Connect with us

The Dictatorship

Trump, apparently terrified of the midterms, is pushing Texas to change the game

Published

on

Trump, apparently terrified of the midterms, is pushing Texas to change the game

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott announced Wednesday that the state Legislature would return to Austin later this summer for a special session. On its own, the announcement was not surprising: With the Texas Constitution limiting regular sessions of the Legislature to only 140 days a year, these bonus legislative sessions have become the norm for governing a state with over 31 million people. What was surprising was one of the agenda items that Abbott listed for the session: drafting legislation that “provides a revised congressional redistricting plan in light of constitutional concerns raised by the U.S. Department of Justice.”

A redistricting push in 2025 is an oddity. States typically only redraw their congressional districts every 10 years in response to the U.S. census results. But the reason Abbott claims this shuffle is necessary is a gross smoke screen that mocks the Voting Rights Act and the protections it provides.

The reason Abbott claims this shuffle is necessary is a gross smoke screen

The Justice Department concerns that the governor cites are a reference to a lawsuit filed in 2021, alleging that Texas’ current congressional map violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. In particular, the DOJ accused Texas of “creating redistricting plans that deny or abridge the rights of Latino and Black voters to vote on account of their race, color or membership in a language minority group.” It was just the latest in a long history of complaints against Texas, which has had to repeatedly redraw its maps since 1964 in the face of federal judges’ rulings.

Four years after it was filed, the 2021 lawsuit recently went to trial in El Paso — but the Justice Department is no longer one of the plaintiffs. The Trump administration had the DOJ withdraw from the lawsuit in March, leaving civil rights groups like LULAC and the Texas NAACP to continue the court battle without the legal firepower the federal government provides. And while Abbott’s phrasing implies Texas legislators will work to address the alleged discrimination, his administration is continuing to fight back against the claims in that case.

In fact, the major driving force for this redistricting push is coming not from the Justice Department — or from Texas Republicans — but the White House. President Donald Trump has reportedly been leaning on Abbott to rejigger the state’s 38 congressional districts to help protect the slim Republican majority in the House ahead of the 2026 midterms. The president, terrified of a repeat of the 2018 midterms that opened the door to two impeachments against him, has zeroed in on even more extreme gerrymandering to limit Democrats’ midterm gains.

The New York Times reported last month that “President Trump’s political team is encouraging Republican leaders in Texas to … turn Democratic districts red by adding reliably Republican voters from neighboring Republican districts.” As NBC News noted Wednesdaythere are at least a few potential gains to be had:

Trump carried two of the 13 Texas seats that Democrats hold, the South Texas districts of Reps. Henry Cuellar and Vicente Gonzalez. Cuellar’s district went to Trump by 7 points, while Gonzalez’s went to Trump by 4 points, according to analysis by NBC News’ Decision Desk. Cuellar won his seat by less than 6 points, while Gonzalez was victorious by less than 3 points, illustrating the slim margins at play in the region.

But the Times also reported that “congressional Republicans from Texas professed little interest in redrawing their districts” ahead of an election that historically would benefit the Democrats. Since 2003Texas has spent the last several redistricting cycles maximizing the GOP’s grasp on the House delegation. The state’s demographics have shifted in that time, leading to a worry that the move could wind up endangering Republicans more than hurting Democrats. When you add in California reportedly mulling a tit-for-tat redistricting effort and the long to-do list ahead of Texas lawmakersthe whole scheme seems very high-risk/mid-tier reward.

Importantly, none of this affects the issue that Abbott claimed as the reason for needing redistricting at all.

Importantly, none of this affects the issue that Abbott claimed as the reason for needing redistricting at all. The Texas Republican Party didn’t even bother repeating the governor’s false pretense in its statement on the special session, calling redistricting “an essential step to preserving GOP control in Congress and advancing President Trump’s America First agenda.”

Cracking open Democratic-controlled districts to gerrymander in new GOP-leaning voters would more likely result in an increase in minority voters’ disenfranchisement. There would inevitably be even more lawsuits to that effect, slowing the new map’s implementation. And while the U.S. Supreme Court has been unfriendly to the Voting Rights Act overallthe justices in 2023 ordered Alabama to redraw its districts to create a new majority, or near majority, Black district.

Despite the warning signs, Abbott still decided to move ahead with gerrymandering efforts just as Trump visits areas of the state affected by last week’s deadly floods. Abbott’s willingness to exploit legitimate concerns over whether Texan minorities are being fully represented in Congress shows that he knows how risky the real reasoning is both politically and legally. Over the next weeks and months, this play could wind up being decisive in determining control of the House next year — or it could blow up in his and Trump’s faces and leave members of their own party more vulnerable to losing their seats than before.

Hayes Brown

Hayes Brown is a writer and editor for BLN Daily, where he helps frame the news of the day for readers. He was previously at BuzzFeed News and holds a degree in international relations from Michigan State University.

Read More

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Dictatorship

Iran moves to take permanent control of Strait of Hormuz, a vital shipping choke point

Published

on

Iran announced on Thursday that it was drafting a “protocol” that would allow it to “monitor transit” by oil tankers through the Strait of Hormuzthe strategic waterway Tehran has shut downsending oil and gas prices soaring in the U.S. and across the world.

Kazem Gharibabadi, Iran’s deputy foreign minister for legal and international affairs, said tanker traffic through the narrow route “should be supervised and coordinated” between Iran and Oman, the two countries that border the strait, according to a translation of a report from Iran’s state news agency cited by CNBC.

“Of course, these requirements will not mean restrictions, but rather to facilitate and ensure safe passage and provide better services to ships that pass through this route,” Gharibabadi said according to the report.

President Donald Trump has suggested that the U.S. may leave it to other countries to end Iran’s de facto blockade of the strait, which it enforces by firing missiles at tankers. Trump has called on European nations to do so, but experts say Europe lacks the military resources to halt Iranian attacks on tankers for the long term.

Iranian and Omani officials did not respond to requests for comment from MS NOW.

For decades, the strait has been an international waterway, controlled by no country, that ships from all nations could transit.

Gregory Brew, a senior Iran and oil analyst at the Eurasia Group, said that if Iran manages to take control of the Strait of Hormuz permanently, it would be a “colossal win” for the country.

“It’s a massive strategic win, given that Iran has demonstrated that it can close the strait,” Brew told MS NOW. “It’s a huge financial win.”

Brew added that if Iran gains long-term control of the straitit would be more powerful than it was before the Trump administration attacked it. Iran’s parliament passed a law to begin charging “tolls” of up to $2 million per ship, which could mean as much as $100 billion in annual revenue — or the equivalent of Iran’s current annual oil export earnings.

“It’s not innocuous,” Brew said, referring to the protocol announced on Thursday. “Iran has passed legislation and is now claiming to be coordinating with Oman in establishing joint management of the Strait of Hormuz.”

Brew predicted that Oman, which has less oil and wealth than other Gulf nations, may be willing to accept a temporary arrangement that could help end the conflict.

“The Omanis are probably hedging; they’ve always tried to manage their relationship with Iran, and they lose relatively little by cooperating with Iran right now to ease pressure on the strait,” Brew said. “The bigger question is whether they continue to cooperate after the war.”

Ted Singer, a former senior CIA official who oversaw the agency’s operations in the Middle East, said Iranian officials are likely trying to see what they can achieve.

“I wouldn’t see this as a fork in the road,” Singer told MS NOW.

Singer, who served as a CIA station chief in five different countries over a 35-year career, said Iranian officials could be trying to stoke division between gulf countries.

“The Iranians are good at doing more than one thing at a time,” he said. “Why not stake out a maximalist position on tolls, then toss out options to roil the waters?”

The United Arab Emirates, for example, is adamantly opposed to Iran taking control of the strait.

“The Iranians play multi-dimensional chess,” said Singer, now a senior adviser to the Chertoff Group, a security consulting firm run by Michael Chertoff, who served as secretary of Homeland Security in the George W. Bush administration.

“Try to create division between Oman and the rest of the Gulf countries,” Singer said. “Why not fiddle around with this and see if something sticks?”

David Rohde headshot

David Rohde

David Rohde is the senior national security reporter for MS NOW. Previously he was the senior executive editor for national security and law for NBC News.

Ian Sherwood is the director of international newsgathering for MS NOW, a former executive editor for NBC News and a former deputy Washington bureau chief for the BBC.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

Thursday’s Mini-Report, 4.2.26

Published

on

Thursday’s Mini-Report, 4.2.26

Today’s edition of quick hits.

* Targeting Iranian infrastructure: “President Trump celebrated the destruction of a bridge near Tehran on Thursday, warning on social media that there was ‘much more to follow.’ The attack on the B1 bridge between Tehran and the nearby city of Karaj killed eight people and wounded 95, according to Fars, a semiofficial Iranian news agency.”

* I don’t think the speech worked: “The price of oil rose sharply and stocks wavered on Thursday after President Trump, in an address from the White House the day before, said the war against Iran was ‘nearing completion’ but failed to offer a concrete timeline and committed to more attacks. In the 19-minute address, Mr. Trump said U.S. forces would hit Iran ‘extremely hard over the next two to three weeks.’”

* Reversing one of Noem’s worst ideas: “Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin on Wednesday rescinded a rule that DHS expenditures over $100,000 be personally approved by his office, ending a widely criticized policy implemented by his predecessor Kristi Noem that critics said put a particular burden on the Federal Emergency Management Agency ’s work aiding disaster response and recovery.”

* The latest on the ballroom: “Donald Trump’s handpicked National Capital Planning Commission voted Thursday to authorize the president’s plan to erect a gilded 90,000-square-foot White House ballroom in place of the historic East Wing, which was destroyed last fall to make way for the ballroom.”

* Remember when Congress, by constitutional mandate, had the power of the purse? “President Donald Trump said Thursday he will soon sign an order to pay all Department of Homeland Security employees who have gone without paychecks during the record-long partial government shutdown that has reached 48 days.”

* A year after “Liberation Day,” there’s fresh tariff news: “President Donald Trump announced Thursday he will levy tariffs as high as 100 percent on some name-brand pharmaceuticals and is adjusting tariffs on products that contain steel and aluminum, the administration’s first move to expand duties since the Supreme Court dealt his trade agenda a blow in February.”

* The latest from Artemis II: “NASA’s latest update about the Artemis II moon mission shows a breathtaking view of Earth as the Orion capsule with four astronauts on board orbits tens of thousands of miles above. Hitching a ride beyond Earth’s atmosphere atop NASA’s powerful Space Launch System rocket, the three Americans and one Canadian selected for the mission are preparing to begin heading toward the moon.”

See you tomorrow.

Steve Benen is a producer for “The Rachel Maddow Show,” the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He’s also the bestselling author of “Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans’ War on the Recent Past.”

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

Judge weighs legality of Trump’s planned arch near Arlington National Cemetery

Published

on

Judge weighs legality of Trump’s planned arch near Arlington National Cemetery

A federal judge is weighing whether the Trump administration can legally build a 250-foot arch just across the Potomac River from the Vietnam and Lincoln memorials, as three veterans who fought in Vietnam have argued the project would violate federal law and permanently alter one of the country’s most sacred landscapes.

Judge Tanya Chutkan declined on Thursday to issue a preliminary injunction, instead asking the parties to report by 5 p.m. on Friday whether they can agree to halt groundbreaking while the case proceeds. If no agreement is reached, she will ask the executive branch to provide supplemental sworn declarations disclosing any awards, grants, contracts, permits or other relevant information related to the arch’s construction.

The suit was brought by three Vietnam War veterans and an architectural historian, who argued the project would obstruct views of the Vietnam War and Lincoln memorials from Arlington National Cemetery. The plaintiffs contended the planned arch would violate federal laws governing historic sites and monuments, and the White House cannot lawfully proceed without congressional authorization.

The plaintiffs cited Trump’s various Truth Social posts and public statements to support their claim that construction is underway, pointing to design specifications, a target completion date of July 4 and renderings backed by a White House fact sheet. They also argued the National Park Service must sign off on any use of the land before construction begins.

President Donald Trump told reporters in January that his proposed arch “will be the most beautiful in the world,” and is already “being built.” He also shared renderings of the arch on his Truth Social account.

The government’s attorney, Bradley Craigmyle, argued that Trump’s media and social media statements constitute hearsay. Chutkan pushed back sharply, saying Trump’s posts are admissible as statements by a party. Throughout the hearing, Craigmyle argued the project is in the conceptual phase despite the president’s statements.

Today’s hearing comes as the National Capital Planning Commission voted 9-1, with two abstentions, to approve construction for Trump’s 90,000-square foot ballroom at the White House, clearing the final procedural hurdle for the project. Chutkan referenced the ballroom case during the hearing, saying, “If we haven’t had the whole White House ballroom situation, this might be a little more academic than it is now.”

Selena Kuznikov contributed to this article.

Peggy Helman is a desk associate at MS NOW.

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending