Alaska Supreme Court allows for potential popular repeal of controversial election system
Alaska’s Supreme Court issued a decision Thursday that will allow a question regarding repeal of the state’s controversial ranked choice voting system to appear on the November ballot. The state’s high court upheld a lower court ruling that would allow the ballot measure to come to a popular vote. “Having considered the record, the parties’ briefs, and the parties’ arguments, we affirm the superior court’s summary judgment order,” the judges said in their ruling. “An opinion explaining this decision will be issued at a later date.” The case came about after three Alaska residents, led by Elizabeth Medicine Crow, sought to disqualify the measure based on allegedly defective petitions. RANKED-CHOICE VOTING RANKLES ELECTION SEASON AS SUPPORTERS, OPPONENTS TRANSCEND PARTY LINES IN KEY STATES Alaska’s Division of Elections certified in March that enough signatures had been collected to qualify the repeal initiative after the agency allowed petitioners to fix notarized errors in their paperwork. In 2020, Alaska voters narrowly approved the original ballot measure — with a 50.55% majority recorded — that instituted ranked choice voting there. The practice, praised as a way to help moderate candidates, changes the election tabulation system from a simple majority framework to one that holds multiple rounds of counting. In the first round, totals for each candidate are tabulated, and the candidate with the fewest “first votes” is eliminated. The “second votes” of that candidate’s supporters are added to the totals of the remaining candidates, round after round, until a winner is decided. Alaska Republicans, in particular, criticized the practice in 2022 after Rep. Mary Peltola, D-Alaska, won in an otherwise shocking upset in the red state to succeed six-decade GOP lawmaker Don Young, who died that spring at 88. The two leading GOP candidates under the new system, former Gov. Sarah Palin and Nick Begich III, the conservative scion of a noted Democratic political family in the state, collectively garnered more votes than Peltola in the first round of tabulation but still lost. IN THE ONLY STATE BORDERING RUSSIA, ALASKA GOVERNOR SAYS DEFENSES ARE STRONG Kelly Tshibaka, a fellow Republican who lost to Sen. Lisa Murkowski in 2022, previously called it “deceptive how they sell [ranked-choice voting] to the public” as a “moderating force” when it is not in her view. She pointed to the failed candidacy of Al Gross, a Democrat turned Independent who, at times, led in the primary but dropped out, leaving Peltola, on his left, to remain. Meanwhile, proponents argue the practice helps take partisanship out of elections. In Alaska specifically, many have pointed to the fact both conservative Gov. Mike Dunleavy and moderate Murkowski emerged victorious in 2022. New York Mayor Bill de Blasio also sung its praises after the “biggest ranked choice voting election in America” in his city in 2021, and states like Maine have also adopted it. Ranked choice voting however, has also been criticized by Alaska conservative activists like Judy Eledge, a former schoolteacher in Barrow, which is now known as Utqiagvik. “You basically don’t get your first choice of who you want to win, and it enables people that otherwise would never win anything,” Eledge said in a recent Fox News Digital interview. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP “It gives them enough to win and basically just destroys the party system within the state when it comes to elections.” Some on the right do support the system, including former Virginia State Delegate Chris Saxman, now executive director of Virginia Free, an organization that provides objective, nonpartisan political information to the business community. In a recent interview with Fox News Digital, the former Staunton lawmaker noted Virginia Republicans utilized ranked choice voting in their 2021 convention candidate selection process and ultimately won back the governorship after a decade out of power. Saxman spoke of a run-in with a Republican consultant at a party function who decried the use of the system because the right wing could have “gone after [the more moderate Republican] Youngkin harder, but we couldn’t afford to alienate his voters.” “I was like, ‘So, it’s a problem not to attack a fellow Republican?’” Saxman countered. The 2024 general election in Alaska will still be operated under ranked choice voting. Fox News Digital reached out to Peltola, Murkowski, Dunleavy and Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, for comment.
DNA TV Show: Sheikh Hasina to face same fate as Saddam Hussein?
Will Sheikh Hasina face the same fate as Saddam Hussein in Bangladesh?
Did you know this Oscar-winning Indian song was shot outside palace where Ukraine’s Zelenskyy hosted PM Modi
The iconic song ‘Naatu Naatu’ from the movie RRR was shot at Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s official residence, months before the war broke out in the region.
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. suspends campaign, backs Trump for president
Independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. on Friday dropped his White House bid and announced support for former President Donald Trump, issuing broadsides against the Democratic Party’s handling of the primary election and media censorship. Kennedy said in Phoenix that the Democratic Party of “waged continual legal warfare against both President Trump and myself,” and “ran a sham primary.” “In an honest system, I believe I would have won the election,” he said. Kennedy’s campaign is asking swing states to remove his name from the ballot because he does not want to be a “spoiler,” he said. He will remain on the ballot in states that he considers “red” or “blue,” he said. “If you live in a blue state, you can vote for me without harming or helping President Trump or or Vice President Harris,” Kennedy said. “In red states, the same will apply.” The former Democrat spoke a couple of hours before Trump was scheduled to hold a campaign event in nearby Glendale, Arizona. The Trump campaign on Thursday advertised that the former president would be joined by a “special guest,” which further sparked speculation of a Kennedy endorsement of the Republican 2024 presidential nominee. The announcement ends the presidential run by the longtime environmental activist and high-profile vaccine skeptic, who is the scion of the nation’s most storied political dynasty. DOES KENNEDY’S DEPARTURE FROM THE 2024 RACE HELP TRUMP MORE THAN HARRIS? Kennedy launched his long-shot campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination in April of last year, but last October the 70-year-old candidate switched to an independent run for the White House. HARRIS TAKES AIM AT TRUMP AS SHE VOWS ‘TO BE A PRESIDENT FOR ALL AMERICANS’ While Kennedy had long identified as a Democrat and repeatedly invoked his late father Sen. Robert F. Kennedy and his uncle President John F. Kennedy, who were both assassinated in the 1960s, Kennedy in recent years built relationships with far-right leaders. Kennedy repeatedly invoked his father and uncle Friday in Phoenix. President Biden’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee for months repeatedly slammed Kennedy as a potential spoiler whose supporters could hand Trump a presidential election victory in November. And the DNC battled Kennedy and his supporters at nearly every step as he worked to place his name on the ballot in all 50 states. RFK JR.’S RUNNING MATE CHARGES DEMOCRATS ‘OBSTRUCTED A FAIR ELECTION,’ ‘FULLY SUPPORTS’ WORKING WITH TRUMP But Kennedy remained a thorn in Biden’s side from last year through the president’s announcement last month that he was ending his re-election bid and endorsing Harris. The Trump campaign, which had cheered on Kennedy when he was running against Biden as a Democrat, also started taking aim at him after he switched to an independent run, labeling him a member of the “radical left,” and criticizing him for his environmental activism. But the relationship between Kennedy and Trump started warming earlier this year, and the two spoke last month after the assassination attempt against Trump and met in person the following day. Earlier this week, Kennedy running mate Nicole Shanahan sparked headlines by saying in a podcast interview that the campaign was considering whether to “join forces” with Trump to prevent the possibility of Vice President Kamala Harris winning the 2024 election. “If he endorsed me, I would be honored by it. I would be very honored by it. He really has his heart in the right place,” Trump said on Thursday in an interview on “Fox & Friends.” And the former president’s running mate, Sen. JD Vance of Ohio, said Wednesday in an interview on “Fox & Friends” that he hoped Kennedy “endorses the president, gets on the team, because this is about saving the country.” Kennedy’s departure from the race comes as his campaign was cratering. The last public event put on by his campaign came on July 9, in Freeport, Maine. But even before that, his poll numbers – which once stood in the teens – had faded. The most recent Fox News national poll, conducted August 9-12, indicated Kennedy at 6% support. His fundraising was also in a free fall, with campaign finance reports indicating he had just $3.9 million cash on hand as of the start of July, with nearly $3.5 million in debt. Get the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews and more at our Fox News Digital election hub.
Veronica Escobar’s role with the presidential campaign offers exciting and sometimes uneasy spotlight
The El Paso Democrat has defended the Biden and Harris campaign through its best — and worst — moments
Sheila Jackon Lee’s daughter files to finish out her mother’s term
Carter will run against two Republicans for her mother’s seat to hold for a few weeks before the winner of the general election takes over.
Texas, other GOP-led states sue over program to give immigrant spouses of U.S. citizens legal status
The suit targets a new Biden administration policy that allows spouses to remain in the U.S. while they apply for legal status and possibly a path to citizenship.
Reporter’s Notebook: What the end of the year looks like in Congress
Congress does not return to session until Sept. 9, and the only thing the House and Senate must absolutely do the rest of the year is fund the government. The problem is that Congress does not have until Dec. 31. The government’s fiscal year deadline is Oct. 1. THE HOME STRETCH: VP HARRIS FILLS DEMOCRATS WITH OPTIMISM AS ELECTION DAY NEARS As per usual, expect a veritable adventure between now and October – if not the end of the year and maybe into 2025 – over how Congress might sidestep a government shutdown. The House Freedom Caucus issued an ultimatum. The coalition of the House’s most-conservative members wrote to House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., demanding a simple renewal of existing funding at current levels – known as a Continuing Resolution (CR) – through “early 2025.” The Freedom Caucus is banking on a return of former President Donald Trump to the White House – to say nothing of the supposition that Republicans will hold the House and flip the Senate. Recent polling is starting to favor Vice President Kamala Harris. The chances of Republicans holding the House are a jump ball at best – and may trend toward Democrats. Political handicappers have long favored Republicans to seize control of the Senate, but that’s not a done deal, either. The Freedom Caucus believes the GOP will seize the major levers of government and can implement the spending package it wants next year. Johnson is certainly entertaining this possibility. And he may be wise to do so, considering the rambunctious nature of the House Republican Conference. More on that in a moment. But many Republicans, especially members of the Appropriations Committee, aren’t on board with the Freedom Caucus strategy. And those same Republicans doubt that Senate Democrats would ever abide such a plan. In short, some Republicans and lots of Democrats would prefer a short-term CR that runs through mid-November or December. Then work out the bills individually and pass everything, en masse, in an omnibus before the end of the calendar year. Then no one needs to worry about funding the government until next Oct. 1. Which is precisely the concern in conservative circles. First, many Freedom Caucus members abhor the concept of any omnibus spending bill. Even a few “minibus” spending bills, with a handful of appropriations measures tucked into each legislative vehicle. Secondly, with President Biden still in the White House and Democrats at the helm of the Senate, conservatives believe a longer CR which stretches into the new year short-circuits how long liberal and progressive spending policies might remain in effect. Republicans can nip these in January with a CR which lasts until then. But if lawmakers adopt a short-term CR through late fall and then mash all of the spending plans together at once before handing over the keys to a new Congress and new President next year, Democratic spending priorities remain in place until the autumn of 2025. This is counterintuitive, but conservatives believe an elongated CR actually helps them more in the short-term. HOUSE LAWMAKERS LEAVE DC UNTIL SEPTEMBER WITH GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN DEADLINE LOOMING The question is what path Johnson might choose. Johnson caught flak from conservatives for doing a number of short-term spending bills last fall, through the winter and into the spring to avoid multiple forays into a government shutdown. He also fielded criticism for allowing a bill to aid Ukraine to come to the floor. And don’t forget that simply advancing a short-term spending bill last year cost former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., his gavel. So, Johnson must be mindful of which course he takes. But the question of how to fund the government might be laced with questions about the future of the House Republican leadership. It’s hard to see how Johnson is able to punt into next year. He’ll need House Democrats and certainly buy-in from the Senate for that. But let’s say Johnson somehow pulls that off and scores a longer-term CR. If that’s the case, the government is funded and Johnson likely protects himself from political challenges on the right. The House will elect a speaker on Jan. 3, the start of the new Congress. First, Republicans must be in the majority. If former President Trump wins, he might dictate whether Johnson or someone else becomes speaker. However, what happens if Democrats win the House and/or Vice President Harris prevails? Does Johnson become the Minority Leader? What is past could be prologue. After the McCarthy experience, how Johnson handles the CR might dictate his future. That said, it is tougher to become House speaker than Minority Leader. Johnson or anyone else needs an outright majority of the entire House (Democrats and Republicans casting ballots) to become speaker. That’s a high bar. but the Minority Leader only requires a simple majority of their respective conference or caucus. That race isn’t decided on the floor. Regardless, even if some conservatives disagree with how Johnson addresses government funding, they don’t have the stomach to go through another protracted leadership battle. Many House Republicans suffer from “PTSD.” Or, as we might call it on Capitol Hill, “Post Traumatic Speaker Disorder.” So while some conservatives might not fully embrace whatever decision Johnson makes, they’re not willing to engage in another donnybrook over who will lead House Republicans. Moreover, the tactics of the right and the Freedom Caucus exhausted some rank-and-file Republicans and GOP members of the Appropriations Committee. Many Republicans point to the schism in the party over the Freedom Caucus approach. One senior GOP appropriator noted that Freedom Caucus members might not support whatever spending plan Republican leaders concoct – simply because they oppose most everything. So they aren’t willing to kowtow to the right. There’s a push by some Republicans to latch an election integrity bill to a stopgap spending bill. The plan would bar noncitizens from voting in federal elections – even though that’s already illegal. Senate Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Patty Murray, D-Wash., characterized the election bill demand as
Gun rights groups ask Supreme Court to rule on sweeping Maryland firearm ban lower bench upheld
Two major Second Amendment groups called on the Supreme Court to hear a case challenging Maryland’s stringent “Assault Weapons Ban of 2013,” after a lower court ruled the ban constitutional. The Firearms Policy Coalition filed a petition to the high bench asking them to hear Snope v. Brown – alternatively Bianchi v. Frosh – which the Richmond, Va.-based Fourth Circuit upheld in a 10-5 decision earlier this month. That decision, written by Reagan-appointed Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III, said the Old Line State’s ban on certain semi-automatic rifles and pistols “fits comfortably within our nation’s tradition of firearms regulation.” Two residents of Baltimore County, Md., and one from Anne Arundel County first filed suit against Maryland in 2021. The California-based Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) and Washington State-based Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) filed petitions for certiorari, asking the Supreme Court to make a superseding ruling on the Fourth Circuit’s decision. SAF founder Alan Gottlieb said the appeals bench is trying to flip the landmark “Heller” decision nixing the District of Columbia’s gun ban “on its head.” LAWMAKERS INVOKE HUNTER BIDEN, SECOND AMENDMENT WHILE OFFERING VARYING DEFENSES OF GUN LAWS “They are essentially arguing the arms protected by the Second Amendment are limited only to certain state-approved firearms, which would make it no right at all, but a government-regulated privilege,” Gottlieb said in a statement. “This is the third time we have petitioned the high court in this case,” Gottlieb added. Meanwhile, in a separate release, FPC President Brandon Combs argued the case is an “ideal vehicle for the Supreme Court to resolve exceptionally important issues.” Combs said AR-15s and other similar arms prohibited in Maryland are otherwise very commonly owned. “There is no legitimate basis for the Fourth Circuit to have concluded that the most widely owned semiautomatic rifles in the United States are not arms protected by the Second Amendment,” he said. “The Court must provide more guidance on which weapons the Second Amendment covers and they should do so in this case. This immoral and abusive gun control regime must end here.” Proponents also cited the recent Bruen decision overturning New York’s open-carry ban. OBAMA JUDGE’S RULING ON ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS OWNING GUNS HELPS THE LEFT BLUR THE LINES OF CITIZENSHIP: RUBIO In his majority decision, Wilkinson argued the AR-15 and Barrett .50 cal and “gangster-style” guns are not protected by the Constitution due to their “excessively dangerous” nature, according to Maryland Matters. He then listed mass shootings in Blacksburg, Va., Las Vegas, Nev., Parkland, Fla., Thousand Oaks, Calif., and about a dozen other cities. Meanwhile, writing in dissent, Trump-appointed Judge Julius Richardson countered that the “Second Amendment is not a second-class right subject to the whimsical discretion of federal judges.” Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown, a Democrat, is the named defendant in the suit – which formerly named his Democratic predecessor Brian Frosh. Brown’s office declined to comment on the filings. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP Fox News Digital also reached out to Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., who spearheaded the ban while serving in the state Senate at the time. The Takoma Park lawmaker was listed as the first sponsor of the legislation, which also named Frosh – then a state senator from Potomac – as one of its co-sponsors. The law’s text orders that “certain firearms” be designated as “assault weapons” and prohibits sale, transfer or purchase of such weaponry. It also called upon an Annapolis board to create a roster of prohibited weapons. Fox News Digital also reached out to Maryland Gov. Wes Moore for comment but did not hear back by press time.
Riley Gaines, NCAA athletes to testify in Georgia about competing against, sharing locker room with Lia Thomas
FIRST ON FOX: Five NCAA All-American Women Athletes, including OutKick.com contributor Riley Gaines, will testify in Georgia about their experience competing against and sharing a locker room with a biological male. Earlier this month, the Georgia state Senate established a Special Select Committee on Women’s Sports to analyze the issue of biological males competing against female athletes. Fox News Digital learned that the first topic of the committee’s inquiry will focus on the 2022 National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA) Division I Women’s Swimming and Diving Championships, where biological male swimmer, Lia Thomas, competed for the University of Pennsylvania women’s swimming team. The hearings will feature testimony from Riley Gaines, the host of “Gaines for Girls” who competed against and eventually tied with Thomas, who identifies as a woman, in the 200-yard NCAA championships. RILEY GAINES OFFERS WARNING TO POSSIBLE HARRIS VOTERS AMID OLYMPIC BOXING CONTROVERSY In addition to competing, Gaines and other women involved in the tournament will reportedly recall being forced to share a locker room with Thomas. Also testifying will be athletes Reka Gyorgy, Kylee Alons, Grace Countie, and Kaitlynn Wheeler — all members of the Independent Council on Women’s Sports (ICONS) who filed a lawsuit against the NCAA in March alleging the association knowingly violated Title IX in allowing Thomas to compete. SUPREME COURT STRIKES DOWN BIDEN-HARRIS TITLE IX CHANGE THAT SOME ARGUED WOULD ALLOW MEN IN WOMEN’S SPORTS The women athletes will reportedly “explain how they were harmed by the actions of Georgia Tech University and the NCAA and what must be done to protect women in the future,” according to their lead attorney, William Bock III. “My priority is to ensure that female athletes across Georgia have the right to compete on a fair and level playing field, and I will not waver on this effort,” Lt. Governor Burt Jones, R-Ga., said in an announcement of the special committee. “We will not stand idly by while radical politicians, athletic associations, schools and higher education institutions push policies threatening this right.” The first hearing will be held on Tuesday, Aug. 27, at the Georgia State Capitol. Georgia Tech University and the NCAA did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s requests for comment.