WASHINGTON – Suddenly, evidence is emerging that noncitizens were on New Jersey’s voter rolls, and fresh questions are emerging about the reliability of Alaska voter data. Republicans say it’s a large deal and an critical boost for their so-far stalled election integrity efforts.

But take a closer look. Congressional lawmakers and independent experts said this week that none of these disclosures are sufficient to significantly support the Trump administration’s ongoing efforts to purge noncitizens from the voter rolls.

New Jersey found In 2023 and 2024, there will be 6,600 foreigners on the voter lists, of which less than 400 people actually vote. Alaska officials are asking questions about several thousand voters even though it has not been proven they were ineligible to vote. President Donald Trump won Alaska in 2024 by 44,000 votes.

“The answer is no,” said David Becker, executive director of the nonpartisan organization Center for Innovation and Electoral Research, when asked if this news would enhance support for the SAVE America Act.

“They just don’t have the votes in the Senate,” Becker said. “Even if that happened, there are less than three months left until the election.”

House it passed the SAVE America Act in April and last week approved legislation that would give states $10 billion to tighten voting laws.

But any effort to advance the measures is stalled in the Senate, where most measures will need 60 votes to overcome a filibuster. There are 53 Republicans in the Senate, but not all of them support Trump’s plan.

Majority Leader John Thune saw a arduous path forward.

The South Dakota Republican said Monday that it would be up to Trump to convince hesitant senators to agree. “If he can change the facts and start convincing some senators from ‘no’ to ‘yes,’ then we will have a different conversation. That’s just reality,” Thune told reporters.

The SAVE America Act, arguably Trump’s top legislative priority this year, would require voters to show proof of citizenship when registering and a photo ID when voting. Foreign citizens can no longer vote in state, federal and almost all local elections.

Problems with New Jersey and Alaska

What sparked the latest Republican action was New Jersey Governor Mike Sherrill last week it was revealed that about 6,600 foreigners were registered to vote in the state because of a software problem with the state Motor Vehicle Commission’s automatic voter registration system.

About 400 people actually voted. Sherrill said the bug started in 2023 and took a year to fix. She stated that there was no evidence that it influenced the election results. Sherrill took office in January 2026.

“It is unacceptable that a vendor released software with such an egregious bug. It is unacceptable that it took MVC a year to fix this problem, and it is unacceptable that no one in the previous administration disclosed this and demanded accountability,” she said. The New Jersey Monitor reported.

Last week, Alaska also reported registration problems with its Department of Motor Vehicles. Officials said the state had removed 3,048 people from voter rolls, saying they may not be citizens.

Carol Beecher, director of the Division of Elections, told state lawmakers that a person identified as a non-citizen should contact her agency and ask whether he or she is a citizen or not. – reported the Alaska Beacon.

“It’s not a burdensome request for the department to just contact us and confirm, and that’s what we asked them to do. We don’t require documentation. We don’t require documentation. Nothing like that,” she said.

Auto Voter Law

Federal car voters law in 1993 was largely considered a bipartisan success as a way to make it easier for citizens to register to vote.

Requires states to offer registration with their motor vehicle agencies, including by mail. Registration applications must be attached to applications for renewal and fresh driving licenses.

The 1993 law applies in 44 states, and Washington, Idaho, Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Wisconsin, and Wyoming are exempt because there were no registration requirements in place when the law went into effect or voter registration took place at the polls on the same day.

Act of 2002 requires voters to show identification, usually a driver’s license, before they can register.

Non-citizens cannot vote in federal or state elections, but they can apply for a driver’s license.

It is unclear why foreigners appeared on the ballots in New Jersey and possibly Alaska. Was it a software bug? Were the officials negligent? Is there an issue that other countries should know about?

“We don’t know much about it yet,” Becker said.

Evidence of fraud?

The Trump administration earlier this month claimed that as many as 250,000 foreigners were registered to vote in New Jersey, California, Pennsylvania and Nevada.

Secretary of Homeland Security Markwayne Mullin stated that as many as 35,152 “prospective noncitizens” could be registered to vote in New Jersey.

No concrete evidence has emerged to support this figure voting rights analysts questions have arisen about how this number was calculated.

For SAVE Act supporters, last week’s disclosures in New Jersey and Alaska were finally solid evidence that things are going wrong. The following changes have occurred since disclosure:

• The Department of Justice wants names and other information of incorrectly registered people. Sherrill said will not disclose data.
• U.S. Rep. Jeff Van Drew, a Republican from New Jersey who heads the House Judiciary Subcommittee, and 18 other House Republicans sent a letter to Sherrill demanding details of what happened. They want to know by August 21 why the state failed to identify the error and why it took so long. “New Jersey should end automatic voter registration with the Motor Vehicle Commission, clean up its voter rolls, and require proof of citizenship to register to vote. These are basic protections that should already be in place,” Van Drew – wrote in the statement.
• Trump and some Republicans called on the Senate to continue session. Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, wants to keep senators in Washington after summer recess begins behind schedule next week so they can work on election reform. “The Senate doesn’t need a vacation as much as the country needs the SAVE America Act. Let’s cancel the recess,” he wrote on Twitter on Sunday. He was joined by Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla. and Jim Banks, R-Ind.
• Republicans blamed Democrats. In the Senate, Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso, D-Wyo. he linked the mess to Democrats’ views on illegal immigrants. “Democrats cannot open the border, hand illegal immigrants driver’s licenses, and then act shocked – shocked (as Democrats claim) when these illegal immigrants ultimately vote. Illegal immigrants must not be allowed to vote in American elections,” he said.

Democrats ridiculed such rhetoric.

“Give it up, Donald. The SAVE Act will not become law,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said this week in a speech to Trump.

For Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, senior member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the situation is tinged with sadness.

“All of this makes me more suspicious that there are problems with the mail-in ballots. I’m sure there are, based on anecdotal information,” he said on the news from New Jersey. “The more the validity of the voting system is questioned, the more people are discouraged from participating.”

Asked if these reports changed the Senate’s votes on the SAVE America Act, he replied categorically: “No.”

On Monday, the Trump administration asked the U.S. Supreme Court to stay a district court ruling that blocked President Donald Trump’s sweeping March 31 order limiting mail-in voting.

The decision came just two days after a federal appeals court rejected the administration’s request to revive a controversial plan that would have imposed significant restrictions and requirements on states collecting voter information for absentee voting.

It also sets off a high-stakes confrontation in the Supreme Court between the administration and the 23 states that sued over Trump’s executive order, just over three months before midterm elections that will decide control of Congress.

“The district court issued an emergency injunction prohibiting federal agencies from applying an executive order promoting election integrity in the upcoming federal election in November,” wrote Solicitor General D. John Sauer in his application to the Supreme Court.

Sauer argued that the executive order should not be blocked because, among other things, the U.S. Postal Service has not yet issued final regulations on how it will be implemented.

Ruling of the court of appeal

A three-judge panel of the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed a lower court ruling last month which blocked the order because the U.S. Constitution gives states – not the president – ​​the power to administer elections.

The executive order “orders an unprecedented level of involvement by federal officials in the way states administer elections,” wrote the two appellate judges, Gustavo A. Gelpí and Julie Rikelman. order for Saturday. Both were appointed by President Joe Biden.

Gelpí and Rikelman considered and rejected the administration’s argument that states could not challenge the order because Postal Service regulations had not yet been finalized.

The order directed the agency’s final rule to include a requirement for states to begin filing voter rolls 60 days after the general election on Sept. 4 of this year. Allowing the order to go into effect would force states that have been preparing for months to devote significant time and resources to creating a recent electoral system in just a few weeks.

“The government has not persuaded us that the (executive order’s) impact on the Plaintiffs is ‘hypothetical,'” Gelpí and Rikelman wrote.

The panel’s third judge, Joshua D. Dunlap, partially agreed and partially disagreed with that opinion, noting that the Postal Service rule imposed by the executive order had not yet been finalized. But he added that the timeline suggested in the order would require states to take immediate action on absentee ballots.

Consequences for countries

The Trump administration is running out of time to effectively implement mail-in voting restrictions ahead of the November midterm elections 99 days from Monday.

The 1st Circuit panel cited the upcoming midterms as a reason to temporarily block the order. A full review of the ordinance could be considered over a longer time horizon, but state election officials faced inevitable consequences if they did not begin preparing to meet the ordinance’s requirements in time for the November general election and September primary, the justices said.

The order directed the U.S. Postal Service to require states to notify the agency 90 days before an election if they plan to utilize absentee ballots and, if so, to send the list of eligible voters to the federal government at least two months before the election and before mailing ballots to those voters.

Democratic officials in 23 states – California, Massachusetts, Nevada, Washington, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania – and the District of Columbia have filed lawsuits challenging the executive order.

Twelve states with Republican attorneys general – Alabama, Missouri, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota and Texas – joined the call on the federal government’s side.

Citizenship lists

The executive order also required the Department of Homeland Security, with the assistance of the Social Security Administration, to compile lists of voting-age citizens residing in each state and then report that information to state officials at least 60 days before each federal election.

According to the ordinance, the list of citizens would be drawn up from naturalization and social security registers. It would also include data from SAVE, a powerful computer program maintained by the Department of Homeland Security that verifies citizenship by comparing names with information in federal databases.

District Court Judge Indira Talwani found that the executive order failed to invoke appropriate constitutional or legal authority to justify the creation of the lists.

Trump is questioning faith in mail-in ballots

Trump has consistently raised unfounded concerns about mail-in voting, which almost every state and some only allow.

The practice, particularly common in Western countries, enjoyed robust bipartisan support until Trump tried to undermine its credibility during the 2020 election cycle.

According to the Pew Research Center, in 2018, 71% of voters, including 57% of Republicans, supported voting by mail.

Until then April 2026 pollDemocrats’ positive view of mail-in voting remained high, but Republican support dropped to 34%.

In the executive order, Trump said that restricting mail-in voting would restrict foreigners from voting, another voting issue that Trump has often raised without providing evidence that it caused a stern integrity issue in any election.

Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Sherrod Brown raised more than twice as much as incumbent Republican Sen. Jon Husted from April to June, according to financial data from both campaigns.

Congressional candidates must file several financial disclosures during the year in which they are elected. Reports for the second quarter of 2026 were due on July 15.

Brown’s campaign announced direct donations of $14.1 million in the second quarter and an additional $3 million from an affiliated PAC. The Husted campaign saw $3.4 million in direct donations and $4.3 million from three affiliated PACs.

“Ohioans across the state are fed up with Jon Husted, who repeatedly prioritizes corporations, billionaires and special interests at the expense of hardworking families,” said Patrick Eisenhauer, Brown’s campaign manager.

In a press release, the Husted campaign touted its results as the largest second-quarter fundraising total ever posted by a Republican candidate for U.S. Senate from Ohio.

This is the third consecutive U.S. Senate election in Ohio in which the Democratic candidate’s early summer fundraising was significantly greater than that of his Republican opponent. Former Ohio State Rep. Tim Ryan outperformed current Vice President J.D. Vance by USD 6.8 million from April to June 2022, and Brown outperformed incumbent U.S. Senator Bernie Moreno by $6 million from April to June 2024.

Both elections ended with Democratic losses at the ballot box. The 2024 race has become the most exorbitant non-presidential election in American history, and although Brown more than tripled Moreno’s campaign spending, Republican groups still outspent Democratic groups by more than $75 million.

A recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court will also strengthen the role of political parties in supporting campaigns this election cycle. Ruling in the Ohio case brought by Vance, in a 6-3 decision, the court established spending limits for political parties in coordination with specific candidates.

Expenses

This time, Brown spent more than $11.5 million on advertising in the second quarter. Some internal advertisements touted his position health care AND Congress Stock TradingAND three ads tried to link Husted to deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Brown also released trio advertising in data centers in July.

While Brown raised about $4.3 million more than it did in the second quarter of 2024, it was also more frugal, spending more than $2.5 million less on advertising. At the end of June, the former three-term senator declared that he had $16.2 million in cash at his disposal.

Meanwhile, Husted’s campaign generated more than five times Moreno’s ad spending during the same period in 2024. His main committee, Husted for Senate, paid for his first TV ad of the series in slow April. Two May ads attacking Brown’s congressional record came from the Husted Victory secondary committee.

His campaign reported more than $11 million in cash, more than double Moreno’s June 2024 cash balance.

These two campaigns aren’t the only groups with money in Ohio’s U.S. Senate race. Outside groups have already pledged to spend more than $174 million on the race AdImpact expects total spending to reach $749 million until election day.

The Republican-backed Senate Leadership Fund has already spent $700,000 on this year’s race and plans to spend a total of $79 million. The Democratic-backed Senate Majority PAC has committed $64 million to the race.

Most of the outside spending in the second quarter came from two Republican super PACs. Americans for Prosperity Action, Inc., a super PAC financed by Republican megadonor Charles Koch, has spent more than $3.1 million since April.

Ohio Flyer PAC paid more than $445,000 for April “The Party’s Over” advertising aimed at Brown’s record in Congress, part of more than $1.6 million in ad spending in the second quarter. The super PAC is dedicated solely to supporting Husted’s election candidacy, and its name refers to Husted’s time playing on the University of Dayton football team.

Fundraising

Ohio Flyer PAC received its largest second-quarter donation from A Public Voice, Inc., a Virginia-based gloomy money group that has given millions to Republican super PACs in the previous elections.

Nonprofit organizations like A Public Voice, Inc. do not have to disclose their donors. A Public Voice, Inc. has a history in U.S. Senate races in Ohio: she has donated $315,000 super PAC that opposed Brown in 2018and donated $850,000 to super PAC-backed Republican Sen. Jane Timken, who is running in the 2022 primary.

Brian Colleran, CEO of an Ohio nursing home chain, and Chevron also made six-figure contributions to Ohio Flyer PAC. A super PAC can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money, but cannot directly coordinate with a candidate’s campaign committee.

The Husted campaign received the largest donations in the second quarter, including a total of $637,200 from two Jane Street Capital executives through Husted Victory. Quantitative trading firm Jane Street has made some progress recently artificial intelligence AND data centers.

His campaign was also approved a total of $69,750 in smaller donations from the political action committees of utilities such as American Electric Power and Duke Energy, as well as technology companies such as Oracle and Meta.

Other prominent Husted donors include Cleveland Browns owners Jimmy and Dee Haslam, who regularly contribute to Republican campaigns. During the second quarter, Cleveland Browns executives and Haslam family members gave a total of $292,000 to Husted.

Only one person donated more than $50,000 to a committee affiliated with Brown’s campaign in the second quarter: Joe Kanfer, former CEO of Akron-based hand sanitizer maker Purell. Brown received most of his largest individual donations through the Ohio Grassroots Victory Fund affiliate committee.

James McClave, another Jane Street trader who donated millions to a gloomy money group who supported former President Joe Biden in 2024, donated $7,000 to Brown’s campaign committee.

McClave was also an early investor in artificial intelligence giant Anthropic spending millions on artificial intelligence regulation. Anthropic general counsel Jeff Bleich contributed $20,500 to Brown’s campaign committees during the second quarter.

Brown reported more than $5.1 million in donations through the Democratic fundraising platform ActBlue, and Husted contributed $500,000 from Republican counterpart WinRed. According to a press release, the former senator made more than 135,000 donations in the second quarter, including nearly 70,000 first-time donors.

The next deadline for congressional candidates to submit financial reports is October 15.

Issue 3 asked Ohioans whether the current voter photo ID requirement should be written into the state constitution. While Republicans say it’s good policy, Democrats and Libertarians say the constitutional amendment is only meant to unite the GOP base.

The three candidates for Ohio Secretary of State are divided on this amendment.

What is the applicable law?

Ohio law already requires voters to show up ID card with photo when casting your vote in person. Acceptable forms include a valid Ohio driver’s license, U.S. passport, or military ID. Voters can no longer exploit bank statements or utility bills.

The ID card must have a valid expiration date, a photo of the voter, and the voter’s name, which must substantially match the voter’s name as it appears on the voter roll or in the poll book.

Other acceptable forms of ID include an Ohio ID card, an Ohio BMV momentary identification form, a U.S. passport, an Ohio National Guard ID card, and a U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs ID card.

What does a yes vote on issue 3 mean?

Voting “yes” on Issue 3 means you want to make it more challenging to change current voter ID requirements by enshrining them in the Ohio Constitution.

“We should protect elections here in Ohio,” said Robert Sprague, the Republican candidate for secretary of state.

A future General Assembly could repeal the law unless it is written into the constitution, supporters of the proposal argue.

The Ohio Constitution is the primary governing document that supersedes all other state policies. It can only be changed by the votes of the people.

The Ohio Revised Code contains all current laws that Ohio lawmakers pass and sign into law. It is regularly updated and changed by state lawmakers.

“I would like us to go back to in-person voting – that way everyone would have to show a photo ID,” Sprague said in an interview. “We know people are who they say they are.”

It is much more challenging to introduce a policy into the constitution or change it. In order for citizens to put the proposed amendment on the ballot, they must collect hundreds of thousands of valid signatures from across the state.

For lawmakers to propose an amendment, support is required from 60% of the members of each chamber. Issue 3 was put to a vote by supermajority Republican lawmakers. For the amendment to become part of the state constitution, voters must still pass it.

Changes to the Ohio Revised Code either require significantly fewer signatures to be collected for proposed legislation to be considered by voters, or the bill can be passed by a basic majority vote in the Legislature.

If the legislature enacts a law that is inconsistent with the Constitution, it is up to the judiciary to uphold the Constitution.

Both President Donald Trump and GOP gubernatorial candidate Vivek Ramaswamy campaigned for No. 3’s passage.

“I think Ohioans will support this,” Sprague said.

Trump has been advocating for stricter voting laws across the country for years. He is currently advocating for Congress to pass the SAVE America Act, which, among a number of other significant changes, would require a photo ID to vote.

There is no evidence of widespread voter fraud in Ohio, even if photo ID wasn’t the law. Thousands of audits have confirmed this.

What does a “no” vote on issue number 3 mean?

Voting “no” on Issue 3 means you don’t want to add the current requirements to the state constitution and instead keep them in the Revised Code.

Allison Russo, the Democratic nominee for secretary, believes the amendment is on the ballot for political reasons.

“It speaks to the desperation we see from Republicans in this state,” Russo said in an interview. “They are clearly concerned about the November election.”

Republican strategists acknowledged there are concerns about the GOP this year.

“We may have a turnout problem,” GOP strategist Bob Clegg said, adding that there could be “lowered turnout.”

This isn’t the first time the Republican Party has turned on the “vote squeezer” some opponents he said.

In 2022, the next midterm year, Republicans put a proposal on the ballot that would ban noncitizens from voting in all Ohio elections. Noncitizens could no longer vote in state or federal elections.

“Instead of addressing the real issues of everyday Ohioans, they are turning to red meat issues that may or may not have any impact in November,” Russo said.

She supports photo ID, but it’s the law, so she said it was a waste of time.

“Our photo ID requirements that we currently have are the strictest in the country,” she added.

Republicans deny it is an attempt to raise turnout, saying it is simply good politics.

Tom Pruss, the candidate’s Libertarian secretary of state, opposes the amendment, calling it “political theater.”

“Our election laws should not be crafted in response to nationwide fear-mongering, cable news debates, or baseless claims designed to incite voter anger and fear,” Pruss said.

(*3*)

Some conservative activists also oppose the proposal, arguing it doesn’t go far enough because it doesn’t require voter ID for absentee ballots.

In trying to get Issue 3 passed by the Legislature and put it on the ballot, Republicans couldn’t get enough votes.

To get the 60 voters needed, the GOP amended an unrelated bill to require photo ID for absentee ballots. Gov. Mike DeWine vetoed the measure, noting that it contained many errors and could disenfranchise voters.

Pruss raised the fact that the constitutional amendment does not apply to absentee or mail-in voting, citing concerns about what a future General Assembly might do.

“This gives partisan lawmakers significant power to later restrict mail-in voting, which could impact seniors, military personnel, voters with disabilities, rural residents, shift workers and others who cannot easily vote in person,” Pruss said.

Why is this “Issue 3?”

Beginning in November 2024, Ohio began renumbering its state ballot proposals. Instead of renumbering each election, the numbers will not repeat until a state reaches number 500.

This was originally an issue in 2023. The first special election in August 2023 asked voters whether Ohio should take power away from the majority. Supporters, mostly Republicans, wanted people to vote yes.

However, in November 2023, issue 1 asked voters whether the right to reproductive freedom and abortion should be protected. Opponents, mostly Republicans, wanted people to vote no.

So for the GOP in August it was “Yes on 1”, in November “No on 1” and vice versa for the Democrats.

Under this fresh plan, No. 1 is the November 2024 redistricting proposal. No. 2 is the May 2025 bond proposal. Currently, No. 3 is the November 2026 voter ID amendment.

Follow WEWS House of Representatives reporter Morgan Trau X AND Facebook.

This article was originally published on News5Cleveland.com and are published in the Ohio Capital Journal under a content sharing agreement. Unlike other OCJ articles, it is not available for free republication on other news outlets because it is owned by WEWS in Cleveland.

WASHINGTON – Hundreds of thousands of Haitian immigrants could lose their legal status as early as Tuesday, putting them at risk of deportation after the U.S. Supreme Court last month allowed the Trump administration to end their humanitarian protections.

The impending loss of Temporary Protected Status for between 330,000 and 350,000 immigrants comes amid the Trump administration’s deportation campaign and continued attacks on TPS recipients who come from countries deemed too risky to return. The Department of State strongly discourages any visits to Haiti due to kidnappings and gang violence.

The Department of Homeland Security has already urged people who are at risk of losing their TPS to self-deport.

“Temporary Protected Status is exactly that – TEMPORARY,” DHS he said in a social media post on Monday. “For people with solved TPS: closing time. You don’t have to go home, but you can’t stay here.”

Several media reports indicated that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement plans to aggressively enforce the law against Haitian immigrants who are losing their legal status, starting with a immense population in Springfield, Ohio.

said the state’s Republican governor, Mike DeWine CBS News on Monday was unaware of these DHS plans and called any enforcement action against Haitians a “mistake.”

The lower court stays

The exact moment when you lose your status is complicated by a federal judge in Washingtonwhich has not yet complied with the Supreme Court’s ruling in the case and lifted the earlier suspension that prevents the administration from ending TPS for Haitians. A decision, potentially granting another stay while the court hears other arguments, is expected this week.

The U.S. Department of Justice has proposed a briefing schedule to continue appearances in the District of Columbia trial court, with the final hearing taking place on November 6. Lawyers for the Haitians at TPS plan to submit a brief by Friday laying out their legal arguments in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision.

Federal judges have halted TPS terminations for citizens of Burma, Ethiopia and South Sudan. Before the second Trump administration began last year, there were approximately 1.3 million immigrants from 17 countries in TPS.

Companies and families in constant motion

Immigration advocates and business leaders have criticized the administration’s policy to repeal TPS.

“The majority of adult TPS holders are active participants in the labor market, working in industries that are already struggling with persistent labor shortages,” Rebecca Shi, CEO of the American Business Immigration Coalition Action, said in a statement. “Removing these workers not only turns lives upside down, it weakens industries that are already struggling to meet demand.”

The Haitian Bridge Alliance, which advocates for TPS holders in Haiti, said in a statement that the loss of protection from deportation would lead to family separation because many beneficiaries have children who are U.S. citizens.

“What we will witness will be one of the largest family separation events in modern history,” the Haitian Bridge Alliance said.

Closure of other roads

Some TPS recipients may apply for other immigration status, such as asylum, although not all may apply or qualify for it.

For example, foreign nationals suffering from TPS as a result of a natural disaster are unlikely to meet the criteria for asylum, which include fear of persecution “due to race, religion, nationality, membership in a specific social group or political beliefs” – according to federal law.

Plus the Trump administration issued the recipe on Tuesday, allowing asylum officials to immediately send asylum seekers to appear before immigration judges without holding a hearing or attaching key evidence of the applicant’s credibility, leading to quick denial and deportation.

The modern rule, combined with the loss of TPS, means beneficiaries are unlikely to have much chance of winning their asylum claims.

Supreme Court ruling

Last month, the Supreme Court ruled that courts were barred from reviewing whether the decision to end TPS designations made by then-Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem followed proper procedures.

Although the case was brought by TPS recipients from Haiti and Syria, the decision could also impact other TPS-related challenges to the Trump administration’s efforts to end the designation.

Due to the Supreme Court’s ruling, lawyers representing TPS recipients in courts across the country are correcting their complaints.

They argue that termination of TPS status, including work authorization, violates the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which states that the government may not deprive a person of “life, liberty, or property” without following certain procedures.

Lawyers also argued that TPS’s dissolutions were driven by racial resentment rather than improvements in domestic conditions.

They cite President Donald Trump’s 2024 campaign statements that falsely accused Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, of eating pets.

The federal government is taking a swipe at funding for teen pregnancy prevention, sparking concerns in Ohio and elsewhere as advocates try to continue helping teens.

The cuts are also controversial for teenagers who are already parents.

Rosemary Oglesby-Henry was a teen mom herself thirty years ago, and from what she’s seen, not much has changed in the perception of teen pregnancy.

“I decided to become a parent, and when I decided to become a parent, there were no resources to teach me how to be a mother,” she told the Capital Journal.

In 2016, Oglesby-Henry founded Rosemary’s Babies Company, a Cincinnati-based nonprofit organization dedicated to helping teen parents learn not only parenting skills, but also how to achieve educational goals, gain job skills and delay having more children.

The founder and CEO hopes to be part of the support that may not be as needed in the future.

“Basically, what we’re saying is OK, we understand that you have a child, but… you can still go back to school, you can wait until you expand your family and have another child, and that way you get back to your goal so you’re not dependent on the government and you don’t end up on the economic cliff, especially for our young girls,” she said.

Rosemary’s Babies is a donor-driven nonprofit that also receives state funding, which she says is challenging to come by in the area of ​​teen pregnancy support, but is most essential when it comes to supporting population often burdened with trauma and abuse no other supportsincluding sex education.

“It helps reduce the stigma, so organizations like mine can now seek support by saying, ‘I’m not promoting teen pregnancy, but when these young people have babies, we need to help them before they get caught up in the system,’” Oglesby-Henry said.

The U.S. Health and Human Services Administration recently announced a plan to cancel 53 of 67 grants for the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program, amounting to approximately $68 million in eliminated financing.

Federal health agency cancels most subsidies to prevent teen pregnancy

Stateline reported that President Donald Trump took similar action during his first term, changing grant funding for more than 80 recipients before a judge halted the action by ruling in favor of the legal group Democracy Forward in a lawsuit alleging violations of agency regulations.

The latest actions are also the subject of a lawsuit in which Democracy Forward is again involved is suing the Trump administration to stop the cuts.

Nationwide Children’s Hospital Research Institute was recognized as one of the recipients of 2020-2023 federal grants, receiving more than $860,000 for the Changing Landscape for Youth Health Equity and Access in Central Ohio program, according to the HHS website.

Hospital representatives were unavailable for comment.

Nationwide, Children’s continues to operate its Teen and Pregnant Women’s Program, which provides prenatal and postnatal care to pregnant women up to age 21.

According to the program’s website, the Teen Pregnancy Clinic allows pregnant women to meet with doctors, participate in group meetings, learn about infant care and enroll in public programs, including federal food assistance, as well as learn about birth control for the future.

According to the Health and Social Care Agency’s own data, for a purpose it calls “Healthy People 2030,“Babies born to teenage mothers are “more likely to be born prematurely, have low birth weight and even die.”

“Having a child can also negatively impact teen mothers’ health and their educational and career opportunities,” the HHS data states. “Although teen pregnancy and birth rates have declined in recent years, race/ethnicity disparities persist.”

The department also states that “evidence shows that a variety of outreach and education programs can help reduce teen pregnancy rates.”

State data from 2024 showed that 69 children were born in Ohio to mothers younger than 15 years of age, more than 1,300 children were born to people aged 15 to 17, and almost 4,000 children were born to mothers aged 18 to 19.

The latest state data is still considered preliminary, but 2025 data showed that 52 children under the age of 15 were born in Ohio in 2025 and more than 1,000 children between the ages of 15 and 17 were born in 2025, according to the Ohio Department of Health database. People aged 18 to 19 represented over 3,700 births in 2025.

The most recent CDC data on teen births is from 2024. Ohio’s teen birth rate that year was 14 per 1,000 women ages 15 to 19, a slight decline from the previous yearwhen it was 14.6 per 1,000 Ohioans.

Teen pregnancy-related funding is also part of state grant efforts, particularly through a program established by Gov. Mike DeWine called the Governor’s Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives.

The money traditionally comes from federal and state contributions to the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program.

The Ohio General Assembly’s most recent operating budget authorized up to $26.8 million for Governor’s Office initiatives in 2026 and 2027.

DeWine’s spokesman did not comment specifically when asked about cuts to federal teen pregnancy prevention programs, but said the governor’s office and the state Office of Budget and Management “continuously monitor federal funding decisions throughout the year.”

The latest executive order of DeWine, who directs TANF funding for 2026 and 2027, stated that one of the goals of the TANF program is to “prevent and reduce the incidence of nonmarital pregnancies and to establish annual numerical goals to prevent and reduce the incidence of these pregnancies.”

Following the recent cuts, HHS has launched up-to-date grant programs called “Replicating Effective Teen Pregnancy Prevention Programs” and “Rigorous Assessment of the Impact of Teen Pregnancy Prevention Programs and Achieving Optimal Health,” according to the agency’s website.

The Trump administration also plans to allocate money temperance education and emphasis on marriagewith the language for submitting grant applications referring, among others, to: to concepts supported by conservative groups that advise against, among others, contraception.

Sex education and the “success sequence”

For years, the state has been criticized for lacking a standardized sex education curriculum, which advocates say contributes to the teen pregnancy rate.

Sex education advocacy group SIECUS has given Ohio a failing grade in a national ranking of state sex education programs.

The group condemned the latest development in the state’s sex education program, called “success sequence”, which requires the school to teach students that they should graduate from high school, get a job and get married sequentially before the baby is born.

Under the up-to-date law, a “sequence of success” would be a graduation requirement.

AND 2021 study commissioned by the federal Health and Human Services Agency found that although graduating from high school, working full-time, and getting married do reduce the risk of poverty, the order of events is not necessarily essential.

“Regarding the relationship between milestones and economic self-sufficiency at ages 35–40, our results suggest that individual milestones, regardless of order, appear to be the primary factors associated with economic outcomes in adulthood,” the study said.

For Oglesby-Henry, the information provided by the “success sequence” and other metrics can be helpful, even as a conversation starter.

“It teaches about economics and the impact that happens when we make these decisions, and it also teaches about the consequences,” she said.

However, lessons are still needed at higher levels about the consequences of promoting pregnancy without providing the support needed.

“With the administration pushing for families to have more children and things like that, we have to assess whether people can afford day care, if we cut benefits, whether they can afford housing,” Oglesby-Henry said.

The founder of Rosemary’s Babies, which recently opened in Holloway House to provide housing support, workforce training and other programs for teenage parents, is seeking to combat the rise of homelessness among youthful mothers too, making funding even more essential.

“We’re looking at how we can continue to help these families where, if we get them through our program, we get the training that this administration requires (encouragement)… but when they complete all that, they can’t afford housing or they still can’t afford to live,” Oglesby-Henry said.

It is not uncomplicated to finance support for pregnant teenagers and prevention in the future, she said, but education and money to continue it will bring more results.

“Prevention always costs less than the actual epidemic or actual problem,” says Oglesby-Henry.

Each morning in the Ohio Capital Journal’s free newsletter, The Eye-Opener, we round up the news and commentary from across Ohio, the country and the world that catches our attention. We call this feature Catching Our Eye and have published it here.

Sign up for our free daily newsletter to get all the Ohio news you need to know delivered straight to your inbox every weekday morning.

If you already subscribe, please share the Ohio Capital Journal with your family and friends: https://ohiocapitaljournal.com/subscribe/

Catching our eyes

• House in Ohio. Andrew Tobias of Signal Ohio reports: “The sudden withdrawal of Cincinnati-area Republicans from the Ohio House race is causing confusion among the GOP.”

  Hamilton County Republicans are scrambling to find a replacement candidate in one of Ohio’s more competitive legislative districts after the party’s candidate in the November election abruptly resigned this week.

  Elizabeth Maier surprised Republicans and Democrats alike on Wednesday by announcing on her campaign website that she was ending her campaign for Ohio’s 27th House District.

• Americans left and right see the game rigged. CNN’s Aaron Blake writes: “According to polls, Americans – including many Republicans – are losing faith in capitalism”

  President Donald Trump has indicated that his main strategy for the 2026 midterm elections is to call Democrats “socialists” and even “communists” at every turn. There is evidence that democratic socialism is gaining slightly more support in recent Democratic primaries.

  However, the more critical event in American politics today may not be the rise of socialism but the decline of faith in capitalism and economic justice.

  New polls confirm that even the right is increasingly disillusioned.

• Cruelty for cruelty’s sake. Bob Ballard of TiffinOhio.net writes: “Trump’s cruel deportation campaign will devastate Springfield, Ohio, and threaten its Haitian neighbors”

  Cruelty is the cheapest thing a government can produce. It doesn’t need a budget, no legislation, no argument that can survive ten seconds of exposure to evidence. I need a date on the calendar and other people’s neighbors.

  The date in Springfield (was) on Friday.

  That’s when Temporary Protected Status expires and between 12,000 and 15,000 people in the Clark County city of less than 60,000 people cease to be legally present and become a burden.

WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump revived his tariff program on Friday, imposing new import taxes on products from dozens of top U.S. trading partners, immediately replacing the transient global tariffs he imposed after the U.S. Supreme Court dealt a major blow to his sweeping “Emancipation Day” obligations.

As of Friday morning, U.S. importers will now pay an additional 10% to 12.5% ​​of product value for most goods from nearly 60 countries, including Canada, the European Union, Japan, Mexico, South Korea, Taiwan and the United Kingdom, among dozens of others. According to US trade authorities, the tariffs could affect 99.4% of imports.

The new round of import taxes, first announced delayed Thursday afternoon, replaces the blanket 10% tariff on world goods under Section 122 of the Trade Act 1974, which expired at midnight Friday. These tariffs invited new ones legal challengesincluding from Democratic-led states.

The latest tariffs were imposed after the Office of the United States Trade Representative allegedly found forced labor conditions in all economies under investigation under Section 301 of the 1974 Trade Act.

U.S. Trade Ambassador Jamieson Greer said in a statement Thursday that Trump “recognizes that decades of moral suasion have failed to eradicate forced labor from global supply chains. The United States has had a ban on the import of forced labor for nearly a century and rigorously enforces it; it is long past time for our trading partners to do the same.”

Supreme Court ruling

The Office of the United States Trade Representative announced two wide investigations in March, less than a month after the Supreme Court struck down Trump’s unprecedented global tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977, commonly known as IEEPA.

Shortly after the Supreme Court struck at the IEEPA rates it announced in early April 2025, in the so-called “Liberation Day”, the government was in limbo for approximately $166 billion in returns to US importers who have already paid tariffs.

The latest batch of tariffs, effective Friday, is the second round of import taxes announced this week by the Trump administration. The White House introduced 50% tariffs on most goods Import from Canada Monday, triggering customs duties in accordance with Art. 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930.

The crisis-era provision, which has never been enforced before, authorizes the president to impose tariffs of up to 50% of the value of a product in response to discrimination against U.S. trade.

States Newsroom spoke to many people miniature business owners from 2025 on the impact of tariffs on their ability to keep prices stable, hire workers, invest in new equipment and supplies, and just generally continue to operate.

“Ridiculously Dumb”

Critics have blasted the administration’s new series of sweeping tariffs on a enormous share of domestic imports.

Scott Lincicome, vice president of general economics at the libertarian Cato Institute, wrote Thursday that the results of Section 301 investigations were “clearly predetermined” and “both laughably obtuse and wildly disproportionate to any measurable economic distortions.”

“And the whole thing sets a precedent for an ‘automatic tariff generator’ that Trump or a future president can implement at will. It makes a mockery of the real problem and could poison legal reforms. And Congress probably won’t do anything about it.” – Lincicome he wrote.

Some Republicans in the US House of Representatives rejected Trump’s tariff agenda in February, but no legislative changes have emerged.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a statement Thursday that the president “bleds inflation-plagued Americans dry with his tariffs.”

“Now he’s back for more. Trump’s chaotic tariffs have made life harder and more expensive for Americans. Families are paying more for everyday items. Small business owners are struggling to keep the lights on. Manufacturers are laying off jobs and farmers are being squeezed. Meanwhile, Trump and his billionaire family and friends are getting rich off the backs of working families,” said Schumer, D-N.Y.

Yale Budget Lab estimates Under the new tariffs, consumer prices could rise by up to 1%, adding approximately $1,100 to household costs.

If the tariffs remain in place, the U.S. would gain about $2 trillion in revenue over the next decade, though that number will likely be lower after taking into account the negative impact on the economy, according to the Yale Budget Lab.

WASHINGTON — Political party poll watchers are increasingly showing up, usually outside polling places.

They have a different mission than nonpartisan election observers, long considered a beacon of credibility, and the fear is that voters will be confused about who is there to influence them and who is there to protect them.

A growing partisan presence raises the possibility of even more conflict in November’s midterm elections, voting rights advocates worry. They fear that confusion between the two groups will contribute to a continuing decline in voter confidence in the process.

“This is a polarized country. There is a risk that people will see other poll monitoring programs designed to intimidate and lump us all together,” said Dan Vicuna, senior director of voting policy and fair representation at Common Cause.

His organization is part of a coalition of voting rights advocates that trains and sends nonpartisan workers to the polls. They ensure that voters will not be intimidated and that the counting and recounting will be carried out correctly.

Political parties that have their own poll-watching programs insist that the other side is responsible for the confusion.

“The Trump administration has sought to break long-standing norms around observers and bystanders,” she said Rep. Terri SewellD-Ala., the top Democrat on the House elections subcommittee.

Republicans say the integrity of the election has been at risk for years and, despite virtually no evidence, they are maintaining results in key state and presidential races that were subject to fraud.

President Donald Trump in his address to the nation On July 16, it said that “evidence shows that the electoral system we have is dangerously and truly vulnerable, at levels we never thought possible, to hacking, exploitation and foreign interference.”

The result so far is a Trump-inspired redrawing of congressional lines in some states to favor Republicans, a so-far unsuccessful push to pass Congress a bill requiring voters to show proof of citizenship and show ID at the polls, and a Supreme Court decision weakening the Electoral Law Act safeguards against intimidation in polls.

Many eyes on the process

Survey viewing takes many forms, depending on state laws and policies. Observers and poll workers often find themselves outside elections promoting their interests.

Monitors, on the other hand, are trained observers.

Common Cause explains that poll watchers are “individuals assigned to observe polls on behalf of a campaign or political party and confirmed by election officials – often at the polling place.” In some states, they can challenge voting eligibility

Some election observers remain outside polling stations. “They may be clearly biased in favor of a specific candidate or party. These people have no right to enter the polling station.” Common cause explains.

Common Cause is part of the Election Protection program, which focuses on helping voters and election officials in areas where turnout may be low or there is concern about voter intimidation.

“Our program focuses on impartial problem solving,” Vicuna said. Depending on your state’s laws, it may direct people to the appropriate polling place.

Observers who go through a training program can ensure that a partisan poll worker does not attempt to overstep his authority or that a voter does not show up fearing that immigration officials may be present.

Another highly regarded system is the “observer” program, approved by Congress two years ago under a 413-1 votes in the House and by vote in the Senate.

“The goal of the program is that during close or difficult elections, House staff members, designated and accredited by the (House Administration) Committee, will be on-site at the office or polling facility to observe election procedures and ensure that a certified winner will be selected in a free and fair election,” he says House Administration Committee Fact Sheet.

It emphasizes that “election observers are not campaign staff and cannot endorse or represent any candidate or position.”

The program enjoys broad bipartisan support and has recently gained recognition Representative Laurel Lee, R-Florida, chairman of the House Elections Subcommittee.

“It promotes transparency, gives election officials a different perspective on the process, and helps candidates and voters better understand how elections are conducted,” she said of the program. “Taken together, these benefits strengthen public confidence in our choices.”

A system that works?

Subcommittee conducted the hearing July 15 regarding election activities. Despite fierce fighting over voting rights, the hearing was peaceful and based on political principles.

It featured two local election officials, Wesley Wilcox of Marion County, Florida, and Lance Reed of Summit County, Ohio, describing how they try to avoid any display of bias or attempts to influence voters.

Summit County, which includes Akron, is largely Democratic. Marion County is largely Republican.

“We have a great opportunity to counter the many false narratives circulating online. We can educate people about how elections actually work,” Wilcox said.

Reed described how officials in his county had a “positive experience” with the congressional program and were unaware of the political opinions of observers.

Sewell expressed a broader concern that the combination of Republican efforts to send poll watchers coupled with court decisions that have likely weakened the Voting Rights Act could lead to more GOP intimidation of minority voters.

She asked Reed where he saw the line “between legitimate election observation and conduct that risks intimidating voters and disrupting or disrupting the work of election officials?” She also asked what safeguards might be most effective in preventing observers from promoting biased views?

“Fortunately, we have not encountered any problems in this regard,” he said, adding that many of the local observers are people well known to election officials who have been doing this work for years.

Suspicious political parties

Beyond composed talks in Congress and nonpartisan efforts to protect elections, both parties are increasingly suspicious of each other’s activity at the ballot box.

Republicans have sent poll watchers to multiple states in 2024 as part of a massive effort that officials say will ensure election integrity.

“Every ballot. Every precinct. Every processing center. Every county. Every battleground state. We will be there,” he said Lara Trumpwho was then co-chairman of the Republican National Committee. The party sent thousands of volunteers to track polls in 18 potential swing states.

Republicans have sent congressional observers to Atlanta, Detroit, Milwaukee, Philadelphia and Madison, Wisconsin, this year, said Republican Joe Morelle of New York state, the top Democrat on the House Administration Committee. He said no Democratic congressional observers were sent.

“Their departure from long-established norms suggested an unprecedented attempt to exploit the program for partisan gain,” Morelle said. The Republican National Committee did not respond to a request for comment.

Trump praised GOP election observation efforts and vowed to continue them this year.

He recalled May Truth Social in the post like “Republicans had an election integrity army in every state to protect the sanctity of every legal vote.”

He said: “We will do the same thing again in 2026, but it will be much bigger and stronger. The voice of all Americans should be heard by casting a vote. Rest assured that this election will be fair!”

So far, “The RNC is already on the ground, deploying staff in 17 states, registering voters and aggressively pursuing victory in November – and we won’t stop until we do it,” he said President Joe Gruters in a May post on X. The states were not identified.

Democrats are fighting back using their own poll viewing programs.

Democratic National Committee claims to be working to “develop comprehensive counter-programming for potential GOP voter intimidation and election subversion.”

It plans to do this through “the deployment of poll watchers, constitutional observers, escalation protocols, and coordinated legal and operational support.”

The DNC does not provide details.

Additionally, last month Senate Democratic leaders announced a modern program that they say will “train Senate staff to serve as official election observers and protect against any interference in the 2026 midterm elections.”

They wrote in a statement “Their role will be to observe, document and report objective information to assist the Senate in addressing any potentially contested Senate elections and to inform future legislation and oversight efforts related to federal election administration.”

Voters seem to agree on one thing. “I think at the end of the day, public trust is the most important thing, and right now it’s on the rocks,” said a member of the elections subcommittee, Rep. Julie Johnson, D-Texas. “This is the most fragile element of our electoral system in a long time.”