Politics
Supreme Court Deals Further Blow to Voting Rights Act
The Supreme Court on Wednesday struck down Louisiana’s voting map, finding that lawmakers had illegally used race when drawing up a new majority-Black district.
The decision was 6-to-3, split along ideological lines. The conservative majority asserted that the opinion was a limited ruling that preserved a central tenet of the Voting Rights Act, but the court’s liberal wing, in dissent, argued that the justices had taken the final step to dismantle the landmark civil rights law.
In the majority opinion, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. wrote that the court had kept intact the Voting Rights Act but that Louisiana’s new majority-minority district violated the equal protection clause of the Constitution.
For decades, lawmakers have crafted congressional districts with a focus on ensuring that minority voters had the opportunity to elect candidates of their choice, often working to create majority-minority districts as they labored under scrutiny from federal courts that guaranteed the rights of minorities because of the Voting Rights Act.
Justice Alito wrote that the justices were updating the 40-year-old framework that courts look to for evaluating the use of race in drawing up congressional districts, essentially saying that the Voting Rights Act only prevents lawmakers from drawing maps that would intentionally limit the power of minority voters.
To successfully challenge district maps under the Voting Rights Act now, Justice Alito wrote, challengers will need to show proof a state “intentionally drew its districts to afford minority voters less opportunity because of their race.” A legal challenge that “cannot disentangle race from the state’s race-neutral considerations, including politics,” will fail.
Justice Alito added that the new framework “reflects important developments” since the court laid out factors for evaluating the use of race in voting maps in 1986. He cited increased voter registration and turnout by minorities, writing that “the racial gap in voter registration and turnout” had “largely disappeared.”
Justice Elena Kagan, in dissent, countered that the practical effect of the decision would be to make it nearly impossible to use race when drawing up voting maps, writing that “the court’s decision will set back the foundational right Congress granted of racial equality in electoral opportunity.”
Justice Kagan read her dissent from the bench, a rare move that often signals a justice’s strong displeasure with a decision.
It is unclear how the decision will impact the midterm elections amid the nationwide redistricting battle that has spiraled already into multiple states.
Coming in the middle of the primary calendar, there were still multiple states that could draw new maps, citing today’s decision. Republicans in Florida moved swiftly after the announcement. The state’s House approving a new map on Wednesday morning. Louisiana will likely lose one Democratic district when it finalizes a new map.
Got a news tip about the courts? If you have information to share about the Supreme Court or other federal courts, please contact us.
Any map that eliminated majority-minority districts and was drawn in the wake of the ruling would likely be challenged in court — potentially prompting a new wave of litigation.
Representative Troy Carter of Louisiana, a Democrat, condemned the ruling.
“It sends a dangerous signal that the progress we have made can be undone under the guise of legal theory,” Mr. Carter said in a statement. “The Voting Rights Act is not a relic. It is a living promise, a commitment that our democracy belongs to everyone.”
Wednesday’s decision marks the latest in a series of rulings by the justices to weaken the Voting Rights Act of 1965, often considered the crown jewel of the civil rights-era laws.
The case, Louisiana v. Callais, arose from a dispute over a new voting map drafted by Louisiana lawmakers after the 2020 census. Before then, only one of the state’s six congressional districts was majority Black, even though Black Louisianans made up about a third of the state’s population.
Two groups of Black voters sued in 2022, after state lawmakers adopted a new map that still included only one majority-Black district. They argued Louisiana had violated the Voting Rights Act by packing Black voters into one district, which had the effect of diluting the power of their votes. A federal judge agreed.
In 2024, state lawmakers tried again, this time adopting a map that included a second majority-Black district. A group of white Louisiana voters then challenged that map, claiming it was an illegal racial gerrymander. They pointed to the boundaries of the new district, which snakes diagonally across the state from the southeast to the northwest.
Lawmakers initially defended the map, arguing that the odd shape was the result of politics, not race. They said that lawmakers created the second district’s area to protect high-profile politicians, including House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Republican. The court has said it is acceptable to draw maps motivated by partisan advantage.
The Supreme Court first heard the challenge to the Louisiana map in spring 2025, considering whether state lawmakers had properly balanced race and political considerations. But in June, rather than announce a decision, the justices said they would rehear it in the fall. In August, the justices announced they were expanding the case, asking the lawyers to prepare for an argument on a much broader question than they had originally considered: Whether the state’s creation of a second majority-minority district violated the Constitution.
That announcement raised alarms among proponents of the Voting Rights Act, who feared that the court’s conservative majority — long skeptical of the legislation — would use the case to deal a fatal blow to the law and rule its provision requiring lawmakers to consider race was unconstitutional.
Just two years ago, the justices heard a similar dispute over Alabama’s congressional map and cited the Voting Rights Act without finding it unconstitutional. In that case, Allen v. Milligan, the Supreme Court ruled that the state’s Republican supermajority illegally diluted the power of Black voters in violation of the Voting Rights Act.
But in that case, Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh wrote in a concurring opinion that he wondered whether there should be a time limit on the ability of states to “conduct race-based redistricting,” writing that it could not “extend indefinitely into the future.”
During the oral arguments in the Louisiana case, Justice Kavanaugh and several other conservative justices appeared to question whether there should be a sunset to taking race into account in drawing voting maps.
“What exactly do you think the end point should be, or how would we know, for the intentional use of race to create districts?” Justice Kavanaugh had asked a lawyer for the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, who argued to uphold the Voting Rights Act.
Nick Corasaniti and Rick Rojas contributed reporting.
Politics
DOJ launches grand jury probe into Marxist mogul Neville Roy Singham’s funding of leftist groups
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
FIRST ON FOX: A federal grand jury is investigating alleged financial crimes by Neville Roy Singham, the China-based tech tycoon whose fortune has funded a sprawling network of socialist, communist and Marxist organizations across the U.S. over the last decade.
According to sources familiar with the matter, the grand jury in Manhattan has issued subpoenas as part of a probe launched by U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton for the Southern District of New York, one of the country’s most powerful districts for federal prosecutions. Acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche authorized the investigation as the Trump administration seeks to crack down on fraud, money laundering and other financial crimes in the multibillion-dollar nonprofit industry.
The grand jury action follows a Fox News Digital investigation published in mid-March, documenting how Singham pumped $285 million from his base in Shanghai into a Goldman Sachs philanthropy fund and two shell corporations that then fed the money into a constellation of nonprofit organizations, media operations and activist groups pushing sectarian division, identity politics and support for socialist politicians.
The investigation is examining the movement of the money in Singham’s financial network and attempting to determine if Singham, the organizations he funded or their leaders committed wire fraud, bank fraud, money laundering or other financial crimes, according to sources familiar with the matter.
HOUSE OF SINGHAM: READ FOX NEWS DIGITAL’S 5-PART INVESTIGATION
On Feb. 14, 2018, Jodie Evans, co-founder founder of CodePink, and Neville Roy Singham, founder of Thoughtworks, attend V20: The Red Party, a 20th anniversary celebration of V-Day and The Vagina Monologues, featuring a performance by playwright Eve Ensler and an after-party at Carnegie Hall in New York City. (Dave Kotinsky/Getty Images)
Prosecutors have presented evidence to the grand jury, which has issued subpoenas seeking bank records and other financial documents from organizations in Singham’s network. Federal prosecutors use grand jury subpoenas as an investigative tool to compel the production of documents and testimony as they determine whether sufficient evidence exists to pursue criminal charges.
Nicholas Biase, spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, declined to comment.
Showdown with Goldman Sachs
According to sources, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent traveled to New York City earlier this year for a meeting with Goldman Sachs Chairman and CEO David Solomon. The men discussed the role of a Goldman Sachs philanthropic arm — GS Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund For Wealth Management Inc. — that facilitated the movement by Singham of millions of dollars into a network of U.S. nonprofits.
A Treasury Department spokesman declined to comment. A person familiar with the meeting confirmed that it occurred, saying that Bessent has regular meetings with business leaders, and declined to comment further on the substance of the meeting.
At that meeting, sources said, Bessent delivered a blunt ultimatum: Goldman Sachs could face scrutiny for alleged conspiracy in the funneling of the Singham money and urged Solomon to cooperate with federal investigators.
Like many U.S. companies, Goldman Sachs has had a long business relationship with the Chinese Communist Party, with Solomon participating in a meeting, for example, on Nov. 4, 2025, with He Lifeng, a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China Central Committee and director of the Office of the Central Commission for Financial and Economic Affairs.
Solomon pledged his cooperation, according to sources.
WALL STREET BANKS HELPED CHINESE MILITARY-LINKED FIRM RAISE BILLIONS DESPITE RED FLAGS, LAWMAKERS FIND
By mid-May, with the Southern District of New York investigation in full throttle, Solomon joined a delegation of powerful American business leaders who accompanied President Donald Trump, Bessent and other administration officials to China to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping and other leaders of the Chinese Communist Party.
On Nov. 4, 2025, He Lifeng, a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China Central Committee and director of the Office of the Central Commission for Financial and Economic Affairs, meets in Beijing with David Solomon, chairman and CEO of Goldman Sachs Group. (Cai Yang/Xinhua News Agency via Getty Images)
In a five-part investigative series published earlier this year, Fox News Digital unearthed a four-minute-13-second speech in which Singham stood on a stage at the Golden Tulip Hotel on Nov. 13, 2025, for a conference of the “Global South Academic Forum,” coincidentally just days after the Goldman Sachs’ chief was in Beijing. Tricontinental Ltd., a Singham-funded nonprofit, co-sponsored the event with academic institutions administered by the Chinese Communist Party.
On stage, Singham openly supported a “new world order” promoted by Chinese President Jinping and the Chinese Communist Party. During the speech, he called the United States a “fascist” nation, echoing the propaganda of the Chinese Communist Party now also parroted on the streets by communist, socialist and Democratic Party activists.
WATCH THE NOVEMBER 2025 SINGHAM SPEECH:
The series revealed a 172-page report in which Singham outlined his theory of change, invoking 20th century Chinese communist leader Mao Zedong’s battle plan to wage a “people’s war” to spread communism. Mao was inspired by communist leaders Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin.
LAWMAKERS RAISE ALARM OVER NEVILLE ROY SINGHAM’S $278M NETWORK SPREADING CCP PROPAGANDA IN THE U.S.
Singham’s rise as a global political financier accelerated after his February 2017 marriage to Jodie Evans, the co-founder of Code Pink, a far-left activist group that has aligned itself with authoritarian regimes including the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Communist Party of Cuba and the Chinese Communist Party. According to sources, Evans is also a target of the investigation, emerging as a board member in the U.S. on many of the organizations that Singham funded.
That same year, Singham sold his company, ThoughtWorks, for an estimated $785 million to a London-based private equity firm, Apax Partners. A spokeswoman for Apax Partners said the company wouldn’t disclose the names of the investors who pumped money into that sale, but sources told Fox News Digital that federal investigators are looking for potential ties to the Chinese Communist Party.
After that sale, Fox News Digital found, Singham began directing large sums of money into a network of organizations that now form part of a broader activist infrastructure in the United States and abroad.
In its investigation, Fox News Digital mapped 223 transactions from 2017 through 2025 that moved $591 million across five continents through 67 core groups in the Singham network. They partner with hundreds of groups worldwide, resulting in a network of about 2,000 groups, amplifying anti-U.S., pro-China messages.
Of that money, Fox News Digital established a documented $278 million flowed directly from Singham into organizations that “sow discord” in the U.S., as House Ways and Means Chair Jason Smith put it earlier this year at a hearing a dynamics called “foreign malign influence.”
Following the Money
In money-laundering investigations, prosecutors typically examine three stages of alleged impropriety called “placement,” “layering” and “integration.” Placement refers to the introduction of funds into the financial system. Layering involves moving money through multiple entities or transactions to allegedly obscure its origin. Integration is the point at which the money reemerges as apparently legitimate funding, grants, payments or organizational support.
Step 1: Alleged Placement
Singham allegedly funneled $278 million from Shanghai into the United States through three key channels — the philanthropic arm of Goldman Sachs and two shell corporations that have since gone defunct.
- $164,040,000 to Mutod LLC, a now-defunct shell corporation established in 2017, based in Chicago.
- $110,376,701 to GS Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund For Wealth Management Inc., a philanthropy arm of Goldman Sachs, based in New York City.
- $3,500,000 to Likewise Conceptions LLC, a now-defunct shell corporation established in 2017, based in Crystal Lake, Ill.
Step. 2: Alleged Layering
The three entities then pumped the $278 million into six nonprofits:
- $167,540,000 to People’s Support Foundation Ltd., a 501(c)(3) nonprofit established with a hotel address in 2017 in Chicago and Singham’s wife, Evans, on the board.
- $68,748,701 to Justice and Education Fund Inc., a 501(c)(3) established with a UPS Store address in 2018 in New York City with self-avowed communists, including Manola De Los Santos, on the board.
- $22,440,000 to People’s Forum Inc., a 501(c)(3) established in 2017 on W. 37th Street in New York City with Evans and De Los Santos on the board.
- $16,760,000 to Tricontinental Ltd., a 501(c)(3) established in North Hampton, Mass., in 2017 by Singham friend and fellow Marxist ideologue Vijay Prashad.
- $1,330,000 to CodePink Women For Peace, a 501(c)(3) established in 2009 in Marina Del Ray, Calif., by Singham’s wife, Evans, and her friend, Susan Medea Benjamin.
- $1,098,000 to Breakthrough BT Media Inc., a 501(c)(3) established in New York City in 2020 at the People’s Forum headquarters with longtime American communist leader Brian Becker’s son, Ben Becker, as editor-in-chief of its pro-communist propaganda outlet, Breakthrough News.
Step 3: Alleged Integration
The six nonprofits then funneled at least $223 million and other forms of support into a global network of organizations including:
- People’s Welfare Association, a 501(c)(4) established in 2019 with the address of a UPS store in Madison, Wisc., today reporting about $12 million in revenues transformed into grants to undisclosed groups around the world.
- Countless unidentified organizations in six regions around the world, including Subsaharan Africa, Central America and even North America, receiving tens of millions of dollars.
- The ANSWER Coalition, a communist organization whose Chicago address has been listed as the location of the Green Mill Restaurant, a regular haunt for 20th century gangster Al Capone, whom federal prosecutor Elliott Ness prosecuted and convicted for tax evasion.
- The Party for Socialism and Liberation, a loosely-structured organization with shared leadership from the House of Singham, like the Becker father-son duo.
FLASHBACK: INSIDE THE POLITICAL MOVEMENT THAT PUT A SOCIALIST IN CHARGE OF NEW YORK CITY
Socialist New York congressional nominees Darializa Avila Chevalier (L), Claire Valdez (C) and Brad Lander. (Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images; Michael Nagle/Bloomberg via Getty Images; Adam Gray/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Singham and Evans haven’t responded to repeated requests for comment from Fox News Digital. In January, Becker and De Los Santos refused to respond to questions by Fox News Digital outside the People’s Forum headquarters. Benjamin refused to respond to questions during a protest in May.
The ANSWER Coalition, Breakthrough BT Media Inc., CodePink Women for Peace, Justice and Education Fund Inc., Party for Socialism and Liberation, People’s Forum Inc., People’s Welfare Association and Tricontinental Ltd. also haven’t responded to repeated requests for comment. Representatives for Mutod Ltd. and Likewise Conceptions LLC couldn’t be located.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
WASHINGTON — Licensed gun owners have a right to carry a concealed firearm into stores and other private places unless the owner objects, the Supreme Court ruled Thursday.
The 6-3 decision extends gun rights and strikes down laws in Hawaii, California, New York, New Jersey and Maryland.
Those measures would prohibit carrying guns onto private property that is open to the public unless the owner has expressly authorized them.
“This regime hobbles what the 2nd Amendment protects: the right of Americans to carry arms for self-defense as they go about their daily lives. We hold that the law is unconstitutional,” Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. said for the court.
The new laws, if upheld, would “impose severe restrictions on the daily activities of residents who have satisfied the state’s rigorous requirements for the issuance of a carry permit. When these permit holders leave home in the morning, … they may also be barred from entering many places that people routinely visit in the course of their daily routines, such as gas stations, convenience stores, restaurants, coffee shops, drug stores, grocery stores, ‘big box’ stores, home improvement stores, barber shops or hair salons, dry cleaners, and laundromats.”
The three liberals dissented, saying the law would protect property owners who don’t want guns in their stores.
“There is no constitutional right to enter private property without the owner’s permission, let alone with a firearm,” said Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.
Trump administration lawyers had joined a coalition of Hawaii gun owners in urging the court to strike down these blue state laws in the case of Wolford vs. Lopez.
They said the laws, if enforced, would mean “a person carrying a handgun for self-defense commits a crime by entering a mall, a gas station, a convenience store, a supermarket, a restaurant or a coffee shop.”
This litigation is part of much broader debate over where guns may be permitted or prohibited.
Four years ago, the justices ruled that law-abiding persons had a right to obtain a permit to carry a concealed gun when they left home. They also agreed there are “sensitive places” where guns may be prohibited, such as schools, courts and other government buildings.
In response, lawmakers in California and Hawaii adopted their own lists of “sensitive places.” They imposed restrictions on concealed weapons at parks, beaches, playgrounds, places of worship and public transit as well as bars and restaurants that serve alcohol.
Gun owners sued but the 9th Circuit Court refused to block most of those restrictions in a single 83-page opinion covering Hawaii and California. Both states would prohibit carrying guns onto private property open to the public without the owner’s consent.
The 9th Circuit upheld that measure in principle but said California went too far by requiring the owner to post a prominent sign expressly authorizing guns.
“While today’s ruling in Wolford is disappointing, owners still have every right to decide whether firearms are allowed in their stores and businesses,” said Janet Carter, managing director of Second Amendment Litigation at Everytown Law. “The Supreme Court may have changed the default rule, but it cannot take away a private property owner’s authority over their own land.”
The Firearms Policy Coalition said the court had properly protected gun rights and barred states from carving out their “own regional version of the 2nd Amendment.”
“The historical record does not support forcing peaceable people to obtain advance permission before carrying for self-defense in places held open to them,” the group said.
Last week, the court upheld gun rights in a Texas case and said the government may not make it a crime for an “unlawful user” of a drug such as marijuana to own a gun.
Politics
Jacob Frey praises Somali community as Minnesota faces renewed scrutiny over fraud investigations
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey told members of the city’s Somali community over the weekend that they are “our family,” pledging solidarity and praising their contributions to the city during remarks celebrating Somali Independence Day.
Frey’s remarks came as Minnesota continues to face scrutiny over several high-profile fraud investigations and weeks after a Republican-led House Oversight Committee report alleged the Minnesota Governor Tim Walz’s administration failed to act on repeated warnings about widespread fraud in the state’s social services programs.
“Through the most difficult of times and through Operation Metro surge, we all saw that they tried to come for some of us,” Frey told members of the Somali community on Saturday. “And when that happens, we say that you’re coming for all of us.”
BLUE STATE’S ANTI-ICE PLEDGE COLLAPSES AS GOP WARNS OF NEW SANCTUARY ‘CONFEDERACY’
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey speaks during a Somali Independence Day celebration in Minneapolis as attendees stand on stage holding Somali flags. (Credit: Mayor Jacob Frey X Post)
“In Minneapolis, we loved our neighbors. In Minneapolis, we do not see you as immigrants. We see you as our family,” he added. “You are our brothers. You’re our sisters. You have done so much for this incredible city, and for that, we stand with you.”
Frey appeared to reference Operation Metro Surge, the Trump administration’s immigration and public safety initiative in Minnesota.
The operation concluded in February after border czar Tom Homan announced it had resulted in the arrest of more than 4,000 people in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area and had reduced what he described as public safety threats.
BLUE STATE’S ANTI-ICE PLEDGE COLLAPSES AS GOP WARNS OF NEW SANCTUARY ‘CONFEDERACY’
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey speaks to the media at City Hall on Jan. 9. (Aaron Lavinsky/The Minnesota Star Tribune via Getty Images)
Frey shared the video on X, writing, “Happy Somali Independence Day.”
“Here in Minnesota, home to one of the largest Somali communities in the United States, we celebrate the resilience, culture, and leadership that continue to enrich our city and community,” he said.
Earlier this month, a Republican-led House Oversight Committee report alleged Walz’s administration repeatedly failed to act on warnings about fraud involving state social services programs, including the Feeding Our Future scandal.
WALZ ADMINISTRATION IGNORED FRAUD WARNINGS AS BILLIONS VANISHED, HOUSE OVERSIGHT REPORT ALLEGES
Democratic Gov. Tim Walz speaks during a news conference on Tuesday, Jan. 6, 2026, in Minneapolis, Minnesota. (Alex Kormann/Star Tribune via AP)
The committee said more than 110 people have been charged in connection with various fraud schemes in Minnesota, including many defendants identified as members of Minnesota’s Somali immigrant community.
The report also alleged concerns about potential racial discrimination claims contributed to delays in addressing suspected fraud and estimated Minnesota lost roughly $300 million in stolen federal child nutrition funds during the COVID-19 pandemic.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Walz administration officials have disputed the committee’s findings.
Fox News Digital’s Adam Pack contributed to this report.
-
Minnesota19 seconds agoDavid Doty, Minnesota federal judge who oversaw NFL’s labor disputes for decades, dies at 96
-
Mississippi7 minutes agoUS Supreme Court endorses grace periods for Mississippi mail-in ballots
-
Missouri10 minutes agoDonut fundraiser helps mid-Missouri family’s medical expenses for treatment in Italy
-
Montana15 minutes agoFrench Montana Shares Rare Insight into Khloe Kardashian Relationship
-
Nebraska22 minutes agoHeartland Nebraska group presents Quilts of Valor to six veterans
-
Nevada25 minutes agoCourt OK’s counting late-arriving mail ballots in Nevada, 29 other states
-
New Hampshire30 minutes agoReport card reflects New Hampshire’s maternal mental health improvements, room for growth – Concord Monitor
-
New Jersey37 minutes agoDrunk Black History comes to Newark Culture Club on July 10th
