Tag Archive for: states

Red States Replace ‘Pride Month’ as Support for LGBT Events Plummets

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

Pride Month is off to a faltering start again this year as yet another red state ditches the month-long celebration of LGBT depravity in favor of family values. Arkansas Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders (R) signed a proclamation last week declaring June to be “Fidelity Month” in her state.

“The United States of America was founded on the values of faith, liberty, and patriotism as acknowledged in its founding documents and in the statements of its Founding Fathers,” the proclamation reads. “The commitment of Arkansas to spiritual and civic institutions is at the core of the State’s collective identity. … Cultivating fidelity to God, family, community, and country contributes to human flourishing and supports a healthy, stable, well-ordered society,” it continues. “Practices that encourage virtue, commitment, responsibility, and shared moral foundations strengthen both individuals and their communities. … Fidelity Month provides an opportunity for residents to reflect on and renew commitments to these shared values and institutions…”

Earlier this year, Tennessee Governor Bill Lee (R) also rejected Pride Month, declaring June instead to be “Nuclear Family Month” in the Volunteer State. The governor’s proclamation asserted that “the nuclear family, consisting of one husband, one wife, and any biological, adopted, or fostered children, is God’s design for familial structure and has been the bedrock of society since the creation of the world…” The nuclear family “was the basic building block of Tennessee’s society throughout her formative years [and] built the United States of America and created prosperity

within our nation,” Lee’s proclamation continued.

“Tennessee’s values do not align with the humanistic, globalist ideologies of the World Health Organization, the United Nations, and like-minded organizations that fight for population control through the means of promoting sterilization and abortion practices,” Lee stated in his proclamation, adding that “the nuclear family is God’s perfect design for humanity and is aligned with the long-held traditional values of Tennessee,” but “is under attack in our beloved State and nation, and it is our responsibility to uplift, protect, and support values that help Tennessee prosper…”

Lee noted that broken families, fatherless homes in particular, are a breeding ground for all manner of societal ills, including poverty, drug and alcohol abuse, mental health and behavioral issues, and increased crime rates among youth, among other problems.

Last year, The Washington Stand reported that corporate sponsorship for Pride Month events was scaling back dramatically in the wake of President Donald Trump’s return to the White House and the previous months of crippling boycotts targeting companies that made LGBT themes central to their marketing. The evaporating corporate sponsorship impacted public-facing Pride Month initiatives, with LGBT parades and events in major cities facing serious reductions. 2026 is on track for much of the same.

According to a report from NPR, corporate sponsorship for 2026 Pride Month events is declining even further, falling by an estimated 60% to 70% from years past. Organizers pointed to the Trump White House and its agenda targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and pro-transgenderism programs and the public backlash against LGBT events, marketing, and sponsorship as causes for the reduced corporate involvement in Pride Month this year. According to ProCapitas, many Pride Month events are now shifting from large-scale corporate-funded initiatives to smaller-scale, “community-driven” events. Several Democrat-run cities, however, are planning larger Pride Month events than in years past, including Boston and Houston.

Some Pride programs, like Pittsburgh Pride, have sought state grants and individual donations to make up for lost corporate funding, but Jordan Braxton, co-president of the United States Association of Prides, confirmed that the “majority” of Pride Month events will evince major reductions in scale. Tampa Pride in Florida, for example, has fully suspended all events for 2026, citing an absence of funding (Florida denied state grants to event organizers) and the “current political and economic climate.” Arlington Pride in Texas also canceled major events, and Fort Myers Pride in Florida is unlikely to host any events this year. Others, like Philadelphia Pride, have moved events to larger venues and plan to charge admission fees to cover costs. The move sparked backlash from LGBT activists, who argued that charging admission fees reduces inclusion and accessibility.

AUTHOR

S.A. McCarthy

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Republican Support for Same-Sex Marriage Collapses, Falling Almost 20% since 2022

NO MORE PRIDE? Congresswoman Ditches ‘Perverse’ Pride Month, Gives June a New Name

Pride Losing Its Stride? Survey Shows Support for LGBTQ Issues Slipping

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2026 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Fear of Islamization of U.S. Sparks a Sharia-Free America Caucus in Congress

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Forty Republican members of the U.S. House of Representatives are joining forces in a new congressional caucus to combat what they view as a rapidly growing movement pushing for the Islamization of America as is happening in Great Britain and elsewhere in Europe.

Rep. Keith Self and Rep. Chip Roy, both of Texas, are co-founders of the Sharia-Free America Caucus that seeks to focus public and official attention and action on the multiple ways that the Islamization movement is making rapid progress in establishing large city-scaled developments exclusively available to Muslims transplanted to the U.S. from the Middle East, Africa, and Asia.

“The American way of life is under siege by radicals from a culture waging war against our Constitution and Western values. We’ve seen what happens when nations allow this infiltration: countries like France and England are on the verge of losing their identity and sovereignty. The same forces are at play here in America today, and if we don’t stop them, they will conquer our country too,” Self said in announcing the formation of the new caucus.

“America is facing a threat that directly attacks our Constitution and our Western values: the spread of Sharia law. From Texas to every state in this constitutional republic, instances of Sharia adherents masquerading as ‘refugees’ — and in many cases, sleeper cells connected to terrorist organizations — are threatening the American way of life. Those who succumb to this political ideology seek to replace our legal system and Constitution,” Roy said in the same announcement.

“Under Sharia law, there is no freedom of speech, religion, or women’s rights. Europe should be a wake-up call to America, showing what the spread of Sharia law looks like. America’s immigration system must brace to take on this battle, not only to preserve our constitutional republic but to take charge in the spiritual warfare and defend our Judeo-Christian values,” Roy continued.

House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R) of Minnesota is among the members joining the caucus. Emmer’s decision to join the caucus came amid growing national attention focused on the likelihood that Somali Muslims living in Minnesota were involved in a systematic defrauding of state and federal social service and other taxpayer programs at a cost of $9 billion or more.

“Sharia is completely incompatible with the American way of life and threatens the very fabric of our society. It is radical, oppressive, and must never be allowed to gain a foothold in America. I’m thankful to Congressmen Roy and Self for leading this noble charge in the House and looking forward to working together to combat this danger,” Emmer said in a January statement.

Members of the new caucus have introduced legislation designed to halt and reverse the current momentum of Islamization efforts in this country. Rep. Randy Fine (R) of Florida’s H.R. 5512, the No Sharia Act, insists the bill “would restrict courts from enforcing any judgment, decree, or arbitration that relies on Islamic law or any foreign system that violates constitutional rights,” according to Self’s initial announcement of the group’s formation.

Roy’s H.R. 5722, the Preserving a Sharia-Free America Act, is written to “prevent foreign nationals who adhere to Sharia from entering or staying in the U.S.” The Texas Republican’s H.R. 6225, the PAUSE Act, would freeze the immigration system until major reforms can be enacted by Congress and signed into law by the president.

Alabama Senator Tommy Tuberville’s (R) S. 3008 and S. 3009 are the Senate versions of the No Sharia Act and the Preserving Sharia-Free America Act.

Representatives from 19 states have flocked to join the caucus, while both co-founders and eight other GOP members of the Texas congressional delegation are members of the caucus, thanks in great part because the Lone Star State has become in recent years a focal point for the growing Muslim presence.

Developers of a massive Muslim-only combined residential and commercial complex near Dallas, initially known as EPIC City, recently opted to change the project’s name to “The Meadows” following public backlash in response to reports that Sharia law would exclusively govern residents there.

Sharia law is the civil and religious law prescribed by the Koran to regulate public and private life. Among much else, Sharia sanctions husbands treating wives as slaves, justifies Islamic men who rape non-Islamic women, requires the death penalty for those who identify as homosexual and death by stoning for adulterers, and forces non-Muslims to convert or face death by beheading.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R) signed into law last year a measure designed to prevent housing developments with religion-based segregation of acceptable buyers.

“One of the issues at stake is the freedom of religion,” Abbott said. “Another issue at stake is what’s called the right to contract. The fact is, religious freedom is a central part of the Texas Constitution. But bad actors like EPIC and EPIC City tried to use religion as a form of segregation. We will ensure that we have the laws and law enforcement in place to prevent attempts to build such discriminatory compounds in the state of Texas.”

But critics of the Abbott measure point out that projects like The Meadows continue moving forward.

Independent investigative journalist Amy Mek, for example, describes Texas as “ground zero” in the Islamization process and “Islam’s top U.S. target and epicenter for settlement, enclaves, and long-term dominance.” As evidence for her description, Mek claims there are “over 330 mosques expanding rapidly” across the state, more than 650 “Islamic nonprofits operating here — more than any other state,” and a proliferation within the financial community of “Sharia-compliant finance” policies.

AUTHOR

Mark Tapscott

Mark Tapscott is senior congressional analyst at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2026 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

What Constitution? Progressive States, Cities Join WHO Network after U.S. Withdrawal

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

For the past decade, left-wing Democrats have calibrated their actions by assessing whatever Donald Trump wants, and doing the opposite. This tactic is evident everywhere, but far fewer people understand how close this pattern comes to triggering a constitutional crisis.

One recent example came after the Trump administration officially withdrew the United States from the World Health Organization (WHO) on January 22. “Like many international organizations, the WHO abandoned its core mission and acted repeatedly against the interests of the United States,” announced Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert Kennedy. “Although the United States was a founding member and the WHO’s largest financial contributor, the organization pursued a politicized, bureaucratic agenda driven by nations hostile to American interests.”

The U.S. Congress reserved the right to withdraw from the WHO when it joined the U.N. organization in 1948. President Trump initiated the process in the waning months of his first administration in response to its mismanagement of the COVID-19 pandemic. President Joe Biden suspended this withdrawal in 2021, but President Trump reinitiated it in 2025. Each of these policy reversals came as American voters decided to exchange one party for the other.

Now, some of Biden’s fellow Democrats have decided that they will simply refuse to follow the Trump administration’s foreign policy lead and engage with the WHO on their own.

On January 23, California Governor Gavin Newsom (D) announced that his state was “becoming the first, and currently the only, state to join WHO’s Global Outbreak Alert & Response Network (GOARN).” Newsom met with WHO Director-General Dr. Tedros Ghebreyesus during the World Economic Forum “to detect and respond to emerging public health threats.”

In Newsom’s announcement, foreign policy disagreement with the Trump administration features prominently. “The Trump administration’s withdrawal from WHO is a reckless decision that will hurt all Californians and Americans,” Newsom declared. “California will not bear witness to the chaos this decision will bring. We will continue to foster partnerships across the globe.”

On February 3, Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker (D) made a similar announcement for similar reasons. “By withdrawing from the World Health Organization, Donald Trump has undermined science and weakened our nation’s ability to detect and respond to global health threats. I refuse to sit idly by and let that happen,” Pritzker protested. “By joining the World Health Organization’s coordinated network, GOARN, we are ensuring that our public health leaders — and the public — have the information, expertise, and partnerships they need to protect the people of our state. Across our state and alongside valued partners around the world, Illinois will continue to put science, preparedness, and people first.”

The Illinois Department of Public Health outlined the benefit from WHO membership resources, such as “Direct access to global early-warning alerts and outbreak intelligence,” “Opportunities for technical collaboration and surge support during major public health events,” “Participation in international training, exercises, and best-practice exchanges,” and “Stronger coordination between state-level public health systems and global response efforts.”

Never one to miss a bandwagon hurtling to the left, the New York City government under Mayor Zohran Mamdani (D) also jumped on board the trend on February 5. “New York City is a global city with 8.5 million residents and more than 12 million international visitors every year,” explained New York City Acting Health Commissioner and Chief Medical Officer Michelle Morse. “To best prevent disease outbreaks and public health emergencies and to protect New Yorkers and visitors from them, the NYC Health Department is joining hundreds of public health institutions worldwide that share critical public health information to support life-saving prevention and response efforts. Infectious diseases know no boundaries, and nor should the information and resources that help us protect New Yorkers.”

The problem with all of this talk of international cooperation and its benefits is that American states and cities are not allowed to have their own foreign policy. Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution stipulates that “No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation.” In fact, “No State shall, without the Consent of Congress … enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power.”

The original reason for the 13 “States of America” to become “United” was to present a unified front on matters of foreign policy. State governments have sovereignty, but only over their domestic affairs. Once that principle is breached, once individual states begin forging independent side-partnerships with foreign governments, American unity would be fundamentally compromised, and American security with it.

Consider the implications of California universities collaborating with the Chinese Communist Party on defense research, or the Texas Military Department sharing intelligence with a foreign power, independent of the federal government.

What California, Illinois, and New York City are proposing is a uniquely unconstitutional manifestation of nullification, where states unilaterally declare federal law to be null and void in their territory.

The Constitution Center records at least “three prominent attempts by states at nullification in American history.” Kentucky tried to nullify the Alien and Sedition Acts in 1798. South Carolina tried to nullify federal tariffs in 1832 (with slavery providing an ugly backdrop). Arkansas tried to nullify Brown v. Board of Education in 1957.

For decades, progressives have derided southern states for their past nullification attempts. Now, it appears that such derision was based on the unfounded belief that progressive values would always (or eventually) prevail in the U.S. federal government. However, progressives have grown increasingly alarmed with their lack of power over federal policy, to the point that they have begun embracing their own versions of nullification.

For instance, Pritzker recently opined, “We need ICE out of our cities and, frankly, out of our state.” What is this but an attempt to dictate where federal officers can enforce federal law? Any expression of “ICE Out” is really an endorsement of the constitutionally illegitimate principle of nullification. (In contrast, a declaration that state or local law enforcement “does not enforce federal immigration law” is simply a recognition of the fact that states enforce state laws, and the federal government enforces federal laws.)

On December 10, 1832, President Andrew Jackson described nullification as “the strange position that any one State may not only declare an act of Congress void, but prohibit its execution,” and that “the true construction” of the Constitution “permits a State to retain its place in the Union and yet be bound by no other of its laws than those it may choose to consider as constitutional.” Such a position, Jackson argued, was absurd, “having for its object the destruction of the Union.”

Only one element of uncertainty may save the decision by progressive jurisdictions to join the GOARN network from being an indefensible violation of the Constitution. One could make a case that GOARN’s cooperation is not so much with a foreign government or international organization as with a global network of research institutes. GOARN has at least 365 partner institutions, of which 36 are in the United States.

Under this theory, these three progressive governments are not directly rejecting the Trump administration’s decision to withdraw from the WHO; that point might save them constitutionally, but it defeats the whole point of their choosing to join GOARN as a way to stick a finger in Trump’s eye.

AUTHOR

Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a senior writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Always Ready: Speaker Johnson Gives Biblical Defense of Borders

FRC’s Pray Vote Stand Chapters Equip Christians for Biblical Engagement in the Public Square

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2026 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Americans Are Continuing to Flee Blue States for Red States, Census Data Show

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Newly released census data has revealed that the trend of a mass exodus from states controlled by Democrats to states run by Republicans is continuing. Census Bureau population estimates indicate that the five fastest-growing states are red, while four of the five states that are facing a shrinking population are blue.

As noted by the National Review editorial board Monday, the data show that since 2020, the U.S. has added about 10.3 million people, only 1.9 million of which were natural births over deaths. The remaining 8.3 million constituted immigrants. “[T]he notion of a future in which we add four new immigrants for every net increase of one homegrown American is alarming,” the editors observed.

The census estimates further demonstrated that states run by Democrats (with one exception) continue to lose residents. The only five states that suffered losses in population were Vermont, Hawaii, West Virginia, New Mexico, and California, with New York narrowly breaking even. Many of these former blue state inhabitants seem to be fleeing to red states. The five fastest-growing states have Republican-controlled governments — South Carolina, Idaho, North Carolina, Texas, and Utah.

This latest data indicates that the population trends that began in 2020 are only continuing. An Institute for Family Studies (IFS) report from September 2024 found that in 2021-2022, the five states that lost the most families were the Democratic strongholds of California, New York, Illinois, Washington, and Oregon. Meanwhile, the states that gained the largest number of families were the Republican bastions of Texas, Florida, and South Carolina, along with the purple states of Georgia and Arizona.

Compounding the population problem for blue states is further data showing that fertility rates in Republican-run states are higher than they are in Democrat-run states. An October 2024 report from IFS analyzing 2023 data found that the 10 states with the highest fertility rates were all red, with the top three being South Dakota, Nebraska, and North Dakota. True to form, the 10 states with the lowest fertility rates were blue, with Vermont, Rhode Island, and Oregon being the three states with the lowest rates. The trend dovetails with studies showing that conservatives marry at higher rates and have more children than liberals.

A recent tax proposal for billionaires in California has left many scrambling the exits. The levy is emblematic of the heavy tax burden that Democrat-led states put on their citizens, with blue states securing the top 10 highest income tax rates in the nation. In addition, red states generally have fewer restrictions on home construction, have more business-friendly policies, have more jobs, and have lower energy costs, among other factors that make the cost of living less.

Experts like FRC Action Director Matt Carpenter say that the migration from blue states to red states will also likely have a big impact on future elections.

“If these projections hold up, the apportionment following the 2030 census will undoubtedly tilt future elections toward the GOP,” he told The Washington Stand. “With red states looking to pick up additional seats in Congress and additional electoral college votes, the Republican path to winning the presidency and Congressional majorities will depend less on winning swing states and swing districts in blue or purple states and will be achievable staying within red states alone.”

“It’s bad form in politics to assume outcomes, and red states will likely have to deal with an influx of more moderate and even liberal voters fleeing blue states,” Carpenter acknowledged. “But it’s even worse form to drive your population out of your state with insanely unpopular agendas.”

AUTHOR

Dan Hart

Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.

RELATED PODCAST: Is this the Left’s Blueprint for the Nation?

RELATED VIDEO: People are leaving blue states in droves and they’re all heading to five Red States

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2026 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Minneapolis Mayhem, ICE Updates, and More

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

President Donald Trump’s immigration enforcement agenda has arrested headlines for over a year, but violent riots and a series of fatal shootings have intensified scrutiny over immigration raids in Minneapolis. Earlier this month, 37-year-old Renee Good was shot and killed by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent when she struck the agent with her vehicle after impeding enforcement operations. Just last week, 37-year-old Alex Pretti was shot and killed by U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) agents when he showed up armed to protest immigration enforcement operations and involved himself in a physical altercation with law enforcement. Subsequently, the president deployed Border Czar and former ICE chief Tom Homan to Minneapolis to take control of operations. Here are the latest updates.

‘Noem, Go Home?’

In the wake of the violence in Minneapolis, multiple Democratic legislators have called for Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to resign, threatening to impeach her if she does not leave of her own volition. Now, Republicans are joining Democrats in clamoring for Noem’s ouster. According to Fox News, frequent Trump critics Senators Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) have joined Democrats in calling on the president to fire Noem. “I think the President needs to look at who he has in place as the Secretary of Homeland Security. I would not support her again,” Murkowski said, referring to her vote to confirm Noem, “and I think it probably is time for her to step down.”

Tillis faulted Noem and, more broadly, the Trump administration, especially White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy and Homeland Security Advisor Stephen Miller, for stalling a partly-bipartisan amnesty push for illegal immigrants. “I don’t know if it’s lost yet, but if it is an opportunity lost, I put it squarely on the shoulders of people like Noem and Stephen Miller,” Tillis said. Referring to the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS’s) handling of Pretti’s death, he added, “Those two people told the president, before they even had any incident report whatsoever, that the person who died was a terrorist. I mean, that is amateur hour at its worst.”

Following Pretti’s death, Noem referred to him as a “domestic terrorist” and official DHS channels, citing the handgun and multiple magazines Pretti brought with him when interfering with federal law enforcement, claimed that he sought to “massacre” federal agents. The characterization has been criticized as premature and has reportedly inspired some frustration within DHS’s ranks, particularly among ICE agents, who fear that they are being blamed for some of the more aggressive riot control tactics used by USBP.

The president has asserted that he will not ask Noem to resign, but he did reportedly question his Homeland Security Secretary in a two-hour Oval Office meeting Tuesday. According to The New York Times, Noem and her top advisor, former Trump campaign official Corey Lewandowski, met with the president, who was joined by White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, Communications Director Steven Cheung, and Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, to discuss the optics surrounding Pretti’s death and Noem’s response. The New York Times reported that no indication was given that either Noem or Lewandowski was at risk of losing their jobs.

Notably absent from the Oval Office meeting was Miller, the chief architect of Trump’s immigration policy over the past decade and one of the president’s closest and longest-serving allies. According to Axios, Noem faults Miller for DHS’s response to Pretti’s death, with the Homeland Security Secretary saying that Miller told her to label Pretti a domestic terrorist and a threat to federal law enforcement personnel. “Everything I’ve done, I’ve done at the direction of the president and Stephen,” Axios quoted Noem as saying. Unnamed sources reported that Miller “heard ‘gun’ and knew what the narrative would be: Pretti came to ‘massacre’ cops,” but that the USBP agents involved in the shooting were quick to shut up and lawyer up, impeding the White House’s fact-finding in the matter.

However, other sources faulted USBP Commander-at-Large Gregory Bovino for the miscommunication. “Bovino should be blamed,” one unnamed source told Axios, “not Stephen.” According to Miller and several other sources, Bovino and USBP quickly relayed potentially incorrect or incomplete information immediately following Pretti’s death, resulting in DHS’s controversial messaging. “The initial statement from DHS was based on reports from CBP on the ground,” Miller told the New York Post. “Additionally, the White House provided clear guidance to DHS that the extra personnel that had been sent to Minnesota for force protection should be used for conducting fugitive operations to create a physical barrier between the arrest teams and the disruptors,” he noted. “We are evaluating why the CBP team may not have been following that protocol.”

Not a Pretti Picture

More information is emerging surrounding the controversial shooting of Pretti. A preliminary DHS review of the incident found that Pretti and another rioter were physically obstructing federal agents, despite being told multiple times to move out of the way. Pretti resisted arrest and struggled with USBP agents, when one agent shouted that Pretti had a gun, a loaded Sig Sauer handgun. Shortly afterwards, at least two federal agents began firing at Pretti, discharging roughly a dozen times. It was not until after Pretti had been shot that another agent announced that he had taken Pretti’s weapon from him. USBP’s Office of Professional Responsibility Investigative Operations Directorate also confirmed that the agents involved were wearing bodycams and that footage has been collected.

While many have touted Pretti’s credentials as a Veterans Affairs nurse, CNN reported that Pretti was already “known” to federal agents due to interfering in previous operations, including a physical altercation in which his rib was broken, just a week before he continued inserting himself into law enforcement operations and was killed. According to a Fox News report, Pretti was a member of an anti-ICE organization that used complex communications and tracking networks to plan obstructions to law enforcement operations. Pretti and others were already waiting for federal agents at the site where Pretti was killed. Pretti’s ex-wife confirmed that he had also been involved in the violent riots that rocked Minneapolis in 2020, following the death of George Floyd.

The president has committed to a thorough investigation of the events surrounding Pretti’s death. “We’re doing a big investigation. I want to see the investigation. I’m going to be watching over it. I want to see it myself,” he told reporters Tuesday. “I love all of our people. I love his family, and it’s a very sad situation,” he continued, advising anti-ICE activists not to bring guns to confrontations with federal law enforcement.

Lives on the Line

Pretti’s armed altercation with federal law enforcement agents and subsequent death comes in the midst of increased violence and threats against ICE personnel and other federal agents. According to a Breitbart News analysis, recent months have seen an 8,000% increase in death threats against ICE agents, including threats against their families, and a 1,300% increase in violent assaults against ICE agents. Breitbart quoted a voice message left on an agent’s phone as an example of the threats made against law enforcement personnel:

“I hope your wife dies. I hope your mom and dad die. I hope everything wrong that could go in your life happens. I hope you have the most miserable life. I hope you get hit by a bus. I hope you’re paralyzed, and your wife leaves you, and starts getting [expletive] by [other men] every day. You are a traitor to the American people, to the values that made our country. You should kill yourself. You’re [expletive] disgusting.”

According to the Washington Examiner, DHS is currently investigating the case of a woman who attempted multiple times to purchase firearms “to protect herself from ICE Agents, and also to kill ICE Agents.” In another instance, Virginia Commonwealth University fired a nurse for a series of social media posts advising anti-ICE activists to use paralytic drugs and poison ivy brews against ICE agents and encouraging single women to use dating apps to meet ICE agents and then poison their drinks.

DHS Assistant Secretary for Communications Tricia McLaughlin partly faulted Democrats for the rise in hostility, citing the dehumanizing rhetoric they use against federal law enforcement officers. “Comparing ICE day in and day out to the Nazi Gestapo, the Secret Police, and slave patrols has consequences,” she warned. “Every day there are more assaults, more vehicle-ramming attacks, more attempts to kill our officers.”

Twin Cities Stalemate?

After having been deployed to Minneapolis this week, Homan has already begun negotiating with Minnesota Governor Tim Walz (D) and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey (D) to ensure that immigration enforcement operations can continue with as little conflict as possible, pressuring the two Democrats to end their “sanctuary” policies and cooperate with ICE. “We all agree that we need to support our law enforcement officers and get criminals off the streets. While we don’t agree on everything, these meetings were a productive starting point and I look forward to more conversations with key stakeholders in the days ahead,” Homan reported Tuesday evening of his meetings with Walz and Frey. “President Trump has been clear: he wants American cities to be safe and secure for law-abiding residents — and they will be.”

Walz is evidently considering cooperating with the Trump administration, much to the outrage of his constituents. Anti-ICE activists stormed the Minnesota state capitol building Tuesday and staged a mass protest outside Walz’s office, chanting slogans such as, “ICE out now!” and “Do your job!” The governor had met with Homan Tuesday afternoon and had spoken with Trump previously, in what the president characterized as “productive.” He later quipped, “It couldn’t have been a nicer conversation. It’s hard to believe that’s the same guy I watch on TV or the debate not doing so well, because we had a reasonable and good conversation. If you believe it, he’d like to get this over with!”

In an interview following his meeting with Homan, Walz classified the Border Czar as “a professional,” which he said was not his experience of Noem and Bovino. “The tone was different, there was a tone shift,” he said of his talk with the Trump immigration official. While insisting that he would still like to see ICE leave Minnesota altogether, Walz admitted, “It was progress. Look, I never got a call from Bovino or Noem, nothing.” However, the governor still faulted federal operations for unrest in Minneapolis, rather than his own actions and rhetoric. “They started this fire.”

Frey also spoke with Homan, but has continued to reject the administration’s requests to end “sanctuary” policies. “Surprisingly, Mayor Jacob Frey just stated that, ‘Minneapolis does not, and will not, enforce Federal Immigration Laws,’” the president reported in a Truth Social post Wednesday morning. “This is after having had a very good conversation with him. Could somebody in his inner sanctum please explain that this statement is a very serious violation of the Law, and that he is PLAYING WITH FIRE!”

Appearing on “Washington Watch” Tuesday night, Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.) stressed the damage done by Democrats’ anti-law enforcement rhetoric, in addition to the importance for Republicans to follow through on the Trump administration’s immigration agenda. “All the other jurisdictions around the country where ICE is doing that job, they have cooperation from local officials, so there are no problems,” Harris observed. “The problems are when you have a governor and a mayor openly telling people in Minnesota to go against the Constitution, go against the ability of the federal government to enforce immigration law,” he continued. “You have a rogue governor and a rogue mayor, that’s the problem in Minnesota.”

“Republicans were elected to the majorities with President Trump to close the border and to begin the deportation of the 10 to 12 million people who crossed the border illegally under the Biden administration. We have to get that done,” Harris emphasized. “Unless you think that the 10 to 12 million people who came in illegally under the Biden administration should be invited to stay forever, you need ICE.”

AUTHOR

S.A. McCarthy

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLE: EXCLUSIVE: How Biden Admin Sowed Seeds For Somali Aid Fraud Scandal

RELATED VIDEOS:

Democrats’ Anti-ICE Outrage is Pure Political Theater

Rubio Calls Out Reality of Cartel Threats After Duckworth Challenges War Status in Shouting Match

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2026 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Virginia’s New Democratic Trifecta Targets Taxes, Guns, and Sentencing

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

A new wave of elected Democrats in Virginia is showing how much of a difference one election can make.

In Virginia’s 2025 midterm elections, Democrats managed to sweep the state, claiming three high-ranking political positions: governor, lieutenant governor, and attorney general. It didn’t take long for the shift in power to translate into policy action. Governor Abigail Spanberger was sworn in on January 17, 2026, and almost immediately, a flurry of new legislation emerged from the Democratic-controlled General Assembly.

Some of the early proposals included gun-related measures that critics argued targeted Second Amendment rights, such as expanded restrictions or heavy taxes on firearms and ammunition. However, scrutiny has intensified across the board as Democrats continue to push broader priorities that stir controversy and appear to diverge sharply from campaign promises.

One high-profile example is House Bill 863, sponsored by Democratic Delegate Rae Cousins. The bill seeks to eliminate mandatory minimum sentences for a range of serious crimes, including manslaughter, rape, possession and distribution of child pornography, assaulting law enforcement officers, certain repeat violent felonies, and even the mandatory five-day jail sentence for some first-time DUI offenders. According to The Post Millennial, “many left-wing activists have criticized mandatory minimum sentencing, labelling the practice as racist.”

Supporters have described it as a “common-sense proposal” that removes “one-size-fits-all” requirements. “This change would give the experienced judges in our communities more discretion to make decisions based on the unique facts of each case,” Cousins said. Proponents also argue it promotes fairer, more individualized sentencing and addresses long-standing criticisms of mandatory minimums as overly rigid or disproportionately harmful. Critics, however, are sounding the alarm.

Law enforcement advocates and former Republican Attorney General Jason Miyares, for example, warn that removing these required prison terms could lead to lighter punishments for dangerous offenders, potentially undermining accountability, endangering public safety, and increasing risks of re-offending. One expert, Josh Ederheimer of the University of Virginia’s Center for Public Safety and Justice, explained to Fox News that “from a law enforcement standpoint, I think police generally want offenders to be held accountable, and frustration among law enforcement officers grows when individuals are released quickly and subsequently re-offend — and even more so if it involved a violent felony.”

Considering how this would affect victims and their families, he added, “I think that the police and public alike have expectations that convicted criminals will be held accountable, and that full sentences should be served. Mandatory minimums assure victims — and the community — that a convicted person will serve their sentence. It is the circumstance when convicted felons are released early that victims may feel a sense of betrayal or that justice was not served. That’s the dilemma.” Notably, HB 863 is only one part of a larger Democratic push on criminal justice reform in the 2025-2026 session.

But for some Virginians, the concerns expand beyond gun rights and criminal justice. For instance, shortly after Democrats consolidated power, a separate set of tax proposals were introduced — mirroring (if not surpassing) some of California’s rates.

Only months after campaigning on affordability and vowing lower costs for families, Virginia Democrats set forth legislation that would create new higher-income tax brackets, including an increase to 8% on income over $600,000 and 10% on income over $1 million. They also added measures like a 3.8% net investment income tax on higher earners, which could lower after-tax returns on investments and discourage saving and investing. Combined, some say these could push Virginia’s top effective income tax rate to around 13.8%, which would potentially surpass California’s current top rate, the highest in the nation.

Even so, supporters frame the changes as a “Fair Share” approach, arguing that millionaires and high earners should contribute more to fund education, housing, public services, and affordability initiatives. Groups like The Commonwealth Institute, a left-wing policy group backing the tax plan, estimate such reforms could generate over $1 billion annually for these priorities. Meanwhile, critics are accusing Democrats of breaking campaign promises.

During her 2025 run, Spanberger emphasized an “Affordable Virginia Plan” to lower health care, housing, and energy costs, with pledges to deliver savings in 2026. Opponents, including House Minority Leader Terry Kilgore (R) and the Republican Party of Virginia, call the tax hikes a betrayal that could drive jobs, investment, and residents away — following what they describe as the “failed paths” of high-tax states like California and New York. National figures like Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform have labeled the timing “particularly foolish” amid competitive pressures from neighboring states lowering taxes.

Family Research Council’s Matt Carpenter, director of FRC Action, addressed the apparent shift in priorities with The Washington Stand. “When [Spanberger] was representing the people of Virginia’s 7th congressional district,” he said, “she was an informal member of the ‘mod squad’ of allegedly moderate House Democrats who wanted to work with their Republican counterparts on issues of mutual interest, like agriculture, veterans’ affairs, and fentanyl. She may have done some work on these issues with moderate Republicans, but the reality is Spanberger’s vote history in Congress shows her to be committed to the left-wing cultural revolution playbook.”

As he went on to explain, “She was a reliable vote when taxpayer funded abortion, gender transitions on minors, special rights for adults’ ‘sexual orientation and gender identity,’ and more, came up. And yet, during the 2025 election, she was adept at stepping around controversial topics like men participating in women’s sports throughout the campaign, maintaining her carefully curated moderate brand.”

These early moves, from gun laws to criminal justice to taxes, illustrate how dramatically one election cycle can reshape a state’s direction. With Democrats holding trifecta control for the first time in years, the 2026 legislative session is already advancing these and other priorities at a rapid pace. And yet, Carpenter concluded, it’s not surprising. Rather, he said, “It’s safe to assume [Spanberger] will do as governor just as she did while in Congress: campaign as a centrist and govern as a bona fide leftist.”

AUTHOR

Sarah Holliday

Sarah Holliday is a reporter at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2026 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Bureaucrats’ Political Donations Hint Census Bureau Over-Counting for Democrats May Not Be Coincidental

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Undercounting the population in red states like Texas and Florida in 2020 cost Republicans at least six seats in the House of Representatives, while overcounting in blue states like California and New York contributed to 18 new Democratic seats, according to Rep. Wesley Hunt (R-Texas).

“In 2020, the Census Bureau undercounted in primarily deep-red states like Arkansas, Florida, Mississippi, Tennessee and Texas, all red, while overcounting in radical blue states like Delaware, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, and Rhode Island,” Hunt told a November 19, 2025, hearing of the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on the Constitution and Limited Government.

“This egregious error led to many states being denied proper representation in Congress and the Electoral College. So much so that these errors costs Republicans … six seats in the House. In addition to the 2020 miscounting, including illegal immigrants in the Census has improperly granted radical Left blue states 12 additional seats in the United States House of Representatives. That is a total of 18 seats gain and that is a huge problem. And those are the facts,” Hunt told the hearing.

The Census Bureau acknowledged the over and under counts in a May 2025 report. The Census Bureau uses its population counts as the basis for determining how many House of Representatives seats are in each of the 50 states. The census counts all present individuals without distinguishing between citizens and noncitizens, meaning a higher head count gives a state more House seats, without regard to citizenship status. It is illegal for noncitizens to vote in all federal elections, as well as the vast majority of state and local contests.

Not all of the undercounted states were red, as deep-blue Illinois was among this group, while not all of the overcounted states were blue. Ohio and Utah, both red states, were among the over-counted group, according to the Census report.

Most congressional Republicans like Hunt support requiring Census Bureau counters to at least include a question about the citizenship of every counted individual, while most congressional Democrats oppose such a requirement. The issue has intensified in recent years, especially during the Biden administration’s open-border era in which millions of illegal immigrants crossed into the U.S.

Legislation originally introduced in the House of Representatives in 2025 by Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) — The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act — requires proof of citizenship when registering to vote and provides criminal penalties for violations. The measure, which has 110 House co-sponsors, including Hunt, passed the lower chamber but has not been acted upon by the Senate. President Donald Trump supports the measure.

Hunt did not address the issue of whether political bias within the Census Bureau’s workforce could be a factor in the significant under and overcounting, but The Washington Stand’s review of Federal Election Commission (FEC) campaign contribution data for the years 2023, 2024, and 2025 found a huge bias in favor of Democrats among donors who said they work for the agency.

During the three years indicated, the FEC records disclosed 4,037 contributions by individuals who listed “U.S. Census Bureau” as their employer. Of those contributions, 3,583 went to Democrats, compared to 455 made to Republicans, for a 7-1 ratio. The average Democrat contribution was for $29, while the average Republican contribution was $229.

Interestingly, the total dollar value of the contributions by Census Bureau workers to Democrats was $104,597, only slightly more than the $104,130 total given to Republicans.

Federal workers like those at the Census Bureau are covered by the Hatch Act, which bars partisan political activities by government employees while on official duty. The Hatch Act does not limit the right of government employees to work for candidates while off-duty, to contribute to the candidates of their choice, or to participate in activities supporting candidates, as long as federal property is not used in the process.

Two-thirds of the Democratic contributions, or 1,999 of the 3,582 total, were given through Act Blue, a digital site that acts as a conduit for campaign funding from individuals to favored candidates. Winred, the similar digital site created by Republicans to counter Act Blue, accounted for only 253 contributions to GOP candidates by Census Bureau workers.

Former Vice President Kamala Harris, the 2024 Democratic presidential nominee, received 347 contributions from Census workers, compared to just 69 for Trump, her 2024 Republican rival.

Apprised of the Census Bureau employee contribution bias, Hunt provided the following statement to The Washington Stand:

“The inaccuracies and deliberate manipulations embedded in Democrat-led Census reporting expose a level of corruption that plagued the previous administration and continues today under radical Left leadership. Despite these efforts, the American people saw through the deception and delivered a decisive victory for Donald Trump in the last election.

“Now, with Republicans holding all three chambers of government, we have both the responsibility and the obligation to correct these abuses immediately and restore integrity to the process by ensuring that Census data reflects only United States citizens.

“The irony is unmistakable. For years, Democrats have warned of a supposed threat to democracy, while actively engaging in the very practices that undermine it — manipulating systems designed to distort representation and influence elections. Democracy is not endangered by transparency and lawful governance. It is endangered by those who abuse institutions for political gain.”

Hunt will not be in the House of Representatives in 2027, as he is seeking the Republican nomination for the Senate in a hotly contested primary that also includes Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and the Lone Star State’s long-serving incumbent, Senator John Cornyn. The primary election is March 3.

AUTHOR

Mark Tapscott

Mark Tapscott is senior congressional analyst at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Blue States Wage War on Republican Congressional Seats

‘So Help Me Law’? New Jersey Governor Sworn in on Constitution, Not Bible

PERKINS: Is the Law beyond Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison?

RELATED VIDEOS:

STEPHEN MILLER: ‘This was the plan all along… get them here illegally then give them access to the voting booth!

President Trump Gaggles with Press on Air Force One En Route Joint Base Andrews, Jan. 22, 2026

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2026 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Sanctuary State Illinois Releases Nearly 1,800 Violent Illegal Immigrants

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Since the beginning of President Donald Trump’s second term to present day, Illinois’s sanctuary state policies have led to the release of nearly 1,800 illegal immigrants. Their crimes, however, are not limited to illegally crossing the border, but also include charges of murder, assault, burglary, robbery, and sex crimes.

This data was released by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Acting Director Todd Lyons on Monday. According to a press release from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Illinois officials have already failed “to honor ICE detainers,” which has “resulted in the release of 1,768 criminal illegal aliens since January 20.” The crimes of these convicted immigrants, many of whom are now roaming free within the state (or elsewhere), include the following: five charges of homicide, 141 charges of assault, 23 charges of burglary, four charges of robbery, 24 charges of dangerous drugs offenses, 15 charges of weapons offenses, and 10 charges of sexual predatory offenses.

As the DHS went on to highlight, “There are currently 4,015 aliens in the custody of an Illinois jurisdiction with an active detainer. The crimes of these aliens include 51 homicides, 1,134 assaults, 107 burglaries, 36 robberies, 275 dangerous drugs offenses, 120 weapons offenses, and 813 sexual predatory offenses.” Some egregious cases, as emphasized by the DHS, of illegal immigrants released by Governor Pritzker and other state sanctuary politicians, include:

  • Victor Manuel Mendoza-Garcia — “arrested and convicted for 3 counts of aggravated kidnapping/ransom and sentenced to 18 years in [the] Illinois Department of Corrections in Cook County Court in Illinois. ICE’s detainer for Mendoza-Garcia was not honored. On November 12, ICE arrested Mendoza-Garcia where he remains in ICE custody.”
  • Juan Alberto Caro Marin — arrested and convicted of aggravated criminal sexual abuse/victim/family and sentenced to six years in [the] Illinois Department of Corrections. ICE’s detainer for Caro Marin was not honored. On November 9, ICE arrested Caro Marin where he is currently in ICE custody.
  • Amilcar Waldo Gonzalez-Jimenez — “arrested and convicted for 1 count of driving under the influence and domestic battery and 2 counts of criminal sexual assault. ICE’s detainer for Gonzalez-Jimenez was not honored. On November 13, ICE arrested Gonzalez-Jimenez.”
  • Jose Manuel Fuentes-Vargas — “arrested for domestic battery, violation of protection order, and convicted of sexual assault of a victim less than 13 years of age. ICE’s detainer for Fuentes-Vargas was not honored. On October 30, ICE arrested Fuentes-Vargas where he is currently in ICE custody.”

Several other examples put forth by the department included criminals who targeted children. Notably, Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul (D) received a letter from ICE in September. The agency requested state officials cooperate with ICE efforts to detain illegals, but Raoul’s office never responded.

As part of the newly released data, Assistant Secretary of the DHS Tricia McLaughlin asserted that “Governor Pritzker and his fellow Illinois sanctuary politicians are releasing murderers, pedophiles, and kidnappers back into our neighborhoods and putting American lives at risk.” She called “on Governor Pritzker and his administration to stop this dangerous derangement and commit to honoring the ICE arrest detainers of the more than 4,000 criminal illegal aliens in Illinois’ custody. It is common sense. Criminal illegal aliens should not be released back onto our streets to terrorize more innocent Americans.”

According to a letter from Lyons shared with Fox News, Illinois has “tens of thousands of criminal illegal aliens” in custody that Lyons urged “should be swiftly removed from the United States and not be returned to our streets to wreak havoc on law-abiding citizens.”

As Erin Schniederjan, research assistant for Homeland Security, shared with The Washington Stand, “Illinois should repeal the TRUST Act, in which doing so would allow local law enforcement to participate in federal immigration enforcement. Illinois residents should also be empowered to sue state officials who obstruct federal law enforcement. The new ICE-out legislation Governor Pritzker just signed facilitates residents to sue federal law enforcement for enforcing federal immigration law, but Illinois residents still can’t hold state officials accountable for obstructing federal law enforcement.”

As Schniederjan went on to explain, “Sanctuary policies allow illegal aliens to be protected, and unrightfully so. Protecting illegal aliens, many of them being violent criminals, only puts communities at risk. Think of all of the crimes that could have been prevented and people that would still be with us if sanctuary policies didn’t exist.” Ultimately, she added, “If Illinois and other states alike actually cared about their residents, they would work with federal law enforcement to remove the illegal aliens who have no right to be here in the first place.”

Schniederjan concluded by calling for accountability: “The federal government can hold states accountable for harboring illegal aliens by revoking state and city funding.” Otherwise, “sanctuary jurisdictions will prioritize illegal aliens over their own citizens to maintain political power.”

AUTHOR

Sarah Holliday

Sarah Holliday is a reporter at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Who Is Behind the Chavista Propaganda in a Corner of New York?

DEMOCRAT: The Party of the Terrorists, by the Terrorists and for the Terrorists

New Tool Allows Americans to Learn Identities of Illegal Aliens Arrested in Their Communities

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

Partner with The Washington Stand to bring news from a biblical worldview to readers nationwide. From now until December 31, every gift will be doubled through our year-end Challenge Match.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Texas Takes Redistricting Battle to SCOTUS as Blue States Prepare to Ax GOP House Seats

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Ahead of next year’s midterm elections, Texas Republicans are moving to redraw their state’s congressional district maps, netting the GOP at least five more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives, but federal judges have accused the Lone Star State’s legislature of racial gerrymandering.

“The public perception of this case is that it’s about politics,” wrote Judge Jeffrey Brown of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, in a decision this week barring the use of the new congressional maps. “To be sure, politics played a role in drawing the 2025 Map. But it was much more than just politics. Substantial evidence shows that Texas racially gerrymandered the 2025 Map.”

Most federal cases are heard first by a district court, then a court of appeals, and finally by the U.S. Supreme Court, if they make it that far in the appeals process. Voting rights cases, however, are heard by a three-judge panel consisting of two federal district court judges and one appellate judge, and are then appealed immediately to the Supreme Court. Brown, appointed by President Donald Trump, was joined in his decision to reject Texas’s new congressional maps by Judge David Guaderrama of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, who was appointed by Barack Obama. Judge Jerry Smith of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, who was appointed by Ronald Reagan, was the sole dissent.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) announced immediately following the decision that he would appeal the case to the Supreme Court. “The radical left is once again trying to undermine the will of the people. The Big Beautiful Map was entirely legal and passed for partisan purposes to better represent the political affiliations of Texas,” Paxton insisted, repudiating the claims of racial gerrymandering. “For years, Democrats have engaged in partisan redistricting intended to eliminate Republican representation. Democratic states across the country, from California to Illinois to New York, have systematically reduced representation of Republican voters in their congressional delegations,” the attorney general continued. “But when Republicans respond in kind, Democrats rely on false accusations of racism to secure a partisan advantage. I will be appealing this decision to the Supreme Court of the United States, and I fully expect the Court to uphold Texas’s sovereign right to engage in partisan redistricting.”

In the court’s injunction blocking the use of the new maps, Brown alleged that Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R) and the Republican-led state legislature had been hesitant to redistrict along partisan lines when Trump made the suggestion earlier this year. Instead, Brown charged, Lone Star State officials only moved on the proposal when the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ’s) civil rights division warned that the state may face lawsuits over its current “unconstitutional” congressional maps, which the DOJ argued created illegal racial coalitions favoring Democrats over Republicans and thus diluting what would otherwise be a majority vote for a Republican candidate.

Appearing on Wednesday night’s episode of “Washington Watch,” FRC Action Director Matt Carpenter commented, “The mid-decade redistricting cycle we’re in was always going to be litigated, and it seems like we’ve arrived at that stage now where the courts are going to have to weigh in.” He also anticipated that a number of states “waiting in the wings trying to figure out which way this is headed” before redrawing congressional maps may be encouraged to do so if the Supreme Court backs Texas in its move. “I think whatever comes from the Supreme Court, if they decide to take up this case, is going to have enormous ramifications for some of the states that are making overtures that they’re going to redraw their own districts,” Carpenter suggested. “Florida is looking at redrawing their districts. Indiana is — it’s kind of stalled, but they’re looking at it as well. And you’ve got blue states like Virginia and Maryland that are also looking at redistricting, and there’s potential for even more in the future.”

Trump and Indiana Governor Mike Braun (R) have pressed the Hoosier State’s legislature to draw new district maps favoring Republicans, potentially eliminating two Democrat-held seats in the U.S. House, but Republicans in Indiana’s GOP-dominated senate split over whether or not to push the congressional maps through in a special session next month, ensuring that they would be used in the 2026 midterms, or delay until early next year and risk not redistricting in time to effect the midterms. All 10 Democrats in the state senate voted against participating in a special session, while Republican senators split evenly on the issue: 19 in favor, 19 against.

Carpenter noted that Indiana senate Republicans may not “have the votes to go through with this redistricting push” during a special session. “It looks as though they may take up redistricting when they convene for their regularly scheduled session,” he explained. “So I guess the concern was they were not able to get the votes during a special session, but we’ll see if, maybe with some additional time once they convene in January, perhaps they’ll have the votes needed to look at their maps again.”

Redistricting in Virginia, where Democrats expanded their control over the state legislature and took the governor’s mansion in off-year elections earlier this month, will likely come down to meeting deadlines, Carpenter observed. “Each state has their own sort of labyrinth of constitutional requirements and statutes around redistricting. The situation in Virginia is there’s basically no room for error,” he explained. “They have to pass a constitutional amendment this session with this governor,” Carpenter noted, referring to outgoing Republican Governor Glenn Youngkin. “He won’t have to veto it, but then they have to come back next session and pass an identical constitutional amendment, get it on the ballot before their spring primaries — which I believe are in April — and get it passed,” Carpenter detailed. “So they have a series of events that that they can’t miss any one of those deadlines in order to circumvent their constitutionally-required bipartisan redistricting commission.”

In Maryland, Carpenter anticipated, Governor Wes Moore (D) may not attempt redistricting through the usual legislative means, due to the makeup of the Old Line State’s Supreme Court. “They have a Supreme Court that’s been loaded up from former Republican Governor Larry Hogan. And so I think the political calculus from Democrat Governor Wes Moore in that state and the Democratic leadership in the legislature is that they’re not likely to get new maps past that Republican dominated state Supreme Court,” Carpenter observed. “Nevertheless, Governor Moore is pushing through with a redistricting commission, so he’s trying to circumvent the legislature.”

AUTHOR

S.A. McCarthy

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump Signs Bill Ordering Release Of Epstein Files

Democratic Rep Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick Indicted Over ‘Stealing’ FEMA Funds

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

State, County, and City Officials Nixing ‘Sanctuary’ Policies to Avoid Trump Admin. Ire

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

As President Donald Trump and his administration continue enforcing federal immigration law, several “sanctuary” jurisdictions have opted to reverse course and rescind policies barring state and local police from assisting federal agents. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem announced on Monday that Nevada has been removed from the Trump administration’s public list of “sanctuary” jurisdictions after 17 sheriffs, under the leadership of Governor Joe Lombardo (R), recommitted to cooperating with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), honoring ICE detainers, and assisting in the arrests of illegal immigrants.

“When others cower, real leaders step up. I applaud the Nevada Sheriffs’ & Chiefs’ Association and Governor [Lombardo] for their commitment to working with [ICE] to protect American citizens from dangerous criminal illegal aliens,” Noem said in a social media post. “Because of their efforts, Nevada has been removed from the Trump Administration’s sanctuary jurisdiction list. I encourage every leader across our nation to follow their example so that all Americans can live in peace and safety.”

In August, the Department of Justice (DOJ) published a list of “sanctuary” jurisdictions, which included Nevada and 11 other states. In a letter to Noem, the sheriffs of Carson City, Las Vegas, and Churchill, Douglas, Elko, Esmerelda, Eureka, Humboldt, Lander, Lincoln, Lyon, Mineral, Nye, Pershing, Storey, Washoe, and White Pine Counties confirmed that their offices will cooperate with ICE in matters of immigration law enforcement. “We are committed to ensuring our jurisdictions are in full compliance with federal and state laws, especially when it comes to immigration enforcement actions in support of the Department of Homeland Security’s efforts,” the sheriffs wrote. “Our commitment is to serve and protect the communities of Nevada, prioritizing public safety and professionalism. Sheriffs of NV and NV Sheriffs’ and Chiefs’ Association shares federal law enforcement’s zero tolerance policy for criminals endangering Nevada communities.”

Baltimore County in Maryland also rescinded “sanctuary” policies in an effort to be removed from the DOJ’s list. County officials signed a memorandum of understanding late last month pledging to cooperate with ICE, although state leadership still largely opposes the president’s immigration agenda. “Despite restrictions from state leadership, Baltimore County has shown a willingness to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement,” Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward said in a statement. “This is a small step toward restoring public safety and we appreciate the county’s commitment to updating its policies.”

Since signing the memorandum, Baltimore County has been removed from the DOJ’s list. According to a report from the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), Maryland released nearly 400 illegal immigrants from jails and prisons between October 1 of 2022 and February 6 of 2025, including at least one illegal immigrant released from the Baltimore County Detention Center despite having a homicide conviction or charge. Maryland’s Gaithersburg Police Department and Howard County Detention Center also both released illegal immigrants who had either homicide convictions or homicide charges.

Earlier this year, Mayor Craig Greenberg (D) of Louisville, Kentucky, also rescinded “sanctuary” policies, in the face of action from the federal government. Although Greenberg insisted that the Louisville Metropolitan Police Department (LMPD) is “not involved in enforcing federal immigration policy,” the mayor did agree to honor ICE detainers, when ICE asks state or local police to keep an illegal immigrant already jailed for committing a crime jailed for an extended period so that ICE can safely take custody of the illegal immigrant in a law enforcement facility. “The federal government’s 48-hour detainer is standard practice for the State of Kentucky’s Department of Corrections today. It was also standard practice for Louisville Metro Corrections until 2017. We are currently the only city in Kentucky that doesn’t follow this practice,” Greenberg confessed. “Metro Corrections will begin honoring 48-hour federal detainers as soon as practical because the stakes are too high. In turn, Louisville will no longer be considered a ‘sanctuary city’ by the federal government.”

Greenberg also noted that his administration decided to comply with federal law in order to avoid federal lawsuits and targeted action by ICE. “Cities on the sanctuary city list right now are experiencing a terrifying increase in raids by ICE, including mass raids,” the mayor said. “From the data I’ve reviewed, we’re talking about under 100 inmates at our jail each year who are charged with crimes and affected by detainers. We have tens of thousands of immigrant families in Louisville. We do not want to see highly coordinated and often violent federal enforcement action here…”

In comments to The Washington Stand, Lora Ries, director of the Heritage Foundation’s Border Security and Immigration Center, suggested, “The simplest thing states and localities can do to avoid preventable crimes is to allow ICE into their prisons to pick up known criminal aliens who are about to be released following their criminal detention.” She explained, “Border Czar Tom Homan has said countless times that if sanctuary jurisdictions refuse to allow ICE into their prisons, ICE must go into the community in which the sanctuary jurisdiction released the criminal alien to take custody. This requires more planning, more agents, and resources.” Ries added, “It also endangers the agents, the alien, and community members if the alien, community members, and/or protestors refuse to cooperate with ICE or interfere with the agents.”

“The federal government should withhold federal funds from states and localities that hinder federal agents from carrying out federal laws. The Justice Department has placed several jurisdictions on notice that they may lose federal funds if they do not change their sanctuary policies,” Ries observed. “These three jurisdictions have realized the seriousness of the consequences and are course correcting to do the bare minimum — hold a criminal alien for up to an additional 48 hours for ICE to pick them up,” she continued. “It’s time for all named jurisdictions on the DOJ sanctuary list to do the same to protect their own citizens and uphold the rule of law.”

Jessica Vaughan, director of Policy Studies for CIS, told TWS, “Sanctuary policies are a serious public safety problem, and especially concerning because they are adopted for purely political reasons.” She explained, “The biggest problem is that they inevitably result in the release of criminal aliens who were arrested for local crimes and otherwise would be taken straight into ICE custody if not for the policies forced on the law enforcement agencies. We know from ICE records that a significant number (about 1/4) will commit another crime in the first few months after release (‘Rejecting Detainers, Endangering Communities’). More will re-offend if they are allowed to remain on the streets here.”

Vaughan continued, “In addition, sanctuary policies force ICE officers to do their work on the streets instead of in a secure location like a jail. This results in the kind of chaotic and dangerous situations we’re now seeing in Chicago, Portland, Los Angeles, and other places.”

“While many local governments see the light after tragedies happen, like the Laken Riley case, it’s clear that the diehard sanctuaries like Chicago and Boston will never abandon their policies on their own,” Vaughan observed. “That’s why it’s important for the federal government to impose consequences. Louisville and Baltimore County and a number of other jurisdictions have done the right thing, and hopefully others will follow suit.”

The DOJ’s “sanctuary” jurisdiction list currently includes California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Minnesota, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, the District of Columbia, Cook County (Ill.), San Diego County (Calif.), San Francisco County (Calif.), Albuquerque, Berkeley (Calif.), Boston, Chicago, Denver, East Lansing (Mich.), Hoboken (N.J.), Jersey City (N.J.), Los Angeles, New Orleans, New York City, Newark (N.J.), Paterson (N.J.), Philadelphia, Portland, Rochester (N.Y.), Seattle, and San Francisco City.

AUTHOR

S.A. McCarthy

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

New Debt Analysis Finds 5 Red ‘Sunshine States,’ 5 Deep Blue ‘Sinkhole States’

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Four western states and one southern state are the five financially healthiest “Sunshine States” in the American union and have more than enough budgetary resources to cover all of their debts and still have a “taxpayer surplus” left over, according to a Chicago-based non-profit devoted to advocating greater transparency in government accounting.

North Dakota tops the 2025 edition of Truth-in-Accounting’s (TIA) annual Financial Condition of the States survey, followed by Alaska, Wyoming, Utah, and Tennessee. Officials in these five states — all of which vote heavily Republican in national elections — manage their budgets so effectively that they could return significant amounts of money to resident taxpayers.

North Dakota’s “Taxpayer Surplus” is $63,000 per taxpayer, followed by Alaska ($48,500), Wyoming ($27,200), Utah ($14,400), and Tennessee ($10,900). The Taxpayer Surplus represents how much authorities would have left to give back to each state taxpayer after settling all of their state’s debts.

At the opposite end of the TIA rankings are the “Sinkhole States,” including California (with $21,800 needed in additional levies from each tax-payer to settle outstanding debts), followed by Massachusetts ($24,900), Illinois ($38,800), and Connecticut and New Jersey, tied as the worst of the 50 states, with both needing $44,500.

There are 25 Sunshine and 25 Sinkhole states in the TIA rankings. But TIA has cautionary notes for residents of Sunshine and Sinkhole states. Those cautions recall Proverbs 11:1, which states that “a false balance is an abomination to the Lord, but a just weight is His delight.” The same view is expressed in Proverbs 20:23, and Leviticus 19:36.

“By definition, if a state has a balanced budget requirement, then spending should equal revenue during a specific year. Unfortunately, in government accounting, things are often not as they appear. Every state except Vermont has balanced budget requirements, yet even with these rules, states have accumulated $765 billion in money needed to pay bills,” the TIA analysis explains.

“How can states rack up debt while simultaneously balancing their budgets?” the report asks. “States balance budgets by using accounting tricks such as the following:”

  • “Inflating revenue assumptions
  • “Counting borrowed money as income
  • “Understating the actual costs of government
  • “Delaying the payment of current bills until the start of the next fiscal year so they aren’t included in the budget calculations.”

“The most common accounting trick states use is hiding a large portion of employee compensation costs from the budgeting process,” the report continues. “Employee compensation includes retirement benefits such as healthcare, life insurance, and pensions. States become obligated to pay for these benefits as employees earn them.”

The shifting by politicians of payment of present benefits to the future is a major factor in how state governments conceal their true financial condition. Illinois, for example, ranks as the 48th most indebted state overall. As The Washington Stand recently reported, Governor J.B. Pritzker (D) rails against President Donald Trump for allegedly “lying” about his federal budget policies while concealing his own role in a long-running accounting deception regarding Illinois’ massive unfunded pension liabilities.

Interestingly, eight of the 10 worst “Sinkhole” states in the TIA compilation voted for Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris in the 2024 election. These include New Jersey, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, California, Delaware, Maryland and Vermont. Louisiana and Kentucky are the only states among the 10 worst Sinkhole states where voters favored Trump in 2024.

A major reason why state government accounting reports cannot always be trusted to give a complete and trustworthy description of a jurisdiction’s financial health, according to TIA, is that politicians are not required to meet the same strict accounting standards that apply to private corporations and businesses.

“Government budgets need to be more accurate and precise. How governments currently calculate their budgets circumvents the objectives of the balanced budget requirements. Debt has been accumulated, and elected officials have incurred costs beyond the tax revenues collected, so these budgets were not balanced,” the TIA report explains.

“Governments can accumulate debt while claiming a balanced budget because most budgets are prepared on a cash basis. This antiquated accounting method records financial transactions only when cash is received or paid. As a result, budgets can be ‘balanced’ using loan proceeds, and expenses can be excluded if corresponding payments are not made,” the report continued. “Financial reports should help elected officials and citizens determine whether revenues were sufficient to pay for the services and benefits provided that year.”

One solution advocated by TIA is requiring state governments to comply in their financial accounting reports with the Employment Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) that applies to private sector enterprises.

“In the past, employers, including large corporations, often took risks with employees’ retirement benefits and underfunded their plans. So, Congress passed ERISA to protect employees’ retirement accounts, but it exempted state and local governments from the same strict funding and reporting rules,” the TIA report noted.

“Truth in Accounting encourages elected officials to strengthen transparency and accountability by supporting reforms that would bring government pension plans under the same standards as private-sector plans. By applying ERISA-like principles to public pensions, elected leaders would be held accountable for fulfilling their contractual obligations to government employees, and taxpayers would gain a clearer understanding of the full cost of these long-term commitments,” the report said.

AUTHOR

Mark Tapscott

Mark Tapscott is senior congressional analyst at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

Empower TWS to continue reporting the truth and save tomorrow’s children today! This week only, your gift to defend the unborn will be TRIPLED thanks to FRC’s challenge match.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

‘Absolutely Shameful’: Illinois Gov. Signs Law Extending Financial Aid to Illegal Immigrants

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker (D) has signed a new, allegedly “inclusive,” law extending financial aid eligibility — not necessarily to poorer students or families in need, but to illegal immigrants.

The bill makes it so that all residents can receive financial aid regardless of immigration status. Reportedly, this is designed to establish “equitable eligibility for financial aid and benefits” for all students throughout the state. As the legislation itself reads: “a student who is an Illinois resident and who is not otherwise eligible for federal financial aid, including, but not limited to, a transgender student who is disqualified for failure to register for selective service or a noncitizen student who has not obtained lawful permanent residence, shall be eligible for financial aid and benefits.”

State Senator Celina Villanueva (D) co-signed the bill, and she argued it “is about making sure no student is left behind because of where they were born.” Villanueva’s office released a statement that further explained the legislation, claiming it “eliminates the patchwork of confusing and sometimes conflicting requirements that have excluded undocumented, DACAmented, and mixed-status students from critical aid.” According to the senator, “If you live in Illinois and are pursuing higher education, you should have access to the same opportunities as your peers. Illinois invests in all of our students, and we’re committed to helping them succeed.”

Others, however, see it differently. In fact, the backlash against this bill has been fierce. State Rep. Marly Miller (R) slammed the new law as an insult to families and especially other students. She told Fox News that “allowing taxpayer-funded financial aid for illegal aliens is a slap in the face to hardworking Illinois families and students.” Miller added, “Our state is drowning in debt, yet J.B. Pritzker is determined to drain even more taxpayer dollars to reward illegals. It’s absolutely shameful.”

Echoing this, a spokesperson for the Illinois GOP, also in comment to Fox, stressed how, “once again, Governor Pritzker proves that he is prioritizing illegal immigrants at the expense of Illinois families. Illinois taxpayers should not have their hard-earned taxpayer dollars pay for benefits to illegal immigrants who shouldn’t be here in the first place.”

And yet, government officials are not the only ones speaking out against this new law. Parents, too, are voicing concern. Michelle Cunney, an Illinois mother and local Parents’ Rights in Education chapter leader, spoke with Fox. She described the legislation as a “nightmare,” emphasizing that this law opens a floodgate of problems. As she put it, “To be honest, it’s terrifying that not only are we having to pay for this, as you know, taxpaying citizens. … But also, as parents, not knowing how it will really truly end up affecting our children and their education.”

From Cunney’s experience living in the state, she stressed that Pritzker has a tendency to prioritize illegal immigrants over legal residents. With this new law, “we know that the children who are not here legally will get … more of a chance and an opportunity to get scholarships and everything than our children, because to Pritzker, and so many others, we are not important,” she stated. “We are not anything other than money.” According to Cunney, several others feel the same way, noting that “most of the parents are not okay with this.”

In a statement, state Rep. Chris Miller (R) argued that “this move is top of the list for why Pritzker must be put out of office.” He continued, “While you’re figuring out how to pay $500 electric bills, he quickly signed HB 460 into law giving illegals free college!” Miller took note of the same trend many Illinois residents seem to be emphasizing, namely, that “since Pritzker took office, Illinois citizens have been left behind while illegals get all the handouts they need to feel right at home in Illinois. The governor has betrayed every Illinois citizen with his policies that roll out the red carpet for illegal immigrants.”

“Billions of taxpayer funds,” he stressed, “are being wasted on services for individuals who broke federal law and people here in our great state of Illinois have had enough.” There’s been talk of Pritzker running for president in the 2028 election. But according to Congresswoman Mary Miller (R-Ill.), “Pritzker’s sanctuary state policies have transformed Illinois into a cesspool of crime and drugs brought by the illegals he is actively resettling.”

She concluded, “Our communities are being overwhelmed, innocent girls are being raped, and Americans are being ruthlessly murdered. These are the tragic consequences of his failed leadership.”

AUTHOR

Sarah Holliday

Sarah Holliday is a reporter at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

No. 2 Senate Republican Backs Rules Changes To Break Dems’ Confirmation Blockade

The Squad Brings Back One Of Democrats’ Worst Lines Ever

‘I’m Getting Emotional’: Dem Plays World’s Smallest Violin For Illegals Housed At Alligator Alcatraz

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Texas, California Kick off Redistricting Wars

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Legislatures in Texas and California this week both advanced bills to redraw their congressional maps halfway through the census cycle, kicking off what could become a partisan redistricting war over control of the U.S. House of Representatives, which is currently closely divided.

In Texas, House Republicans on Wednesday easily (88-52) advanced a bill to redraw the congressional map in a way that shifts five U.S. House seats toward the GOP. Democratic representatives initially fled the state to deny the House a quorum, but they eventually returned after the month-long special session had expired. Governor Greg Abbott (R) immediately called a second special session, and House leaders took steps to ensure the Democrats did not flee the state again.

The redistricting bill now heads to the Texas Senate. The Senate passed the bill easily during the first special session (Democratic senators did not abscond), but it must vote again in the new session. If the bill reaches Abbott’s desk, he is expected to sign it.

In California, the Democrat-controlled legislature has moved much more quickly. On Thursday, Governor Gavin Newsom (D) signed two bills to redraw California’s congressional districts that the legislature passed earlier in the day. These bills aim to move five congressional seats from Republican to Democrat. “We’re responding to what occurred in Texas. We’re neutralizing what occurred,” argued Newsom, “because when all things are equal, we’re all playing by the same rules.”

As a matter of fact, California and Texas do not play by the same redistricting rules. In 2008 and 2010, California voters passed a ballot measure that authorized a bipartisan commission to redraw California’s state and federal legislative districts. This commission drew the lines that California has used since 2022. Thus, before the California legislature can redraw the map, they need the voters’ permission to supersede the map created by the redistricting commission. To that end, Governor Newsom has called a special election on November 4, a mere 10 weeks away.

It remains unclear whether California’s voters will approve this redistricting gambit, as contradictory early polling points in both directions. Only 15 years ago, California voters overwhelmingly approved the redistricting commission (61.2% to 38.7%); it would be a remarkable shift if they undermined its authority now.

In fact, many California voters likely have some inkling that the district map drawn by the bipartisan commission already tilts heavily in Democrats’ favor. In 2022, California Democrats won 63.3% of the congressional vote but almost 77% of the seats. In 2024, Democrats won 60.4% of the vote but 82.6% of the seats. Somehow, without an obvious partisan gerrymander by Sacramento legislatures, California Democrats have maneuvered themselves into quite a comfortable advantage.

If California voters do second the legislature’s effort to neutralize Texas’s redistricting effort, it might kick off a redistricting war that Democrats are not well positioned to win. By Punchbowl’s calculation, “Republicans can get 12 or more new seats fairly easily. Democrats can get two or three without amending a state constitution, and eight if Newsom’s California gambit works.”

A New York Times analysis helps explain why: there are 15 states with unified Democratic control and 26 with unified Republican control. But partisan gain is not possible in all these states, either because a state only has one congressional seat (like Delaware or Wyoming), or because the dominant party already holds all the congressional seats (like Massachusetts or Oklahoma).

This leaves eight Democrat-controlled states with Republican-held districts and 15 Republican-controlled states with Democrat-held districts. However, in five of these Democrat-controlled states, the legislature is not in control of drawing the map. This leaves only three Democrat-controlled states (besides California) where the legislature could potentially redraw the map to knock Republicans out of Congress, compared to 15 states where Republicans could do the opposite.

Across these three states (Illinois, Maryland, and Oregon), Democrats have already maximized their advantage, leaving a total of five Republicans in Congress across the three states. It would be extremely difficult to draw maps that would favor the Democrats any further. Maryland Democrats already tried this census cycle, but their gerrymander was struck down in court. Likewise, New York (another large, Democrat-controlled state) already tried to override its redistricting commission to enact a partisan gerrymander, which was also struck down in court.

Some analysts believe California Democrats are pushing their new map simply to oppose Trump. The Trump administration provided the impetus for Texas’s redistricting effort, in hopes of giving the president’s party a more effective House majority in Congress. California Democrats may not believe they can win a nationwide redistricting war, but they do believe their base wants to see them stand tow-to-tow with Trump.

Thus, California Assemblyman Marc Berman (D), who sponsored one of the redistricting bills, offered this half-hearted defense on Thursday, “We don’t want this fight, and we didn’t choose this fight, but with our democracy on the line, we cannot and will not run away from this fight.” Begun, the Redistricting Wars have.

AUTHOR

Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a senior writer at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Florida’s Crackdown on Child Predators Arrests Nearly 50 Pedophiles in Undercover Operation

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Florida and federal authorities have delivered a powerful blow against child predators, arresting nearly 50 pedophiles in a six-day undercover operation targeting online exploitation. Seven of those arrested are under Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainment, paving the way for federal custody and potential deportation proceedings.

The operation, described in a press release as yielding the “highest number of arrests ever made during this annual joint effort,” underscores what Florida officials call their unwavering commitment to protecting children from abuse. Attorney General James Uthmeier (R) emphasized the state’s resolve, stating, “I know the state attorney here is going to be doing the Lord’s work to make sure that these people go away for absolutely as long as possible.” Concerning “those that shouldn’t have even been in this country,” he added, “they’ll go back where they came from after they’ve served their time.” The seven on hold reportedly “traveled from Jamaica, El Salvador, Dubai, and India to the state of Florida with the intention to prey on children.”

The sting resulted in 153 charges, including 34 for “Traveling to Meet a Minor for Illegal Sexual Conduct,” five for “Human Trafficking,” 48 for “Using a Computer to Solicit a Child for Sexual Conduct,” and 14 for “Transmitting Material Harmful to a Minor,” among others. Uthmeier was unequivocal in his stance: “To go after young kids, there is no defense, there is no justification, there is no excuse.” He reaffirmed the operation’s ongoing nature, declaring, “It will not happen. It cannot happen in Florida, and we will work every day to make sure that we are getting every single one of these guys off the streets. When I took the oath of office six months ago, I told my team [that] going after child predators is priority one. We’ve got about 1,000 priorities, but it’s priority one.”

A significant focus of the operation was the social media platform Snapchat, where predators used various online chat and gaming platforms to target minors — who were, in this case, undercover officers. The press release highlighted the attorney general office’s lawsuit against Snapchat, filed in April, for “knowingly and willingly violating” Florida law, including protections under HB3 and the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act. The lawsuit accuses Snapchat of misleading parents about the platform’s risks to children.

Marion County Sheriff Billy Woods praised the operation’s success while sounding a sobering note. “My office routinely conducts these types of operations. With each operation, we catch more and more. The number of offenders only goes up.” He urged parents to monitor their children’s online activity, adding, “Parents, we will never arrest every single one of them. You have to know what your child is doing online, and children have to know what dangers are lurking online. As a Sheriff and as a father, I understand the anger and disgust a parent has towards these types of individuals. I assure you that we will continue to attack this plague head on.”

State Attorney for the Fifth Judicial Circuit Bill Gladson lauded the operation’s impact, stating, “I had the privilege of being able to see this operation firsthand, and it was nothing short of remarkable. Sheriff Woods and his deputies did an outstanding job catching and removing 40 predators from the Central Florida community. A special thank you to Attorney General James Uthmeier and the Office of Statewide Prosecution for their commitment to keeping our community safe.”

Joseph Backholm, Family Research Council’s senior fellow for Biblical Worldview and Strategic Engagement, commended the successful operation in a comment to The Washington Stand. “It’s wonderful that Florida and other law enforcement agencies around the country are dealing with this seriously,” he said. However, Backholm used this as an opportunity to explain how, “if we really want it to stop it, we have to be honest about where it’s coming from.”

As he explained, “The problem of human trafficking begins where all sin begins, with pride. Once you decide you are more important than others, it’s not hard to decide that other people should serve your needs. Human trafficking and sexual exploitation are the worst examples of this, but far from the only examples.” Backholm emphasized, “We either want virtue, or we don’t.”

Ultimately, he continued, “We live in a confused moment where we celebrate sexual liberty and decry the results of sexual liberty. People are told to do what ‘makes you happy,’ and then they’re told to stop doing what makes them happy. The right answer, of course, is to do what you were created for, and you will find happiness along the way.” And yet, Backholm argued that “most of the time, doing what you were created for requires not doing the thing that offers immediate pleasure.”

“[W]e want to arrest predators,” Backholm concluded, “but we’re going to continue create more predators if we don’t rethink the path to happiness and stop pretending that evil,” in any form, “is good.”

AUTHOR

Sarah Holliday

Sarah Holliday is a reporter at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washigton Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Illegal Immigrants to Be Housed in ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ and Other Immigration News

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

With conflict in the Middle East seemingly reaching its conclusion, the American public is shifting its attention back to President Donald Trump’s immigration policy. Tensions are still high, with deportation efforts meeting resistance, especially in major metropolitan hubs like Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York City. Here are the latest immigration updates.

‘Alligator Alcatraz’

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has greenlit the use of a new detention center in Florida to house illegal immigrants slated for deportation. Nicknamed “Alligator Alcatraz,” the detention center will repurpose the largely-unused Miami-Dade Collier Training Facility in the Everglades. DHS official Tricia McLaughlin reported that the facility will be composed of “large tents,” providing space to house at least 5,000 illegal immigrants at a time. The area is surrounded by dangerous wildlife, including alligators and pythons.

“Under President Trump’s leadership, we are working at turbo speed to deliver cost-effective and innovative ways to deliver on the American people’s mandate for mass deportations of criminal illegal aliens,” DHS Secretary Kristi Noem said in a social media post.

She continued, “These new facilities will in large part be funded by FEMA’s Shelter and Services Program, which the Biden administration used as a piggy bank to spend hundreds of millions of American taxpayer dollars to house illegal aliens, including at the Roosevelt Hotel that served as a Tren de Aragua base of operations and was used to shelter Laken Riley’s killer.”

Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier (R) said that the location chosen for “Alligator Alcatraz” is ideal “because you don’t need to invest that much in the perimeter. People get out and there’s not much waiting for them other than alligators and pythons — nowhere to go, nowhere to hide.” He added, “I’m proud to help support President Trump and Secretary Noem in their mission to fix our illegal immigration problem once and for all. Alligator Alcatraz and other Florida facilities will do just that.”

The Trump administration has already repurposed detention facilities at Guantanamo Bay to house illegal immigrants prior to deportation, yielding the capacity to house at least 30,000 at a time. Border czar Tom Homan has previously stressed the importance of receiving further funding from Congress for the Trump administration’s deportation efforts. “We’re out of money,” Homan reported in March. He explained, “When we run out of beds, it means we stop interior enforcement operations, because when we arrest somebody, [we’ve] gotta have a bed to put them in for removal.” The border czar added, “Congress does — they need to get us the funding we need so this administration can keep the promises they made to the American people. I think the president was given a mandate: illegal immigration was the number one issue in the campaign.”

Raiding California

Earlier this month, the president federalized California’s National Guard to protect U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents carrying out immigration raids in Los Angeles. With much of the violence now having subsided, some National Guard soldiers were detailed to assist the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) and ICE in raids on three illegal marijuana-growing facilities in the Coachella Valley. At least 70 illegal immigrants were arrested. While executing search warrants, federal forces found two men at the facilities padlocked inside a trailer in 122-degree heat.

The anti-deportation riots which prompted the Trump administration to deploy National Guard troops and Marines to L.A. have since spread to other areas, with riots and protests appearing in Anchorage, Arkansas; Atlanta; Austin; Chicago; Dallas; Denver; Huntington Beach, California; Las Vegas; Minneapolis; New York City; Omaha, Nebraska; Peoria, Arizona; Portland; Riverside, California; San Antonio, Texas; San Francisco; Santa Ana, California; Seattle; and Spokane, Washington.

According to the New York Post, Republican lawmakers have launched an investigation into the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA), accusing the nonprofit of funding the riots in L.A. The legislators wrote in a letter that they have “concerns that CHIRLA may be using federal funds to support violent criminal activity that impedes the enforcement of federal immigration law.” Another report has suggested that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is investigating Cynthia Gonzalez, vice mayor of L.A. County-area city Cudahy, for apparently calling on Hispanic gangs to combat ICE agents in L.A.

Resistance on ICE

Despite the protests, the majority of Americans still support ICE — and Trump’s plans for deportations. A June Economist/YouGov survey found that 52% of American voters say it should be illegal to impede ICE operations, with 24% saying it should be illegal to do so and another 24% “unsure.” A recent Rasmussen Reports poll found that 83% of likely voters said that deporting illegal immigrants who continued to commit crimes after entering the country was an important issue, including 57% who rated the issue “very important.” Additionally, 58% said that “sanctuary” cities, which refuse to investigate immigration status or cooperate with ICE, increase threats to public safety.

This month’s Harvard CAPS/Harris survey also found that 80% support deporting illegal immigrants who continued to commit crimes after entering the country, while 68% opposed impeding ICE operations.

AUTHOR

S.A. McCarthy

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Anti-ICE Riots Will Cost Los Angeles over $30 Million

ICE Rounds up Iranians after U.S. Strike

‘NO Kings 2.0’ Protests Set for July 4th Because the First One Was a Bust

RELATED VIDEO: Florida AG says construction of ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ detention facility will move forward

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

Like what you’re reading? Donate to The Washington Stand! From now until June 30, your gift will be doubled to fuel bold, biblically-based reporting.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.