People attend a Billionaire Tax Now rally, Feb. 18, 2026 in Los Angeles (Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)
While the spotlight on the upcoming midterm elections has been on the balance of power in Congress, several states and cities around the country have ballot measures under consideration that could have ripple effects for years.
From transgender rights to taxation on high earners, here are some of the major ballot proposals that voters will consider on Election Day.
Voter access
Voters in 13 states have ballot initiatives that would affect voter access and rights.
California, Colorado, Nevada, North Carolina and Arizona would impose voter identification laws under a ballot measure.
Nevada voters passed their voter measure with 73% of the vote in 2024, however, the state constitution requires ballot measure approval in two consecutive elections to pass.
Noncitizens are not eligible under federal law to vote in elections, but most states do not explicitly state this mandate in their constitutions or laws. Alaska, Arizona, South Dakota, Kansas, Arkansas and West Virginia have ballot measures that would mandate only U.S. citizens can vote in any elections administered in the state.
Some Republican leaders have pushed back against noncitizens voting in elections, however, there are few proven cases of this taking place in previous elections.
Two states have proposals that would expand voter access.
In Massachusetts, voters will decided whether or not to implement same-day voter registration on Election Day. A ballot measure in Virginia would restore voting rights to some incarcerated citizens after they are released from prison.
Gender and sex issues
The debate over gender rights and transgender issues is on the ballot in several states.
In four states -- Arizona, Colorado, Nebraska and Washington -- voters will decide on ballot measures that would prohibit participants from playing on teams that are different from their sex assigned at birth.
Washington's ballot measure would mandate students who compete on female sports teams provide healthcare documentation verifying their sex.
Voters in Colorado and Missouri are set to vote on measures that would prohibit minors from receiving gender transition surgeries or healthcare professionals from providing the surgeries.
Taxation
As affordability and income inequality have become leading concerns among Americans, some states are seeking to address that through taxation.
In five states, California, Iowa, North Carolina, Colorado and Washington, voters will choose how their state's tax laws will change.
California has four propositions related to taxation with Proposition 40 -- also known as the "billionaires' tax" -- being the one that has come under the most scrutiny. If that proposition passes, the state would levy a 5% tax on the wealth of California taxpayers and trusts with assets valued over $1 billion.
The revenue would go to pay for state healthcare programs, food assistance programs and public education.
Colorado's ballot proposal would remove the state's uniform tax rate requirement and replace it with a progressive tax that would levy different levels of tax based on income levels.
State taxpayers who make less than $25,000 annually would be taxed 3.7% and those percentage levels would rise with the maximum being 8.4% levied on anyone earning more than $1 million annually.
Washington state voters will decide whether or not to repeal its 9.9% tax on taxpayers who make over $1 million annually.
Reproductive rights
States continue to grapple with the aftermath of the U.S. Supreme Court's 2022 decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, which eliminated the constitutional right to an abortion, leaving laws and regulations around it up to individual states.
In this year's election, voters in four states will decide on reproductive laws.
Virginia, Idaho and Nevada would enshrine laws that would give people the right to make their own reproductive rights decisions and privacy over those decisions.
A top general at the Pentagon was suddenly removed from his senior post earlier this week and has now retired, according to two sources familiar with the situation.
Lt. Gen. Brett Sylvia served in the Joint Staff as the Joint Staff's Director for Strategy, Plans & Policy, an important office, that handles long-term strategic planning and is known in military jargon as the J-5.
Sylvia was removed from the position for a lack of confidence, according to one of the sources. With his removal Sylvia retired from the U.S. Army after having served in the role for 11 months.
Sylvia becomes the latest senior military officer to be either fired or sidelined during Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's tenure. However, one source said it was unclear whether Sylvia's removal was ordered by Hegseth or Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
"The Chairman, the Joint Staff, and the Joint Force extend our deepest gratitude to Lt. Gen. Brett Sylvia and his family for their 32 years of distinguished service to our nation," said a Joint Staff spokesperson.
"We wish him and his family the best as they graduate to new opportunities and the next chapters of their lives," the spokesman added.
Earlier this week, Sylvia was listed as still being the director of the planning office on the Joint Staff's website, but the website now lists only the name of Vice Director Maj. Gen. Mark H. Slocum.
The J-5 is recognized as one of the Joint Staff's most important directorates in the Joint Staff along with the directorate for Operations, the J-3, that is responsible for the planning and execution of military operations.
Last year, two prominent Army generals serving on the Joint Staff were sidelined and had to retire early, including Sylvia's immediate predecessor as the J-5, Lt. Gen. Joseph "JP" McGee, who retired last October.
McGee had been nominated under the Biden administration to become the director of the Joint Staff, but he was not renominated by the Trump administration. With no other slots available to him as a three or four star general he had to retire.
Also retiring early last year was Lt. Gen. Douglas Sims, the director of the Joint Staff, who was widely expected to be on track for a fourth star.
A federal judge in California has rejected the Justice Department's push for an emergency order to have California segregate roughly 20,000 ballots belonging to individuals the Trump administration has claimed are "likely" noncitizens.
"Never before in American history has the federal government, on the eve of an election, sought to coerce a state and local government to abandon their own Constitutional elections procedures and bend to the will of the Executive Branch," U.S. District Judge David Carter wrote in his Wednesday order.
Regarding the DOJ request for the order to require California to set aside the ballots of those it alleges are likely noncitizens, the judge said it would "wreak havoc and disrupt the election that is already underway, create a chilling effect on election workers and voters alike, and discount the votes of United States citizens."
The judge wrote: "This request violates longstanding constitutional principles mandating that states have control over their elections. If Plaintiff's last-minute request for relief were granted, either party could create chaos for their own political purposes to disrupt the election process. Over 20,000 registered Californians would potentially lose the right that generations of Americans have fought to preserve."
Earlier this month, the DOJ filed suit against California accusing the state of failing to review a list of alleged noncitizens that the Trump administration claimed were sent mail-in ballots for next month's midterm election.
In a court hearing earlier this week, Bill Essayli, a controversial Trump-installed leader of the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Central District of California, argued the administration was simply pushing for the state to be in compliance with federal law barring noncitizens from casting votes.
But state officials and other legal advocates opposing the DOJ lawsuit countered that the litigation violated longstanding Constitutional principles mandating that states have control over their elections -- and could have chaotic consequences for the state in tabulating final vote counts in the weeks ahead.
In court papers filed last week, Los Angeles officials said a preliminary analysis of 200 of the names on the 20,000-person list, included a "high percentage" of individuals who say they were born in the U.S. and many more who have no voting history at all.
Earlier this week, in a 2-1 decision, a federal appeals court panel also rejected a DOJ request for an immediate order demanding California segregate the roughly 20,000 mail-in ballots.
Voters cast their ballots at a polling location on the first day of early voting for the midterm election in East Point, Georgia, Oct. 13, 2026. (Elijah Nouvelage/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
With less than a week to the midterms elections, an ABC News analysis of the early vote in the key states of Texas and Georgia shows signs of more enthusiasm among Democrats, who are getting slightly higher turnout among those who don't vote regularly -- particularly in Texas -- compared to what they got in 2022.
Much of the apparent surge in turnout is among voters who likely would have voted later in the pre-election period or on Election Day, the analysis shows. Less-habitual voters who are voting early, while a much smaller number compared to regular voters, appear to be more likely to vote for the Democrat.
The data from voter records firm L2 that ABC News' analysis is based on does not indicate who someone might have voted for and does not say anything about who might yet turn out on Election Day.
The analysis also uses L2's models for whether a voter is likely to vote Democratic or Republican, as neither Texas nor Georgia register voters by party. The modeling uses available information like turnout in primaries and other factors to predict which party people are likely to support.
There are closely watched races for Senate and governor in the Lone Star state; Democrats hope to flip both despite not having won a statewide race since 1994. President Donald Trump rallied there twice on Tuesday and Republicans say the president’s swings through red-leaning states are meant to turn out his base and motivate Republicans who otherwise might have sat out this midterm.
As of Monday, 51% of the early vote in Texas is from voters modeled as likely to vote for Democrats while 45% is from voters modeled as likely to vote for Republicans, the analysis shows -- a 14 percentage point swing for Democrats from 2022 when they were behind Republicans by around 8 percentage points when early voting was finished. Donald Trump won Texas by 14 points in 2024.
In Texas, regular voters who voted in four out of the last four federal elections made up a greater share of the turnout as of Monday than they did in the complete early vote in 2024 and 2022, according to the analysis. This doesn’t necessarily mean that more habitual voters have shown up, just that fewer less-regular voters have. The habitual votersmake up 60% of the early vote this year, as of Monday; this group made up 47% of the total early vote in 2024 and 44% of the total early vote in 2022
The early vote data shows that Democrats are getting far higher turnout among the less frequent voters in Texas who likely prefer Democrats, in comparison to the less frequent voters who likely prefer Republicans. Whether it be during the remaining days of early voting or on Election Day, Republicans will need to mobilize their less enthusiastic supporters.
Among voters who did not vote in any of the last four federal elections but who have voted early in Texas as of Monday, 64% of them are modeled as likely to vote for a Democrat and 21% as likely to vote for a Republican. In the total early vote in 2022, 50% of these voters were modeled as likely Democratic voters and 39% were estimated to be likely Republican voters.
In the early vote to date, there are far fewer less-habitual voters compared to high-turnout ones and they take up a smaller share of the early vote overall. Still, close elections are decided at the margins and polling in Texas has shown the Senate and governor’s races being close.
In the Senate race, GOP Rep. Mike Collins is trying to unseat incumbent Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff. Democrats are trying to flip the governorship as Democratic former Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms faces Republican businessman Rick Jackson in a race both parties see as competitive.
According to ABC News' analysis, 54% of the early vote in Georgia is from voters modeled as likely to vote for Democrats while 38% is from voters modeled as likely to vote for Republicans.
In Georgia, habitual voters who voted in four out of the last four federal elections comprised a greater share of the turnout as of Monday than they did in the early vote one week out from the 2022 midterms.
Habitual voters made up 67% of the early vote in 2026 as of Monday while they comprised 55% of the total early vote one week from Election Day 2022.
Among voters who did not vote in any of the last four federal elections but who have voted early in Georgia as of Monday, 52% of them are modeled as likely to vote for Democrats and 12% are modeled as likely to vote for Republicans. In the early vote at this time in 2022, 51% of those voters were modeled Democratic and 27% were modeled Republican
Meanwhile, among voters who voted in two out of the last four federal elections who had voted early in Georgia as of Monday, 56% are modeled Democratic and 24% Republican. In the early vote at this point in 2022, 54% of those voters were modeled Democratic and 35% Republican.
Alaska Democratic Senate candidate Mary Peltola's campaign is under fire after a New York Times report Wednesday that it played a role in recruiting Dan J. Sullivan -- a Republican who almost has the same name as incumbent GOP Sen. Dan Sullivan -- as part of an effort to sow confusion and ultimately benefit Peltola's campaign.
The Times report said it relied on 12 sources, text messages and documents that allegedly showed members of Peltola's campaign, lawyers for Peltola and senior aides at the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee contributed to pushing Dan J. Sullivan, a Republican on Alaska's four-way ballot, to run.
The Times said the effort to find a spoiler candidate -- who could potentially siphon votes from Sen. Sullivan and benefit Peltola -- was internally referred to as the ballot composition project.
Alaskans for Mary, the campaign committee for Peltola, said through a spokesperson on Wednesday that it "has no involvement with either Sullivan campaign."
The DSCC told ABC News in a statement that it was "not involved with Dan J. Sullivan."
"Republicans have a long history of recruiting and propping up candidates in an attempt to boost their own campaigns," a DSCC spokesperson wrote in the statement, detailing an instance when Peltola ran for reelection in the House in 2024 and the state Republican Party supported an effort by a Democratic House candidate and inmate in New York federal prison to stay on the ballot, challenging Peltola.
Peltola finished first in Alaska's August primary with 49.5% of the vote and Sen. Sullivan was second with 41.4%. Dan J. Sullivan was third with 2.5% of the vote and Democrat David Leslie finished with 1.1%. Leslie later dropped out of the race and Republican Gerald Heikes, who finished fifth in the primary with 1%, moved into the fourth spot on the November ballot.
On the general election ballot, Sen. Sullivan is listed as Dan S. Sullivan, a registered Republican and it is noted that he is the incumbent. The other Sullivan is listed as Daniel J. Sullivan Jr. with no party affiliation.
In response to the Times report, President Donald Trump said in a social media post Wednesday afternoon that Peltola should "suffer the Legal and Political consequences for what she has done," and that she and Dan J. Sullivan should be kicked off the ballot. The president also said Peltola engaged in "election fraud."
"Dan Sullivan should be allowed to run without either Mary Peltola or FAKE Dan Sullivan on the Ballot," Trump wrote.
ABC News has reached out to Dan J. Sullivan's campaign for comment on the New York Times' report. ABC News also reached out to the Alaska Department of Elections for comment.
Alaska courts evaluated the dispute over Dan J. Sullivan's candidacy and found nothing illegal about his bid to be on the ballot -- even if it was not entirely in "good faith" or an attempt to "confuse and mislead" as the Trump administration and Republicans contend.
Ballot-stacking tactics are common in politics and are widely considered legal, the New York Times reported.
Former Peltola staffer Elisa Rios told the Times about the reported recruitment effort, saying Peltola wasn't directly involved but that she was "definitely aware."
However, the Times also reported that Rios later requested a retraction of the statements she gave the newspaper, though she did not disclose a reason.
Rios was also reportedly fired from the campaign this past summer, just days before the primary. At the time, the Peltola campaign told ABC News the "campaign has undergone staffing updates as we transition into the general election" but did not comment on Rios specifically.
For months, Republicans have claimed that Dan J. Sullivan was pursued as a candidate in order to confuse Alaskan voters and potentially peel away voters from the incumbent GOP senator.
In a statement on Wednesday, Nate Adams, campaign spokesperson for incumbent Sen. Sullivan said that "Alaskans deserve the truth" and claimed that Peltola and her campaign "have spent months gaslighting Alaskans" in an effort to "deceive" voters.
The Department of Justice has an active criminal investigation into the circumstances surrounding Dan J. Sullivan's candidacy dating back several months, ABC News has reported.
In a statement on Wednesday, the Alaska Department of Law said the Times' story confirmed its initial concerns about Dan J. Sullivan's candidacy, but it had no impact on the DOJ litigation.
“Placing candidates on the ballot is a matter of state law, not federal law," it said. "The Alaska Supreme Court ordered the Division to place Daniel J. on the primary election ballot and he advanced to the general election under Alaska law as the third-place candidate."
"The Division is bound by the Alaska Supreme Court’s order and is committed to running a fair election and assisting voters as needed,” it said.
The Trump administration preemptively filed a lawsuit last week to block certification of the Alaska Senate race if Sen. Sullivan narrowly loses, citing voter confusion with two Dan Sullivans on the ballot.
The federal judge handling that case signaled considerable skepticism of DOJ's legal strategy on Monday.
District Judge Sharon Gleason highlighted the last-minute nature of the government's actions, especially as Alaskans have already begun casting their ballots.
Judge Alvin Hellerstein, October 29, 2019 in New York City. (Owen Hoffmann/Patrick McMullan via Getty Images)
The federal judge in New York handling the prosecution of ousted Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro has died.
Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein died of natural causes Wednesday morning just shy of his 93rd birthday, according to Laura Taylor Swain, chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
"Judge Hellerstein was an insightful and dedicated lawyer who, following a distinguished career in the private sector, served with distinction for over 25 years as a distinguished jurist of this court," Swain said in a statement, in part. "His energetic and dedicated service to this Court continued until his death. He is greatly appreciated and will be sorely missed."
"We were saddened to learn of Judge Hellerstein’s passing and offer our condolences to his family," Nicolas Maduro's attorney said in a statement to ABC News.
Hellerstein was appointed by President Bill Clinton in 1998 and oversaw a diverse array of federal cases in the nation’s preeminent district court, including litigation involving the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, over which Swain said he presided "with sensitivity, fairness and efficiency."
Born in New York City on Dec. 28, 1933, Hellerstein earned his law degree from Columbia Law School in 1956. He clerked for Judge Edmund Palmieri of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York from 1956 to 1957 and served in the U.S. Army JAG Corps as a first lieutenant from 1957 to 1960, according to Swain's statement. He subsequently worked as a litigator at a New York law firm from 1960 until his appointment to U.S. district court by President Clinton.
A new judge will be randomly assigned to take over the Maduro case and Hellerstein's other matters, according to the court.
While Election Day is on Nov. 3, at least some of California's midterm election results may not be projected until days or even weeks later.
Not only is there a plethora of ballots to count because California is the most populous state, with 23 million registered voters, but it also relies on a large number of mail-in ballots, with some not arriving until a week after voting ends.
According to the California secretary of state, "vote-by-mail ballots postmarked on or before Election Day and received within seven days after the election, as well as any provisional ballots cast, must still be counted."
Earlier this year, the Supreme Court upheld a Mississippi law allowing tabulation of late-arriving mail-in ballots so long as they were postmarked by Election Day. The decision was a loss for the Republican Party, which brought the case, and the Trump administration, which has pushed to override state election rules nationwide by imposing strict federal limits on voting by mail.
The Supreme Court last month also rejected the Trump administration's attempt to limit mail-in voting for now, keeping in place a lower court decision blocking the U.S. Postal Service from implementing new restrictions.
In addition to late-arriving mail ballots, the California secretary of state told ABC News that there is an arduous process of counting mail ballots and validating voters' signatures, as each envelope signature must match the signatures on file. County election officials have up to 30 days after the election to count ballots.
More than 89% of Californians that voted in the June 2 primary election did so by mail, according to California Secretary of State Shirley Weber. On July 10, Weber announced that the primary results were certified.
ABC News projected the two candidates advancing to the state's gubernatorial general election about one week after the primary election: Democrat Xavier Becerra was projected to advance on June 5, and Republican Steve Hilton was projected to advance on June 9.
California's long ballot-counting process often opens floodgates for criticism, with President Donald Trump frequently claiming without evidence that elections in the state are "rigged."
"In the end, they're not going to let you win it. They just won't let you win it because it's a rigged state," Trump said during a Newsmax interview earlier in October.
In his claims of election fraud, Trump has repeatedly referenced Republican Spencer Pratt's loss in the Los Angeles mayoral primary. While Pratt was initially in second place on primary night, he was eventually edged out by Democrat Nithya Raman once ballots were fully counted -- which can happen given the state's vote-counting process.
"Spencer Pratt was doing great. And at the end of the election, Election Day, his opponent was crying. Oh, she's lost so badly. She was crying. Then all of a sudden, like a week and a half later, you hear that she's surging. Nobody ever heard of her. You know, people that nobody ever heard of don't surge. The only time they surge is when they cheat," Trump claimed in early October.
The University of Florida's Election Lab has found that so far, 50% of mail ballots that have been accepted by the state of California are from registered Democrats and 29% are from registered Republicans, as of Oct. 25. The remaining 21% of ballots are from those with no party affiliation or registered with a minor party.
An October ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll found that among likely California voters who said they would probably or certainly vote -- or who already had -- 65% said they would vote by mail. Just 11% of California voters said they would vote in person at a polling place on Election Day.
The president has also railed against mail-in ballots for years, despite himself voting by mail twice during Florida elections this year. A White House spokesperson said that Trump has supported "commonsense exceptions" to allow Americans to use mail-in ballots, including for "illness, disability, military, or travel," but that he opposes universal voting by mail due to it being "highly susceptible to fraud."
"They send out millions and millions of ballots. Democrats get, in some cases seven, in some cases one, but in some cases they get much more than one. Republicans oftentimes don't get any, they have to call in for their ballot," Trump claimed.
Ahead of the general election, officials and state leaders have emphasized the security of California elections and mail ballots.
"Voting in California is secure, reliable, and part of California's tradition of encouraging participation in our democracy," Weber, the secretary of state, said earlier this month.
"Voting is safe, vote-by-mail is accessible to any and all who need it. And I encourage every Californian to make their voice heard this November," California Gov. Gavin Newsom also said in October.
California is not the only state where election results take an extended amount of time. Alaska, for instance, accepts some ballots up to 15 days after the election and certification cannot be done before then.
The Alaska Division of Elections says that the "process is intentionally slow and methodical so that accuracy is obtained."
Pennsylvania also prevents counties from opening ballots until 7 a.m. on Election Day, meaning early votes cannot be counted upon receipt.
The federal district judge overseeing the Justice Department's lawsuit asking California to segregate roughly 20,000 ballot belonging to individuals it claims are "likely" noncitizens appeared skeptical of the DOJ's efforts to seek emergency action just a week from the state's election.
U.S. District Judge David O. Carter said in court Tuesday he intends to appoint a special master to probe DOJ's process that led it to compile the list of alleged 20,000 likely non-citizens, dealing a setback to the Trump administration's attempt to quickly intervene in the election.
Judge Carter did not rule by the conclusion of the hearing on the DOJ request for a temporary restraining order against the state, though he appeared skeptical of the department's late-stage attempt to force what he described as a "monumental change" in California's ongoing administration of its election.
Carter told the parties he intends to issue some kind of ruling governing proceedings on the case moving forward by tomorrow.
Bill Essayli, a controversial Trump-installed leader of the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Central District of California, argued in the hearing that the administration was simply pushing for the state to be in compliance with federal law barring non-citizens from casting votes.
But state officials and other legal advocates opposing the DOJ lawsuit countered that the litigation violated longstanding Constitutional principles mandating that states have control over their elections -- and could have chaotic consequences for the state in tabulating final vote counts in the weeks ahead.
Notably in closing out the hearing, Judge Carter appeared to admonish the administration over its recent letters to state officials around California suggesting it could prosecute them if they are involved in tabulating ballots that could be from the list of alleged likely noncitizens.
"This court believes it would be wise that any threats to state and county elected employees cease immediately," Carter said. "Good night."
On Monday, a federal appeals court rejected a request from the DOJ to issue an order requiring California to set aside the 20,000 ballots from its list, kicking the back to the district court.
Earlier this month, the DOJ filed suit against California, accusing the state of failing to review the list of alleged noncitizens that the Trump administration claimed were sent mail-in ballots for next week's midterm election.
In court papers filed earlier last week, Los Angeles officials said a preliminary analysis of 200 of the names on the 20,000-person list, included a "high percentage" of individuals who say they were born in the U.S. and many more who have no voting history at all.
Tension between the U.S. and Cuba was on full display at the United Nations on Tuesday as the Trump administration's envoy to the body, Ambassador Mike Waltz, and Cuba's foreign minister engaged in a shouting match on the floor of the General Assembly.
During the U.N.'s annual debate on the U.S. blockade against Cuba, Waltz took the podium and began delivering a speech that was hotly critical of the Cuban regime.
Shortly after Waltz began his remarks, Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla and the rest of the Cuban delegation began challenging him from the audience -- shouting and gesturing as the president of the assembly banged his gavel and fruitlessly asked them to quiet down.
"I hope everyone, Mr. President, is listening to the delegation right now," Waltz said with a smile. "Imagine what happens when someone ask these questions in Havana, not in a room of ambassadors and cameras! Imagine what happens to those people if this is the intimidation and disruption that we see!"
Rodríguez Parrilla and Waltz traded more remarks, with Waltz declaring "This is America, this is the United Nations, this isn't your communist dictatorship. You can't silence me or you cannot silence my colleagues!
Rodríguez Parrilla, whose comments could not be clearly heard on a U.N. livestream of the meeting, approached the front of the hall.
Waltz yelled, "Mr. President, this individual needs to back away from this podium. He's not going to intimidate me in the United States of America! I'm the representative of the United States of America! Back up!"
At that point, the assembly president suspended the meeting. After recounting the U.N.'s rules for the event, the president then gave Rodríguez Parrilla a chance to issue a point of order on the condition he limit his grievances to procedure rather the substance of Waltz's remarks.
Rodríguez Parrilla returned to his seat and used the opportunity to speak to protest Waltz's claims, accusing him of "grossly lying."
Waltz finished his speech without major incident, ending by urging the chamber to vote against the resolution under consideration on Wednesday. Waltz finished his remarks without major incident -- urging the chamber to vote against the resolution under consideration on Wednesday.
Following the incident, Rodríguez Parrilla doubled down on X, writing that Waltz "with his arrogance and hubris, forgets that he is at the United Nations, not at the US National Security Council, nor in a Green Berets unit, nor in a Signal group, where he has repeatedly shown his incompetence and incapacity."
Waltz, a former Green Beret, came under scrutiny last year while serving as national security adviser for inadvertently inviting a journalist to a Signal chat with Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Vice President JD Vance and other top national security officials discussing details of the strike on the Houthis in Yemen.
President Donald Trump nominated Waltz to the U.N. post at the same time he announced Secretary of State Marco Rubio would also serve as national security adviser.
U.S. President Donald Trump departs Air Force One at Corpus Christi International Airport on Oct. 27, 2026, in Corpus Christi, Texas. President Trump is traveling to Texas for campaign rallies in Corpus Christi and Lubbock ahead of next week's midterm elections. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
President Donald Trump is barnstorming deep-red states across the country to defend GOP majorities in Congress as Democrats make inroads in some unlikely places.
The president has made 19 stops to states he handily won and six to battlegrounds since Sept. 9, according to ABC News tracking. Those include three in Texas, two in Ohio, two in Tennessee, and visits to states that for some observers may be surprising: Oklahoma, Kentucky and Alabama.
The president is set to make his fourth campaign season trip to Texas -- a state he won in three presidential elections -- on Tuesday, where he will attend two rallies; Vice President JD Vance will be in Texas for a rally later this week. These two upcoming trips mean Trump and Vance will have visited Texas -- typically reliably red -- eight times since Labor Day weekend.
An early October ReconMR poll found that among likely Texas voters, Texas Democratic state Rep. James Talarico had 48% support while Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton had 44% support, within the poll's margin of error.
Trump's red-state travels come with just days until the high-stakes midterm elections where control of Congress is at stake.
As Democratic candidates largely center their campaigns around affordability and ending the Iran war, they are fending off attacks from Republicans, largely on taxes, culture war and transgender issues. At the same time, Republicans are calling on the president and his Cabinet officials to heed voter economic concerns.
As Republicans look to shore up support among the MAGA faithful, Trump's approval ratings have suffered. His approval rating recently reached a record low of 33% in the ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll. About 7 in 10 Americans say that gas is unaffordable and that the country is headed in the wrong direction, according to the same poll.
On Monday, Trump hit the campaign trail in Mississippi, where no Democrat has been elected to the U.S. Senate since 1982. Trump carried the state by a 23-point margin in the 2024 presidential election. GOP Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith is defending her seat against Democrat and district attorney Scott Colom.
"A lot of folks ain't gonna be able to make this rally because they can't afford the gas to get up here," Colom said at a press conference in Corinth ahead of Trump's rally in the city.
Trump said on Monday that he was supporting Hyde-Smith in the state because he "can't take a chance."
"I can't take a chance. She's got no problem. The only problem is sometimes, and this happens, and sometimes when you think somebody's doing so well, nobody wants – they all stay home," Trump said -- later adding "so that's why I'm here."
Last week, Trump campaigned in Kansas for Republican incumbent Sen. Roger Marshall, who is fighting in what ABC News is rating a toss-up race for reelection against Democrat Rev. Adam Hamilton. Vance stumped for the one-term incumbent in September and again on Monday.
Hamilton could break a 94-year losing streak for Democrats -- he is split even with Marshall among likely Kansas voters, according to a September New York Times/Siena University poll.
Trump is headed back to Kansas on Saturday in Salina, where he will need to run up the score in a county he carried by more than 30 points in 2024.
Several Republicans -- including Trump, Vance, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Speaker Mike Johnson -- have visited Wisconsin's closely watched 3rd Congressional District, where Democrat Rebecca Cooke is facing off against GOP incumbent Rep. Derrick Van Orden. ABC News recently shifted its rating from "toss-up" to "lean Democrat."
Trump surrogates are also flocking to Iowa, a state Trump won in the last three presidential elections. The president has already paid a visit to Sioux City and will headline a rally in Dubuque just two days before the midterms.
Iowa Democratic Senate candidate Josh Turek, a state lawmaker, is running against Republican Rep. Ashley Hinson to succeed outgoing GOP Sen. Joni Ernst.
Hinson has praised the president but also sought to distance herself at times and recently called for an end to the Iran war.
But Turek told ABC News it is "good" for Trump to see how healthcare funding cuts and tariffs have affected Iowans.
"I think that the war in Iran has hurt Iowa more than any other state," Turek said.
Kennedy is stumping for Iowa Republican gubernatorial candidate Zach Lahn on Wednesday. Johnson is headlining a rally for GOP incumbent Rep. Zach Nunn in the state's 3rd Congressional District that same day.
At least nine cabinet members visited Iowa in August, underscoring just how competitive the House races, open Senate and governor races have become.
ABC News' Oren Oppenheim contributed to this report.
An election worker opens voter ballots for the midterm elections at the King County Elections headquarters on Oct. 23, 2026, in Renton, Washington. (David Ryder/Getty Images)
The Justice Department is asking election officials in Washington state to set aside hundreds of ballots it says may belong to noncitizen voters, the latest move by the Trump administration to intervene in a state-run election just days before the midterms.
The move sparked backlash from state officials who said the Justice Department’s intention in publicizing these allegations so close to an election was to create "unfounded suspicion."
Federal prosecutors in Washington state claimed in a statement Monday that the more than 400 individuals on the list represented “only the tip of the iceberg.” The statement accompanied a letter sent by the state’s two U.S. attorneys demanding that election officials set aside any ballots belonging to individuals on the list. ABC News has not seen the letter.
The Justice Department’s messaging in Washington on Monday echoes steps it took ahead of a lawsuit it filed last week against California, where it has sued to prevent the state from counting more than 20,000 ballots it claims may belong to noncitizen voters.
The Trump administration has promoted a number isolated cases of alleged noncitizen voting in recent weeks as evidence of rampant election fraud. But all available evidence suggests voter fraud and noncitizen voting remains exceedingly rare, and certainly not widespread enough to alter the outcome of any election.
A federal appeals court declined to intervene in that matter and said that the "emergency" the DOJ claimed was in part "self-constructed."
Local officials in Los Angeles said a sampling of the 20,000 ballots surveyed showed a "high percentage" of people who say they were born in the U.S.
"We saw what happened in California and don't want Washingtonians to be harassed," Secretary of State Steve Hobbs said in a statement on Monday responding to the Justice Department's letter.
Hobbs wrote in his response that at least one of the individuals on the Justice Department’s list dates back to 1994. Since then, 113.5 million primary and general election ballots have been cast in Washington, according to the secretary of state’s office.
"The timing of this request -- one week before the General Election -- is no doubt intended to cast unfounded suspicion on the results," Hobbs added. "We are carefully reviewing the request and assessing the information sought to ensure that our response complies with applicable state and federal laws."
The federal judge handling the Justice Department's bid to block certification of Alaska's Senate race if Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan narrowly loses signaled considerable skepticism of DOJ's legal strategy on Monday.
In her first order acknowledging the case, District Judge Sharon Gleason highlighted the last-minute nature of the government's actions, especially as Alaskans have already begun casting their ballots.
"After Alaskans had already begun casting their ballots for the November 2026 election -- and nearly four months after the Alaska Supreme Court directed the Division of Elections to include Daniel J. Sullivan on the ballot for the upcoming United States Senate election -- the United States initiated this action on October 22, 2026," Gleason said.
"The United States seeks a court order to prevent Defendants from certifying the result of the November 2026 United States Senate election if '(1) [Dan S.] Sullivan does not win the election; and (2) had all votes cast for Daniel J. Sullivan been cast instead for [Dan S.] Sullivan and Alaska's rank-choice process played out accordingly, [Dan S.] Sullivan would have won the election.'"
On Friday, President Donald Trump said that he had directed the Justice Department to preemptively file a lawsuit to try to block the certification of the crucial Alaska Senate race if Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan loses, citing name confusion among the candidates.
Republicans have alleged that candidate Dan J. Sullivan is running a sham campaign to purposefully confuse voters and draw votes away from incumbent Sen. Dan S. Sullivan based on their names being similar.
The district judge's order came in response to a rapid series of briefings from parties seeking to join the case and dismiss the lawsuit.
Gleason said in her order on Monday that she intends to issue a ruling on a request for outside parties to join by Wednesday at 5 p.m. local time. She has yet to indicate whether she will hold a hearing.
Over the last month, a legal fight has been playing out behind closed doors about the Department of Justice’s ongoing investigation into former FBI Director James Comey over the alleged mishandling of classified information dating back more than a decade ago.
According to newly unsealed court records, prosecutors allege that Comey broke the law by directing FBI staff to leak information to a New York Times reporter for an article published on Oct. 5, 2016, titled “Yahoo Said to Have Aided U.S. Email Surveillance by Adapting Spam Filter.”
“The United States' investigation has uncovered evidence that former FBI Director, James B. Comey, sought to correct misinformation which had appeared in the press by way of Reuters the day before,” prosecutors wrote in their response to Comey’s motion to dismiss earlier this month. “Mr. Comey directed staff to speak to [the New York Times reporter] about specific accuracy concerns related to the Reuters article, and thereby illegally transferred classified information.”
The article in question centered on whether the Department of Justice sought a court order from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to force Yahoo to search for communications between members of a foreign terrorist organization. According to court filings, Comey sought to correct claims in a Reuters story published the previous day that Yahoo “secretly built a custom software program to search all of its customers' incoming emails for specific information provided by U.S. intelligence officials.”
Prosecutors with the Department of Justice filed the charges against Comey via what's known as a “criminal information,” which does not require the approval of a grand jury. It was filed under seal on Oct. 5.
Department of Justice lawyers argue that by filing a criminal information within 10 years of the alleged crime, they stopped the clock on the statute of limitations and secured a months-long extension to secure an indictment.
“The Department filed a waiverless criminal information to toll the statute of limitations as it relates to allegations concerning former FBI Director Comey. Filing a criminal information to toll the statute of limitations is a widely recognized practice in federal court and has been approved by multiple Circuit Courts of Appeals. This is an ongoing criminal investigation, and we will not comment further,” a Department of Justice account said on social media.
However, Comey’s lawyers argue that the statute of limitations to bring a criminal information actually expired five years agoc and the rule prosecutors cited to secure an extension only applies to indictments. They also argued that the Washington, D.C., Circuit Court has not approved the practice of tolling the statute of limitations via a criminal information.
“Because the default five-year statute of limitations for federal felonies has long since elapsed on the alleged offenses, and the government's information does not meet the express statutory requirement for an extended ten-year limitations period, the information is untimely and must be dismissed,” Comey’s lawyers wrote in their motion to dismiss.
Prosecutors pushed back on that argument, claiming that the federal law in question applies to both indictments and informations and arguing that “the case comes down to a syllogism" in federal law.
“Given the seriousness of espionage offenses, and given the deficiencies of the prior statute-of-limitations period in capturing treasonous conduct threatening this nation, Congress intended to lengthen the time to prosecute acts of espionage – not to split that time by instrument,” prosecutors wrote.
Comey also faces federal charges of threatening Trump after a federal grand jury indicted Comey on two charges in April after he posted a picture on his Instagram account of seashells spelling out "8647," which federal prosecutors say constituted a threat against the president's life.
Comey's lawyers are seeking to have that case thrown out. His defense lawyers argued that Trump's repeated calls for Comey's prosecution and criticism of his public statement "leave no doubt as to his genuine animus" and demonstrate that the case against him for allegedly threatening to kill Trump by posting photos of seashells on a beach is vindictive.
"The ensuing indictment is not based on a good faith application of the law to the facts; instead, it effectuates a yearslong campaign by the President to use the criminal process to punish Mr. Comey for his protected speech and because of the President's deep-seated animosity," Comey's lawyers wrote.
A sign for the Department of Justice (DOJ) during a news conference about safeguarding unaccompanied immigrant children at the Department of Justice headquarters, June 11, 2026, in Washington, D.C. (Al Drago/Getty Images)
A 9th Circuit Court of Appeals panel on Monday rejected a request from the Justice Department for an immediate order demanding California segregate roughly 20,000 mail-in ballots from individuals the Trump administration claims are likely non-citizens.
The 2-1 ruling from the panel said the appeals court lacks jurisdiction at this stage in the litigation, punting it back to district court, which has a hearing on the DOJ lawsuit set for Tuesday afternoon.
Circuit Judge Mark Bennett, who was appointed by President Donald Trump, and Circuit Judge Gabriel Sanchez, a President Joe Biden appointee, ruled against the administration's request, with Circuit Judge Patrick Bumatay, who was appointed by Trump, dissenting.
In their ruling, Bennett and Sanchez wrote: "The United States’s claimed emergency, at least in part, is a self-constructed one. At least part of the delay here is attributable to the United States’s own delay in filing suit, in realizing that existing California state law governs the issuance and processing of ballots, in recognizing that California has millions of registered voters and processes ballots on a schedule aligned with that scale, and in communicating to the court its desired relief."
Earlier this month, the DOJ filed suit against California, accusing the state of failing to review a list of alleged noncitizens that the Trump administration claimed were sent mail-in ballots for next week's midterm election.
In court papers filed earlier last week, Los Angeles officials said a preliminary analysis of 200 of the names on the 20,000-person list, included a "high percentage" of individuals who say they were born in the U.S. and many more who have no voting history at all.
Of those 200 individuals, officials said, nearly 40% "indicate that they were born in the United States, which is strong evidence of citizenship; and 71.2% of the records have no voting history," according to a filing.
In a rare Sunday emergency hearing, the Justice Department's efforts to have the appeals court quickly rule on its lawsuit faced considerable skepticism from the panel.
Bennett repeatedly questioned whether the appeals court had jurisdiction to step in at this stage in the litigation and expressed considerable constitutional concerns over the lawsuit itself.
"I don't see how we have jurisdiction," Bennett said to DOJ attorney Matthew Donnelly after pressing him over the timeline of the government's decision to seek emergency appeal when a hearing before the district judge is already set for Tuesday.
Donnelly claimed that the DOJ's decision to seek relief from the appeals court came after disclosures by California of the numbers of mail-in ballots already being processed in advance of the election -- which number in the hundreds of thousands.
Bennett's most significant concerns appeared to be the nature of the lawsuit and it appearing to directly contradict the Constitution's Elections Clause -- which mandates that states have jurisdictions over the manner their elections are run.
"How can the legislature making laws with regard to the manner of holding elections be preempted by a criminal statute passed by the Congress, especially when both the Congress and the California Legislature have made it illegal for non-citizens to vote?" he asked.
Donnelly repeatedly pointed to DOJ's position that the way California is administering its elections -- and not acting on the hard drive of potential 20,000 likely non-citizens -- infringes on the federal government's ability to enforce the federal statute barring voting by illegal immigrants.
President Donald Trump said on Monday that he is offering a $1 million reward for anyone who reports voter fraud -- in past elections or in the upcoming midterm elections -- that leads to a conviction.
"Anybody reporting Voter Fraud in the past Elections, or the upcoming 2026 Midterm Election, will be paid $1,000,000 upon the arrest and conviction of those that created the Fraud," Trump wrote in a social media post.
Trump has repeatedly made unfounded claims that there was widespread voter fraud in past elections. It is not clear where the money for this reward that the president is offering would come from.
The White House would not provide any additional details about Trump's announcement.
Trump has pushed election reform legislation, the SAVE America Act, which he says will cut down on voter fraud. The legislation requires voter ID at the ballot box and proof of citizenship to register.
The House passed the measure earlier this year; it has failed in the Senate multiple times.
Last week, Trump announced a separate fraud whistleblower program where tipsters who successfully report and prove fraud cases will be rewarded a 1% commission of the amount of money the government is able to recover. The president said he would make the determination of whether a tipster would receive a financial reward.
ABC News' Sarah Beth Hensley contributed to this report.
Sen. Susan Collins in Bangor, Maine, October 15, 2026 and Democratic candidate for US Senate Troy Jackson in Bangor, Maine, October 15, 2026. (Getty Images)
Thirty-five Senate seats are up for grabs when Americans head to the polls on Nov. 3. A key handful of them will be critical in determining whether Democrats or Republicans control the chamber next year.
Republicans currently control the Senate with 53 seats. Democrats and two independents make up the Senate minority with 47 seats.
In order for Democrats to take the chamber back, they’ll have to net four seats in the upcoming election. Republicans can afford to lose up to three and still be considered the Senate majority with the tie-breaking vote of Vice President JD Vance.
Some of the races that were closely watched earlier this year have slid from the spotlight as the election grew near.Republicans seem to have abandoned efforts to unseat incumbent Sen. Jon Ossoff in Georgia and have pulled out of spending in North Carolina, where former Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper now seems poised to best former Republican National Committee Chair Michael Whatley to fill retiring GOP Sen. Thom Tillis' seat.
As both parties prepare for the final leg of the campaign, here are some of the most closely watched Senate races.
Michigan: A bitter fight against a progressive newcomer
ABC News rating: Lean Democrat
Republican nominee Mike Rogers is no stranger to Senate races -- the former congressmen lost his 2024 bid to now-Sen. Elissa Slotkin by less than 20,000 votes.
Rogers is squaring off this time against progressive Abdul El-Sayed, a former health executive who bested a moderate candidate in the Democratic primary.
Republicans have gone to great lengths to frame El-Sayed as “radical" over his support for Medicare for all and his positions on immigration. They've also attacked him for his faith and ethnicity. Rogers has falsely linked him to terrorist groups and President Donald Trump has gone as far as calling him a "vicious, violent jihadist" while urging voters to reject him to "preserve our religion, our values, and our heritage."
El-Sayed, who was born to Egyptian immigrant parents in Rochester Hills, Michigan, has denied ties to terrorism and called those characterizations Islamophobic.
El-Sayed told ABC News Live anchor Linsey Davis last week, "They think they can point to my name and my faith and distract us from the fact that we can't afford our gas and we can't afford our groceries."
Rogers told Davis in a separate interview the he thought he was making inroads with traditionally Democratic Jewish and Black voters who are wary of El-Sayed.
Michigan has voted for Trump in two of the last three elections, yet Democrats have prevailed in every Senate race since 1994.
Texas: A primary upset puts Dems in the hunt
ABC News rating: Tossup
Texans have not been represented by a Democrat in the Senate for 33 years, but Democrats say this could be the year that changes.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton beat long-time incumbent Sen. John Cornyn in a costly GOP primary runoff thanks to Trump's late endorsement. Paxton, a hardliner and ally of the president, is seen by many Republicans as a harder sell in the general election than Cornyn would have been.
Paxton has had several scandals in his time in the public eye. He was impeached in 2023 on allegations of abuse of office, bribery and corruption but was acquitted by the state Senate. He was indicted on securities fraud charges in 2015 but reached a pretrial agreement with prosecutors just weeks before trial in which he agreed to community service, legal ethics courses and pay $300,000 in restitution in return for not having to admit guilt.
Democrat James Talarico is a former state representative and Presbyterian seminarian. Republicans have tried to paint the 37-year-old progressive as far-left and radical.
Democrats hope Paxton’s lack of favorability coupled with larger concerns about affordability could be enough to end their three-decade Senate drought.
Republicans are taking no chances, pouring millions into this race and even opted to hold their inaugural midterm convention in Dallas.
The race is the most expensive Senate race in history: Outside groups have contributed more than a quarter-billion dollars to elect Paxton. Over $500 million has been spent on ads in the state, according to AdImpact.
Alaska: 4 candidates, 2 Dan Sullivans
ABC News rating: Tossup
Incumbent Republican Dan Sullivan will square off against former Democratic Rep. Mary Peltola and another candidate with the same name in another surprisingly close race.
Alaska’s ranked-choice voting sends the top four vote-getters in primaries to the general election. Peltola is advantaged by being the only Democrat to advance.
In addition to Peltola, Sen. Sullivan faces another opponent on the ballot also named Dan Sullivan, an independent, and Republican Gerald Heikes, who made the final four when the fourth-place finisher dropped out.
Republicans, including Trump, have made a point of reminding voters to check that they’re casting their ballot for the “real Dan Sullivan,” and on Oct. 23 he directed the Justice Department to preemptively sue to block certification of the results if the incumbent narrowly loses.
Trump won Alaska by 13 points in 2024.
Ohio: An appointee senator vs. a former one
ABC News rating: Tossup
The Ohio Senate race features two candidates fighting for their chance to return to the Senate: incumbent Republican John Husted and former Sen. Sherrod Brown, who lost his 2024 reelection bid to Bernie Moreno.
Husted was appointed by Ohio GOP Gov. Mike DeWine in 2025 to fill the Senate seat left vacant by Vice President JD Vance. This race will determine who finishes out the remainder of Vance’s term until 2029.
This is Husted’s first time on the statewide ballot. Though Ohio has been moving increasingly toward Republicans in recent elections, Husted faces a tough race amid growing concerns about affordability and data centers in his home state.
Brown lost his reelection bid against newcomer Moreno by about four points in 2024, though he outperformed Democratic nominee Kamala Harris in the state. The three-term senator is making a pitch to working-class voters concerned about cost-of-living issues.
Kansas: Challenging the GOP's lock on Senate seat
ABC News rating: Tossup
The Kansas Senate race was not expected to be competitive -- Trump won the state by 16 points in 2024 and Republicans have held both Senate seats in Kansas for nearly a century. Yet even incumbent Republican Sen. Roger Marshall has conceded that it's “quite a close race” this cycle.
Marshall, a medical doctor who served in the House before being elected to the Senate in 2020, has largely supported Trump’s policies during his time in Congress. His opponent, Adam Hamilton, has sought to emphasize Marshall’s ties to the unpopular policies that have created economic challenges for voters.
Hamilton is reverend of the largest United Methodist congregation in the nation. He has tried to brand himself as an “independent-minded” Democrat but Marshall has said Hamilton is “too woke” to represent the people of Kansas.
Maine: Can a 100-day-long campaign unseat an institution?
ABC News rating: Tossup
Longtime Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins has repeatedly defied the odds, and kept her seat even after being counted out. She’s a moderate Republican who has been more willing than most in her party to break with the president on some issues.
But Democrats think Troy Jackson, a former Maine Senate president and majority leader, could put an end to Collins’ nearly-30-year Senate career.
Jackson was a late entry into the race after Graham Platner, the original nominee, dropped out following sexual assault allegations.
Collins, the chair of the powerful Senate Appropriations Committee, has name recognition and a long record of serving Maine on her side and has tried to highlight her willingness to vote against her party.
Jackson has tried to show Collins failed to when it counted -- notably, Jackson has accused her of "paving the way" for the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade by casting the deciding vote for Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
Iowa: A surprisingly competitive race
ABC News rating: Tossup
Trump has been rallying in Iowa to support Republican Rep. Ashley Hinson’s bid to replace retiring GOP Sen. Joni Ernst in a race that few thought would be competitive at the beginning of the cycle.
There are no Democrats in Iowa's congressional delegation and Trump won the state by a commanding 13 points in 2024. Iowa has not elected a Democrat to the Senate since 2008.
But rising costs caused by the Iran war have hit Iowa farmers hard. Many see moderate Democratic nominee Josh Turek, a state representative and two-time Paralympics gold medalist in wheelchair basketball, as a formidable candidate against Hinson.
Rep. Ashley Hinson, R-Iowa, chats with ABC News' Jonathan Karl. (ABC News)
With days to go until the midterms, President Donald Trump is traveling the country on a red-state blitz to stave off a potential blue wave, including in Iowa, where an open U.S. Senate seat is up for grabs.
Democrats are pinning their hopes on state Rep. Josh Turek, a two-time Paralympic gold medalist, to flip the seat for the first time since 2008. He's running as a centrist on what he calls a "common-sense prairie populist" platform against Republican Rep. Ashley Hinson.
Iowa Republicans hold the governorship, majorities in the statehouse and represent the state's entire congressional delegation. But in a midterm environment broadly seen as unfavorable to Republicans, Democrats see a competitive opportunity to flip control of Congress amid growing economic discontent over rising gas and fertilizer costs in the agriculture-heavy state.
Trump, who is backing Hinson, handily won the state in the last three presidential elections, but Hinson is walking a political tightrope. Though she praised Trump at his Sioux City rally last week for "preserving our country for generations to come," she has criticized the president's recent deal with Russia he said would lower diesel fuel costs. And in September, she reversed her position on Iran, calling for an end to the war.
When asked by ABC News about the Pentagon's timeline for a new offensive after the midterms, Hinson deferred to the commander-in-chief.
"I trust the president and the U.S. military to get this done on the time frame that works right to make sure we can actually achieve the result of making sure Iran does not get a nuclear weapon," Hinson told ABC News' Jon Karl.
On Ukraine, Hinson disagreed with the president's waiving of sanctions against Russia President Vladimir Putin.
"I don't think we should be making any deals with Russia," Hinson said, later adding, "I want to bring all of these conflicts abroad to an end as quickly as possible. I don't think anybody likes forever wars, but certainly we cannot be empowering dictators to win wars."
The congresswoman also took issue with the U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff calling Putin a "humanitarian" last week when Russia released formerly detained American Stephen Hubbard.
"He's a murderer. I don't think we should be making deals with murderers and dictators, and that's why I stood up for Ukraine," Hinson said.
Former President Barack Obama, who twice carried the Hawkeye State, endorsed Turek in July and reminded voters, "I know a little something about winning Iowa."
Will endorsements make a difference?
"Probably not," Turek told ABC News. "One thing I do believe is that we're not a red state. We're a common-sense state that's masqueraded more red than what we actually are."
Turek has leaned into his personal story. The state lawmaker was born with spina bifida due to his father's exposure to Agent Orange during the Vietnam War. "I am an example of the generational consequences of these forever wars," he has said.
On Thursday, Turek visited a local manufacturer in Shell Rock, home to some 1,260 people in Butler County, Iowa, which Trump carried by 45 percentage points in the 2024 presidential election. He said too many Democrats have overlooked small communities like this one – areas where some Iowans say they're reeling from the economic fallout of Trump's seesaw tariff policies and the Iran war.
A recent CNN poll found that majorities of likely Iowa voters say Trump's policies have increased their cost of living, that gas prices have caused them hardship and that tariffs are bad for the state.
Hinson told ABC News she is unafraid "to tell [Trump] when I think he's wrong on something."
"I think that's how Iowans expect you to do your job. They don't like empty rhetoric," she added. "They like results here in Iowa, and that's exactly what I've done."
Turek has slammed Hinson for her votes in Congress to continue the war with Iran. But the Democrat has also touted his bipartisan bona fides in ads, promising voters he would work across the aisle, including with Trump, on issues like immigration.
"He's done a better job on the border than Biden," Turek said. "I agree with him that we need to drive private equity out of housing. I would also like to see us drive private equity out of housing, healthcare, and nursing homes. And I agree with him that we should have no tax on tips, overtime, and Social Security."
Turek, who hails from the deep-red city of Council Bluffs, also recently launched a coalition of Republicans backing him, including members of his own family. He told ABC News his father is a two-time Obama voter and three-time Trump voter. His sister, he added, is a registered Republican and he's unsure whether his mother "has ever voted for a Democrat besides me."
Democrats like Turek have also slammed the GOP for voting to pass Trump's signature tax legislation, the "One Big Beautiful Bill," arguing it has threatened rural hospitals and reduced healthcare access, even as the state faces rising cancer rates.
The bill slashed Medicaid funding by $1 trillion over the next 10 years, in part through new work and eligibility requirements. Republicans said their goal is reducing "waste, fraud and abuse" in these programs.
Hinson, pitching herself as a "minivan-driving mom," told ABC News that she knows Iowans are economically struggling and defended the "One Big Beautiful Bill" for delivering tax relief to families. The congresswoman pledged to take more action to lower healthcare premiums and gas prices.
At 43, Hinson could become the youngest elected Republican woman in the U.S. Senate. And like Turek, she's pitching herself as a bipartisan lawmaker, despite her initial campaign promise to be Trump's "strongest ally" if elected.
"I found common ground with President Biden. He and I didn't agree on much, but we were able to get some things done for Iowa, even when I was in the minority," Hinson said. "I'm going to operate that same way, no matter who's in the White House.
In Shell Rock, Turek said that Iowans are telling him they're tired of the "political theater" and "tribalism."
"'I'm struggling to keep food on the table, a roof above my head, pay my electric bill, and keep gas in my tank,'" Turek said voters are telling him. "Can you please go up there and solve problems through policy in a bipartisan way?'"
A rare Sunday federal appeals court hearing for the Justice Department's voting lawsuit against California closed without a ruling.
The department requested that the court issue one by Tuesday prior to the scheduled 1 p.m. PDT hearing before the district court.
The arguments followed a surprise appeal by the Trump administration, which claims a district judge did not act quickly enough to address the administration's allegations of roughly 20,000 potential noncitizen voters on the state's voter rolls.
A three-judge panel that includes two appointees of President Donald Trump and one appointee of former President Joe Biden heard arguments on DOJ's efforts to segregate ballots from the alleged noncitizens.
California officials have countered that the list is unverified and includes the names of lawful voters, despite recent charges announced by DOJ of roughly 28 individuals from the list accused of voting and immigration-related crimes.
Earlier the DOJ sent letters last week to every county in California asking local elections officials to help identify potential voters who may be in the U.S. illegally, according to a letter described to ABC News.
"Within 48 hours, we ask that you commit to working with DOJ and DHS to identify who on the accompanying list is a citizen and who is not," according to a letter sent by Justice Department officials to every county in California and described to ABC News. "The Department strongly urges you and your agency to work with the Department of Justice to ensure the integrity of California's federal elections before taking actions that risk significant federal scrutiny and legal exposure."
Earlier this month, the DOJ filed suit against California accusing the state of failing to review a list of alleged noncitizens that the Trump administration claimed were sent mail-in ballots for next month's midterm election.
In court papers filed earlier this week, Los Angeles officials said a preliminary analysis of 200 of the names on the 20,000-person list, included a "high percentage" of individuals who say they were born in the U.S. and many more who have no voting history at all.
Of those 200 individuals, officials said, nearly 40% "indicate that they were born in the United States, which is strong evidence of citizenship; and 71.2% of the records have no voting history," according to a filing.
The Justice Department's rushed efforts to have an appeals court quickly rule on its lawsuit faced considerable skepticism from the three-judge panel in Sunday's emergency hearing.
Circuit Judge Mark Bennett, a Trump appointee, repeatedly questioned whether the appeals court had jurisdiction to step in at this stage in the litigation, and expressed considerable constitutional concerns over the lawsuit itself.
"I don't see how we have jurisdiction," Bennett said to DOJ attorney Matthew Donnelly after pressing him over the timeline of the government's decision to seeking emergency appeal when a hearing before the district judge is already set for this Tuesday.
Donnelly claimed that the DOJ's decision to seek relief from the appeals court came after disclosures by the state of the numbers of mail-in ballots already being processed in advance of the election -- which number in the hundreds of thousands.
But Bennett's most significant concerns appeared to be the nature of the lawsuit and it appearing to directly contradict the Constitution's Elections Clause -- which mandates that states have jurisdictions over the manner their elections are run.
"How can it preempt something that is expressly authorized by a provision of the Constitution?" Bennett asked. "How can the legislature making laws with regard to the manner of holding elections be preempted by a criminal statute passed by the Congress, especially when both the Congress and the California Legislature have made it illegal for non-citizens to vote?"
Donnelly repeatedly pointed to DOJ's position that the way California is administering its elections -- and not acting on the hard drive of potential 20,000 likely non-citizens -- infringes on the federal government's ability to enforce the federal statute barring voting by illegal immigrants.
That explanation didn't appear to sit well with Bennett, however, who pointed out that the Constitution specifically tasks Congress with jurisdiction over how states administer their elections and not the Judiciary.
"How can we, a federal court, do what is reserved to Congress, which Congress, in my view, hasn't done?" Bennett asked.
"Your Honor, I would just simply -- unfortunately -- disagree with you that 18 USC 611 is not an election law that fits in the power of Congress," Donnelly replied.
The judges also appeared to express concern about last-minute intervention to force California to segregate certain mail-in ballots given the state has provided a declaration saying if such an order was implemented it could have a "catastrophic" impact on tabulating the upcoming election.
Circuit Judge Patrick Bumatay, a Trump appointee, repeatedly pressed California's attorney Samuel Siegel over why an injunction wouldn't be appropriate to ensure non-citizens votes are being actively cast in the ongoing election.
"Without an injunction, you will never know, correct?" Bumatay asked. "Because if -- if the ballots are cast and separated, then they're going to be tabulated, and there's no way of knowing."
"Your Honor, we would respectfully disagree with that because of the number of steps that people have to take to attest to their citizenship, to declare consistent with what is required by both federal and state law that they are citizens when they register to vote," Siegel responded.
Even as Bumatay's questioning suggested he had more sympathy to granting the government some kind of relief, both Bennett and Circuit Judge Gabriel Sanchez, a Biden appointee, appeared unified that the extraordinary relief being sought by DOJ was not appropriate at this juncture.
"That's why I have a problem with the relief that's being sought here because I just don't see -- Congress and the California legislature have said non-citizens can't vote, and this lawsuit is about 'we don't like the way you're sorting citizens from non-citizens, and I just don't see 611 as telling California how to do the sorting," Bennett said.
"That's absolutely right, Your Honor, and to reiterate my earlier point, if the federal government, if the Executive Branch wants that authority in the first instance, they need to go ask Congress for it, they haven't done that," Siegel said. "They ask this court to short circuit the democratic process and issue an order, not just on the eve of an election, but as an election is underway."
In closing remarks, Bennett said the panel "will try to decide this case as quickly as possible."
Gov. Wes Moore (D-Md.) said Sunday that he believes several statewide races in the historically red U.S. South are “in play” for Democrats this cycle, adding that the party has “made mistakes in not investing earlier” in the region.
“We've seen some movement, especially in the South -- talk of Florida potentially being in play, Mississippi, South Carolina. Do you think those places are really in play?” asked “This Week” co-anchor Jonathan Karl Sunday, adding, "And if so, did Democrats make a mistake by not investing earlier?”
“They are,” Moore said. “They are in play, and we have made mistakes in not investing earlier. And I don't even think just earlier in this cycle -- I think earlier in this generation.”
Moore said the Democratic Party had largely written off the region, which he said has led to fewer history-making candidates being elected.
“I am the third African American ever elected governor in the history of the United States of America. That's not because I'm the third African American ever qualified. That's because oftentimes there's been chronic underinvestment,” Moore said.
Democrats are increasingly bullish about their midterm prospects. Polls for top-of-the-ticket races in Texas, Iowa, Kansas and Alaska have shown the Democratic candidates tied with, or even leading against, Republican contenders. More recent polling suggests that statewide races in places considered to be even more in the GOP’s grip -- like Florida, South Carolina and Mississippi -- are closer than expected.
Moore noted his campaign “personally invested” in Texas Democratic gubernatorial candidate Gina Hinojosa’s campaign.
“The wonderful thing that I feel about Gina or Keisha [Lance Bottoms in Georgia] or, or Jermaine Johnson in South Carolina is that they would be history-making candidates, but making history is not the assignment. The assignment is to win,” Moore said. “The assignment is to do things like making sure that we can provide health care for people. The assignment is to make sure that we can end child poverty. The assignment is to make sure that we can raise wages."
"If you can do that, then I think you have really good candidates who don't have a chance to win, but really good chance, have a chance to make life better for the people in their states,” Moore declared.
Moore predicted that Democrats would have the successful election they’re hoping for.
“I think it's not just that the base is, is energized. I think right now the base is [enlarged], and that is, that is important,” he said. “I’m seeing it all over the state of Maryland, where we’re campaigning for re-election. … But I'm also seeing it when I'm out campaigning for other common-sense leaders around the country.”
“People are excited right now because they're looking for leadership that's not just going to push back against this corruption from [President] Donald Trump, but push forward for a new direction,” he added.
While the 2026 midterm election is now nine days away, jockeying for the 2028 presidential election is already underway. Karl pressed Moore on whether he’d be one of the Democrats expected to make a run for the White House.
“You’ve been pretty clear over the past year that you’re not running for president, but you seem to be a little less clear now,” Karl said. “Have you changed your mind on this?”
“You know, no, because I’m very focused on--,” Moore began.
“You haven’t changed your mind? So you’re committed to fulfilling a full term [as governor]?” Karl interjected.
“Yeah, I wouldn't be running for re-election if I was thinking about anything else, to be clear,” Moore said. “My entire focus right now is on the people of Maryland.”
Karl also asked Moore to share a few words that came to mind about other potential 2028 Democratic presidential candidates.
On Sen. Mark Kelly: “Remarkable veteran.”
On former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg: “Remarkably competent.”
On Gov. Josh Shapiro: “Really solid advocate.”
On former Vice President Kamala Harris: “Really decent person and great vice president.”
On Gov. Gavin Newsom: “Strong leader.”
On Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: “Passionate advocate.”
Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith arrives in the U.S. Capitol for the first vote of the week, September 22, 2026. (Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
Why are major Democrats and Republicans flocking to Mississippi in recent weeks?
In a climate where polls show President Donald Trump's approval ratings cratering, Democrats are unusually optimistic about Scott Colom's chances of flipping the Senate seat held by incumbent Republican Cindy Hyde-Smith -- even in deep-red Mississippi.
"We got to have a senator that looks out for Mississippi, that puts Mississippi farmers first, Mississippi small businesses first, represent our values by not allowing corruption to ruin our country and actually delivers on the commitments to put America first," Colom told ABC News in an interview earlier this week.
The incumbent's campaign dismisses the Democratic push as the last-ditch effort of a campaign that will fall short.
Colom is a district attorney for four counties along the Mississippi-Alabama border and a former nominee to become a U.S. district judge. He would be Mississippi's first Black U.S. senator since Reconstruction.
Democrats have argued that Colom's prominent credentials, as well as voter pushback against Republican incumbents and motivation among Democratic-leaning Black voters, could help boost him. Mississippi's population is around 36% Black, according to U.S. Census data.
Colom faces an uphill battle, as Mississippi has not elected a Democrat to the U.S. Senate since 1982 and voted for Donald Trump in 2024 by around 20 points. ABC News rates the race solid Republican.
But he has gotten the attention of national Democrats; major party figures such as former former Vice President Kamala Harris and Georgia Sen. Raphael Warnock have campaigned with him. Former President Barack Obama also recorded an ad for him released earlier this month.
Harris, during a rally with Colom on Thursday, told attendees, "I've been in those rooms where there's no cameras, it's senators talking to each other... When you have a voice like his in that room, just think about the impact that's going to have on the decisions coming out of that room. Think about that. This is no ordinary time, and this is no ordinary man."
Colom also went viral online last week after a social video he posted showed Hyde-Smith, during a local news interview from February, saying "You have so many proteins to choose from" while discussing how to deal with higher prices on meat and other goods. In the interview, Hyde-Smith also spoke about working on regulations that would help energy production, and tax incentives to help development.
But it was the proteins part that Colom's campaign seized on, with a punchy video that featured voters mocking the senator's words, with one saying, "Pick another protein ... I'd rather pick another Senator instead." (The campaign has confirmed to ABC News that the video has been turned into a campaign ad.)
One concrete sign of confidence among Democrats over Colom's chances came on Tuesday, when the Senate Majority PAC, an outside group aligned with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, announced it would spend $1.2 million on an ad campaign across broadcast TV and digital for ads for Colom.
Asked what signs the group sees in Mississippi that makes it worth investing in, spokesperson Lauren French wrote, "Cindy Hyde-Smith has spent a decade in Washington without passing a single piece of legislation, and Mississippians have noticed."
Hyde-Smith has cosponsored legislation that has passed into law but legislation she initially sponsored or reintroduced has not become law, according to congressional records. Asked to respond to Senate Majority PAC, Hyde-Smith's campaign pointed to how bills from lawmakers "are often passed as part of larger legislative packages," and that has been true for some of Hyde-Smith's bills, including the first one she introduced. The campaign also pointed out that she is running for only her second full term.
French said Colom is running a "disciplined campaign" with messages resonating with voters.
Colom and Hyde-Smith have some history, as she blocked his nomination for federal judge in 2023. She cited his support for transgender rights and having previously been boosted by a George Soros-linked PAC, according to the Mississippi Free Press.
He insists his bid for Senate is not motivated by a desire to get back at her.
"It has nothing to do with the run for me ... as a Christian, I forgive her. It's about the people in Mississippi," Colom told ABC News.
Hyde-Smith dismissed Colom's chances.
"We are confident that Mississippians will once again send Cindy Hyde-Smith back to the U.S. Senate on November 3rd. This is simply Washington insiders making a last ditch effort to give life to Scott Colom's failing campaign," campaign manager Jake Monssen told ABC News in a statement.
Hyde-Smith's supporters may be more motivated after a boost from President Donald Trump, who's set to hold a rally in Mississippi on Monday as part of a swing of campaign rallies mostly in red states.
The Republican National Committee announced the rally around a week after Colom's social video went viral, although Trump and the group have not indicated why they are doing the rally there and Trump has expressed confidence in Hyde-Smith.
"Cindy Hyde-Smith's very popular ... So if I need to get her over the top, I would go there [to Mississippi]. She's great. Cindy Hyde-Smith is great," Trump told reporters when asked Thursday about the Senate election.
Hyde-Smith will be attending the rally, according to her campaign.
