Disney channels, including ABC and ESPN, are no longer available to YouTube TV users after the parties were unable to reach an agreement on a new content distribution agreement. The Disney Channel, FX, and Nat Geo are among the other networks that have disappeared from Google’s subscription TV service.
In a blog post published late Thursday, Google’s premium TV service announced that Disney had acted on its promise to halt its programming while the talks were ongoing. The collapse might affect Saturday’s NBA, NFL, and NHL games as well as several college football games.
With over 9 million users, YouTube is the biggest online TV provider in the United States. Disney’s Hulu comes in second with almost half as many customers.
Warnings scrolling across their screens in recent weeks have made viewers aware of the disagreement. Disney, according to YouTube, used the threat of a blackout as a negotiation tool to get its members to pay more. According to YouTube, Disney’s decision to remove its material also helps its own streaming services, Hulu + Live TV and Fubo.
Frustration & Disappointment for Subscribers
It stated, “We continue to urge Disney to work with us constructively to reach a fair agreement that restores their networks to YouTube TV, as we know this is a frustrating and disappointing outcome for our subscribers.”
According to YouTube, if Disney material is inaccessible “for an extended period of time,” members will receive a $20 credit. The basic membership option for YouTube TV costs $82.99 a month.
Talks Fail Between Disney and YouTube TV, Leading to Channel Removal
Source: Web
Disney cited the number of Top 25 teams competing this weekend to claim that YouTube TV is refusing to pay fair rates for its channels and has decided to “deny their subscribers the content they value most.”
Furthermore, “Google is using its market dominance to eliminate competition and undercut the industry-standard terms we’ve successfully negotiated with every other distributor,” Disney stated, highlighting the company’s $3 trillion market capitalization. The business stated that it was dedicated to finding a solution as soon as possible.
The United States Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced Thursday that China had authorized the transfer agreement for the TikTok app, which allows users to record short videos. He said he expected the deal to proceed in the upcoming weeks and months, but he did not provide any other information.
“In Kuala Lumpur, we finalized the TikTok agreement in terms of getting Chinese approval, and I would expect that would go forward in the coming weeks and months, and we’ll finally see a resolution to that,” he said on “Mornings with Maria” on Fox Business Network after President Donald Trump met with Chinese leader Xi Jinping.
The meeting between U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping was praised as “amazing” and “12” on a 10-point scale. However, the deal that the two leaders achieved seems to be little more than a tenuous truce in a trade war that has yet to tackle its underlying reasons.
The agreement unveiled Thursday, which calls for China to resume buying soybeans, halt its export restrictions on rare earths for a year, and reduce U.S. tariffs on China by 10%, essentially restores relations to the pre-tit-for-tat escalation period that preceded Trump’s “Liberation Day” offensive.
So, China will appropriately resolve TikTok-related concerns with the United States, the Commerce Ministry of China stated in a statement earlier Thursday. According to a Chinese official, “the Chinese side will work with U.S. side to properly address issues related to TikTok.” ByteDance, a Chinese company that owns TikTok, did not immediately respond.
Bytedance Ownership Breakdown
After the U.S. Congress approved a bill in 2024 requiring TikTok’s Chinese owners to sell the service’s U.S. assets by January 2025, the status of the 170 million-user app has been unclear for more than 18 months. On September 25, Trump issued an executive order stating that the plan to sell TikTok’s U.S. business to a group of American and international investors satisfies the national security conditions outlined in the 2024 law. He also authorized the investors 120 days to finalize the deal.
Additionally, he postponed the law’s implementation until January 20, 2026. According to Trump’s order, the new joint venture will be in charge of the algorithm’s functioning and the U.S. company’s security partners will retrain and oversee it. As per the deal on TikTok’s U.S. operations, ByteDance has appointed one of the seven board members for the new company; the other six positions are occupied by Americans.
US Treasury Secretary Confirms China’s Approval of TikTok Transfer Deal
Source: Web
Furthermore, if ByteDance didn’t sell its U.S. assets, it would possess less than 20% of TikTok U.S. in order to meet the legal requirements that mandated the company shut down by January 2025.
As part of ByteDance’s plan to sell U.S. assets of the short video app, U.S. Representative John Moolenaar, the Republican chair of the House Select Committee on China, stated this month that a license arrangement for the use of the TikTok algorithm would raise “serious concerns.”
According to a prominent Senate Democrat and a person with direct knowledge of the matter, the Trump administration briefed Republicans on Wednesday regarding US military operations on suspected drug boats without informing Democratic senators of the briefing. When the Trump administration excluded Democratic members on Wednesday, Senate Intelligence Committee Vice Chairman Mark Warner blasted the action as “a partisan stunt” that “is a slap in the face to Congress’ war powers responsibilities and to the men and women who serve this country.”
A classified Justice Department OLC memo detailing the administration’s legal rationale for the strikes – which CNN first reported on earlier this month – was presented to the Republicans by administration officials during the meeting. Warner said in a statement that it is “indefensible and dangerous to exclude Democrats from a briefing on U.S. military strikes and to withhold the legal justification for those strikes from half the Senate.”
“Decisions regarding the use of American military force are not the exclusive domain of one political party, nor are they the subject of campaign strategy sessions,” he stated. “Any administration that treats them in that manner undermines our national security and violates Congress’ constitutional duty to supervise matters of peace and war.”
The Virginia Democrat continued, “It also sets a reckless and deeply troubling precedent,” adding that the administration should immediately provide Democrats the same briefing and the OLC opinion. CNN has reached out to the White House for comment. Warner’s comments come as the Trump administration accelerates its attacks against boats that they allege are involved in drug trafficking.
Highly Misleading Briefings
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said on Wednesday that the US military conducted another strike against a vessel in the Pacific Ocean that day, killing four people. “This vessel, like all the others, was known by our intelligence to be involved in illicit narcotics smuggling, was transiting along a known narco-trafficking route, and carrying narcotics,” Hegseth said in a post on X.
This is the 14th time that the US military has reportedly attacked a suspected drug-smuggling ship. On 15 boats in total, the activities had claimed the lives of 61 persons. Earlier this week, the Trump administration told CNN that it has given seven different secret briefings on US military operations on suspected drug boats.
President Trump Govt. Excludes Democrats from Briefing on Recent U.S. Military Raid
Source: Web
However, other politicians claim they haven’t gotten the information they’re looking for. The administration “appears to be counting the same briefing given multiple times to certain staff or members (including in small groups),” a Democratic Senate official told CNN. Therefore, seven briefings are incredibly deceptive.
According to two sources who spoke to CNN earlier Wednesday, Pentagon officials are scheduled to provide members of the House Armed Services Committee with a classified briefing on Thursday regarding the recent US military strikes on vessels suspected of being involved in drug trafficking.
California Governor Gavin Newsom had a lengthy interview on CNN‘s “The Story Is with Elex Michaelson” on Monday, going into further detail about his remarks regarding a possible 2028 presidential campaign. According to Newsom, “people talk about it, and you’d be lying if you haven’t thought about it, processed it.” Newsom added, “I’m literally arguing that there might not be a free and fair election in 2028, which is why I have this initiative, Prop 50.”
The term-limited governor, who will step down in January 2027, stated that he hasn’t considered running for president “beyond just a few people bringing things up and talking about the future.” However, Newsom has recently been more open about his political chances, much like a few other possible 2028 contenders.
Even while he seemed to be making efforts to increase his national reputation, the California governor said for years that he had “sub-zero” interest in running for president. On Monday, Newsom stated that “everything has changed,” which is why his position has changed. He cited the president’s choice to station the National Guard in cities like Los Angeles as an illustration of how the nation has changed due to new norms.
California Holds Key Vote in 2026 Midterms
According to Newsom, “I simply believe that we’re on the other side of something drastically different, not slightly different,” continuing further, “everything has changed, including my perspective on the world we live in, my energy, my focus, and my mindset.”
And the question of whether Democrats want to run someone perceived as a liberal from San Francisco is one of the image problems that Newsom’s presidential candidacy would probably encounter in a Democratic primary. The governor stated that he intends to address how some Americans view him in a book that he will publish the following year.
The largest myth surrounding Newsom, who was raised by a single mother who worked several jobs for the most of his childhood, is “this notion of the silver spoon,” that he “was born into great wealth and privilege,” according to Newsom. “Quite the opposite,” he stated. “In that regard, I’m going to be pushing back.”
California Gov. Newsom Elaborates On His Plans, Confirms Consideration for 2028 Presidential Run
Source: Web
Newsom has spearheaded the push to approve Proposition 50, a ballot initiative that would enable his party to favor Democrats in five GOP-held California House seats, at a time when Democrats are searching for new party leaders. Mr. Newsom claimed that the Department of Justice was attempting to stifle free speech by sending election monitors to six California counties prior to the Proposition 50 vote on November 4.
Furthermore, he remarked, “It’s a pattern and practice.” They’re using it as a tactic of intimidation. They are attempting to stifle the vote.
According to the US Treasury Secretary, the two countries have reached an agreement on the framework of a possible trade agreement that will be considered when their presidents meet later this week. This includes a “final deal” on TikTok’s US operations and a postponement of China’s stricter rare earth mining regulations, Scott Bessent told CBS, the BBC’s US news partner.
Additionally, he said that he did not expect President Donald Trump’s planned 100% tariff on Chinese imports to take effect, even though China will once again buy a lot of soybeans from the US. Both countries want to prevent the trade war between the two biggest economies in the world from getting worse. On Thursday, Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping are scheduled to meet in South Korea.
On the fringes of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) summit in Malaysia, which Trump is also attending as part of his Asia visit, Bessent spoke with top Chinese trade officials. They conducted “constructive” talks, according to Beijing.
According to Bessent, the nations had “reached a substantial framework for the two leaders” and “the tariffs will be averted.” Both negotiating teams “reached a basic consensus on arrangements to address their respective concerns,” according to a statement from the Chinese government. “Both sides agreed to further finalize specific details,” they stated.
Trump’s Tariff Pressure & Political Play
Trump has threatened and implemented broad taxes on imports from other nations since reentering the White House, claiming that the measure would increase American manufacturing and employment.
Many nations, including the UK, have reached new agreements with the US as a result of the imposition of tariffs. However, he has threatened China with the highest levies. Although the two agreed to postpone the implementation of the levies while seeking a trade agreement, Beijing has responded with its own measures.
In reaction to China’s tightening restrictions on the sale of rare earths, which are elements necessary for the manufacturing of many electronics, Trump earlier this month said that he would put an additional 100% tariff on Chinese imports starting in November. The president of the United States accused Beijing of “becoming very hostile” and attempting to “captive” the world.
China & US Talks Outline Rare Earths Deal, Tariff Pause Ahead of Summit in Japan
Source: Web
Supplying rare earths to US firms is a crucial negotiating chip because China produces over 90% of the world’s supply, which is used in everything from solar panels to smartphones. Many US companies that depended on the materials protested when Beijing last tightened export limits, after Trump’s increase in tariffs on Chinese exports earlier this year.
According to Bessent, China will “delay that for a year while they re-examine it” on Sunday on This Week, a different news program. China is the world’s largest consumer of soybeans, which is another point of concern. US farmers suffered when China stopped all orders as the trade conflict intensified. Bessent suggested that the boycott would end shortly, but she would not elaborate.
The Defense Department revealed Friday that the Trump administration intends to use a $130 million donation from a President Donald Trump loyalist who wishes to remain anonymous to pay military personnel during the government shutdown. The money was received under the department’s “general gift acceptance authority,” according to a statement released by chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell to CNN. “The donation was made on the condition that it be used to offset the cost-of-Service members’ salaries and benefits.”
The action is a dramatic break from government practice, which has hitherto relied on congressionally authorized public funds to fund the military. Additionally, it immediately sparked inquiries regarding the identity of the contributor and the reasons behind sending the government the nine-figure cheque. It’s unlikely that the $130 million donation will have a significant effect on paying the salaries of the approximately 1.3 million active-duty military personnel, which comes to about $100 per service member.
On Friday, appropriators from both parties of Congress stated that they were still waiting for an explanation from the administration regarding the details of the donation. Democrats also questioned its legality, arguing that the Pentagon’s cited gift acceptance authority only allows gifts for a few specific uses, like supporting military schools, hospitals, and cemeteries, or helping injured soldiers or the families of those killed or injured in the line of duty.
Offset a Lapse in Appropriations
Donations from foreign governments or organizations may also be subject to further, stricter regulations. Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware, the leading Democrat on the Senate’s defense budget subcommittee, said in a statement that using anonymous donations to finance our military raises serious concerns about whether our own troops are in danger of being literally bought and paid for by foreign powers.
Additionally, budget experts questioned whether the Antideficiency Act, which prohibits federal agencies from utilizing federal monies in excess of what has been allotted to them, would be violated if the donation were used to pay military personnel. During the shutdown, Democrats have repeatedly charged the administration with breaking that rule, notably when it decided to fire thousands of government employees.
“The Antideficiency Act makes it clear that private contributions cannot be used to make up for a lapse in appropriations,” said Bill Hoagland, a senior vice president at the Bipartisan Policy Center and a former Senate GOP budget aide. “The law is very clear, so I think they could accept it, but they couldn’t use it for that purpose,” Hoagland told CNN.
Pentagon Receives $130 million Anonymous Trump Ally Donation to Pay U.S. Military
Source: Web
In an effort to address military shortages, Trump praised the $130 million donation on Thursday, claiming it came from “a friend of mine.” Declining to reveal the donor’s identity, he said, “He doesn’t really want the recognition.”
A White House spokesperson directed inquiries to the Pentagon and Treasury regarding the donor’s name and any connections to foreign organizations or interests. After that, the Pentagon forwarded those inquiries back to the White House. A request for comment was not immediately answered by Treasury. In addition to calling the donation “anonymous,” the Pentagon did not answer inquiries about whether it intended to inform Congress of the specifics of its use.
In an unexpected reversal, the Trump administration announced “massive sanctions” on Moscow’s two largest oil producers on Wednesday, following nine months of trying to persuade Russia to make concessions through incentives alone, such as hosting a major bilateral summit on US soil or holding talks on repairing diplomatic relations.
After speaking with Russian President Vladimir Putin over the phone and securing an invitation to a second bilateral summit, this time in Budapest, President Donald Trump had just a week earlier retracted his plans to send long-range Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine.
Preparing that summit fell to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, one of Trump’s most aggressive Cabinet members with regard to Ukraine. However, the White House was finally struck by Russia’s unyielding insistence on tackling what it considers to be the “root causes” of the crisis.
Trump stated on Wednesday that he didn’t want to “waste time” at another summit, but he did leave the possibility open, saying that “we’ll do it in the future.” As it became evident that his much-discussed Alaska summit had not been able to halt the rising conflict in Ukraine, Trump’s annoyance with Russia had been evidently increasing in recent months.
This Deal – A Serious Blow to Russia’s War Machine?
According to individuals who spoke to CNN last week, he even changed his mind on Ukrainian strikes deep within Russia, boosting intelligence sharing to assist Kyiv in targeting military and energy facilities. Even so, experts were taken aback by Wednesday’s decision to sanction the Russian oil giants and their subsidiaries after Trump’s repeated threats to increase sanctions against Moscow failed to materialize and the two presidents’ phone conversation last week suggested the US leader was still vulnerable to Russian pressure.
Trump’s New Sanctions Hit Russia Hard but Enforcement Remains Key Challenge
Source: Web
In written remarks to CNN, Maria Shagina, a senior scholar at the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), stated, “It was actually surprising simply because there was always a discrepancy between Trump’s rhetoric and actions.” She stated, “It appears that Russia has overplayed its hand today, and Trump’s patience is wearing thin.” Experts and the energy markets are still trying to figure out how painful this will be for Russia.
The Details and Implications of Newly Imposed Sanctions
Although his government announced punitive secondary tariffs on India for its purchases of Russian oil in August, this is the first time Trump has directly sanctioned Russia since taking office again in January. The sanctions are standard in that US entities will be prohibited from conducting business with the listed corporations, Rosneft and Lukoil, as well as numerous subsidiaries, and their assets will be blocked in the US.
However, the majority of experts concur that going after Rosneft and Lukoil is a big shift. RBC Capital Markets estimates that the two businesses together account for around half of Russia’s oil exports.
Response of West to the Situation
The appearance (whether intentional or not) of coordinating penalties with NATO partners, which had been standard procedure under the Biden administration, is another first for Trump’s second term. The European Union unanimously approved its 19th package of penalties on Wednesday, while the United Kingdom broadened its sanctions to include Lukoil and Rosneft a week earlier on October 15. A complete transaction embargo on Rosneft is part of that package.
Additionally, it targets Litasco, a Lukoil trading company in the United Arab Emirates that the European Union refers to as “Lukoil’s prominent shadow fleet enabler,” even though it does not specifically target Lukoil. Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, stated, “This is a clear signal from both sides of the Atlantic that we will keep up collective pressure on the aggressor.” Von der Leyen also spoke with the US Treasury secretary on the phone Wednesday.
The identities of the affluent individuals and businesses funding US President Donald Trump’s new $250 million White House ballroom remain a mystery as work gets underway. On Monday, excavators and construction workers started pulling up sections of the East Wing as part of the groundbreaking for the elaborate 90,000 sq-ft project.
The U.S. President has stated that he will personally fund a large amount of its construction and implied that certain unnamed benefactors would be prepared to invest over $20 million to finish the project. Some legal experts are worried about the funding mechanism because they believe it could be equivalent to paying for access to the administration.
Richard Painter, who served as the Bush White House’s chief ethics lawyer from 2005 to 2007, told the BBC, “I see this enormous ballroom as an ethics nightmare.”
Major Donors Funding W.H. Ballroom Project
Painter continued, “It is raising money by gaining access to the White House and I dislike it. These corporations all want something from the government.” Senior executives from well-known US corporations, including Blackstone, OpenAI, Microsoft, Coinbase, Palantir, Lockheed Martin, Microsoft, Amazon, and Google, attended a dinner for prospective contributors on October 15 at the White House.
The owners of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers and Manchester United, Shari and Edward Glazer, together with their siblings, were also in attendance, as was Woody Johnson, owner of the New York Jets NFL team.
The BBC’s US partner, CBS News, obtained a commitment form that implied donors would be eligible for “recognition” for their contributions. Names engraved on the building could be one way to honor them, though designs are still being finalized.
At first, the White House said that 650 people could be accommodated in the enormous building. Trump stated this week that it can accommodate 999 people. So yet, only one contribution has been identified.
President Donald Trump’s Multi billion-dollar White House Ballroom Project Funded by Wealthy Donors
Source: Web
According to court filings, YouTube will contribute $22 million to the project as part of a settlement with Trump over a lawsuit alleging that his account was suspended after the disturbance at the US Capitol Hill on January 6, 2021. However, it’s unknown how many or how much of the remaining attendees have promised to donate. White House officials said they intend to make the formal list public, but it has not yet been released.
Trump Remarks, “I will take it”
The Trust for the National Mall, a non-profit organization that collaborates with the National Park Service and raises money for projects on the Mall and at the White House, would manage the gifts, according to documents that CBS was able to get.
Trump claimed that several of the attendees at the luncheon for possible donors had been “really, really generous” and that some had inquired as to whether $25 million was a suitable donation. Trump stated, “I said – I will take it,”
The White House has stated that future administrations will use the ballroom and that there was nothing improper about asking for donations. It has stated that US taxpayers will not be charged for the restoration. The money given to the ballroom “will eventually pay for itself and save costs,” according to Martin Mongiello, a former executive chef at the White House and general manager of Camp David who has served under seven administrations, who spoke to the BBC.
Furthermore, without accounting for other incidentals related to hosting large-scale events, the tents that are occasionally erected outside for gatherings – which he called “elbow to elbow” and “embarrassing” – often cost $1 million or more. However, Mr. Painter said it might be regarded as a “pay-to-play scheme,” which has plagued both political parties’ past White House administrations.
The U.S. President Trump is requesting that the Justice Department compensate him roughly $230 million for the federal investigations into him, according to people familiar with the matter. They also stated that senior department officials who supported him or those close to him may eventually approve any settlement.
In American history, there has never been a situation like this. Federal law enforcement followed Mr. Trump, a presidential candidate, who ultimately won the election and took control of the administration that now has to investigate his claims. Additionally, it is the most glaring illustration to date of the possible moral dilemmas that could arise from placing the president’s former attorneys in charge of the Justice Department.
Mr. Trump filed concerns via the administrative claim procedure, which frequently serves as a prelude to legal action. According to people familiar with the case, the first claim, filed in late 2023, seeks damages for a variety of alleged rights abuses, including the F.B.I. and special counsel investigation into Russian election tampering and potential ties to the 2016 Trump campaign.
Since the claim has not been made public, they talked under the condition of anonymity. Furthermore, the F.B.I. is accused of violating Mr. Trump’s privacy in the second complaint, which was filed in the summer of 2024, by searching his Florida home and club, Mar-a-Lago, for classified materials in 2022. Additionally, it charges him with mishandling confidential documents after he left office, which is an act of malicious prosecution by the Justice Department.
Awfully Strange to Make a Decision
“I was damaged very greatly and any money I would get, I would give to charity,” the president remarked when questioned about the matter at the White House following the publication of this piece. “That decision would have to cross my desk, and I’m the one who makes the decision,” he continued. “It’s really weird to make a decision where I’m paying myself.”
According to attorneys, there are unquestionable ethical issues with the president’s legal arguments. Bennett L. Gershman, a professor of ethics at Pace University, called it a travesty. “The ethical dilemma is so fundamental and basic that a law professor is not necessary to explain it.”
“And then to have people in the Justice Department decide whether his claim should be successful or not,” he continued, adding that those individuals are the ones who will determine whether he succeeds or fails. It’s strange, almost too unbelievable to be true.
President Trump Says He May Seek $230 mln in Damages from U.S. DOJ
Source: Web
The president also appeared to recognize that point last week in the Oval Office when he made a passing reference to the matter while standing by Attorney General Pam Bondi, her deputy Todd Blanche, and F.B.I. director Kash Patel. The deputy attorney general, in this case Mr. Blanche, is one of two individuals who can approve such a settlement in accordance with Justice Department standards.
When he became president, Mr. Trump said, “I have a lawsuit that was doing very well, and I said, I’m sort of suing myself.” “It sort of looks bad, I’m suing myself, right?” he continued. Thus, I’m not sure. However, that was a really powerful and strong lawsuit.
Lawsuits are not strictly administrative claims. In order to determine whether a settlement may be made without filing a lawsuit in federal court, these complaints are first sent to the Justice Department using a document known as a Standard Form 95. A person may file a lawsuit in court if the department formally denies the claim or chooses not to take action. However, in this case, that is unlikely to happen because Trump is already essentially negotiating with his subordinates.
Taxpayers usually pay for compensation. According to two people with knowledge of the president’s legal claims, he anticipated to be compensated by the federal government but had not received it.
In the second claim, Merrick B. Garland, who was then the attorney general, Christopher A. Wray, who was then the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and Jack Smith, who was the special counsel looking into Mr. Trump at the time, were accused of “harassment” meant to influence the election results. “President Trump spent tens of millions of dollars defending the case and his reputation as a result of this malicious prosecution,” the claim stated.
President Donald Trump and his allies are increasingly pressuring Republican-controlled legislatures in several states to secure more GOP seats in order to strengthen the party’s majority in the US House, sparking a nationwide redistricting battle.
The Republicans in charge of the legislature in North Carolina moved swiftly on Monday to go forward with a new congressional map, joining an increasing number of states that are redistricting in advance of the midterm elections next year. The map will be sent to the House after a vote by the state’s Senate on Tuesday morning.
Targeting the US House district currently held by Democratic Representative Don Davis, the proposed design seeks to give Republicans the upper hand in 11 of North Carolina’s 14 House seats, up from the current 10. The most recent Republican-controlled state to start redistricting in the middle of the decade is the Tar Heel State. After next year’s legislative elections, Democrats only need to flip a few seats to seize control of the House, as the president’s party usually loses ground in midterm elections.
On Monday, Republican Sen. Ralph Hise of North Carolina, who is supervising the map-drawing, made a blunt admission of the high stakes. During a Senate election committee meeting on Monday, he stated, “The motivation behind this redraw is simple and singular: draw a new map that will bring an additional Republican seat to the congressional delegation.”
Hise went on to say that if Democrats win the House, they will “torpedo President Trump’s agenda.” The Trump “has called on Republican-controlled states across the country to fight fire with fire,” according to Hise. That call is answered by this map. The map and Trump’s travels across the nation were denounced by Democrats as a blatant attempt to seize power.
The Ongoing State-by-State Battle
Lawmakers wearing deep red with a map aiming to elect five more Republicans to Congress, Texas launched this year’s political arms race. Republicans in Missouri have also drawn new lines to increase the number of GOP representatives in the state’s congressional delegation. Both are being challenged in court, and Missouri activists are attempting to get the map overturned by means of a petition drive.
California, which started a redistricting campaign in response to Texas, has so far shown the strongest opposition among Democrats. To convince voters to temporarily ignore congressional boundaries created by an independent panel next month and give Democrats up to five additional US House seats, a multimillion-dollar advertising and get-out-the-vote effort is now in progress.
When it comes to the number of states that potentially have their maps redone, Republicans have a distinct advantage over Democrats. In 23 states; compared to 15 for Democrats; the GOP controls both houses of the legislature and the governor’s office.
Other Republican states are also considering new maps, including as Kansas, where lawmakers have approved $460,000 to support a special session that would target four-term Representative Sharice Davids, the state’s only Democrat in Washington. To call a special session, two-thirds of the state Senate and House must concur.
GOPs in North Carolina Set to Hand President Trump Another Win in Redistricting Battle
Source: Web
The White House has asked the Republican-controlled state legislature to target at least one of the Democratic-held seats in Indiana, where Republicans have a 7-2 advantage in the US House. JD Vance, the vice president, has made two trips to the state to influence lawmakers. Ohio and Utah, two other Republican-controlled states, are also embroiled in redistricting disputes that started prior to Trump’s election.
Political Tensions Rise Among Democrats in North Carolina
North Carolina Republicans have hurried to comply with Trump’s requests. Democratic Governor Josh Stein is not able to veto the maps under North Carolina law. Last week, state lawmakers started working on a map, and on Monday morning, a Senate elections committee openly discussed it for the first time.
The map “would give the fantastic people of North Carolina the opportunity to elect an additional MAGA Republican in the 2026 Midterm Elections, which would be A HUGE VICTORY for our America First Agenda, not just in North Carolina, but across our Nation,” the president wrote last week on Truth Social, expressing his admiration for the map.
