President Trump

NEW YORK — Zohran Mamdani was elected mayor of New York City on Tuesday, capping a stunning ascent for the 34-year-old state lawmaker, who was set to become the city’s most liberal mayor in generations.

In a victory for the Democratic party’s progressive wing, Mamdani defeated former Gov. Andrew Cuomo and Republican Curtis Sliwa. Mamdani must now navigate the unending demands of America’s biggest city and deliver on ambitious — skeptics say unrealistic — campaign promises.

With the victory, the democratic socialist will etch his place in history as the city’s first Muslim mayor, the first of South Asian heritage and the first born in Africa. He will also become the city’s youngest mayor in more than a century when he takes office Jan. 1.

Mamdani’s unlikely rise gives credence to Democrats who have urged the party to embrace more progressive, left-wing candidates instead of rallying behind centrists in hopes of winning back swing voters who have abandoned the party.

It was one of three victories by Democrats in high-profile races for elective office that were being viewed as a gauge of public sentiment toward President Trump in his second term. In California, voters were expected to approve Gov. Gavin Newsom’s Proposition 50, a redistricting measure aimed at boosting Democrats’ chances in the midterm elections.

In New Jersey, Democratic Rep. Mikie Sherrill was elected New Jersey governor over Republican Jack Ciattarelli, who was endorsed by Trump.

New Jersey Democratic Governor-elect Mikie Sherrill speaks during an election night party in East Brunswick, N.J., on Tuesday.

(Matt Rourke / Associated Press)

Sherrill, a 53-year-old Navy veteran who represented a northern New Jersey district in the U.S. House for four terms, will be the state’s second female governor.

Democrat Abigail Spanberger won the Virginia governor’s race, defeating Republican Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears to give Democrats a key victory heading into the 2026 midterm elections and make history as the first woman to lead the commonwealth.

Spanberger, 46, is a center-left Democrat and former CIA case officer who helped her party win a House majority during Trump’s first presidency.

Economic worries were the dominant concern as voters cast ballots for Tuesday’s elections, according to preliminary findings from the AP Voter Poll.

The results of the expansive survey of more than 17,000 voters in New Jersey, Virginia, California and New York City suggested the public was troubled by an economy that seems trapped by higher prices and fewer job opportunities.

Supporters celebrate during the election night watch party for Virginia Democratic gubernatorial candidate Abigail Spanberger as she is projected to win the race at the Greater Richmond Convention Center.

(Alex Wong / Getty Images)

Mamdani has already faced scrutiny from national Republicans, including Trump, who have eagerly cast him as a threat and the face of what they say is a more radical Democratic Party.

The contest drove the biggest turnout in a mayoral race in more than 50 years, with more than 2 million New Yorkers casting ballots, according to the city’s Board of Elections.

Mamdani’s grassroots campaign centered on affordability, and his charisma spoiled Cuomo’s attempted political comeback. The former governor, who resigned four years ago following allegations of sexual harassment that he continues to deny, was dogged by his past throughout the race and was criticized for running a negative campaign.

There’s also the question of how he will deal with Trump, who threatened to take over the city and to arrest and deport Mamdani if he won. Mamdani was born in Uganda, where he spent his early childhood, but was raised in New York City and became a U.S. citizen in 2018.

New Yorkers celebrate as NY1 projects Zohran Mamdani the winner in the mayoral election at the Bohemian Hall & Beer Garden on Tuesday.

(Jeremy Weine / Getty Images)

Mamdani, who was criticized throughout the campaign for his thin resume, will now have to begin staffing his incoming administration before taking office next year and game out how he plans to accomplish the ambitious but polarizing agenda that drove him to victory.

Among the campaign’s promises are free child care, free city bus service, city-run grocery stores and a new Department of Community Safety that would send mental health care workers to handle certain emergency calls rather than police officers. It is unclear how Mamdani will pay for such initiatives, given Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul’s steadfast opposition to his calls to raise taxes on wealthy people.

His decisions around the leadership of the New York Police Department will also be closely watched. Mamdani was a fierce critic of the department in 2020, calling for “this rogue agency” to be defunded and slamming it as “racist, anti-queer & a major threat to public safety.” He has since apologized for those comments and has said he will ask the current NYPD commissioner to stay on the job.

Mamdani’s campaign was driven by his optimistic view of the city and his promises to improve the quality of life for its middle and lower classes.

But Cuomo, Sliwa and other critics assailed him over his vehement criticism of Israel’s military actions in Gaza. Mamdani, a longtime advocate of Palestinian rights, has accused Israel of committing genocide and said he would honor an arrest warrant the International Criminal Court issued for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

New York Independent mayoral candidate former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo votes at the High School of Art and Design on Tuesday in New York City.

(Alexi J. Rosenfeld / Getty Images)

Going into the Democratic primary, Cuomo was the presumed favorite, with near-universal name recognition and deep political connections. Cuomo’s chances were buoyed further when incumbent Mayor Eric Adams bowed out of the primary while dealing with the fallout of his now-dismissed federal corruption case.

But as the race progressed, Mamdani’s natural charm, catchy social media videos and populist economic platform energized voters in the notoriously expensive city. He also began drawing outside attention as his name ID grew.

In New Jersey, Sherrill built her campaign around pushing back against Trump. She recently seized on the administration’s decision to abruptly freeze funding for a multibillion-dollar project to replace the aging rail tunnels that connect New Jersey to New York City beneath the Hudson River.

Spanberger’s victory in Virginia will flip partisan control of the governor’s office when she succeeds outgoing Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin.

“We sent a message to every corner of the commonwealth, a message to our neighbors and our fellow Americans across the country,” Spanberger told cheering supporters in Richmond. “We sent a message to the whole word that in 2025, Virginia chose pragmatism over partisanship. We chose our commonwealth over chaos.”

Izaguirre and Colvin write for the Associated Press. AP writers Mike Catalini, Adriana Gomez Licon, Olivia Diaz and Bill Barrow contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — Hurling a sandwich at a federal agent was an act of protest for Washington, D.C., resident Sean Charles Dunn. A jury must decide if it was also a federal crime.

“No matter who you are, you can’t just go around throwing stuff at people because you’re mad,” Assistant U.S. Atty. John Parron told jurors Tuesday at the start of Dunn’s trial on a misdemeanor assault charge.

Dunn doesn’t dispute that he threw his submarine-style sandwich at a U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent outside a nightclub on the night of Aug. 10. It was an “exclamation point” for Dunn as he expressed his opposition to President Trump’s law enforcement surge in the nation’s capital, defense attorney Julia Gatto said during the trial’s opening statements.

“It was a harmless gesture at the end of him exercising his right to speak out,” Gatto said. “He is overwhelmingly not guilty.”

A bystander’s cellphone video of the confrontation went viral on social media, turning Dunn into a symbol of resistance against Trump’s months-long federal takeover. Murals depicting him mid-throw popped up in the city virtually overnight.

“He did it. He threw the sandwich,” Gatto told jurors. “And now the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia has turned that moment — a thrown sandwich — into a criminal case, a federal criminal case charging a federal offense.”

A grand jury refused to indict Dunn on a felony assault count, part of a pattern of pushback against the Justice Department’s prosecution of surge-related criminal cases. After the rare rebuke from the grand jury, U.S. Atty. Jeanine Pirro’s office charged Dunn instead with a misdemeanor.

Customs and Border Protection Agent Gregory Lairmore, the government’s first witness, said the sandwich “exploded” when it struck his chest hard enough that he could feel it through his ballistic vest.

“You could smell the onions and the mustard,” he recalled.

Lairmore and other agents were standing in front of a club hosting a “Latin Night” when Dunn approached and shouted profanities at them, calling them “fascists” and “racists” and chanting “shame.”

“Why are you here? I don’t want you in my city!” Dunn shouted, according to police.

Lairmore testified that he and the other agents tried to de-escalate the situation.

“He was red-faced. Enraged. Calling me and my colleagues all kinds of names,” he said. “I didn’t respond. That’s his constitutional right to express his opinion.”

After throwing the sandwich, Dunn ran away but was apprehended about a block away.

Later, Lairmore’s colleagues jokingly gave him gifts making light of the incident, including a subway sandwich-shaped plush toy and a patch that said “felony footlong.” Defense attorney Sabrina Schroff pointed to those as proof that the agents recognize this case is “overblown” and “worthy of a joke.”

Parron told jurors that everybody is entitled to their views about Trump’s federal surge. But “respectfully, that’s not what this case is about,” the prosecutor said. “You just can’t do what the defendant did here. He crossed a line.”

Dunn was a Justice Department employee who worked as an international affairs specialist in its criminal division. After Dunn’s arrest, Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi announced his firing in a social media post that referred to him as “an example of the Deep State.”

Dunn was released from custody but rearrested when a team of armed federal agents in riot gear raided his home. The White House posted a highly produced “propaganda” video of the raid on its official X account, Dunn’s lawyers said.

Dunn’s lawyers have argued that the posts by Bondi and the White House show Dunn was impermissibly targeted for his political speech. They urged U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols to dismiss the case, calling it a vindictive and selective prosecution. Nichols, who was nominated by Trump, didn’t rule on that request before the trial started Monday.

Dunn is charged with assaulting, resisting, opposing, impeding, intimidating and interfering with a federal officer. Dozens of Trump supporters who stormed the Capitol were convicted of felonies for assaulting or interfering with police during the Jan. 6 attack. Trump pardoned or ordered the dismissal of charges for all of them.

Kunzelman writes for the Associated Press.

California voters went to the polls Tuesday to decide on a radical redistricting plan with national implications, but the campaign is shaping up to be a referendum on President Trump.

Proposition 50, a ballot measure about redrawing the state’s congressional districts, was crafted by Democrats in response to Trump urging Texas and other GOP-majority states to modify their congressional maps to favor Republicans, a move that was designed to maintain Republican control of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Opponents have said Proposition 50 is a power grab by Democrats that would blatantly disenfranchise Republican voters.

But supporters, fueled by a huge war chest in deep blue California, managed to make the vote about Trump and what they say are his efforts to erode democracy. The president has never been popular in California, but unprecedented months of immigration raids, tariffs and environmental rollbacks have only heightened the conflict.

“Trump is such a polarizing figure,” said Rick Hasen, a professor of law and political science at UCLA. “He commands great loyalty from one group of people and great animosity from others. … It’s not surprising that this measure has been portrayed as sticking it to Donald Trump or [California Gov.] Gavin Newsom.”

Proposition 50 underscores how hyperpartisan California politics have become. A UC Berkeley poll last week conducted in conjunction with The Times found more than 9 out of 10 Democrats supported Proposition 50 and a similar proportion of Republicans opposed it.

California voters had been bombarded with television ads, mailers and social media posts for weeks about the high-stakes special election, so much so that only 2% of likely voters were undecided, according to the poll.

As if on cue, Trump weighed in on Proposition 50 on Tuesday morning just as voting was getting underway.

“The Unconstitutional Redistricting Vote in California is a GIANT SCAM in that the entire process, in particular the Voting itself, is RIGGED,” Trump said on Truth Social just minutes after polling stations opened across California.

The president provided no evidence for his allegations.

Newsom dismissed the president’s claims on X as “the ramblings of an old man that knows he’s about to LOSE.”

At a White House briefing Tuesday afternoon, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt claimed, without providing examples, that California was receiving ballots in the name of undocumented immigrants who could not legally vote.

California’s top elections official, Secretary of State Shirley Weber, called Trump’s allegation “another baseless claim.”

“The bottom line is California elections have been validated by the courts,” Weber said in a statement. “California voters will not be deceived by someone who consistently makes desperate, unsubstantiated attempts to dissuade Americans from participating in our democracy.”

More than 6.3 million Californians — 28% of the state’s 23 million registered voters — had cast ballots as of Monday, according to a voting tracker run by Democratic redistricting expert Paul Mitchell. Ballots submitted by Democrats were outpacing votes by Republicans on Monday, though GOP voters were believed to be more likely to vote in person on election day.

Disabled Army veteran Micah Corpe, 50, had some choice words for Newsom outside a Twentynine Palms church that served as a polling place, calling the politician a “greasy used car salesman.”

Corpe, a Republican, described Proposition 50 as an effort by the governor to “do whatever he wants because he doesn’t like Trump.” At the same time, he said Texas’ decision to redraw its congressional districts was a necessity because of the influx of people moving there from California and other blue states.

“He fights [Trump] on everything,” Corpe said of Newsom. “Just give in a little to get a little. That’s all he’s got to do.”

Matt Lesenyie, an assistant professor of political science at Cal State Long Beach, said the seeds of Proposition 50 were sowed when it became clear that Republicans in Congress were not going to challenge Trump in an investigatory way or provide serious oversight.

“One of the benefits of our system is that there are checks designed in there and we haven’t exercised those checks in a good long time, so I think this is a Hail Mary for potentially doing that,” he said.

Bob Rowell, 72, said that in an ideal world Proposition 50 wouldn’t be necessary. But the Trump administration’s push to redraw lines in red states has created a “distinct danger of creating a never-ending Republican domination in Congress,” he said. So Rowell, a Green Party member, voted yes.

“I hope there’s some way to bring us back into balance,” he said.

Robert Hamilton, 35, an architectural drafter who lives in Twentynine Palms, sees Proposition 50 as a necessary step to push back on Trump’s policies, which he said are impinging on people’s rights. He’s proud of the role California is playing in this political moment.

“I think as a state we’re doing an excellent job of trying to push back against some of the more egregious oversteps of our liberties,” Hamilton said outside a church where he’d just cast his ballot in favor of the measure. “I do hope that if this measure is successful that other states will follow suit — not necessarily taking the same steps to redistrict but finding ways to at least hold the line while hopefully we get things sorted out.”

Times staff writers Seema Mehta and Katie King contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla announced Tuesday that he will not run for California governor next year, ending months of speculation about the possibility of the Democrat vying to succeed Gov. Gavin Newsom.

“It is with a full heart and even more commitment than ever that I am choosing to not run for governor of California next year,” Padilla told reporters outside his Senate office in Washington.

Padilla instead said he will focus on countering President Trump’s agenda in Congress, where Democrats are currently on the minority in both the House and Senate, but hope to regain some political clout after the 2026 midterm elections.

“I choose not just to stay in the Senate. I choose to stay in this fight because the constitution is worth fighting for. Our fundamental rights are worth fighting for. Our core values are worth fighting for. The American dream is worth fighting for,” he said.

Padilla said his decision was influenced by his belief that under President Trump, “these are not normal times.”

“We deserve better than this,” he said.

Many contenders, no clear favorite

Padilla’s decision to bow out of the 2026 governor’s race will leave a prominent name out of an already crowded contest with many contenders but not a clear favorite.

For much of the year, the field was essentially frozen in place as former Vice President Kamala Harris debated whether she would run, with many donors and major endorsers staying out of the game. Harris said at the end of July that she wouldn’t run. But another potential candidate — billionaire developer Rick Caruso — remains a question mark.

Caruso said Monday night that he was still considering running for either governor or Los Angeles mayor, and will decide in the next few weeks.

“It’s a really tough decision,” Caruso said. “Within a few weeks or so, or something like that, I’ll probably have a decision made. It’s a big topic of discussion in the house with my kids and my wife.”

Major Democratic candidates include former Orange County Rep. Katie Porter, former U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, current California Supt. of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond, former state Controller Betty Yee and wealthy businessman Stephen Cloobeck. Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco and conservative commentator Steve Hilton are the most prominent Republicans running.

Amid fire recovery aftermath, immigration raids and a high-octane redistricting battle, California voters have yet to turn their attention to next year’s gubernatorial matchup, despite the vast power Newsom’s successor will wield. California is now the world’s fourth-largest economy, and policy decisions in the Golden State often have global repercussions. Newsom is nearing the end of his second and final term.

Recent polling shows the contest as wide open, with nearly 4 in 10 voters surveyed saying they are undecided, though Porter had a slight edge as the top choice in the poll. She and Bianco were the only candidates whose support cracked the double digits.

Candidates still have months to file their paperwork before the June 2 primary to replace Newsom.

June incident brought attention

Known for soft-spoken confidence and a lack of bombast, Padilla’s public profile soared in June after he found himself cuffed by federal agents, at the center of a staggering viral moment during a news conference by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.

Despite identifying himself, Padilla was tackled after trying to interrupt Noem with a question. The manhandling of California’s senior senator was filmed by a staffer and broadcast around the world, provoking searing and widespread condemnation.

Days later, Vice President JD Vance joked about the incident and referred to Padilla — his former Senate colleague — as “Jose Padilla,” a misnaming that Padilla suggested was intentional and others characterized as racist.

The event put Padilla on the national spotlight and rumors of Padilla’s interest in the gubernatorial race ignited in late August.

Padilla told reporters on Tuesday that he received an “outpouring of encouragement and offers of support for the idea” of his candidacy and that he had “taken it to heart”

Alongside his wife, Angela, the senator said he also heard from many people urging him to keep his fight going in Washington.

“Countless Californians have urged me to do everything i could to protect California and the American Dream from a vindictive president who seems hell bent on raising costs for working families, rolling back environmental protections, cutting access to healthcare, jeopardizing reproductive rights and more,” he said.

Padilla said he had listened.

“I will continue to thank them and honor their support by continuing to work together for a better future,” he said.

Ceballos reported from Washington, Wick from Los Angeles. Times staff writer Noah Goldberg, in Los Angeles, contributed to this report.

Politics in the year after a presidential election are typically focused on local and statewide contests.

But the races decided on Tuesday — which include a pivotal mayoral contest in New York and California’s referendum on congressional redistricting — will have national implications. The gubernatorial races in Virginia and New Jersey will be a report card on President Trump’s second term.

As a result, cable news will be paying special attention. The races will also serve as an important test run for a couple of cable news networks in transition.

“This is the first election of the 2026 midterms, and we know what happens 30 seconds after the mid-terms are over — 2028 starts in earnest,” said Chris Stirewalt, political editor for Nexstar Media Group’s NewsNation. “In New Jersey and Virginia, you have two states that look a lot like the country as a whole. President Trump’s approval ratings in those places is about the same as it is nationally.”

MSNBC will be covering its first election night without the resources of NBC News. The progressive-leaning network — which changes its name to MS NOW on Nov. 15 — is being spun off by parent company Comcast into a new entity called Versant.

NBC News no longer shares correspondents or analysts with MSNBC. The channel’s line-up of opinion hosts including Rachel Maddow, Joe Scarborough, Nicolle Wallace, Ari Melber and Lawrence O’Donnell remains intact.

Loyal MSNBC viewers will notice that election data maven Steve Kornacki will not be crunching numbers on his big board. Kornacki signed a new deal last year with NBC, where he works for the news and sports divisions.

Kornacki will be a part of the network’s coverage on NBC News Now, its free streaming channel. “NBC Nightly News” anchor Tom Llamas is leading the coverage with Hallie Jackson, the network’s senior Washington correspondent; and “Meet the Press” moderator Kristen Welker.

MSNBC host Ali Velshi will take on the voter analysis duties previously held down by Kornacki. The network said it will have 15 correspondents reporting throughout the country, including West Coast-based Jacob Soboroff delivering analysis on TikTok.

MSNBC national correspondent Jacob Soboroff.

(MSNBC/Paul Morigi/MSNBC)

CNN will use the night to test the appeal of its new direct-to-consumer streaming service launched last week.

While CNN will have its usual array of anchors and experts led by anchor Jake Tapper, Anderson Cooper and Erin Burnett, the network will also offer an alternative streaming feed featuring its analyst Harry Enten alongside conservative commentator Ben Shapiro and “The Breakfast Club” radio host Charlamagne tha God.

“CNN Election Livecast” will be only be available from 5:30 to 7:30 p.m. Pacific to subscribers of CNN All Access. The program will be a discussion of the results presented as “a more casual option” for viewers, according to a representative for the network.

The feed will mark the first time CNN, owned by Warner Bros. Discover, has produced full-scale live coverage exclusively for a streaming audience.

Martha MacCallum and Bret Baier of Fox News

(Fox News)

Fox News will rely on anchors Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum for a special telecast at 10 p.m. Eastern and 7 p.m. Pacific, pre-empting its comedic talk show “Gutfeld!”

The 2025 election night will also mark a change in calling the results. All of the major broadcast networks and cable channels will be using data analysis from the Associated Press, which teamed with Fox News and NORC at the University of Chicago several years ago to create an alternative to the research company used by CBS, NBC, ABC and CNN.

Starting Tuesday, all five networks will get voting results at the same time.

Leland Vittert, Elizabeth Vargas and Chris Cuomo will anchor election night coverage for NewsNation.

(NewsNation)

The exception is Nexstar Media Group’s NewsNation, which will use Decision Desk HQ to call its races during its coverage co-anchored by Stirewalt, Chris Cuomo, Leland Vittert and Elizabeth Vargas. The service was the first to call the results of the 2024 presidential election, beating the competition by 15 minutes.

The ability to call the races sooner means more time for analysis, which is expected to lean heavily into what the results say about the 2026 midterms and the 2028 presidential campaign.

Stirewalt said the night has the potential to set up the political plot lines of the next two years. He believes the passage of Proposition 50 in California and a victory for New York mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani would elevate Gov. Gavin Newsom and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as 2028 presidential contenders.

“That’s would be a big feather in the cap for AOC, who can say that she’s leading a movement,” Stirewalt said. “Gavin Newsom gets to ring the bell. He gets to say ‘I won. I did something that was controversial. I took it to Donald Trump. I’m delivering a win.’”

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom stepped to the microphone at the state Democratic headquarters in mid-August with the conviction of a man certain he was on the right side of history, bluntly saying California has a moral obligation to thwart President Trump’s attempt to tilt the balance of Congress.

Over the next 2½ months, Newsom became the public face of Proposition 50, a measure designed to help Democrats win control of the U.S. House of Representatives by temporarily redrawing California’s congressional districts.

Newsom took that leap despite tepid support for a gerrymandering measure in early polls.

With Tuesday’s election, the fate of Proposition 50 arrives at a pivotal moment for Newsom, who last week acknowledged publicly that he’s weighing a 2028 presidential run. The outcome will test not only his political instincts but also his ability to deliver on a measure that has national attention fixed squarely on him.

From the outset, Newsom paired his conviction with caution.

“I’m mindful of the hard work ahead,” Newsom said in August, shortly after lawmakers placed Proposition 50 on the ballot.

It was familiar territory for a governor who has built a career on high-stakes political bets. As San Francisco mayor, his decision to issue same-sex marriage licenses in 2004 made him a progressive icon. It also drew accusations he’d energized conservative turnout that year in the presidential election that ended with George W. Bush winning a second term.

As the state’s newly elected governor, he suspended the death penalty in 2019 despite voters having twice rejected measures to do so, calling it a costly and biased system that “fails to deliver justice” — a move that drew fury from law enforcement groups and victims’ families. His decision to take on Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis in a 2023 prime-time debate hosted by Sean Hannity on Fox News was intended to showcase his command of policy and political agility, but instead fell flat amid an onslaught of insults.

With Proposition 50, Newsom placed himself at the center of another potentially career-defining gamble before knowing how it would land. Ahead of Tuesday’s special election, polling suggests he may have played his cards right. Six out of 10 likely voters support Proposition 50, according to a survey by UC Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies that was co-sponsored by The Times.

“You know, not everybody would have done it,” veteran Democratic strategist Gale Kaufman said. “He saw the risk and he took it.”

If approved by voters, the ballot measure would redraw California’s congressional maps to favor Democrats beginning with the 2026 midterm elections in hopes of discounting Republican efforts to gerrymander more seats for themselves. California introduced the measure in response to Trump and his political team leaning on Republican-led states to redraw their district lines to help Republicans retain control of the House.

The balance of power in the closely divided House will determine whether Trump can advance his agenda during his final two years in office — or face an emboldened Democratic majority that could move to challenge, or even investigate, his administration.

And while critics of the governor see a power-craving politician chasing headlines and influence, supporters say this is classic Newsom: confident, risk-tolerant and willing to stand alone when he believes he’s right. He faced intense backlash from his political allies when he had conservative personality Charlie Kirk as his inaugural guest on his podcast this year, on which Newsom said he believed it was “deeply unfair” for transgender athletes to compete in women’s sports. After Kirk was killed, Newsom regularly brought up that interview as a point of pride, noting the backlash he received from his own party over hosting a Trump ally.

In recent months Newsom struck a deal to stabilize struggling oil refineries, pushed cities to ban homeless encampments and proposed walking back healthcare coverage for undocumented immigrants — a series of moves that have tested his standing with progressives. Supporters say the moves show his pragmatic streak, while critics argue they reflect a shift to the center ahead of a possible presidential run.

“In so many ways, he is not a cautious politician,” said Jessica Levinson, a law professor at Loyola Law School. “His brand is big, bold decisions.”

With Proposition 50, Newsom has cast the redistricting counterpunch as a moral imperative, arguing that Democrat-led states must “fight fire with fire,” even if it means pausing a state independent redistricting process largely considered the gold standard. The measure upends a system Californians overwhelmingly endorsed to keep politics out of the map-drawing process.

Levinson said Newsom’s profile has been rising along with the polling numbers for Proposition 50 as he has booked national television shows like ‘The Late Show with Stephen Colbert” and appeared in an ad in favor of the ballot measure with former President Obama, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren and other prominent Democrats that ran during the World Series.

“We are talking about Proposition 50 on a nationwide scale,” Levinson said. “And it’s really hard to talk about Proposition 50 without saying the words ‘Gov. Newsom of California spearheading the effort to pass.’”

California Republicans have called the effort misguided, arguing that the retaliatory response creates a slippery slope that would erode the independent redistricting process California voters have chosen twice at the ballot box.

“When you fight fire with fire, the whole world burns,” said California Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Rocklin), whose district is among those that would be overhauled under Proposition 50. “Newsom is trying to claim that Texas did a bad gerrymandering, but what California is doing is a good gerrymander because somehow it’s canceling it out … I just think gerrymandering is wrong. It’s wrong in Texas and it’s wrong in California.”

Kiley said Newsom never has been one to shy away from national attention “and for pursing explicitly partisan goals.”

“He’s certainly used this as an opportunity to do both of those things,” Kiley said.

Out of the gate, the redistricting plan had lackluster support. Then came the flood of ads by proponents peppered with talking points about Trump rigging the election.

Supporters of Proposition 50 took in more than four times the amount that opponents raised in recent weeks, according to campaign finance reports filed with the state by the three main committees campaigning about the measure. Supporters of Proposition 50 raised so much money that Newsom told them “you can stop donating.”

Political analysts said the redistricting fight has given Newsom what every ambitious politician craves: a narrative. It’s allowed him to cast himself as a defender of democracy while reenergizing donors. That message sharpened when Trump administration officials said they’d monitor polling sites in several California counties at the state GOP’s request, prompting Newsom to accuse the Trump administration of “voter intimidation.”

Republican strategist Rob Stutzman said the campaign gave Newsom something he’d struggled to find: “an authentic confrontation” with Trump that resonates beyond California.

“And I think it’s worked well for him nationally,” Stutzman said. “I think it’s been great for him in some ways, regardless of what happens, but if it does lose, it’ll hurt the brand that he can win and there will be a lot of disgruntled donors.”

While Newsom has framed the measure as good for the country, Stutzman said it’s clear that Proposition 50 has been particularly good for the governor.

“He’s used it for his own purposes very, very effectively,” Stutzman said. “If he becomes the [presidential] nominee, you could look back and say this was an important part of him getting there.”

WASHINGTON  — The Supreme Court’s conservatives face a test of their own making this week as they decide whether President Trump had the legal authority to impose tariffs on imports from nations across the globe.

At issue are import taxes that are paid by American businesses and consumers.

Small-business owners had sued, including a maker of “learning toys” in Illinois and a New York importer of wines and spirits. They said Trump’s ever-changing tariffs had severely disrupted their businesses, and they won rulings declaring the president had exceeded his authority.

On Wednesday, the justices will hear their first major challenge to Trump’s claims of unilateral executive power. And the outcome is likely to turn on three doctrines that have been championed by the court’s conservatives.

First, they say the Constitution should be interpreted based on its original meaning. Its opening words say: “All legislative powers … shall be vested” in Congress, and the elected representatives “shall have the power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposes and excises.”

Second, they believe the laws passed by Congress should be interpreted based on their words. They call this “textualism,” which rejects a more liberal and open-ended approach that included the general purpose of the law.

Trump and his lawyers say his sweeping “Liberation Day” tariffs were authorized by the International Economic Emergency Powers Act, or IEEPA.

That 1977 law says the president may declare a national emergency to “deal with any unusual and extraordinary threat” involving national security, foreign policy or the economy of the United States. Faced with such an emergency, he may “investigate, block … or regulate” the “importation or exportation” of any property.

Trump said the nation’s “persistent” balance of payments deficit over five decades was such an “unusual and extraordinary threat.”

In the past, the law has been used to impose sanctions or freeze the assets of Iran, Syria and North Korea or groups of terrorists. It does not use the words “tariffs” or “duties,” and it had not been used for tariffs prior to this year.

The third doctrine arose with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and is called the “major questions” doctrine.

He and the five other conservatives said they were skeptical of far-reaching and costly regulations issued by the Obama and Biden administrations involving matters such as climate change, student loan forgiveness or mandatory COVID-19 vaccinations for 84 million Americans.

Congress makes the laws, not federal regulators, they said in West Virginia vs. Environmental Protection Agency in 2022.

And unless there is a “clear congressional authorization,” Roberts said the court will not uphold assertions of “extravagant statutory power over the national economy.”

Now all three doctrines are before the justices, since the lower courts relied on them in ruling against Trump.

No one disputes that the president could impose sweeping worldwide tariffs if he had sought and won approval from the Republican-controlled Congress. However, he insisted the power was his alone.

In a social media post, Trump called the case on tariffs “one of the most important in the History of the Country. If a President is not allowed to use Tariffs, we will be at a major disadvantage against all other Countries throughout the World, especially the ‘Majors.’ In a true sense, we would be defenseless! Tariffs have brought us Great Wealth and National Security in the nine months that I have had the Honor to serve as President.”

Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer, his top courtroom attorney, argues that tariffs involve foreign affairs and national security. And if so, the court should defer to the president.

“IEEPA authorizes the imposition of regulatory tariffs on foreign imports to deal with foreign threats — which crucially differ from domestic taxation,” he wrote last month.

For the same reason, “the major questions doctrine … does not apply here,” he said. It is limited to domestic matters, not foreign affairs, he argued.

Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh has sounded the same note in the past.

Sauer will also seek to persuade the court that the word “regulate” imports includes imposing tariffs.

The challengers are supported by prominent conservatives, including Stanford law professor Michael McConnell.

In 2001, he and John Roberts were nominated for a federal appeals court at the same time by President George W. Bush, and he later served with now-Justice Neil M. Gorsuch on the U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver.

He is the lead counsel for one group of small-business owners.

“This case is what the American Revolution was all about. A tax wasn’t legitimate unless it was imposed by the people’s representatives,” McConnell said. “The president has no power to impose taxes on American citizens without Congress.”

His brief argues that Trump is claiming a power unlike any in American history.

“Until the 1900s, Congress exercised its tariff power directly, and every delegation since has been explicit and strictly limited,” he wrote in Trump vs. V.O.S. Selections. “Here, the government contends that the President may impose tariffs on the American people whenever he wants, at any rate he wants, for any countries and products he wants, for as long as he wants — simply by declaring longstanding U.S. trade deficits a national ‘emergency’ and an ‘unusual and extraordinary threat,’ declarations the government tells us are unreviewable. The president can even change his mind tomorrow and back again the day after that.”

He said the “major questions” doctrine fully applies here.

Two years ago, he noted the court called Biden’s proposed student loan forgiveness “staggering by any measure” because it could cost more than $430 billion. By comparison, he said, the Tax Foundation estimated that Trump’s tariffs will impose $1.7 trillion in new taxes on Americans by 2035.

The case figures to be a major test of whether the Roberts court will put any legal limits on Trump’s powers as president.

But the outcome will not be the final word on tariffs. Administration officials have said that if they lose, they will seek to impose them under other federal laws that involve national security.

Still pending before the court is an emergency appeal testing the president’s power to send National Guard troops to American cities over the objection of the governor and local officials.

Last week, the court asked for further briefs on the Militia Act of 1908, which says the president may call up the National Guard if he cannot “with the regular forces … execute the laws of the United States.”

The government had assumed the regular forces were the police and federal agents, but a law professor said the regular forces in the original law referred to the military.

The justices asked for a clarification from both sides by Nov. 17.

WASHINGTON — Throwing a sandwich at a federal agent turned Sean Charles Dunn into a symbol of resistance against President Trump’s law-enforcement surge in the nation’s capital. This week, federal prosecutors are trying to persuade a jury of fellow Washington, D.C., residents that Dunn simply broke the law.

That could be a tough sell for the government in a city that has chafed against Trump’s federal takeover, which is entering its third month. A grand jury refused to indict Dunn on a felony assault count before U.S. Atty. Jeanine Pirro’s office opted to charge him instead with a misdemeanor.

Securing a trial conviction could prove to be equally challenging for Justice Department prosecutors in Washington, where murals glorifying Dunn’s sandwich toss popped up virtually overnight.

Before jury selection started Monday, the judge presiding over Dunn’s trial seemed to acknowledge how unusual it is for a case like this to be heard in federal court. U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols, who was nominated to the bench by Trump, said he expects the trial to last no more than two days “because it’s the simplest case in the world.”

A video that went viral on social media captured Dunn hurling his subway-style sandwich at a Customs and Border Protection agent outside a nightclub on the night of Aug. 10. That same weekend, Trump announced his deployment of hundreds of National Guard troops and federal agents to assist with police patrols in Washington.

When Dunn approached a group of CBP agents who were in front of the club, which was hosting a “Latin Night,” he called them “fascists” and “racists” and chanted “shame” toward them. An observer’s video captured Dunn throwing a sandwich at an agent’s chest.

“Why are you here? I don’t want you in my city!” Dunn shouted, according to police.

Dunn ran away but was apprehended. He was released from custody but rearrested when a team of armed federal agents in riot gear raided his home. The White House posted a highly produced “propaganda” video of the raid on its official X account, Dunn’s lawyers said. They noted that Dunn had offered to surrender to police before the raid.

Dunn worked as an international affairs specialist in the Justice Department’s criminal division. After Dunn’s arrest, U.S. Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi announced his firing in a social media post that referred to him as “an example of the Deep State.”

Before trial, Dunn’s lawyers urged the judge to dismiss the case for what they allege is a vindictive and selective prosecution. They argued that the posts by Bondi and the White House prove Dunn was impermissibly targeted for his political speech.

Julia Gatto, one of Dunn’s lawyers, questioned why Trump’s Justice Department is prosecuting Dunn after the Republican president issued pardons and ordered the dismissal of assault cases stemming from a mob’s attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

“It’s an obvious answer,” Gatto said during a hearing last Thursday. “The answer is they have different politics. And that’s selective prosecution.”

Prosecutors countered that Dunn’s political expressions don’t make him immune from prosecution for assaulting the agent.

“The defendant is being prosecuted for the obvious reason that he was recorded throwing a sandwich at a federal officer at point-blank range,” they wrote.

Dunn is charged with assaulting, resisting, opposing, impeding, intimidating and interfering with a federal officer. Dozens of Trump supporters who stormed the Capitol were convicted of felonies for assaulting or interfering with police during the Jan. 6 attack. Trump pardoned or ordered the dismissal of charges for all of them.

Kunzelman writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — The government shutdown is poised to become the longest ever this week as the impasse between Democrats and Republicans has dragged into a new month. Millions of people stand to lose food aid benefits, health care subsidies are set to expire and there are few real talks between the parties over how to end it.

President Trump said in an interview aired on Sunday that he “won’t be extorted” by Democrats who are demanding negotiations to extend the expiring Affordable Care Act subsidies. Echoing congressional Republicans, the president said on CBS’ “60 Minutes” he’ll negotiate only when the government is reopened.

Trump said Democrats “have lost their way” and predicted they’ll capitulate to Republicans.

“I think they have to,” Trump said. “And if they don’t vote, it’s their problem.”

Trump’s comments signal the shutdown could drag on for some time as federal workers, including air traffic controllers, are set to miss additional paychecks and there’s uncertainty over whether 42 million Americans who receive federal food aid will be able to access the assistance. Senate Democrats have voted 13 times against reopening the government, insisting they need Trump and Republicans to negotiate with them first.

The president also reiterated his pleas to Republican leaders to change Senate rules and scrap the filibuster. Senate Republicans have repeatedly rejected that idea since Trump’s first term, arguing the rule requiring 60 votes to overcome any objections in the Senate is vital to the institution and has allowed them to stop Democratic policies when they’re in the minority.

Trump said that’s true, but “we’re here right now.”

“Republicans have to get tougher,” Trump told CBS. “If we end the filibuster, we can do exactly what we want.”

With the two parties at a standstill, the shutdown, now in its 34th day and approaching its sixth week, appears likely to become the longest in history. The previous record was set in 2019, when Trump demanded Congress give him money for a U.S.-Mexico border wall.

A potentially decisive week

Trump’s push on the filibuster could prove a distraction for Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and Republican senators who’ve opted instead to stay the course as the consequences of the shutdown become more acute.

Republicans are hoping at least some Democrats will eventually switch their votes as moderates have been in weekslong talks with rank-and-file Republicans about potential compromises that could guarantee votes on health care in exchange for reopening the government. Republicans need five additional Democrats to pass their bill.

“We need five with a backbone to say we care more about the lives of the American people than about gaining some political leverage,” Thune said on the Senate floor as the Senate left Washington for the weekend on Thursday.

Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine, a Democrat, said on ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday there’s a group of people talking about ”a path to fix the health care debacle” and a commitment from Republicans not to fire more federal workers. But it’s unclear if those talks could produce a meaningful compromise.

Far apart on Obamacare subsidies

Trump said in the “60 Minutes” interview that the Affordable Care Act — often known as Obamacare because it was signed and championed by then-President Barack Obama — is “terrible” and if the Democrats vote to reopen the government, “we will work on fixing the bad health care that we have right now.”

Democrats feel differently, arguing that the marketplaces set up by the ACA are working as record numbers of Americans have signed up for the coverage. But they want to extend subsidies first enacted during the COVID-19 pandemic so premiums won’t go up for millions of people on Jan. 1.

Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said last week that “we want to sit down with Thune, with (House Speaker Mike) Johnson, with Trump, and negotiate a way to address this horrible health care crisis.”

No appetite for bipartisanship

As Democrats have pushed Trump and Republicans to negotiate, Trump has showed little interest in doing so. He called for an end to the Senate filibuster after a trip to Asia while the government was shut down.

White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said on Fox News Channel’s “Sunday Morning Futures” that the president has spoken directly to Thune and Johnson about the filibuster. But a spokesman for Thune said Friday that his position hasn’t changed, and Johnson said Sunday that he believes the filibuster has traditionally been a “safeguard” from far-left policies.

Trump said on “60 Minutes” that he likes Thune but “I disagree with him on this point.”

The president has spent much of the shutdown mocking Democrats, posting videos of House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries in a Mexican sombrero. The White House website is now featuring a satirical “My Space” page for Democrats, a parody based on the social media site that was popular in the early 2000s. “We just love playing politics with people’s livelihoods,” the page reads.

Democrats have repeatedly said that they need Trump to get serious and weigh in. Virginia Sen. Mark Warner said that he hopes the shutdown could end “this week” because Trump is back in Washington.

Republicans “can’t move on anything without a Trump sign off,” Warner said on “Face the Nation” on CBS.

Record-breaking shutdown

The 35-day shutdown that lasted from December 2018 to January 2019 ended when Trump retreated from his demands over a border wall. That came amid intensifying delays at the nation’s airports and multiple missed paydays for hundreds of thousands of federal workers.

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said on ABC’s “This Week” that there have already been delays at several airports “and it’s only going to get worse.”

Many of the workers are “confronted with a decision,” he said. “Do I put food on my kids’ table, do I put gas in the car, do I pay my rent or do I go to work and not get paid?”

As flight delays around the country increased, New York City’s emergency management department posted on Sunday that Newark Airport was under a ground delay because of “staffing shortages in the control tower” and that they were limiting arrivals to the airport.

“The average delay is about 2 hours, and some flights are more than 3 hours late,” the account posted.

SNAP crisis

Also in the crossfire are the 42 million Americans who receive SNAP benefits. The Department of Agriculture planned to withhold $8 billion needed for payments to the food program starting on Saturday until two federal judges ordered the administration to fund it.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said on CNN Sunday that the administration continues to await additional direction from the courts.

“The best way for SNAP benefits to get paid is for Democrats — for five Democrats to cross the aisle and reopen the government,” Bessent said.

House Democratic leader Jeffries, D-N.Y., accused Trump and Republicans of attempting to “weaponize hunger.” He said that the administration has managed to find ways for funding other priorities during the shutdown, but is slow-walking pushing out SNAP benefits despite the court orders.

“But somehow they can’t find money to make sure that Americans don’t go hungry,” Jeffries said in an appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

Jalonick writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Aamer Madhani contributed to this report.

Millions of YouTube TV subscribers could miss “Monday Night Football” on ESPN and ABC News’ election day coverage as the blackout of Walt Disney-owned channels stretches into a second week.

“Monday Night Football” features the Dallas Cowboys battling the Arizona Cardinals. In addition, several important political contests are on Tuesday ballots, including the New York City mayor’s election, gubernatorial races in Virginia and New Jersey, and California’s Prop. 50 to decide whether officials can redraw the state’s congressional map to favor Democrats.

Disney on Monday sought a temporary thaw in tensions with Google Inc. after the two sides failed last week to strike a new distribution contract covering Disney’s television channels on Google’s YouTube TV.

“Despite the impasse that led to the current blackout, we have asked YouTube TV to restore ABC for Election Day so subscribers have access to the information they rely on,” a Disney spokesperson said in a statement Monday. “We believe in putting the public interest first and hope YouTube TV will take this small step for their customers while we continue to work toward a fair agreement.”

A Google spokesperson was not immediately available for a comment.

ABC’s “World News Tonight With David Muir” is one of television’s highest rated programs.

More than 10 million YouTube TV customers lost access to ESPN, ABC and other Disney channels late Thursday after a collapse in negotiations over distribution fees for Disney channels, causing one of the largest recent blackouts in the television industry.

The two TV giants wrangled for weeks over how much Google must pay to carry Disney’s channels, including FX, Disney Jr. and National Geographic. YouTube TV — now one of the largest pay-TV services in the U.S. — has balked at Disney’s price demands, leading to the outage.

YouTube TV does not have the legal right to distribute Disney’s networks after its last distribution agreement expired.

“We know this is a frustrating and disappointing outcome for our subscribers,” a YouTube spokesperson said in a statement last week. “We continue to urge Disney to work with us constructively to reach a fair agreement that restores their networks to YouTube TV.”

YouTube has said that should the outage stretch for “an extended period,” it would offer its subscribers a $20 credit.

Spanish-language TelevisaUnivision-owned channels were knocked off YouTube TV in a separate dispute that has lasted more than a month. Televisa has appealed to high-level political officials, including President Trump and Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr.

Last year, after Disney-owned channels went dark on DirecTV in a separate carriage fee dispute, Disney offered to make available to DirecTV subscribers its ABC coverage of the sole presidential debate between President Trump and then-Vice President Kamala Harris.

DirecTV viewed ABC’s offer as something of a stunt, noting the debate would be streamed. DirecTV countered by asking Disney to instead make all of its channels available.

That fee dispute resulted in a 13-day blackout on DirecTV, one that was resolved a few days later.

Heightened tensions in the television industry have led to numerous blackouts.

In 2023, Disney and Charter Communications were unable to iron out a new contract by their deadline, resulting in a 10-day blackout of Disney channels on Charter’s Spectrum service. A decade earlier, Time Warner Cable subscribers went nearly a month without CBS-owned channels.

Programming companies, including Disney, have asked for higher fees for their channels to help offset the increased cost of sports programming, including NFL and NBA contracts. But pay-TV providers, including YouTube have pushed back, attempting to draw a line to slow their customers’ ever-increasing monthly bills.

More than 40 million pay-TV customer homes have cut the cord over the last decade, according to industry data. Many have switched to smaller streaming packages. YouTube TV also benefited by attracting disaffected customers from DirecTV, Charter Spectrum and Comcast. YouTube TV is now the nation’s third-largest TV channel distributor.

President Trump’s administration said Monday that it will partially fund SNAP after a pair of judges’ rulings required it to keep the food aid program running.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture had planned to freeze payments to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program starting Nov. 1 because it said it could no longer keep funding it due to the shutdown. The program serves about 1 in 8 Americans and is a major piece of the nation’s social safety net. It costs about $8 billion per month nationally.

It’s not clear how much beneficiaries will receive, nor how quickly beneficiaries will see value show up on the debit cards they use to buy groceries. The process of loading the SNAP cards, which involves steps by state and federal government agencies and vendors, can take up to two weeks in some states. The average monthly benefit is usually about $190 per person.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture, which oversees the nation’s largest food program, said last month that benefits for November wouldn’t be paid out due to the federal government shutdown. That set off a scramble by food banks, state governments and the nearly 42 million Americans who receive the aid to find ways to ensure access to groceries.

Most states have boosted aid to food banks, and some are setting up systems to reload benefit cards with state taxpayer dollars.

It also spurred lawsuits.

Federal judges in Massachusetts and Rhode Island ruled separately but similarly Friday, telling the government that it was required to use one fund with about $5 billion to pay for the program, at least in part. The benefits and administration cost over $8 billion per month.

The judges gave the government the option to use additional money to fully fund the program and a deadline of Monday to decide.

Judge John J. McConnell Jr., in Providence, Rhode Island, said if the government chose full funding, it would need to make payments Monday. With a partial version, which would require recalculating benefits, the payment deadline is Wednesday.

Trump said on social media Friday that he does “NOT want Americans to go hungry just because the Radical Democrats refuse to do the right thing and REOPEN THE GOVERNMENT.” He said he was telling government lawyers to prepare SNAP payments as soon as possible.

Benefits will be delayed in November because many beneficiaries have their cards recharged early in the month and the process of loading cards can take weeks in many states.

Democratic state attorneys general or governors from 25 states, as well as the District of Columbia, challenged the plan to pause the program, contending that the administration has a legal obligation to keep it running in their jurisdictions. Cities and nonprofits also filed a lawsuit.

The USDA has a $5 billion contingency fund for the program, but the Trump administration reversed an earlier plan to use that money to keep SNAP running. Democratic officials argue that the administration could also use a separate fund of about $23 billion.

U.S. District Judge John J. McConnell in Providence, Rhode Island, said SNAP must be funded using at least contingency funds, and he asked for an update on progress by Monday.

In an additional order Saturday, McConnell said if the government makes full payments, it must do so by the end of the day Monday. If it chooses partial ones — which involve recalculating how much recipients get — those would need to be issued by Wednesday.

That does not mean people would necessarily see the payments that quickly, because the process of loading cards can take up to two weeks in some circumstances.

McConnell also ruled that all previous work requirement waivers must continue to be honored. During the shutdown, the USDA has terminated existing waivers that exempted work requirements for older adults, veterans and others.

In Boston, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani ruled the suspension was unlawful and said USDA has to pay for SNAP. Talwani ordered the federal government to advise by Monday whether they will use emergency reserve funds to provide reduced SNAP benefits for November or fully fund the program using both contingency funds and additional available funds.

Advocates and beneficiaries say halting the food aid would force people to choose between buying groceries and paying other bills. The majority of states have announced more or expedited funding for food banks or novel ways to load at least some benefits onto the SNAP debit cards.

Rhode Island officials said Monday that under their program, SNAP beneficiaries who also receive benefits from another federal program, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, received payments Saturday equal to one-fourth of what they typically get from SNAP. Officials in Delaware are telling recipients that benefits there won’t be available until at least Nov. 7.

To qualify for SNAP in 2025, a household’s net income after certain expenses can’t exceed the federal poverty line. For a family of four, that’s about $32,000 per year. Last year, SNAP assisted nearly 42 million people, about two-thirds of whom were families with children.

Mulvihill writes for the Associated Press. AP reporter Kimberlee Kruesi in Providence, R.I., contributed to this report.

If the ads are any indication, Proposition 50 offers Californians a stark choice: “Stick it to Trump” or “throw away the constitution” in a Democratic power grab.

And like so many things in 2025, Trump appears to be the galvanizing issue.

Even by the incendiary campaigns California is used to, Proposition 50 has been notable for its sharp attacks to cut through the dense, esoteric issue of congressional redistricting. It comes down to a basic fact: this is a Democratic-led measure to reconfigure California’s congressional districts to help their party win control of the U.S. House of Representatives in 2026 and stifle President Trump’s attempts to keep Republicans in power through similar means in other states.

Thus far, the anti-Trump message preached by Proposition 50 advocates, led by Gov. Gavin Newsom and other top Democrats, appears to be the most effective.

Supporters of the proposal have vastly outraised their rivals and Proposition 50, one of the most expensive ballot measure campaigns in state history, leads in the polls.

“Whenever you can take an issue and personalize it, you have the advantage. In this case, proponents of 50 can make it all about stopping Donald Trump,” said former legislative leader and state GOP Chair Jim Brulte.

Adding to the drama is the role of two political and cultural icons who have emerged as leaders of each side: former President Obama in favor and former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger against, both arguing the very essence of democracy is at stake.

Schwarzenegger and the two main committees opposing Proposition 50 have focused on the ethical and moral imperative of preserving the independent redistricting commission. Californians in 2010 voted to create the panel to draw the state’s congressional district boundaries after every census in an effort to provide fair representation to all state residents.

That’s not a political ideal easily explained in a 30-section television ad, or an Instagram post.

Redistricting is a “complex issue,” Brulte said, but he noted that “the no side has the burden of trying to explain what the initiative really does and the yes side gets to use the crib notes [that] this is about stopping Trump — a much easier path.”

Partisans on both sides of the aisle agree.

“The yes side quickly leveraged anti-Trump messaging and has been closing with direct base appeals to lock in the lead,” said Jamie Fisfis, a political strategist who has worked on many GOP congressional campaigns in California. “The partisanship and high awareness behind the measure meant it was unlikely to sag under the weight of negative advertising like other initiatives often do. It’s been a turnout game.”

Obama, in ads that aired during the World Series and NFL games, warned that “Democracy is on the ballot Nov. 4” as he urged voters to support Proposition 50. Ads for the most well-funded committee opposing the proposition featured Schwarzenegger saying that opposing the ballot measure was critical to ensuring that citizens are not overrun by elected officials.

“The Constitution does not start with ‘We, the politicians.’ It starts with ‘We, the people,’” Schwarzenegger told USC students in mid-September — a speech excerpted in an anti-Proposition 50 ad. “Democracy — we’ve got to protect it, and we’ve got to go and fight for it.”

California’s Democratic-led Legislature voted in August to put the redistricting proposal that would likely boost their ranks in Congress on the November ballot. The measure, pushed by Newsom, was an effort to counter Trump’s efforts to increase the number of GOP members in the House from Texas and other GOP-led states.

The GOP holds a narrow edge in the House, and next year’s election will determine which party controls the body during Trump’s final two years in office — and whether he can further his agenda or is the focus of investigations and possible impeachment.

Noticeably absent for California’s Proposition 50 fight is the person who triggered it — Trump.

The proposition’s opponents’ decision not to highlight Trump is unsurprising given the president’s deep unpopularity among Californians. More than two-thirds of the state’s likely voters did not approve of his handling of the presidency in late October, according to a Public Policy Institute of California poll.

Trump did, however, urge California voter not to cast mail-in ballots or vote early, falsely arguing in a social media post that both voting methods were “dishonest.”

Some California GOP leaders feared that Trump’s pronouncement would suppress the Republican vote.

In recent days, the California Republican Party sent mailers to registered Republicans shaming them for not voting. “Your neighbors are watching,” the mailer says, featuring a picture of a woman peering through binoculars. “Don’t let your neighbors down. They’ll find out!”

Tuesday’s election will cost state taxpayers nearly $300 million. And it’s unclear if the result will make a difference in control of the House because of multiple redistricting efforts in other states.

But some Democrats are torn about the amount of money being spent on an effort that may not alter the partisan makeup of Congress.

Johanna Moska, who worked in the Obama administration, described Proposition 50 as “frustrating.”

“I just wish we were spending money to rectify the state’s problems, if we figured out a way the state could be affordable for people,” she said. “Gavin’s found what’s working for Gavin. And that’s resistance to Trump.”

Newsom’s efforts opposing Trump are viewed as a foundational argument if he runs for president in 2028, which he has acknowledged pondering.

Proposition 50 also became a platform for other politicians potentially eyeing a 2026 run for California governor, Sen. Alex Padilla and billionaires Rick Caruso and Tom Steyer.

The field is in flux, with no clear front-runner.

Padilla being thrown to the ground in Los Angeles as he tried to ask Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem about the Trump administration’s immigration policies is prominently featured in television ads promoting Proposition 50. Steyer, a longtime Democratic donor who briefly ran for president in 2020, raised eyebrows by being the only speaker in his second television ad. Caruso, who unsuccessfully ran against Karen Bass in the 2022 Los Angeles mayoral race and is reportedly considering another political campaign, recently sent voters glossy mailers supporting Proposition 50.

Steyer committed $12 million to support Proposition 50. His initial ad, which shows a Trump impersonator growing increasingly irate as news reports showing the ballot measure passing, first aired during “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” Steyer’s second ad fully focused on him, raising speculation about a potential gubernatorial run next year.

Ads opposing the proposition aired less frequently before disappearing from television altogether in recent days.

“The yes side had the advantage of casting the question for voters as a referendum on Trump,” said Rob Stutzman, a GOP strategist who worked for Schwarzenegger but is not involved with any of the Proposition 50 campaigns. “Asking people to rally to the polls to save a government commission — it’s not a rallying call.”

As we mentioned last time when Sabrina Carpenter hosted “Saturday Night Live,” there’s no substitute for a host who fully throws themselves into “SNL.”

He may not have done double duty as host and musical guest the way Carpenter did, but Miles Teller appeared to fully embrace the challenge of returning to host for a second time (the first was in 2022). The “Top Gun 2: Maverick” star, who’ll next be appearing in the movie “Eternity,” gave a solid performance, appearing in nearly every sketch, including the cold open and two pre-recorded videos.

He first appeared as former Gov. Andrew Cuomo, a candidate for New York mayor, in the cold open with help from Ramy Youssef and Shane Gillis as opponents Zohran Mamdani and Curtis Sliwa.

After that, Teller played a hungover game show contestant recovering from Halloween, a hockey player shooting a public service announcement for the unfortunately named Nashville Predators and both twin Property Brothers in a video sketch about the current White House renovation.

Teller was also in a sketch about a TV newsroom that decides to show viewers what its background employees are doing, a Netflix promo for a true crime story about husbands who don’t know where their wives went, one about a police press conference that takes a turn and a show closer about a silly Italian restaurant in Nebraska.

Teller handled it all well; he’s good with accents and earned strong laughs, especially playing two characters at the same time in the “Property Brothers” sketch and as Cuomo in the cold open.

Musical guest Brandi Carlile performed “Church & State” and “Human.”

This week’s cold open was one of the stronger (or at least funnier) political sketches of the season so far, tackling the New York mayoral race. As hosted by Errol Louis (Kenan Thompson), “the least famous person to be impersonated on ‘SNL,’ ” the debate sketch portrayed Cuomo (Teller) as a sexually harassing (“Yadda yadda yadda, honk honk, squeeze squeeze) panderer to Jewish voters; Mamdani (Youssef) as a force-smiling, TikTok-flirting candidate who’s pretty sure he won’t be able to implement his promises; and long-shot candidate Sliwa (Gillis) as an “old-fashioned New York nut” with one traumatic story after another to recount. The biggest surprise may have been Gillis, who as Sliwa recounted stories about being hung by his testicles and getting assaulted by a Times Square Spider-Man. Where was this energy when Gillis hosted “SNL”? As has been the habit on many a cold open, President Trump (James Austin Johnson) interrupts the proceedings to mock the candidates and insert his own commentary. This time, that included singing a song from “Phantom of the Opera” to conclude the sketch.

Teller’s monologue was short and simple, relaying how as a kid who moved around most of his childhood, “SNL” was a constant. He shared a photo of himself and his sisters dressed up as the “Night at the Roxbury” characters from the show and then made up a list of memories from the show, like having his first beer in the audience and falling over after having a few beers. Teller mentioned that he and his wife lost their Palisades home in January’s Los Angeles fires. As such, he made sure to point out the fire exits for the audience.

Best sketch of the night: An extreme White House makeover

The Property Brothers Jonathan and Drew Scott (Teller times two) meet their toughest clients yet: Trump and First Lady Melania Trump (Chloe Fineman) who need help with their current renovation of the White House to make room for a new ballroom. Melania shared her skeleton and withered tree decorations (“They are for Christmas,” she said), and the couple complained that 55,000 square feet and 132 rooms just isn’t enough space. With a budget of “$350 million to infinity” the brothers get to work with the help of park rangers and astronauts working through the government shutdown. But when it comes to getting paid for their work, there’s a problem. “Aren’t you guys from Canada?” the president asks. Then he calls ICE on them.

Also good: Nobody asked for this much transparency in news

On a show called Newspoint, the host (Fineman) and her guest (Thompson) are trying to have a serious news discussion, but because the show has opened up its full newsroom to viewers, all the workers in the background draw attention. Among them are Mikey Day, who awkwardly notices the cameras are on him before spilling a carrier of drinks, Bowen Yang as a worker who gets electrocuted by a copy machine and Teller, who has manga erotica up on his work screen. It’s nice to see some physical comedy from Day in particular and the sketch’s visual gags work nicely.

‘Weekend Update’ winner: George Santos is back, untruthful as ever!

Andrew Dismukes and Ashley Padilla (who should be a full cast member at this point instead of a featured player) played a couple who just made out but are trying to discuss the government shutdown. But it was Yang as chronic liar George Santos who stole “Update” (and some jewels) after Yang missed an opportunity on the last “SNL” episode to play the former representative, whose prison term was commuted by Trump. Santos claimed he finished the New York marathon, which hadn’t happened yet, and kept interrupting his chat with “Update” co-host Colin Jost to take calls with prisoners with a jail window and phone he brought with him. He purported to speak with Ghislaine Maxwell, Luigi Mangione and Sean “Diddy” Combs before revealing that the key to making prison rice pudding is preheating the toilet to 350 degrees. Santos ended the segment by revealing the necklace he stole from the Louvre and insisting that he’d just won the World Series.