With control of Congress on the line, next week’s midterms amount to a referendum on Trump, who has urged voters to pretend he is on the ballot Sign up for the Breaking News US email Hello and welcome to the US politics live blog. Donald Trump is tele-rallying from Mar-a-Lago with just three days to go before the midterm elections. On Sunday, he will make appearances at rallies in Iowa in Kansas in a reversal after he initially backed out . The top federal prosecutor in Alaska confirmed on Friday the existence of a criminal and a civil investigation into an alleged scheme by Mary Peltola’s campaign and national Democrats to confuse voters in the closely watched Senate race by recruiting a spoiler candidate who shares a name with the Republican incumbent, Dan Sullivan . Michigan Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed resisted a demand from his defeated primary rival, congresswoman Haley Stevens , that he apologize for criticism of US military aid to Israel on Friday – two days before they were scheduled to campaign together in Detroit. Early voting this cycle has set a record. More than 49 million Americans have already cast ballots, either in person or by mail, the Associated Press reported. Continue reading...
Results for “doj”
A federal judge Friday blocked the Trump administration from threatening election workers with criminal prosecution for counting ballots cast by registered voters the administration claims are ineligible. Why it matters: The emergency order, issued four days before the midterms , prohibits federal pressure to sideline ballots based solely on allegations of ineligibility and forces the Justice Department to walk back threats it already sent to election officials. The big picture: The ruling adds to a series of courtroom losses for the administration, as federal officials intensify election-related investigations and challenges across the country. Judges are warning that federal threats and investigations are driving citizens out of elections and putting lawful votes at risk. Driving the news: U.S. District Judge Trina Thompson found that the Justice and Homeland Security departments likely violated the Voting Rights Act's prohibition on voter intimidation and exceeded their constitutional authority over elections. Her temporary restraining order prohibits demands that states remove registered voters, withhold their ballots or stop counting votes solely because the administration claims the voters are ineligible. It also bars threats of criminal prosecution against election workers who refuse those demands or process ballots in accordance with election laws. The judge ordered prosecutors to disclose pending search warrant applications, grand jury subpoenas and other demands related to its lists of allegedly ineligible voters. What she's saying: Thompson found the administration's actions forced election workers to choose between complying with "Defendants' unlawful demands" or risk criminal prosecution for performing their jobs. "In the lead-up to the election," she wrote, "high-ranking DOJ and DHS officials have engaged in a campaign to intimidate, threaten, and coerce state and local officials and employees who are engaged in administering the ongoing midterm 2026 e
Order says local officials can’t be forced to separate or stop counting ballots that the government deems to be disputed A federal judge has barred the justice department from threatening or coercing election workers to stop processing ballots. The order issued late Friday also bars the justice department from demanding local election officials segregate or not count ballots that the federal government deems may have been cast by ineligible voters. Continue reading...
The Justice Department is investigating the Arizona voter registration efforts of three Democratic-aligned groups after an "undercover" video purported to show volunteers willing to register non-citizens. Why it matters: The Friday announcement comes four days before the Nov. 3 election, and nearly a month after Arizona's registration deadline passed, timing one Republican former elections official says could sow unnecessary doubt about the results. Driving the news: In a news release , the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Arizona announced it has "opened a case into recent reporting about three non-profit organizations registering non-citizens to vote in Arizona." The groups are nonprofits Worker Power and Stand Indivisible AZ, as well as When We Count, a voter-registration program of the Democratic National Committee. DNC spokesperson Angelo Fernández Hernández wrote to Axios, "We are not aware of any instances of our fellows … registering a noncitizen to vote." He called the allegations "fabricated" and "inspired by right-wing operatives." The other two groups did not immediately respond. State of play: The "recent reporting" appears to reference an Oct. 22 video by Muckraker , a right-wing media outlet with a marred past . The video shows a man posing as a felon or noncitizen and asking if he can register to vote. The U.S. attorney's office has "already referred the matter to the FBI," per the announcement. Between the lines: In letters to both Republican Maricopa County Recorder Justin Heap and Democratic Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, Courchaine wrote that it "appears these organizations … may have violated" a state law about knowingly registering ineligible persons. However, the video does not show them registering anyone, only discussing it. U.S. Attorney Timothy Courchaine asked both men for "a review of registrations submitted by these groups to ensure only United States Citizens were registered to vote." The U.S. Attorney's Office did
A federal appeals court rejected the Justice Department's emergency bid to set aside mail ballots tied to more than 20,000 California voters the Trump administration suspects are noncitizens. Why it matters: The 2–1 ruling leaves California's election procedures intact just days before the midterms, with the judges citing doubts about the DOJ's voter list and the risk of disenfranchising eligible voters. The ruling is a major setback for a DOJ that has doubled down on unsubstantiated claims of widespread voter fraud in the Golden State. What they're saying: The majority cited the lower court's finding that the DOJ's process for identifying suspected noncitizens was "not credible," undermining its claims. "Granting [the United States]'s request would provoke catastrophic change, upending the administration of the election," it wrote, quoting the district court's finding. "There is a material risk that granting the United States its requested relief would result in disenfranchisement and could jeopardize [Los Angeles] County's entire election." The other side: Ninth U.S. Circuit Judge Patrick Bumatay dissented, arguing that counting votes from noncitizens dilutes the power of citizens. "The federal government proposes a modest remedy—stopping California from mixing the ballots of citizens and suspected noncitizens. This solution would not cancel any vote but would allow time to verify the eligibility of suspected noncitizens." The White House and the Justice Department did not immediately respond to Axios' request for comment. Catch up quick: The DOJ sued California in mid October for refusing to segregate the ballots it asserted were sent to noncitizens. A district court denied the request for an injunction, deciding that the federal law the DOJ was relying on to bring the suit did not supersede existing state law. The Trump administration appealed, leading to Friday's decision. The administration can now appeal again to the Supreme Court. Zoom out: Trump has continu
The 2026 midterms already face a messy pileup of lawsuits and ballot battles, raising fears about election confidence before voters even finish casting ballots . Why it matters: Election challenges aren't unusual, but as the Trump administration continues to make false claims about widespread voter fraud, officials are juggling fights over voter lists, mail-ballot rules and election certification challenges. What they're saying: "The types of challenges that we are seeing pre-election, this close to election day, are very unusual, and mostly because they are coming from the federal government," Jonathan Diaz of the Campaign Legal Center told Axios. "These lawsuits are frivolous," Diaz said, adding they could "create doubt in the minds of the public about the legitimacy of the election process." The other side: The White House referred Axios to comments President Trump made to the media. The Department of Justice did not respond to Axios' request for comment. Here's some of the ways chaos and uncertainty have shaped the 2026 midterms: California In the Golden State, the Trump administration asked state election officials to set aside ballots from roughly 20,000 registered voters whom the DOJ suspects are noncitizens. A federal judge rejected that push Wednesday night, warning that the administration lacked sufficient evidence to justify potentially disenfranchising eligible voters. The judge noted that the DOJ had made similar claims in neighboring Nevada, where election officials determined that 185 voters the DOJ had flagged as noncitizens were actually U.S. citizens. Diaz told Axios that, from his perspective as a voting-rights advocate, the California battle is "not a real lawsuit. It's a political press release that they just happened to submit to the court." The other side: The White House directed questions about the ruling to remarks Trump made Thursday, in which he said "California is very corrupt," and the state's elections are "extremely corrupt." He did n
Operation Ghostbusters targets ghost students and identity theft in a student aid fraud scheme with potentially hundreds of millions in taxpayer losses.
The Justice Department failed to secure an indictment against Cassidy Hutchinson , a former White House aide who testified about President Trump's actions on Jan. 6, multiple media outlets reported Tuesday. Why it matters: The grand jury's refusal to indict Hutchinson is another blow to the DOJ in its ongoing effort to prosecute President Trump's perceived political enemies . The latest: A Justice Department lawyer told a magistrate judge Tuesday that a grand jury could not agree on an indictment, according to the Washington Post. The lawyer, whom the Post identified as Neville S. Hedley, the division's acting senior litigation counsel, did not say who the indictment referenced, but multiple sources told the Post and other outlets that it relates to Hutchinson. Catch up quick: Hutchinson's 2022 testimony before Congress revealed several bombshells about the Trump administration's actions leading up to and on Jan. 6, 2021. She testified that she had been told Trump lunged at a Secret Service agent who refused to drive him to the Capitol, that Trump knew some of his supporters were armed, and that former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows had been warned of potential violence on Capitol Hill. She also described Trump's reluctance to call on his supporters to back down as violence unfolded at the Capitol. Zoom out: Republicans have long disputed Hutchinson's testimony, and Secret Service agents she identified as familiar with the events of that day have also said they do not recall some of the incidents she described. Earlier this year, Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.) sent a criminal referral of Hutchinson to the Justice Department for investigation. House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) co-signed it. Criminal referrals are recommendations to the Justice Department and do not necessarily indicate criminal wrongdoing or result in charges. The intrigue: In a break from precedent, the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, led by Trump loyalist Harmeet Dhi
Former FBI Director James Comey is facing new federal charges, according to a charging document made public Monday. Why it matters: This marks the third time the Trump administration has charged Comey. He has been a subject of the president's ire since his dismissal from the first Trump administration in 2017. Driving the news: Prosecutors allege Comey directed the disclosure of national defense information to a reporter through one or more co-conspirators in October 2016, while he was serving as FBI director . He is charged with participating in the transmission of national defense information and conspiracy to transmit national defense information. The case has been ongoing under seal since early October. What they're saying: A U.S. Department of Justice spokesperson told Axios that the case is an "ongoing criminal investigation" and declined to comment further. The White House referred Axios to the DOJ for comment. The other side: Comey's attorney Patrick Fitzgerald said in a statement posted to Comey's Instagram account that the former FBI director "steadfastly maintains his innocence" and will fight the latest charges. Fitzgerald said the case concerns an Oct. 5, 2016, New York Times article that two separate teams of prosecutors investigated during President Trump's first administration. Both teams decided not to bring charges, he said. He also welcomed U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden's decision to unseal the case. Catch up quick: Trump fired Comey in 2017 amid the FBI's investigation into alleged Russian interference in the 2016 election. His dismissal led to the appointment of Robert Mueller as special counsel, tasked with uncovering any links to Russian interference in the election. Mueller's investigation report — released in 2019 — documented extensive Russian interference in the 2016 election but did not establish a criminal conspiracy between Trump's campaign and Russia. Zoom out: The charges were made public the same day a federal judge ruled that
With just nine days until the midterms, the Trump administration is escalating its assault on two of the Department of Justice's most sacred guardrails: Independence from the White House. Restraint before elections. Why it matters: President Trump's DOJ has shattered the traditional calm of a pre-election period with a barrage of politically sensitive investigations, prosecutions and eleventh-hour efforts to influence the vote. Zoom in: The Justice Department's most aggressive election intervention yet came this week in Alaska, where a preemptive lawsuit seeks to delay certification of the state's U.S. Senate results — if the Democrat wins. The DOJ argues that a second candidate, Dan J. Sullivan Jr., could confuse voters and siphon support from the Republican incumbent, Sen. Dan S. Sullivan. The administration wants certification halted if Sen. Sullivan loses to Democrat Mary Peltola but could have won with votes cast for the other Sullivan, pending an investigation into voter intent. Between the lines: Alaska's Supreme Court already ruled that the second Sullivan belongs on the ballot, and the state's ranked-choice system allows voters to rank both candidates. Legal experts question the DOJ's authority to block certification of a state-run election, or how officials could determine voters' intentions without compromising ballot secrecy. Peltola's campaign and national Democrats have moved to intervene in the lawsuit, challenging the administration's preemptive attempt to halt certification. Zoom out: Alaska is just one front in an October offensive aimed at rooting out alleged election fraud, investigating prominent Democrats and relitigating Trump's oldest political grievances. On Oct. 7, Trump established a White House committee to investigate alleged mortgage fraud by Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook , authorizing DOJ personnel to participate in proceedings that could lead to her removal. Cook denies wrongdoing. On Oct. 12, federal agents searched Rep. Ilhan O
The Trump administration sued Alaska on Thursday to delay certification of election results if incumbent Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan loses. Why it matters: The race between incumbent Sullivan, Democrat Mary Peltola , and retired teacher Dan Sullivan has been marked by controversy, with Republicans accusing Democrats of trying to confuse voters by planting a candidate with the same name. Alaska's use of ranked-choice voting, which eliminates candidates in rounds if no one gets 50% of the initial vote, complicates matters. "An election result may be impacted by voter confusion if: (1) Senator Sullivan does not win the election; and (2) had all votes cast for Daniel J. Sullivan been cast instead for Senator Sullivan and Alaska's rank-choice process played out accordingly, Senator Sullivan would have won the election," the lawsuit , filed in Alaska District Court, states. Zoom in: Because of a previous Alaska Supreme Court decision and Sullivan's name already being on the ballot, the administration contended in the lawsuit that the only means to ensure that the winner of the race is voters' choice "is to ensure that the certification is not impacted" by his candidacy. The lawsuit requests a delay in certification until after an investigation determines "whether votes cast for Daniel J. Sullivan were meant to be cast for Senator Sullivan." What they're saying: "Alaska's Division of Elections determined that Mr. Daniel J. Sullivan's candidacy was intended to mislead voters and compromise the fairness of the ballot," a DOJ spokesperson said in a statement. "Therefore, the Justice Department, consistent with the National Voter Registration Act enacted by Congress, is taking the necessary steps to ensure that this frivolous candidacy does not undermine the integrity of Alaska's election or the will of its voters." The White House referred Axios to the DOJ. President Trump told reporters Friday that he told the DOJ to file the suit against Alaska. He then explained the situa
Democratic groups sued the Trump administration Tuesday, accusing it of using unfounded voter fraud claims to muscle its way into how states run elections. Why it matters: The groups say the administration is issuing a stream of threats to intimidate and bully both voters and election officials. They're asking a judge to declare the administration's actions unlawful and block further interference. Driving the news: The lawsuit condemns the administration for targeting state voter rolls by insisting that local officials review federally compiled lists of alleged noncitizens on their voter rolls. The suit also alleges that the administration is improperly demanding that states deny ballots to registered voters based on those federal lists. The Democrat-aligned groups also claim the administration has attempted to intimidate state and local officials by threatening them with jail time or prosecution. Case in point: The lawsuit cites a Department of Homeland Security claim that Nevada had nearly 16,000 noncitizens on its voter rolls. The department later claimed that it had confirmed 185 of those people were noncitizens. State records later indicated that all 185 were citizens. The DOJ also demanded that California deny ballots to more than 20,000 people based on a federal list that flagged them as suspected ineligible voters, the lawsuit says. A preliminary investigation by Los Angeles County investigators found that more than 25% of those flagged listed a U.S. birthplace, and others already had their voter registrations canceled. What they're saying: "Department of Justice and DHS officials have sought to bolster their interference efforts through a persistent stream of threats and intimidation directed towards state and local election officials across the country," the groups' attorneys wrote. "Defendants' coercive threats of legal retaliation against state officials, including even potential imprisonment, for simply following state law and aiding registered voters i