Latest news with #GOP-majority
Roya News
7 hours ago
- Politics
- Roya News
Iowa City Council passes ‘Israel' boycott bill over Gaza genocide
In a landmark decision, the Iowa City Council voted unanimously to pass a resolution that will boycott investments in bonds and companies complicit in 'Israel's' actions in Gaza. This makes Iowa City the first municipality in a state with a GOP-majority government to take such an action, marking a significant victory for the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement in a conservative state . The resolution, which passed with a seven-to-zero vote on August 5, is the result of a two-year campaign by local group Iowa City Action for Palestine (ICAP). It builds on a previous ceasefire resolution from January 2024 and uses strong language, explicitly recognizing "the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza, the genocide of Palestinian people, ethnic cleansing by Israeli armed forces, and illegal occupation of Palestinian land". The resolution directs the city to avoid future investments in companies identified by the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC). Companies on this list, which includes major corporations like Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Caterpillar, are complicit by providing military equipment and other support to the 'Israeli' military . The resolution's passage places Iowa City in direct conflict with Iowa's 2016 anti-BDS law, which prohibits state entities from contracting with or investing in companies that boycott 'Israel'. This has led to concerns from some council members about the potential for state and federal funds to be withheld. Given the history of Governor Kim Reynolds and Attorney General Brenna Bird using their offices to combat progressive local policies, a legal challenge from the state is considered highly likely . This brewing conflict is set to be a key test case for anti-BDS laws nationwide.
Miami Herald
07-08-2025
- Politics
- Miami Herald
Could ‘redistricting wars' tip the scales in 2026 midterms? Experts weigh in
It started with Texas. Then came California. Now, a slew of states across the country have joined in a hard-nosed, high-stakes redistricting battle. It's a mad scramble to redraw electoral maps ahead of the 2026 midterm elections, with both Republicans and Democrats racing to secure an edge in the fight for control of the House of Representatives. But, can states complete redistricting in time? And, if successful, will their power play be enough to tip the balance of power in Washington, D.C.? Election experts share their insights. 'Many states could potentially redraw their congressional districts, but Texas is furthest along and most likely to happen,' Barry Burden, a political science professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, told McClatchy News. The Lone Star State's Republican-controlled legislature plans to vote on a newly proposed district map, which would add five new GOP-majority districts. However, 50 Democratic lawmakers fled the state in an attempt to block the vote — and state officials, with the assistance of the FBI, are now seeking their return. The state's push to redistrict is unusual, as the process of reforming congressional districts typically only happens every 10 years, following the decennial U.S. census. 'Redistricting is (President Donald) Trump's way of doing a hardball power play to retain the playing field,' Jeffrey Wice, a professor at the New York Law School, told McClatchy News. Trump himself has said Republicans are 'entitled to five more seats' in Texas. As a result, officials in a number of other states have expressed their desire to follow suit — with Democratic leaders seeking to counteract Texas Republicans. California Gov. Gavin Newsom said he plans to 'fight fire with fire.' And New York Gov. Kathy Hochul called the Texas redistricting move a 'blatant power grab' and said the Empire State would move forward with its own plan to redistrict. But, blue states face a number of hurdles in their attempt to redistrict — in part because many of them have ceded redistricting power to independent commissions, experts said. 'New York would need to adopt a constitutional amendment to change its process, and the earliest we could see new maps there would be for the 2028 election,' Shawn Donahue, a political science professor at the University of Buffalo, told McClatchy News. 'California would need to vote on changes to its process.' Other Democratic strongholds like Maryland and New Jersey would also face uphill battles, he said. On the other hand, Republican-controlled states, in addition to Texas, 'have many more potential opportunities to re-redistrict for 2026,' Donahue said. For example, Ohio is required to redraw its electoral map as its current map, approved in 2021, is set to expire, Wice said. Other GOP-controlled states that have expressed interest in redrawing their electoral maps, like Indiana and Missouri, 'can mostly do what they want as far as redistricting,' Donahue said. Vice President JD Vance flew to Indiana on Aug. 7 to discuss a potential redistricting move with state Republicans. Still, though, it's easier said than done. 'There's a big difference between members of a state legislature floating the idea of redrawing the state's districts, or even introducing a bill to do so, and the actual enactment of a new redistricting plan, which takes a lot of work and coalition-building,' David Hopkins, a political science professor at Boston College, told McClatchy News. On top of that, there's a big time crunch. 'The timelines are tight because congressional primaries in some states occur as early as March, meaning that candidates would need to file for office weeks or month before that,' Burden said. Because of this, 'there's a good chance that things stop with Texas,' Charles Stewart, a political science professor at MIT, told McClatchy News. Given the extremely narrow GOP majority in the House — maintained by just a few seats — 'the redistricting wars of 2025' could undoubtedly play a role in the outcome of next year's midterm elections, Burden said. 'Every seat in every state could potentially determine whether Trump continues to work with a Republican Congress after the midterm dust has settled,' he said. If only Texas redraws its electoral map, it could potentially thwart Democrats' attempt to gain control of the House — which would allow them to stall Trump's legislative agenda. 'A five-seat swing toward the Republicans just based on the changes in Texas would make it more difficult for the Democrats to retake the House, but not impossible,' Stewart said. However, if blue states like California succeed in redistricting, it could result in 'a wash,' Wice said. Burden echoed this view, saying 'If some blue states are able to create new districts, they might end up cancelling out the efforts in Texas.' However, larger forces are at play that may outweigh any partisan gains achieved through redistricting. Chief among these is the usual ebb and flow of power in Washington, where the president's party often faces losses during midterm elections. 'The normal historical pattern,' Hopkins said, 'is that the party of the president usually loses at least 10 House seats in the midterms.' This trend may be difficult to counteract, given current polls that show Trump has lost significant support. A July survey by Gallup found the president's approval rating had dipped to a record low for his second term. 'If we consider this episode as the opening salvo of the 2026 election and take it as evidence that inside Republican information is predicting a bloodbath for them in 2026, then (redistricting efforts) may end up looking like a bump in the road,' Stewart said.
Boston Globe
30-07-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
Texas Republicans propose new US House map with more winnable GOP seats
Republicans in Texas currently hold 25 of the state's 38 seats, and the new map ups the total they could win to 30. All of those new 30 seats were won by Trump in November by at least 10 percentage points, leading to conservative optimism they can hold them even in what's likely to be a tough midterm environment for the party. Advertisement The new seats come from making two Rio Grande Valley seats that have been narrowly won by Democrats recently slightly more Republican, collapsing two seats held by Democrats Lloyd Doggett and Greg Casar in the Austin and San Antonio area into a single liberal district and turning two Democratic-held seats in the Dallas-Ft. Worth area into GOP-majority ones. Rep. Greg Casar, one of the Democrats who could face a more difficult reelection under the new map, called the proposed changes 'illegal voter suppression,' pointing to the merging of his district with another Democratic-held seat. 'Everyone who cares about our democracy must mobilize against this illegal map,' Casar said in a statement. Advertisement
New York Post
13-07-2025
- Politics
- New York Post
Nassau County will allow cops to wear face masks for ICE raids, undercover work: ‘We have their back'
Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman has carved out a key exemption to the county's controversial mask ban — allowing local cops involved in ICE raids and working undercover to still wear face coverings. The existing law only exempts public mask-wearing for religious or health reasons, but Blakeman's new executive order now gives federal, state and local law-enforcement officers the option to wear masks during operations such as drug and gang raids and soon, immigration enforcement alongside ICE. 5 The existing law only exempts public mask-wearing for religious or health reasons. Brigitte Stelzer 'Here in Nassau County, we respect our law enforcement officers,' Blakeman said at the signing inside the legislative building in Mineola on Friday. 'And we have their back.' The executive order comes as Nassau is gearing up to fully launch its partnership with ICE. Ten detectives have been deputized for the work and are already trained and waiting for the green light. Blakeman said the purpose of the order is to allow cops to mask up during certain police operations 'when deemed necessary' to conceal their identity to 'protect the integrity of their mission' and to limit any possibility of retaliation against them or their families. 5 The executive order comes as Nassau is gearing up to fully launch its partnership with ICE. Brigitte Stelzer The county executive first signed the mask ban into law in August, after the GOP-majority local legislature passed the bill in response to anti-Israel protests across college campuses. The law makes it a misdemeanor crime to wear any face covering unless for religious or health reasons, punishable by a $1,000 fine or up to a year in jail. The law immediately sparked multiple lawsuits that have so far been unsuccessful at shutting it down, with courts citing the existing exemptions written within the legislation as valid. 5 Ten detectives have been deputized for the work and are already trained and waiting for the green light. Kyle Mazza/NurPhoto/Shutterstock Blakeman's executive order is effectively the opposite of a bill proposed Wednesday in neighboring New York City that would prevent any federal agents from wearing masks and other face coverings while on the job. Blakeman said he signed his executive order with the city's bill in mind — wanting to make clear that he will continue to be a partner in ICE's operations in the area despite pushback from the state, the five boroughs and pending lawsuits from civil-rights groups. 5 The law immediately sparked multiple lawsuits that have so far been unsuccessful at shutting it down. Brigitte Stelzer 'I think they're out of their mind,' Blakeman said about the city's proposal. 'I think that they will destroy the city, and I think they will make law enforcement in the metropolitan area, including Nassau County, much more difficult.' The suburb signed an agreement with ICE in February to deputize 10 detectives so they can work federally alongside ICE in helping detain and deport undocumented immigrants. Nassau Democrats slammed Blakeman's partnership with ICE and his executive order as politically motivated and called the carve-out for police an admission of guilt. 5 Blakeman said he signed his executive order with the city's bill in mind — wanting to make clear that he will continue to be a partner in ICE's operations. Brigitte Stelzer 'This executive order is a quiet admission that his original law is most likely illegal,' Nassau County Legislator Delia DeRiggi-Whitton told The Post. 'Democrats warned from Day One that Blakeman's mask ban was vague, over-broad and more focused on politics than public good. 'We proposed a clear, constitutional alternative focused on actual criminal conduct. Instead, the county executive chose a political headline over sound policy, and now he's scrambling to patch the consequences.' Blakeman fired back, 'What I find troubling is the very same people that criticized our mask law are the same people that are saying law enforcement officers in the performance of their duty can't wear a mask to protect their identity if they're involved in a sensitive investigation.' The county executive said the mask ban was never meant to target law enforcement but to deter agitators, who he previously called 'cowards' and claimed were using face coverings to avoid accountability during protests.
Yahoo
13-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Federal trial alleging illegal racial gerrymandering in Tampa Bay Senate seat concludes
The front of the federal courthouse in Tampa on June 12, 2025 (Photo by Mitch Perry/ Florida Phoenix) A panel of three federal judges is now weighing whether a Tampa Bay state Senate district created in 2022 was the result of illegal racial gerrymandering. A four-day trial over the district concluded on Thursday afternoon and judges must decide whether the constitutional rights of voters in Hillsborough and Pinellas counties were violated when the Legislature created the Senate district in 2022 that crossed from St. Petersburg over the water to Hillsborough County. Florida was sued by three voters who are represented by the ACLU of Florida and the Civil Rights & Racial Justice Clinic at New York University School of Law. The plaintiffs allege that the Legislature's plan to connect Black populations from parts of Hillsborough and Pinellas counties violated their equal-protection rights by unjustifiably packing Black voters into District 16 and removing them from nearby District 18, reducing their influence there. The defendants, Senate President Ben Albritton and Florida Secretary of State Cord Byrd, have denied that claim, saying that the maps were lawfully drawn up and previously approved as legally sound by the Florida Supreme Court. But the defense's arguments go beyond refuting the plaintiffs' claims. Indeed the defense went on the offense both before and during the trial to allege that the ACLU of Florida's lead attorney in the case, Nicholas Warren, worked behind the scenes with Democratic House and Senate staffers to try to get a partisan map approved. To bolster that argument, attorneys representing the state called Matthew Isbell to the stand (remotely) on Thursday, their last witness. Isbell is a Tallahassee-based data analyst and consultant who has worked with Democrats and Democratic-affiliated groups over the past decade. Text and direct Twitter messages between Isbell and Warren were displayed to the court showing how both men hoped that the Senate would adopt a map that kept Pinellas County intact and separate from Hillsborough County. Warren drew his own map that kept the two counties separate and introduced it before the redistricting committee in late 2021, without identifying himself as being a staff attorney for the ACLU of Florida. Sen. Ray Rodrigues, who was chair of the Senate Committee on Reapportionment at the time, subsequently sent a memo to all 40 state senators accusing him of violating Senate rules by not disclosing that he was with the ACLU of Florida. Warren testified earlier this week that he drew the map on his own personal time and resources, and that the Senate forms that needed to be completed to appear before the committee did not require an individual to list his employer. Isbell testified on Thursday that he believed that the GOP-majority Legislature's motivation to split the city of St. Petersburg up was motivated by partisan politics, an allegation that attorneys for the Florida Senate president's office have strongly refuted. After Isbell's video appearance concluded, the closing statements began, starting with the plaintiffs. Warren declared that 'race predominated in the drawing of the district.' In terms of direct evidence to back up that statement, Warren played a video clip from a November 2021 committee hearing. The excerpt shows Orange County Democratic Sen. Randolph Bracy asked Senate Committee on Reapportionment staff director Jay Ferrin why the newly proposed Senate District 16 district had to cross from St. Petersburg over into Tampa Bay and Hillsborough County. Ferrin replied that it was to comply with the Fair Districts amendment in the Florida Constitution, specifically the 'Tier 1' standards which provide protections for racial and language minorities. Bracy then asked Ferrin if there was a way to configure the district to comply with the Fair Districts amendment and still keep the two countries separate. Another video exchange showed Pasco County Republican Danny Burgess,telling Bracy that Senate 'staff' had said keeping the counties separate wasn't possible, because it would lead to a 'significant number of voters who would be disenfranchised.' At the time Burgess was the chair of another Senate committee that also dealt with reapportionment. Ferrin agreed with Burgess, saying it would result in a'wide diminishment' that would ultimately disenfranchise Black voters in Pinellas County. Bracy followed up asking how much the Black vote would be diminished by if the counties were to remain separate. Ferrin replied 'close to 30%,'and added that such a reduction 'would constitute diminishment.' That comment, Warren said in his closing, revealed that race placed a major role in why Senate District 16 was created. The defense came back with closing statements from the two attorneys representing their side: Daniel Nordby, who was representing Ben Albritton in his official capacity as president of the Florida Senate, and Mohammad Jazil, who was representing Florida Secretary of State Cord Byrd. Nordby said the plaintiffs had to prove that race was a predominant factor in the creation of Senate District 16, but that they fell short. 'Plaintiffs have not come close to doing so,' Nordby said. He emphasized how Ferrin had recognized the constitutional requirements for drawing up districts – which is that districts should be compact, and when possible, utilize existing political and geographic boundaries. Ferrin did, Nordby said, noting that Ferrin used important boundaries such as I-275, the Hillsborough River, and 22nd Avenue North in St. Petersburg, a major artery, when configuring the Senate district. Nordby acknowledged that race was a consideration, because 'it had to be,' noting that to ignore that would be ignoring part of the state constitution. Nordby also dismissed the three alternative maps drawn up for the plaintiffs by Pennsylvania State University professor of statistics Cory McCartan that keep Hillsborough and Pinellas counties separate. And he then addressed the peculiar situation regarding Warren, saying, 'This case is an odd one.' Nordby asserted Warren had essentially 'laundered' his map through the alternative presented during the trial by McCartan. He also questioned why none of the lawmakers that plaintiff attorneys had indicated could be witnesses in the case – Sen. Darryl Rouson, House Democratic Leader Fentrice Driskell and most notably former Bracy, the 'alleged lynchpin' for the plaintiff's case, never showed up. Bracy was a scheduled witness but failed to appear earlier in the week, much to the disappointment of the ACLU attorneys. When contacted by phone on Tuesday by a representative from the three-judge panel, Bracy said he hadn't seen the subpoena until that very day and said that he had already told plaintiff attorneys that he did not intend to show up. Burgess and Rodrigues cited legislative privilege in declining to appear, according to the court. Representing Byrd,Jazil said all of the proposed Senate maps that the ACLU had presented during the trial were examples of partisan and racial gerrymandering, and cited his text messages to House and Senate staffers involved with the reapportionment process. In response to their closing arguments meanwhile, Daniel Tilley, another attorney with the ACLU of Florida, noted how no lawmaker had testified. Tilley said all of the attention focused on Warren was a 'contrived kerfuffle' that found no evidence to support the idea that members of the Senate were influenced by his map. It was, he surmised, a 'spectacular failure.' During the four-day trial there were hours of detailed descriptions by experts that dealt with how to draw legislative districts that were logically configured and not oddly shaped. The Florida Senate District 16 seat is held by Rouson, who resides in St. Petersburg. Several Tampa-based constituents in the district complained earlier in the trial that he was not as accessible to meet in Hillsborough County, though defense attorneys said he has district offices in the county in Tampa and Brandon. The three-judge panel that will decide the case includes two of them who are Trump appointees. The panel was led by Andrew L. Brasher, who serves in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. Accompanying him was U.S. Senior District Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell and U.S. District Judge Thomas P. Barber, both of whom serve on the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida. Brasher and Barber were appointed by Trump during his first term as president in 2019. If they rule in favor of the plaintiffs, their hope would be that the Florida Senate could create and approve a new map of the district in time for the 2026 election. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
