federal authority

Influencer brothers Andrew and Tristan Tate, whose social media empire promoting wealth, male dominance and misogyny has made them among the world’s most polarizing internet personalities, were arrested Saturday in Miami as British authorities sought their extradition on rape and sex trafficking charges.

The brothers were taken into custody by the U.S. Marshals Service on a sealed warrant, agency spokesperson Brady McCarron told the Associated Press, placing the United States at the center of an international legal saga that has stretched from Romania to Britain.

British prosecutors announced Saturday that they were seeking the brothers’ extradition on charges alleging they raped and trafficked women between 2010 and 2017.

The dual U.S. and British citizens moved to Romania in 2016. They were arrested there in 2022, accused of participating in schemes to lure women for sexual exploitation. They denied those allegations, and the Romanian case hasn’t gone forward because of legal and procedural problems.

Last year, they were allowed to leave Romania and flew to Florida on a private jet.

The brothers are expected to appear in Miami’s federal court early next week, according to a person familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive law enforcement operations.

The pending charges in the United Kingdom accused the brothers of abusing women in an area north of London, where they grew up. Their lawyers had said they denied the allegations.

Joseph McBride, an attorney representing the Tate brothers, said in a phone interview Saturday evening that he has not been able to speak with his clients but called the new charges in the U.K. “filth and slander” intended to derail defamation lawsuits filed by the brothers in the U.S.

“They’re pulling out all the stops to make sure these guys never get their day in court,” McBride said.

“We are confident that once a competent judge sees the facts, and once the Department of Justice confronts this egregious abuse of its own authority, Andrew and Tristan Tate will walk free. America does not do Britain’s political dirty work.”

Andrew Tate, 39, first reached a mainstream audience as a contestant on the U.K. reality television show “Big Brother” in 2016. He was removed from the show when a video surfaced that appeared to show Tate assaulting a woman. He and his brother Tristan, 38, are vocal supporters of President Trump.

Andrew Tate has amassed more than 10 million followers on X but has been banned from platforms including YouTube, TikTok and Instagram for violating hate speech guidelines. His most widely condemned rhetoric includes comments that women who are sexually assaulted should bear some responsibility for their attacks, graphic descriptions of how he might attack women and criticisms of people who seek treatment for mental illness.

The Tate brothers have consistently denied allegations of abuse and human trafficking, claiming that violent and misogynistic statements have been taken out of context or were intended as jokes.

In a statement Saturday, the U.K.’s Crown Prosecution Services said that in addition to the charges announced against the brothers in 2025, involving alleged crimes against three women, it was bringing a total of 38 new charges related to “four further victims.”

Both brothers are accused of rape and human trafficking. Andrew Tate faces an additional charge of profiting from prostitution, and 19 charges “for offenses relating to indecent images of a child and extreme pornography,” according to U.K. authorities.

“There is no place for male violence against women and girls, and we will continue to work tirelessly to support victims and investigate all reports made to us,” said Karena Thomas, an assistant chief constable of the Bedfordshire Police, which investigated the case.

Durkin Richer writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Savannah Peters in Santa Fe, N.M., contributed to this report.

In a speech to the nation Thursday evening, President Trump said Americans deserve secure elections, and he claimed to be using federal authority to prevent them from being “stolen.”

In fact, one of the strongest security features of U.S. elections is the fact that they aren’t conducted at the federal level. America votes in more than 10,000 different election jurisdictions, each with different rules set by state and sometimes local governments.

That structure makes the nation’s elections extraordinarily complicated — and also safe from widespread fraud. And when misconduct does happen — rarely — security protocols frequently catch it.

Decentralized elections date back to the nation’s founding

America’s highly decentralized system of voting exists because the nation’s Founding Fathers gave authority over elections to the states, rather than the federal government. While Congress has the power to regulate elections — and has used that authority to pass such laws as the Voting Rights Act — the Constitution makes clear that states have primary authority to set the “times, places and manner” for elections.

There also is no national election agency that administers the presidential contest, something that’s different from many other countries. And when it comes to doing the day-to-day work of running an election, the responsibility falls to officials at the local level — usually a clerk or election supervisor — with help from staff and volunteers.

While differences in election laws can get confusing, election security experts say this structure is a strength. That’s because to pull off stealing a presidential election — as Trump falsely claims was done to him in 2020 — it would require large numbers of election workers in the most competitive counties across the country who are willing to risk prosecution, prison time and fines while working with officials from both parties willing to look the other way. And everyone somehow would have to keep quiet — a highly unlikely scenario.

There are also shared practices and security measures in place across the country that together work to ensure that only eligible voters can cast a ballot and only one ballot is counted for each.

Voter fraud can happen, but it’s rare and there are safeguards to catch it

Most Americans by now have probably heard stories about someone casting multiple ballots, or voting in the name of dead relatives, or stealing mail ballots from mailboxes.

When these incidents happen, they are often caught and prosecuted.

Voting more than once, tampering with ballots, lying about your residence to vote somewhere else or casting someone else’s ballot are crimes that can be punished with hefty fines and prison time. Non-U.S. citizens who break election laws can be deported.

For anyone still motivated to cheat, election systems in the United States are designed with multiple layers of protection and transparency intended to stand in the way.

For example, for in-person voting, most states either require or request voters provide some sort of identification at the polls. Others require voters to verify who they are in another way, such as stating their name and address, signing a poll book or signing an affidavit.

For absentee voting, all states require a voter’s signature, and many states have further precautions, such as having bipartisan teams compare the signature with other signatures on file, requiring the signature to be notarized or requiring a witness to sign.

That means even if a ballot is erroneously sent to someone’s past address and the current resident mails it in, there are checks to alert election workers to the foul play.

AP review found there was too little voter fraud to tip the 2020 election

Trump has spent six years insisting he won the 2020 election, a campaign he lost to former President Joe Biden.

An Associated Press review in 2021 dug into every potential case of voter fraud in the six battleground states that Trump disputed. It found fewer than 475 cases — a number that would have made no difference in that race.

Allegations from Trump of massive voting fraud have been refuted by a variety of judges, state election officials and an arm of his own administration’s Homeland Security Department. In 2020, then-Attorney General William Barr, a Trump appointee, told the AP that no proof of widespread voter fraud had been uncovered. “To date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have effected a different outcome in the election,” he said at the time.

Swenson writes for the Associated Press.

The fatal shooting of a Houston man by a federal immigration officer Tuesday marks at least the eighth death during the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement campaign, and the first fatality amid a newly intensified push by the administration to carry out its mass deportations agenda.

Department of Homeland Security officials said in a statement that Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, a Mexican national, ignored commands while trying to evade arrest during an enforcement operation. They say he attempted to ram his car into an agent, who opened fire in self-defense.

Araujo’s family said he was on his way to work at a construction job. He died on the way to the hospital.

The fatal shooting drew immediate criticism from immigrants rights groups and some Democrats who called for an independent investigation and for all footage, communication and evidence to be preserved.

Video footage in several previous shootings has contradicted the accounts of federal officers. No immigration officers have been charged in those fatal encounters.

Man shot during vacation trip traffic stop

A fatal late-night traffic stop in Texas in March 2025 marked the earliest deadly shooting by federal officers during the nationwide immigration crackdown. It took almost a year for records in the fatal shooting of the 23-year-old U.S. citizen to be disclosed.

A Homeland Security Investigations team was conducting an immigration enforcement operation with local police when agents stopped Ruben Ray Martinez, who was on his way from San Antonio to South Padre Island. Family members said he had just turned 23 and was with his best friend on his way to celebrate.

DHS officials said Martinez was told to exit the vehicle, but he refused and instead “intentionally ran over” an agent. Another agent fired shots through the open driver’s window, striking Martinez, who died at a hospital. The HSI agent was treated for an undisclosed knee injury.

Martinez’s mother said she was contacted by investigators with the Texas Rangers who told her there was video that contradicted the account given by federal agents. Federal and state authorities have declined to comment on potential discrepancies.

Nurse shot during Minneapolis protest

A Border Patrol officer shot and killed Alex Pretti, a 37-year-old nurse, during a Jan. 24 protest against the Metro Surge immigration operation in Minneapolis.

Federal authorities immediately described Pretti, a U.S. citizen, as an armed agitator who was a threat to officers. But bystander video showed Pretti was on the ground and had been holding a cellphone during the interaction with officers.

The video showed an officer appearing to pull a gun from Pretti’s waistband and step away before the first shot was fired by another officer, followed by more shots. Pretti had a permit to possess a firearm.

State and local officials pushed back against the federal officials’ initial characterizations of Pretti, with Gov. Tim Walz calling the comments “despicable.”

Driver shot behind the wheel of an SUV

Renee Good, a U.S. citizen, was repeatedly shot by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer in Minneapolis on Jan. 7. Videos show she was turning the wheels of her car away from an officer, Jonathan Ross, when he opened fire. Trump administration officials have repeatedly defended Ross, claiming his life was at risk from the moving vehicle.

Good’s death caused a firestorm across the country. The U.S. Justice Department said it wouldn’t share information on the shooting with state authorities.

State and local officials subsequently sued to try to stop the immigration sweeps. Protesters with whistles trailed officers who, in response, deployed tear gas and other chemical irritants.

Cook from Mexico shot during a traffic stop

ICE agents fatally shot Silverio Villegas González during a traffic stop Sept. 12 in suburban Chicago. Relatives said the 38-year-old line cook from Mexico had dropped off a child at daycare that morning.

At the time, DHS officials said agents were pursuing a man with a history of reckless driving who was in the country illegally. They alleged Villegas González evaded arrest and dragged an officer with his vehicle.

Homeland Security said the officer opened fire fearing for his life and was hospitalized with “serious injuries.” However, local police videos showed the agent walking around and dismissing his injuries as “nothing major.”

DHS has said the death remains under investigation.

Farmworker fell from greenhouse roof during ICE raid

Authorities were arresting dozens of farmworkers July 10 at Glass House Farms in Camarillo when Jaime Alanis fell from the roof of a greenhouse and broke his neck. The 57-year-old laborer from Mexico died at a hospital two days later.

Relatives said Alanis had spent a decade working at the farm. During the raid, Alanis called family to say he was hiding. Officials said he fell about 30 feet from the greenhouse roof.

Homeland Security said Alanis was never in custody and was not being chased by immigration authorities.

Man struck on California freeway after running from officers

A man fleeing from immigration officers outside a Home Depot store in Monrovia died after being hit by an SUV as he tried to cross a freeway on Aug. 14.

Monrovia police said ICE agents were conducting enforcement operations when the man was hit while running across the eastbound lanes of the 210 Freeway.

The man, identified by the National Day Laborer Organizing Network as Carlos Roberto Montoya Valdez, 52, of Guatemala, died at a hospital.

Homeland Security said Montoya Valdez wasn’t being pursued by immigration authorities when he ran.

Gardener from Honduras killed on Virginia interstate

A pickup truck fatally struck Josué Castro Rivera on a highway in Norfolk, Va., as he tried to escape authorities during a traffic stop on Oct. 23.

Castro Rivera, 24, of Honduras, was heading to a gardening job with three passengers when ICE officers pulled over the vehicle, according to his brother, Henry Castro.

State and federal authorities said Castro Rivera ran away on foot and was hit by a pickup truck on Interstate 264.

Homeland Security said Castro Rivera’s vehicle was stopped as part of a “targeted, intelligence-based” operation and that Castro Rivera had “resisted heavily and fled.”

Bynum and Lauer write for the Associated Press. Bynum reported from Savannah, Ga. Lauer reported from Philadelphia. AP reporters Ed White in Detroit; Sophia Tareen in Chicago; and Michael Biesecker in Washington contributed to this report.

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom did something this week that most politicians would only in a nightmare: He announced that the federal government is investigating him and his wife.

The revelation, delivered in a direct-to-camera 4½-minute video set against a backdrop of U.S. and California flags, became a top headline across the country.

In the upside-down politics of the Trump era, that was exactly as intended.

“He seems to be wearing this as a badge of honor because his brand is being the strongest opponent of Donald Trump,” said Thad Kousser, a professor of political science at UC San Diego. “The ability to show that you’re going on offense and that you know how to effectively fight back against this president is part of making your case for office.”

As he eyes a run for president in 2028, an antagonistic relationship with President Trump is Newsom’s political currency.

So when friends and former employees said the FBI and Internal Revenue Service had knocked on their doors and asked about him and his wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom, last Wednesday, the governor took advantage of the situation to boost his political profile.

“Mr. President, come after me,” Newsom said in the video he posted online. “I’m not going anywhere, and the country is watching.”

Newsom, who is in his final year as California’s governor, has not declared his intent to run for president, though his claim that Trump is targeting him because he’s considering a bid for the White House was an open acknowledgment of his thoughts about the future. Announcing the probe himself — before federal authorities had a chance to describe it on their terms — allowed him to get ahead of and try to discredit any findings as a “personal vendetta” long before potential charges are brought.

Celinda Lake, a Democratic strategist and national pollster, said Newsom publicly defending his wife could also play well with voters.

“He’s positioned himself as the front-runner because he’s the one who’s under attack,” Lake said. “Primary voters love it when he engages Trump, and I think the combination of engaging Trump and then also the sexism of going after your wife is just a real home run for a primary electorate that’s 59% female.”

The video released Monday seemed similar to a speech Newsom delivered after Trump sent federal troops to Los Angeles last summer.

That address, in which he countered Trump’s version of events and challenged the president to come after him instead of women and child immigrants, made Newsom the captain of the Democratic response to the unprecedented deployment and ended his attempt to play the part of respectful statesman and ease political tensions following the 2024 election.

Liberals have since seemed to relish Newsom’s near-constant derision of the president on social media.

But David McCuan, a professor of political science at Sonoma State University, said casting the case as another instance of Trump’s political weaponization ignores questions about the murky timeline and origin of the investigation.

Newsom’s aides point to Trump saying that the governor should be arrested during last summer’s anti-ICE protests as evidence that he personally called for the inquiry. The claim has gained oxygen — and been echoed by other Democratic leaders in the state — while going largely unchallenged by federal officials. The Justice Department has declined to comment, as has the White House.

A source familiar with the matter, who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it publicly, said two federal probes have been going on for about a year, and that they originated not from Washington, D.C. but from conversations between whistleblowers and federal prosecutors based in Sacramento. The probes are linked to Newsom’s former chief-of-staff, Dana Williamson, and Siebel Newsom’s taxes, the source said.

Newsom’s critics have also noted that federal prosecutors under the Biden administration had pursued questions about his involvement in a state lawsuit against Activision Blizzard Inc., a major video game distributor, before Trump retook office.

“This is something that could lead to other elements that blow up, so there’s a risk,” McCuan said.

Newsom’s aides described the investigation as a fishing expedition, with federal authorities searching for anything they can use against the governor.

They said federal authorities appeared to initially investigate allegations that turned up nothing about the Activision case before refocusing their questions on nonprofits and other entities tied to the couple. Investigators also asked about personal information related to the family’s household, Newsom’s office said.

McCuan said three nonprofits that surround the couple have received millions of dollars from donors and political interests and are not subject to campaign finance limits.

The California Partners Project is a nonprofit that promotes gender equity. The Representation Project is an avenue for Siebel Newsom’s documentary films. The California State Protocol Foundation uses private donations to pay for gubernatorial expenses and was founded under former Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

“It’s a long-running game,” McCuan said. “It’s just the Newsom first couple has perfected it and moved it forward.”

Newsom getting out ahead of prosecutors and framing their probes as nothing but a “witch hunt” — borrowing a phrase often used by Trump during his own previous prosecutions — carries risk.

If prosecutors do turn up evidence of wrongdoing, Newsom’s decision to parade his indignation could backfire.

Publicly challenging Trump also runs the risk that the president could instruct the Justice Department to dig in deeper on an investigation that might have otherwise petered out.

But Lake and others said there’s no placating Trump, who has targeted Newsom and other Democrats.

While traditional politics suggest facing federal charges could sink Newsom’s political ambitions, the rules have been thrown out under Trump.

“You know the last person who got tied up in courts on the campaign trail?” Kousser asked. “That was Donald Trump, and nothing elevated Donald Trump more than doing courthouse press appearances and being seen as the target of an unfair political prosecution.”

Sacramento — A veteran California political consultant has agreed to plead guilty in a scheme to steal campaign funds from Xavier Becerra, now a leading candidate for governor, when he served in the Biden administration, according to filings in her criminal case on Thursday.

Dana Williamson will plead guilty to three counts, including bank fraud and lying to authorities. In exchange, the federal government will dismiss 20 other counts against her related to her tax filings and a federal COVID-era loan she received.

A court hearing is scheduled Thursday morning.

Williamson, a former chief of staff to Gov. Gavin Newsom, was arrested in November and pleaded not guilty. The government secured guilty pleas in December from two advisors who worked with alongside her to skim money from Becerra.

The case against her and a looming plea deal have taken center stage in the California governor’s race as rivals seek to tie the charges to Becerra, who is a Democratic front runner. He hasn’t been charged, and prosecutors paint him as a victim.

Prosecutors say that Williamson, Becerra’s then-chief of staff Sean McCluskie and lobbyist Greg Campbell took part in a scheme to siphon money from Becerra’s dormant campaign account and funnel it to McCluskie.

McCluskie needed the money, according to prosecutors, so he could afford to fly home frequently to see his family in California while working for Becerra, who was Biden’s health secretary, in Washington, D.C.

As part of the scheme, Williamson and another consultant charged Becerra’s account up to $10,000 a month to manage one of his dormant state campaign accounts.

Becerra approved the payments, even though he had never paid such a high amount for a similar job. He told The Times that McCluskie told him to pay the fees.

Becerra’s rivals in the governor’s race are hammering him over his decision, arguing he should have known something wasn’t right. Becerra has said that he didn’t know about the criminal behavior and has called the charges a “gut punch.”

Known as an hard-nosed and aggressive operator, Williamson’s career in politics also included working for former governors Jerry Brown and Gray Davis and mentoring other women.

McGregor Scott, Williamson’s attorney, told reporters last year that federal authorities initially approached Williamson about helping them with a probe into Newsom. She refused, he said, and was subsequently charged.

Details contained in the indictment and other public records suggest that federal authorities were looking into the state’s handling of alleged sexual harassment at Activision Blizzard Inc., a video game company.