logo
Gov. Greg Abbott sets Nov. 4 special election for open state Senate seat

Gov. Greg Abbott sets Nov. 4 special election for open state Senate seat

Yahoo15 hours ago

Gov. Greg Abbott on Friday set a special election for Nov. 4 to fill the Texas Senate seat vacated by Republican Kelly Hancock, who resigned from the Legislature earlier this month to become the acting state comptroller.
The contest coincides with the state's November uniform election, when voters across Texas will already be at the polls to elect representation for local offices and vote on numerous ballot measures, including 17 proposed amendments to the Texas Constitution.
The candidate filing deadline for the Senate District 9 special election is Sept. 3, with early voting to start Oct. 20.
Earlier Friday, conservative activist Leigh Wambsganss announced her candidacy to fill the vacant seat. Shortly after her announcement, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, the president of the Senate, endorsed Wambsganss, saying she would be a 'great addition to our conservative Texas Senate.'
In a statement announcing her bid, Wambsganss said she was 'not a career politician' but a 'battle-tested conservative who gets results.'
'I have spent decades on the front lines of the conservative movement—leading one of the most impactful campaigns against Critical Race Theory in the country, working alongside Republican leaders during the Republican Revolution of the 1990s, and consistently standing firm for pro-life and pro-2nd Amendment values,' she said.
Wambsganss is a former congressional staffer and a longtime conservative activist on the Tarrant County GOP executive committee. She has also spearheaded the Patriot Mobile Action, a PAC that led the charge to elect conservative candidates to school boards across North Texas in 2022.
Soon after Wambsganss's announcement, Rep. Nate Schatzline, R-Fort Worth, withdrew his own bid for the seat and endorsed her.
A Democratic candidate, veteran and union president Taylor Rehmet, is also running for the seat.
The North Texas district leans solidly Republican and covers about half of Fort Worth and much of Tarrant County's northern suburbs. In 2024, Republican Donald Trump carried the district with 58% of the vote.
Whoever wins the special election will serve the remainder of Hancock's term, which runs until January 2027. The seat is up for reelection in 2026.
Big news: 20 more speakers join the TribFest lineup! New additions include Margaret Spellings, former U.S. secretary of education and CEO of the Bipartisan Policy Center; Michael Curry, former presiding bishop and primate of The Episcopal Church; Beto O'Rourke, former U.S. Representative, D-El Paso; Joe Lonsdale, entrepreneur, founder and managing partner at 8VC; and Katie Phang, journalist and trial lawyer.
Get tickets.
TribFest 2025 is presented by JPMorganChase.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Wind, Solar Credits Face Shorter Phase-Out in GOP's New Tax Bill
Wind, Solar Credits Face Shorter Phase-Out in GOP's New Tax Bill

Bloomberg

time15 minutes ago

  • Bloomberg

Wind, Solar Credits Face Shorter Phase-Out in GOP's New Tax Bill

Key tax incentives for US wind and solar projects would face a more aggressive phase-out in the Senate's latest version of President Donald Trump's spending package. The tweak, which follows pushback by Trump on the Inflation Reduction Act credits, would sharply limit the number of solar and wind farms that qualify for incentives, appeasing opponents while risking the ire of moderate members who argued for a slower phase-out.

Tens of thousands march against Hungary's government, for LGBT rights
Tens of thousands march against Hungary's government, for LGBT rights

USA Today

time16 minutes ago

  • USA Today

Tens of thousands march against Hungary's government, for LGBT rights

Crowds in Budapest waved rainbow flags and carried signs mocking Prime Minister Viktor Orban amid a new ban on Pride marches. BUDAPEST, June 28 (Reuters) - Tens of thousands of protesters marched through Hungary's capital on June 28 as a banned LGBTQ+ rights rally swelled into a mass demonstration against the government. Crowds filled a square near Budapest's city hall before setting off across the city, some waving rainbow flags, others carrying signs mocking Prime Minister Viktor Orban. "This is about much more, not just about homosexuality, .... This is the last moment to stand up for our rights," Eszter Rein Bodi, one of the marchers, said. More: They were out and their companies were proud. Then came the DEI backlash. "None of us are free until everyone is free," one sign read. Small groups of far-right counter-protesters attempted to disrupt the parade, but police kept them away and diverted the route of the march to avoid any clashes. Orban's nationalist government has gradually curtailed the rights of the LGBTQ+ community in the past decade, and its lawmakers passed a law in March that allows for the ban of Pride marches, citing the need to protect children. Opponents see the move as part of a wider crackdown on democratic freedoms ahead of a national election next year when Orban will face a strong opposition challenger. Organizers said participants arrived from 30 different countries, including 70 members of the European Parliament. More than 30 embassies have expressed support for the march and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen called on Hungarian authorities to let the parade go ahead. Seventy Hungarian civil society groups, including the Hungarian Civil Liberties Union, Transparency International Hungary and the Hungarian Helsinki Commission, published an open letter on June 27 in support of the march, saying the law that led to the police ban "serves to intimidate the entire society". 'Legal consequences' "The right to assembly is a basic human right, and I don't think it should be banned. Just because someone does not like the reason why you go to the street, or they do not agree with it, you still have the right to do so," Krisztina Aranyi, another marcher, said. Budapest mayor Gergely Karacsony tried to circumvent the law by organising the march as a municipal event, which he said does not need a permit. Police however banned the event, arguing that it fell under the scope of the child protection law. Orban, whose government promotes a Christian-conservative agenda, provided some clues on June 27 about what participants can expect when he warned of "legal consequences" for organising and attending the march. Earlier this week Justice Minister Bence Tuzson warned in a letter sent to some foreign embassies in Budapest that organizing a prohibited event is punishable by one year in jail, while attending counts as a misdemeanour. The law that allows for the ban of Pride lets police impose fines and use facial recognition cameras to identify people who attend. When asked about the threat of a one-year jail term, Karacsony said at a press briefing on June 27 that such a sentence would only boost his popularity. "But I cannot take it seriously," he said. Making the march a key topic of political discourse has allowed the Orban government to take the initiative back from the opposition and mobilise its voter base, said Zoltan Novak, an analyst at the Centre for Fair Political Analysis think tank. "In the past 15 years, Fidesz decided what topics dominated the political world," he said, noting that this has become more difficult as Orban's party has faced an increasing challenge from centre-right opposition leader Peter Magyar's Tisza party, which has a 15-point lead over Orban's Fidesz in a recent poll. Tisza, which has been avoiding taking a strong position on gay rights issues, did not specify in response to Reuters questions whether it believed the Pride march was lawful, but said those attending deserved the state's protection. "Peter Magyar has called on the Hungarian authorities and police to protect the Hungarian people this Saturday, and on other days as well, even if it means standing up against the arbitrariness of power," its press office said. Magyar himself would not attend.

Court Fans Fear of State Patchwork in Birthright Citizenship
Court Fans Fear of State Patchwork in Birthright Citizenship

Yahoo

time17 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Court Fans Fear of State Patchwork in Birthright Citizenship

(Bloomberg) -- A US Supreme Court ruling is stoking fears that the babies of many noncitizen parents could be treated differently depending on the state in which they're born, as legal challenges unfold against President Donald Trump's order ending birthright citizenship. Philadelphia Transit System Votes to Cut Service by 45%, Hike Fares US Renters Face Storm of Rising Costs Squeezed by Crowds, the Roads of Central Park Are Being Reimagined Sprawl Is Still Not the Answer Mapping the Architectural History of New York's Chinatown The justices didn't rule on the constitutionality of Trump's restrictions. But in a divided decision Friday, they paused nationwide injunctions in three cases that had blocked the policy from taking effect. That opens a potential path for Trump's ban on birthright citizenship to be enforced in the 28 states where no court order to block it is currently in place, many of them Republican strongholds from Texas to Florida and Wyoming to Oklahoma. State officials and legal experts warn the arrangement could lead to a patchwork quilt of outcomes, in which the children of people in the US unlawfully or on temporary visas would be recognized as citizens in some states but not in others. 'What we have is an unworkable mess that will leave thousands of babies in an untenable legal limbo,' said Connecticut Attorney General William Tong, who joined officials from 21 other Democratic-led states in suing to block the order. 'Will babies born in Connecticut have different citizenship rights than those born in Texas or Florida?' Nothing will change immediately — the justices said Trump's restrictions can't take effect for 30 days. Much will be in flux during that period as lower courts revise their rulings to align with the new precedent set by the high court. Justices also left open an avenue for opponents to continue trying to block Trump's order through a class action lawsuit. And they left key questions unanswered about the scope of relief that certain challengers — particularly individual states — are entitled to receive. Trump celebrated Friday's ruling as a 'monumental victory.' His administration has long sought to limit the ability of a single judge to block a federal policy across the country. Organizations including the American Civil Liberties Union, Democracy Defenders Fund and CASA Inc. have sued to block his order on birthright citizenship. They're already adjusting their legal strategy in light of the Supreme Court ruling, refiling their cases as class action lawsuits and seeking fresh court orders to block Trump's policy while their lawsuits proceed. 'Every court to have looked at this cruel order agrees that it is unconstitutional,' Cody Wofsy, deputy director of the ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project and lead attorney in this case, said in a statement. 'The Supreme Court's decision did not remotely suggest otherwise, and we are fighting to make sure President Trump cannot trample on the citizenship rights of a single child.' Litigation will also proceed in cases filed by the 22 Democratic-led states that sued to block the order. Those states are Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin. Amanda Frost, a law professor at the University of Virginia, emphasized the legal uncertainty and said lower courts will now have to determine the scope of relief available to states that sued in order to avoid running afoul of the Supreme Court. 'There's lots of unanswered questions,' she said. Some state attorneys general said language in Justice Amy Coney Barrett's majority opinion leaves open the possibility that the states could still successfully argue for a nationwide order. 'The rights guaranteed by the US Constitution belong to everyone in this country, not just those whose state attorneys general had the courage to stand up to this president's anti-democratic agenda,' California Attorney General Rob Bonta said in a statement. 'We remain hopeful that the courts will see that a patchwork of injunctions is unworkable.' America's Top Consumer-Sentiment Economist Is Worried How to Steal a House Inside Gap's Last-Ditch, Tariff-Addled Turnaround Push Apple Test-Drives Big-Screen Movie Strategy With F1 Luxury Counterfeiters Keep Outsmarting the Makers of $10,000 Handbags ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Erreur lors de la récupération des données Connectez-vous pour accéder à votre portefeuille Erreur lors de la récupération des données Erreur lors de la récupération des données Erreur lors de la récupération des données Erreur lors de la récupération des données

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store