House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) agreed with liberal Call To Activism host Joe Gallina that House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) is obstructing the confirmation of newly-elected Rep. Adelita Grijalva (D-AZ) to stave off the final vote on the bipartisan discharge petition to compel the release of the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking case files.

Johnson plans not to bring back lawmakers throughout next week to conduct business, and while observers suspect delaying an Epstein vote is the main cause, another potential side effect is dragging out a potential government shutdown.

Grijalva, who was elected to replace her late father, progressive icon Rep. Raúl Grijalva, is expected, once sworn in, to cast that final vote for the petition, which was introduced by Reps. Ro Khanna (D-CA) and Thomas Massie (R-KY). President Donald Trump and Republican leadership have opposed the resolution and done everything in their power to stop it.

"It looks like Speaker Johnson is literally slow-walking Adelita Grijalva to her seat," said Gallina. "She just won the special election. She, importantly, is that final needed vote on that discharge petition to release the Epstein files and get that vote on the floor, and it looks like Republicans want to delay, delay, maybe so they can pressure other Republicans. What's your perspective about that?"

"I think you're exactly right," said Jeffries. "There's reason to believe that House Republicans are trying to push back the swearing in of Representative-elect Grijalva, who is going to be a tremendous representative, following in the footsteps of her legendary father, Chairman Grijalva. And, you know, there's no controversy as it relates to who won that election. Zero controversy. She won. She won decisively. And what has happened in every other instance is, when there is a clear winner, and Republicans just did this in Florida, in the aftermath of the special elections in April, is swear their members in immediately. And Representative-elect Grijalva should be treated with the same level of respect."

"And if she's not treated with that same level of respect, we are going to forcefully use whatever tools are available to us in the Congress to push back and make sure we're highlighting for the public that this is probably being done because she's the 218th vote on releasing the Epstein files, which they've been hiding from the American people" said Jeffries. "And they're frightened to death, clearly, about what's in them."

Amid rising concerns over US President Donald Trump’s authoritarianism, including attacks on the media, press freedom advocates on Friday celebrated the dismissal of some federal charges against a journalist indicted during the Biden administration.

“This ruling is a significant victory for free expression and press freedom, and it will help restore confidence that journalists, researchers, and members of the public are not breaking federal law simply by accessing or reviewing streaming information,” said Bobby Block, executive director of the Florida First Amendment Foundation, which had filed an amicus brief with other advocacy groups.

US District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle—appointed to the Middle District of Florida by Trump during his first term—dismissed seven of the 14 charges against Tampa-based media consultant and journalist Timothy Burke on Thursday.

Burke was arrested and charged last year after obtaining and disseminating unaired 2022 footage from Tucker Carlson’s former show on Fox News, including antisemitic remarks by Ye, the rapper formerly known as Kanye West.

“In this case, the government argues that it can prove a Wiretap Act violation solely by showing that a defendant intentionally acquired a communication using a device and that the many exceptions to the Wiretap Act are not elements of the crime but instead defenses to be raised by a criminal defendant,” the judge wrote. “Significant First Amendment concerns arise if I were to adopt the government’s theory.”

“The court recognized that the government’s theory not only posed serious threats to press freedom, but also to anyone engaged in everyday internet activity.”

Seth Stern, director of advocacy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation, explained that “the prosecution’s theory would have allowed not only journalists but anyone who watched a livestream to be forced to defend themselves in court to stay out of prison. It would be naive to think the government wouldn’t abuse that kind of power.”

Stern expressed relief at the judge’s dismissal decision, while Yanni Chen, legal director at the group Free Press, called it “a crucial victory for the First Amendment—for journalists, for internet users, and, most immediately, for Timothy Burke.”

“The court recognized that the government’s theory not only posed serious threats to press freedom, but also to anyone engaged in everyday internet activity,” Chen said. “At a time when journalists face increasing risks for doing their jobs of holding power to account, this ruling affirms the essential protections they deserve and sends a clear message: The law cannot be twisted to criminalize newsgathering.”

Jennifer Stisa Granick, surveillance and cybersecurity counsel with the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, also pointed to threats under the current US government, saying that “now is a time when press freedom is in jeopardy and it’s essential that courts stop prosecutors from twisting the law to silence news the government doesn’t like.”

“The Wiretap Act protects our privacy; it doesn’t criminalize journalists whose reporting relies on online sources,” she stressed. “Tim Burke’s case isn’t the first example of this kind of abuse, but hopefully it will be the last.”

In a social media post late Thursday, Burke thanked not only his “overworked and underpaid legal team” but also the press freedom groups that submitted amicus briefs in this case.

Burke also stressed that the case against him continues, saying, “To be clear, only the wiretap charges (which were half of the total) have been dismissed, though they were certainly the far more serious of the allegations and I’m grateful the court has found them to be deficient.”

Last month, Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell—appointed to the Middle District of Florida by former President Barack Obama—sentenced Marco Gaudino to five years of probation with a year of house arrest for his role in helping Burke gain unauthorized access to the videos. Gaudino pleaded guilty to a single conspiracy charge and agreed to cooperate with prosecutors against Burke.

Americans in the largest health insurance market could see their premiums double in price virtually overnight, depending on what Congress does over the next few days.

Politico reported Friday that hundreds of thousands of people in California could see a significant spike in their health insurance premiums at the end of the month, due to the possibility of both a federal government shutdown and a funding bill being passed without an extension of Affordable Care Act (ACA, or Obamacare) subsidies. When open enrollment begins in November, those buying health insurance in the Golden State could experience significant sticker shock should those subsidies not be renewed.

"It’s going to cause a lot of grief, a lot of anxiety," Martha Santana-Chin, who is the CEO of the L.A. Care insurance plan, told Politico. "Quite frankly, there’s not a whole lot we can do about that if people just simply can’t afford to pay."

Because the subsidies keep plans affordable, those subsidies expiring could lead to as many as 400,000 Californians — almost a quarter of all enrollees in the Golden State – dropping their health insurance plans over a matter of months. This would cause premiums for those still on their insurance to spike, as most people who drop their insurance are typically younger and healthier. With that population gone, the risk pool for insurers automatically becomes older and sicker by default.

Jessica Altman, who is the executive director of Covered California (the state-run health insurance exchange) said there is roughly $190 million set aside to help state residents cover insurance funding gaps. However, she lamented that even that amount would be a drop in the bucket compared to the estimated $2.5 billion in lost funds should Congress not extend the ACA subsidies.

"I feel very privileged to be in a state that’s putting that amount forward for affordability, particularly in the context of a challenging fiscal situation in the state budget," she said. "But we shouldn’t pretend it’s going to fully fill the hole ... we will lose a lot of people."

There could be even greater numbers of people dropping off of the insurance rolls in the coming years, thanks to language in President Donald Trump's "One Big Beautiful Bill Act." That law will make it so Americans have to manually opt into insurance coverage, as opposed to the current system that automatically enrolls Golden State residents. Politico reported that roughly 70 percent of Covered California customers were automatically enrolled.

Republicans have indicated a willingness to discuss extending the subsidies, though not as part of the must-pass funding bill due on Trump's desk by Tuesday. The subsidies will permanently expire by the end of the calendar year if no action is taken.

Click here to read Politico's full report.