Elections

The wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas wrote to legislators in a crucial swing state after the Trump campaign’s loss in 2020.In the weeks after the 2020 presidential election, Virginia Thomas, the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, twice lobbied the speaker of the Arizona House and another lawmaker to effectively reverse Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s popular-vote victory and deliver the crucial swing state to Donald J. Trump.Ms. Thomas, known as Ginni, a right-wing political activist who became a close ally of Mr. Trump during his presidency, made the entreaties in emails to Russell Bowers, the Republican speaker, and Shawnna Bolick, a Republican state representative. Ms. Bolick’s husband, Clint, once worked with Justice Thomas and now sits on the Arizona Supreme Court.The emails came as Mr. Trump and his allies were engaged in a legal effort to overturn his defeats in several battleground states. While the Arizona emails did not mention either presidential candidate by name, they echoed the former president’s false claims of voter fraud and his legal team’s dubious contention that the power to choose electors therefore rested not with the voters but with state legislatures.“Do your constitutional duty,” Ms. Thomas wrote the lawmakers on Nov. 9. On Dec. 13, with Mr. Trump still refusing to concede on the eve of the Electoral College vote, she contacted the lawmakers again.“The nation’s eyes are on you now,” she warned, adding, “Please consider what will happen to the nation we all love if you do not stand up and lead.”After she sent her first round of emails, but before the second round, Mr. Trump and his personal lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani, more directly pressured Mr. Bowers. They called him and urged him to have the state legislature step in and choose Arizona’s electors.Mr. Bowers could not be reached for comment on Friday. In a statement to The Arizona Republic, a spokesman said that Mr. Bowers never saw Ms. Thomas’s email. He ended up rebuffing all the requests to intervene, even in the face of protests outside his house.Ms. Bolick, who did not return requests for comment and is now running to become Arizona’s next secretary of state on a platform to “restore election integrity,” proved more of an ally. She thanked Ms. Thomas for reaching out, writing that she hoped “you and Clarence are doing great!” Among other things, she would go on to urge Congress to throw out Arizona’s presidential election results and award the state’s Electoral College votes to Mr. Trump.The emails, reported earlier by The Washington Post and obtained by The New York Times, were part of a letter-writing campaign hosted on FreeRoots, a political advocacy platform. On Friday, Mark Paoletta, a lawyer and close friend of the Thomases, said on Twitter that Ms. Thomas “did not write the letter and had no input in the content,” but rather merely “signed her name to a pre-written form letter that was signed by thousands of citizens.”“How disturbing, what a threat!” he wrote, dismissing the revelations as a “lame story.” He added: “A private citizen joining a letter writing campaign, hosted by a platform that served both conservative and liberal causes. Welcome to America.”In fact, the emails are a reflection of the far broader and more integral role that Justice Thomas’s wife played in efforts to delegitimize the election and install Mr. Trump for a second term — efforts that culminated on Jan. 6, 2021, with a protest called the “March to Save America” that turned into a violent attack on the U.S. Capitol.As a string of revelations by The Times and other outlets in recent months has demonstrated, Ms. Thomas actively supported and participated at the highest levels in schemes to overturn the election. Those efforts have, in turn, cast a spotlight on her husband, who from his lifetime perch on the Supreme Court has issued opinions favoring Mr. Trump’s efforts to both reverse his loss and stymie a congressional investigation into the events of Jan. 6.This February, The New York Times Magazine reported on Ms. Thomas’s role on the board of C.N.P. Action, a conservative group that had instructed members to adopt letter-writing tactics — of the kind she personally used in Arizona — to pressure Republican lawmakers in swing states to circumvent voters by appointing alternate electors.C.N.P. Action had also circulated a newsletter in December 2020 that included a report targeting five swing states, including Arizona, where Mr. Trump and his allies were pressing litigation. It warned that time was running out for the courts to “declare the elections null and void.” The report was co-written by one of Mr. Trump’s leading election lawyers, Cleta Mitchell, a friend of Ms. Thomas.And in the lead-up to the rally on Jan. 6, Ms. Thomas played a mediating role, uniting feuding factions of planners so that there “wouldn’t be any division,” one of the organizers, Dustin Stockton, later told The Times.Ms. Thomas declined to speak to The Times for that article, but a few weeks later, in an interview with a friendly conservative outlet, she denied playing any role in the organization of the rally, even as she acknowledged attending it. (She said she left before Mr. Trump addressed the crowd.)But she has adamantly opposed a fuller inquiry into the insurrection. Last December, she co-signed a letter calling for House Republicans to expel Representatives Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger from their conference for joining the committee investigating the Capitol riot, saying it brought “disrespect to our country’s rule of law” and “legal harassment to private citizens who have done nothing wrong.”And in late March, The Post and CBS reported that she had sent a series of text messages to Mr. Trump’s chief of staff, Mark Meadows, imploring him to take steps to reverse the election. Ms. Thomas urged him to “release the Kraken and save us from the left taking America down,” invoking a slogan popular on the right that refers to a set of conspiratorial claims that Trump supporters believed would overturn the vote. In the text messages, she also indicated that she had been in contact with the president’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, about a post-election legal strategy.Democrats expressed outrage. In a letter after the text messages were reported, two dozen Democrats, including Senators Elizabeth Warren, Amy Klobuchar and Cory Booker, wrote: “Given the recent disclosures about Ms. Thomas’s efforts to overturn the election and her specific communications with White House officials about doing so, Justice Thomas’s participation in cases involving the 2020 election and the January 6th attack is exceedingly difficult to reconcile with federal ethics requirements.”Still, it remains an open question whether the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack will seek an interview with Ms. Thomas. In March, people familiar with the committee’s work signaled a desire to ask Ms. Thomas to voluntarily sit for an interview. But the committee has yet to do so, and its chairman, Representative Bennie Thompson, Democrat of Mississippi, told reporters that Ms. Thomas had not come up recently in the panel’s discussions.Justice Thomas has remained defiant amid questions about his own impartiality, resisting calls that he recuse himself from matters that overlap with his wife’s activism. Earlier this year, when the Supreme Court ruled 8 to 1 to allow the release of records from the Trump White House related to Jan. 6, Justice Thomas was the sole dissenter. In February last year, he sharply dissented when the court declined to hear a case brought by Pennsylvania Republicans seeking to disqualify certain mail-in ballots.The latest revelations about his wife follow a speech last week in which he lambasted protests in front of the houses of justices after a draft opinion was leaked that would overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark abortion case. “I wonder how long we’re going to have these institutions at the rate we’re undermining them,” he told a conference of fellow conservatives. “And then I wonder when they’re gone or destabilized, what we’re going to have as a country.”And he flashed at his own partisanship in claiming that the left’s protests lacked the decorum of the right — while failing to mention last year’s attack on the Capitol, or protests like those in front of Mr. Bowers’s house.“You would never visit Supreme Court justices’ houses when things didn’t go our way,” he said. “We didn’t throw temper tantrums. It is incumbent on us to always act appropriately and not to repay tit for tat.”Justice Clarence Thomas and his wife have frequently appeared at political events despite longstanding customs of the Supreme Court.Drew Angerer/Getty ImagesThe Thomases have long defied norms of the high court, where justices often avoid political events and entanglements and their spouses often keep low profiles. No spouse of a sitting Supreme Court justice has ever been as overt a political activist as Ms. Thomas. C.N.P. Action, where she sits on the board, is a branch of the Council for National Policy, a secretive conservative organization that includes leaders from the National Rifle Association and the Family Research Council, a Christian advocacy group. Ms. Thomas also founded an organization called Groundswell that holds a weekly meeting of influential conservatives, many of whom work directly on issues that have come before the Supreme Court.Justice Thomas, for his part, has frequently appeared at political events hosted by advocates hoping to sway the court. He and his wife sometimes appear together at such events, and often portray themselves as standing in the breach amid a crumbling society.“It’s very exciting,” Ms. Thomas said during a 2018 Council for National Policy meeting, “the fact that there’s a resistance on our side to their side.”Luke Broadwater More

Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger is fending off a challenger fueled by Donald J. Trump’s election lies. But do voters still care about 2020 as much as the former president does?ATLANTA — An anti-Trump Republican advocacy group recently organized a focus group of G.O.P voters in Georgia to get their take on perhaps the most competitive and consequential primary election in the state. They heard a lot of indecision.Most of the voters, convened by the group, the Republican Accountability Project, knew little about the race between Brad Raffensperger, Georgia’s secretary of state, and his leading challenger, Representative Jody Hice. Mr. Raffensperger seemed to get the benefit of the doubt — until the voters were reminded of the back story.As the state official responsible for certifying the 2020 presidential election results, Mr. Raffensperger rejected President Donald J. Trump’s attempt to overturn his defeat. Mr. Trump recruited Mr. Hice to seek revenge.“Go Jody, I guess?” said one voter.Three out of six others agreed.The exchange offered a glimpse into why the Republican primary race for the office that oversees elections remains a dogfight just days from Election Day, on May 24. Two years after Mr. Trump lost Georgia by the slimmest of margins and Democrats captured both of the state’s open Senate seats, wounds from the 2020 election have still not completely healed for some partisans.But marshaling that residual anger to unseat an incumbent is not an easy feat. Mr. Raffensperger has worked to win back Republicans by casting himself as a defender of “election integrity,” even as he has spent hours debunking a laundry list of false claims about the 2020 election. Some voters’ memories and passions have faded. Many never had strong opinions about their secretary of state.It all has made the race one of the purest tests yet of whether the 2020 election lie can be weaponized to win elections. While polls have shown that leagues of Republican voters in Georgia and elsewhere largely embraced the fiction that the 2020 election was “stolen” in its immediate aftermath, it is not clear those concerns alone, or Mr. Trump’s personal vendetta, are enough to drive voters’ choices.“I think 2020 was really a turning point in how closely people looked at things,” said Salleigh Grubbs, chairwoman of the Cobb County Republican Party. “Before, people might not have even realized that the secretary of state was in charge of running the elections for the state. But now they’re keenly aware of it.”Mr. Hice, whom Mr. Trump endorsed last year, is one of more than a dozen candidates running for secretary of state under the America First banner, alongside others in battleground states like Arizona, Michigan and Ohio. They share an unflinching loyalty to Mr. Trump and a belief that the 2020 election was marred. Some are calling for a law enforcement arm to more aggressively prosecute violators of election laws.Representative Jody Hice, who is running to be Georgia’s secretary of state, at an event of Atlanta Young Republicans on Thursday.Nicole Craine for The New York TimesPolls show large numbers of undecided voters in the race, with Mr. Hice and Mr. Raffensperger neck and neck, each with about one-third of the vote. Both campaigns are braced for a runoff.Mr. Trump’s attempt at payback for 2020 in Georgia is floundering in the state’s other marquee primary on Tuesday. Former Senator David Perdue, his pick to challenge Gov. Brian Kemp after the governor refused to overturn the election results, is trailing Mr. Kemp in polls and fund-raising. Mr. Trump has hardly weighed in publicly on Mr. Perdue’s prospects since hosting a “tele-rally” for the former senator in April. His former vice president, Mike Pence, is set to visit the state to campaign for Mr. Kemp on the eve of the primary election.Mr. Kemp has been adept at using his office to win over skeptical Republicans, passing a slew of conservative policies on elections, law enforcement and education. For voters still enthralled with false claims of fraud, Mr. Kemp can point to the Election Integrity Act of 2021, which limits provisions like ballot drop boxes and mobile voting centers.“When voters see that kind of activity around the concern they have, it just becomes difficult to drive an argument that people who are in office are being inattentive to the issue,” said Brad Alexander, an Atlanta-based political consultant and Raffensperger supporter, who was among several who argued that the potency of the “stolen” election debate has started to wane.In January, 43 percent of Georgia Republican voters said they were confident that the November elections would be fair and accurate, according to a University of Georgia poll. By April, that number had increased to nearly 60 percent. And a record number of voters have already participated in the state’s primary elections, topping more than 700,000 voters on the final day of early voting.Mr. Hice, a four-term congressman, was one of the 147 House Republicans who voted against certifying the election results for President Joe Biden. He later took part in a White House meeting alongside Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene to try to determine how the election results could be flipped in Mr. Trump’s favor. He has claimed, falsely, that Mr. Trump would have won in Georgia if the election had been “fair.”At a meeting with the Atlanta Young Republicans on Thursday, Mr. Hice made unsupported claims about “ballot harvesting,” said he no longer wanted to use Dominion Voting machines and slammed Mr. Raffensperger for sending out unsolicited absentee ballots ahead of the last election. The voice of the people had been “violated” in 2020, he said.County officials in Georgia identified 64 cases of potential fraud out of the state’s roughly 5 million votes in the 2020 election, according to an Associated Press survey of all but 11 of the state’s 159 counties.Fulton County election workers in Atlanta counting ballots after the 2020 election.Nicole Craine for The New York TimesBut Mr. Hice has tried to make his case about more than just 2020 — raising the prospect of fraud in the future.“The issue is not who wins an election, but the issue is absolutely, Was it a fair election?” he said. “If the election itself is compromised or violated, then all the effort out there really doesn’t matter anymore. And that’s what we’ve got to defend. That’s what we’ve got to protect at all costs.”Most of the young Republicans in the room said they wanted to hear what Mr. Hice would do differently from Mr. Raffensperger in elections should he be elected.“Even if you’re not a dogmatic, election-was-stolen person, there are a lot of people with reasonable doubt, and that reasonable suspicion is fair,” said Chris Campbell, 39, a national accounts manager at SmartFeeds. “Raffensperger didn’t address those concerns well, and people don’t have confidence in him. But I do have confidence in Hice and trust that he would run the office with integrity.”The Trump InvestigationsCard 1 of 8Numerous inquiries. More

PITTSBURGH — State Representative Summer Lee, a progressive Democrat who could become the first Black woman to represent Pennsylvania in Congress, won an expensive and fiercely fought primary battle on Friday after three days of vote-counting, defeating a more centrist contender who was the favorite of the party establishment.After a string of primary losses for the national left-wing movement in 2021 and a mixed record in the first months of 2022, Ms. Lee’s narrow victory, called by The Associated Press, amounts to a significant win for that slice of the party, amid a vigorous battle over the direction of the Democratic Party that will be playing out in races around the country over the coming weeks. Ms. Lee, 34, who overcame heavy outside spending against her, had the endorsements of leading progressive figures including Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Senators Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, and local figures including Mayor Ed Gainey of Pittsburgh and some labor groups. Mr. Sanders held a rally with Ms. Lee last week. Ms. Lee defeated her chief rival, Steve Irwin, a lawyer and former head of the Pennsylvania Securities Commission who had amassed substantial support from the party establishment. Mr. Irwin gained the endorsement of Representative Mike Doyle, whose retirement opened the seat.In a statement before the race was called, Mr. Irwin called Ms. Lee a “passionate, dynamic voice and strong leader for our region.”Even before the race was called, left-leaning leaders and organizations in the party were declaring victory while more moderate party strategists seemed demoralized by the result, even as more centrist candidates won other races this week.“Against an obscene amount of dark money, Summer Lee pulled off a stunning victory,” read a fund-raising appeal from Ms. Ocasio-Cortez’s team. Her “victory demonstrates the strength of the growing, organized progressive and democratic socialist movement,” the message said.Among the outside groups that intervened in the race was a super PAC aligned with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which paid for a barrage of advertising attacking Ms. Lee.She also defeated candidates including Jerry Dickinson, an associate professor of law at the University of Pittsburgh.Ms. Lee, who won a 2018 State House primary with the backing of the Democratic Socialists of America, is a supporter of sweeping policies including Medicare for All and the Green New Deal, and she has spoken forcefully about the need to defend abortion rights and combat racial injustice.The 12th District in the Pittsburgh area is considered safely Democratic in the general election. More

More from our inbox:The Republican Checklist After Another ShootingNew York Mayor’s Rejection of Covid MandatesVoters, Defend DemocracyEstonia’s Tough Voice Against Russian AggressionAbortion Funds Already ExistA crowd gathered Sunday outside Tops Market for a vigil the day after the shooting in Buffalo.Joshua Rashaad McFadden for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Before Attack, Solitary Teen Caused Alarm” (front page, May 16):In the days after the mass shooting in Buffalo we have witnessed a heightened focus on the mental health of adolescents. A few months ago, after the Michigan school shooting, we heard a similar concern.In each case the youths, when confronted with their potentially homicidal “behaviors,” denied them. They offered explanations that were accepted by school authorities and mental health professionals.Having worked in an emergency room where individuals were brought by the police for “behavioral issues,” I needed after assessing each of them to decide whether they should be hospitalized or discharged. These assessments frequently occurred in the middle of the night. In all cases the individuals I assessed assured me that they were fine and would harm no one. Some I hospitalized and some I allowed to leave the emergency room.One morning when my rotation was completed, I was afraid to turn on my car radio for fear I would hear of a shooting by two young men I let leave. I did not.Mass shootings are not simply a mental health problem that mental health workers can fix. They are also societal problems fueled by the availability of guns and the ubiquity of prejudice.Sidney WeissmanChicagoThe writer is a clinical professor of psychiatry and behavioral science at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine.To the Editor:Re “Others Joined Chat Room With Suspect Before Attack” (news article, May 18):I’m a 70-year-old tech dinosaur. I don’t understand what an algorithm is, but I do know that we have a significant problem if a racist openly discussed in chat rooms his plans to carry out an atrocity and no one did anything to stop it.Robert SalzmanNew YorkTo the Editor:Pages and pages about the recent tragic shooting in Buffalo. And in newspapers across the country, other incidents of gun violence involving young people as shooters. In schools, churches and places where people shop. The beat goes on, and the conversation remains the same. Hate. Gun control. Political bickering. And inaction.What’s missing in all too many of these gun tragedies are parent controls. Parents asleep at the wheel or parents being complicit or enabling seems to be a common thread. But not much discussion about that, by either journalists or political leaders. Maybe there should be.George PeternelArlington Heights, Ill.The Republican Checklist After Another ShootingTo the Editor:The Republican checklist after a mass shooting:Thoughts and prayers: Check.This is not the time: Check.Let’s not politicize: Check.Guns are not the problem: Check.Just enforce the laws we have: Check.More mental health care: Check.(Repeat.)Jon MerrittLos AngelesNew York Mayor’s Rejection of Covid MandatesSuzette Burgess, 79, of Morris Heights in the Bronx, gave out free masks on Thursday as part of her own personal campaign to fight the virus.Dave Sanders for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Adams Resists New Mandates as Covid Rises” (front page, May 20):We just don’t get it. Every time we “open up” and remove protective measures, Covid soars. Over a million Americans have died from the virus, depriving their loved ones of their presence. And needless hospitalization costs more than prevention and taxes the health system, already enormously overwhelmed.As physicians, we aim to prevent disease. New York City’s mayor thinks that it is better to treat Covid (with expensive drugs that don’t always work and can cause serious side effects) than to take the necessary steps to avoid it. And it may be more than just the mayor’s “tickle in my throat” if you wind up in the I.C.U. or get long Covid.Yes, the economy is vital, but more disease makes fewer people able to shop or eat out or go to work. And we don’t yet know the long-term effects on the brain and body. So prevention is key, and we need to follow the advice of public health experts who should be in control of this, not politicians.It is not a burden to get vaccinated and boosted and wear a good-quality mask. It is a responsibility to our fellow citizens and ourselves. We used to care about each other. Taking these steps would help us finally emerge from this scourge.Stephen DanzigerBrooklynThe writer, a physician, is a member of the Covid-19 Task Force of the Medical Society of the County of Kings (Brooklyn).Voters, Defend Democracy Jason Andrew for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “In Primaries, G.O.P. Voters Reward a Lie” (news analysis, front page, May 19):In November, voters must decide to cast their ballots either for congressional candidates who view fidelity to the rule of law as sacrosanct or for those who consider the oath to “support and defend the Constitution” a hollow pledge. The outcome may determine whether or not our constitutional republic survives.John Adams pessimistically asserted: “Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself.” If, as Adams suggested, our form of government is on a path toward suicide, then we must look to the electorate for intervention.To prove Adams wrong, the electorate must once again rise to the occasion as it did in the 2020 presidential election when it ousted Donald Trump for undermining democratic governance.Jane LarkinTampa, Fla.Estonia’s Tough Voice Against Russian AggressionPrime Minister Kaja Kallas of Estonia in Brussels just after Russia invaded Ukraine in February.Pool photo by John ThysTo the Editor:Re “Estonian Leader Warns Against Deal With Putin” (news article, May 17):As an American living in Estonia, I have watched with great admiration Prime Minister Kaja Kallas’s leadership on all issues related to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. She has been a firm and unyielding voice urging tough measures against Russian aggression.Estonia is a small country, but it punches well above its weight in terms of its commitment to NATO, its commitment to helping Ukraine, including taking in a huge number of refugees relative to its population, and its commitment to freedom and democracy.Ms. Kallas has advocated a 21st-century strategy of “smart containment,” appropriately building on the 20th-century Cold War “containment” policy first advocated by George F. Kennan. She has insisted on Western resolve to stop Russia before Vladimir Putin’s desire to re-form the Soviet Union through war is realized.The West should heed Ms. Kallas, especially her forceful argument that Russia must lose this war, and any result short of that is unacceptable. Tragically, if her policy of “smart containment” had been largely implemented before the Russian invasion, Mr. Putin would have never invaded.It’s not as if the war in Ukraine was a surprise — certainly not to those in the Baltics who through history and proximity know Russia well.Michael G. BrautigamTallinn, EstoniaAbortion Funds Already ExistTo the Editor:Re “An Abortion Fund” (letter, May 16):We appreciate Jack Funt’s interest in a national fund that would support people traveling for abortion after the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson. Mr. Funt will be delighted to learn that a network of more than 80 abortion funds already exists.Legal abortion has never meant accessible abortion. The cost of a first-trimester abortion averages $575, but can exceed $1,000. Three-quarters of abortion patients are low income. Even with Roe in effect, many Americans struggle to pay for their abortions and travel to clinics. Since before 1973, abortion funds have helped people access care that would otherwise have been out of reach.We encourage people to learn about and support the work already being done to ensure abortion access. Readers can find their local abortion fund by visiting the website of the National Network of Abortion Funds.Rhian LewisAriella MessingThe writers direct the Online Abortion Resource Squad, which connects people to high-quality information about abortion. More

Election Day has arrived. Here’s what to watch.The Australia Letter is a weekly newsletter from our Australia bureau. Sign up to get it by email.Australians go to the polls on Saturday to choose a new government. Will Prime Minister Scott Morrison and his conservative coalition be given another three years, or will Anthony Albanese, the opposition Labor Party leader, seize a victory?A hung Parliament may also be a very real possibility. If that happens, the wave of “teal independents” I wrote about this week could be the kingmakers for a minority government.Their emergence in Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide and elsewhere reflects a major shift for Australia — a backlash against the major parties and the status quo from the political center, led by community groups and accomplished women who are stepping forward as candidates for the first time.Understand Australia’s Federal ElectionAustralians go to the polls on May 21 as the country faces rising inflation, climate change anxiety and foreign policy challenges. A ‘Manchurian Candidate’ Strategy: Ahead of the election, Prime Minister Scott has attempted to exploit rising fears of China. Dark Money: Shadowy financing, unreported donations, payouts from coal barons: This political season has shone a light on a culture of opacity. Identity Issues: The tone and arguments of the campaign debate around the rights of transgender people feels very American. How Climate Fits in: Australia has been hit hard by climate disasters. But it’s also making tons of money from fossil fuels.Read my story to get a sense of why many analysts believe their efforts amount to a revival for Australian democracy.We also have what we call an election explainer for you this week, which attempts to lay out what’s at stake and offers capsule reviews of the major issues and candidates. Starting on Election Day, we’ll have a live briefing where we’ll follow news and put the campaigns — and results — into context.Yes, for those who are wondering, we will also be sure to address the Grand Unifier of all Australians: the democracy sausage.And if you have thoughts on why this election matters — and what the result might reveal about Australia — shoot us an email at [email protected] here are our stories of the week.Australia and New ZealandBuildings in Cobargo destroyed by fire, January 2020.How the Long Recovery From Bush Fires Could Decide Australia’s Election. The fires that tore through the country in late 2019 and early 2020 are history, but halting recovery efforts have kept memories vivid and anger fresh.How Australia Saved Thousands of Lives While Covid Killed a Million Americans. The United States and Australia share similar demographics, but their pandemic death rates point to very different cultures of trust.How a Group of Female Independents Aims to Revive Australian Democracy. A community-driven movement has recruited around 25 candidates, most of them successful women preaching pragmatic reform. They could shape the balance of power after Saturday’s election.Opinion: Australia’s Prime Minister Ignored the Climate. Voters Could Make Him Pay.Around the TimesPresident Biden departing for South Korea on Thursday. Mr. Biden’s first trip to Asia will pose diplomatic challenges on several fronts.Doug Mills/The New York TimesBiden Begins Trip to Asia Meant to Reassure Allies of Focus on China. With the administration’s attention having shifted to Ukraine, President Biden plans to emphasize that the United States can counter aggression in both Europe and Asia.Puberty Starts Earlier Than It Used To. No One Knows Why. Some girls are starting to develop breasts as early as age 6 or 7. Researchers are studying the role of obesity, chemicals and stress.Doctors Gave Her Antipsychotics. She Decided to Live With Her Voices. A new movement wants to shift mainstream thinking away from medication and toward greater acceptance.Prince Charles and Camilla Visit Canada, Confronting Legacy of the Crown. Prince Charles acknowledged the “suffering” of the Indigenous community in a visit to the Northwest Territories on the last day of his three-day tour of the country, where polls suggest there is little support for the monarchy.Enjoying the Australia Letter? Sign up here or forward to a friend.For more Australia coverage and discussion, start your day with your local Morning Briefing and join us in our Facebook group. More

The three leaders of Alabama’s Republican Senate race have experienced giddy ascents and, in some cases, steep plunges, with the result that Representative Mo Brooks and two first-time candidates, Katie Britt and Mike Durant, enter Tuesday’s primary election tightly bunched together in recent polling. Unless one tops 50 percent, which seems unlikely, there will be a runoff between the top two.One factor driving the ups and downs in the race is a flood of attack ads from deep-pocketed outside groups aligned with the candidates, which have spent freely to drive up negative impressions of their rivals. When voters say they aren’t swayed by TV ads, Alabama is Exhibit 1 that that is not the case.Mr. Brooks, who jumped to a lead in the race last year and was endorsed by former President Donald J. Trump, was attacked by a super PAC that received $2 million from the Senate Leadership Fund, which is aligned with Senator Mitch McConnell. The Senate G.O.P. leader, who is often at odds with Mr. Trump for influence in the party, doesn’t want the hard-right Mr. Brooks to join his caucus next year.An attack ad paid for by the super PAC funded partly by the McConnell group dredged up old clips of Mr. Brooks — a leader of Mr. Trump’s crusade to reverse the 2020 election — disparaging him in 2016. “I don’t think you can trust Donald Trump with anything he says,” Mr. Brooks said then.During the time the ad was on the air, Mr. Brooks saw his support plunge to 16 percent in one poll. Shortly afterward, Mr. Trump withdrew his endorsement. Mr. Brooks has since regained a competitive footing, thanks in no small part to attack ads aimed at his two rivals.Mr. Durant, a retired Army pilot who figured in the 1993 “Black Hawk Down” episode in Somalia, appeared to lead the race in the spring. But lately he has faltered, after being raked over the coals by a group calling itself Alabama RINO PAC, which is funded in part by the McConnell-aligned group. One ad, quoting without context remarks that Mr. Durant once delivered at the U.S. Army War College, includes him saying, “The first thing that needs to be done is to disarm the population.”Another ad went after a supporter of Mr. Durant’s as “a top Never Trumper.”The money behind both the anti-Brooks and anti-Durant ads comes from supporters, in state and out, of Ms. Britt, a former chief of staff of Senator Richard C. Shelby, whose retirement has opened the seat.But Ms. Britt has hardly gotten off unscathed. The Club for Growth, the powerful anti-tax group based in Washington, which supports Mr. Brooks, is trying to undermine Ms. Britt. One ad says she is “really a lobbyist” because of a prior job leading a business group in Alabama; it goes on to quote a tweet from Donald Trump Jr. in 2021 — back when his father liked Mr. Brooks — calling her “the Alabama Liz Cheney.”Many of the attacks seemed to have landed with voters, but also apparently confused them. There is no clear leader in the latest polls. More

John Eastman said in a court filing that he had received handwritten notes from President Donald J. Trump as they strategized about how to keep him in power.WASHINGTON — The conservative lawyer John Eastman, the architect of a strategy to overturn the 2020 election, dealt directly with President Donald J. Trump and received handwritten notes from him as the men sought to keep Mr. Trump in power, according to a new court filing.The filing underscored how instrumental Mr. Eastman was in devising ways to fight Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s victory, and how personally involved Mr. Trump was in the attempt to keep the presidency in his hands. It also provided further documentation of how members of the Trump campaign and White House aides were involved in the plans.The filing came as the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol is preparing for public hearings in June about the attempt to overturn the election, and as more information has emerged about Mr. Eastman’s role in advising state officials in Pennsylvania to reject votes cast in favor of Mr. Biden.Mr. Eastman did not release the contents of his communications with Mr. Trump and others in the White House and the Trump campaign, but he described them in general terms in a filing in his federal lawsuit in California against the House committee. He is fighting the release of hundreds of documents that the panel has demanded via subpoena, including by arguing that some of them are protected by attorney-client privilege.In the filing on Thursday, Mr. Eastman argued that some of his emails with the White House and Trump campaign were covered by attorney-client privilege because, he said, the people he communicated with were functioning as “conduits” for or “agents” of Mr. Trump. He said he mostly communicated with Mr. Trump using six intermediaries, three of whom worked for the Trump campaign and three of whom worked directly for Mr. Trump while he was in office.But Mr. Eastman said he also spoke directly to Mr. Trump, and the filing stated that Mr. Eastman received two “handwritten notes from former President Trump about information that he thought might be useful for the anticipated litigation.”“While Dr. Eastman could (and did) communicate directly with former President Trump at times, many of his communications with the president were necessarily through these agents,” Mr. Eastman’s lawyers, Anthony T. Caso and Charles Burnham, wrote, referring to the six intermediaries.The documents Mr. Eastman is seeking to block from release include the two handwritten notes from Mr. Trump; communications with what he called “potential clients,” including seven state legislators, who were seeking advice about how to challenge their states’ election results; a document discussing “various scenarios for Jan. 6”; and another discussing the “need to pursue election integrity litigation even in the event of Trump loss for the good of the country.”In March, the federal judge in the case ruled that Mr. Eastman and Mr. Trump had most likely committed felonies as they pushed to overturn the election, including obstructing the work of Congress and conspiring to defraud the United States. The actions taken by Mr. Trump and Mr. Eastman, the judge found, amounted to “a coup in search of a legal theory.”At the time, the judge, David O. Carter of Federal District Court for the Central District of California, ordered the release of more than 100 of Mr. Eastman’s emails; Mr. Eastman turned them over to the House committee as he continued to fight the release of others.Among the documents that Mr. Eastman turned over was a draft memo written for Rudolph W. Giuliani, Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer, that recommended that Vice President Mike Pence reject electors from contested states in his role overseeing the certification by Congress of the Electoral College results on Jan. 6.In their filing, Mr. Eastman’s lawyers wrote that their client disagreed with Judge Carter’s conclusion that he had undermined democracy, arguing that Mr. Eastman truly believed the election was stolen. The filing cited the work of conservative media figures — including the new film “2000 Mules” by Dinesh D’Souza, which fact checkers have described as misleading — as evidence that widespread fraud occurred in the election.“If, as seemed clear to Dr. Eastman and his client at the time, there was illegality and fraud in the election of sufficient magnitude to have altered the outcome of the election, then far from ‘undermining’ democracy, Dr. Eastman’s actions and advice must be seen for what they were — a legitimate attempt to prevent a stolen election,” Mr. Eastman’s lawyers wrote. “Perhaps Dr. Eastman was wrong about that. But even if he was, being wrong about factual claims is not and never has been criminal.”They added, “Dr. Eastman’s position remains that his legal theories, controversial though they may have been, were not unlawful.”In the filing, Mr. Eastman said he began working for Mr. Trump two months before the 2020 election at the invitation of Cleta Mitchell, a lawyer who the Jan. 6 committee said “promoted false claims of election fraud to members of Congress” and participated in a call in which Mr. Trump tried to pressure Georgia’s secretary of state to “‘find’ enough votes to reverse his loss there.”Mr. Eastman, Ms. Mitchell and others began preparing to fight the election results well before Election Day, but the effort “kicked into high gear” on Nov. 7 — four days after the election — when Mr. Eastman met with Mr. Trump’s campaign team in Philadelphia to assist with the preparation of an election challenge, the filing said.In deciding in March that Mr. Trump and Mr. Eastman had “more likely than not” broken the law, Judge Carter noted that Mr. Trump had facilitated two meetings involving Mr. Eastman in the days before Jan. 6 that were “explicitly tied to persuading Vice President Pence to disrupt the joint session of Congress.”At the first meeting, on Jan. 4, Mr. Trump and Mr. Eastman invited Mr. Pence and two of his top aides, Greg Jacob and Marc Short, to the Oval Office. There, Judge Carter wrote, Mr. Eastman “presented his plan to Vice President Pence, focusing on either rejecting electors or delaying the count.”That meeting was followed by another, Judge Carter wrote, on Jan. 5, during which Mr. Eastman sought again to persuade Mr. Jacob to go along with the scheme. More

Senator Bernie Sanders, the progressive former presidential candidate who rose to prominence in part by denouncing the influence of wealthy interests in politics, has a new target in his sights: the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and its affiliated super PAC, which is spending heavily in Democratic primaries for the first time this year.After Mr. Sanders traveled last week to Pittsburgh to campaign for Summer Lee, a liberal state legislator whose House campaign was opposed by millions of dollars in such spending, he is now headed to Texas. There, he is aiming to lift up another progressive congressional candidate, Jessica Cisneros, whose left-wing challenge of a moderate incumbent has been met with significant spending from the pro-Israel super PAC.“This is a war,” Mr. Sanders said in an interview, “for the future of the Democratic Party.”AIPAC has long been a bipartisan organization, and its entry this year into direct political spending has included giving to both Democrats and Republicans. That has earned the ire of Mr. Sanders and other progressives because the group’s super PAC also ran ads attacking Ms. Lee as an insufficiently loyal Democrat.“Why would an organization go around criticizing someone like Summer Lee for not being a strong enough Democrat when they themselves have endorsed extreme right-wing Republicans?” Mr. Sanders said. “In my view, their goal is to create a two-party system, Democrats and Republicans, in which both parties are responsive to the needs of corporate America and the billionaire class.”Mr. Sanders specifically called out the committee for donating to congressional Republicans who refused to certify the 2020 election, while its super PAC, the United Democracy Project, has framed itself as a pro-democracy group.“That just exposes the hypocrisy,” Mr. Sanders said.Marshall Wittmann, a spokesman for AIPAC, said in response to Mr. Sanders, who is Jewish, that the group “will not be intimidated in our efforts to elect pro-Israel candidates — including scores of pro-Israel progressives.”“It is very revealing that some who don’t take issue with super PAC support for anti-Israel candidates get indignant when pro-Israel activists use the same tools,” Mr. Wittmann said.After the Pennsylvania and North Carolina PrimariesMay 17 was the biggest day so far in the 2022 midterm cycle.The Stakes: G.O.P. voters are showing a willingness to nominate candidates who parrot Donald J. Trump’s 2020 lies, making clear that this year’s races may affect the fate of free and fair elections in the country.Trump’s Limits: The MAGA movement is dominating Republican primaries, but Mr. Trump’s control over it may be slipping.Trump Endorsements: Most of the candidates backed by the former president have prevailed. However, there are some noteworthy losses.Up Next: Closely watched races in Georgia and Alabama on May 24 will offer a clearer picture of Mr. Trump’s influence.More Takeaways: ​​Democratic voters are pushing for change over consensus, nominating a left-leaning political brawler for Senate in Pennsylvania. Here’s what else we’ve learned.The three candidates that Mr. Sanders has been most personally invested in backing so far have also had all super PAC support, though two were heavily outspent.Despite more than $3 million in opposition spending from pro-Israel groups, Ms. Lee is narrowly ahead in her primary against Steve Irwin, a lawyer; The Associated Press has not yet called the race.In North Carolina, Nida Allam, the Sanders-backed candidate, lost to Valerie Foushee, a state legislator, in an open congressional race. Ms. Foushee’s campaign was supported by nearly $3.5 million in spending from two pro-Israel groups and a super PAC linked to a cryptocurrency billionaire. Super PAC spending for Ms. Allam was $370,000.Maya Handa, Ms. Allam’s campaign manager, said Mr. Sanders’s megaphone — he did robocalls, sent a fund-raising email to his giant list and held a virtual event — brought invaluable attention to the outside money flooding in the race.The message broke through to some voters. In Hillsborough, Elese Stutts, 44, a bookseller, had been planning to vote for Ms. Foushee. However, on Election Day, Ms. Stutts said, she was turned off after learning about the origin of the super PAC money that had helped Ms. Foushee’s campaign.Ms. Foushee ultimately won the Democratic primary for a district that includes several major universities, including Duke and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and where Mr. Sanders registered 83 percent favorability among Democratic primary voters in the Allam campaign’s polling.Mr. Sanders has sparred with pro-Israel groups over the years, including during his 2020 presidential run, when a group called the Democratic Majority for Israel PAC spent money to attack him when he emerged as a front-runner early in the primary season.And when one of Mr. Sanders’s national co-chairs, Nina Turner, ran for Congress in a special election in 2021 and again in 2022, that group and the AIPAC-aligned super PAC both spent heavily to defeat her.Understand the 2022 Midterm ElectionsCard 1 of 6Why are these midterms so important? More