states

WASHINGTON — The midterm elections already upended national politics. Due to the number of state governments that have flipped to Democratic control, they also could change the way the U.S. elects a president.

The sudden blue tint to so many more statehouses opens the door to enough states joining 18 other Democratic-run states in a deal that would effectively neuter the Electoral College. It would remake the battle for the presidency into one for the most votes nationwide, rather than candidates concentrating on a half dozen or so swing states.

The states that have joined what is known as the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact account for 222 Electoral College votes. Once the number of states involved hits the 270 needed to win the presidency, the arrangement would effectively require a candidate to win the national popular vote to get an Electoral College majority.

It’s not clear that the strategy has support from all the newly elected lawmakers and governors in the key states, and it’s almost certain to draw legal challenges from conservative groups. If it does go forward, it could land before the conservative-majority Supreme Court.

Yet the sweep of the Democratic wins for governor and in state legislatures has the plan’s supporters optimistic. In Tuesday’s elections, Democrats won full control in six states representing 71 Electoral College votes: Arizona, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Minnesota, with its 10 electoral votes, had joined the compact when it was previously under full Democratic control in 2023.

Some governors express support while others are noncommittal

“We can do away with it,” Wisconsin’s new Democratic Gov. David Crowley said of the Electoral College, now that he has a legislature in his party’s hands for the first time in 16 years. “I am interested in having those conversations with the state Legislature.”

Over the weekend, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, a likely 2028 contender for the Democratic presidential nomination, said he would like his newly Democratic legislature to take steps toward making the Electoral College obsolete.

“I think that the national popular vote makes sense. My views on that have not changed,” Shapiro said on a liberal podcast. “I’ll work with lawmakers to figure out what the right mechanism is for moving forward on that.”

If Pennsylvania and Wisconsin supported the compact, reaching the 270 threshold would require Michigan and either Arizona or Nevada to join. Michigan’s new Democratic governor, Jocelyn Benson did not respond to a request for comment.

Not every Democratic governor is embracing the push yet. In a television interview on Monday, Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs declined to say whether she favored her state joining the compact. She said she’s focused on other things, like the cost of living.

Nevada’s previous experience with the issue also is a cautionary tale for supporters.

In 2019, then-Democratic Gov. Steve Sisolak vetoed a measure that would have committed Nevada to joining the compact after it was passed by Democratic majorities in both houses of the Legislature. Sisolak said at the time that the popular vote idea would diminish the influence of smaller-population states like Nevada in national elections.

Democrats passed another measure to join the compact in 2023, but couldn’t figure out a way around the state’s then-Republican governor. The incoming administration of its new Democratic governor, Aaron Ford, did not respond to requests for comment.

Republicans will use their diminished power to push back.

“Our Constitution gives states a voice in choosing the president for a reason,” Tyler August, the Republican leader in the Wisconsin Assembly, said in a statement Tuesday. “This would undermine that balance and disenfranchise Wisconsin voters by letting results in other states override their choice.”

Two presidents 16 years apart lost the popular vote

The idea of shifting to a national popular vote gained traction among Democrats after Republican George W. Bush won the 2000 presidential election by inching ahead of Democrat Al Gore in the Electoral College even while losing the popular vote. It became turbocharged after Republicans again won the White House that way in 2016 with Donald Trump’s victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton.

Under the National Popular Vote plan, the candidate who wins the popular vote nationwide would receive the Electoral College votes from the states that have joined the compact.

There’s nothing inherently partisan about the idea, said Patrick Rosenstiel, a Republican strategist in Minnesota who is a senior consultant to the popular vote movement. Occasionally GOP-majority legislative chambers, including the Oklahoma Senate, have passed proposals to join the compact, but the bills haven’t gone further.

He said his own presidential vote is essentially meaningless because Minnesota has reliably voted Democratic in presidential elections for decades, leaving him with no say in the outcome and steering the vast majority of the candidates’ attention elsewhere.

“I don’t believe I’ve ever been relevant in the outcome of a presidential election,” he said. “National popular vote forces campaigns to focus on every persuadable voter in every precinct across the nation.”

Rosenstiel said the national popular vote campaign has been revving up to push the issue when the newly Democratic state legislatures convene at the start of the year. He said the organization has already lined up legislative sponsors.

The compact could create constitutional concerns

Republicans no longer have the power to stop the change in the Democratic-controlled states, but some conservative groups are prepared for a fight. The change “disenfranchises voters in member states if enacted, violates the United States Constitution, and undermines America’s Founders’ intent,” wrote analysts for the America First Policy Institute, a pro-Trump think tank, in September.

There also is no guarantee the proposals will pass. Derek Muller, a Notre Dame law professor who is skeptical of the idea, said some might have second thoughts now that it’s gone from a symbolic protest vote to a real possibility. He said there will be constitutional concerns, as well, that will likely lead to legal challenges.

The Constitution lets states run elections, and the Supreme Court in a case stemming from electors who sought to find a substitute for Trump in 2016 has ruled that states can require electors to vote for the presidential candidate they’re pledged to.

Muller flagged potential legal hurdles to the popular vote plan. States have the power to run their elections but not set rules that will determine the outcome in other states’ contests. Additionally, each state ballot is different, and some would potentially have third-party candidates who wouldn’t appear elsewhere, leading to the dilution of a vote for a Democrat or Republican in one state compared to another.

That could violate the 14th Amendment’s requirement that everyone have “equal protection of the laws.” The U.S. Supreme Court also might decide that states can’t join a compact to change one of their core constitutional duties, unless they get congressional approval.

“I think the Supreme Court will be interested,” Muller said.

Riccardi and Bauer write for the Associated Press. Bauer reported from Madison, Wis. AP writers Marc Levy in Harrisburg, Pa., Jacqueline GaNun in Lansing, Mich., Jessica Hill in Las Vegas and Mikella Schuettler in Phoenix contributed to this report.

After Democrats’ stunning blowout in the United States midterm elections, five Republican election deniers have come up short in their races to become governor in top battleground states.

Congressman Andy Biggs in Arizona, Congressman John James in Michigan, State Treasurer Stacy Garrity in Pennsylvania and Congressman Tom Tiffany in Wisconsin all lost their gubernatorial races on Tuesday.

So too did billionaire Rick Jackson of Georgia, a state that was central to President Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential results.

All five candidates had either cast doubt on or voted to block Joe Biden’s victory over Trump in the 2020 election.

Jackson, for instance, had called Biden’s win “totally ridiculous” and criticised Georgia state officials for not complying with Trump’s demands to “find” extra votes.

“Our people really let us down,” Jackson said when he was pressed on the 2020 election during a campaign event earlier this year.

In January 2021, Biggs and Tiffany voted to overturn the 2020 results as members of the US House of Representatives.

Both lawmakers also signed on to a lawsuit that sought to invalidate results in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, all states that Biden won in that year’s contentious presidential race.

James was not in Congress when it came time to certify the 2020 election results. He had unsuccessfully run for the US Senate during that election cycle. He later made a successful bid for the House of Representatives in the 2022 midterms.

That year, he acknowledged Biden’s victory. But he reversed his position in June, when he told podcaster Benny Johnson that the 2020 election was “rigged and manipulated”.

Garrity, who was elected to her current position in 2020, was among the right-wing politicians to campaign with Trump to reverse his election defeat.

She appeared at a rally in Pennsylvania on January 5, 2021, to call on state lawmakers to decertify the 2020 results. A day later, Trump supporters would storm the US Capitol, echoing the Republican leader’s claims of voter fraud.

Tiffany, Garrity and Jackson have since released statements or clarified their previous actions regarding the 2020 election and acknowledged that Biden won. Biggs and James, however, have not.

Al Jazeera has reached out to both of their offices for comment but has not yet heard back.

Tuesday’s midterm results are likely to have significant implications for the next presidential race in 2028.

Trump is entering the final two years of his lame-duck second term, and under the US Constitution, he is ineligible for re-election. It is unclear who will succeed him as the Republican standard-bearer.

Battleground states like Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin have all vacillated between presidential nominees of both parties in recent elections.

They will play critical roles in 2028, as the US looks to determine its next leader.

In some US states, governors play a major role in issues like voting access, election administration and efforts to redraw congressional maps.

Over the past year and a half, Trump has sought to rally state leaders to redesign congressional maps to help Republicans get elected.

Some Democratic-led states, notably California, under Governor Gavin Newsom, have responded with their own efforts at gerrymandering.

But it is unclear whether the push for redistricting will retain its momentum after Tuesday’s midterm results.

Already, Georgia’s Governor Brian Kemp, a Republican who was prevented by term limits from running in this midterm cycle, said on Wednesday that he would not call a special session of the state’s legislature to redraw the state’s congressional maps before his Democratic successor, Keisha Lance Bottoms, is sworn in.

Trump, after years of casting doubt on US elections, told The New York Times on Tuesday night that he was “absolutely willing” to accept the midterm results.

He also pledged to engage with the Democratic Party, which handily retook control of both chambers of the US Congress.

“We’ll, you know, look forward to working with them,” Trump said of the Democrats. “We’ll probably work something out.”

Polls to start closing in waves across the country, with the earliest closures at 23:00 GMT in Indiana and Kentucky.

WASHINGTON  — In its latest chapter on religion in schools, the Supreme Court debated Tuesday whether Colorado may fund private preschools for 4-year-olds but exclude Catholic schools that refuse to serve same-sex parents and their children.

The court’s six conservatives, all of whom were raised Catholic, leaned in favor of ruling the state was discriminating based on religion.

The state offered funding to all preschools but said they must abide by an “equal opportunity” rule that forbids discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett said state officials “chose to impose a condition” they knew those Catholic schools “will be unable to agree to.”

In contrast, the court’s three liberals said the Catholic schools were not seeking equal treatment but a new right to discriminate.

“You are asking for a special rule for religious schools,” said Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor said the state opened the funding program to all schools, including church-related schools. “The Catholic schools are not being excluded. They’re choosing not to participate because they won’t get an exemption,” she said.

In the last decade, the court’s conservative majority has strengthened the 1st Amendment’s protection for the “free exercise of religion.”

States and local governments need not offer public funds to private groups and entities, the justices said. But if they do so, they may not single out religious schools or people and deny them public funding that is open to all.

They struck down laws in Minnesota and Maine that denied scholarships or school funds to students who enrolled in a religious school. And they ruled the city of Philadelphia could not bar Catholic social services from providing foster care because they did not work with same-sex couples.

Despite that history, Colorado adopted a strong “equal opportunity” law in 2022 to go with its new state funding for preschools.

The state voters had approved a ballot measure in 2020 to provide public funding for a year of preschool prior to kindergarten. Both public and private schools were encouraged to participate.

The state pays for 15 hours per week and provides parents about $6,000 in tuition.

Lawmakers said eligible schools must provide children “an equal opportunity to enroll regardless of race, ethnicity, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, gender identity, lack of housing, income level or disability.”

The Archdiocese of Denver oversees 34 Catholic preschools. Parents were told they must support and affirm the teachings of the church, including on matters of gender and marriage.

In light of the new funding law, the church asked for an accommodation that would allow “faith based providers to participate in the program without compromising their sincerely held religious beliefs.”

The state refused. It said “no provider may discriminate against children or families in violation of the state statute.”

St. Mary Catholic Parish in Littleton, Colo., and two of its parents sued, alleging a violation of the 1st Amendment.

Their attorneys — the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty — argued that no LGBTQ+ family has been harmed or claimed discrimination under the preschool funding law, while “thousands of Catholic families have zero Catholic preschools available to them.”

They lost before a federal judge and the 10th Circuit Court. Those judges said the state did not target the Catholic schools or treat them differently from others because of their religious beliefs.

The Supreme Court agreed in April to hear the case of St. Mary Catholic Parish vs. Roy.

During Tuesday’s argument, Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh voiced dismay over how this case arose.

“This seems like a would-be solution in search of a problem. Why are we here?” he asked a state attorney.

He and Barrett said same-sex couples did not seek to have their children enrolled in Catholic preschools. Meanwhile, other parents were denied state funds because of the marriage and family policies of the Catholic parishes.

The court is likely to hand down a decision in several months.

Captain Meg Jones says England are aiming to expand their attack to stay at the head of rugby’s world order.

The Red Roses’ four-year, 41-match unbeaten run was ended by a pair of defeats by Canada earlier this month, while New Zealand threatened victory at Allianz Stadium last month, only to be undone by Zoe Harrison’s final-play try.

For so long the runaway leaders at the top of the world rankings, England could even have dropped to third with a combination of a 15-point defeat against the United States on Friday and a New Zealand win over France on Saturday.

That never looked likely as the Red Roses ran in nine tries in victory over the USA in New Jersey, but Jones says competition is becoming more fierce at the top of the game.

“Teams are getting better, that’s the nature of it,” Jones said.

“It happened in the men’s game, it’s happened in the women’s game, and we’ve just got to start being probably more unpredictable.

“We’ve learned loads on this tour, and gained so much feedback from where we want to keep growing, getting better and keep pushing.”

While Mitchell will undoubtedly take positives – Holly Aitchison’s play-making and Maud Muir’s all-action performance among them – he has plenty on his to-do list.

Top will be to tune up his team’s set-piece solidity and attacking fluency.

England suffered at the line-out early on, unable to fire up their rolling maul from two promising attacking positions before being shoved back over their own line, only for Kathryn Treder’s try to be ruled out for a obstruction call.

The scrum was also, initially at least, more closely contested than expected.

Muir was pinged as the experienced Hope Rogers grappled for set-piece supremacy.

And, all the while, the hosts were making headway at the gainline, buying territory with brute physicality – an aspect of the game which is usually England’s trademark.

The United States got their reward as Rogers burrowed beneath Maddie Feaunati for a short-range score that sparked lasting celebrations.

Jones went over after full-back Emma Sing hit a good line to restore a 10-point lead by the break, but the stats below the scoreboard favoured the United States with the hosts enjoying more territory and possession and making more metres with the ball in hand at the interval.

Moloney-MacDonald’s third and fourth scores soon after the restart put England 20 points clear and the outcome out of doubt.

The United States, who came into the match on the back of five-match winning run that includes successes over Ireland and South Africa, hung tough however.

While England’s endurance and depth told, with Hannah Botterman impressing off the bench, Ellie Kildunne weaving up from backfield on her introduction, the tide turning in the scrum and four tries scored in the final quarter, the hosts’ energy was impressive.

Even with replacement prop Mona Lisa Tupou being sent to the sin bin for a scrum infringement, their resistance and physicality stayed high and was rewarded with Zackary’s late score.

With both the attendance and the playing surface appearing patchy at the 25,000-capacity Sports Illustrated Stadium, organisers will hope to have a more impressive platform in place by the time the Women’s Rugby World Cup is held stateside in 2033.

WASHINGTON — In the final days before an election that will decide control of Congress, President Trump’s closing argument — buoyant, digressive and characteristically off-script — is at times running headlong into the economic anxieties of the voters Republicans most need.

With a war in Iran driving up gas prices for Americans, Trump is boasting to supporters that the conflict is making the country rich. At a rally in Georgia, he said his aides had urged him not to brag about the billions of dollars the United States was earning on oil from the war, since Americans are “paying a little higher” in costs because of it. But he did it anyway.

“I said, I don’t give a damn,” Trump said. “We are making a freaking fortune. Our country is getting stronger and stronger all the time. And those pump prices are going to come down.”

The moment underscores the gamble at the core of Trump’s final pitch to voters. With polls showing an overwhelming majority of Americans unhappy with the economy, the president is offering a portrait of national prosperity that many voters do not recognize, and pairing it with jokes and digressions that can seem to make light of their struggles.

Tuesday’s results will be the clearest test yet of whether that message still moves his base, or whether the president has become a liability for a party at risk of losing Congress in part because of his sinking popularity.

Signs of GOP anxiety are reflected in where Trump is spending his final days campaigning. Rather than courting swing voters in battleground states, he is leading rallies in Mississippi, Texas, Ohio, South Carolina and Kansas — states that have long been Republican strongholds but where the party now worries its voters may stay home.

Still, the president is insisting to voters that the country is succeeding, and he is making the election a referendum on his agenda.

“The world is falling apart, and we are doing better than we’ve ever done,” he told a crowd in Mississippi on Monday. The next day, during a stop in Texas, he joked that the $5,000 he has promised Americans if Republicans win would not be enough for his supporters to eat a meal at Mar-a-Lago, his private club in Palm Beach, Fla.

“You will be my guest at Mar-a-Lago. The problem is that for $5,000 the most you’ll be able to buy is a hamburger and maybe a small dessert,” Trump said, laughing. “I’m not even sure you could buy that.”

Democrats have criticized the president’s remarks, calling them dismissive of voters’ concerns. Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said Trump boasting that the country was making money out of the Iran war was a “fitting” slogan for Trump’s White House.

Trump’s personal oil and gas holdings are now estimated to be worth between $22.5 million and $81.6 million, up from $12.6 million to $46 million at the end of last year, according to a report released this week by congressional Democrats.

Joe Gruters, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, rejected the idea that the president has dismissed voters’ financial pain.

“The president, I think, shows empathy about what we’re going through, and he is fighting like hell,” Gruters said in an interview.

Asked to sum up Trump’s closing message, Gruters framed it as a choice between “common sense vs. crazy.” When pressed on the economy, Gruters pointed to Trump’s push to limit federal taxes on tips and overtime pay, to create investment accounts for children and to bring back manufacturing jobs.

“He has transformed the Republican Party into the workingman’s party,” Gruters said. “He is all about trying to bring back jobs that will bring up real wages across the board.”

But that message can be overshadowed with the off-script riffs that have long defined Trump’s rallies. During a rally in Ohio, while praising Sen. Jon Husted, Trump detoured into remarks about the Republican senator’s backside as well as rapper Nicki Minaj’s.

“I looked at his ass and I’ve never done that with a man before. It’s true. Off the record: Women, yes, men, no, OK?” Trump said. “By the way, I looked at one hell of a beautiful ass before, Nicki Minaj.”

At a separate rally, Trump turned his attention to Abdul El-Sayed, the Democratic Senate nominee in Michigan, saying that if elected, El-Sayed should be forced to pass through a metal detector before entering the U.S. Senate chamber.

“Anyone with that record of support for jihadists would be screened and unable to get a seat on an airplane,” Trump said of El-Sayed. “They certainly should not give him a seat in the United States Senate.”

In those moments, the message is aimed squarely at his base, which over the last decade has celebrated his unfiltered style. And it is that base, more than swing voters, that Trump has spent his precious time courting in the final stretch of the campaign.

On Monday, Trump rallied supporters in Mississippi, a state he carried by 23 points two years ago. On Tuesday, he went to Texas for the fourth time this month to make the case for Ken Paxton, the Republican Senate nominee trying to stave off what could be the first statewide Democratic victory there in three decades. Then on Wednesday, Trump was in Ohio for the third time this month, playing defense in a state he has won every time he’s been on the ballot. And on Saturday, Trump is heading to Kansas, a state that has not elected a Democrat to the U.S. Senate since 1932.

Gruters said the red state swing reflects the need to get Republicans to the polls.

“You can’t take anything for granted. You have to fight hard in every single state, and remind people why they need to go vote,” he said. “This is a turnout, turnout, turnout race. And we’re doing everything we can as a party.”

Don Haider-Markel, a political science professor at the University of Kansas, said it is still surprising to see the party deploy the president in Republican strongholds so close to the election.

“It really reflects, not just the tilt toward Democrats, but also the lack of enthusiasm among Republican voters for this election,” Haider-Markel said.

Republicans outnumber Democrats in Kansas, but there is a possibility that Democrats can win if Republicans stay home, he said. One of the biggest assets the party has to mobilize the MAGA base is having Trump talk to them in person, he argued. But so far, it is unclear whether his closing message will resonate.

“I don’t think that he’s really speaking to the issues that voters care about, but I don’t think he’s coming to change people’s minds,” Haider-Markel said. “He’s looking for lines that get him applause and praise.”

In rally after rally, Trump has turned the event into a show about himself. In Iowa, congressional candidate Joe Mitchell presented Trump with a “man of the century” certificate. In Texas, Trump bemoaned that he was not awarded the Nobel Peace Prize last year. And in several events, he has shown the crowd a video of a CNN analyst saying that among GOP voters, Trump is more popular than Ronald Reagan or Abraham Lincoln.

But in the end, he also tried to appeal to his base with nostalgia.

“We’ve been doing this together for 11 years, and there’s never been anything like it and there probably never will be anything like it again politically or otherwise,” he said. “So let’s go out and do what we do best and that is win on Nov. 3. We gotta win!”

Planned talks to be first high-level contact between Iran and the bloc since Houthi rebels escalated their attacks on Saudi Arabia.

Delegations from the Mecca Defence Alliance countries – Saudi Arabia, Turkiye and Pakistan – will visit Tehran for talks, according to Saudi and Iranian officials.

Ali Bagheri Kani, deputy secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, was quoted by state-run media as saying Saudi Defence Minister Khalid bin Salman Al Saud, Pakistani military chief Asim Munir and Turkish intelligence chief Ibrahim Kalin will participate in a joint meeting during their visit to Tehran on Monday.

The Iranian delegation will be led by Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of the Supreme National Security Council.

The participating countries could take an effective step towards establishing regional security based on actors in the region, Bagheri Kani said.

Rayed Krimly, the Saudi deputy minister for public diplomacy, also confirmed the meeting, adding that the visit comes as part of the continued efforts by the Mecca Defence Alliance allies “for de-escalation between parties involved in the ongoing crisis and promoting dialogue and diplomatic solutions in support of the mediation efforts carried out” by Qatar and Pakistan.

“The visit underscores the pivotal role of Mecca Joint Defence Agreement countries in reinforcing regional security and stability and working with all countries in the region to achieve that goal,” he wrote on X.

Houthi attacks on Saudi Arabia

The planned talks would be the first high-level contact between Iran and all members of the alliance since Yemen’s Iran-aligned Houthi armed group escalated attacks on Saudi Arabia last month.

Field Marshal Munir last week visited Tehran, where he met President Masoud Pezeshkian and other senior officials.

During the visit, Iranian officials told him there would be no talks with the United States about ending the US-Israel war on Iran until Tehran’s demands were met, according to Iranian media.

Pakistan has been a key intermediary between Washington and Tehran since the US and Israel launched the war in February.

Earlier mediation efforts helped produce an interim agreement in June, but the deal quickly unravelled as fighting between Iran and the US resumed weeks later.

Saudi Arabia intercepted another wave of missiles and drones on Sunday as fighting with the Houthis continued.

Ministers from the Mecca Defence Alliance countries held an emergency meeting in Riyadh this month and agreed to ensure the “rapid deployment” of military forces and capabilities in Saudi Arabia.

The Houthi attacks have become an increasingly destabilising element in the US-Israeli war on Iran, turning US ally Saudi Arabia into a pressure point ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠in the wider war.

Turkiye, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia signed the Mecca Joint Defence Agreement in August. Under it, an armed attack on one member is considered an attack on all.

The agreement’s first article says the parties shall use “all necessary means” to eliminate threats to one another’s territorial integrity, sovereignty and internationally recognised borders, according to the text publicised at the time.

Efforts by Turkiye’s parliament to ratify the agreement began last week and are still under way while Pakistan approved the pact last week.

Championship leader Kimi Antonelli sealed his ninth victory of the season with victory at the United States Grand Prix in Austin.

Ferrari’s Charles Leclerc was second and Red Bull’s Max Verstappen third.

Mercedes’ Antonelli, 20, can become the youngest world champion in Formula 1 history if he finishes ninth or higher at the Mexico City Grand Prix next weekend.

Here are my ratings for how the drivers performed across the whole weekend in Texas.

Kimi Antonelli – 10/10

A superb weekend under the added pressure of having his first opportunity to seal the championship. Produced an outstanding lap for pole and then controlled the race beautifully, making the one-stop work while many around him needed two.

Charles Leclerc – 9.5/10

Very close to a perfect weekend himself. Fastest in both Friday practice sessions, qualified fourth and then raced brilliantly in his Ferrari to second, including late passes on Lando Norris and Max Verstappen.

Max Verstappen – 8.5/10

Quick all weekend and put the Red Bull on the front row, but the poor start immediately made his race more difficult. Recovered well despite problems with the car and still came away with a sixth consecutive podium.

Lewis Hamilton – 7.5/10

Another strong weekend but behind team-mate Leclerc for the majority of it. Fastest in final practice, only narrowly behind Leclerc in qualifying and fought his way back to fourth after Ferrari committed to the two-stop strategy.

Lando Norris – 8/10

Recovered well from eighth on the grid but qualifying should have been better as his quickest Q3 lap was deleted for track limits. McLaren’s decision to leave him out on ageing tyres cost him late on, so fifth was not entirely of his own making.

Isack Hadjar – 8.5/10

An excellent turnaround after struggling badly with the Red Bull during practice. Qualified a superb third, ran strongly in the race and eventually finished sixth despite throttle mapping problems and moving aside for team-mate Verstappen.

Oscar Piastri – 6.5/10

A fairly subdued weekend by the McLaren man’s standards. Seventh in qualifying and seventh in the race, although the first-lap battle with George Russell went against him and the stewards decided the Mercedes driver was at fault.

George Russell – 5.5/10

A disappointing weekend given what the other Mercedes achieved. Admitted both of his Q3 laps were poor and then picked up a five-second time penalty for leaving the track and gaining an advantage in his battle with Piastri, eventually finishing eighth.

Liam Lawson – 8/10

Another quietly excellent weekend from Lawson. Racing Bulls sacrificed a proper Q3 attempt to preserve tyres for Sunday and he converted ninth on the grid into ninth at the finish to score again.

Pierre Gasly – 8/10

Probably extracted just about everything available from the Alpine. Missed Q3 but fought his way back into the points after an early dice with Haas’ Oliver Bearman.

He came into the weekend insisting he was going to try to apply the “same mindset as I had all year – one race at a time”.

But on Saturday he acknowledged that this one was a new kind of weekend.

“It does feel a little bit different,” he said. “But the goal stays the same. I just need to keep doing my job. And, actually, I feel like I can enjoy more driving, everything.

“But, of course, we’re going to do the race tomorrow. We’re going to try and win. And then we’ll see what happens. Obviously, I’m in a very good position.”

Antonelli is typically accompanied by his father, Marco, at grands prix, but he said this weekend he had brought other people with him as well to help keep him in the right frame of mind.

“I have a great group of people around me,” he said. “I have a lot of friends here as well, so we enjoy the evenings together.

“We play cards in the evening, so we’re just doing the fun stuff. And that’s what helps, to just relax a little bit and just connect with the mind, and then once you go on track you are back full focus.”

The maths suggest the most likely scenario is that Antonelli will not win the title on Sunday – it would, as he put it on Thursday, require “something catastrophic to happen to the others”.

If this is a bit of an overstatement – Russell and Hamilton would need only to crash together on the first lap, for example – the fundamental truth is real.

Foes of Gov. Gavin Newsom, who is widely viewed as a likely 2028 presidential candidate, are launching television and digital ads this weekend in early primary states that criticize the governor’s opposition to the proposed billionaire tax on California’s November ballot.

The ad, funded by backers of the wealth tax, castigates Newsom for opposing Proposition 40, the ballot measure that would impose a 5% tax on California billionaires’ assets to offset federal healthcare funding cuts approved by congressional Republicans and signed by President Trump last year.

“We’re all struggling with the high cost of healthcare. In California, Democrats are championing a one-time tax on billionaires that would save coverage for millions,” a narrator says in the 30-second ad. “So why [has] presidential hopeful Gavin Newsom betrayed his own supporters by trying to sabotage the billionaire tax? Maybe it’s because the same billionaires who oppose Prop. 40 also gave millions of dollars to Newsom. Gavin Newsom turned his back on working Californians. Will he do the same to you?”

The ad specifically calls out billionaires Stewart Resnick, who owns several businesses including Pom Wonderful, Fiji Water and Justin Wines; crypto executive Chris Larsen; former Google leader Eric Schmidt; and venture capitalist Michael Moritz, all of whom have backed Newsom’s political ambitions.

Newsom has argued that, although he supports wealth taxes, they ought to be enacted at the national level, rather than a state-by-state patchwork that could drive the rich to leave California, a state with a volatile budget heavily dependent on the state’s wealthiest residents.

The primary funders of the ad are the Service Employees International Union – United Healthcare Workers West, which crafted Proposition 40; Saikat Chakrabarti, a climate change warrior and political advisor who made his wealth in part as a founding engineer at Stripe; and Ross Boucher, an early engineer at Stripe.

The ad buy is six figures but could grow, according to its backers. Among the states where the ad is expected to air are South Carolina, Nevada, New Mexico, Virginia and New Hampshire.

Earlier this month, Newsom stumped for candidates in New Hampshire, his latest foray to early presidential primary states.

The ad launch comes amid a contentious, expensive battle over the proposed wealth tax, which has divided Democrats and their allies. Although Newsom is among Democrats who oppose it, the ballot measure was endorsed by the state Democratic Party and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). Voters are closely divided about the measure.

The track is built on former marshland and that has made it difficult for organisers to keep it in good condition, but the four-time champion rejected that as a reason not to try to solve the issue.

“You can use the excuse that the soil is the problem but then you should have known that and you need to make sure that you reinforce it more,” Verstappen said.

“Last year, for example, you pull around 5-6G in a corner, but I had some impacts, vertical load, which was over 9G on my spine, which I can tell you is really not fun, and especially the older you get, you think about that more and more.”

Verstappen said the problem was likely to be exacerbated this year because although the cars from 2022-25 had lower ride-heights overall, the way the cars are run under the latest regulations means they are running lower in corners than last season.

That’s because of the switch between having the front and rear wings open in drag-reduction mode on the straights and closing in corners means the cars drop down towards the ground when they brake.

“You bottom out way harder, because when the wings close and the ride-height comes down, under braking is actually a very stressful moment, and I know around here in some places, it’s very bumpy under braking,” he said.

“Especially when it’s like these kind of awkward bumps, not just bumps from the track getting older, but the surface underneath the soil just moving up and down, sometimes (it’s) very hard to expect, or if you’re like a tiny bit offline, you don’t know what is there, because no-one really drives here sometimes.

“I can tell you from the checks that I’ve done from my spine, the bottom end doesn’t look that great.

“I know that’s part of racing. I know that can be part of sport, but it’s also further damage from the cars that we had the last few years.

“And now if we continue with finding this acceptable to drive on, then you are going to suffer with that much more.”

President Trump has pushed Congress to pass a proof-of-citizenship law, signed an executive order seeking a national voter ID requirement and tried to limit mail voting through U.S. Postal Service changes.

None of those moves succeeded in time to affect this year’s midterm elections. It’s a different matter in the states.

More than three dozen voting laws passed in Republican-controlled states are taking effect for the first time this year, many of them containing elements of Trump’s stalled proposals. They include changes to what IDs are acceptable to register for the first time and requirements to show proof of citizenship, an issue the Republican president has tried but failed to get through Congress.

“Trump’s attacks on our elections are deeply damaging, but they are not happening in isolation,” said Sophia Lin Lakin, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Voting Rights Project. ”Across the country, states are also advancing restrictions that make it harder for eligible voters to cast a ballot.”

Republican lawmakers who support the tighter voting laws, especially around voter ID, describe them as common sense changes that help build trust in elections.

Trump and other Republicans have been pushing for more restrictive rules since the president’s false claims of widespread fraud in his 2020 election loss to Democrat Joe Biden. Trump’s false claims have resonated with Republican voters, a majority of whom believe Biden was not legitimately elected despite all evidence to the contrary. Trump lost dozens of court challenges, his own attorney general found no evidence of widespread fraud, and reviews, audits and recounts in the battleground states where he contested his loss all affirmed Biden’s victory.

Among the changes confronting voters as early voting gets underway: Students in New Hampshire can no longer use student IDs; Utah voters returning mail ballots must include more information on the envelope; and some voters in Mississippi might need birth certificates or passports to verify their identities.

Changes to voter ID requirements are challenged

New Hampshire state Rep. Donald McFarlane said he sponsored the bill to eliminate student IDs as acceptable for voting because colleges don’t have the same controls when issuing those cards as government agencies.

“The change removes a special exception and applies the same government-issued ID standard to all voters,” he said, adding that his bill had bipartisan support.

Students, he said, can still get state IDs free of charge.

The new requirements have not gone unchallenged.

In South Dakota, the ACLU has filed a lawsuit seeking to halt a new law that includes requiring voters registering for the first time to present the most common forms of ID — driver’s licenses, Tribal IDs and non-driver state IDs. They must be presented in person at places that accept registration.

“Proof of citizenship in itself is not terrible,” said Kathryn Johnson, president of the League of Women Voters of South Dakota.

Her concern is the requirement to present the IDs in person.

“We’re kind of a remote state, so sometimes it takes a drive, and you have to coordinate, you have to take off work, and all of these kinds of things,” she said.

Some Democrats also have expressed support for voter ID during recent debates. Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro said he was open to the idea as long as it wasn’t based on “conspiracy theories.” When legislatures change their state’s voting laws, they typically give election offices and voters time to adjust. Trump wanted federal voter ID and proof-of-citizenship legislation to take effect immediately, forcing election officials and voters to comply in the middle of the midterms.

Ohio seeks to scrub voter rolls

Ohio has a proof of citizenship requirement in effect for the first time this year for those registering to vote or updating their voter registration information at a Bureau of Motor Vehicles location. The state also eliminated its four-day grace period for mail ballots, which now must be received at local election offices by Election Day.

Yet the biggest concern for voting rights groups is an ongoing purge of the state’s voter rolls. The databases used to check citizenship against voter registration lists can be outdated, said Freda Levenson, legal director of the ACLU of Ohio, which has sued to overturn the law.

“Vast numbers of perfectly eligible voters are vulnerable to being disenfranchised,” she said.

Republican state Sen. Theresa Gavarone, one of the primary sponsors of the bill, challenged the ACLU’s legal action and said the problem it addresses is a real one.

“In the past two years, hundreds of noncitizens have been removed from Ohio’s voter rolls,” she said in an email. “Every single vote cast by a noncitizen disenfranchises a lawful Ohio voter.”

Voters have mixed views on the changes

Outside an early voting center in Wayne County, Ohio, retired steel worker Dan Walter, an independent voter, said he opposes requiring documentary proof of citizenship to vote.

“It’s to keep people from voting, it sounds to me like,” he said.

His wife, Jody, a retired aerospace executive and a Democrat, said she felt the same way about Ohio’s new requirement for registering to vote.

“A driver’s license doesn’t prove citizenship, and that’s all they ask for now,” she said. “It’s going to be an obstacle for so many people.”

Genia Fortune had a different view. A nurse, the Millersburg resident described herself as an independent and said she voted for President Barack Obama, a Democrat, and later for Trump. She believes Trump’s false claims that the 2020 election was stolen and sees requiring documentary proof of citizenship as a necessary precaution.

“I just feel like you need to be a citizen and show proof of ID,” she said.

Voting and election laws have become a regular target for legislatures

The Trump administration has pushed multiple strategies to influence this year’s midterm elections, most of them stymied by Congress or the courts.

Chris Diaz, director of legislative tracking at the Voting Rights Lab, said the group has seen several versions of the Republican president’s proposals passed by his allies in the states.

A recently released report by the group highlighted some of the key areas drawing Republican lawmakers’ attention, including mail balloting, voter ID and the hunt for noncitizens on voter rolls.

Noncitizen voting has been a focus of the Trump administration despite it being a rare problem. The U.S. Department of Justice recently announced it had brought charges in roughly 90 cases for various types of election misconduct, including 50 against people who are alleged to have voted as noncitizens. The U.S. had 227 million registered voters for the 2024 presidential election.

The Brennan Center for Justice has identified nearly 40 laws in 21 states taking effect this election season that will make it harder for eligible voters to register, stay on the rolls or cast ballots.

The report from the center, part of the New York University School of Law, found that many of the new laws target subsets of voters.

“What I want voters to take away from this is that elections are still run by the states and there are still people in many states who are trying to make it harder for you to vote,” said Sean Morales-Doyle, senior director of the center’s Voting Rights and Elections Program. “But that’s all the more reason to go make a plan to vote and participate.”

Fields and Smyth write for the Associated Press. Fields reported from Washington and Smyth reported from Wooster and Millersburg, Ohio.