News
How a Major Democratic Law Firm Ended Up Bowing to Trump
Since President Trump’s first term, Brad S. Karp, the chairman of the law firm Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, championed himself as a bulwark against what he saw as an unlawful and unpredictable presidency.
Mr. Karp, who has a long history of fund-raising for Democrats, sought to unite major law firms in “a call to arms” to fight Mr. Trump in court on issues like his administration’s policy of separating migrant children from their parents. He publicly said lawyers were obligated to defend the rule of law.
He hosted a “Lawyers for Biden” fund-raiser in 2023, and one of his top partners prepared Vice President Kamala Harris for her debates with Mr. Trump.
So it was not surprising that Mr. Trump targeted Paul Weiss with an executive order last week that created a potential existential threat for the firm, although the order was legally dubious and undercut fundamental principles of the justice system. In response, Mr. Karp began discussions with another big firm about presenting a unified and bipartisan front and challenging the order in court.
But on Wednesday, Mr. Karp walked into the Oval Office around 8:30 a.m., leaving behind the adversarial approach.
Now, he wanted to make a deal.
A day later, Mr. Trump announced that Mr. Karp had agreed to pledge $40 million in pro bono legal services to issues the president has championed, including a task force being run by the Justice Department aimed at combating antisemitism “and other mutually agreed projects.”
The White House said the firm had committed to stop using diversity, equity and inclusion policies. And Mr. Trump said Mr. Karp had acknowledged to him that a former partner of the firm who had worked as a prosecutor in Manhattan and had pushed for Mr. Trump to be charged criminally had committed “wrongdoing.” These assertions appear inconsistent with a copy of the statement that Mr. Karp shared with his firm.
In deciding to bend to Mr. Trump, Mr. Karp likely saved his law firm, which had $2.63 billion in revenue last year and represents corporate clients like Exxon Mobil and Apollo Global Management, from hemorrhaging clients and lawyers.
But in doing so, Mr. Karp, who had positioned himself as a spokesman and advocate for the legal profession, left other firms even more vulnerable to Mr. Trump’s retribution campaign by demonstrating that his intimidation tactics could lead even a powerhouse like Paul Weiss to make public concessions, according to interviews with lawyers at other firms and legal experts.
In fact, a White House official said on Friday that despite the deal reached with Paul Weiss, Mr. Trump would continue to target law firms with executive orders, including some the president could sign as early as next week.
In the Oval Office on Friday, Mr. Trump asserted that law firms “did bad things” and had attacked him “ruthlessly, violently, illegally.” But now, he said, they “want to make deals.”
Mr. Karp’s decision left many in the legal world, including some in his own firm, reeling, concerned that other firms would now face a choice between bowing to Mr. Trump or abandoning their principles or political beliefs to avoid financial calamity.
Before reaching the deal, Mr. Karp, who has led Paul Weiss for nearly two decades, talked to some of the firm’s 200 partners to weigh their options, according to three people with knowledge of the matter. The group decided to seek a meeting with Mr. Trump to try and reach a deal, rather than engage in what could be a drawn-out legal battle, the people said. Those people and others who spoke for this story did so on the condition of anonymity to talk about discussions that were supposed to remain private.
Some of the firm’s corporate partners were particularly adamant that the firm should not sue the administration, the people said. That put them at odds with other partners who work on high-profile litigation and had been arguing that the firm should fight, some of whom expressed displeasure internally on Friday that Mr. Karp had settled, according to four people familiar with the matter.
The deal, while supported by the vast majority of the firm’s partners, also drew swift condemnation from lawyers outside the firm and critics of Mr. Trump.
And while many of the firm’s clients were relieved by the deal, some senior lawyers at large financial institutions began to privately express dismay, two people with knowledge of the matter said. Some of these lawyers suggested they would consider pulling business from the firm.
Mr. Trump has put law firms at the center of his efforts to seek revenge against enemies real and perceived, especially those linked to any efforts to investigate him or hold him legally accountable.
Before targeting Paul Weiss, Mr. Trump had issued executive orders imposing penalties on two other firms, Covington & Burling and Perkins Coie. Last week a federal judge barred the order against Perkins Coie from going into effect on the grounds that it would likely be found to be illegal.
Many within the legal community had hoped that Mr. Karp, with his firm’s resources, would fight Mr. Trump in court as aggressively as did Perkins Coie, which was targeted by a nearly identical executive order earlier this month.
Paul Weiss employs many prominent Democrats and has expressed pride in its long history at the forefront of the fight for civil rights. It has trumpeted how it was the first major New York City firm to have Jewish and non-Jewish lawyers working alongside each other, to hire a Black associate and to have a female partner.
According to two people briefed on the matter, it initially appeared that Mr. Karp was headed down the path of suing Mr. Trump’s administration.
Last week, a federal judge in Washington temporarily barred enforcement of the executive order Mr. Trump had directed at Perkins Coie, saying, “It sends little chills down my spine” to hear arguments that a president can punish individuals and companies like this.
The judge’s decision relieved many in the legal community by suggesting that the courts would serve as a check against Mr. Trump and that the big firms would not have to confront him directly.
But two days after that decision, Mr. Trump signed a nearly identical executive order against Paul Weiss. That action deeply unnerved the big firms by showing that Mr. Trump would not be deterred by the courts. And it demonstrated that he was willing to try to target firms that had years-old ties to lawyers on his enemies list, like Mark F. Pomerantz, a former Paul Weiss partner. Mr. Pomerantz had tried to build a criminal case against Mr. Trump several years ago while working at the Manhattan district attorney’s office.
The executive order against Paul Weiss barred the firm from dealing with the government and suggested that clients of the firm could lose their government contracts. Those provisions were intended to drive business away from Paul Weiss, which employs more than 1,000 lawyers and has offices around the world.
Last Saturday and Sunday, Mr. Karp began discussions with William Burck, the co-managing partner of the law firm Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, about Mr. Burck joining Paul Weiss in bringing a court challenge against Mr. Trump’s order, people familiar with the talks said.
The discussions with Mr. Burck were notable given that Mr. Burck is one of the few lawyers at a major firm that represents the Trump Organization. He has also helped some of Mr. Trump’s nominees through their confirmation process. And bringing Paul Weiss together with Quinn Emanuel would signal to the industry that firms across the partisan divide were coming together to address what they saw as an all-out assault on their business.
Earlier this month, Mr. Burck declined to represent Perkins Coie, believing that it was not worth taking on Mr. Trump to help that firm. But with Mr. Trump undeterred by the judge’s ruling in the Perkins Coie case and moving against another firm, Mr. Burck agreed to help Paul Weiss and put his firm’s name on the suit against Mr. Trump.
At the same time, Mr. Karp weighed another possibility. With the help of Mr. Burck and other Trump-friendly contacts Mr. Karp had in the business world, Mr. Karp sought to determine whether it would be possible to cut a deal with Mr. Trump to resolve his firm’s problems.
Mr. Karp, whose firm has represented the N.F.L., had the New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft, an ally of Mr. Trump’s, reach out to the president.
Mr. Burck began working the phones to the White House, reaching out to officials to signal that Mr. Karp was open to making a deal. During those conversations, Mr. Burck concluded that one of the White House’s biggest issues with Paul Weiss and other big firms was that they had refused to represent clients like Mr. Trump on the right — especially after the Jan. 6, 2021 assault on the Capitol — whom they viewed as politically unsavory.
Mr. Burck relayed to the White House that Paul Weiss was willing to make some sort of public statement that they would represent clients no matter their political views.
Two days later, Mr. Trump called Mr. Karp and invited him to come to the White House. The following day, Mr. Karp went to visit Mr. Trump, where they met in the Oval Office for three hours. Mr. Trump’s adviser on negotiations, Steve Witkoff, joined the meeting, which was cordial, and both sides believed they had a potential framework for a deal.
At the same time, there was pressure on Mr. Karp. The lawyers at his firm who were preparing to sue Mr. Trump wanted to go to court as soon as possible, concerned that a judge might not give them a temporary restraining order because they waited too long.
In the day that followed, proposed language went back and forth between the White House, Mr. Burck and Mr. Karp.
Pursuing a deal represented a stark shift for Mr. Karp, who until recently was helping to marshal support for Perkins Coie. Mr. Karp was among the prominent lawyers working behind the scenes to persuade other law firms to sign a friend of the court brief on behalf of Perkins Coie, according to four people with knowledge of the matter. It is now unclear whether the brief — which was drafted by Donald B. Verrilli Jr., a solicitor general during the Obama administration and a partner at Munger Tolles & Olson — will be filed.
The ordeal with Mr. Trump came at a personally trying time for Mr. Karp, who had suffered a heart attack just a few months earlier and was still easing his way back into his normally frenetic work schedule of nonstop meetings and client calls.
On Thursday evening, Mr. Karp sent a firm-wide email justifying the decision, writing that he had really just “reaffirmed” the firm’s statement of principles outlined in 1963 by one of Paul Weiss’s original named partners, Judge Simon H. Rifkind.
“Thank you all for your patience during this time,” Mr. Karp told the staff at the firm. “With this behind us, we can devote our complete focus — as we always do — to our clients, our work, our colleagues and our firm.”
But it was a bitter pill for some to swallow as lawyers knew the outside world would view the deal as capitulating to Mr. Trump, especially at a time when other institutions, like universities and media companies, have begun to settle with Mr. Trump rather than fight, infuriating and demoralizing Mr. Trump’s critics.
George Conway, a conservative lawyer and frequent critic of Mr. Trump, posted on social media, “This Paul Weiss capitulation is the most disgraceful action by a major law firm in my lifetime, so appalling that I couldn’t believe it at first.”
By the time Mr. Trump made his announcement on Thursday, there were already signs that Paul Weiss had been burned in making a deal with Mr. Trump.
The copy of the agreement that Mr. Karp shared with Paul Weiss differed in some ways from Mr. Trump’s characterization of the deal in a post on his social media platform, Truth Social.
Although Mr. Trump said the law firm had specifically agreed to not follow any diversity, equity and inclusion policies in its hiring practices, there is no reference to D.E.I. in the agreement that Mr. Karp shared. Mr. Trump has mounted an aggressive campaign against diversity initiatives in the federal government, labeling it as a form of workplace discrimination.
There also was no mention of Mr. Pomerantz, the former Paul Weiss partner, in the copy of the agreement circulated by Mr. Karp. Five people briefed on the matter said Mr. Karp said he did not criticize Mr. Pomerantz with the president, in spite of Mr. Trump’s assertion to the contrary.
In a statement issued on Thursday evening, Mr. Pomerantz denied he had done anything wrong.
Jonah E. Bromwich and William K. Rashbaum and Tyler Pager contributed reporting, and Sheelagh McNeill contributed research.
News
Trump claims US stockpiles mean wars can be fought ‘forever’; Kristi Noem testifies before Congress – US politics live
Trump says US stockpiles mean “wars can be fought ‘forever’”
In a late night post on Truth Social, Donald Trump said that the US munitions stockpiles “at the medium and upper medium grade, never been higher or better”.
He added that the US has a “virtually unlimited supply of these weapons”, meaning that “wars can be fought ‘forever’”.
This comes after Trump said that the US-Israel war on Iran could go beyond the four-five weeks that the administration initially predicted. The president also did not rule out the possibility of US boots on the ground in Iran during an interview with the New York Post on Monday.
“I rebuilt the military in my first term, and continue to do so. The United States is stocked, and ready to WIN, BIG!!!,” he wrote.
Key events
During his opening remarks, Senate judicicary committee chairman, Chuck Grassley, blamed Democrats for the ongoing shutdown Department of Homeland Security (DHS) but highlighted four agencies: the Secret Service, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), and the Coast Guard.
Democrats are demanding tighter guardrails for federal immigration enforcement, but a sweeping tax bill signed into law last year conferred $75bn for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which means the agency is still functional amid the wider department shuttering.
In a late night post on Truth Social, Donald Trump said that the US munitions stockpiles “at the medium and upper medium grade, never been higher or better”. He added that the US has a “virtually unlimited supply of these weapons”, meaning that “wars can be fought ‘forever’”.
This comes after Trump said that the US-Israel war on Iran could go beyond the four-five weeks that the administration initially predicted. The president also did not rule out the possibility of US boots on the ground in Iran during an interview with the New York Post on Monday.
“I rebuilt the military in my first term, and continue to do so. The United States is stocked, and ready to WIN, BIG!!!,” he wrote.
The embattled homeland security secretary, Kristi Noem, will answer questions from lawmakers on the Senate judiciary committee today.
This will be the first time she’s addressed members of Congress since federal immigration officers fatally shot two US citizens – Renee Good and Alex Pretti – during a surge of law enforcement in Minneapolis. The actions of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) throughout the crackdown drew condemnation from both parties. Now, a funding bill to keep Noem’s department open remains stalled on Capitol Hill. Democrats have pushed for stronger guardrails on immigration enforcement agents, while Republicans have called many of their demands (like the need for officers to appear visible and no longer wear masks while patrolling and making arrests) non-starters.
Several Democrats have also called for Noem to resign or risk impeachment.
We’ll bring you the latest lines as things get underway.
Donald Trump is in Washington today. We will hear from him at 11am when he welcomes German chancellor Friedrich Merz to the White House for a bilateral meeting. We’ll bring you the latest lines from that summit, particularly the president’s first in-person meeting with a close ally since the US-Israel war on Iran began. The conflict enters its fourth day, with six US service members killed and 787 Iranian casualties since strikes started on Saturday.
Later Trump will meet with energy secretary Chris Wright at 2pm ET. That will be closed to the press but we’ll let you know if the opens up. President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that Tehran wanted to talk but it was too late, as the United States continued its military operation against Iran.
“Their air defense, Air Force, Navy, and Leadership is gone. They want to talk. I said “Too Late!” Trump said in a Truth Social post commenting on an opinion piece.
Jessica Elgot Donald Trump has criticised Keir Starmer again over the UK’s refusal to aid the offensive strikes on Iran, saying the “relationship is obviously not what it was”.
Starmer had issued his strongest rebuke yet of Trump’s action in Iran, saying the UK did not believe in “regime change from the skies” and defended his decision not to allow the use of British bases to conduct the strikes.
But the prime minister said the UK would allow the use of its bases for defensive action to protect allied forces and nations in the Gulf and Middle East who have been hit by a wave of retaliatory strikes after the US-Israeli attacks on Iran. Speaking to the Sun, Trump compared Starmer’s actions unfavourably with France’s support for the strikes and with the backing of the Nato secretary general, Mark Rutte. “He has not been helpful. I never thought I’d see that. I never thought I’d see that from the UK. We love the UK,” he said.
“It’s a different world, actually. It’s just a much different kind of relationship that we’ve had with your country before. It’s very sad to see that the relationship is obviously not what it was.”
Dharna Noor
A North Carolina congressional primary on Tuesday is an early test of datacenter politics – a fight increasingly shaping elections nationwide.
In the Durham-area fourth district, Congresswoman Valerie Foushee is seeking her third term against progressive challenger Nida Allam, a Durham county commissioner she defeated in 2022. The heated rematch comes against the backdrop of a major datacenter battle in the district. Allam has come out staunchly against a massive new proposed facility, and is supporting a federal datacenter moratorium. Foushee, meanwhile, said she does not personally support the new development, but that datacenter decisions should be left to local leaders, not federal ones.
Until mid-February, Allam’s campaign donations dwarfed Foushee’s, thanks to Pacs such as Justice Democrats and gun control activist David Hogg’s Leaders We Deserve. In the last two weeks, that picture has changed dramatically as major Pacs have raced to back the incumbent.
Chief among them is Jobs and Democracy, a Super Pac whose sole disclosed donor is Anthropic, the AI firm behind Claude. The group has spent about $1.6m on Foushee’s re-election campaign since February 21.
Though Anthropic has no known links to the local datacenter proposal, opposition to it has left some local residents especially skeptical of all political funding tied to big tech.
Anthropic brands itself as safety-focused, making headlines in recent days for refusing the Pentagon’s demand for unfettered use of its products, though its tools have since reportedly been used in strikes on Iran. The company has backed some state AI safeguards and last year helped defeat a federal ban on state AI regulations. George Chidi The marquee matchup for the open US Senate seat in North Carolina will begin to resolve into focus Tuesday, with a well-known former Democratic governor and a Donald Trump-endorsed but untested Republican appearing to lead the field.
In the Democratic primary, former two-term governor Roy Cooper is ahead in recent polling against the slate of other candidates who have never held elected office. Cooper is widely seen among North Carolina’s Democrats as their best chance at flipping a Republican-controlled seat, now held by retiring US senator Thom Tillis, a conservative who has turned hard against the Trump administration on its handling of healthcare, defense and the Epstein file disclosures.
For Republicans, Michael Whatley, the former Republican National Committee chair, leads the field in polling, with his closest competitor, representative Don Brown, in the single digits.
Polling in both primaries has been relatively scant and may have masked softness in conservative support for Whatley. About half of the Republican electorate remains undecided heading to voting booths Tuesday.
Whatley has Trump’s endorsement, but that hasn’t stopped the grumbling on the right.
“The president made a horrible mistake forcing Whatley on us,” said Brant Clifton, who publishes the Daily Haymaker, a conservative news site in North Carolina. Whatley has been closely connected to Tillis over the years, which sullies him among voters for whom Tillis has become unpopular, Clifton said. “Trump spends a lot of time talking about how bad Tillis sucks and expressing his anger at Tillis, but here he is. He’s got the RNC working to shove Mike Whatley down our throats, but Tom Tillis and his wife are responsible for elevating Whatley out of obscurity to the state Republican party chairmanship.”
Homeland security secretary Kristi Noem is expected to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee later today, with funding for her department still stalled due to Democratic objections to its aggressive tactics.
It will be the first time Noem has appeared before the committee since two people were killed by federal immigration officers in Minneapolis in January.
Noem, appointed by Trump last year, also may field questions on other matters including possible threats to the United States after the US attacks on Iran and reports of disorder within her department.
The former South Dakota governor has overseen Trump’s immigration agenda, including the deployment of thousands of masked federal agents to US cities, where they have swept through neighborhoods in search of possible immigration offenders and clashed with residents. Noem is scheduled to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday and the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee on Wednesday.
President Trump hosts Germany’s Friedrich Merz later today for his first visit with a foreign leader since joining Israel in strikes on Iran.
The long-scheduled White House meeting was supposed to focus on the war in Ukraine and rocky EU-US trade relations, part of a wider effort to salvage frayed transatlantic ties.
But Trump’s signal that airstrikes against Iran could go on for weeks has upended the global agenda, with Tehran striking back against US bases and allies in the region, AFP reported.
Merz, a harsh critic of the Islamic republic’s leadership, said Berlin shared the Iranian people’s “relief” that the “mullah regime is coming to an end”. Yet he declined to “lecture” the United States and Israel on the legality of the Iran strikes aimed at ending Tehran’s nuclear and missile programs.
Hello and welcome to the US politics live blog.
With all members of Congress across both houses due to be briefed today on the Iran strikes, the Trump administration has presented a shifting new justification for its war.
Secretary of state Marco Rubio, defense secretary Pete Hegseth and general Dan Caine will brief the full membership of the House and Senate on Tuesday, with a possisble vote on parallel war powers measures to follow.
It comes after House speaker Mike Johnson suggested on Monday that the White House believed Israel was determined to act on its own, leaving the president with a “very difficult decision”. The Republican was speaking following a classified briefing at the Capitol, the first for congressional leaders since the start of the conflict, a joint US-Israel military campaign that killed Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
The strikes have quickly spiraled into a wider Middle East conflict, leaving hundreds of people dead, including at least six US military service personnel.
Johnson said the attack on Iran was a “defensive operation” because Israel was ready to act against Iran, “with or without American support”.
“The commander in chief has said this is going to be an operation that is short in duration,” Johnson said. “We certainly hope that’s true.”
Politico is reporting that he Senate could vote as early as Tuesday on senators Tim Kaine and Rand Paul’s measure to limit Trump’s strikes, followed by a separate House vote on a resolution from Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna. The Democrats’ strategy of forcing votes on war power resolutions has been portrayed as a way for Congress to reclaim its constitutional powers to declare war but have, so far, all failed.
In other developments:
In his first conference since the joint US-Israel operation against Iran, Donald Trump laid out his administration’s objectives moving forward. This includes destroying Iran’s missile capabilities, annihilating their navy, preventing Iran from ever having nuclear weapons, and ensuring the country “cannot continue to arm, fund and direct terrorist armies outside their borders”.
In a heated Pentagon press conference, Pete Hegseth initially said that US troops wouldn’t be in Iran, but later said he wouldn’t get into details. “We’re not going to go into the exercise of what we will or will not do,” he said. “This is not Iraq. This is not endless … Our generation knows better, and so does this president.”
US Central Command (Centcom) said that six service members have been killed in action, and eighteen have been seriously wounded in the US-Israel war on Iran.
The US state department is urging Americans to “depart now” from more than a dozen Middle Eastern countries, following the US-Israel strikes on Iran. Hundreds of thousands of travelers are currently stranded in the Gulf states, as the airspace over some of the world’s busiest airports, such as Dubai and Abu Dhabi, closed over the weekend.
Kuwait air defences mistakenly shot down three US F-15 fighter jets flying in Iran-related operations, the US Central Command (Centcom) said on Monday. All six crew members ejected safely, were safely recovered and in stable condition.
In an appearance on Fox News, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Iran’s “ballistic missile program and their atomic bomb program” would have been “immune within months” if the United States and Israel had not struck the country this weekend.
Trump says US stockpiles mean “wars can be fought ‘forever’”
DHS secretary to testify before Congress
Trump rebukes Starmer over UK refusal to back strikes on Iran
North Carolina kicks off some of first midterm primaries for key Senate and House races
Noem to face questions over immigration enforcement and DHS shutdown
Trump hosts Germany’s Merz for talks eclipsed by Middle East war
Congress to be briefed on Iran strikes ahead of vote over president’s war powers
News
Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP
The Supreme Court
Win McNamee/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Win McNamee/Getty Images
The Supreme Court on Monday intervened in New York’s redistricting process, blocking a lower court decision that would likely have flipped a Republican congressional district into a Democratic district.
At issue is the midterm redrawing of New York’s 11th congressional district, including Staten Island and a small part of Brooklyn. The district is currently held by a Republican, but on Jan. 21, a state Supreme Court judge ruled that the current district dilutes the power of Black and Latino voters in violation of the state constitution.
GOP Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, who represents the district, and the Republican co-chair of the state Board of Elections promptly appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to block the redrawing as an unconstitutional “racial gerrymander.” New York’s congressional election cycle was set to officially begin Feb. 24, the opening day for candidates to seek placement on the ballot.
As in this year’s prior mid-decade redistricting fights — in Texas and California — the Trump administration backed the Republicans.
Voters and the State of New York contended it’s too soon for the Supreme Court to wade into this dispute. New York’s highest state court has not issued a final judgment, so the voters asserted that if the Supreme Court grants relief now “future stay applicants will see little purpose in waiting for state court rulings before coming to this Court” and “be rewarded for such gamesmanship.” The state argues this is an issue for “New York courts, not federal courts” to resolve, and there is sufficient time for the dispute to be resolved on the merits.
The court majority explained the decision to intervene in 101 words, which the three dissenting liberal justices summarized as “Rules for thee, but not for me.”
The unsigned majority order does not explain the Court’s rationale. It says only how long the stay will last, until the case moves through the New York State appeals courts. If, however, the losing party petitions and the court agrees to hear the challenge, the stay extends until the final opinion is announced.
Dissenting from the decision were Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Writing for the three, Sotomayor said that if nonfinal decisions of a state trial court can be brought to highest court, “then every decision from any court is now fair game.” More immediately, she noted, “By granting these applications, the Court thrusts itself into the middle of every election-law dispute around the country, even as many States redraw their congressional maps ahead of the 2026 election.”
Monday’s Supreme Court action deviates from the court’s hands-off pattern in these mid-term redistricting fights this year. In two previous cases — from Texas and California — the court refused to intervene, allowing newly drawn maps to stay in effect.
Requests for Supreme Court intervention on redistricting issues has been a recurring theme this term, a trend that is likely to grow. Earlier last month the high court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map. California’s redistricting came in response to a GOP-friendly redistricting plan in Texas that the Supreme Court also permitted to move forward. These redistricting efforts are expected to offset one another.
But the high court itself has yet to rule on a challenge to Louisiana’s voting map, which was drawn by the state legislature after the decennial census in order to create a second majority-Black district. Since the drawing of that second majority-black district, the state has backed away from that map, hoping to return to a plan that provides for only one majority-minority district.
The Supreme Court’s consideration of the Louisiana case has stretched across two terms. The justices failed to resolve the case last term and chose to order a second round of arguments this term adding a new question: Does the state’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority district violate the constitution’s Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments’ guarantee of the right to vote and the authority of Congress to enforce that mandate?
Following the addition of the new question, the state of Louisiana flipped positions to oppose the map it had just drawn and defended in court. Whether the Supreme Court follows suit remains to be seen. But the tone of the October argument suggested that the court’s conservative supermajority is likely to continue undercutting the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
News
Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California
Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 3 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “weak,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown. The New York Times
A minor earthquake with a preliminary magnitude of 3.5 struck in Central California on Monday, according to the United States Geological Survey.
The temblor happened at 7:17 a.m. Pacific time about 6 miles northwest of Pinnacles, Calif., data from the agency shows.
As seismologists review available data, they may revise the earthquake’s reported magnitude. Additional information collected about the earthquake may also prompt U.S.G.S. scientists to update the shake-severity map.
Source: United States Geological Survey | Notes: Shaking categories are based on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale. When aftershock data is available, the corresponding maps and charts include earthquakes within 100 miles and seven days of the initial quake. All times above are Pacific time. Shake data is as of Monday, March 2 at 10:20 a.m. Eastern. Aftershocks data is as of Monday, March 2 at 11:18 a.m. Eastern.
-
World6 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts6 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Denver, CO6 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Louisiana1 week agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Oregon4 days ago2026 OSAA Oregon Wrestling State Championship Results And Brackets – FloWrestling
-
Florida2 days agoFlorida man rescued after being stuck in shoulder-deep mud for days
-
Technology1 week agoArturia’s FX Collection 6 adds two new effects and a $99 intro version
-
News1 week agoVideo: How Lunar New Year Traditions Take Root Across America