act

Democrats, election officials and voting rights groups have long wondered whether President Trump, upon his return to the Oval Office, would again attempt to overturn an election when his party is trailing.

It’s no longer hypothetical.

Late last week, the president directed his Department of Justice to preemptively contest a potential Republican loss in the U.S. Senate race in Alaska. The department is demanding a court hold up certification of a possible Democratic win until it’s determined whether voters were confused by having two candidates with the same name on the ballot.

Trump followed that by calling for the prosecution of Democratic candidate Mary Peltola, a former congresswoman, based on a New York Times report that her campaign helped recruit someone named Dan Sullivan to siphon away votes from the Republican incumbent, also named Dan Sullivan. The governor has ordered an investigation.

Academics believe the lawsuit is the first time since the Civil Rights era that the federal government has sued to halt certification of an election, a duty the Constitution places in the hands of states.

Trump, for years, has claimed elections are rigged when he or his party loses, and this time is no exception. He has used his midterm rallies to say Democrats cheat, criticize election officials by name and call the ranked choice voting system in Alaska, which might hold the key to Senate control, a scam.

But the certification lawsuit elevates Trump’s crusade beyond mere rhetoric, indicating that he is preparing to use the power of the presidency to try to reverse a possible loss as his party struggles to hold its control of Congress in Tuesday’s elections.

Earlier this week, the president also announced a $1 million bounty for anyone who provides proof of prior or current voter fraud in the country. It wasn’t clear whether or how he planned to follow through.

“For at least the last year and a half, they’ve been laying that groundwork,” said Theresa Lee, a senior attorney with the ACLU. “We’ve been preparing for just as long, if not longer.”

Trump says he’ll accept results if the election is ‘honest’

Trump told reporters this week that he would accept the election results, but with his typical caveat: “If they’re honest elections,” he said.

That follows a pattern. Trump has preemptively claimed that upcoming elections will be rigged and labeled elections he’s lost as stolen. It started with the 2016 Republican Iowa caucuses, when he came in second to Texas Sen. Ted Cruz.

“Ted Cruz didn’t win Iowa,” Trump said at the time. “He stole it.”

Democrats and other groups that oppose Trump have been concerned that his words would turn into directives to have his administration interfere in the midterms. They have been running exercises for months and have lawsuits pre-written. They also plan to have tens of thousands of people monitoring the polls on Election Day.

So far, early voting has been quiet, with about 35 million people already casting ballots without any notable disruption.

In that respect, this year’s election so far resembles 2025’s off-year elections in New Jersey, Virginia and a handful of other states. Democrats braced for possible Trump action then, but the election proceeded with no major issues. But the Justice Department’s more aggressive actions this month already make 2026 different from any election in recent memory.

It has sued California to block it from counting ballots after it alleged the state had 20,000 noncitizens on its rolls and made a similar demand of Washington related to about 400 voters in that state. Both states said the demands came too close to the election to fulfill, and a federal judge Wednesday rejected the federal government’s California demands.

Earlier, the Justice Department seized ballots and election records related to the 2020 presidential election in Georgia’s Fulton County, and the administration launched a sweeping investigation of that vote, though it has yet to turn up evidence supporting Trump’s false claims of fraud.

Attorney General Todd Blanche said the Justice Department does not want to intervene in elections, but had no choice in Alaska.

“We are not doing anything improper,” Blanche said Sunday on CNN. “But I do think it’s important for the American people to understand that we are not — (and) President Trump is not — trying to take over a state election in any way, shape or form.”

After the lawsuit was filed, Trump told reporters he was the one who pushed for it: “I’m the one that said do it,” the president said.

Lawsuits seem more ‘impulsive’ than strategic

Though the Trump administration claimed to be acting on behalf of Alaska’s voters in its lawsuit to hold up certification, the president’s Republican allies in the state didn’t appear happy.

Sen. Sullivan would not say whether he supported the lawsuit. Alaska’s Republican-controlled state government filed court papers to try to have it dismissed. The state’s other Republican senator, Lisa Murkowski, said the administration “should never have filed” it.

While controversial, the situation in Alaska is not that unusual. Political parties often support extra candidates on the ballot to try to pull votes from their rivals. If state courts allow it, legal experts say, the federal government has no role challenging the results.

Derek Muller, a Notre Dame law professor, wrote that the Alaska lawsuit’s legal argument was “one of the worst ones I’ve ever seen.” He said that should reassure the public that Trump won’t be able to change election outcomes.

“The notion that there’s going to be something systemic that’s going to thwart the will of the voters seems much more speculative,” he said. “A lot of the conduct seems impulsive rather than strategic and planned.”

The courts have repeatedly rebuffed the administration, in many cases because the Constitution gives the president no direct power over how elections are run. Courts put on hold two Trump executive orders seeking to change voting procedures. The administration also has lost more than two dozen cases trying to get detailed voter information from the states.

That resembles 2020, when Trump and his allies tried to overturn his loss to Democrat Joe Biden and in the process lost dozens of lawsuits.

Can the institutions hold?

Pat McCrory, a former Republican governor of North Carolina, is part of Right Count, a group of conservatives pushing back against election conspiracy theories and intervention in local elections. He said he’s confident the system will hold.

“The only thing that protects us from anarchy is this thin piece of paper called the Constitution,” McCrory said. “That thin piece of paper is, to me, a cement wall.”

It’s one that many analysts expect will continue to stymie Trump in the courts.

“The courts are likely to throw most, if not all, of these charges out,” said Matt Dallek, a political historian at George Washington University. “But this is a way of intensifying the signal to Trump’s supporters that the elections are rigged.”

The Justice Department in 2020 refused to join Trump’s allies in litigation. In his second term, Trump has pushed out career staff and stocked his administration with people who helped him challenge the 2020 election. That’s led to mounting concern he could deploy immigration agents, the FBI or even the military to the polls or seize ballots or voting machines, although multiple administration officialshave denied they have such plans.

All of that could happen before courts even have a chance to weigh in, said Brendan Nyhan, a Dartmouth political scientist.

“The threat is that he’ll take actions that can’t be undone,” Nyhan said.

Riccardi and Swenson write for the Associated Press.

Dozens of people have been injured in the protests, including students, teachers, and police officers.

Protests have resumed at schools across France as high school students press on with demands for more education funding and better conditions, the day after the country’s prime minister ordered ministers to provide an action plan.

Reporting from Paris, Al Jazeera’s Natacha Butler said university students and more trade unions have joined the nationwide protests and that a large rally is expected in the capital on Thursday.

“They are moving around, trying to block off the streets,” Butler said from outside one school, where university students were barricading a large area.

“They are out, they say, in solidarity with high school students because they say it’s important that as many young people join in the protests as possible,” she added.

The wave of protests began in a high school in a deprived area of Paris on September 21 . Tens of thousands of students across the country have since marched with a range of demands, from renovated school buildings to fewer classroom hours.

Police response under scrutiny

Rights groups have accused security officials of using disproportionate force against protesters.

Several demonstrators have been injured, including one teenager who lost a hand and another whose jaw was shattered by an exploding stun grenade. They have since been banned at marches.

Police officers and teachers have also been injured, authorities say, accusing students of committing violent acts. At least 6,600 arrests – mostly of minors – have been made so far, according to the Interior Ministry.

Authorities said 375 schools were either fully or partially closed on Thursday, and that two dozen had been burned or destroyed.

The demonstrations are increasing pressure on the cash-strapped outgoing government of Emmanuel Macron ahead of April elections.

Prime Minister Sebastien Lecornu condemned the violence in a TV address on Wednesday. He faulted “political leaders who use this anger to conduct their electoral battles”, after opposition leader Jean-Luc Mélenchon called for protesters to keep marching.

Lecornu has ordered ministers to provide an action plan responding to students’ demands by the end of the month, but protesters remain unconvinced.

“As far as they are concerned, the government only talks about solutions but never actually comes up with concrete actions, so they say they are going to keep coming out onto the streets until their demands are met,” Butler said.

The opening episode ended with two players fighting for their lives but before that – what on earth was Richard E Grant thinking?

Richard E Grant’s outrageous act of self-sabotage on The Celebrity Traitors last night left producers and fellow players reeling.

Claudia Winkleman said she believed the huge gaffe, in which he openly revealed his role as a Traitor just minutes after she’d selected him, was not because he was nervous, but because he was giddy with excitement after achieving the role he’d always dreamed of.

Now viewers will have to wait until tomorrow’s episode to see if the actor can survive the first roundtable banishment – while also discovering whether it was comedian James Acaster or TV journalist Amol Rajan who met their grisly end in a coffin.

Claudia said that Richard, 69, was so desperate to be a Traitor, she had no choice but to tap him on the shoulder. “You just couldn’t not give it to him, because he wanted it so much,” she laughed at a screening last week. “I couldn’t believe he was literally in the castle. And yeah, he was giddy. The genius of the game is that everyone plays it completely differently, and he took that to the next level.

“I think it was excitement. I think he was genuinely so happy. He came into the church. He loved the game. He had to eat. He wanted to be a Traitor. He got picked for a Traitor. He just wanted to tell everyone.”

Producer Sarah Fay agreed: “Never in our wildest dreams did we think that we’d have a Traitor admit they were a Traitor five minutes on from the round table. We’ve never had anything like that happen before. I think it was just static delirium. I don’t know what he was thinking. I still can’t believe it now, but yeah, Richard E Grant, how iconic.” She confessed that the star’s astonishing faux pas had left her feeling conflicted in the moment: “It was a mixture of a little bit of sick coming up in my mouth and a punch at the same time.”

Ahead of being picked, Richard told Claudia: “If I was lucky enough to be a Traitor, that would be one of my dreams come true – it’s the only way to have some control. Friendships means diddly squit!” And he won over the audience by speaking about his late wife Joan Washington, who told him four days before she died, in 2021, that he was to find “a pocketful of happiness” each day. “I feel like I’ve got a wheelbarrowful, and then some,” he marvelled.

But it wasn’t long before he boldly told Joe Lycett that he was “a Traitor” – leaving the group stunned. Luckily for him, Jerry Hall – who claimed in the show that she’d make a good Faithful because her uncle was one of the Texas Rangers who’d caught Bonnie and Clyde – quickly dismissed his outburst. “Oh, that’s just Richard, he wanted to be a Traitor so bad,” she said. “I’ve known him for 30 years and he says and does eccentric things.”

Many of the group appeared to follow her lead, with actress Myha’la insisting he must have been joking because “he’s too smart for that”. But viewers saw Richard sigh on camera: “That might be the biggest mistake I have ever made in my life.”

Finding out her fellow Traitor was like “an unhinged uncle” left Love Island host Maya Jama, 32, realising they’d have to work hard to keep him in the game. Despite this, she wholeheartedly accepted the challenge of getting him off the hook. “Me and Richard are in it together,” she said in a solo chat. “It’s like heaving an unhinged uncle running wild in the castle – that is my partner in crime.”

Told they had to choose a new recruit to join them in the turret, the duo picked the pair who had expressed the loudest views about Richard being a Traitor – Amol, who called Richard the “lord of chaos” and James Acaster. Whoever joins the Traitors after pleading for their life and ending up in a coffin cliffhanger will now have to change their argument – or throw Richard under the bus. But what is certain is that either James, 41, or Amol, 43, will tonight follow in the footsteps of Paloma Faith by becoming the first celebrity to exit the series.

Sarah said the idea for this twist was sparked by the pop star’s swift death last year. “We thought wouldn’t it have been interesting if Paloma had had the chance to plead for her life?” she explained. “Going home first is a massive thing, but if you can slightly put the power back in their hands, how interesting would that be?”

The idea of having Claudia pop out of a coffin at the start came after the celebrities had to dig their own graves in last year’s opener. “We were racking our brains: how can we make this feel different” Sarah said. “We landed on starting in the church and ending in the church, bookmarking episode one. So opening with Claudia popping out of a coffin, and then our first murder being someone getting slammed into one.” Claudia’s own ideas, that she got into the suit of armour or emerged from the grandfather clock, were both dismissed.

Almost all of the 21 celebrities wanted to have the green cloak, with only a handful determined to be Faithful, including singer James Blunt, mathematician Hannah Fry and comedians Miranda Hart and James Acaster – who will have failed in that quest if he remains in the game.

Ross Kemp said in his entrance interview that he wanted to show people he had a good sense of humour – and he certainly provided plenty of laughs last night. But, sadly for him, the comedy he brought was mostly at his own expense after he went into a tailspin first during the mission, and then later over drinks in the castle.

The TV tough man had prepared so thoroughly by going through previous episodes that he interpreted any gesture towards him as an attempt to kill him in plain sight. First Bella Ramsay was under suspicion after placing the Captain’s hat on his head as an mark of respect because he’d excelled in the mission. Then it was Leigh-Anne Pinnock’s turn after she touched him in the bar because she felt chilly. “I’ve just had my arm rubbed – she rubbed me on the arm,” he spluttered to the group. Accusing her outright of murder, she could only insist: “Oh my gosh – calm down! Stop.”

Admitting he was caught in a spiral of doom, the 62-year-old sighed: “My guard is very much up. Anyone touching me, offering me a drink or talking to me in a slightly odd way – that could be me gone. I’m feeling pretty paranoid.” Uncloaked host Ed Gamble branded his reactions as “one of the funniest things I’ve ever seen”. He laughed: “He’s a big hard man running that mission and then immediately terrified of a member of Little Mix touching him on the arm.”

The Celebrity Traitors returns tomorrow on BBC1 at 8pm.

SACRAMENTO — Days after signing a package of bills to rebuff aspects of federal immigration enforcement in California, Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed two bills from Los Angeles lawmakers that targeted public employment for federal agents.

One of the bills, backed by Speaker Robert Rivas (D-Hollister), would have blocked agents and contractors who worked to enforce federal immigration laws from state and local jobs in California, including for law enforcement agencies. It was called the “Get the Feds Out” or “GTFO” Act.

Newsom said the bill goes “a step too far.”

“It is a mistake to discourage empathetic and qualified Americans from working in the federal government, or choosing to leave long-standing employment with the federal government because they find the current administration’s policies and tactics reprehensible,” the governor wrote in a veto letter to the Legislature made public on Wednesday.

The governor added that hiring for public employment already includes personal conduct evaluations. He emphasized the “horrific tactics” used by immigration agents during President Trump’s second term but said it is the responsibility of Congress to hold the administration and individual agents accountable.

Newsom signed a similar bill that prevents federal agents from becoming police in California if their federal badge was revoked for misconduct.

While he expressed disappointment in the veto, Assemblymember Mark Gonzalez (D-Los Angeles), the author of Assembly Bill 1896, applauded Newsom for signing “a strong package of legislation that will protect Californians and stand up for our immigrant communities.”

“From the beginning, the GTFO Act was about a simple principle: We should never use public dollars to reward conduct that has caused fear, terror, and pain in our communities. I am proud to have stood alongside my brother, Speaker Rivas, in this fight and this fight is not over,” Gonzalez said in a statement to The Times.

A spokesperson for Rivas said while the proposal did not become law, “Californians know Trump’s immigration agenda is failing and doesn’t keep anyone safe. That’s why Assembly Democrats are leading the nation in holding ICE accountable. The Speaker thanks his colleagues for delivering real results this year.”

The outgoing governor also vetoed a proposal from Assemblymember Isaac Bryan (D-Culver City), Assembly Bill 1537, that would have prevented sworn law enforcement officers from taking secondary employment or contract jobs for immigration enforcement.

Newsom took issue with the prospect of prohibiting “secondary employment law enforcement officers choose to do in their free time.”

“State and local peace officers already must abide by specific standards and rules, including ones that apply to their personal conduct,” Newsom wrote in the veto letter. “Any officers who violate those standards are held accountable through investigations that may culminate in their peace officer status being suspended or revoked entirely.”

Bryan, through a spokesperson, declined to comment on the veto.

Earlier this week, Newsom signed 21 bills aimed at federal immigration enforcement, including bans on electric shock gloves and face coverings for law enforcement. Other laws impose a 25% tax on companies that operate private detention centers, along with additional oversight of the facilities.

“No tax will stop ICE from deporting criminal illegal aliens to make California safe again,” a spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security said in an email. “While California sanctuary politicians continue to release pedophiles, rapists, gang members, and murderers onto their streets, our brave law enforcement will continue to risk their lives to arrest these heinous criminals and make California safe again.”