine Hanaway is now “fair and sufficient.” It was Hoskins’ second attempt to write a summary that will appear on the ballot, and the approved version still doesn’t specifically mention that most abortions would be banned.&nbsp;The language approved Tuesday by Green states:“Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to:<ul>
 <li>Guarantee women’s medical care for emergencies, ectopic pregnancies, and miscarriages;&nbsp;</li><li>Ensure women’s safety during abortions;&nbsp;</li><li>Ensure parental consent for minors;&nbsp;</li><li>Repeal Article I, section 36, approved in 2024; allow abortions for medical&nbsp;emergencies, fetal anomalies, rape, and incest;</li><li>and Prohibit sex-change procedures for children?”</li>
 </ul>Until this week, the fourth bullet was the sticking point for Green, who said that Hoskins had to be more explicit in stating that a current constitutional amendment would be repealed. The previous ballot language used the word “amend” rather than “repeal,” which Green called an&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/briefs/missouri-judge-orders-revised-ballot-language-repeal-abortion-rights/">“insufficient and unfair”</a>&nbsp;characterization of the measure.But attorneys representing abortion-rights organizations said even with the inclusion of the word “repeal,” the current language continues to be misleading, in part because it does not include the name of the amendment that would be repealed, instead assuming voters know that it’s a reference to “The Right to Reproductive Freedom Initiative.”&nbsp;“The secretary’s new bullet point four also still implies that (the amendment) gives rights to Missourians for the first time,” attorneys Chuck Hatfield with Stinson LLP and Tori Schafer with the ACLU of Missouri, wrote in a court filing opposing the language on Monday. “Voters should not be made to believe that, for the first time, Missourians will have access to abortions in certain circumstances.”The passage of the reproductive rights amendment, which was listed as Amendment 3 on the 2024 ballot,&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/11/05/missouri-voters-overturn-states-near-total-abortion-ban/">enshrined the right to abortion up to the point of fetal viability&nbsp;</a>in the state constitution. This legalized broader access to abortion than Missourians had seen in years.&nbsp;Before November 2024, almost all abortions were illegal in Missouri, with limited exceptions for medical emergencies.&nbsp;The&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2025/05/14/missouri-republicans-shut-down-senate-debate-to-pass-abortion-ban-repeal-sick-leave-law/">proposed new ban,</a>&nbsp;which will also be listed as Amendment 3 on the 2026 ballot, would be slightly less restrictive than the near-total ban implemented in June 2022. It would allow abortions for survivors or rape or incest up to 12 weeks gestation, though it is not clear if or how a survivor would need to prove the assault in order to receive medical care.Hoskins was tasked with rewriting the ballot language<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2025/09/24/judge-rules-unconstitutional-law-missouri-attorney-general-special-appeal-power/">&nbsp;in keeping with a new law</a>&nbsp;after Green determined the initial wording by lawmakers failed to alert voters that&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/briefs/judge-orders-revisions-to-ballot-language-for-missouri-abortion-ban-proposal/">the amendment would ban most abortions</a>.Today’s decision confirms that our office is following the law and protecting the integrity of Missouri’s ballot,” Hoskins said in a statement Tuesday.&nbsp;Hoskins was also responsible for writing the fair ballot statement that appears in polling places and on the office’s website that summarize what both a “yes” and “no” vote mean.This approved fair ballot statement lays out that a “yes” vote would guarantee women’s medical care under specific scenarios, including ectopic pregnancies and miscarriages, and allow abortions in the first 12 weeks festation in cases of rape or incest. It would also ban gender-affirming health care for minors.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;A “no” vote, Hoskins wrote, in part, would “limit abortion” to specific scenarios.Attorneys for abortion-rights groups also took issue with this language, arguing in court filings Monday that it doesn’t make clear that “instead of enshrining a right for the first time,” the proposed amendment “reduces the protections currently existing in the constitution.”The judge also weighed whether the inclusion of a ban on gender-affirming care for minors violates the constitution’s prohibition on ballot questions containing more than one subject. Critics say the provision targeting transgender care&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2025/08/27/missouri-abortion-amendment-3-ballot-ban-cole-county-trial/">&nbsp;is nothing more than “ballot candy” designed to trick voters.</a>&nbsp;Green disagreed, giving the amendment approval for the ballot after concluding that&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/briefs/judge-orders-revisions-to-ballot-language-for-missouri-abortion-ban-proposal/">abortion and gender-affirming health care were related enough</a>&nbsp;to meet constitutional requirements for a single subject.&nbsp;

Judge approves ballot language for amendment reinstating Missouri abortion ban

KANSAS CITY — The Missouri State Highway Patrol released additional details on a crash that injured a State Trooper just after 11:30a.m. Tuesday in Clay County.

According to the Patrol, the crash occurred as a 2023 Dodge Charge driven by the 30-year-old Trooper from Lees Summit was eastbound on MO 21- just east of Route EE. The vehicle crossed the center line and struck the trailer of a westbound 2024 Kenworth semi driven by a 61-year-old Marissa, Illinois man.&nbsp;&nbsp;

EMS transported the Trooper to North Kansas City Hospital for treatment of serious injuries. The semi driver was not injured.&nbsp; The Patrol released no additional details.

CLAY COUNTY —A Missouri State Highway Patrol Trooper was injured in an accident that occurred just after 11:30a.m. Tuesday in Clay County.

The Missouri State Highway Patrol reported the Trooper was eastbound on MO 210 near Stillhouse Road. The&nbsp; Trooper's vehicle crossed the center line and collided with the trailer of a westbound semi.&nbsp;

EMS transported the Trooper to an area hospital for treatment of serious injuries. The semi driver was not injured.

The Missouri State Highway Patrol’s Major Crash Investigation Unit is investigating in charge of the investigation.&nbsp; Check the Post for additional details as they become available.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/10/1759886123534.png" alt="Photo courtesy KCTV" />
 <figcaption>Photo courtesy KCTV</figcaption>
 </figure>KANSAS CITY — The Missouri State Highway Patrol released additional details on a crash that injured a State Trooper just after 11:30a.m. Tuesday in Clay County.According to the Patrol, the crash occurred as a 2023 Dodge Charge driven by the 30-year-old Trooper from Lees Summit was eastbound on MO 21- just east of Route EE. The vehicle crossed the center line and struck the trailer of a westbound 2024 Kenworth semi driven by a 61-year-old Marissa, Illinois man.&nbsp;&nbsp;EMS transported the Trooper to North Kansas City Hospital for treatment of serious injuries. The semi driver was not injured.&nbsp; The Patrol released no additional details.------------------------&nbsp;CLAY COUNTY —A Missouri State Highway Patrol Trooper was injured in an accident that occurred just after 11:30a.m. Tuesday in Clay County.The Missouri State Highway Patrol reported the Trooper was eastbound on MO 210 near Stillhouse Road. The&nbsp; Trooper's vehicle crossed the center line and collided with the trailer of a westbound semi.&nbsp;EMS transported the Trooper to an area hospital for treatment of serious injuries. The semi driver was not injured.The Missouri State Highway Patrol’s Major Crash Investigation Unit is investigating in charge of the investigation.&nbsp; Check the Post for additional details as they become available.

MSHP Trooper injured in crash with a semi

&nbsp;Attorney General Pam Bondi faced a combative Senate Judiciary hearing on Tuesday. with questions on the Epstein files and other controversial issues.

&nbsp;Attorney General Pam Bondi faced a combative Senate Judiciary hearing on Tuesday. with questions on the Epstein files and other controversial issues.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">.<a href="https://twitter.com/AGPamBondi?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@AGPamBondi</a>&#39;s opening remarks before the Senate Judiciary Committee: &quot;We learned the former FBI secretly investigated you and your colleagues... this is the kind of conduct that shatters the American people&#39;s faith in our law enforcement system. We will work to earn that back… <a href="https://t.co/Y5ZiXCTCPD">pic.twitter.com/Y5ZiXCTCPD</a>&mdash; Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) <a href="https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/1975563351452246212?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 7, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">&quot;Your city has a murder rate five times higher than New. York&#39;s — 571 homicides last year,&quot; says <a href="https://twitter.com/AGPamBondi?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@AGPamBondi</a> to the insufferable <a href="https://twitter.com/SenatorDurbin?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SenatorDurbin</a> on the National Guard in Chicago. &quot;We&#39;re there to help make America safe and Illinois safe — whether or not you want to.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/qgbZIryITP">pic.twitter.com/qgbZIryITP</a>&mdash; Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) <a href="https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/1975568173291515944?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 7, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Sen. SCHIFF: You’ve refused to answer questions about ethics, the Qatari plane, the Epstein files, Tom Homan’s alleged bribery, political prosecutions, military authorization… Bondi: *tries interrupting* Schiff: Excuse me. This is an oversight hearing. We demand answers. <a href="https://t.co/GSeAoMtcf4">pic.twitter.com/GSeAoMtcf4</a>&mdash; Senate Judiciary Democrats 🇺🇸 (@JudiciaryDems) <a href="https://twitter.com/JudiciaryDems/status/1975669931955134611?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 7, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">.<a href="https://twitter.com/AGPamBondi?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@AGPamBondi</a> cooks <a href="https://twitter.com/SenatorDurbin?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SenatorDurbin</a>: &quot;I wish you loved Chicago as much as you hate President Trump — and currently, the National Guard are on the way to Chicago. If you&#39;re not going to protect your citizens, President Trump will.&quot; 🔥 <a href="https://t.co/4CoNdH5w4p">pic.twitter.com/4CoNdH5w4p</a>&mdash; Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) <a href="https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/1975561272919015731?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 7, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Sen. DURBIN: Why was the FBI directed to flag Donald Trump’s name in the Epstein files? Bondi: I&#39;m not going to discuss anything related to these files. Durbin: Eventually, you&#39;re going to have to answer. <a href="https://t.co/OEUJEaReeM">pic.twitter.com/OEUJEaReeM</a>&mdash; Senate Judiciary Democrats 🇺🇸 (@JudiciaryDems) <a href="https://twitter.com/JudiciaryDems/status/1975621594841305544?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 7, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Sen. KLOBUCHAR: Do you support raising the age to 21 to purchase assault weapons? Bondi: I won’t discuss pending litigation. Sen. KLOBUCHAR: Your views are not pending litigation. <a href="https://t.co/RpCItcSjf5">pic.twitter.com/RpCItcSjf5</a>&mdash; Senate Judiciary Democrats 🇺🇸 (@JudiciaryDems) <a href="https://twitter.com/JudiciaryDems/status/1975625224537378969?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 7, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>

🎥Some highlights of AG Pam Bondi's fiery Senate hearing

KANSAS CITY —One person died in an accident just before 4p.m. Tuesday in Kansas City.

A gold Ford F150 was eastbound on 31st Street, according to KCPD Sergeant Jake Becchina.&nbsp; Just east of Mersington Street, an adult male pedestrian ran into the roadway from the grassy area located next to the parking lot of the Family Dollar Store.

The pickup struck the pedestrian who was thrown to the pavement. The driver of the pickup stopped immediately, remained at the scene, cooperated fully with the investigation, and was not impaired. 

KCFD EMS transported the pedestrian to a local hospital with life-threatening injuries. The pedestrian was subsequently pronounced deceased by hospital staff shortly after arrival. This is fatality #52 compared to #73 at this time last year, according to Becchina.

KANSAS CITY —One person died in an accident just before 4p.m. Tuesday in Kansas City.A gold Ford F150 was eastbound on 31st Street, according to KCPD Sergeant Jake Becchina.&nbsp; Just east of Mersington Street, an adult male pedestrian ran into the roadway from the grassy area located next to the parking lot of the Family Dollar Store.The pickup struck the pedestrian who was thrown to the pavement. The driver of the pickup stopped immediately, remained at the scene, cooperated fully with the investigation, and was not impaired. KCFD EMS transported the pedestrian to a local hospital with life-threatening injuries. The pedestrian was subsequently pronounced deceased by hospital staff shortly after arrival. This is fatality #52 compared to #73 at this time last year, according to Becchina.

Man killed running into street from KC store parking area

KANSAS CITY—A Kansas City area man faces felony charges for the stabbing and attempted robbery of a man hired to clean a city-owned park.

<a href="https://www.jacksoncountyprosecutor.com/DocumentCenter/View/2740/Lewis-Austin-Complaint-Packet_Redacted">Austin R. Lewis</a>, 30, is charged with 1st Degree Attempted Robbery, two counts of Armed Criminal Action, and 1st Degree Assault, according to&nbsp;Jackson County Prosecutor Melesa Johnson.

On October 5, Kansas City police were dispatched to an area near the National WWI Museum and Memorial regarding a reported cutting, a<a href="https://www.jacksoncountyprosecutor.com/DocumentCenter/View/2739/Austin-Lewis-Statement-of-Probable-Cause_Redacted">ccording to court records</a>. Based on witness reports, detectives determined that Lewis approached the victim, a worker cleaning the sidewalks, and asked for a dollar. When the victim, who did not speak English, did not respond, Lewis stabbed him with a knife in full view of witnesses before fleeing the scene.&nbsp;

The victim is alive and in stable condition.&nbsp;

Officers located Lewis a few minutes after responding to the scene and took him into custody. He declined to speak with detectives.&nbsp;

Lewis is being held on a $100,000 cash-only bond.&nbsp;

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/10/1759845288270.png" alt="Lewis photo Jackson Co." />
 <figcaption>Lewis photo Jackson Co.</figcaption>
 </figure>KANSAS CITY—A Kansas City area man faces felony charges for the stabbing and attempted robbery of a man hired to clean a city-owned park.<a href="https://www.jacksoncountyprosecutor.com/DocumentCenter/View/2740/Lewis-Austin-Complaint-Packet_Redacted">Austin R. Lewis</a>, 30, is charged with 1st Degree Attempted Robbery, two counts of Armed Criminal Action, and 1st Degree Assault, according to&nbsp;Jackson County Prosecutor Melesa Johnson.On October 5, Kansas City police were dispatched to an area near the National WWI Museum and Memorial regarding a reported cutting, a<a href="https://www.jacksoncountyprosecutor.com/DocumentCenter/View/2739/Austin-Lewis-Statement-of-Probable-Cause_Redacted">ccording to court records</a>. Based on witness reports, detectives determined that Lewis approached the victim, a worker cleaning the sidewalks, and asked for a dollar. When the victim, who did not speak English, did not respond, Lewis stabbed him with a knife in full view of witnesses before fleeing the scene.&nbsp;The victim is alive and in stable condition.&nbsp;Officers located Lewis a few minutes after responding to the scene and took him into custody. He declined to speak with detectives.&nbsp;Lewis is being held on a $100,000 cash-only bond.&nbsp;

Police: Man attacked worker hired to clean KC owned park

SHAWNEE COUNTY—Law enforcement are investigating a suspect on multiple allegations.&nbsp;

Just after 12:30p.m.&nbsp;October 5, a K-9 Unit with the Shawnee County Sheriff's office conducted a traffic stop on a gray Dodge Durango with a stolen license plate in the 2000 block of SE California Avenue, according to Sheriff's Deputy Abigail Christian.

During the investigation, illegal narcotics and multiple stolen items were located.

Deputies arrested 47-year-old Tashara D. Yeargin-Charles of Topeka and she was booked into the Shawnee County Department of Corrections on requested charges of&nbsp; identity theft, Possession of an opiate, opium, narcotic or certain stimulant, Use/possess with intent to use drug paraphernalia into the human body, Possession of stolen property, Vehicles; display plate not assigned, Vehicle liability insurance and Operate a motor vehicle without a valid license.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/10/1759850096982.png" alt="Yeargin-Charles photo Shawnee County" />
 <figcaption>Yeargin-Charles photo Shawnee County</figcaption>
 </figure>SHAWNEE COUNTY—Law enforcement are investigating a suspect on multiple allegations.&nbsp;Just after 12:30p.m.&nbsp;October 5, a K-9 Unit with the Shawnee County Sheriff's office conducted a traffic stop on a gray Dodge Durango with a stolen license plate in the 2000 block of SE California Avenue, according to Sheriff's Deputy Abigail Christian.During the investigation, illegal narcotics and multiple stolen items were located.Deputies arrested 47-year-old Tashara D. Yeargin-Charles of Topeka and she was booked into the Shawnee County Department of Corrections on requested charges of&nbsp; identity theft, Possession of an opiate, opium, narcotic or certain stimulant, Use/possess with intent to use drug paraphernalia into the human body, Possession of stolen property, Vehicles; display plate not assigned, Vehicle liability insurance and Operate a motor vehicle without a valid license.

Sheriff: Kansas woman jailed for alleged ID theft

By:<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/annaclairevollers/">Anna Claire Vollers</a>

The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday is scheduled to hear oral arguments in a case that could reverse or solidify state laws across the country that ban a controversial counseling practice for LGBTQ+ youth.

<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/audio/2025/24-539">Click here to listen</a>&nbsp;to a replay of the oral argument

The case challenges a 2019 Colorado law that bans “conversion therapy” for children and teens. Conversion therapy is a catchall term for efforts to change the sexual orientation or gender identity of LGBTQ+ people. Sometimes called “reparative therapy,” it can range from talk therapy and religious counseling to&nbsp;<a href="https://hls.harvard.edu/today/human-rights-program-hosts-un-expert-consultation-on-so-called-conversion-therapy-practices/#:~:text=an%20umbrella%20term%20referring%20to%20practices%20ranging%20from%20talk%20therapy%20to%20emotion%20suppression%20to%20electrical%20shocks%20that%20aim%20to%20change%20a%20person%E2%80%99s%20sexual%20orientation%20and/or%20gender%20identity." target="_blank">electrical shocks</a>, pain-inducing&nbsp;<a href="https://hls.harvard.edu/today/human-rights-program-hosts-un-expert-consultation-on-so-called-conversion-therapy-practices/#:~:text=an%20umbrella%20term%20referring%20to%20practices%20ranging%20from%20talk%20therapy%20to%20emotion%20suppression%20to%20electrical%20shocks%20that%20aim%20to%20change%20a%20person%E2%80%99s%20sexual%20orientation%20and/or%20gender%20identity." target="_blank">aversion therapy</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nursingoutlook.org/article/S0029-6554(15)00125-6/pdf" target="_blank">physical isolation</a>. The therapy has been widely discredited by medical groups.

<a href="https://www.lgbtmap.org/equality-maps/conversion_therapy" target="_blank">More than half of states</a>&nbsp;— including some led by Republicans — have banned or restricted the practice for children and teens since California became the first to do so in 2012, according to the Movement Advancement Project, a left-leaning nonprofit research organization that tracks LGBTQ+-related laws and policies.

In recent years, however, Republicans in several states have worked to reverse bans, with some success. A&nbsp;<a href="https://www.dataforprogress.org/blog/2025/6/16/voters-strongly-oppose-so-called-conversion-therapy-think-supreme-court-should-allow-state-bans" target="_blank">poll</a>&nbsp;in June by Data for Progress, a liberal think tank, found that although less than half of Republican voters, 43%, support or strongly support conversion therapy, more than half — 56% — said the Supreme Court ought to allow states to ban it.

A decision in the Colorado case, expected next year, could have far-reaching ramifications&nbsp;for dozens of other states.

“I think we’re all really worried about the implications,” said Cliff Rosky, a professor of law at the University of Utah. Rosky helped draft&nbsp;<a href="https://le.utah.gov/~2023/bills/static/HB0228.html" target="_blank">Utah’s 2023 law</a>&nbsp;prohibiting licensed professionals from practicing conversion therapy on LGBTQ+ youth. That measure&nbsp;<a href="https://legiscan.com/UT/bill/HB0228/2023" target="_blank">unanimously passed</a>&nbsp;the Republican-controlled legislature.

“We certainly hope the court will uphold the right of states to regulate the behavior of therapists that it licenses and protect children from a lethal public health threat,” he told Stateline.

The impact on other states’ laws would depend on the scope of the high court’s ruling. But most of those laws are similar to Colorado’s, Rosky said.

“Certainly, a broad ruling against Colorado’s law would jeopardize the constitutionality of all the other laws.”

In Chiles v. Salazar, a licensed counselor in Colorado Springs, Kaley Chiles,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/2025/24-539" target="_blank">sued state officials</a>&nbsp;in 2022 over a law that bars licensed mental health professionals from conducting conversion therapy on clients under 18. She argues the law violates her First Amendment right to free speech and interferes with her ability to practice counseling in a way that aligns with her religious convictions. Chiles is represented by conservative religious law firm Alliance Defending Freedom.

“The government has no business censoring private conversations between clients and counselors,” Jim Campbell, chief legal counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom,&nbsp;<a href="https://adflegal.org/press-release/supreme-court-weighs-whether-the-government-belongs-in-the-counseling-room/" target="_blank">said</a>&nbsp;in a news release when the group filed its opening brief in June. “Colorado’s law harms these young people by depriving them of caring and compassionate conversations with a counselor who helps them pursue the goals they desire.”

Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, a Democrat, said in an August&nbsp;<a href="https://coloradonewsline.com/2025/08/19/supreme-court-colorado-weiser-conversion-therapy/" target="_blank">news conference</a>&nbsp;that the law doesn’t prohibit a provider from sharing information or viewpoints with a patient, and that therapists are still allowed to talk with patients about conversion practices offered by religious groups.

But he&nbsp;<a href="https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1AEZ79eDJ7/" target="_blank">called</a>&nbsp;conversion therapy a “substandard, discredited practice.” Conversion therapy has been denounced by major medical organizations including the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.ama-assn.org/system/files/conversion-therapy-issue-brief.pdf" target="_blank">American Medical Association</a>, the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apa.org/topics/lgbtq/sexual-orientation-change#:~:text=Sexual%20orientation%20and%20gender%20identity%20(SOGI)%20change%20efforts%20commonly%20use%20an%20array%20of%20psychosocially%20harmful%20techniques%2C%20including%20public%20shaming%20or%20inducing%20adverse%20physiological%20reactions." target="_blank">American Psychological Association</a>, the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.psychiatry.org/getattachment/3d23f2f4-1497-4537-b4de-fe32fe8761bf/Position-Conversion-Therapy.pdf" target="_blank">American Psychiatric Association</a>&nbsp;and the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.aacap.org/aacap/Policy_Statements/2018/Conversion_Therapy.aspx#:~:text=Furthermore%2C%20based%20on,children%20and%20adolescents" target="_blank">American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry</a>.

“This practice has been used in the past to try to force patients to change their sexual orientation or their gender identity,” Weiser said. “The science, however, says that this practice is harmful. It doesn’t work.

“Regardless of how it’s performed, there can be real harms from this practice. And those harms can include depression, self-hatred, loss of faith, even suicide.”

The key question in the case is whether Colorado’s law regulates professional standards of conduct and speech, or whether it attempts to regulate the right to free speech, said Marie-Amélie George, a legal historian who has published extensively on LGBTQ+ rights and is a professor of law at Wake Forest University School of Law.

“What is really interesting about these laws is that most licensed health professionals don’t offer conversion therapy because professional associations across the board have condemned it as extremely harmful,” George told Stateline. After the mainstream mental health community disavowed efforts to change people’s sexual orientation by the late 1980s, conversion therapy “became primarily the province of religious and lay ministers,” she said.

State laws like Colorado’s don’t restrict clergy and lay ministers from engaging in conversion therapy, she said. They address only the small subset of state-licensed mental health professionals who wish to use it.

In August, attorneys general in 20 states and the District of Columbia filed an amicus brief&nbsp;<a href="https://www.mass.gov/doc/colorado-conversion-therapy-amicus/download" target="_blank">supporting Colorado’s law</a>. They argue the First Amendment doesn’t shield mental health practices from regulation when the state deems them dangerous or ineffective, and that states have a long and established history of regulating professional standards of care.

The decision in this case will probably affect all of the conversion therapy bans in this country.

– Marie-Amélie George, Wake Forest University School of Law professor

Colorado isn’t the only recent battleground over conversion therapy, as conservative majorities in the courts, state legislatures and at the federal level have opened the door for Republican lawmakers and conservative Christian groups to reinstate the practice.

Earlier this year, Kentucky’s Republican-controlled legislature passed a&nbsp;<a href="https://legiscan.com/KY/bill/HB495/2025" target="_blank">bill</a>&nbsp;canceling Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear’s&nbsp;<a href="https://kentuckylantern.com/2024/09/18/beshear-signs-order-banning-conversion-therapy-on-kentucky-minors/" target="_blank">2024 executive order</a>&nbsp;that banned conversion therapy for minors. Beshear promptly vetoed the bill, but the legislature&nbsp;<a href="https://kentuckylantern.com/2025/03/27/conversion-therapy-protected-in-kentucky-as-legislature-overrides-beshear-veto/" target="_blank">overrode his veto</a>&nbsp;in March.

In April, a coalition of Republican attorneys general from 11 states, led by Iowa and South Carolina,&nbsp;<a href="https://michiganadvance.com/briefs/republican-ags-ask-federal-appeals-panel-to-overturn-michigans-conversion-therapy-ban/" target="_blank">appealed</a>&nbsp;a January decision by a U.S. district court judge to uphold&nbsp;<a href="https://michiganadvance.com/2023/07/26/michigan-becomes-22nd-state-to-ban-conversion-therapy-for-lgbtq-youth/" target="_blank">a 2023 Michigan law</a>&nbsp;that’s similar to Colorado’s. It prohibits mental health professionals from trying to alter a minor’s sexual orientation or gender identity. The case began when Catholic Charities of three Michigan counties&nbsp;<a href="https://michiganadvance.com/2024/07/15/lawsuit-seeks-to-overturn-michigans-ban-on-conversion-therapy-for-minors/" target="_blank">filed a lawsuit targeting Michigan’s law in 2024</a>&nbsp;on behalf of a licensed therapist.

In July, a Virginia court partially struck down the state’s 2020 ban on conversion therapy for minors. Republican lawmakers in Michigan introduced a&nbsp;<a href="https://legiscan.com/MI/bill/HB4752/2025" target="_blank">bill</a>&nbsp;in July to repeal their state’s ban,&nbsp;while Missouri’s Republican attorney general&nbsp;<a href="https://ago.mo.gov/attorney-general-bailey-files-suit-against-jackson-county-to-protect-free-speech-in-counseling-offices/" target="_blank">sued</a>&nbsp;to overturn local conversion therapy bans.

From the mid-1990s until the mid-2010s, LGBTQ+ rights advocates won a lot of cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, said George, the Wake Forest professor.

“But in the years since, the Supreme Court has been more hostile to LGBTQ+ rights claims,” she said. “I think, with the political environment of the court, it will be interesting to see what they do given how they have treated other LGBTQ+ rights cases in recent years.

“States are extremely similar in the laws they have enacted, so the decision in this case will probably affect all of the conversion therapy bans in this country.”

Stateline reporter Anna Claire Vollers can be reached at&nbsp;<a href="mailto:avollers@stateline.org">avollers@stateline.org</a>.

This story was originally produced by&nbsp;<a href="https://stateline.org/2025/10/06/conversion-therapy-for-lgbtq-minors-goes-before-the-supreme-court/" target="_blank">Stateline</a>, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Missouri Independent, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

🎧 Conversion therapy for LGBTQ+ minors goes before the US Supreme Court

By:<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/jennifer-shutt/">Jennifer Shutt</a>

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration may try to interpret a law enacted during his first term in office differently than it did following the last government shutdown, potentially denying back pay to hundreds of thousands of furloughed federal workers.&nbsp;

The change in stance, outlined in a memo from the Office of Management and Budget that was&nbsp;<a href="https://www.axios.com/2025/10/07/trump-memo-furloughed-federal-workers-backpay" target="_blank">first reported by Axios</a>&nbsp;on Tuesday and confirmed to States Newsroom by a White House official, would drastically change the stakes of the ongoing funding lapse, which began Oct. 1.&nbsp;

President Donald Trump didn’t clearly say how he personally views the law during an afternoon press conference in the Oval Office, though he indicated he doesn’t intend to provide back pay to all federal workers.&nbsp;

“I would say it depends on who we’re talking about,” Trump said. “I can tell you this: the Democrats have put a lot of people in great risk and jeopardy. But it really depends on who you’re talking about. But for the most part we’re going to take care of our people. There are some people that really don’t deserve to be taken care of and we’ll take care of them in a different way.”

Trump said he will likely announce mass layoffs of federal employees in the next week and opened the door to canceling funding approved by Congress if the shutdown persists.&nbsp;

“I’ll be able to tell you that in four or five days if this keeps going on,” Trump said. “If this keeps going on it’ll be substantial and a lot of those jobs will never come back.”

OPM earlier said workers would receive back pay

Reinterpreting the law would go against&nbsp;<a href="https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/reference-materials/guidance-for-shutdown-furloughs-sep-28-2025/?" target="_blank">guidance</a>&nbsp;the Office of Personnel Management released in late September, which stated that after “the lapse in appropriations has ended, employees who were furloughed as the result of the lapse will receive retroactive pay for those furlough periods.”

During the 35-day shutdown during Trump’s first term, Congress approved&nbsp;<a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/24" target="_blank">a bill</a>&nbsp;titled the Government Employee Fair Treatment Act of 2019 that guaranteed back pay for both exempt and furloughed federal workers. Trump signed the legislation into law himself.&nbsp;

Before the law, Congress typically voted following each funding lapse to ensure back pay for all federal employees.&nbsp;

The Congressional Budget Office&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/about-750000-federal-workers-will-be-furloughed-shutdown-nonpartisan-cbo-projects" target="_blank">projected</a>&nbsp;750,000 federal workers would be furloughed in the current shutdown.&nbsp;

Democrats on Capitol Hill rebuffed the memo on Tuesday, arguing it is another example of Trump attempting to circumvent the law.&nbsp;

“The letter of the law is as plain as can be—federal workers, including furloughed workers, are entitled to their backpay following a shutdown,” Senate Appropriations ranking member Patty Murray, D-Wash., wrote on social media. “Another baseless attempt to try and scare &amp; intimidate workers by an administration run by crooks and cowards.”

Maryland Democratic Sen. Chris Van Hollen, who represents a considerable number of federal workers, said during a brief interview he doesn’t believe lawmakers need to clarify the law in any way, calling it “crystal clear.”&nbsp;

“This is a bill that (former) Senator (Ben) Cardin and I introduced back during that shutdown,” Van Hollen said. “And I looked at it again today after the White House comments, and they’re blowing smoke. This is part of their effort to scare. So this is all part of their fearmongering. That’s what it’s about.”&nbsp;

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., asked about the memo during a morning press conference, said he hadn’t seen it or spoken with anyone in the White House, but he didn’t seem to take issue with its change of course.&nbsp;

“I’m sure there will be a lot of discussion about that. But there are legal analysts who think that is not something that government should do,” Johnson said. “If that is true, that should turn up the urgency and the necessity of the Democrats doing the right thing here.”&nbsp;

Pressed by another reporter about the principle involved with possibly not adhering to the law, Johnson said he hopes that furloughed federal workers do receive their back pay.

“I can tell you the president believes that as well. He and I have talked about this personally. He doesn’t want people to go without back pay,” Johnson said. “And that’s why he pleaded with Chuck Schumer to do the right thing and vote to keep the government open. We don’t want this to happen.”&nbsp;

Johnson didn’t clarify why — if Trump believes furloughed workers should receive back pay consistent with the 2019 law — the White House budget office prepared a memo stating the opposite.

Johnson’s&nbsp;<a href="https://mikejohnson.house.gov/services/government-shutdown.htm" target="_blank">official House website</a>&nbsp;explains that during a shutdown “federal employees will either be furloughed, or in some cases required to work without pay. Under federal law, employees are entitled to back pay upon the government reopening.”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said during an afternoon press conference he expects furloughed workers will receive their back pay once the shutdown ends.&nbsp;

“I haven’t looked at the memo specifically yet. My assumption is that furloughed workers will get back pay,” Thuen said. “But that being said, this is very simple — open up the government and this is a nonissue.”

The Senate&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/government-shutdown-enters-day-six-talks-over-health-care-impasse" target="_blank">has deadlocked five times</a>&nbsp;on a stopgap government funding bill that passed the House in mid-September. The upper chamber is expected to vote at least one more time this week.

Democrats call for negotiations on shutdown

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said during a morning floor speech that Johnson “has become a massive roadblock to progress,” though he didn’t address the possibility of no back pay for furloughed workers.&nbsp;

“Ending this shutdown will require Donald Trump to step in and push Speaker Johnson to negotiate because without the president’s involvement, Speaker Johnson and MAGA Republicans in the House are increasingly dug in,” Schumer said.&nbsp;

House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, &nbsp;a New York Democrat, said during a morning press conference the White House was incorrect in its new interpretation.&nbsp;

“The law is clear — every single furloughed employee is entitled to pay back. Period. Full stop,” Jeffries said. “The law is clear and we will make sure that that law is followed.”

American Federation of Government Employees National President Everett Kelley wrote in a statement the “frivolous argument that federal employees are not guaranteed backpay under the Government Employee Fair Treatment Act is an obvious misinterpretation of the law.&nbsp;

“It is also inconsistent with the Trump administration’s own guidance from mere days ago, which clearly and correctly states that furloughed employees will receive retroactive pay for the time they were out of work as quickly as possible once the shutdown is over.”

&nbsp;Shauneen Miranda and Ariana Figueroa contributed to this report.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/10/1759875394137.png" alt="A sign advising that the Capitol Visitors Center in the U.S. Capitol is closed, in Washington, D.C., is pictured on Oct. (Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)." />
 <figcaption>A sign advising that the Capitol Visitors Center in the U.S. Capitol is closed, in Washington, D.C., is pictured on Oct. (Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom).</figcaption>
 </figure>By:<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/jennifer-shutt/">Jennifer Shutt</a>WASHINGTON — The Trump administration may try to interpret a law enacted during his first term in office differently than it did following the last government shutdown, potentially denying back pay to hundreds of thousands of furloughed federal workers.&nbsp;<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Q: &quot;Is it the White House&#39;s position that furloughed workers should be paid for their back-pay?&quot; President Trump: &quot;I would say it depends on who we&#39;re talking about. I can tell you this, the Democrats have put a lot of people in great risk and jeopardy, but it really depends on… <a href="https://t.co/dbftoc2vC2">pic.twitter.com/dbftoc2vC2</a>&mdash; CSPAN (@cspan) <a href="https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1975596357172802032?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 7, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>The change in stance, outlined in a memo from the Office of Management and Budget that was&nbsp;<a href="https://www.axios.com/2025/10/07/trump-memo-furloughed-federal-workers-backpay" target="_blank">first reported by Axios</a>&nbsp;on Tuesday and confirmed to States Newsroom by a White House official, would drastically change the stakes of the ongoing funding lapse, which began Oct. 1.&nbsp;President Donald Trump didn’t clearly say how he personally views the law during an afternoon press conference in the Oval Office, though he indicated he doesn’t intend to provide back pay to all federal workers.&nbsp;“I would say it depends on who we’re talking about,” Trump said. “I can tell you this: the Democrats have put a lot of people in great risk and jeopardy. But it really depends on who you’re talking about. But for the most part we’re going to take care of our people. There are some people that really don’t deserve to be taken care of and we’ll take care of them in a different way.”Trump said he will likely announce mass layoffs of federal employees in the next week and opened the door to canceling funding approved by Congress if the shutdown persists.&nbsp;“I’ll be able to tell you that in four or five days if this keeps going on,” Trump said. “If this keeps going on it’ll be substantial and a lot of those jobs will never come back.”<h2>OPM earlier said workers would receive back pay</h2>Reinterpreting the law would go against&nbsp;<a href="https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/reference-materials/guidance-for-shutdown-furloughs-sep-28-2025/?" target="_blank">guidance</a>&nbsp;the Office of Personnel Management released in late September, which stated that after “the lapse in appropriations has ended, employees who were furloughed as the result of the lapse will receive retroactive pay for those furlough periods.”During the 35-day shutdown during Trump’s first term, Congress approved&nbsp;<a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/24" target="_blank">a bill</a>&nbsp;titled the Government Employee Fair Treatment Act of 2019 that guaranteed back pay for both exempt and furloughed federal workers. Trump signed the legislation into law himself.&nbsp;Before the law, Congress typically voted following each funding lapse to ensure back pay for all federal employees.&nbsp;The Congressional Budget Office&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/about-750000-federal-workers-will-be-furloughed-shutdown-nonpartisan-cbo-projects" target="_blank">projected</a>&nbsp;750,000 federal workers would be furloughed in the current shutdown.&nbsp;Democrats on Capitol Hill rebuffed the memo on Tuesday, arguing it is another example of Trump attempting to circumvent the law.&nbsp;“The letter of the law is as plain as can be—federal workers, including furloughed workers, are entitled to their backpay following a shutdown,” Senate Appropriations ranking member Patty Murray, D-Wash., wrote on social media. “Another baseless attempt to try and scare &amp; intimidate workers by an administration run by crooks and cowards.”Maryland Democratic Sen. Chris Van Hollen, who represents a considerable number of federal workers, said during a brief interview he doesn’t believe lawmakers need to clarify the law in any way, calling it “crystal clear.”&nbsp;“This is a bill that (former) Senator (Ben) Cardin and I introduced back during that shutdown,” Van Hollen said. “And I looked at it again today after the White House comments, and they’re blowing smoke. This is part of their effort to scare. So this is all part of their fearmongering. That’s what it’s about.”&nbsp;<h2>‘That should turn up the urgency’</h2>Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., asked about the memo during a morning press conference, said he hadn’t seen it or spoken with anyone in the White House, but he didn’t seem to take issue with its change of course.&nbsp;“I’m sure there will be a lot of discussion about that. But there are legal analysts who think that is not something that government should do,” Johnson said. “If that is true, that should turn up the urgency and the necessity of the Democrats doing the right thing here.”&nbsp;Pressed by another reporter about the principle involved with possibly not adhering to the law, Johnson said he hopes that furloughed federal workers do receive their back pay.“I can tell you the president believes that as well. He and I have talked about this personally. He doesn’t want people to go without back pay,” Johnson said. “And that’s why he pleaded with Chuck Schumer to do the right thing and vote to keep the government open. We don’t want this to happen.”&nbsp;<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/10/1759875311575.png" alt="U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson’s website on Oct. 7, 2025, stating, “Under federal law, employees are entitled to back pay upon the government reopening.” (States Newsroom screenshot)" />
 <figcaption>U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson’s website on Oct. 7, 2025, stating, “Under federal law, employees are entitled to back pay upon the government reopening.” (States Newsroom screenshot)</figcaption>
 </figure>Johnson didn’t clarify why — if Trump believes furloughed workers should receive back pay consistent with the 2019 law — the White House budget office prepared a memo stating the opposite.Johnson’s&nbsp;<a href="https://mikejohnson.house.gov/services/government-shutdown.htm" target="_blank">official House website</a>&nbsp;explains that during a shutdown “federal employees will either be furloughed, or in some cases required to work without pay. Under federal law, employees are entitled to back pay upon the government reopening.”Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said during an afternoon press conference he expects furloughed workers will receive their back pay once the shutdown ends.&nbsp;“I haven’t looked at the memo specifically yet. My assumption is that furloughed workers will get back pay,” Thuen said. “But that being said, this is very simple — open up the government and this is a nonissue.”The Senate&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/government-shutdown-enters-day-six-talks-over-health-care-impasse" target="_blank">has deadlocked five times</a>&nbsp;on a stopgap government funding bill that passed the House in mid-September. The upper chamber is expected to vote at least one more time this week.<h2>Democrats call for negotiations on shutdown</h2>Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said during a morning floor speech that Johnson “has become a massive roadblock to progress,” though he didn’t address the possibility of no back pay for furloughed workers.&nbsp;“Ending this shutdown will require Donald Trump to step in and push Speaker Johnson to negotiate because without the president’s involvement, Speaker Johnson and MAGA Republicans in the House are increasingly dug in,” Schumer said.&nbsp;House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, &nbsp;a New York Democrat, said during a morning press conference the White House was incorrect in its new interpretation.&nbsp;“The law is clear — every single furloughed employee is entitled to pay back. Period. Full stop,” Jeffries said. “The law is clear and we will make sure that that law is followed.”American Federation of Government Employees National President Everett Kelley wrote in a statement the “frivolous argument that federal employees are not guaranteed backpay under the Government Employee Fair Treatment Act is an obvious misinterpretation of the law.&nbsp;“It is also inconsistent with the Trump administration’s own guidance from mere days ago, which clearly and correctly states that furloughed employees will receive retroactive pay for the time they were out of work as quickly as possible once the shutdown is over.”&nbsp;Shauneen Miranda and Ariana Figueroa contributed to this report.

🎥Trump floats plan to deny back pay to furloughed federal workers after shutdown

WASHINGTON&nbsp;– An explosive&nbsp;<a href="https://www.grassley.senate.gov/download/arctic-frost-toll-analysis-of-us-senators">FBI document</a>&nbsp;obtained by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) reveals the FBI targeted eight Republican senators’ personal cell phones for “tolling data” as part of its Arctic Frost investigation, according to a statement from the Senate Judiciary Committee.

One Republican member of the House of Representatives was also impacted. The Arctic Frost investigation formed the basis of Jack Smith’s elector case against President Donald Trump.

The FBI in 2023 sought and obtained data about the senators’ phone use from&nbsp;January 4 through January 7, 2021. That data shows when and to whom a call is made, as well as the duration and general location data of the call. The data does not include the content of the call.

This document was found in a Prohibited Access file in response to Grassley’s oversight requests. Grassley’s oversight&nbsp;<a href="https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/press/rep/releases/grassley-investigates-prohibited-access-files-at-fbi-demands-accountability-for-document-destruction-and-obstruction-in-mueller-investigation" target="_blank">exposed the existence</a>&nbsp;of Prohibited Access files, a file system the FBI uses to limit access to certain documents by making some files inaccessible to most FBI agents.

Read the FBI document&nbsp;<a href="https://www.grassley.senate.gov/download/arctic-frost-toll-analysis-of-us-senators">HERE</a>.

The FBI targeted the following Members of Congress:Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.)Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.)Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska)Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.)Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.)Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.)Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.)Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.)

Grassley issued the following statement regarding today’s disclosure:

“Based on the evidence to-date, Arctic Frost and related weaponization by federal law enforcement under Biden was arguably worse than Watergate.

“What I’ve uncovered today is disturbing and outrageous political conduct by the Biden FBI. The FBI’s actions were an unconstitutional breach, and Attorney General Bondi and Director Patel need to hold accountable those involved in this serious wrongdoing.

“I started the Arctic Frost investigation&nbsp;<a href="https://www.grassley.senate.gov/download/grassley-to-justice-dept-fbi_-political-bias" target="_blank">in July 2022</a>&nbsp;after hearing from whistleblowers. It’s taken years to get records and advance my investigation, but what the public is seeing now demonstrates the importance of congressional oversight and whistleblowers. My whistleblowers deserve great thanks for what they’ve helped expose. None of this would have been known without them.”

Background:The FBI’s Arctic Frost investigation was&nbsp;<a href="https://www.grassley.senate.gov/download/exhibit-8-arctic-frost" target="_blank">opened in April 2022</a>&nbsp;by former anti-Trump agent Timothy Thibault. In November 2022,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.grassley.senate.gov/download/arctic-frost-bank-record-subpoenas" target="_blank">it was assigned</a>&nbsp;to Special Counsel Jack Smith.&nbsp;

Whistleblower disclosures to Grassley earlier this year&nbsp;<a href="https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/press/rep/releases/grassley-johnson-release-records-showing-fbi-obtained-trump-pence-cell-phones-conducted-sweeping-interviews-to-advance-anti-trump-arctic-frost-investigation" target="_blank">revealed</a>&nbsp;the FBI acquired the government cell phones of President Donald Trump and former Vice President Mike Pence during its Arctic Frost investigation. Officials in the Biden White House&nbsp;<a href="https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/press/rep/releases/grassley-johnson-release-additional-arctic-frost-records-detailing-sweeping-anti-trump-investigation" target="_blank">personally assisted</a>&nbsp;the FBI in securing Trump and Pence’s government phones. FBI agents used taxpayer dollars to travel the country and conduct dozens of interviews in support of the political probe.

WASHINGTON&nbsp;– An explosive&nbsp;<a href="https://www.grassley.senate.gov/download/arctic-frost-toll-analysis-of-us-senators">FBI document</a>&nbsp;obtained by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) reveals the FBI targeted eight Republican senators’ personal cell phones for “tolling data” as part of its Arctic Frost investigation, according to a statement from the Senate Judiciary Committee.One Republican member of the House of Representatives was also impacted. The Arctic Frost investigation formed the basis of Jack Smith’s elector case against President Donald Trump.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">This document shows the Biden FBI spied on 8 of my Republican Senate colleagues during its Arctic Frost investigation into &quot;election conspiracy&quot; Arctic Frost later became Jack Smith&#39;s elector case against Trump BIDEN FBI WEAPONIZATION = WORSE THAN WATERGATE <a href="https://t.co/V2JyiVlX48">pic.twitter.com/V2JyiVlX48</a>&mdash; Chuck Grassley (@ChuckGrassley) <a href="https://twitter.com/ChuckGrassley/status/1975297712712262100?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 6, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">.<a href="https://twitter.com/AGPamBondi?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@AGPamBondi</a>: &quot;We learned that former FBI secretly investigated you and your colleagues. Why? They wanted to take President Trump off the playing field...This is the kind of conduct that shatters the American people&#39;s faith in our law enforcement system.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/FRr65KtHsH">pic.twitter.com/FRr65KtHsH</a>&mdash; CSPAN (@cspan) <a href="https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1975590921082114532?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 7, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Sen. <a href="https://twitter.com/HawleyMO?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@HawleyMO</a>: &quot;Who ordered the tapping of the phones of United States Senators?<a href="https://twitter.com/AGPamBondi?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@AGPamBondi</a>: &quot;I cannot discuss the details of that right now for very good reason...We will be looking at all aspects of this and I have talked to Director Patel at length about this.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/8OEwJ24gsr">pic.twitter.com/8OEwJ24gsr</a>&mdash; CSPAN (@cspan) <a href="https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1975610383051206995?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 7, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>The FBI in 2023 sought and obtained data about the senators’ phone use from&nbsp;January 4 through January 7, 2021. That data shows when and to whom a call is made, as well as the duration and general location data of the call. The data does not include the content of the call.This document was found in a Prohibited Access file in response to Grassley’s oversight requests. Grassley’s oversight&nbsp;<a href="https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/press/rep/releases/grassley-investigates-prohibited-access-files-at-fbi-demands-accountability-for-document-destruction-and-obstruction-in-mueller-investigation" target="_blank">exposed the existence</a>&nbsp;of Prohibited Access files, a file system the FBI uses to limit access to certain documents by making some files inaccessible to most FBI agents.Read the FBI document&nbsp;<a href="https://www.grassley.senate.gov/download/arctic-frost-toll-analysis-of-us-senators">HERE</a>.The FBI targeted the following Members of Congress:Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.)Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.)Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska)Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.)Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.)Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.)Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.)Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.)Grassley issued the following statement regarding today’s disclosure:“Based on the evidence to-date, Arctic Frost and related weaponization by federal law enforcement under Biden was arguably worse than Watergate.“What I’ve uncovered today is disturbing and outrageous political conduct by the Biden FBI. The FBI’s actions were an unconstitutional breach, and Attorney General Bondi and Director Patel need to hold accountable those involved in this serious wrongdoing.“I started the Arctic Frost investigation&nbsp;<a href="https://www.grassley.senate.gov/download/grassley-to-justice-dept-fbi_-political-bias" target="_blank">in July 2022</a>&nbsp;after hearing from whistleblowers. It’s taken years to get records and advance my investigation, but what the public is seeing now demonstrates the importance of congressional oversight and whistleblowers. My whistleblowers deserve great thanks for what they’ve helped expose. None of this would have been known without them.”Background:The FBI’s Arctic Frost investigation was&nbsp;<a href="https://www.grassley.senate.gov/download/exhibit-8-arctic-frost" target="_blank">opened in April 2022</a>&nbsp;by former anti-Trump agent Timothy Thibault. In November 2022,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.grassley.senate.gov/download/arctic-frost-bank-record-subpoenas" target="_blank">it was assigned</a>&nbsp;to Special Counsel Jack Smith.&nbsp;Whistleblower disclosures to Grassley earlier this year&nbsp;<a href="https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/press/rep/releases/grassley-johnson-release-records-showing-fbi-obtained-trump-pence-cell-phones-conducted-sweeping-interviews-to-advance-anti-trump-arctic-frost-investigation" target="_blank">revealed</a>&nbsp;the FBI acquired the government cell phones of President Donald Trump and former Vice President Mike Pence during its Arctic Frost investigation. Officials in the Biden White House&nbsp;<a href="https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/press/rep/releases/grassley-johnson-release-additional-arctic-frost-records-detailing-sweeping-anti-trump-investigation" target="_blank">personally assisted</a>&nbsp;the FBI in securing Trump and Pence’s government phones. FBI agents used taxpayer dollars to travel the country and conduct dozens of interviews in support of the political probe.Records Grassley made public last month&nbsp;<a href="https://www.grassley.senate.gov/download/arctic-frost-bank-record-subpoenas" target="_blank">showed</a>&nbsp;the FBI also placed 92 Republican-linked individuals and Republican groups – such as Charlie Kirk’s Turning Point USA – under Arctic Frost’s investigative scope.