More stories

  • in

    California legislature approves first of three redistricting bills in response to Texas gerrymandering

    The California legislature on Thursday began advancing a series of three bills designed to redraw congressional boundaries and create five potential new Democratic US House seats.The effort in California is an answer to the Republican redistricting push in Texas, sought by Donald Trump and aimed at tilting the map in his party’s favor before next year’s midterm elections.The nation’s two most populous – and ideologically opposed – states were racing on parallel tracks toward consequential redistricting votes, potentially within hours of each other. As Democrats in Sacramento worked to advance a legislative package that would put their “election rigging response act” before voters in a special election this fall, Republicans in Austin were nearing a final vote on their own gerrymandering pursuit.Democratic state lawmakers erupted in applause, when the assembly passed the constitutional amendment to allow the redrawing in a 57-20 vote, sending it next to the state senate. On the other side of the capitol, the state senate passed a bill on a 30-9 party-line vote laying out the proposed congressional maps Democrats hope voters will accept in the November special election.The chambers were debating the legislative package simultaneously, with Democrats up against a Friday deadline to give the secretary of states’s office enough time to get the measure on the November ballot.The state’s Democratic governor, Gavin Newsom, who has led the redistricting push, intends to sign the bill as soon as it arrives on his desk.“We will not let our political system be hijacked by authoritarianism. And today, we give every Californian the power to say no,” said the Democratic assembly speaker Robert Rivas, in floor remarks before the vote. “To say no to Donald Trump’s power grab and yes to our people, to our state and to our democracy.”Approval by the Texas senate, which is expected as early as Thursday, would conclude a dramatic showdown with the state’s outnumbered Democratic lawmakers whose two-week boycott captured national attention and set in motion a coast-to-coast redistricting battle.The California plan is designed to flip as many as five Republican-held seats in California – the exact number of additional GOP seats Trump has said he is “entitled to” in Texas.“This is a new Democratic party, this is a new day, this is new energy out there all across this country,” Newsom said on a call with reporters on Wednesday. “And we’re going to fight fire with fire.”The redistricting tit-for-tat is an extraordinary deviation from the norm. Traditionally, states redraw congressional maps once a decade based on census data, with both the Texas and California maps originally intended to last through 2030.The California state legislature, where Democrats have a supermajority, is expected to easily approve new congressional maps despite sharp Republican objections. Newsom’s signature would send the measure to the ballot in a special election this November.Before Thursday’s vote, California Republicans pleaded with their Democratic colleagues to oppose what they derisively called a “Gavinmander”.“The problem when you fight fire with fire is you burn it all down,” James Gallagher, the state assembly Republican leader, said at a news conference.Initially, Democratic lawmakers said the changes would only take effect in response to a gerrymander by a Republican state – a condition that would be met when the Texas legislatures sends the maps to the state’s governor, Greg Abbott, for his promised signature. But they amended the language on Thursday to remove any reference to a trigger, arguing it was no longer necessary now Texas has moved ahead.A Texas senate committee approved the GOP plan on Thursday morning, setting up a vote on final passage in the chamber, which was scheduled to reconvene that evening.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionCalifornia was acting after a dramatic showdown in Austin, where Democratic lawmakers left the state earlier this month to delay a GOP redistricting plan pushed by the president. They returned only after California moved forward with its counterproposal. When they returned, some were assigned police minders and forced to sign permission slips before leaving the capitol. Several spent the night in the chamber in protest before Wednesday’s session, where Republicans pushed through a map designed explicitly to boost their party’s chances in 2026.California Democrats are moving ahead after days of contentious debate over the cost – and consequences – of a referendum to temporarily toss out the maps drawn by the state’s voter-approved independent redistricting commission. Republicans estimated that a special election could cost more than $230m – money they said would be better spent on other issues like healthcare.On Wednesday night, the state supreme court declined an emergency request by Republican lawmakers seeking to block the Democratic plan from moving forward.The redistricting push has also caused angst among some Democrats and independents who have fought for years to combat gerrymandering.Testifying in favor of the changes during a hearing earlier this week, Sara Sadhwani, a political science professor who served as a Democratic member of the state’s independent redistricting commission in 2020, said the map-drawing tit-for-tat presented California voters with a “moral conflict”. But she argued that Democrats had to push back on the president’s power grab.“It brings me no joy to see the maps that we passed fairly by the commission to be tossed aside,” she said. “I do believe this is a necessary step in a much bigger battle to shore up free and fair elections in our nation.”The plan also drew the backing of former president Barack Obama and other champions of fair redistricting, such as his former attorney general, Eric Holder.But Newsom’s redistricting plan – a high-stakes gambit for the term-limited governor who has made no secret of his 2028 presidential ambitions – is not assured to succeed. It faces mounting opposition from high-profile Republicans, including the state’s former governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has vowed to “terminate gerrymandering”.Early polling has been mixed. But a new survey conducted by Newsom’s longtime pollster David Binder found strong support for the measure in the heavily Democratic state, with 57% of voters backing it while 35% opposed it.In a memo, Binder noted that support for the redistricting measure varies depending on how it is presented to voters. When framed as eliminating the state’s independent redistricting commission designed to prevent partisan gerrymandering, support drops. However, when voters hear that the initiative would allow temporary map changes only in response to partisan actions in other states, like Texas, while retaining the commission, the measure enjoys a double-digit margin of support. More

  • in

    Texas killed in-state tuition for undocumented college students – what happened next?

    Ximena had a plan.The 18-year-old from Houston was going to start college in the fall at the University of Texas at Tyler, where she had been awarded $10,000 a year in scholarships. That, she hoped, would set her up for her dream: a PhD in chemistry, followed by a career as a professor or researcher.“And then the change to in-state tuition happened, and that’s when I knew for sure that I had to pivot,” said Ximena, who is from Mexico but has attended schools in the US since kindergarten. (The Guardian and its partner the Hechinger Report, which produced this story, is using her first name only because she fears retaliation for her immigration status.)In June, the Texas attorney general’s office and the Trump administration worked together to end the provisions in a state law that had offered thousands of undocumented students like Ximena lower in-state tuition rates at Texas public colleges. State and federal officials successfully argued in court that the longstanding policy discriminated against out-of-state US citizens who paid a higher rate. That rationale has now been replicated in similar lawsuits against Kentucky, Oklahoma and Minnesota – part of a broader offensive against immigrants’ access to public education.At UT Tyler, in-state tuition and fees for the upcoming academic year total $9,736, compared to more than $25,000 for out-of-state students. Ximena and her family couldn’t afford the higher tuition bill, so she withdrew. Instead, she enrolled at Houston Community College, where out-of-state costs are $227 per semester hour, nearly three times the in-district rate. The school offers only basic college-level chemistry classes, so to set herself up for a doctorate or original research, Ximena will still need to find a way to pay for a four-year university down the line.Her predicament is exactly what state lawmakers from both political parties had hoped to avoid when they passed the Texas Dream Act, 2001 legislation that not only opened doors to higher education for undocumented students but was also meant to bolster Texas’s economy and its workforce in the long term. With that law, Texas became the first of more than two dozen states to implement in-state tuition for undocumented students, and for nearly 24 years, the landmark policy remained intact.Conservative lawmakers repeatedly proposed to repeal it, but despite years of single-party control in the state legislature, not enough Republicans embraced repeal even as recently as this spring, days before the Texas attorney general’s office and the federal Department of Justice moved to end it.Now, as the fall semester approaches, immigrant students are weighing whether to disenroll from their courses or await clarity on how the consent agreement entered into by the state and justice department affects them.Immigration advocates are worried that Texas colleges and universities are boxing out potential attendees who are lawfully present and still qualify for in-state tuition despite the court ruling – including recipients of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (Daca) program, asylum applicants and temporary protected status holders – because university personnel lack immigration expertise and haven’t been given clear guidelines on exactly who needs to pay the higher tuition rate.At Austin Community College (ACC), members of the board of trustees are unsure how to accurately implement the ruling. As they await answers, they have so far decided against sending letters asking their students for sensitive information in order to determine tuition rates.“This confusion will inevitably harm students because what we find is that in the absence of information and in the presence of fear and anxiety, students will opt to not continue higher education,” said Manuel Gonzalez, vice-chair of the ACC board of trustees.Policy experts, meanwhile, warn that Texas’s workforce could suffer as talented young people, many of whom have spent their entire education in the state’s public school system, will no longer be able to afford the associate’s and bachelor’s degrees that would allow them to pursue careers that would help propel their local economies. Under the Texas Dream Act, beneficiaries were required to commit to applying for lawful permanent residence as soon as possible, giving them the opportunity to hold down jobs related to their degrees. Even without legal immigration status, it’s likely they will still work – just in lower-paying, under-the-radar jobs.“It’s so short-sighted in terms of the welfare of the state of Texas,” said Barbara Hines, a former law school professor who helped legislators craft the Texas Dream Act.The legislation was first introduced in the state’s lower chamber by retired army national guard Maj Gen Rick Noriega, a Democrat who served in the Texas legislature from 1999 to 2009, after he learned of a young yard worker in his district who wanted to enroll at the local community college for aviation mechanics but could not afford out-of-state tuition.View image in fullscreenNoriega called the school chancellor’s office, which was able to provide funding for the student to attend. But that experience led him to wonder: how many more kids in his district were running up against the same barriers to higher education?So he worked with a sociologist to poll students at local high schools about the problem, which turned out to be widespread. And Noriega’s district wasn’t an outlier. In a state that has long had one of the nation’s largest unauthorized immigrant populations, politicians across the partisan divide knew affected constituents, friends or family members and wanted to help. Once Noriega decided to propose legislation, a Republican, Fred Hill, asked to serve as a joint author on the bill.The legislation easily passed the Texas house, which was Democratic-controlled at the time, but the Republican-led senate was less accommodating.“I couldn’t even get a hearing,” said Leticia Van de Putte, the then state senator who sponsored the legislation in her chamber.View image in fullscreenTo persuade her Republican colleagues, she added several restrictions, including requiring undocumented students to live in Texas for three years before finishing high school or receiving a GED. (Three years was estimated as the average time it would take a family to pay enough in state taxes to make up the difference between in-state and out-of-state tuition.) She also included the clause mandating that undocumented students who accessed in-state tuition sign an affidavit pledging to pursue green cards as soon as they were able.Van de Putte turned to Texas business groups to hammer home the economic case for the bill. And she convinced the business community to pay for buses to bring Latino evangelical conservative pastors from Dallas, San Antonio, Houston and other areas to Austin, so they could knock on doors in support of the legislation and pray with Republican senators and their staff.After that, the Texas Dream Act overwhelmingly passed the state senate in May 2001, and the then governor, Rick Perry, a Republican, signed it into law the following month.Yet by 2012, a new slew of rightwing politicians was elected to office, many philosophically opposed to the law – and loud about it. Perry’s defense of the policy came back to haunt him during the 2012 Republican presidential primary, when his campaign was dogged by criticism after he told opponents of tuition equity during a debate: “I don’t think you have a heart.”Still, none of the many bills introduced over the years to repeal the Texas Dream Act were successful. And even the current Texas governor, Greg Abbott, a Republican border hawk, at times equivocated on the policy, with his spokesperson saying in 2013 that Abbott believed “the objective” of in-state tuition regardless of immigration status was “noble”.By 2017, the same year Trump began his first term, polling showed a plurality of Texans in support of in-state tuition for undocumented students. More recently, research has indicated time and time again that Americans support a pathway to legal status for undocumented residents brought to the US as children.But arguments against in-state tuition regardless of immigration status also grew in popularity: critics contended that the policy is unfair to US citizens from other states who have to pay higher rates, or that undocumented students are taking spots at competitive schools that could be filled by documented Americans.The justice department leaned on similar rhetoric in the lawsuit that killed tuition equity in Texas, saying the state law is superseded by 1996 federal legislation banning undocumented immigrants from getting in-state tuition – over US citizens – based on residency.View image in fullscreenIn Texas, the sudden policy change is causing chaos. Even the state’s two largest universities, Texas A&M and the University of Texas, are using different guidelines to decide which students must pay out-of-state rates.“Universities, I think, are the ones that are put in this really difficult position,” said Luis Figueroa, senior director of legislative affairs at the advocacy group Every Texan. “They are not immigration experts. They’ve received very little guidance about how to interpret the consent decree.”Meanwhile, young scholars are facing difficult choices. One student, who asked to remain anonymous because of her undocumented immigration status, wondered about her future.The young woman, who has lived in San Antonio since she was nine months old, had enrolled in six courses for the fall at Texas A&M-San Antonio and wasn’t sure whether to drop them. It would be her final semester before earning her psychology and sociology degrees, but she couldn’t fathom paying for out-of-state tuition.“I’m in the unknown,” she said, like “many students in this moment.”

    This story was originally produced by the Hechinger Report, a non-profit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education More

  • in

    Texas house passes redrawn electoral map aiming to help Republicans keep majority in 2026 midterms – US politics live

    Hello and welcome to the US politics live blog. My name is Tom Ambrose and I will be bringing you all the latest news lines over the next few hours.We start with news that the Texas legislature’s lower chamber passed a contentious new electoral map on Wednesday that aims to help Donald Trump’s Republican party retain its razor-thin US House majority in the 2026 midterm elections, AFP reported.The vote had been delayed by two weeks after Democratic legislators fled the southern state to halt the redistricting drive, which carves out five new Republican-friendly districts.More than 50 Democrats walked out, stalling legislative business and generating national headlines as they sought to draw attention to the rare mid-decade redistricting push.The Democratic lawmakers returned this week, but not before their protest had set off a national map-drawing war, with Trump pressuring his party’s state-level officials to do everything they can to protect the majority in the US House of Representatives.The stakes are sky-high for Trump, who will be bogged down in investigations into almost every aspect of his second term if Democrats manage to flip the handful of districts nationwide needed to win back the House in next year’s midterm elections.Trump hailed the “Big WIN for the Great State of Texas“ on Wednesday night. “Everything Passed, on our way to FIVE more Congressional seats and saving your Rights, your Freedoms, and your Country, itself,” he wrote on his Truth Social platform. “Texas never lets us down.”The president also suggested Florida, Indiana and other states were looking into pursuing similar redistricting to benefit Republicans while once again calling to “STOP MAIL-IN VOTING.”Trump – who has long railed against postal ballots, even though they have benefited his party and he has voted by mail – said in a separate post:
    END MAIL-IN VOTING, AND GO TO PAPER BALLOTS. 100 additional seats will go to Republicans!!!”
    In other developments:

    The vice-president, JD Vance, the defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, and the White House deputy chief of staff, Stephen Miller, staged a photo op with National Guard troops at Union Station in the nation’s capital. They were roundly booed and jeered on their way in and out of the station.

    A federal judge denied the justice department’s bid to unseal records from the grand jury that indicted Jeffrey Epstein in 2019. US district judge Richard Berman said the small number of documents seen by the court pale in comparison with the 100,000 records the government already has on Epstein and that disclosing them could harm victims.

    Lisa Cook, the Federal Reserve governor Trump has called on to immediately resign over an accusation that she falsely declared a property she obtained a mortgage on was her primary residence, responded on Wednesday that she has “no intention of being bullied to step down”.

    Trump has bought at least $100m of bonds since he returned to office in January, according to a CNBC analysis of new filings from the president with the US Office of Government Ethics.

    A young American citizen who was violently arrested by federal immigration officers in Los Angeles county in June, after he objected to the arrest of an older man in a Walmart parking lot, was charged with conspiracy to impede a federal officer. More

  • in

    Justice department reportedly investigating DC police for allegedly manipulating crime data – live

    The US attorney for DC has launched a criminal investigation into the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) for allegedly manipulating crime data, the Washington Post is reporting.This investigation comes after NBC Washington reported that the MPD put police commander Michael Pulliam on leave in May, and began investigating him for allegedly making “questionable” changes to the city’s crime data.Sources tell the Post that the justice department’s investigation is set to go beyond investigating Pulliam, and examine actions of other local officials.The president has repeatedly claimed that crime in DC is the “worst its been”, despite a DOJ report that shows a 30-year low in violent crime in the nation’s capital.Earlier this week, Trump wrote on Truth Social that an investigation was taking place, but did not give any specifics. “D.C. gave Fake Crime numbers in order to create a false illusion of safety. This is a very bad and dangerous thing to do,” he said.Texas Democrats are tearing up the “permission slips” they signed in order to leave the chamber, joining state representative Nicole Collier ahead of Wednesday’s vote on the controversial Texas congressional redistricting maps.The slips are part of new surveillance protocols set by Texas Republicans in the House chamber, stating that Democrats would “be granted written permission to leave only after agreeing to be released into the custody of a designated [Texas department of public safety] officer” who would ensure their return to the chamber.The move follows a two-week quorum break that had delayed Republicans’ effort to redraw the state’s congressional districts to align with Donald Trump’s push to reshape the US House map in his favor before the 2026 midterm elections.On Tuesday, Collier chose to remain confined inside the Texas house chamber until lawmakers reconvene on Wednesday, refusing to comply with what she condemned as a “demeaning” protocol.US to ‘root out anti-Americanism’ in reviewing immigration applicationsThe Trump administration said on Tuesday that it will look for “anti-American” views, including on social media, when assessing the applications of people wanting to live in the United States.In an announcement, US Citizenship and Immigration Services, which handles requests to stay in the United States or become a citizen, said it would expand vetting of the social media postings of applicants and that “reviews for anti-American activity will be added to that vetting”.“America’s benefits should not be given to those who despise the country and promote anti-American ideologies,” said agency spokesperson Matthew Tragesser. “US Citizenship and Immigration Services is committed to implementing policies and procedures that root out anti-Americanism and supporting the enforcement of rigorous screening and vetting measures to the fullest extent possible. Immigration benefits – including to live and work in the United States – remain a privilege, not a right.”The US Immigration and Nationality Act, which dates back to 1952, defines anti-Americanism, which at the time primarily focused on communists.Read the full story here:Donald Trump called on Texas Republicans in the legislature to pass the new congressional map “as is”, what he called “ONE BIG, BEAUTIFUL CONGRESSIONAL MAP.”“With the Texas House now in Quorum, thanks to GREAT Speaker Dustin Burrows, I call on all of my Republican friends in the Legislature to work as fast as they can to get THIS MAP to Governor Greg Abbott’s desk, ASAP,” Trump said in a post on Truth Social.In the post, he’s linked a Texas border security map to a push for the congressional map.California senator Adam Schiff, one of Donald Trump’s fiercest political opponents, formed a legal defense fund after the president threatened him with federal investigations.Last week, FBI director Kash Patel declassified and released interview notes from a former House Intelligence Committee staffer. In 2017, the staffer accused Schiff of directing illegal leaks of classified information about Trump and Russia. Federal prosecutors had already investigated these claims during Trump’s first term and questioned the staffer’s credibility.Still, Trump used the allegations to call on attorney general Pam Bondi to open an investigation into the California Democrat.“I’m looking at Pam because I hope something’s going to be done about it,” Trump said on Wednesday. “It was a hoax created by the Democrats, but in particular, Schiff, crooked Hillary, the whole group.”The paperwork for the “Senator Schiff Legal Defense Fund” filed with the Internal Revenue Service is dated 14 August.National intelligence director Tulsi Gabbard said Tuesday she has stripped security clearances from 37 current and former national security officials, including some who worked on the intelligence community’s assessment that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election.In a memo posted on X, Gabbard accused the targeted individuals of having engaged in “politicizing and manipulating intelligence, leaking classified intelligence without authorization, and/or committing intentional egregious violations of tradecraft standards”.This move is the latest act in a series of retributions by the Trump administration against national security officials and political opponents he views as adversaries. In March, Trump revoked security clearances for Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, and several other Democrats and critics. The order also stripped access from former secretary of state Antony Blinken, former representatives Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, New York attorney general Letitia James – who prosecuted Trump for fraud – and Biden’s entire family.

    The US attorney for DC has launched a criminal investigation into the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) for allegedly manipulating crime data, according to the Washington Post. It comes as the president repeatedly claims that crime in DC is the “worst its been”, and has accused city officials of issuing fake crime statistics.

    In today’s White House press briefing, Karoline Leavitt said that there will be “many discussions” with members of Congress when they return from recess about the president’s push to end mail-in ballots and the use of voting machines. She also said that the issue was a “priority” for Trump. A reminder that yesterday the president said that an executive order is being drafted to end mail-in voting. He also repeated baseless claims that the process is “corrupt”. Another reminder, the decision to end mail-in voting, and overhaul the way states conduct their elections is not up to the executive branch.

    Also at today’s press briefing, Leavitt confirmed that Trump has ‘definitively’ ruled out American boots on the ground in Ukraine, but the US will help coordinate security guarantees. Leavitt added that Trump has directed his national security team to coordinate with Europe, and continue to discuss these matters with Ukraine and Russia. My colleague, Lucy Cambpell, is tracking the latest here.

    The White House also confirmed the latest batch of arrest data following the surge in federal law enforcement in DC. There have been over 450 arrests by federal law enforcement in the nation’s capital since 7 August, according to a White House official. The official also said that throughout this period, 68 firearms have been seized, and three known gang members have been arrested – including a MS-13 gang member.

    Beyond Washington, Republican lawmakers in California filed an emergency petition with the state supreme court that seeks to block governor Gavin Newsom’s fast-track redistricting effort, designed to counter a redrawn congressional map sought by Donald Trump in Texas. The lawsuit argues that the state legislature is violating California’s constitution by advancing the bills before a required 30-day review period. This comes as Texas Democrats returned to the Austin state capitol this week, with a vote on the GOP-drawn redistricting plan scheduled for Wednesday 20 August.
    The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) is urging that children as young as six months and up to 23 months old receive the Covid-19 vaccine – a position that diverges from the current federal guidance given by the Trump administration’s health agencies.The AAP released its updated childhood immunization schedule, which outlines recommendations for vaccines against Covid-19, influenza and RSV for individuals under 18.“It differs from recent recommendations of the advisory committee on immunization practices of the CDC, which was overhauled this year and replaced with individuals who have a history of spreading vaccine misinformation,” the organization said in a statement.The announcement follows a decision from health and human services secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr in late May to halt CDC recommendations for healthy children to receive the Covid-19 vaccine. Previously, the CDC advised vaccination for everyone six months and older with the latest available dose.The CDC currently advises that Covid-19 vaccinations for children aged six months through 17 years should be determined through “shared clinical decision-making”.The AAP recommends vaccination for anyone under 18 who is at higher risk of serious illness from Covid-19, resides in a longterm care or congregate living facility, has not previously been vaccinated, or shares a household with someone at elevated risk.The president announced on Truth Social today that lawyers from the administration will “go through the Museums, and start the exact same process that has been done with Colleges and Universities”, referring to the the ongoing showdown between the White House and many of the countries leading public and private higher education institutions.The president railed against many of the permanent collections and exhibitions across the country’s museums, declaring them the “last remaining segment of ‘WOKE’”.He added:
    Everything discussed is how horrible our Country is, how bad Slavery was, and how unaccomplished the downtrodden have been — Nothing about Success, nothing about Brightness, nothing about the Future. We are not going to allow this to happen…We have the “HOTTEST” Country in the World, and we want people to talk about it, including in our Museums.
    This comes after the White House announced a review of the Smithsonian museums earlier this month – ahead of the 250th anniversary of the country’s founding – to ensure that they “reflect the unity, progress, and enduring values that define the American story”.The US attorney for DC has launched a criminal investigation into the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) for allegedly manipulating crime data, the Washington Post is reporting.This investigation comes after NBC Washington reported that the MPD put police commander Michael Pulliam on leave in May, and began investigating him for allegedly making “questionable” changes to the city’s crime data.Sources tell the Post that the justice department’s investigation is set to go beyond investigating Pulliam, and examine actions of other local officials.The president has repeatedly claimed that crime in DC is the “worst its been”, despite a DOJ report that shows a 30-year low in violent crime in the nation’s capital.Earlier this week, Trump wrote on Truth Social that an investigation was taking place, but did not give any specifics. “D.C. gave Fake Crime numbers in order to create a false illusion of safety. This is a very bad and dangerous thing to do,” he said.Leavitt was asked several times about the location of a meeting between Trump, Zelenskyy and Putin but wouldn’t divulge anything, refusing to comment on reports about Budapest and that the Kremlin had even suggested Moscow.Politico is now reporting that the White House is planning for the summit to be held in Budapest, citing a Trump administration official and a person close to the administration.This would probably be an uncomfortable choice for Zelenskyy given the Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán is a longtime Putin ally.Republican lawmakers in California filed an emergency petition with the state supreme court that seeks to block governor Gavin Newsom’s fast-track redistricting effort designed to counter a redrawn congressional map sought by Donald Trump in Texas.The Democratic-led California legislature set to work this week advancing a series of bills that they need to pass by the end of the week in order to get the redistricting measure on the ballot in time for a special election this November.The lawsuit, filed Monday, argues that the state legislature is violating California’s constitution by advancing the bills before a required 30-day review period. Democrats, who hold a supermajority in both legislative chambers, introduced the redistricting bills on Monday and aim to pass them by Thursday.“Instead of a months-long transparent and participatory process overseen by an independent citizens redistricting commission for such a sensitive matter,” the lawsuit states, “the public would be presented instead with an up-or-down vote on maps unilaterally prepared in secret by the Legislature.”The Republicans’ case centers on when a bill is officially “introduced” under the state Constitution. In the lawsuit, the Republicans argue that the clock should start on after full legislative text is available, while Democrats say the initial drafts and bill numbers are sufficient to begin the review period. The Republicans also raise concerns about the potential impact of redistricting on Asian American and Hispanic communities, saying the rushed process limits input and debate.The redistricting fight in California is part of a widening redistricting arms race pitting red and blue states against each other in a battle that was kicked off when Trump asked Texas to redraw its congressional map to help Republicans maintain control of the US House in the midterm elections. Texas Democratic lawmakers fled the state to deny Republicans the quorum necessary to pass their redistricting plan – and used their time to call on other blue states to respond.After Newsom announced that California would ask voters to temporarily override the state’s independent redistricting commission and approve a US House map that would deliver five additional seats for their party in a tit for tat with Texas, the lawmakers returned to the Austin state capitol this week.The Republican lawmakers asked the California state supreme court to weigh in by Wednesday.In today’s press briefing Karoline Leavitt says that there will be “many discussions” with members of Congress when they return from recess about the president’s push to end mail-in ballots and the use of voting machines.Leavitt says that the administration will also be “talking to our friends in state legislatures across the country to ensure that we’re protecting the integrity of the vote for the American people.”A reminder that, legally, the decision to end mail-in voting, and overhaul the way states conduct their elections is not up to the executive branch. The US constitution gives states the power to regulate the “The Times, Places and Manner” of federal elections. Congress can override those rules by passing federal laws.Yesterday, the president said that an executive order is “being written right now” to end mail-in voting. Trump repeated baseless claims that the process is “corrupt”.Today, Leavitt doubles down on Trump’s plans:
    I think Republicans generally, and the president generally, wants to make it easier for Americans to vote and harder for people to cheat in our elections. And it’s quite mind boggling that the Democrat party could stand in opposition to common sense. He wants to ensure election integrity…I can assure you, this is a priority for the president. More

  • in

    There is no ‘Trump Doctrine’ in foreign policy. Just chaos | Sidney Blumenthal

    All the elaborate efforts of the European allies to prevent Donald Trump from prostrating himself before Vladimir Putin came to naught at their summit meeting in Alaska. Flattering, coddling and petting the big baby appeared to have been in vain. Before the 15 August summit, the Europeans persuaded Trump to impose new sanctions if Putin would not agree to a ceasefire, which would serve as a prerequisite for any negotiations. But Trump willfully tossed policy like a stuffed animal out of the window of “the Beast,” the presidential car as he eagerly invited Putin to join him for a triumphant chariot ride.The Europeans scrambled once again, trying to get the addled Trump back on the page he was on before the summit. Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, sped to Washington to confer with Trump to try to pick up the pieces. At their last encounter, Trump jibed: “You don’t have any cards.” But Trump had just handed over his cards to Putin. Zelenskyy was not about to play the appeasement card. The European leaders gathered in an extraordinary posse to accompany Zelenskyy in an attempt to restore a unified western position. Unlike the last Zelenskyy meeting with Trump, he was not hectored. With the Ukrainian leader urrounded by a protective phalanx, Trump made agreeable sounding but vague gestures about a future summit with both Zelenskyy and Putin. Trump seemed favorable, if indefinite and imprecise, about western forces stationed in Ukraine to maintain its sovereignty. But the notion of a ceasefire, pressed again by the French president, Emmanuel Macron, and German chancellor, Friedrich Merz, had evaporated. While the European recovery effort took place at the White House, Russian bombs rained down. Trump dreams of receiving the Nobel peace prize. Before the summit, he called the Norwegian finance minister to lobby him.In Alaska, Trump melted again in the presence of Putin while the whole world was watching. The self-abasing embarrassment of his previous meeting in Helsinki in 2018 did not serve as a cautionary precedent. Now, he invited the sanctioned war criminal to US soil. He ordered uniformed US soldiers to roll out the red carpet, “the beautiful red carpet” as the Russian foreign ministry called it. He applauded when Putin stood next to him. He patted Putin’s hand when he clasped it with an affectionate gesture. Then the door of “the Beast” opened for Putin.Trump’s personal negotiator for the summit, Steve Witkoff, a New York real estate operator whose knowledge of Russian culture to prepare him for his delicate role may had been a bowl of borscht at the Russian Tea Room on 57th Street, was easy prey for Putin. Bild, the German newspaper, reported on 9 August that Witkoff had committed an “explosive blunder”. According to Bild, Putin “did not deviate from his maximum demand to completely control the five Ukrainian regions of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, Kherson and Crimea before the weapons remain silent … And even worse: Trump’s special envoy Witkoff is said to have completely misunderstood some of the Russians’ positions and misinterpreted them as an accommodation by Putin. He had misunderstood a “peaceful withdrawal” of the Ukrainians from Kherson and Zaporizhzhia demanded by Russia as an offer of “peaceful withdrawal” of the Russians from these regions”.“Witkoff doesn’t know what he’s talking about,” a Ukrainian government official told Bild. An assessment that, according to Bild information, is also shared by German government representatives.Bild further reported: “There was a telephone conference on Thursday evening between representatives of the US government – including the special envoy Witkoff and Foreign Minister Marco Rubio and Vice President JD Vance – and the European partners. As BILD learned, the American side was perceived as chaotic and ununited. This was primarily due to Witkoff, whose remarks about his conversation with Putin on Wednesday in the Kremlin were perceived as confusing. He himself seemed overwhelmed and incompetent to the Europeans when he spoke about the territorial issues in Ukraine.”The German newspaper also reported friction between Rubio and Vance, with the vice-president seeking to shut the European allies out of the process and Witkoff taking his side against the secretary of state. “Apparently, there was also disagreement about the further course of action between Witkoff and Rubio, as the foreign minister emphasized that the Europeans should be involved in the further process, while Vance and Witkoff only wanted to inform Europe of the results of the further Trump steps.”Bild’s report on Putin’s position turned out to be completely accurate and its description of the Trump administration’s unsettled position prophetic of the fiasco that would unfold.Little noticed in the US media accounts, Trump had presented Putin with enormous economic advantages, according to the Telegraph. He offered access to valuable Alaskan natural resources, opportunities to tap into the US portion of the Bering Strait, which would boost Russia’s interests in the Arctic region. Trump promised to lift sanctions on Russia’s aircraft industry, which would permit Russian airlines (and by extension the Russian air force) to return to US suppliers for parts and maintenance. Trump would give Putin approval for access to rare earth minerals in Ukrainian territories currently under Russian occupation.In Trump’s new world order, Putin would be his partner, especially on the frontier of the Arctic, while Trump waged a trade war imposing harsh tariffs on every other nation. Ukraine stood as an obstacle to the gold rush.According to the Telegraph, Witkoff suggested to the Russians: “Israel’s occupation of the West Bank could be used as a model for ending the war. Russia would have military and economic control of occupied [parts of] Ukraine under its own governing body, similar to Israel’s de facto rule of Palestinian territory.”Then, after Trump laid on lavish treatment for the Russian dictator at the US military base, marking his indifference to international condemnation, came the joint appearance, which exceeded the Helsinki disaster. An elated Putin and dejected Trump appeared on stage together.The announced joint press conference was a theater of the absurd. Its brevity contributed to the farce. There was no agreement, no plan for an agreement, and no press conference. Trump deferred to Putin to speak first, to set the tone and terms after which he would come on as the second banana to slip on the peel.A clearly delighted Putin reiterated his belief that Ukraine was a security threat to Russia, and that “we need to eliminate all the primary roots, the primary causes of that conflict,” which was his language for the elimination of an independent and democratic Ukraine. He blamed Biden for the war he had launched. He affirmed Trump’s presumptuous boast that there would have been no war had he been president. “Today, when President Trump is saying that if he was the president back then, there would be no war, and I’m quite sure that it would indeed be so. I can confirm that.”A clearly glum Trump stepped to his podium. “So there’s no deal until there’s a deal,” he said. He had pledged during the 2024 campaign that he could and would end the war on “day one”. It had taken him 210 days to reach the “No Deal”.Trump wistfully talked about doing business with Russia, his will-o’-the-wisp ambition since he attempted for decades to build a Trump Tower in Moscow even through the 2016 election. He threw Putin a bouquet. “I’ve always had a fantastic relationship with President Putin, with Vladimir.” He blamed their inability to monetize their relationship to the inquiries that extensively documented Putin’s covert efforts in the 2016 election to help Trump. “We were interfered with by the Russia, Russia, Russia hoax,” Trump complained. He would not let it go, drifting incoherently into his grievances. “He knew it was a hoax, and I knew it was a hoax, but what was done was very criminal, but it made it harder for us to deal as a country, in terms of the business, and all of the things that would like to have dealt with, but we’ll have a good chance when this is over.”Then, Trump praised the Russian officials accompanying Putin. Chief among them was the foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, who had arrived wearing a sweatshirt embossed with the Cyrillic letters “CCCP”, standing for the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, signaling Putin’s ultimate objective to restore the empire of the Soviet Union. The message was more than nostalgia; it was a mission statement. And Trump called Putin “the Boss”, not a reference to Bruce Springsteen. “Next time in Moscow,” said Putin.The press conference was over. There were no questions. There were no answers. Trump fled from the stage.Before the summit, Trump threatened new sanctions if Putin did not agree to a ceasefire, but now he forgot he had ever said that. He spoke loudly and carried a tiny stick. On Air Force One, on the return to Washington, he gave an exclusive interview to his lapdog, Sean Hannity of Fox News, along on the ride for this purpose. Trump reverted to his tacit support for Putin’s position. He put the burden on Zelenskyy to accede to Putin’s demands, which were unchanged.Then, Trump spiraled down a wormhole, obviously anxious about his growing unpopularity and the prospect of the Democrats winning the congressional midterm elections, which has prompted him to prod the Texas Republicans to gerrymander districts and California Democrats aroused to counter it in their state. “Vladimir Putin, smart guy, said you can’t have an honest election with mail-in voting,” said Trump. “Look at California with that horrible governor they have. One of the worst governors in history. He is incompetent, he doesn’t know what he is doing.”Is this a subject that Putin actually spoke about in their discussion? Has he had experience with mail-in voting or even know what it is? Was it brought up by Trump during their car ride? Or was Trump simply making it up for his gullible Fox News audience? Whatever the reality, Trump’s fear about losing control of domestic politics was at the top of his mind as he flew away from his charade in Anchorage.The shambolic scene left in Alaska represented the wreckage of Trump’s attempt at diplomacy. Setting the stage himself, Trump babbled, whined and weakly sided with Putin. Trump’s foreign policy team was exposed as incompetent, confounded and feckless. This was no best and the brightest, no rise of the Vulcans, but the circus of the Koalemosians, after Koalemos, the Greek god of stupidity.Apologists for Trump, in advance of this exemplary event, had suggested that there was such a conceit as a Trump doctrine. A former Trump official from his first term, A Wess Mitchell, has called it “The Return of Great Power Diplomacy” in the May/June issue of Foreign Affairs. He described “a new kind of diplomacy” that is “diplomacy in its classical form” and “an instrument of strategy”. He cited an ancient Spartan king, Archidamus II, the Roman Emperor Domitian, Cardinal Richelieu, and in his mélange did not neglect to throw in Metternich and Bismarck. (Kissinger, in his grave, must be weeping over the parading of Metternich’s mannequin as a forerunner of Trump. Mitchell, in any case, dismisses Kissinger as a fake realist and an “idealist”, which would have been a revelation to Kissinger.) Left out of Mitchell’s pantheon of great diplomatic influences through the ages is the influencer Laura Loomer, the loony far-right troll who has an open door to Trump, feeding him lists of national security officials he must purge.In Putin’s shadow, Trump was bared as having no larger or smaller concept or strategy of Great Power politics. It would be unfair to accuse Trump of having an idea beyond his self-aggrandizement. If anything, he aspires to be like Putin, whom he called a “genius” after his invasion of Ukraine. Putin has created and controls a vast kleptocracy. In 2017, Bill Browder, an American businessperson who had invested in Russia and has been targeted for assassination by Putin for exposing his corruption, testified before the Senate judiciary committee that Putin was “the biggest oligarch in Russia and the richest man in the world”. Nobody, however, knows Putin’s true personal wealth.Trump, the Putin manqué, is trying to turn the United States into a kleptocratic system. According to the calculations of David D Kirkpatrick in the New Yorker, in just six months of his second term his alleged personal profiteering, “would disappoint the haters who saw Trump as a Putin-level kleptocrat. Yet some three and a half billion dollars in Presidential profits – even though my accounting is necessarily approximate – is a dizzying sum.”Meanwhile, three days before the Trump-Putin summit, the Trump family crypto business, World Liberty Financial, raised $1.5bn to buy the Trump family token. The CEO of World Liberty Financial, Zach Witkoff, son of Steve Witkoff, along with Eric Trump of WLF, will join the board of the investing company. That is the Trump doctrine.

    Sidney Blumenthal, former senior adviser to President Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton, has published three books of a projected five-volume political life of Abraham Lincoln: A Self-Made Man, Wrestling With His Angel and All the Powers of Earth. He is a Guardian US columnist More

  • in

    Democrats return to Texas as California kicks off push to pass new electoral map

    Texas Democrats returned to their state on Monday as California lawmakers kicked off a rapid push for voters to approve a new congressional map that could add as many as five Democratic seats in the US House.The Texas Democrats’ return ends a two-week walkout that stalled the Republican effort to redraw the state’s congressional districts to satisfy Donald Trump’s demands to reshape the US House map in his favor ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.The California plan was drafted in response to Texas’s push to redraw the congressional map there. On Friday, Texas’s Republican governor, Greg Abbott, called a second special session after Democrats remained out of the state for two weeks, denying Republicans a quorum to conduct legislative business.The Democrats said last week they would return once California moved ahead with its counter-proposal, all but ensuring that Texas’s new maps will pass.The protest began on 3 August, when dozens of Texas Democrats left the state for Illinois and other blue states in a high-stakes bid to deny their Republican colleagues the quorum needed to approve the redrawn maps. Although the Democrats’ return allows Republicans to advance their redistricting plan, the quorum-breakers have declared their two-week walkout a strategic success that set off a “redistricting arms race”.“We killed the corrupt special session, withstood unprecedented surveillance and intimidation and rallied Democrats nationwide to join this existential fight for fair representation – reshaping the entire 2026 landscape,” Gene Wu, the chair of the Texas house democratic caucus, said.“We’re returning to Texas more dangerous to Republicans’ plans than when we left.”Dustin Burrows, the Republican house speaker, did not mention the Republican redistricting proposal, but said the chamber would move swiftly to enact its legislative agenda during the second special session. Later on Monday evening, a house committee approved the new map, which will soon be sent to the floor for a full vote.“Representatives come and go. Issues rise and fall. But this body has endured wars, economic depressions and quorum breaks dating back to the very first session,” Burrows said during Monday’s session. “Now is the time for action.”He also outlined new surveillance protocols that would apply to the Democrats who had civil arrest warrants issued in their absence, stating they would “be granted written permission to leave only after agreeing to be released into the custody of a designated [Texas department of public safety] officer” who would ensure their return to the chamber.One Democrat is refusing to accept the conditions. Nicole Collier, a state representative for Fort Worth, vowed to remain confined inside the Texas house chamber until lawmakers reconvene on Wednesday, declining to comply with what she condemned as a Republican “permission slip” – a document authorizing a round-the-clock law enforcement escort.“I refuse to sign away my dignity as a duly elected representative just so Republicans can control my movements and monitor me with police escorts,” Collier, a seven-term lawmaker and a former chair of the Texas Legislative Black caucus, said on Monday.Collier’s demonstration is the latest act of Democratic resistance to the Republican redistricting plan. “When I press that button to vote, I know these maps will harm my constituents – I won’t just go along quietly with their intimidation or their discrimination,” she said.The new California map, released on Friday, would create three new safely Democratic districts and two new districts that are Democratic leaning but still competitive.The plan, led by the California governor Gavin Newsom, must be approved by the state legislature before it is put to vote in a special election this fall. If voters agree to override the house map created by the independent redistricting commission after the 2020 census, the proposed boundaries would replace current ones through 2030. Democrats said they will return the mapmaking power to the commission after that.Newsom praised the effort on Monday, calling it a necessary response to Trump’s influence over redistricting in Texas and other Republican-led states.“We are not going to sit idle while they command Texas and other states to rig the next election to keep power,” Newsom said, adding that the proposal gives Californians “a choice to fight back”.Internal polling presented to lawmakers showed voters favored the measure 52% to 41%, with 7% undecided, according to the local television station KCRA.Republicans in California condemned the proposal as an assault on the state’s voter-approved independent redistricting commission and said they plan to introduce legislation that advocates for creating similar map-drawing bodies in all 50 states.“Governor Newsom, this is nothing more than a power grab,” Tony Strickland, a Republican state senator, said during a Monday news conference in Sacramento.He warned the redistricting tit-for-tat sets a dangerous precedent that will not be easily undone. “The Golden Gate Bridge toll was supposed to be temporary,” he added. “You’re still paying the toll.”The legislature could hold floor votes to send the measure to voters for approval as soon as Thursday, KCRA reported.House Republicans currently hold a razor-thin three-seat majority in the US House and Trump has pushed to redraw district boundaries ahead of next year’s midterm elections, in which the president’s party typically loses seats. Republicans are also poised to redraw congressional districts in Ohio, Missouri and Florida, as well as potentially Indiana.Democrats have signaled they will try to redraw districts in other states where they hold power at the state level, such as New York and Maryland, though they do not have as many opportunities to draw districts as Republicans do. More

  • in

    Judge restrains Beto O’Rourke’s group from sending funds to Democrats outside Texas

    A Texas judge has expanded a restraining order against former congressman Beto O’Rourke and his political organization over its fundraising for Democratic state lawmakers who left Texas to prevent a legislative session on congressional redistricting.Tarrant county judge Megan Fahey, a member of the conservative Federalist Society and past president of the Fort Worth Republican Women’s Club, said in a four-page order published on Saturday that O’Rourke and his political group, Powered by People, are barred from sending money out of Texas.Fahey found that “harm is imminent to the State, and if the Court does not issue this order, the State will be irreparably injured” because “defendants’ fundraising conduct constitutes false, misleading, or deceptive acts under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act”.Fahey said that financial institutions and political fundraising platforms, including ActBlue, the main online platform for Democrats, are “immediately restrained from removing any property or funds that belong to, or are being held for”, O’Rourke or Powered by People “from the State of Texas”.The order came in response to a complaint from Ken Paxton, the far-right Republican attorney general who is seeking to unseat Republican senator John Cornyn, and also attempting to revoke the charter of O’Rourke’s group.On Saturday, O’Rourke said his group had donated more than $1m to Texas Democrats since the start of the redistricting session prompted their out-of-state walk-out. He said the group received “more than 55,000 donations” and the money benefited the Texas legislative Black caucus, the Texas house Democratic caucus, and the Mexican American legislative caucus.Many Texas Democrats have been in Chicago under the protective wing of governor JB Pritzker since early August, each accruing fines of $500 a-day for failing to attend a session called by the Republican Texas governor, Greg Abbott, that would probably add five seats to the Republican slate in Congress after next year’s midterm elections.California’s governor, Gavin Newsom, has responded in kind, unveiling a plan last week to redraw voting lines in his state that could add five safe Democratic seats in Congress, if Texas proceeds. Currently, only one in five seats in the House of Representatives are considered competitive.The California plan came as Texas Democrats are reportedly preparing to make their way home to launch a new chapter in the redistricting war after a series of nationwide protests on Saturday called “Fight the Trump Takeover National Day of Action.”“We were playing chess and they were playing tic-tac-toe,” Texas sate representative Jolanda Jones told Austin’s KVUE. “We were able to stop them, so their numbers didn’t matter. I think it was a gangster move. It was boss, and I’m proud of us.”With members of the Democratic delegation expected to attended a second special legislative session in Austin on Monday, meeting the numbers required, the Texas redistricting measure is expected to pass.Paxton celebrated the judge’s decision, saying that in Texas, “lawless actions have consequences, and Beto’s finding that out the hard way.”Paxton said in a statement that O’Rourke’s “fraudulent attempt to pad the pockets of the rogue cowards abandoning Texas has been stopped” and that “the cabal of Democrats who have colluded together to scam Texans and derail our Legislature will face the full force of the law, starting with Robert Francis O’Rourke.”O’Rourke, who ran a brief campaign for the Democratic party presidential nomination in 2020, filed his own lawsuit against Paxton earlier this month that requested a block on an investigation into his group and alleged that Paxton was engaged in a “fishing expedition, constitutional rights be damned”.O’Rourke said at a protest in Austin on Saturday that Democrats were “not going to bend the knee. We’re going to stand and fight wherever we have to – from the state house to the court house, from Texas to California.” More

  • in

    ‘We’re anti-federal chaos’: Democratic cities prepare for worst after Trump’s tirades against DC and LA

    As sand-colored Humvees rolled down Washington DC streets against the wishes of local leaders, mayors around the country planned for what they would do if the Trump administration comes for them next.Donald Trump’s disdain for Democratic-run cities featured heavily in his 2024 campaign. The president vowed to take over DC – a promise he attempted to fulfill this week. Earlier this year, he sent national guard troops to Los Angeles amid protests despite California opposing the move, which led to a lawsuit from the state.City leaders say there are appropriate ways for the federal government to partner with them to address issues such as crime, but that Trump is using the pretext of crime and unrest to override their local authority, create chaos and distract from a bruising news cycle about his ties to Jeffrey Epstein.Many cities have worked to bring down violent crime rates – they are on the decline in most large cities, though mayors acknowledge they still have work to do to improve the lives of their residents.“President Trump constantly creates a narrative that cities like Seattle are liberal hellholes and we are lawless, and that is just not the fact,” said Bruce Harrell, the mayor of Seattle. “We are the home of great communities and great businesses. So his view of our city is not aligned with reality. It’s to distract the American people from his failures as a president.”By sending in the military, some noted, Trump was probably escalating crime, contributing to distrust in the government and creating unsafe situations both for residents and service members.Even Republican mayors or mayors in red states have said they don’t agree with Trump usurping local control for tenuous reasons. The US Conference of Mayors, currently led by the Republican mayor of Oklahoma City, David Holt, pushed back against Trump’s takeover of DC, saying “local control is always best”.“These mayors around the country, by the way, from multiple ideological backgrounds, they love their city more than they love their ideology,” said Jacob Frey, the mayor of Minneapolis.Mayors told the Guardian they are ready to stand up for their cities, legally and otherwise, should Trump come knocking. They are working with their chiefs of police to ensure they agree on the chain of command and coordinating with governors in the event the national guard is deployed. Because Trump has so frequently brought up plans to crack down on cities, large Democratic cities have been strategizing with emergency planning departments and city attorneys.But Trump has shown he’s willing to bend and break the law in his pursuits against cities. The Pentagon is reportedly planning to potentially put national guard troops at the ready, stationed in Alabama and Arizona, to deploy to cities experiencing unrest. He has indicated this is just the beginning of an assault on cities. His attorney general sent letters to a host of Democratic cities this week, threatening to arrest local leaders if they don’t cooperate with federal authorities on immigration enforcement.The idea that troops could be on the ground for any number of reasons in cities around the US should alarm people, said Brett Smiley, the Democratic mayor of Providence, Rhode Island.“This is not something that we should be used to, and we shouldn’t let this administration break yet another norm or standard in our society, such that a couple years from now, we don’t think twice about when we see troops in our cities,” Smiley said.Why Trump is going after citiesThe roots of Trump’s battle with cities stretch back to his first administration, and they align with common narratives on the right about how cities today have fallen off because of liberal policies. Project 2025, the conservative blueprint, called for crackdowns on cities, including withholding federal funds to force compliance with deportation plans.His campaign promises included a commitment to “deploying federal assets, including the National Guard, to restore law and order when local law enforcement refuses to act”. In a video from 2023, he explained: “In cities where there has been a complete breakdown of law and order, where the fundamental rights of our citizens are being intolerably violated, I will not hesitate to send in federal assets including the national guard until safety is restored.”In 2020, he reportedly wished he cracked down much harder and faster on protesters and rioters during the demonstrations after George Floyd’s murder. Now, he’s using smaller problems – anti-immigration protests and crime against a government employee – to declare emergencies.Minneapolis, where the protests began after a police officer killed Floyd, has at times made Trump’s list of rundown cities. Frey, a Democrat, said he didn’t know whether 2020 protests played a role in Trump’s current actions.“I don’t think anybody can pretend to know what’s in Donald Trump’s head,” Frey told the Guardian. “It’s an utter mess of idiocy. I don’t know what he’s thinking. I don’t know what he’s thinking or what the rhyme or reason is. I mean, clearly there’s a focus on Democratically run cities.”When Trump called out other cities on his radar, he named blue cities run by Black mayors – Baltimore, Oakland, Los Angeles, Chicago.“The fact that my city and all the others called out by the president on Sunday, led by Black mayors, are all making historic progress on crime, but they’re the ones getting called up – it tells you everything that you need to know,” Baltimore’s mayor, Brandon Scott, said in a press call this week.DC is differentThe federal government can often partner with cities to address crime – several Democratic mayors noted that they worked with the Biden administration on this front successfully. But those partnerships are mutually agreed upon collaborations, not overrides of local policing.“We’re not anti-federal help. We’re anti-federal chaos,” Frey said.Detroit’s mayor, Mike Duggan, said in a statement that his city is seeing its lowest homicides, shootings and carjackings in more than 50 years, crediting a partnership with federal agencies and the US attorney as a major part of that success.“This partnership is simple and effective: DPD does the policing and the feds have strongly increased support for federal prosecution,” Duggan said. “We appreciate the partnership we have today and are aware of no reason either side would want to change it.”Mayors are not saying they have solved the issue of violent crime, Scott said, though they are acknowledging they have reduced it and will continue to work toward further reductions. “We need folks that want to actually help us do that, versus try to take and show force and make us into something other than a representative democracy that we all are proud to call home,” he said.Mayors throughout the US made a clear distinction between Trump’s authority in Washington DC compared to other cities. Washington has a legal provision in the Home Rule Act of 1973 that allows for a president to take over its police department during an emergency on a temporary basis, though Trump is the first to use this power. Other cities have no similar concept in law.Even with the Home Rule Act, Washington officials sued Trump after his attempt to replace the city’s police chief, saying the president was mounting a “hostile takeover” of DC police. Trump and the city agreed to scale back the federal takeover on Friday, keeping DC’s police chief in place.“We know when people want to say they’re going to be a dictator on day one, they never voluntarily give up that aspiration on day two,” Norm Eisen, an attorney who frequently sues the Trump administration, said in a press call this week. “That is what you are seeing in the streets of the District of Columbia.”Cities are preparingIn Minneapolis, Frey said the city has prepared operational plans with police, fire and emergency management and readied itself legally.“Our chief of police and I are lockstep, and he reports up to the commissioner of safety, who reports up to me,” Frey said. “There’s no lack of clarity as to how this reporting structure works, and it certainly does not go to Donald Trump. Doing something like that in Minneapolis, it would be just a blatantly illegal usurpation of local control were this to happen here. Of course, we would take immediate action to get injunctive relief.”Trump’s decision to send in national guard troops to Los Angeles is also legally questionable. Governors typically direct guard troops. The California governor, Gavin Newsom, sued Trump for using the military for domestic law enforcement in defiance of the Posse Comitatus Act. The case was heard by a judge this week.Harrell, of Seattle, said he is confident he will be able to protect his police department and the city’s residents if Trump sends troops.“What I have to do is make sure that the people under my jurisdiction as mayor feel confident in an ability to fight his overreach, and that our law department is well geared to advance our legal arguments,” he said.Scott, of Baltimore, said he was prepared to take every action “legally and otherwise”.Still, there is some uncertaintyand unsteadiness about how cities can respond if Trump calls up the national guard.“It’s very difficult to know what our options are, because we’re in unchartered territory here,” Smiley, of Providence, said. “It’s unprecedented and I don’t know what my options are with respect to preventing troops from coming in, which is one of the reasons that I’m trying to be so proactive about making it clear that it’s not necessary, it’s not wanted.” More