FBI agrees to help find Texas Democrats in Illinois after the lawmakers fled in redistricting battle, US Senator says
'I am proud to announce that Director Kash Patel has approved my request for the FBI to assist state and local law enforcement in locating runaway Texas House Democrats,' Cornyn said in a statement.
'I thank President Trump and Director Patel for supporting and swiftly acting on my call for the federal government to hold these supposed lawmakers accountable for fleeing Texas. We cannot allow these rogue legislators to avoid their constitutional responsibilities.'
The decision by Patel and the Trump administration represents the latest escalation in what has become a national battle between Republicans and Democrats after Texas House Democrats left the state Sunday to deny Republicans a quorum to approve a new mid-decade redistricting plan that would flip five Democratic congressional seats to the GOP. The new map, encouraged by Trump, is aimed at helping ensure Republicans maintain their narrow U.S. House majority in next year's midterm elections and during the president's final term.
It was unclear what the FBI's activities would entail since the Texas lawmakers have not been charged with state or federal-level criminal activity. They are facing civil warrants for leaving the state, but they are unenforceable outside of Texas.
As for locating the Texas lawmakers, the bulk of them are staying at the same hotel in far west suburban St. Charles, where they went after arriving at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport on Sunday night. Their hotel was the subject of a bomb threat on Wednesday that caused them to be evacuated during a search, which turned up nothing.
Democratic Gov. JB Pritzker said his administration was closely coordinating with state and local law enforcement to protect the Texas House delegation.
'We've had to react from a law enforcement perspective here in the state by calling our state police, local law enforcement, making sure that they're protecting the people who are staying at that hotel, including the Texas visitors that we have,' Pritzker said Wednesday, at the Illinois State Fair in Springfield.
The Democratic governor didn't directly answer what concrete steps Illinois State Police were taking to shield the Texas legislators from possible efforts to send Texas Rangers or FBI agents to bring them back to Texas.
In making his original request for federal assistance, Cornyn wrote that the FBI 'has tools to aid state law enforcement when parties cross state lines, including to avoid testifying or fleeing a scene of a crime.'
'Specifically, I am concerned that legislators who solicited or accepted funds to aid in their efforts to avoid their legislative duties may be guilty of bribery or other public corruption offenses,' Cornyn wrote.Tuesday.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
13 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Laura Loomer Blasts Return of FDA Vaccine Chief She Helped Force Out
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Laura Loomer has reacted with anger after a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) vaccine chief she criticized returned to the agency. Writing on X, formerly Twitter, the conservative commentator slammed President Donald Trump's administration for rehiring Dr. Vinay Prasad two weeks after he resigned from his role leading the FDA's vaccines and gene therapy division. Why It Matters Loomer is an influential figure in right-wing circles. She was present alongside Trump on the 2024 campaign trail, and she has been tied to his decision to fire National Security Adviser Mike Waltz and other aides, although the president has denied that she was the reason for the sackings. Prasad used to work for the University of California, San Francisco. He has also previously worked at the National Cancer Institute and the National Institutes of Health. Laura Loomer outside the U.S. Capitol on June 12, 2025, in Washington, D.C. Laura Loomer outside the U.S. Capitol on June 12, 2025, in Washington, D.C. Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call via AP Images What To Know Prasad, a physician who was first appointed to the role in May, left the FDA on July 30 following pressure from Loomer and other political influencers. Prasad had faced backlash over the agency's handling of a gene therapy linked to the deaths of two teenagers and his decision not to approve certain drugs. Loomer had also repeatedly claimed Prasad was liberal and said he was anti-Trump. "How did this Trump-hating Bernie [Sanders] Bro get into the Trump admin???" Loomer posted on X in July. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary had defended Prasad, who was a critic of vaccine and mask mandates, prior to his resignation. After it was reported he would return, writing on X, Loomer called the decision to rehire Prasad "egregious." She also indicated she would launch critiques of other figures, saying she "will be ramping up my exposés of officials within the HHS [Department of Health and Human Services] and FDA so the American people can see more of the pay for play rot themselves and how rabid Trump haters continue to be hired in the Trump administration." NEW: In another egregious personnel decision under the Trump administration, it is now being reported that longtime progressive Marxist Vinay Prasad who referred to President Trump's supporters as criminals and compared them to drug addicts after saying he stabbed a Trump voodoo… — Laura Loomer (@LauraLoomer) August 9, 2025 What People Are Saying Department Health and Human Services spokesperson Andrew Nixon said in a statement to Reuters: "At the FDA's request, Dr. Vinay Prasad is resuming leadership of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research." When he resigned, Prasad said he "did not want to be a distraction to the great work of the FDA" and had "decided to return to California and spend more time with his family." What Happens Next As Trump's presidency continues, it is likely that there will be further personnel changes in government departments.
36 minutes ago
Republican Winsome Earle-Sears is on the defensive in Virginia's race for governor
HOPEWELL, Va. -- Against an olive drab backdrop in a barbecue joint filled with the aroma of pulled pork and the sweat of a Virginia summer, Republican Winsome Earle-Sears told voters she was running her campaign for governor like a military-style operation. The lieutenant governor, a former Marine, said she would protect Virginia just as she did America. The way the Earle-Sears tells it, not all attacks come from soldiers. Earlier that day, she was asked on national television why Republican President Donald Trump had not endorsed her and whether she stood by her description of him as liability back in 2022, before his return to the Oval Office about two years later. She challenged the question as backward-looking and called the interview by CNN's Manu Raju a trap. The interview quickly unraveled into a squabble. 'They ambushed me to talk about things that are so in the past, when we've got to move forward,' she told a crowd gathered at Saucy's Sit-Down Bar.B.Q, a mainstay in Hopewell. Her words in both settings, while cast in military terms, reflected a campaign on the defensive. Earle-Sears, who faces Democrat Abigail Spanberger, a former congresswoman, in November, is taking her 'Operation Defend & Deliver' campaign across the state. The off-year election all but guarantees that Virginia will have its first female governor in a race that offers an early sense of voter sentiment before the 2026 midterms. An Earle-Sears victory also would make her the first Black woman to serve as a governor, according to the Center for American Women in Politics. But that feels like a distant prospect at the moment. The nonpartisan Virginia Public Access Project says Spanberger has raised more than $27 million so far, with more than $15 million on hand. Nearly every Democrat in Virginia politics has pledged to support her. When Democrats Ghazala Hashmi and Jay Jones won their respective primary races for lieutenant governor and attorney general, the three nominees went on a bus tour across Virginia. Earle-Sears' ticket lacks that kind of unity, though that is not entirely of her doing. Once the Republican statewide nominees had solidified before the June primaries, GOP Gov. Glenn Youngkin asked John Reid, the candidate for lieutenant governor, to leave the ticket after opposition research linked him to a social media account with sexually explicit photos. Reid denied the allegations and refused to step down, but a rally for the statewide ticket was canceled. After that, the three top Republican candidates did not campaign together for months. Earle-Sears' campaign, meanwhile, has had its own challenges. This summer, a pastor with little political experience stepped down from managing her campaign, and her team has failed to gain traction with big money donors. Attorney General Jason Miyares, seeking a second term, has raised nearly as much money, with roughly $2 million short of the lieutenant governor. He has more in the bank — nearly $7 million compared with almost $5 million for Earle-Sears. One of her biggest donors, a political action committee tied to the Republican Governors Association, gave $500,000 to her campaign in June. But by this time in August 2021, the association had donated more than $2 million to Youngkin's campaign. Responding to written questions about the donations, a spokesperson for the association said: 'Winsome Earle-Sears is the only candidate in this race who will keep Virginia on the right track forged by Gov. Glenn Youngkin. Under their leadership, parents' rights have been protected, Virginia's economy is growing, and communities are safe.' Youngkin, who is term-limited, has offered more than $21,000 in support to Earle-Sears through his political action committee between March and June. When asked in June whether he would give more, his PAC said the governor was "working to elect the entire GOP ticket and is urging all Virginians to support the commonsense team this November to keep Virginia winning.' Republicans went into this election facing tough sledding in swing-state Virginia. Ever since Democrat Jimmy Carter won the White House in 1976, Virginia has backed a governor from the opposite party of a first-term president in the following year. Whatever the outcome in Virginia, 2025 is a special case, given the gap between Trump's terms. Trump stopped short of an outright endorsement when asked last weekend about supporting Earle-Sears. 'I mean, I would,' he said. 'I think probably she's got a tough race. ... She shouldn't have, because the candidate she's running against is not very good, but I think she's got a tough race. But I would.' Many state Republicans are more forceful about standing behind their nominee. At the Hopewell gathering, Republican Dels. Mike Cherry and Scott Wyatt, who are seeking reelection, urged voters to back the lieutenant governor. In a prayer, Cherry asked God to 'imbue her with strength and stamina for the days that are to come in the final, waning days of this election.' Wyatt encouraged voters to help Earle-Sears continue the successes of Youngkin's administration. Then Earle-Sears walked onto the stage, smiling and cracking jokes. She described a political climate where Democrats and the media were hitting her with everything they've got. She predicted that she would show them come November. 'How many of you have seen or read about the polls, which say I am 10 points down?' she said. 'Don't believe it.' Not that she doesn't need more money to make that happen. 'Are we going to pass the offering bucket?' Earle-Sears said to a chuckling crowd. 'OK, see, you're laughing again, and I'm not laughing because that's what it's going to take for us to win.'
The Hill
43 minutes ago
- The Hill
Even if they settle with Trump, universities have their work cut out for them
Last month, the University of Pennsylvania, Columbia University and Brown University cut deals with the Trump administration to resolve accusations related to antisemitism, diversity, equity and inclusion programs, and transgender rights. The administration believes it now has a template for forcing universities to accede to its policy preferences: Make vague but sweeping allegations of discrimination; freeze hundreds of millions of dollars in research funding; overwhelm administrators with civil rights investigations and document requests; and threaten consequences ranging from stripping universities of their right to enroll international students to revoking their tax exemptions. The means used to secure these deals amount to extortion. Over $400 million in research funding was frozen at Columbia with no due process and in violation of the procedural requirements of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. Harvard University, which chose to litigate but is reported to be negotiating a deal, had over $2 billion in federal grants and contracts frozen and faces half a dozen civil rights investigations and threats to its international student population, tax exempt status and accreditation. Trump's tactics work because his targets cannot survive as modern research universities if they are at war with government agencies prepared to ignore legal constraints and social norms. There are ample reasons to question the sincerity of the Trump administration's commitment to combatting antisemitism, and throttling scientific research makes little sense as a response. Many of the policies agreed to in the settlements reached by Columbia, Brown and Penn are damaging and dangerous. But some of the concerns on which they are based are legitimate. American institutions of higher education should act as well as react to this crisis. The anti-Israel protests that engulfed some campuses last year brought with them a surge in antisemitism. Task force reports at Harvard, Columbia, Stanford, UCLA and other elite institutions acknowledge failures to do enough to address harassment of Jewish students, faculty and staff. At UCLA, for example, pro-Palestinian protesters barred Jewish students from crossing parts of campus, prompting a lawsuit UCLA recently settled for over $6 million and a Justice Department finding that UCLA violated civil rights laws and the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause. In its settlement agreement, Columbia pledged to review its Middle East programs to ensure their educational offerings are 'comprehensive and balanced,' appoint new faculty members in related fields who 'will contribute to a robust and intellectually diverse academic environment' and hire an administrator to serve as a liaison to students on antisemitism issues. We believe the imposition of these requirements poses a threat to academic freedom and university autonomy. That said, the Trump administration's draconian demands provided at least part of the impetus for institutions to revise their policies. Harvard, for example, announced a series of initiatives to encourage respectful discourse and support research on antisemitism. Other colleges and universities are also making efforts — generally commendable, sometimes problematic — to maintain their commitments to free speech while tightening time, place and manner restrictions on protests. In an April 11 letter, the Trump administration also insisted that Harvard hire an 'external party' to audit 'the student body, faculty, staff and leadership for viewpoint diversity,' and then hire faculty and admit students to achieve balance in every department, faculty and teaching unit. This demand is ill-defined, absurd and unconstitutional. But as Harvard's president, Alan Garber, has acknowledged, the university needs to do more to ensure 'a culture of free inquiry, viewpoint diversity and academic exploration.' According to a 2023 survey, over 77 percent of Harvard's faculty identify as 'liberal' or 'very liberal,' compared to 3 percent who identify as 'conservative' or 'very conservative.' Similar if less extreme disparities exist on most elite campuses, particularly in the humanities and social sciences. And as the Heterodox Academy has observed, a too-uniform political culture can give rise to 'closed-minded orthodoxies within scholarly communities.' The devil, of course, is in the details. Departments can easily rule out hiring a creationist to teach biology or a climate change denier to teach environmental studies. But what is the right mix of expertise in a history or chemistry department? And how should that be achieved without employing affirmative action, given the dearth of conservatives pursuing a Ph.D. in many fields? One thing, at least, should be clear: The answers to such questions should come from internal deliberations rather than external mandates. The most controversial aspect of the Trump administration's effort to remake higher education has been its attack on DEI programs. The Columbia settlement insists not only that the university maintain 'merit-based admission policies' and refrain from racial preferences, but also that it 'may not use personal statements, diversity narratives, or any applicant reference to racial identity as a means to introduce or justify discrimination,' even though the Supreme Court's decision on affirmative action permits universities to consider 'an applicant's discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise.' Universities must decide how to square this circle. Similar language forbidding racial preferences appears in the Brown settlement. That agreement also requires Brown to 'provide female student-athletes with intimate facilities such as locker rooms and bathrooms strictly separated on the basis of sex,' offer women the option of 'female-only housing, restrooms, and showering facilities' and 'ensure students have access to single-sex floors in on-campus housing,' with male and female defined in accordance with a Trump executive order insisting that sex is binary and immutable. These provisions go well beyond existing law and may make campuses less welcoming places for many students. That said, some DEI policies should be reconsidered. Requiring job applicants to submit diversity statements, for example, risks the imposition of ideological filters. And although concerns about transgender athletes participating in college sports have been vastly overstated, there is room for fine-tuning participation policies. Critics of the Trump administration rightly decry the bullying that is forcing universities to accept unprecedented government intrusion into university affairs. Most of that intrusion will do far more harm than good. But colleges and universities should seize the moment to preserve and promote core values while implementing reforms that are reasonable, feasible and just. Doing so may not keep the wolf away, but it might help win over a skeptical public.
