The Justice Department obtained a portfolio of information about a Fox News correspondent's conversations and visits as part of an investigation into a possible leak, The Washington Post reported Monday -- in the latest example of the government seizing records of journalists.

This follows the charge that the department secretly obtained two months of phone records from Associated Press journalists as part of a separate leak probe. The department in this case, though, went a step further, as an FBI agent reportedly claimed there's evidence the journalist in question -- Fox News' James Rosen -- broke the law "at the very least, either as an aider, abettor and/or co-conspirator."

That detail would potentially send the case into unprecedented territory. No reporter has been prosecuted for seeking information. Such cases often target the suspected leaker, but not the journalist who published sensitive or classified information...

WASHINGTON – A pair of last-ditch meetings between the Obama administration and House Republicans failed to avert a scheduled contempt vote for Attorney General Eric Holder over the 'Fast and Furious' documents dispute.

A source familiar with the talks told Fox News that the Republicans met with administration officials twice Tuesday -- at the Justice Department and at the White House. The Justice Department showed GOP staff 14 documents on the failed anti-gunrunning operation, totaling about 30 pages.

House Oversight Committee Chairman and Republican Rep. Darrell Issa wants internal communications from February 2011, when the administration denied knowledge of gun-walking, to the end of that year, when officials acknowledged the denial was erroneous. Those documents covered a period after Fast and Furious had been shut down...

Romney Press Secretary Andrea Saul attacked President Barack Obama's decision to invoke executive privilege on documents pertaining to the Fast and Furious scandal requested by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

“President Obama’s pledge to run the most open and transparent administration in history has turned out to be just another broken promise,” she said in a statement to BuzzFeed.

The scandal has largely been ignored by the media and the American public, but is entering the mainstream as the committee prepares to vote to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress for failing to turn over the documents.

The contempt vote centers around documents contempt from after February 4, 2011 — the fate the Department of Justice first tried to downplay the failed operation — to examine why it took so long to acknowledge the operation's flaws, the management practices at the department, and how it treated whistle-blowers...

Rep. Darrell Issa pressed ahead with a committee vote Wednesday to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress, despite an 11th-hour move by President Obama to exert executive privilege over the Fast and Furious documents at the heart of the dispute.

The announcement touched off a caustic debate on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that lasted into the afternoon, as Democrats accused Issa of prosecuting a "political witch hunt" and Republicans stepped up their criticism of Holder's "stonewalling" over the Fast and Furious probe. Even for Washington, the tone at the hearing was decidedly bitter and accusatory.

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee was first informed of the president's decision to exert executive privilege in a letter Wednesday morning, shortly before the contempt vote was scheduled...

Attorney General Eric Holder has provided a formal response to a federal appeals court on whether the administration believes judges have the power to overturn federal laws.

Holder said "the power of the courts to review the constitutionality of legislation is beyond dispute," though it should only be exercised in "appropriate cases."

Original story...

The Obama Justice Department is facing an early afternoon deadline to submit its formal explanation over whether the administration believes judges have the power to overturn federal laws.

But while administration officials have made clear in the wake of President Obama's controversial comments that they respect that authority, it's unlikely the letter Thursday will smooth things over...

Attorney General Eric Holder acknowledged Wednesday that the "courts have final say," and said his department would respond formally to an appeals court order to explain whether the Obama administration believes judges in fact have the power to overturn federal laws.

The attorney general, at a brief press conference in Chicago, made clear the administration thinks they do.

"We respect the decisions made by the courts since Marbury v. Madison," Holder said Wednesday, referring to the landmark 1803 case that established the precedent of judicial review. "Courts have final say."

The comments come after a three-judge panel for the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday ordered the Justice Department to explain its position by Thursday at noon.

An advocate for sound policy in the military says a recent decision by the Obama Justice Department goes against a congressional mandate to defend traditional marriage.

The New York Times recently reported that Attorney General Eric Holder backs equal benefits for so-called "gay" couples in the military, even though Congress has not sanctioned same-sex "marriage" for military personnel.

In a letter to House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), Holder said the DOJ shared the view of plaintiffs in a Massachusetts lawsuit against "unconstitutional" statutes that block same-sex military spouses from receiving marriage benefits, including visitation rights at military hospitals, survivor benefits, and burial together at military cemeteries.

The explosive issue of immigration is poised to creep back into the Republican primary battle as the candidates prepare to barnstorm South Carolina, one of a handful of states being sued by the federal government for their illegal immigration crackdowns.

While the issue played second fiddle to concerns like jobs and foreign policy in the prior two contests, voters in South Carolina are likely more attuned, given the high-profile lawsuit filed by the U.S. Justice Department.

"That's very much an important issue in South Carolina," said Van Hipp Jr., former chairman of the South Carolina GOP and current chairman of the advocacy group Americans for Securing the Border.

Mitt Romney is charging into the state with arguably the most aggressive message, praising the state's immigration law while trumpeting his own bona fides on the issue.

A pro-family activist says a U.S. Department of Justice lawyer's arguments against the Defense of Marriage Act further enforces the Obama administration's desire for support from the homosexual lobby.

Assistant Attorney General Tony West argued for lesbian federal employee Karen Golinski in a San Francisco court. West, a senior lawyer who heads the civil division of the Department of Justice, argued that the DOMA bars Golinski from obtaining health insurance for her "wife." The attorney's oral arguments are the first since the Obama administration announced it would no longer defend the marriage law...

(CNSNews.com) - On Jan. 13, 2010, the Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee sent then-Solicitor General Elena Kagan a series of written questions examining the issue of how she would handle recusing herself from cases she might have been involved in as solicitor general if she were confirmed to the Supreme Court.

"Notably, we are concerned about the standard you would use to decide whether to recuse yourself from litigation you participated in as Solicitor General," the senators wrote. "In particular, we are concerned about litigation that was clearly anticipated, but had not yet ... reached the point where your approval was sought for filings or pleadings."

Among other things, the senators asked Kagan if she had ever been asked her opinion regarding the merits, or underlying legal issues, in Florida’s lawsuit challenging the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA)—otherwise known as Obamacare.

In her written responses, Kagan answered: “No”...