Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Schumer seeks election security funding, legislation

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer wants Congress to boost funding for election security while deriding the Trump administration for failing to prepare for threats to the balloting next year.

In a letter to his Democratic colleagues Tuesday, Schumer said the administration is "not forcefully and adequately responding to the attack on our democracy" in light of the findings by special counsel Robert Mueller. He proposed three legislative remedies, predicting all could secure significant GOP backing, for the sort interference detailed in Mueller's report:


  • Provide additional funding for state and local election infrastructure and administration.
  • Fully fund the Election Assistance Commission.
  • Consider election security legislation, such as the stalled Secure Elections Act, which was sponsored by Republican James Lankford of Oklahoma last year.

At a press briefing, Schumer said Democrats were "going to push for a significantly higher number" than the $380 million given to states last year for election security. State officials have told Congress the money doesn't go far enough. He also urged the Senate to impose additional sanctions on Russian President Vladimir Putin and requested a meeting with intelligence officials to learn what the U.S. is doing to protect against interference with the voting of 2020.

Read More

A close up of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement badge.

The Supreme Court’s stay in Vasquez Perdomo v. Noem restores ICE authority in Los Angeles, igniting national debate over racial profiling, constitutional rights, and immigration enforcement.

Getty Images, Tennessee Witney

Public Safety or Profiling? Implications of Vasquez Perdomo v. Noem for Immigration Enforcement in the U.S.

Introduction

The Supreme Court’s recent decision in September 2025 to stay a lower court’s order in Vasquez Perdomo v. Noem marks a significant development in the ongoing debate over the balance between immigration enforcement and constitutional protections. The decision temporarily lifted a district court’s restrictions on Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations in the Los Angeles area, allowing agents to resume certain enforcement practices while litigation continues. Although the decision does not resolve the underlying constitutional issues, it does have significant implications for immigration policy, law enforcement authority, and civil liberties.

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

The Supreme Court’s stay in Vasquez Perdomo v. Noem restores ICE authority in Los Angeles, igniting national debate over racial profiling, constitutional rights, and immigration enforcement.

Getty Images, Tennessee Witney

Public Safety or Profiling? Implications of Vasquez Perdomo v. Noem for Immigration Enforcement in the U.S.

Introduction

The Supreme Court’s recent decision in September 2025 to stay a lower court’s order in Vasquez Perdomo v. Noem marks a significant development in the ongoing debate over the balance between immigration enforcement and constitutional protections. The decision temporarily lifted a district court’s restrictions on Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations in the Los Angeles area, allowing agents to resume certain enforcement practices while litigation continues. Although the decision does not resolve the underlying constitutional issues, it does have significant implications for immigration policy, law enforcement authority, and civil liberties.

Keep ReadingShow less