Politics

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed Alabama to use a congressional map favoring Republicans in this year’s elections, blocking a lower court ruling that the redistricting plan intentionally discriminates against Black people.

The justices granted the state’s emergency appeal to use a map it adopted three years ago that has a majority-Black population in just one of its seven congressional districts. The three liberal justices dissented.

The high-court order is the latest development in a redistricting frenzy that is part of a broader push by President Donald Trump to try to hold on to Republicans’ slim House majority in the November elections. It comes a day before an important deadline that Republican Gov. Kay Ivey had already extended in the state’s desire to use the map in special primary elections in August.

The state’s Republican leadership went to the Supreme Court last week, the day after a three-judge court refused to let the state use its preferred map.

The lower court had ordered Alabama to use the same court-drawn map it used in the 2024 elections that sent two Black Democrats to Congress. Black residents comprise a majority or close to it in two of the state’s seven congressional districts.

“The Supreme Court’s decision gives cover to Alabama and others to deliberately and openly discriminate against Black voters without fear of any consequence. The Court’s shameless decision to reinstate an intentionally racially discriminatory map defies any thoughtful or consistent application of the law,” Deuel Ross, director of litigation for the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, said Tuesday night.

He said the fund will “continue to throw all of our resources into the fight to ensure that Alabama voters have the fair representation that they deserve.”

Shortly after the court acted, Ivey confirmed that the state will use the map in special congressional primaries in four districts on Aug. 11.

“The U.S. Supreme Court confirmed what I have said all along and that is that Alabama knows our state, our people and our districts best. Today’s decision is a win for the people of Alabama and our elections. Alabama is doing our part to keep America strong, and I am proud our state continues to fight the fight to ensure activists do not get the final say,” Ivey said.

“I will see y’all at the polls August 11!” she said.

The order is the latest development in the fallout from last month’s Supreme Court ruling that struck down a Black-majority district in Louisiana and weakened the federal Voting Rights Act. That ruling has led Republicans in several Southern states, including Alabama, to take steps to reshape voting districts with large minority populations that have elected Democrats.

The Alabama cases stretches back several years. The three-judge panel in 2023 ruled that a map drawn by Republican state lawmakers intentionally diluted the voting power of Black citizens. The court said the state, which is about 27% Black, should have two districts where Black voters are the majority or close to it.

After the Supreme Court’s recent ruling in the Louisiana case, Alabama officials moved to implement the 2023 state-drawn map. The Supreme Court’s conservative majority agreed to lift the injunction that had blocked the map’s use and sent the case back to the three-judge panel for reconsideration in light of the Louisiana ruling.

In the meantime, voters cast ballots in Alabama’s May 19 primaries, and Ivey set the new special August primaries in the districts affected by the map switch.

Upon further review, the judicial panel said it was standing behind its initial finding that there was “undisputed evidence” of intentional racial discrimination.

It said the special congressional primaries should instead proceed under the previous court-approved districts.

The panel was wrong, the high court’s conservative majority wrote in an unsigned opinion that said the lower court “did not heed the presumption of legislative good faith.”

In dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor chastised her colleagues for enabling what promises to be “a chaotic election, held under a never-before-used congressional map that intentionally discriminates against Black Alabamians.”

The use of the court-ordered map led to the 2024 election of U.S. Rep. Shomari Figures, a Black Democrat. The map put into place by Tuesday’s order gives the GOP an opportunity to reclaim the south Alabama seat.

___

Associated Press writer Kim Chandler contributed to this report from Montgomery, Ala.

___

Follow the AP’s coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court at https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court.

source

By David Morgan

WASHINGTON, June 2 (Reuters) – Iowa State Representative Josh Turek, who describes himself as a “common-sense prairie populist,” won the Democratic nomination for the U.S. Senate on Tuesday and a chance in November to become the party’s first senator from the farm-belt state since 2008.

Turek, who is backed by national Democrats and former Democratic Senator Tom Harkin, defeated state Senator Zach Wahls 63.7%-36.3% with 30.6% of the vote counted, according to the Associated Press. He will square off against Republican U.S. Representative Ashley Hinson, who won her party’s nomination for the open seat.

Turek and Hinson are running to replace Republican Joni Ernst, a two-term senator and retired military officer whose decision to retire from Congress has given Democrats hopes of picking up the seat in the general election and potentially taking control of the Senate.

Turek, a 47-year-old gold medalist in Paralympic wheelchair basketball, has a history of getting elected in Republican areas, which supporters say could help him appeal to disaffected Republicans and independents at a time of rising economic anxiety. He has also championed access to healthcare, a living wage, affordable housing and other policies important to working families.

Hinson, a 42-year-old three-term congresswoman and former news anchor, is backed by President Donald Trump, Senate Majority Leader John Thune and Ernst. She opposed legislation that ultimately codified the right to same-sex marriage and has campaigned on her support for Trump’s 2025 tax-cut and spending bill.   

Independent analysts rate Iowa’s open Senate seat as likely to remain Republican. Polling data suggests a tight race in November, with Turek leading by a single percentage point, according to the poll-tracking website, RealClearPolitics.com.

(Reporting by David Morgan; Editing by Lincoln Feast.)

source

By Erin Banco and Jonathan Landay

WASHINGTON, June 2 (Reuters) – The CIA has stopped contributing to some intelligence assessments, including those related to the Iran war, produced by the office of the nation’s top spy as disputes over intelligence-sharing and areas of responsibility boil over, say people familiar with the matter.

The infighting between the CIA and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) has flared for more than a year, disrupting collaboration on national security analyses on which presidents long have relied to navigate complex foreign challenges, said a U.S. official and three people with direct knowledge of the matter.

The sources spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive internal matters.

At the heart of the disagreements is a clash over a task force set up in April 2025 by Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, the sources said. 

The CIA, led by Director John Ratcliffe, contends that Gabbard’s Director’s Initiatives Group has acted recklessly by circumventing traditional intelligence-sharing and declassification protocols, said two of the people. ODNI officials say the CIA has consistently blocked the group’s access to intelligence.

The breakdown in collaboration between intelligence agencies comes at a perilous time for the Trump administration, with the U.S. embroiled in the Iran conflict and grappling with national security challenges ranging from Chinese military expansion to Russia’s war on Ukraine.

It also suggests that the post-September 11, 2001, reforms, which created a director of national intelligence to coordinate the 18 U.S. intelligence agencies, have not ended dysfunction.

“ODNI is supposed to be the oil in the system that keeps the arteries of the intelligence community flowing, that removes blockages,” said Beth Sanner, a former deputy director of national intelligence during President Donald Trump’s first term.

“When you’re not doing that, then you set up the potential that agencies are just going to kind of pull back into their stove pipes and you set yourself up for intelligence failures.”

Beyond assessments produced by ODNI, the CIA has other avenues for ensuring its intelligence, including on Iran, reaches the president and other policymakers. The intelligence forms a large part of the Presidential Daily Brief, the highly classified daily compendium of intelligence reports prepared for the president.

Gabbard said last week that she will step down as Trump’s top spy on June 30, citing her husband’s illness. Trump said on Tuesday he was appointing Federal Housing Finance Agency chief Bill Pulte as acting director of national intelligence.

“The president and policymakers continue to receive the best intelligence and analysis” from the intelligence agencies, said Olivia Coleman, an ODNI spokeswoman, adding that ODNI and the agencies it oversees “communicate and collaborate daily with CIA counterparts across the full spectrum of intelligence products and operations.”

The Director’s Initiatives Group “operated within ODNI’s oversight authorities and in support of the president’s executive orders,” Coleman said. 

Reuters in February reported that Gabbard had wound down the group and reassigned its personnel elsewhere in her agency amid congressional scrutiny of its activities.

“Under Director Ratcliffe, CIA quickly moved out on President Trump’s priorities with a more aggressive agency taking smart risks to outmaneuver our adversaries and give the United States a decisive advantage,” CIA Director of Public Affairs Liz Lyons said.

White House spokesman Davis Ingle said Trump’s “peace through strength foreign policy is a tried-and-true approach that keeps America safe and deters global threats,” and media efforts to sow internal division would fail.

“President Trump has full confidence in his entire exceptional national security team,” Ingle said. 

LESS COOPERATION ON INTELLIGENCE ASSESSMENTS

The CIA’s move to significantly pare back its contributions to assessments produced by Gabbard’s office is one of the most serious consequences of the agencies’ mutual distrust.

The CIA has been one of the main contributors to the reports produced by the National Intelligence Council (NIC), the premier U.S. intelligence analytical body. The reports carry weight, especially during a war.

Two of the sources with direct knowledge of the matter said that assessments about Iran — where the U.S. military has been fighting since February — are among those the agency no longer regularly participates in. 

The CIA and ODNI now operate largely as two separate analytical operations, the sources said.

At one point last year, the CIA, in response to friction between the two agencies, stopped publishing NIC reports on the internal intelligence community distribution service it controls, briefly limiting the accessibility of the analytical products, the sources said.

A U.S. official said the reports were only withheld for “a few hours” as a result of a “processing issue.”

The interagency friction started soon after Gabbard assumed her post in February 2025, the four sources said.

Among her first acts was to assert tighter control over production of the Presidential Daily Brief, the sources said. The CIA long had taken a lead role in compiling the brief.

The relationship soured further with the creation of the Director’s Initiatives Group to “root out” alleged politicization of the intelligence community, according to the sources.

The group also worked to declassify documents related to the assassination of former President John F. Kennedy, as well as investigate the security of election voting machines and the origins of COVID-19.

Critics, including some former intelligence officials, charge that the group was established as a tool to exact retribution against Trump’s perceived political foes. 

Task force members at several points pushed the CIA to share intelligence and materials needed to complete ODNI-assigned probes, but believed not enough was provided, according to two people with knowledge of the matter. 

OUSTER OF CIA OFFICERS

In May 2025, Gabbard ousted two senior CIA officers who led the NIC.

An intelligence official speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss internal government matters said the ODNI removed the two “because they created a toxic work environment, as documented in a workforce survey, and because they had a history of politicizing intelligence.” 

The official did not provide evidence to substantiate those claims.

Then in August, Gabbard stripped the security clearances of 37 current and former officials, in the process revealing the identity of an undercover CIA officer serving overseas.

Gabbard charged that the 37 had politicized and leaked intelligence, but did not offer proof.

Former officials and others charged that the move was in part in retaliation for a 2017 intelligence assessment that Russia had used an extensive influence operation to sway the 2016 presidential vote to Trump.

The CIA-ODNI tensions spilled into public view last month when a CIA officer detailed to the Director’s Initiatives Group said to a Senate panel that the agency blocked the group’s access to intelligence on the origins of COVID-19.

That dispute has triggered an investigation by the intelligence community inspector general’s office, an independent watchdog housed at ODNI, said two people with knowledge of the probe.

Reuters could not determine the scope of the probe.

(Reporting by Erin Banco and Jonathan Landay; Editing by Don Durfee and Daniel Wallis)

source

Iranian Officer Calls Return to War ‘Inevitable’; President Trump Expects Deal ‘Over the Next Week’  

A senior Iranian military commander said renewed conflict with the United States is unavoidable, a position that contrasts with President Donald Trump’s assertion that a negotiated agreement between Washington and Tehran could be reached within days.  

According to Iranian state television, Mohammad Jafar Asadi, deputy head of Iran’s central military command, Khatam al-Anbiya, rejected the possibility of Iran accepting US demands.  

“The United States demands our total surrender, and the Iranian nation will never surrender,” Asadi said. “Without surrender, war is inevitable.”  

The remarks came as President Trump expressed confidence that diplomatic efforts remain on track.  

In a phone interview with ABC on Monday, President Trump said a peace agreement with Iran could be reached “over the next week.” The president also said a negotiated settlement would be preferable to a military outcome.  

“It’s not an easy thing for them. It’s actually not easy from our standpoint either. But we’re getting what we need to get,” President Trump said.  

He added that he had not yet agreed to the memorandum of understanding that he previously indicated was nearing completion on May 24 because “I still have to get a few more points.”  

The contrasting statements were made amid continuing tensions between the United States and Iran around the Strait of Hormuz.  

Iran’s Revolutionary Guard said Monday it launched a cruise missile at the MSC Sariska V, a vessel it described as linked to the United States and Israel. The group said the strike was carried out in retaliation for a US attack on the Iranian commercial ship Lian Star in the Gulf of Oman. British maritime authorities said the MSC Sariska V was struck by a large explosion near Iraq.  

The reported attack came as clashes between Iran and the United States continued around the strategic waterway. Both countries have carried out military strikes in recent days, while Tehran and Washington have disagreed over the Strait of Hormuz, through which 20% of the world’s oil and gas are transported.  

source

By Dan Rosenzweig-Ziff, Nandita Bose and Richard Cowan

WASHINGTON, June 2 (Reuters) – The Trump administration is abandoning the president’s nearly $1.8 billion “weaponization” fund, U.S. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche told lawmakers on Tuesday, after a rare backlash from Republican senators. 

“We are not moving forward with the fund,” Blanche said. “Period.”

The fund emerged from a legal settlement between President Donald Trump and the Justice Department to resolve an unprecedented $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS over the alleged mishandling of his tax records.

The agreement with Trump to bar future audits into his or his family’s past tax records will remain in place, Blanche told lawmakers.

The fund was dropped as furious senators faced an impasse over a $72 billion bill to fund immigration and border patrol operations.

Congressional leaders had questioned whether they could pass the bill if the fund was not killed, and a person familiar with the White House’s thinking said Blanche’s future hinged on his ability to address those concerns.

The $1.776 billion fund was meant to pay people who said they had been the subject of government abuse, and Blanche angered senators last month when he would not commit to barring people who assaulted police officers during the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot from receiving funds.

White House officials spent much of Monday calling lawmakers to assure them there would be no payouts after the Republican revolt, said two sources familiar with the matter, speaking on the condition of anonymity. 

That assurance had done little to quiet Republican demands ahead of Blanche’s House subcommittee hearing Tuesday afternoon, where lawmakers pressed for a definitive promise that the fund was dead.

TRUMP CITES POST PRAISING FUND

The White House referred questions on Blanche’s comments to the Justice Department, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 

On Monday, the department said it would abide by a court order that temporarily paused the fund until June 12 but did not say what that meant for the fund permanently. 

    Trump broke his public silence on the fund’s future on Tuesday afternoon, posting a link to a Substack titled, “The Truth the Media Won’t Tell You About the Anti-Weaponization Fund.” The post praised Trump for giving money to those who say they have been abused by the government and criticized the media and Democrats for calling it a slush fund. 

    After a lunch meeting of Republican senators, Senate Majority Leader John Thune told reporters he spoke with Blanche earlier in the day and thought the acting attorney general would ease concerns at the House hearing.

    Thune has said he wants the bill to be narrowly focused on immigration enforcement and not on Trump’s other priorities, keeping out a provision that would have allowed spending $1 billion to secure a 90,000-square-foot ballroom on the White House grounds that Trump wants.

At the Tuesday hearing, Democratic lawmakers pressed Blanche to commit to abandoning the fund in writing, which he declined to do. 

(Reporting by Dan Rosenzweig-Ziff, Nandita Bose and Richard Cowan; Editing by Michael Learmonth, Andrea Ricci and Deepa Babington)

source

New York Democrats are wading into the national redistricting wars — just don’t expect a victory before this year’s midterm elections.

Democrats in the state Legislature are taking the first steps toward a plan to give themselves more control over redistricting, introducing a proposal Monday that could open the door to a new set of aggressively gerrymandered congressional lines for the 2028 elections.

The measure came as Democrats in New York vowed to counter Republican redistricting efforts elsewhere but were barred from redrawing the state’s map without a constitutional amendment, which requires two legislative approvals over two years before it can go to voters as a ballot referendum.

Democrats are instead moving forward with a proposal to change the state constitution’s redistricting rules, potentially allowing themselves to more easily draw new districts while also removing a ban on lines that favor political parties.

Though it wouldn’t help Democrats pick up any seats in this year’s midterms, the amendment could prove potent in the years to come after the U.S. Supreme Court gutted a key provision of the Voting Rights Act, kicking off a new, untamed front in the nation’s redistricting battles.

Elsewhere, Maryland’s Democratic-led statehouse could consider a constitutional amendment this summer, paving the way for congressional redistricting ahead of the 2028 elections. In Georgia, Republican lawmakers are expected to revise congressional and state legislative districts in response to the Supreme Court’s ruling.

Mississippi’s Republican governor also has said he expects lawmakers to redraw districts for the U.S. House, state legislature and state Supreme Court by 2027.

The redistricting flurry began after President Donald Trump urged Republicans to use whatever tools at their disposal to craft lines that could help the GOP hold on to its narrow House majority in November’s midterm elections. Democrats moved to counter with their own efforts in different states, but were at times hamstrung by rules meant to prevent partisan gerrymandering.

In New York, Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul said her state’s proposal “will give New Yorkers the power to fight back against attempts by Donald Trump and his allies to rig our elections.”

“As Republicans across the country redraw maps to shield themselves from accountability, it’s more important than ever that New Yorkers have a voice in the process,” she said.

The proposed amendment leaves the state’s bipartisan independent redistricting commission in place but places tighter deadlines on its redistricting plans. It also allows maps to be passed by a simple majority in the legislature.

The proposal is expected to pass this week, but it will need another legislative approval next year before it can go to voters in 2027. If passed by voters, Democrats could begin tweaking districts for the 2028 elections.

Republicans in New York have accused Democrats of moving to corrupt the state’s redistricting process.

“New York Democrats, who proclaim to want to protect democracy, they only protect it when it’s convenient, when it suits their purpose, when it helps them gain power,” said U.S. Rep. Mike Lawler, a Republican who represents a purple district in New York’s Hudson Valley.

“They don’t care one iota about our elections, they don’t care one iota about the integrity of our elections when it doesn’t serve their purpose,” he said.

The U.S. Supreme Court earlier this year rejected an effort from Democrats to throw out the lines of the only congressional seat in New York City controlled by a Republican.

Democrats in the state Legislature redrew the congressional map in 2024 to give their party a modest boost in a few battleground districts, helping the party pick up a handful of seats. Democrats currently control a majority of the state’s congressional districts.

source

By Erin Banco and Andrew Goudsward

WASHINGTON, June 2 (Reuters) – Kurt Olsen, a White House official who aided President Donald Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election, has joined the Justice Department as a senior attorney reporting to a prosecutor seeking to build a wide-ranging criminal case against the president’s foes.

Olsen joined the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida on Monday, a Justice Department spokesperson confirmed. 

Olsen did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The Justice Department referred questions about his duties to the Miami-based U.S. Attorney’s Office, which did not respond to inquiries.

Among the matters overseen by U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida Jason Reding Quinones, a group of prosecutors is examining whether past investigations of Trump amounted to a criminal conspiracy against him.

The effort is being supervised by Joe diGenova, a Trump ally now serving as a counselor to acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and leader of a new civil rights unit in the Miami office. 

   In a post on X, Reding Quinones last month applauded the team diGenova is assembling.

“Joe diGenova is off to a fast start building our Criminal Civil Rights Section,” the May 19 post read. “He’s already assembled a team of 12 prosecutors, with more joining every week.” 

A photo accompanying the post included Olsen among a group of people standing outside the U.S. federal courthouse in Fort Pierce, Florida, where Reding Quinones said the team met that day.

Olsen, an attorney with no prior record of experience as a prosecutor, was previously sanctioned by a federal court for making false statements while representing Trump ally Kari Lake in a case challenging Arizona voting procedures. 

OLSEN INVESTIGATED VOTE-RIGGING THEORIES

Olsen has been leading the Trump administration’s election integrity effort, including reexamining Trump’s 2020 defeat and investigating disproven vote-rigging theories, as a special government employee with the White House. 

Olsen’s work has included probing potential foreign intervention in U.S. elections and seizing voting machines and materials in Puerto Rico, Georgia and Arizona to aid the investigation. 

He has focused primarily on the disproven theory that the government of former Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro was able to penetrate Dominion voting machines and flip votes by exploiting Venezuelan-origin code.

ELECTION PROBE INCLUDES OTHER TRUMP FOES

The Florida team’s investigation has been examining earlier inquiries into Trump including the probe into ties between his 2016 campaign and Russia as well as more recent cases brought by former Special Counsel Jack Smith and the FBI search of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort for classified documents in 2022.

The probe is part of a larger effort by the Justice Department under Trump to pursue the president’s grievances and political enemies.

Allegations of a broad anti-Trump conspiracy could be difficult to prove given prior investigations examined different issues and some investigative steps were approved by judges and grand juries. Officials involved in those cases have repeatedly said their work was conducted appropriately.

Olsen’s work on election-related matters predates his Justice Department role. As Reuters has reported, he has worked across agencies on efforts to revisit Trump’s 2020 defeat and examine disproven claims of voter fraud.

It was unclear whether Olsen’s election-related work has been folded into the Justice Department.

Blanche and FBI Director Kash Patel have said in recent weeks their offices are examining potential voter fraud in the 2020 election.

(Reporting by Andrew Goudsward in Washington and Erin Banco in New York; Editing by Michael Learmonth and Cynthia Osterman)

source

NEW YORK, June 1 (Reuters) – The Democratic Party indicated in a court filing on Monday that it is appealing a judge’s decision last week not to immediately block President Donald Trump’s executive order tightening rules on mail-in voting. 

• Trump’s March 31 executive order directed his administration to compile a list of confirmed U.S. citizens and required the U.S. Postal Service to deliver ballots only to voters on each state’s approved mail-in ballot list.

•  Democrats challenged the order, arguing it was unconstitutional and could disenfranchise millions of voters.

• In a May 28 ruling, Washington-based U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols said Democrats’ request for a preliminary injunction was premature because federal agencies had not yet taken steps to comply with Trump’s order.

• Nichols’ ruling did not address whether Trump’s March 31 executive order was lawful, and also did not, for now, change how Americans vote.

• The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the Democrats’ appeal.

• On May 29, the Postal Service proposed a new rule that would require states to provide lists of voters who received mailed ballots. The public has 30 days to comment on the plan before the Trump administration can finalize it.

• A different federal judge in Boston is due to hear arguments on Tuesday in a similar lawsuit challenging the executive order brought by a coalition of Democratic states.

• Trump has for years pushed the false claim that his 2020 election defeat was the result of widespread voter fraud and has criticized voting by mail.

• Mail-in voting is largely seen as a secure and trustworthy way of casting ballots.

• Trump’s Republicans are in a tight battle to keep control of the U.S. Congress in the November midterm elections.

(Reporting by Luc Cohen in New York; Editing by Matthew Lewis)

source

LOS ANGELES (AP) — After a shaky first term framed by a devastating wildfire and an ongoing struggle with widespread homelessness, Democratic Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass is looking for a return trip to city hall Tuesday while facing challenges from both ends of the political spectrum.

Spencer Pratt, a Republican and former star of the reality television show “The Hills,” accuses Bass of letting the fires get out of control and failing to make enough progress on the homeless crisis. His candidacy has drawn national attention as a barometer for dissatisfaction with liberal urban governance and because of viral videos that supporters created with artificial intelligence.

And Democrat Nithya Raman, a former Bass ally and progressive city council member who was elected with support from the Democratic Socialists of America, is campaigning on promises to reduce inequality, revive the slumping entertainment industry and build more housing.

Bass, a former member of Congress and the first Black woman to serve as mayor, has lined up most of the Democratic establishment behind her, including former Vice President Kamala Harris and former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, along with the city’s powerful labor unions.

If Bass does not win a majority of the vote, the race will go to a runoff in November. Political observers say that’s likely because there are 14 names on the ballot, including tech entrepreneur Adam Miller and community activist Rae Huang.

The race is unfolding at an unsettled time for LA.

The mayor is still trying to overcome fallout from her absence when the most destructive wildfire in Los Angeles history ignited in a wealthy seaside neighborhood in January 2025. Bass was on a trip to Ghana as part of a presidential delegation. Pratt lost his home in the Palisades Fire, which killed 12 people. And some say the recovery is happening too slowly.

While statistics suggest that Bass has made headway on homelessness, makeshift encampments and rows of rusting RVs remain commonplace across the city. Complaints about the rising cost of living — whether for rent, taxes or groceries — are a constant refrain. Dirty, pocked streets and sidewalks abound.

Meanwhile Hollywood jobs have been decamping for years to more affordable filming locales. Trump administration immigration raids also shook the city.

Population in the once-booming region is falling — Los Angeles County lost about 54,000 people from July 2024 to July 2025, the largest numeric population drop in the nation, according to federal figures.

Crime statistics are down, but public safety is still an issue. World Cup games begin in Southern California in June, and Los Angeles is readying to host the 2028 Olympics. The federal government spearheads security at the Olympics, but there are already concerns that the Los Angeles Police Department will not have adequate funding or personnel to hold up its end of the job.

Bass has acknowledged making missteps but argued that a drop in homelessness and a historically low homicide rate show she is making progress. “I’ll keep fighting for LA,” she said.

Pratt has focused his campaign on reducing homelessness and boosting police ranks, arguing that an outsider is needed to shake up city hall. Looking to tap into voter frustration, he says he is “an Angeleno who’s had enough” and rails against “homeless drug zombies” on the streets.

He received a nod of approval — if not an actual endorsement — from President Donald Trump, who recently said, “I heard he’s a big MAGA person.”

That remark could haunt Pratt in a city where Trump is widely unpopular beyond his conservative base and Republicans account for less than 15% of registered voters.

source

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. (AP) — New Mexicans will choose Democratic and Republican nominees for governor Tuesday as the state grapples with high rates of violent crime, chronically underperforming schools and cuts to federal programs that are key safety nets for residents.

Despite New Mexico’s persistent challenges, the primary election comes at a time of promise for the next governor, who is all but likely to be a Democrat. Oil prices had surged globally from the Iran war, translating into an influx of tax revenue to state coffers. New Mexico is the nation’s second largest oil-producing state behind Texas, and the industry’s revenue funds an array of progressive social programs that include universal childcare.

For the first time, the primary will be open to voters who are independent. The state’s semi-open primary system, which was signed into law by Democratic Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham last year, allows the roughly 23% of New Mexico voters who are not affiliated with a political party to request either a Democratic or Republican ballot.

While voters will decide primaries in three congressional seats, a U.S. Senate seat and a long list of statewide offices, the governor’s race is the main attraction.

Former U.S. Interior Secretary Deb Haaland, who also served a term in the U.S. House of Representatives, and Albuquerque-based district attorney Sam Bregman are seeking the Democratic nomination to replace Lujan Grisham, who reached her term limit.

Haaland, a citizen of Laguna Pueblo, could become the first Native American woman elected governor in the U.S. Her campaign has focused on reducing costs for families, emphasizing her ancestral roots in the state and touting her experience working in the nation’s capital.

She leads Bregman in fundraising by a wide margin in a campaign that became increasingly contentious. Haaland’s campaign has highlighted Bregman’s personal wealth and cast him as out of touch with everyday New Mexicans. Haaland declined several opportunities to debate Bregman, who has argued his experience as a prosecutor puts him in the best position for Democrats to chart a new course in a state that has been bedeviled for years by high crime rates.

His campaign also criticized Haaland after her name appeared in the Jeffrey Epstein files. She flew on a private jet chartered by one of Epstein’s companies during her unsuccessful bid for lieutenant governor in 2014. That flight to a fundraising meeting in Washington, D.C., was paid for by Gary King, her running mate at the time. King’s family had sold Epstein a ranch in New Mexico two decades earlier.

Haaland said she was unaware of Epstein’s role in arranging the flight and never met him.

Bregman, the prosecutor for Bernalillo County and the father of Chicago Cubs All-Star Alex Bregman, has promised to stand up to the Trump administration on issues such as healthcare and immigration.

Three candidates are running in the Republican primary, with the winner facing an uphill battle to claim a state that increasingly has trended left in recent years. Democrats have won every statewide elected office since 2017, and it’s been decades since a Republican presidential candidate won the state.

Gregg Hull was mayor of fast-growing Rio Rancho and has pointed to his leadership there as a blueprint for how he would govern, promising to attract large employers to the state. Duke Rodriguez, former state Cabinet secretary under former Republican Gov. Gary Johnson turned cannabis CEO, has focused on stabilizing the state’s healthcare system, which faces financial troubles and a severe shortage of physicians. Public relations professional Doug Turner has focused on plans to lift the state’s public education system from the bottom of national rankings.

While Hull and Turner have not aligned their campaigns with the MAGA movement, Rodriguez was recently served a cease-and-desist letter from a law firm representing President Donald Trump for “deceptive use” of Trump’s image in campaign materials.

The winner of November’s general election will inherit the oil windfall in the state budget that has led to competing ideas on how best to use it — from cutting one-time checks for taxpayers to funding tax credits that would mostly aid low-income residents to eliminating the state’s income tax.

The state’s reliance on fossil fuels to fund its programs also has proved politically sensitive for Democrats.

source