Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Both sides back off, for the moment, in California fight over drop boxes

California ballot drop box

California Republicans have agreed to rebrand their ballot collection boxes so they aren't confused with official drop boxes, like the one above.

Mario Tama/Getty Images

An uneasy truce in the ballot drop box war has lasted through the weekend in California.

The state Republican Party has removed some of the vote collection bins wrongly labeled "official" that it had placed in areas with hot congressional contests. Two of the state's top Democratic officials say they are taking a trust-but-verify approach to the move.

There's solid potential for the dispute to flare again, however, reigniting a national dispute about how aggressively party operatives may collect their allies' ballots. President Trump, normally the most prominent among critics who deride this so-called ballot harvesting, now asserts his party is doing exactly the right thing in California.


Republicans said Friday they will continue to maintain dozens of other boxes they've deployed that don't have the deceptive labels. Secretary of State Alax Padilla responded by promising to issue subpoenas to unearth details about the GOP effort and Attorney General Xavier Becerra said he was still deciding whether to press charges of election law violations.

Republicans set up more than 100 of the bins a week ago at churches, political offices, gun shops and other conservative-friendly spots across parts of Los Angeles, Orange and Fresno counties. GOP candidates are in the hunt to take back House seats won by the Democrats in those places two years ago, in part on the strength of that party's finely tuned vote collection operation that year.

Padilla and Becerra ordered the GOP to remove the boxes, arguing they crossed the line of the state's ballot harvesting law, which was significantly loosened in 2018.

Instead, the GOP said it would take three steps the law requires: modify the labels on the grey metal cubes to avoid confusion, assign volunteers to sign the backs of the envelopes when taking custody of them, and turn in the contents of the boxes to county officials every three days. That was good enough for state officials to temporarily stand down.

"We may be told one thing in person or we may hear or receive reports of activities but until we get evidence of it we have to assume everyone is trying to comply with the law," Becerra told reporters.

"If there is any indication of state law being violated we will not hesitate to act on it immediately," Padilla quickly added.

But the Democratic officials said they would not seek to disqualify ballots placed in the GOP bins without the necessary signature, a concession to the sensitivities of being accused of voter suppression.

The subpoenas seek the exact locations of each ballot box and the number of votes collected in each. State GOP spokesman Hector Barajas said the party might expand its operation and would not answer either question, labeling the inquiry "a thuggish voter intimidation and vote suppression tactic by our Democratic attorney general and secretary of state."

The dispute gained national attention because California, the most populous state, is also one that has switched to an almost entirely remote voting process for November because of the coronavirus pandemic. All registered voters have been sent a ballot, which can be returned by mail, in a drop box or at a voting center.

More than 1.5 million ballots have already been returned, 10 times the number two weeks before the 2016 election. Although the state's 55 electoral votes are firmly in the Joe Biden column, four congressional races and penty of downballot contests are too close to call.

For years, Republicans have decried the state's collection rules for fomenting election fraud. A House Republican study this spring raised concerns about "politically weaponized ballot harvesting" in the state but offered no proof of malfeasance in the 2018 midterms, when the GOP saw solid election night leads in several congressional races evaporate when all the ballots collected by third parties were tallied.

The most prominent case of ballot collection fraud is that of a Republican operative in North Carolina, who was indicted on felony charges connected with a scheme to collect so many ballots in a close congressional race two years ago that a do-over election was ordered. It is illegal in North Carolina for anyone other than a close relative or guardian to deliver another voter's absentee ballot. In two dozen states, any such third-party involvement is not allowed.

Read More

news app
New platforms help overcome biased news reporting
Tero Vesalainen/Getty Images

The Selective Sanctity of Death: When Empathy Depends on Skin Color

Rampant calls to avoid sharing the video of Charlie Kirk’s death have been swift and emphatic across social media. “We need to keep our souls clean,” journalists plead. “Where are social media’s content moderators?” “How did we get so desensitized?” The moral outrage is palpable; the demands for human dignity urgent and clear.

But as a Black woman who has been forced to witness the constant virality of Black death, I must ask: where was this widespread anger for George Floyd? For Philando Castile? For Daunte Wright? For Tyre Nichols?

Keep ReadingShow less
Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making
Mount Rushmore
Photo by John Bakator on Unsplash

Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making

No one can denounce the New York Yankee fan for boasting that her favorite ballclub has won more World Series championships than any other. At 27 titles, the Bronx Bombers claim more than twice their closest competitor.

No one can question admirers of the late, great Chick Corea, or the equally astonishing Alison Krauss, for their virtually unrivaled Grammy victories. At 27 gold statues, only Beyoncé and Quincy Jones have more in the popular categories.

Keep ReadingShow less
A close up of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement badge.

Trump’s mass deportations promise security but deliver economic pain, family separation, and chaos. Here’s why this policy is failing America.

Getty Images, Tennessee Witney

The Cruel Arithmetic of Trump’s Immigration Crackdown

As summer 2025 winds down, the Trump administration’s deportation machine is operating at full throttle—removing over one million people in six months and fulfilling a campaign promise to launch the “largest deportation operation in American history.” For supporters, this is a victory lap for law and order. For the rest of the lot, it’s a costly illusion—one that trades complexity for spectacle and security for chaos.

Let’s dispense with the fantasy first. The administration insists that mass deportations will save billions, reduce crime, and protect American jobs. But like most political magic tricks, the numbers vanish under scrutiny. The Economic Policy Institute warns that this policy could destroy millions of jobs—not just for immigrants but for U.S.-born workers in sectors like construction, elder care, and child care. That’s not just a fiscal cliff—it is fewer teachers, fewer caregivers, and fewer homes built. It is inflation with a human face. In fact, child care alone could shrink by over 15%, leaving working parents stranded and employers scrambling.

Meanwhile, the Peterson Institute projects a drop in GDP and employment, while the Penn Wharton School’s Budget Model estimates that deporting unauthorized workers over a decade would slash Social Security revenue and inflate deficits by nearly $900 billion. That’s not a typo. It’s a fiscal cliff dressed up as border security.

And then there’s food. Deporting farmworkers doesn’t just leave fields fallow—it drives up prices. Analysts predict a 10% spike in food costs, compounding inflation and squeezing families already living paycheck to paycheck. In California, where immigrant renters are disproportionately affected, eviction rates are climbing. The Urban Institute warns that deportations are deepening the housing crisis by gutting the construction workforce. So much for protecting American livelihoods.

But the real cost isn’t measured in dollars. It’s measured in broken families, empty classrooms, and quiet despair. The administration has deployed 10,000 armed service members to the border and ramped up “self-deportation” tactics—policies so harsh they force people to leave voluntarily. The result: Children skipping meals because their parents fear applying for food assistance; Cancer patients deported mid-treatment; and LGBTQ+ youth losing access to mental health care. The Human Rights Watch calls it a “crueler world for immigrants.” That’s putting it mildly.

This isn’t targeted enforcement. It’s a dragnet. Green card holders, long-term residents, and asylum seekers are swept up alongside undocumented workers. Viral videos show ICE raids at schools, hospitals, and churches. Lawsuits are piling up. And the chilling effect is real: immigrant communities are retreating from public life, afraid to report crimes or seek help. That’s not safety. That’s silence. Legal scholars warn that the administration’s tactics—raids at schools, churches, and hospitals—may violate Fourth Amendment protections and due process norms.

Even the administration’s security claims are shaky. Yes, border crossings are down—by about 60%, thanks to policies like “Remain in Mexico.” But deportation numbers haven’t met the promised scale. The Migration Policy Institute notes that monthly averages hover around 14,500, far below the millions touted. And the root causes of undocumented immigration—like visa overstays, which account for 60% of cases—remain untouched.

Crime reduction? Also murky. FBI data shows declines in some areas, but experts attribute this more to economic trends than immigration enforcement. In fact, fear in immigrant communities may be making things worse. When people won’t talk to the police, crimes go unreported. That’s not justice. That’s dysfunction.

Public opinion is catching up. In February, 59% of Americans supported mass deportations. By July, that number had cratered. Gallup reports a 25-point drop in favor of immigration cuts. The Pew Research Center finds that 75% of Democrats—and a growing number of independents—think the policy goes too far. Even Trump-friendly voices like Joe Rogan are balking, calling raids on “construction workers and gardeners” a betrayal of common sense.

On social media, the backlash is swift. Users on X (formerly Twitter) call the policy “ineffective,” “manipulative,” and “theater.” And they’re not wrong. This isn’t about solving immigration. It’s about staging a show—one where fear plays the villain and facts are the understudy.

The White House insists this is what voters wanted. But a narrow electoral win isn’t a blank check for policies that harm the economy and fray the social fabric. Alternatives exist: Targeted enforcement focused on violent offenders; visa reform to address overstays; and legal pathways to fill labor gaps. These aren’t radical ideas—they’re pragmatic ones. And they don’t require tearing families apart to work.

Trump’s deportation blitz is a mirage. It promises safety but delivers instability. It claims to protect jobs but undermines the very sectors that keep the country running. It speaks the language of law and order but acts with the recklessness of a demolition crew. Alternatives exist—and they work. Cities that focus on community policing and legal pathways report higher public safety and stronger economies. Reform doesn’t require cruelty. It requires courage.

Keep ReadingShow less
Multi-colored speech bubbles overlapping.

Stanford’s Strengthening Democracy Challenge shows a key way to reduce political violence: reveal that most Americans reject it.

Getty Images, MirageC

In the Aftermath of Assassinations, Let’s Show That Americans Overwhelmingly Disapprove of Political Violence

In the aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s assassination—and the assassination of Minnesota state legislator Melissa Hortman only three months ago—questions inevitably arise about how to reduce the likelihood of similar heinous actions.

Results from arguably the most important study focused on the U.S. context, the Strengthening Democracy Challenge run by Stanford University, point to one straightforward answer: show people that very few in the other party support political violence. This approach has been shown to reduce support for political violence.

Keep ReadingShow less