November

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom’s plan to temporarily redraw California’s congressional districts has more support than opposition — but with many voters undecided, the measure’s prospects remain uncertain, a new poll found.

One thing, however, has become clear: Newsom’s standing with voters appears tethered to the fate of his high-stakes redistricting gamble.

The UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies poll, conducted for the Los Angeles Times, asked registered voters about the Newsom-backed redistricting push favoring California Democrats, which serves as a counterattack to President Trump and Texas Republicans reworking election maps to their advantage.

When voters were asked whether they agree with California’s redistricting maneuver, 46% said it was a good idea, while 36% said it was a bad idea. Slightly more, 48%, said they would vote in favor of the temporary gerrymandering efforts if it appeared on the statewide special election ballot in November. Nearly a third said they would vote no, while 20% said they were undecided.

“That’s not bad news,” said Mark DiCamillo, director of the Berkeley IGS Poll. “It could be better. With ballot measures, you’d like to be comfortably above 50% because you got to get people to vote yes and when people are undecided or don’t know enough about initiatives, they tend to vote no just because it’s the safer vote.”

Among voters who regularly cast ballots in statewide elections, overall support for redistricting jumped to 55%, compared with 34% opposed.

That, DiCamillo said, is significant.

“If I were to pick one subgroup where you would want to have an advantage, it would be that one,” he said.

The high-stakes fight over political boundaries could shape control of the U.S. House, where Republicans currently hold a narrow majority. Newsom and Democratic leaders say California must match Texas’ partisan mapmaking move to preserve balance in Congress. Texas’ plan creates five new Republican-leaning seats that could secure the GOP’s majority in the House. California’s efforts are an attempt to cancel those gains — at least temporarily. The new maps would be in place for the 2026, 2028 and 2030 congressional elections.

However, critics say that the plan undermines the state’s voter-approved independent redistricting commission and that one power grab doesn’t negate another.

• Share via Close extra sharing options

Not surprisingly, the partisan fight over election maps elicited deeply partisan results in the poll. Nearly 7 in 10 Democratic voters said they would support the redistricting measure , while Republicans overwhelmingly (72%) panned the plan.

Former President Obama endorsed it, while California’s former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a moderate Republican, told the New York Times he would fight it. The effort faced opposition this week in Sacramento during legislative hearings, where Republicans blasted it as a partisan game-playing. California Republicans attempted to stall the process by filing an emergency petition at the state Supreme Court, arguing that Democrats violated the California Constitution by rushing the proposal through the Legislature. The high court rejected the legal challenge Wednesday.

The effort has by all accounts moved swiftly, with newly reworked maps released late last week and, by Monday, lawmakers introduced legislation to put it before voters. Lawmakers approved those bills Thursday, which secures the measure’s place on the ballot in November.

Newsom, who has become the face of California’s redistricting effort, has seen his once-stagnant approval ratings tick upward as he takes on Trump and Republican leaders. Beyond the high-profile push to reshape the state’s congressional districts, his office has drawn recent attention with a social media campaign that mimics Trump’s own idiosyncratic posts.

More voters now approve than disapprove of the governor’s job performance (51% to 43%), which represented a turnaround from April, when voters were split at 46% on each side. The poll, which surveyed 4,950 registered voters online in English and Spanish, was conducted from Aug. 11 to 17.

A majority of respondents — 59% — back Newsom’s combative stance toward Trump, while 29% want him to adopt a more cooperative approach. Younger voters were especially supportive of Newsom styling himself as Trump’s leading critic, with 71% of those between 18 and 29 years old backing the approach.

Matt Lesenyie, an assistant professor of political science at Cal State Long Beach, said having Newsom as the face of the redistricting campaign would have been more of a liability a month ago. But Newsom’s profile has been rising nationally during the spiraling fight over congressional maps and been buoyed by his prolific Trump trolling, which has struck a nerve with conservative commentators. That has opened up a lane for Newsom to spread the campaign’s message more broadly, he said.

“If he keeps this pace up, he’s right on a pressure point,” Lesenyie said.

Political scientist Eric Schickler, who is co-director of the Berkeley Institute that conducted the poll, said asking Californians to hand back control of redistricting to politicians — even temporarily — after voters made the process independent would normally be a tough sell.

“Voters don’t trust politicians,” Schickler said. “On the other hand, voters see Trump and don’t like what he’s doing. And so it was really a test to see which of those was more powerful and the results suggest, at least for now, Newsom’s winning that argument.”

Winning in November, however, will require pushing undecided voters over the finish line. Among Latino, Black and Asian voters, nearly 30% said they have yet to decide how they would vote on redistricting. Women also have higher rates of being undecided compared with men, at 25% to 14%. Younger voters are also more likely to be on the fence, with nearly a third of 18- to 29-year-olds saying they are unsure, compared with 11% of those older than 65.

Among Democrats, there are still some skeptics about the proposal. One in 5 polled said they were undecided. A quarter of voters with no party preference say they are undecided.

“That suggests there are a bunch of votes left on the table,” Schickler said. “While I wouldn’t be surprised if the margin narrows between now and November, this is a good place for the proposition to start.”

SACRAMENTO — Ratcheting up the pressure in the escalating national fight over control of Congress, the California Legislature on Thursday approved November special election to ask voters in November to redraw the state’s electoral lines to favor Democrats and thwart President Trump’s far-right policy agenda.

The ballot measure, pushed by Gov. Gavin Newsom and other state and national Democratic leaders, is the latest volley in a national political brawl over electoral maps that could alter the outcome of the 2026 midterm elections and the balance of power in the U.S. House of Representatives.

If voters approve the redrawn lines on Nov. 4, Democrats in the Golden State would see the odds tilted further in their favor, while the number of California Republicans in the House could be halved.

Newsom initially said that new electoral districts in California would only take effect if another state redrew its lines before 2031. But after Texas moved toward approving its own maps this week that could give the GOP five more House seats, Democrats stripped the so-called “trigger” language from the amendment — meaning that if voters approve the measure, the new lines would take effect no matter what.

The ballot measure language, which asks California voters to override the power of the independent redistricting commission, was approved by most Democrats in the Assembly and the Senate, where they hold supermajorities.

California lawmakers have the power to place constitutional amendments on the statewide ballot without the approval of the governor. Newsom, however, is expected later Thursday to sign two separate bills that fund the special election and spell out the lines for the new congressional districts.

Democrats’ rush to the ballot marks a sudden departure from California’s 15-year commitment to independent redistricting, often held up as the country’s gold standard. The state’s voters stripped lawmakers of the power to draw lines during the Great Recession and handed that partisan power to a panel of independent citizens whose names are drawn in a lottery.

The change, Democrats said, was forced by an extraordinary change in circumstances: After decades of the United States redrawing congressional lines once a decade, President Trump and his political team have leaned on Republican-led states to redraw their district lines before the 2026 midterm elections to help Republicans retain control of the House.

“His playbook is a simple one: Bully, threaten, fight, then rig the rules to hang onto power,” said Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas. “We are here today because California will not be a bystander to that power grab. We are not intimidated, and we are acting openly, lawfully, with purpose and resolve, to defend our state and to defend our democracy.”

Republicans in the state Assembly and the state Senate criticized Newsom’s argument that Democrats must “fight fire with fire,” saying retaliation is a slippery slope that would erode the independent redistricting process California voters have chosen twice at the ballot box.

“You move forward fighting fire with fire, and what happens? You burn it all down,” said Assembly Minority Leader James Gallagher (R-Yuba City). He said Trump was “wrong” to push Gov. Greg Abbott to redraw Texas’ lines to benefit Republicans, and so was California’s push to pursue the same strategy.

Democratic Assembly member Marc Berman speaks during a meeting of the California State Assembly at the California State Capitol on August 21, 2025 in Sacramento.

(Justin Sullivan / Getty Images)

State Senate Majority Leader Lena Gonzalez (D-Long Beach), who co-authored the bill drawing the proposed congressional districts, said Democrats had no choice but to stand up, given the harm the Trump administration has inflicted on healthcare, education, tariffs and other policies that affect Californians.

“What do we do? Just sit back and do nothing?” Gonzalez said. “Or do we fight back and provide some chance for our Californians to see themselves in this democracy?”

Senate Minority Leader Brian Jones (R-Santee) said the effort is “a corrupt redistricting scheme to rig California’s elections” that violates the “letter and the spirit of the California constitution.”

“Democrats are rushing this through under the guise of urgency,” Jones said. “There is no emergency that justifies this abuse of process.”

Three Assembly Democrats did not vote in favor of the constitutional amendment. Jasmeet Bains (D-Delano), who is running for Congress against Rep. David Valadao (R-Hanford) in the San Joaquin Valley, voted no. Progressive Caucus chair Alex Lee (D-San Jose), and Dawn Addis (D-Morro Bay), did not vote.

Democrats will face an unusual messaging challenge with the November ballot measure, said Matt Lesenyie, an assistant professor of political science at Cal State Long Beach.

The opponents of mid-decade redistricting are stressing that the measure would “disadvantage voters,” he said, which is “wording that Democrats have primed Democrats on, for now two administrations, that democracy is being killed with a thousand cuts.”

“It’s a weird, sort of up-is-down moment,” Lesenyie said.

How did we get here?

Trump’s political team began pressuring Abbott and Texas Republicans in early June to redraw the state’s 38 congressional districts in the middle of the decade — which is very uncommon — to give Republicans a better shot at keeping the House in 2026.

“We are entitled to five more seats,” Trump later told CNBC.

Some Texas Republicans feared that mid-decade redistricting could imperil their own chances of reelection. But within a month of the White House floating the idea, Abbott added the new congressional lines, which would stack the deck against as many as five Texas Democrats in Congress, to the Legislature’s special session in July.

By mid-July, Newsom was talking about California punching back. In an interview with the progressive news site the TN Holler, Newsom said: “These guys, they’re not f—ing around. They’re playing by a totally different set of rules.”

Democrats in Texas fled the state for nearly two weeks, including some to California, to deny Republicans the quorum they needed to pass the new lines. Abbott signed civil arrest warrants and levied fines on the 52 absent Democrats while they held news conferences in California and Illinois to bring attention to the fight.

While the Texas drama unfolded, consultants for the campaign arm of House Democrats in California quietly drew up maps that would further chop down the number of Golden State Republicans in Congress. The proposed changes would eliminate the district of Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Corona) and dilute the number of GOP voters in four districts represented by Reps. Doug LaMalfa, Kevin Kiley, David Valadao and Darrell Issa.

The Democrats agreed to return to Texas last week and pointed to California’s tit-for-tat effort as one measure of success, saying the Golden State could neutralize any Republican gains in Texas.

Since then, other Republican-led states have begun to contemplate redistricting too, including Indiana, Florida and Missouri. Trump’s political allies are publicly threatening to mount primary challenges against any Indiana Republican who opposes redrawing the lines.

In California, the opposition is shaping up as quickly as the ballot measure.

California voters received the first campaign mailer opposing the ballot measure a day before the Legislature voted to approve it. A four-page glossy flier, funded by conservative donor and redistricting champion Charlie Munger Jr., warned voters that mid-decade redistricting is “weakening our Democratic process” and “a threat to California’s landmark election reform.”

Republicans have also gone to court to try and stop the measure, alleging in an emergency petition with the state Supreme Court that Democrats violated the state Constitution by ramming the bills through without following proper legislative procedure. The high court Wednesday rejected the petition.

A wave of legal challenges are expected, not only in California but in any state that reconfigures congressional districts in the expanding partisan brawl.

Assemblymember Carl DeMaio (R-San Diego) said Thursday morning that a lawsuit challenging the California ballot measure would be filed in state court by Friday evening. He said Republicans also plan to litigate the title of the ballot measure and any voter guide materials that accompany it.

And, he said, if voters approve the new lines, “I believe we will have ample opportunity to set the maps aside in federal court.”

Jake Paul will take on WBA lightweight champion Gervonta Davis in an exhibition fight in Atlanta, Georgia on 14 November.

Davis’ title will not be on the line because of the huge gulf in weight between the two men.

Paul weighed 200lbs for his last bout with Davis currently campaigning at 135lb.

Youtuber-turned-boxer Paul found fame on the Disney Channel and then as an influencer before stepping into the world of boxing and has a record of 12 wins and one defeat as a professional.

“Yes, he is one of the top pound-for-pound boxers in the world, but my motto is anyone, anytime, anyplace, against all odds,” Paul wrote on X, external.

Paul added “first David, then Goliath” in what could be seen as a reference to reports he was in talks over a fight with British heavyweight Anthony Joshua.

Matchroom’s Eddie Hearn, who promotes Joshua, recently told BBC Sport that Paul could likely be next for the two-time heavyweight champion when he returns from injury in 2026.

American Davis is undefeated in 31 fights as a professional, winning 30 and drawing one, with 28 of his victories coming by knockout.

The redistricting plan taking shape in Sacramento and likely headed toward voters in November could shift the Golden State’s political landscape for at least six years and determine which party controls the U.S. House of Representatives after the 2026 midterm elections.

Maps made public Friday afternoon show how California Democrats hope to reconfigure the state’s 52 congressional districts. The plan targets five of California’s nine Republican members of Congress, and is designed to counteract the redistricting efforts in Texas that would favor Republicans.

The state Legislature is expected to place the new map and a constitutional amendment to override the state’s independent redistricting process on a Nov. 4 special election ballot.

Enter your address below or select somewhere on the current map to see how the districts could change.

Sean Greene and Hailey Wang contributed to this report.

Gov. Gavin Newsom, Democratic lawmakers and their allies on Thursday launched a special-election campaign to ask California voters to approve new congressional districts to decrease the size of the state’s Republican delegation — a move that could determine control of Congress next year and stymie President Trump’s agenda.

The effort is a response to GOP-led states, notably Texas, attempting to redraw their congressional maps to decrease Democratic ranks in the narrowly-divided U.S. House of Representatives at Trump’s behest.

• Share via Close extra sharing options

Newsom, speaking to a fired-up partisan crowd at the Japanese American National Museum in downtown Los Angeles, said the effort by Republicans represented a desperate effort by a failed president to hold on to power by keeping Congress under Republican control.

“He doesn’t play by a different set of rules. He doesn’t believe in the rules,” Newsom said. “And as a consequence, we need to disabuse ourselves of the way things have been done. It’s not good enough to just hold hands, have a candlelight vigil and talk about the way the world should be. We have got to recognize the cards that have been dealt, and we have got to meet fire with fire.”

The governor was joined by Sens. Alex Padilla and Adam Schiff; Rep. Pete Aguilar, (D-San Bernardino), the chair of the House Democratic Caucus, and union leaders essential to providing the funding and volunteers to convince Californians to vote for the “Election Rigging Response Act.” The proposed California ballot measure would temporarily toss out the congressional districts enacted by the state’s voter-approved, independent redistricting commission.

“Our union stands in full support of this ballot initiative. We are ready to do whatever it takes to stop this power grab and fight back against any and all attacks on our democracy, on our students and on public education,” said Erica Jones, the secretary treasurer of the California Teachers Assn., which represents 310,000 public school teachers.

She said school children have suffered because of the Trump administration’s immigration raids, as well as cuts to healthcare funding, after school programs and teacher trainings.

“Our students deserve better,” she said. “The majority of Americans are not with him on these vicious attacks. So what does Trump want to do? Rig the next election and steal our right to fair representation? He wants to stack the deck to keep slashing public services to pad the pockets of his billionaire donors.”

Outside the political rally, Border Patrol agents gathered and arrested at least one person. Newsom told the crowd inside that he doubted it was a coincidence.

Supporters of the independent commission that currently draws California’s congressional maps criticized Democrats’ efforts to conduct a highly unusual mid-decade redistricting plan. For Newsom’s plant to work, the Democratic-led state Legislature must vote in favor of placing the measure on the ballot in a special election in November, and then the final decision will be up to California voters.

“Two wrongs do not make a right, and California shouldn’t stoop to the same tactics as Texas. Instead, we should push other states to adopt our independent, non-partisan commission model across the country,” said Amy Thoma, spokesperson for the Voters First Coalition, which includes Charles Munger Jr., the son of a billionaire who bankrolled the ballot measure that created the independent commission.

Munger will vigorously oppose any proposal to circumvent the independent commission, she said.

Since voters approved independent congressional redistricting in 2010, California’s districts have been drawn once per decade, following the U.S. Census, by a panel split between registered Democrats, registered Republicans and voters without a party preference.

The commission is not allowed to consider the partisan makeup of the districts, nor protecting incumbents, but instead looks at “communities of interest,” logical geographical boundaries and the Voting Rights Act.

The current map was drawn in 2021 and went into effect for the 2022 election.

Newsom is pushing to suspend those district lines and put a new map tailored to favor Democrats in front of voters on Nov. 4. That plan, he has said, would have a “trigger,” meaning a redrawn map would not take effect unless Texas or another GOP-led state moved forward with its own.

Sara Sadhwani, who served on the redistricting commission that approved the current congressional district boundaries, said that while she is deeply proud of the work she and her colleagues completed, she approved of Newsom’s effort to temporarily put the commission’s work aside because of the unprecedented threats to American democracy.

“These are extraordinary times, and extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures,” said Sadhwani, citing the immigration raids, the encouragement of political violence and the use of National Guard troops in American cities. “And if that wasn’t enough, we are watching executive overreach that no doubt is making our founding fathers turn in their graves, and we have to take action. These are the hallmarks of a democracy in peril.”

If voters approved the ballot measure, the new maps would be in effect until the independent commission redraws the congressional boundaries in 2031.

To meet Newsom’s ambitious deadline, the state Legislature would need to pass the ballot language by a two-thirds majority and send it to Newsom’s desk by Aug. 22. The governor’s office and legislative leaders are confident in their ability to meet this threshold in the state Assembly and state Senate, where Democrats have a supermajority.

Newsom first mentioned the idea in mid July, meaning the whole process could be done in about five weeks. Generally, redrawing the state’s electoral lines and certifying a measure to appear before voters on the ballot are processes that take months, if not more than a year.

Trump’s prodding of Texas Republicans to redraw their congressional maps to create five new GOP seats has kicked off redistricting battles across the nation.

That includes Florida, Ohio, Indiana and Missouri, where Republicans control the statehouse, and New York, Maryland, Illinois, New Jersey, Oregon and Washington, where Democrats are in power.

Democratic lawmakers in Texas fled the state to block the Republican-led legislature from approving a new map that would gerrymander congressional districts to favor of the GOP. The Democrats maneuver worked, since it prevented the legislature from have a quorum necessary to approve the measure. A second special session is expected to begin Friday. The absent lawmakers are facing threats of fines, civil arrest warrants and calls for being removed from office; Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has vowed to call repeated special sessions until the map is approved.

In California, the gerrymandering plan taking shape behind closed doors would increase the Democratic Party’s dominance in the state by making five House districts more favorable to Democrats, according to a draft map reviewed by The Times.

Those changes could reduce by more than half the number of Republicans representing California in Congress. The state has the nation’s largest congressional delegation, with 52 members. Nine are Republicans.

A Northern California district represented by Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-Richvale) could shift to the south, shedding rural, conservative voters near the Oregon border and picking up left-leaning cities in Sonoma County. Sacramento-area Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Rocklin) would see his district shift toward the bluer center of the city.

The plan would also add more Democrats to the Central Valley district represented by Rep. David Valadao (R-Hanford), who has been a perennial target for Democrats.

Southern California would see some of the biggest changes: Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Bonsall) would see his safely Republican district in San Diego County become more purple through the addition of liberal Palm Springs. And Reps. Young Kim (R-Anaheim Hills) and Ken Calvert (R-Corona) would be drawn into the same district, which could force the lawmakers to run against each other.

The plan would also shore up Democrats who represent swing districts, such as Reps. Dave Min (D-Irvine) and Derek Tran (D-Orange).

It could also add another district in southeast Los Angeles County, in the area that elected the first Latino member of Congress from California in modern history. A similar seat was eliminated during the 2021 redistricting.

Times staff writer Taryn Luna contributed to this report from Sacramento.

THE countdown to Black Friday 2024 is officially on, and if last year is anything to go by, fans of Lululemon are in for a treat. 

From leggings to sports bras, Lululemon’s Black Friday deals have traditionally been worth waiting for, making it the perfect opportunity to refresh your wardrobe or invest in some premium gear at discounted prices.

2

Sign up to the Lululemon newsletter to receive updates about its Black Friday sale

Known for its high-performance activewear and loungewear, Lululemon is a go-to brand for fitness enthusiasts and comfort seekers alike. 

With Black Friday around the corner, it’s time to start thinking about what deals might be on offer this year.

Here’s what to expect from Lululemon’s Black Friday sale in 2024, when the sale kicks off and how to prepare for the best discounts. 

So whether you’re after a new pair of the brand’s iconic Align leggings or you’ve been eyeing their latest athleisure pieces, here’s everything you need to know to shop smarter this November.

When is Black Friday 2024?

Mark your calendars: Black Friday 2024 falls on Friday, 29 November. While the main event takes place on this day, many brands, including Lululemon, often begin rolling out deals in the week leading up to Black Friday itself. 

If previous years are any indication, you can expect early access offers and sneak peeks in the days prior, so it’s a good idea to keep an eye on Lululemon’s website and sign up for any email alerts to stay ahead of the game.

Black Friday has grown to be one of the most significant shopping events of the year, and it’s not just confined to the Friday after Thanksgiving anymore. 

It’s now common for sales to extend throughout the weekend and into Cyber Monday, giving you plenty of time to shop and score great deals.

Ever wondered why Black Friday is called Black Friday? Find out here.

Is Lululemon taking part in Black Friday this year?

Yes, Lululemon is expected to participate in Black Friday 2024, just as it has in previous years. 

Whilst the brand is pretty selective with its discounts throughout the year, Black Friday is one of the rare occasions where you can expect to find significant price cuts across a variety of items. 

Last year, Lululemon offered up to 50% off on selected items, and this year is expected to be no different.

Although Lululemon doesn’t typically promote drastic storewide markdowns, it does provide substantial savings on select items. 

The Black Friday sale usually includes popular favourites like the Lululemon Align leggings, Define jackets and a range of accessories, making it a great time to stock up on essentials.

What to expect from Lululemon’s Black Friday sale 2024

While the official details for Lululemon’s Black Friday 2024 sale have yet to be released, we can make some educated guesses based on last year’s deals.

Expect markdowns on some of Lululemon’s best-selling items, including their famed yoga leggings, workout tops and accessories such as gym bags and water bottles. 

Based on previous years, discounts typically range from 20% to 50%, depending on the item.

Lululemon often includes a selection of seasonal and limited-edition styles in their Black Friday sale, so keep an eye out for exclusive pieces. 

Stock tends to move fast, so it’s best to be ready to shop as soon as the sale goes live to secure your must-have items.

What was in Lululemon’s Black Friday sale last year?

In 2023, Lululemon’s Black Friday deals included a variety of savings across their activewear and loungewear collections. 

Shoppers were treated to discounts on best-sellers such as the Align leggings, which were reduced by £14, while the Define jackets also saw significant markdowns. 

Accessories, including the popular Everywhere Belt Bag and water bottles, were also part of the sale.

Many of these items sold out quickly, so if you’re eyeing a particular piece, it’s worth making a list in advance and acting fast when the sale starts. 

Lululemon’s sales can be highly competitive, and sizes tend to sell out quickly, especially on staple items.

2

When is Cyber Monday 2024 and is Lululemon taking part?

Cyber Monday falls on Monday, 2 December 2024, and Lululemon typically extends its Black Friday discounts through to Cyber Monday. 

If you miss out on a deal during the Black Friday weekend, Cyber Monday offers another chance to snag some bargains. 

While the best deals often go live on Black Friday itself, Cyber Monday can feature additional markdowns or further reductions on remaining stock.

How much does Lululemon’s shipping cost?

Lululemon offers free standard shipping on all online orders, which is a great perk for Black Friday shoppers who prefer to avoid the crowds. 

During busy shopping periods like Black Friday and Cyber Monday, Lululemon may offer expedited shipping at a reduced rate or for free on higher-value orders, so keep an eye on their shipping policies as the event approaches.

Does Lululemon offer any other discounts?

In addition to Black Friday sales, Lululemon has a few year-round discounts worth noting. 

The brand offers a ‘We Made Too Much’ section on their website, where shoppers can find discounted items throughout the year. 

Additionally, if you sign up to the Lululemon newsletter you can receive 10% off your first purchase.

While these discounts may not be combinable with Black Friday deals, they’re worth exploring if you qualify.

By keeping an eye on Lululemon’s website and being prepared ahead of time, you’ll be in the best position to score some great deals this Black Friday. 

WASHINGTON — The Constitution makes it clear: “The People” get to pick those who’ll represent their interests in the U.S. House of Representatives.

But just how closely do those choices reflect the overall political leanings of the people? The question is at the heart of a power play in Texas, where Republicans are trying to reshape the state’s congressional boundaries to help them maintain control of the House in next year’s midterm elections.

In many cases, a state’s congressional delegation doesn’t align very closely with what would seem to be the will of the voters, although that’s not always because of partisan gerrymandering.

Every state decides how to draw its own congressional boundaries. Some, like California, rely on independent redistricting commissions, while most leave it to the state Legislature and the governor to hammer out a plan. It’s states where one party controls all the levers of government where redistricting dramas like the one in Texas often play out as the majority tries to maximize its power.

Regardless of the process, the resulting maps often produce congressional delegations much more lopsided in favor of one party than the state’s partisan demographics might suggest.

A state’s presidential vote result isn’t a precise tool for measuring what its congressional delegation ought to look like, but it can provide a compelling point of comparison. Politicians frequently cite it when decrying partisan redistricting practices they think are unfair.

President Trump, who’s pushing Texas and other GOP-controlled states to redraw their maps, has said Republicans are “entitled to five more seats” in Texas based in part on the size of his win there in November. Trump won 56% of the Texas vote, but Republicans already hold 65% of the state’s congressional delegation — which would rise to 79% if the GOP’s new maps are adopted and past voting patterns hold in the next election.

During an event with Texas Democratic lawmakers in Boston, Missouri state Rep. Ashley Aune cited her state’s presidential vote results in warning of possible Republican-driven redistricting efforts there.

“Fifty-eight percent of Missouri voted for Trump, but they want to send an 87% representation to Congress,” said Aune, a Democrat.

It’s actually fairly common for a state’s congressional delegation not to align with statewide presidential vote results.

In 41 of the 44 states with more than one congressional district, the party of the winning presidential candidate had a larger share of the state’s congressional seats than its share of the presidential vote, an Associated Press analysis found. In most cases, it was a much larger share, a gap of at least 10 percentage points.

Here’s a comparison of the congressional delegations and presidential vote results in a sampling of states, including some of those considering a redraw of their congressional boundaries after Texas called its special session.

California and Illinois

In remarks to CNBC, Trump pointed to California and Illinois as justifications for redrawing the Texas map in Republicans’ favor.

“You notice they go to Illinois for safety, but that’s all gerrymandered,” he said in reference to the Texas Democrats who relocated to the Chicago area to block, at least temporarily, the Republican redistricting efforts.

“California’s gerrymandered. We should have many more seats in Congress in California,” he said.

He’s right about Illinois: Democrats have gerrymandered the lines so they hold 14 of the 17 House seats. Not so in California.

Democrats there do have an outsized majority, holding 43 of the state’s 52 House seats, about 83%. Vice President Kamala Harris, a Democrat, received about 59% of the November vote. But that’s not because of Democratic gerrymandering. A ballot initiative took the process away from state lawmakers and gave it to an independent citizens commission.

California’s lopsided map is due in part to the way like-minded people cluster: California Democrats tend to live in and near major cities that get more congressional districts because of their population.

Florida

Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis scored a legal victory in July when the state Supreme Court upheld his congressional redistricting plan redrawing a district with a large Black population. That plan resulted in Republicans holding about 71% of the state’s 28 U.S. House seats. Trump carried the state in November with 56% of the vote.

DeSantis later indicated there may be more “defects” in the map that need to be addressed before the next census.

Republicans held an 18-7 advantage over Democrats in Florida’s House delegation after the 2000 census. Democrats slowly narrowed the gap, reaching 13 seats to Republicans’ 14 after the 2018 election. But Republicans reestablished their advantage after the redistricting that followed the 2020 census, when they reached the 20-8 split they hold today.

New York

Democrats have long enjoyed an advantage at the New York ballot box in presidential and congressional elections. Harris received nearly 56% of the vote in 2024, while Democrats hold 73% of the state’s 26 House seats.

With Democratic advantages in both chambers of the state Legislature, New York might have been a ripe target for Democrats looking to offset Republican redistricting gains in Texas and elsewhere. But they would need to amend the state Constitution to conduct a new round of redistricting before the next census. That constraint means the earliest Democrats could enact a new map would be for 2028.

North Carolina

North Carolina, among the most closely divided states, has been embroiled in its own redistricting drama.

State Republicans implemented new House boundaries in 2023 that turned a 7-7 congressional delegation into one in which Republicans took a 10-4 advantage with the 2024 elections. Several districts are now the subject of a federal lawsuit, with Democrats alleging Republicans illegally diluted Black voting power.

North Carolina has been among the most competitive states in the last several presidential elections. While Trump carried the state in November with about 51% of the vote, it has elected Democrats as governor and attorney general and to other statewide offices.

In the 2008 presidential election, Democrat Barack Obama narrowly edged Republican John McCain with 49.7% of the vote. The congressional delegation at the time mirrored that with an almost even split, with Democrats holding seven seats and Republicans six after the 2010 midterms.

But after rounds of Republican-controlled redistricting after the 2010 census, Republicans held a 10-3 or 9-4 advantage in the congressional delegation for the rest of that decade.

After the 2020 census, a Democratic-majority North Carolina Supreme Court threw out a Republican-drawn plan and permitted elections under a map adopted by trial judges that produced the 7-7 split. The U.S. Supreme Court allowed the boundaries to be used in the 2022 elections.

After flipping to a Republican majority in 2023, the state Supreme Court ruled partisan gerrymandering wasn’t outlawed by the state Constitution, allowing GOP lawmakers to redraw a congressional map in use today that led to their party’s 10-4 majority.

Minnesota

Minnesota is the state where the congressional breakdown most closely matches the 2024 presidential result. Harris received 51% of that vote, compared with Trump’s 47%. Democrats and Republicans split the state’s eight House seats with court-imposed maps.

Nevada

Nevada, where a Democratic Legislature drew the lines, is the only state where the party of the winning presidential candidate is outnumbered by the other party in the state’s congressional delegation. Trump received 51% of the vote in Nevada, but Democrats hold three of the state’s four House districts.

Yoon writes for the Associated Press. Associated Press writer Leah Willingham in Boston contributed to this report.

BRIDGEWATER, N.J. — Federal officials have opened an investigation into Jack Smith, the former special counsel who indicted then-candidate Donald Trump on felony charges before his election to a second term.

The current Office of Special Counsel, traditionally an independent federal agency, on Saturday confirmed the investigation after reporting by other news organizations. Smith was named special counsel by then-Atty. Gen. Merrick Garland to investigate Trump in November 2022 for his actions related to trying to overturn his 2020 election loss to Joe Biden and his hoarding of classified documents at his home in Florida.

Trump and his Republican allies, including Sen. Tom Cotton, have — without offering evidence of wrongdoing — accused Smith of violating the Hatch Act, a federal law that bans certain public officials from engaging in political activity.

Smith prosecuted two federal cases against Trump and indicted him on multiple felony charges in both. He dropped both cases after Trump won the election in November, as a sitting president is shielded from prosecution according to long-standing Justice Department practice. Smith then subsequently resigned as special counsel.

Cotton (R-Ark.) on Wednesday asked the Office of Special Counsel to investigate Smith, alleging that his conduct was designed to help then-President Biden and then-Vice Presiedent Kamala Harris, who became the Democratic nominee in last year’s race against Trump.

Trump is the only felon to ever occupy the White House, having been convicted in May 2024 on 34 criminal counts for fraud related to a hush-money payment to a porn star before the 2016 election, which he also won.

The White House had no immediate comment on the investigation.

The New York Post was first to report on the investigation into Smith.

Superville writes for the Associated Press.

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom said Thursday that he’s considering calling a special election on Nov. 4 to ask voters to approve new congressional maps in California in an effort to thwart President Trump’s plan to redistrict Republican-controlled states and hold onto power of the House of Representatives in the midterm elections.

“I think there’s a growing recognition in this country, not just with Democrats, independents, but also Republicans, that de facto the Trump presidency ends in November of next year if the American people are given a fair chance and a voice and a choice. We’ll take back Congress,” Newsom said. “The President of the United States recognizes that, so he wants to rig the game, wants to change the rules midterm.”

The governor has cast his call to gerrymander California as a response to Trump’s request for Texas and other states to reconfigure their maps to pick up seats in 2026.

“We’re going to respond in a transparent way, an honest way, but it’s in response,” Newsom said. “But I’m not going to sit back any longer in a position, a fetal position, in a position of weakness, when in fact California could demonstrably advance strength and that’s what we intend to do.”

Under Newsom’s plan, the California Legislature would need to take a vote to send a ballot measure to voters.

Newsom said voters would be given the maps of new congressional districts. A special election would be held on the first Tuesday in November asking voters to adopt the maps and allow the new districts to remain in effect through 2030 when California would return to the independent redistricting system that’s currently in place.

California’s Independent Redistricting Commission would craft new maps after the next census to be put into effect in 2032.

The governor said he’s in the early planning states of the process and doesn’t have an estimate yet for the price tag of a statewide special election. Newsom called the cost of preserving Democracy “priceless.”

“There are many local elections that first Tuesday already on the ballot, so it requires significant less resources than a special election that didn’t already have regular elections considered,” Newsom said. “So that could be very meaningful in mitigating the cost.”

Newsom promised more information in the weeks ahead.

In his first major shake-up since taking over the Los Angeles Police Department in November, Chief Jim McDonnell has given new assignments to more than a dozen officials from the upper ranks.

Faced with ongoing struggles to woo new recruits and uncertainty around his plans to overhaul the LAPD, McDonnell gave the first indications about how he intends to reorganize by elevating three deputy chiefs — Emada Tingirides, Michael Rimkunas and Scott Harrelson — to top positions and resurrecting a long-dormant bureau.

The moves were announced in a departmentwide email last week but aren’t expected to take effect until later this month.

Tingirides, who lost out to McDonnell in a bid to become chief last fall, becomes assistant chief in charge of the Office of Operations, which oversees patrol functions. She was recently announced as a finalist for the same job in Fort Worth, according to local news reports. Her recent promotion is seen by some inside the department as a move to convince her to stay. She becomes the highest-ranking Black woman in the department’s history.

Harrelson will now be in charge of the department’s training and recruitment efforts as the head of the Office of Support Services, replacing Assistant Chief Daniel Randolph, who is expected to retire in the coming weeks.

Filling out McDonnell’s inner circle are two other holdovers from the administration of former Chief Michel Moore: Rimkunas and Dominic Choi, who served as interim chief until McDonnell took over in November. Choi remained an assistant chief but was named McDonnell’s chief of staff — in effect the department’s No. 2.

The head of the bureau that includes internal affairs, Rimkunas will now run the Office of Special Operations.

McDonnell also resurrected the department’s Human Resources Bureau, which was shut down in 2004 when McDonnell he was a senior official under former Chief William J. Bratton. He didn’t immediately say what the new bureau’s responsibilities will be.

It’s unclear whether McDonnell will have to submit parts of his reorganization plan to the City Council, which in the past has had to sign off on changes to the department’s structure.

When he took the job last year, McDonnell initially said he wanted to spend at least three months studying the LAPD to understand how it had changed since he came up through the ranks. He left in 2010 to become the top cop in Long Beach, then served a term as L.A. County sheriff. His early review timeline was thrown off, he told reporters at a news conference last week, because of the fires in January and the recent protests over federal immigration raids.

The series of major incidents, McDonnell said, presented an unexpected opportunity to evaluate his senior staff to see how they performed “in crisis mode.”

The chief added that he had delayed his realignment for the “outcome of the budget to see where we were” and the completion of a monthslong study of the department by Rand Corp., a global policy think tank brought in last year to conduct a top-down review. The study was recently finished, and McDonnell said he was reviewing its recommendations, as well as those made by the numerous internal working groups he had convened to look at recruitment, discipline and other workplace issues.

Without offering details, McDonnell hinted that another one of his priorities will be beefing up the department’s detective ranks and overhauling the system that handles misconduct complaints against officers, long a source of controversy and frustration.

“I have in rough form what I think it could look like, but I certainly want to get the input from those who are dealing with it on a day-to-day basis on how do we best deal with the nuances of doing the job today with the number of resources that we have,” he told reporters.

McDonnell has come under growing pressure from critics who have said he is moving too slowly to make changes, with more urgency required as the city gets ready to host events such as the next year’s World Cup and the 2028 Olympic Games.

In other personnel moves announced last week, McDonnell moved Deputy Chief Marc Reina from the Training Bureau to South Bureau, where he previously worked as captain, and promoted German Hurtado, the department’s immigration coordinator, to deputy chief over Central Bureau, which has been the epicenter of recent protests.

Hurtado has been named in at least two pending lawsuits by LAPD officials accusing him of covering up unjustified uses of force by officers during the 2020 protests. The city has denied wrongdoing and is fighting the cases in court.

“As far as I know, I’m only named as a witness in those cases, and I’m not at liberty to talk about ongoing lawsuits,” Hurtado said when reached Monday by The Times.

McDonnell also demoted Assistant Chief Blake Chow to his civil service rank of commander — a similar trajectory to McDonnell, who was made to drop a rank during the tenure of former Chief Charlie Beck. Capt. Ray Valois, who helped oversee the department’s response to the Palisades fire, was elevated to commander in the Valley Bureau.

July 20 (UPI) — The Minneapolis mayor during the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests has lost the backing of the Democratic party to a Somali-American after a contested vote by members of the party.

Omar Fateh, 35, a state Senator, won the mayoral endorsement over Jacob Frey, who has held the office since 2018.

Fateh is the first Somali-American to serve in the state legislature since 2018 and received 60% of the delegates at the Minneapolis DFL convention Saturday, despite complaints from the Frey campaign about the election process.

Frey took issue with electronic balloting at the convention, according to the Minneapolis Star Tribune, and said he would appeal the vote.

“This election should be decided by the entire city rather than the small group of people who became delegates, particularly in light of the extremely flawed and irregular conduct of this convention,” Frey’s campaign manager office said in a statement. “Voters will now have a clear choice between the records and leadership of Sen. Fateh and Mayor Frey. We look forward to taking our vision to the voters in November.”

Frey was elected mayor in 2017 and again in 2021, and was in charge of Minneapolis during the 2020 BLM riots after George Floyd died at the hands of a white police officer.

Imagine a Washington in which President Trump was held to account. A Washington in which Congress doesn’t roll over like a dog begging for a treat. A Washington that functions the way it’s supposed to, with that whole checks-and-balances thing working.

Enticing, no?

Democrats need to win just three seats in 2026 to seize control of the House and impose some measure of accountability on our rogue-elephant president. That’s something Trump is keenly aware of, which is why he’s pushing Texas to take the extraordinary step of redrawing its congressional boundaries ahead of the midterm election.

Republicans, who’ve exercised iron-clad control over Texas for decades, hold 25 of Texas’ 38 congressional seats. A special session scheduled next week in Austin is aimed at boosting that number by as many as five seats, increasing the GOP’s odds of hanging onto the House.

Enter, stage left, California’s White House-lusting governor.

As part of a recent Southern campaign swing, Gavin Newsom sat down with a progressive Tennessee podcaster to discuss the Republican power grab. (The picnic bench, rolled up shirt sleeves, beer and f-bomb showed the governor was being authentic, in case there was any doubt.)

“They’re not f— around now. They’re playing by a totally different set of rules,” Newsom said of Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and his fellow Republicans. Years ago, he noted, California created an independent commission to draw its political lines, which states normally do once a decade after new census figures come out.

But with a super-majority in Sacramento, Newsom said, Democrats could “gerrymander like no other state.”

“We’ve been playing fair,” he continued, but Abbott’s actions “made me question that entire program.” Later, elaborating on social media, the governor accused Republicans of cheating their way to extra House seats and warned, “California is watching — and you can bet we won’t stand idly by.”

There’s a Texas expression for that: All hat and no cattle.

The fact is, voters took the power of political line-drawing away from the governor and his fellow lawmakers, for good reason, and it’s not like Newsom can unilaterally take that power back — no matter how well his chesty swagger might play with Trump-loathing Democrats.

“We have a commission,” said Justin Levitt, an expert on redistricting law at Loyola Law School. “Not only that, a Constitution and the commission’s in the Constitution. And not only that, we have a Constitution that says you only get to redistrict once every 10 years, unless there’s a legal problem with the existing maps.”

In other words, it’s not up to Newsom to huff and puff and blow existing House districts down.

California voters approved Proposition 20, which turned congressional line-drawing over to a nonpartisan, 14-member commission, in November 2010. The point was to introduce competition by taking redistricting away from self-dealing lawmakers. It passed by an overwhelming margin, 61% to 39%, and has worked just as intended.

After decades of prebaked congressional contests, when the success of one party or the other was virtually guaranteed, California has become a hotbed of competition; in recent years, the state — an afterthought in November balloting for president — has been key to control of the House. In 2026, as many as a dozen seats, out of 52, could be at least somewhat competitive.

“I think it’s worked out great,” said Sara Sadhwani, an assistant politics professor at Pomona College and a member of the redistricting commission. (Others doing the map-making included a seminary professor, a structural engineer and an investigator for the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department.)

There are two ways, Levitt said, that Newsom and fellow Democrats could undo the commission’s handiwork.

They could break the law and pass legislation drawing new lines, face an inevitable lawsuit and prevail with a sympathetic ruling from the California Supreme Court. Or they could ask voters to approve different lines through a new constitutional amendment, in a hurried-up special election ahead of the 2026 midterms.

Both scenarios seem as plausible as Newsom delivering universal healthcare and fulfilling his pledge to build 3.5 million new homes a year, to name two other extravagant promises.

To be clear, none of the above condones the plot that Trump and Abbott are attempting to hatch. Their actions are politically ruthless and more than a little cynical. (A letter from Trump’s hand-in-glove Justice Department has provided a legal fig leaf for the special session. Texas was recently — expediently — notified that four of its majority-minority congressional districts were unconstitutionally gerrymandered along racial lines, thus justifying the drawing of a new map.)

That’s no excuse, however, for Newsom to end-run California voters, or call a special election that could cost hundreds of millions of dollars at a time the state is gushing red ink.

Politics rooted in vengeance is both dangerous and wrong, whether it’s Trump or Newsom looking to settle scores.

There’s also the matter of delivering vacant threats. Some Democrats may thrill each time Newsom delivers one of his pugnacious pronouncements. That seems to be a big part of his presidential campaign strategy. But those same voters may tire of the lack of follow through, as Californians have.

Newsom has a well-deserved reputation for over-promising and under-delivering.

That’s not likely to serve him well on the national stage.

NEW YORK — Former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo said Monday he will campaign for mayor of New York City as an independent candidate, staying in a crowded field running against left-wing Democratic candidate Zohran Mamdani.

In a video, Cuomo, who last month suffered a bruising loss to Mamdani in the Democratic primary, announced he was making another run to combat the progressive Mamdani, who he said “offers slick slogans but no real solutions.”

“The fight to save our city isn’t over,” Cuomo said. “Only 13% of New Yorkers voted in the June primary. The general election is in November and I am in it to win it.”

Incumbent Mayor Eric Adams also is running as an independent in the general election, and Curtis Sliwa — founder of the 1970s-era Guardian Angels anti-crime patrol — is again on the Republican line.

People opposed to Mamdani’s agenda, which includes higher taxes on the wealthy, have called on donors and voters to unite behind a single candidate for the November election. They fear multiple candidates will splinter the anti-Mamdani vote, increasing the Democrat’s chances to win.

Mamdani’s campaign responded to Cuomo’s announcement by saying the ex-governor and mayor are cozying up to “billionaires and Republicans” while the Democratic nominee remains focused on affordability issues.

“That’s the choice this November,” campaign spokesperson Jeffrey Lerner said in a statement.

Cuomo’s decision to continue on in the race is the latest chapter in his comeback attempt, launched almost four years after he resigned as governor in 2021 following a barrage of sexual harassment allegations. He denied wrongdoing during the campaign, maintaining that the scandal was driven by politics.

Cuomo was treated as the presumed front-runner for much of the Democratic primary, with the former governor boasting deep political experience, universal name recognition and a juggernaut fundraising operation. He limited media interviews, held few unscripted events and avoided mingling with voters.

That strategy contrasted with Mamdani’s energetic street-level campaign centered around affordability issues. The 33-year-old amassed a legion of young volunteers who blanketed the city to build support, while the candidate’s savvy social media persona won him national acclaim.

Lagging behind Mamdani in the vote count, Cuomo conceded the race last month on primary night. Final results released after the city ran through its ranked choice voting calculations showed Mamdani besting the former governor by 12 percentage points.

Despite the Democratic primary loss, Cuomo had also qualified to run on an independent ballot line in November under a party he created called “Fight and Deliver.”

As he weighed whether to stay on as an independent, Cuomo began losing support from traditional allies. Key labor unions backed Mamdani, and the Rev. Al Sharpton, an influential Black leader, urged Cuomo to step aside.

Some deep-pocketed contributors have meanwhile aligned behind Adams, who is running as an independent. Although he’s still a Democrat, Adams pulled out of the primary shortly after a federal judge dismissed a corruption case against him at the request of President Trump’s Justice Department, arguing that the case had sidelined him from campaigning.

Cuomo, 67, served as governor for over a decade and modeled himself as a socially progressive Democrat who got things done. He pushed through legislation that legalized gay marriage and tackled massive infrastructure projects, such as a three-mile bridge over the Hudson River that he named after his father.

Cuomo’s national profile peaked in the early days of the nation’s COVID-19 outbreak during his televised daily briefings. The governor leavened stern warnings for people to wear masks with heartfelt expressions of concern for his elderly mother or brotherly banter with Chris Cuomo, a TV journalist.

His reputation was soon tainted when it emerged that the state’s official count of nursing home deaths had excluded many victims who had been transferred to hospitals before they succumbed.

Cuomo resigned shortly after New York’s attorney general released the results of an investigation that found he had sexually harassed at least 11 women.

BEIRUT — A U.S. envoy said Monday he was satisfied with the Lebanese government’s response to a proposal to disarm the militant Hezbollah group, adding that Washington is ready to help the small nation emerge from its long-running political and economic crisis.

The U.S. envoy to Lebanon, Tom Barrack, spoke to journalists after meeting President Joseph Aoun, saying he will study the government’s seven-page response. Barrack said the American and Lebanese sides are committed “to get a resolution.”

“What the government gave us was something spectacular in a very short period of time and a very complicated manner,” Barrack said during his 20-minute news conference at the presidential palace southeast of Beirut.

His meetings in Lebanon came amid fears that Hezbollah’s refusal to immediately disarm would renew war with Israel after a shaky ceasefire agreement went into effect in November.

Last month, Barrack gave Lebanese officials a proposal that aims to disarm Hezbollah and move on with some economic reforms to try get Lebanon out of its nearly six-year economic crisis, the worst in its modern history. The economic meltdown is rooted in decades of corruption and mismanagement by Lebanon’s political class.

Barrack said Lebanon should change in the same way Syria has following the fall in December of Syrian President Bashar Assad,who was replaced by a new leadership that is moving ahead with major economic reforms.

Barrack said President Trump and the U.S. are ready to help Lebanon change and “if you don’t want change, it’s no problem. The rest of the region is moving at high speed,” he said.

Hezbollah’s weapons have been one of the principal sticking points since Israel withdrew from southern Lebanon in 2000, ending an 18-year occupation. The two sides fought a destructive war in 2006 that ended in a draw.

The latest Israel-Hezbollah war began a day after the Hamas Oct. 7, 2023, attack on southern Israel and intensified in September, leaving the Iran-backed group badly bruised and much of its political and military leadership dead.

Since a U.S.-brokered ceasefire went into effect in November, Hezbollah has almost ended all its military presence along the border with Israel, which is insisting that the group disarms all over Lebanon. Aoun said Sunday that the number of Lebanese troops along the border with Israel will increase to 10,000, adding that only Lebanese soldiers and U.N. peacekeepers will be armed on the Lebanese side of the border.

On Sunday night, hours before Barrack arrived in Beirut, Israel’s air force carried out strikes on southern and eastern Lebanon, wounding nine people, according to state media. The Israeli army said the airstrikes hit Hezbollah’s infrastructure, arms depots and missile launchers.

Earlier Sunday, Hezbollah leader Naim Kassem reiterated the militant group’s refusal to lay down its weapons before Israel withdraws from all of southern Lebanon and stops its airstrikes.

The Hezbollah-Israel war left over 4,000 people dead in Lebanon and caused destruction estimated at $11 billion. In Israel, 127 people, including 80 soldiers, were killed during the war.

Since the November ceasefire, Israel has carried out hundreds of airstrikes on different parts of Lebanon, killing about 250 people and injuring over 600. Israel is also still holding five strategic posts inside Lebanon that it refused to withdraw from earlier this year.

Chehayeb and Mroue write for the Associated Press.

RICHMOND, Va. — Democrats in Virginia have built up a hefty fundraising advantage for their effort to reclaim the governor’s mansion in a November election that is seen as a bellwether for the party in power in Washington ahead of the 2026 midterms.

Democrat Abigail Spanberger, a former CIA case manager turned congresswoman, has a more than 2-to-1 fundraising advantage over her GOP opponent for governor, Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears, who has struggled to draw support from her fellow Republicans. Both were unopposed for their party’s nominations and were able to focus on the fall general election without having to overcome a challenge in this week’s primaries. The match-up means Virginia is all but certain to elect the state’s first female governor.

Spanberger has amassed $6.5 million toward her campaign for governor over the last two months after raising $6.7 million between January and March, according to the nonpartisan Virginia Public Access Project. Combined with the money Spanberger raised in 2024, she has gathered $22.8 million and still has $14.3 million in her coffers.

Earle-Sears, meanwhile, spent more than she earned between April and June, bringing in $3.5 million and spending $4.6 million. Between January and March, she also raised a little over $3.1 million. In total, she has raked in nearly $9.2 million since launching her campaign last September. Now, she has a little under $3 million in the bank, according to Virginia Public Access Project data.

In a statement, Earle-Sears’ campaign said the candidate is putting forward a message for Virginians that money can’t buy.

“Clearly the Spanberger campaign needs a lot of help attempting to erase Abigail’s bad voting record on issues that actually matter to Virginians,” press secretary Peyton Vogel said in an email. “This race isn’t being bought — it’s being built on a message that matters.”

Virginia is one of two states, along with New Jersey, that host statewide elections this year. The contests will be closely watched as a measure of whether voters in the shadow of Washington will embrace President Trump’s aggressive effort to overhaul the federal government, or be repelled by it.

Democrats’ outsized fundraising lead ahead of the primaries may reflect local Democratic enthusiasm and the party’s ability to push people to the polls in light of Trump being in office. Mark J. Rozell, dean of George Mason University’s Schar School of Policy and Government, also referenced the noticeable frostiness among leading state Republicans. The party’s statewide nominees have yet to campaign together, despite securing their nominations at the end of April.

“Enthusiasm drives fundraising and in Virginia right now the Democrats’ voting base has much greater enthusiasm“ than Republicans, Rozell said. ”It is reminiscent of Trump’s first term in office when Democratic fundraising and ultimately voting overwhelmed the Republicans in Virginia.”

Money does not guarantee success, however. In the last Virginia governor’s race, former Gov. Terry McAuliffe outspent Republican Glenn Youngkin, who had invested $20 million of his own money in the race. Youngkin still clinched the election by nearly two points.

Youngkin, who is term-limited from seeking reelection, has offered more than $21,000 in support to Earle-Sears through his political action committee.

When asked whether he would donate more, his PAC responded, “Governor Youngkin is working to elect the entire GOP ticket and is urging all Virginians to support the commonsense team this November to keep Virginia winning.”

The Democrats’ fundraising advantage isn’t confined to the governor’s race.

State Sen. Ghazala Hashmi, who eked out a primary win in a close three-way contest for lieutenant governor, raised nearly $1.8 million in her primary race and has $462,000 remaining.

The Republican nominee, conservative talk-radio host John Reid, raised nearly $312,000 since launching his campaign and has $116,000 remaining.

The only statewide GOP candidate with a fundraising lead, incumbent Attorney General Jason Miyares, has $2.3 million in the bank after raising a total of $4.6 million. His Democratic opponent, Jay Jones, has raised $2.7 million. He had about $493,000 left at the beginning of June, reports show.

This year, all three Democratic statewide candidates are backed by Clean Virginia, a political group that pushes for clean energy and often takes on legislative challenges against Dominion Energy, Virginia’s largest utility.

The two groups are some of the most influential entities lobbying on state politics and policy. With energy demand likely to be a key issue in November, their influence could be significant.

According to the nonpartisan public-access group, Spanberger has taken in $465,000 from the environmental organization. On Tuesday, Clean Virginia endorsed Hashmi’s candidacy for lieutenant governor, following its previous donations to her state Senate campaign committee.

During his campaign, Jones also received $1.5 million from Clean Virginia, while his primary opponent, Democrat Shannon Taylor, accepted $800,000 from Dominion Energy between 2024 and 2025. Clean Virginia released attack ads targeting Taylor for accepting Dominion money.

The energy utility has become entangled in other statewide battles. On the Republican ticket, Earle-Sears accepted $50,000 from Dominion in March. Miyares also gained $450,000 from the utility so far this year.

Clean Virginia has donated to both Democrats and Republicans, including to candidates running for the House of Delegates, where all 100 members are up for reelection in November.

Democrats who control the legislature are hoping to keep or expand their thin majority and amend the state’s Constitution to protect rights to voting, marriage equality and abortion.

Democratic candidates have raised about $16.9 million in those races, with $3.2 million stemming from House Speaker Don Scott.

Meanwhile, Republicans have raised $8.8 million, with former Minority Leader Todd Gilbert earning over $643,000, and newly tapped Minority Leader Terry Kilgore raising nearly $470,000.

Diaz writes for the Associated Press.

Only a few months ago, former Irvine Vice Mayor Tammy Kim had aspirations of returning to the City Council she previously served on for four years.

Now her immediate goal is to fight off charges that could put her in prison for several years.

The Orange County district attorney’s office announced Thursday afternoon that Kim was charged with 10 felonies tied to allegedly lying about her residency during her City Council tenure and while campaigning for mayor last fall.

Kim was formally charged with three felony counts of perjury by declaration, three felony counts of filing a false document, and one felony count each of a public official aiding the illegal casting of votes, of filing false nominations papers, of knowing of the registration of someone not entitled to vote and of voter registration fraud. She was also charged with a misdemeanor of making a false statement.

She could spend up to 11 years and two months in state prison and county jail if convicted on all counts.

She is scheduled to be arraigned Friday morning.

Kim briefly responded to a call from The Times, saying she was advised not to share too much per her attorney, Caroline Hahn.

“We’re entering a not guilty plea,” Kim said.

Hahn added that she and her client “planned to launch a vigorous defense” but did not answer further questions.

Kim is accused of using two fraudulent addresses while running for mayor in the November 2024 election and then in a City Council special election in early 2025, according to the criminal complaint. She owned a condo in the city’s 3rd District, where she had lived since 2015, according to a separate lawsuit filed against Kim to get her thrown off the City Council ballot.

Kim won election to the Irvine City Council in November 2020, receiving nearly 44,000 votes a 14-person, top-three-candidate race.

At that time, city elections in Irvine used an at-large voting system, meaning candidates could live anywhere in the city.

The city moved to district elections in the fall 2024, requiring council members to live in the districts they represent. Only voters from those districts could vote for those candidates.

Kim served until November 2024 when she ran for and ultimately lost a mayoral campaign to Councilmember Larry Agran by a margin of nearly 5,000 votes.

The district attorney’s office believes Kim improperly used an address to run for mayor, no longer claiming to live in the 3rd District condo she had owned for a decade.

To run for mayor, Kim changed her California driver’s license and her voter registration to a home in the 5th District, where she never lived, according to the criminal complaint.

The home belonged to a family Kim met through a Korean teaching class, the complaint alleges. Kim did not inform the family that she was using their address, according to the complaint.

She has been charged with certifying that address as her own under the penalty of perjury.

Kim eventually finished her campaign and voted in November’s mayoral race based out of the 5th Diistrict home.

Shortly after her defeat, Kim declared her candidacy in December to fill the now- vacant 5th District seat, which Agran left after winning the mayoral election.

Kim eventually found a room in another 5th District home on Jan. 10 and changed her California driver’s registration that same day, according to the complaint. She then filed new nomination paperwork with the new 5th District address, according to the complaint.

Later that month, former mayoral candidate Ron Scolesdang sued Kim, claiming that she was fraudulently using an incorrect address. Scolesdang had hired a private investigator to monitor Kim, according to that lawsuit.

Kim eventually dropped out of the race on Feb. 7, the same day a Superior Court judge removed her name from the ballot.

Betty Franco Martinez won the special election.