Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Montana will move toward a vote-by-mail November election

Montana Gov. Steve Bullock

Gov. Steve Bullock is on the ballot as a Senate candidate and says local officials asked him for the switch.

Joshua Lott/Getty Images

Gov. Steve Bullock is giving county election officials across Montana permission to conduct the general election entirely by mail, as they did for the June primary.

The governor, who will be on the November ballot as the Democratic candidate for the Senate, said Thursday he was issuing the order at the request of the county clerks and election administrators. During the all-mail primary, the state saw a surge in voter turnout.

California, Nevada, Vermont and Washington, D.C. have already opted to send each voter an absentee ballot this fall due to the coronavirus. Before the pandemic, five other states — Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Utah and Washington — already had plans to conduct an all-mail election.


Bullock's directive still requires counties to make in-person voting available if they choose to conduct the election primarily by mail. Absentee ballots will be sent by Oct. 9 with return postage paid.

"It only makes sense that we start preparing now to ensure that no Montanan will have to choose between their vote or their health," Bullock said. "They didn't have to in June and they shouldn't have to in November."

All 56 counties opted for an all-mail primary in June, and it's almost certain they will do the same for the general election. The primary saw the highest rate of voter participation in almost 50 years, with 55 percent of registered voters returning ballots — 10 percentage points higher than the 2016 primary.

Bullock is in a highly competitive race against Republican incumbent Steve Daines, who is seeking a second Senate term. President Trump — who has spent months asserting without evidence that expansive mail voting leads to fraud — is likely but not a lock to carry the state's three electoral votes, according to recent polls. The last Democrat to carry the state was Bill Clinton in 1992.


Read More

As Detainments Increase, Seattle Dedicates $4M to Legal Defense of Immigrants

The City of Seattle sits across Elliott Bay as activists march down Alki Beach with protest signs in support of immigrants on Feb. 2, 2025.

Photo: Alex Garland

As Detainments Increase, Seattle Dedicates $4M to Legal Defense of Immigrants

A $4 million budget increase for the Office of Immigrant and Refugee Affairs (OIRA) will go toward community grants and legal defense for detained immigrants, Mayor Katie Wilson's office announced.

Proposed in September 2025 amid a growing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) presence, nearly half the budget increase will help fund the City's Legal Defense Network (LDN), a program that provides legal representation to those who live, work, or go to school in Seattle during immigration proceedings.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Republic at 250: What History Teaches — and What Americans Must Choose
white red and blue textile

A Republic at 250: What History Teaches — and What Americans Must Choose

As the United States approaches both a consequential election cycle and the 250th anniversary of its founding, Americans stand at a crossroads the framers anticipated but hoped we would never reach: a moment when citizens must decide whether to allow the Republic to erode or restore it through vigilance. This is not about left or right. It is about whether we still share a common vision of the country we want to be — and whether we still believe in the same Republic.

The Founders never imagined “the land of the free” as a place dependent on benevolent leaders. They built a system in which the people — not the government — were the safeguards against overreach. James Madison warned that “the accumulation of all powers…in the same hands…may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny,” a reminder that freedom depends on restraint, not trust in any single individual. George Washington pledged that the Constitution would remain “the guide which I will never abandon,” signaling that loyalty to the Republic must always outweigh loyalty to any leader. These were not ceremonial lines. They were instructions — a blueprint for preventing institutional strain, polarization, and distrust we see today.

Keep ReadingShow less
A gavel.

How the erosion of the rule of law threatens American democracy, constitutional rights, judicial independence, and public trust in government institutions.

Getty Images, David Talukdar

When the Rule of Law Unravels, Democracy Begins to Collapse

There is one thread that holds democracy's cloth together. That is the Rule of Law. For the most part, we take the rule of law for granted; we don’t give it a second thought, even though we rely on it constantly. Yet, pull that thread, and the cloth of democracy frays and ultimately unravels.

The rule of law is defined as the principle under which all persons, institutions, and entities are accountable to laws that are: (1) clear and publicly promulgated; (2) equally enforced; (3) independently adjudicated; and (4) are consistent with international human rights principles.

Keep ReadingShow less
Children sitting down, holding signs that read, "Let Trans Kids Be," and "Gender Liberation Now."

Children hold signs during a “Rise Up for Trans Youth” demonstration in New York City on February 8, 2025. Patients, families and doctors rely on medical guidance in an increasingly hostile landscape, but recent statements — and how politicians interpret them — have only deepened uncertainty.

KENA BETANCUR/AFP/Getty Images

How Gender-Affirming Care Is Becoming a Political Test for Top Medical Groups

The largest medical association in the United States supports gender-affirming care — a stance it has reiterated in different ways over the last 10 years. But as Republicans press leading medical organizations on health care for transgender youth, the American Medical Association (AMA) is the latest group caught between political rhetoric and the complex realities of specialized care that few people receive.

As patients, families and doctors navigate this care in an increasingly confusing and hostile landscape, what medical groups say matters. But lately, what they’ve had to say — and how politicians interpret it — has only caused more uncertainty.

Keep ReadingShow less