Politics
Trump’s Changing Messages on Abortion, in 660 Quotes
When he first ran for president, Donald J. Trump talked repeatedly about his opposition to abortion. “I’m pro-life, and I was originally pro-choice,” he said in 2016. Another time that year, he said, “I am pro-life, and I will be appointing pro-life judges.” In total in 2016, according to a New York Times analysis, he described himself as “pro-life” 36 times:
.
In this campaign, though, he hardly ever uses the term. This year, he has described himself as “pro-life” once:
.
During his re-election campaign in 2020, Mr. Trump often spoke of his support for a federal ban on abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. In total, before the Supreme Court decision that ended the national right to abortion in 2022, he expressed his support for a federal ban 50 times:
.
Since the court’s decision, Dobbs v. Jackson, which allowed individual states to ban abortion, he has expressed support for a federal ban only once
, saying, “It could be a state ban, it could be a federal ban.”
More often, he has said the exact opposite, that he opposes a federal ban. Since the court’s decision, he has said that 11 times:
. “I’m not signing a ban, and there’s no reason to sign a ban”; “There will not be a federal ban”; “I’m not signing a national abortion bill.”
We looked at all the statements Mr. Trump has made about abortion since he first ran for president, in speeches, interviews and posts online, that were cataloged by Roll Call Factba.se. We categorized 660 of them based on the words he used. The analysis shows how his messaging over the last decade has changed with the political moment — and how this year he has tried to distance himself from the core beliefs of the anti-abortion movement.
The way Donald Trump has talked about abortion changed after the Dobbs decision. Below, a comparison of the themes Mr. Trump mentioned most in his public statements, based on a Times analysis.
Some statements appear in more than one theme.
Trump’s Statements on Abortion Before and After Dobbs
There is no evidence that Mr. Trump’s stance on abortion has changed. As president, he did more to restrict abortion rights in the United States than any other president, including by appointing three of the six Supreme Court justices who overturned Roe v. Wade. As recently as the September debate, he took credit, saying, “I did a great service in doing it.” Anti-abortion groups have laid out a pathway for him to effectively ban abortion nationwide if he is re-elected.
As it became clear that the Dobbs decision was hurting some Republican candidates, however, he changed his messaging, sometimes directly contradicting himself. He said as much in April, when he released a video on Truth Social emphasizing that Republicans needed to talk about abortion in a way that would appeal to voters: “You must follow your heart on this issue. But remember, you must also win elections.”
Mr. Trump’s ambiguous or even contradictory statements can allow voters to hear whichever message they want to hear, political analysts said.
Karoline Leavitt, the Trump campaign’s national press secretary, said that Mr. Trump had been consistent in his stance on abortion, and that he had always supported the rights of states to make decisions on abortion rights.
Jason Rapert, founder and president of the National Association of Christian Lawmakers, which supports a nationwide abortion ban, said, “I think we should remember the Donald Trump of 2016, and what he was saying from his heart, and he made good on those policy decisions.”
Mr. Rapert said he was “extremely disappointed” to hear Mr. Trump say he did not support a federal abortion ban. But he does not necessarily believe him, he said: “I realized that he really is delivering messaging that came from many of the consultants around him.”
Celinda Lake, a Democratic pollster, said Mr. Trump was giving mixed messages because he was trying to hold onto the support of evangelical voters while also trying to win back moderates who have turned against him because of his role in overturning Roe.
“It’s a winning strategy with evangelicals — you never hear born-again Christians are defecting; they’re not,” Ms. Lake said. “It’s been a loss with suburban women, with younger women, with the moderate Republican women who now call themselves independents, and he’s been trying to figure out a way to get them back.”
In her polling and focus groups, she said, many voters have never really believed that Mr. Trump opposes abortion. His recent rhetoric “just reinforces that his heart’s not really in it, he doesn’t really believe this,” she said. “But on the other hand, the MAGA party does believe in it, and his political calculations are such that he did Dobbs and he will continue to do more.”
Trump’s evolution
Before he became a national political figure, Mr. Trump had described himself as “very pro-choice,” so in his initial run for president as a Republican, he repeatedly emphasized that he had abandoned that position.
Times Trump described himself as “pro-life,” by quarter
“I am pro-life”
Mr. Trump was courting the evangelical wing of the Republican Party, whose votes he needed. He promised to appoint “pro-life judges” to the Supreme Court. He made abortion restrictions a staple of his 2016 campaign, speaking often about how important the issue was.
Times Trump said abortion is an important issue, by quarterAbortion is an important issue
After he was elected, Mr. Trump kept many of his promises to the anti-abortion movement. He enacted several regulatory policies that limited funding for abortion and organizations that supported it. He appointed three justices to the Supreme Court from a list of candidates pre-approved by the anti-abortion movement.
As he approached his re-election campaign, he supported a bill in Congress that would have banned abortions nationwide after 20 weeks of pregnancy. The bill was a major theme of campaign rallies, and was featured in his 2020 State of the Union address and a speech that year at the March for Life, the anti-abortion movement’s biggest annual event. He was the first sitting president to speak there.
He called on Congress to “defend the dignity of life and to pass legislation prohibiting late-term abortion of children who can feel pain in their mother’s womb.”
Times Trump said he supports federal abortion restrictions, by quarterSupports federal restrictions
After the Dobbs decision overturning the right to abortion in 2022, Mr. Trump often celebrated his role in it: “If you look at what we’ve done with Roe v. Wade, we did something that everyone said couldn’t be done, and we got it done.”
At the presidential debate with Vice President Kamala Harris in September, he again praised Dobbs, and “the genius and heart and strength” of the Supreme Court justices who supported it.
Later that month, he extolled his record on the issue: “I’ve done an unbelievable job on the abortion question.”
He often said that all Americans or “all legal scholars” supported the court’s decision to overturn Roe, despite polling majorities and numerous legal briefs that opposed it.
During this campaign, though, he has sent mixed messages. At first, he said he would support a Florida measure expanding abortion access, then said he wouldn’t. He said he wouldn’t restrict access to abortion pills, then said he was open to it.
He has not always directly answered questions about his personal views on abortion. Often, he avoids it by embracing the fact that Dobbs allowed states to restrict and ban abortion: “It doesn’t matter because this issue has now been taken over by the states.”
Before Dobbs, he did not say much about believing abortion should be decided by the states. Now, he says it instead of answering questions about new federal policies he might pursue as president.
His party platform also emphasizes that abortion rights are a decision for the states, saying only that the party opposes “late-term abortion.” Then it shifts to other topics, like support for prenatal care, and access to birth control and in vitro fertilization.
He also deflects by saying the Democrats have taken extreme positions: “The radicals are really the Democrats because they’ll kill babies in their eighth and ninth month and they’ll kill babies after birth.” In fact, infanticide is illegal in every state. Arguments about Democratic extremism were also a staple of his 2020 re-election campaign speeches, but he is talking about that even more now.
He has also recently repeated his support for exceptions to abortion bans for women who are victims of rape or incest, or whose lives are threatened by their pregnancies. These statements somewhat conflict with his embrace of state-based approaches to abortion policy, since many states with abortion bans do not have these exceptions.
Melania Trump, the former first lady, published a book this month in which she said she supported abortion rights, a surprise that some political analysts said was a calculated move to appeal to more moderate voters.
For much of this campaign, Mr. Trump declined to say whether he would veto a federal abortion ban.
Then, in recent weeks, he changed course again, saying that he would veto a federal ban, in direct opposition to the goals of the anti-abortion movement. He said in an online message earlier this month: “Everyone knows I would not support a federal abortion ban, under any circumstances, and would, in fact, veto it, because it is up to the states to decide based on the will of their voters.”
Otherwise, Mr. Trump is not talking much about how he would handle abortion policy from the executive branch. Regardless of who wins the election, major federal legislation on the topic is unlikely to pass Congress in the next few years.
Instead, he has begun saying abortion is not an important issue: “The country’s falling apart,” he said recently. “We’re going to end up in World War III, and all they can talk about is abortion. That’s all they talk about. And it really no longer pertains because we’ve done something on abortion that nobody thought was possible.”
But the president still has major influence on abortion access nationwide, through regulations and executive actions. In Mr. Trump’s last administration, he cut federal funding to Planned Parenthood for contraceptive services. He appointed numerous federal judges who oppose abortion rights. If elected again, he could also use the Food and Drug Administration or the Justice Department to ban or restrict the mailing of abortion pills, which have contributed to increased abortion access since Dobbs.
“I know he’s steering clear with only days left until the election,” said Mr. Rapert of the National Association of Christian Lawmakers, “but clearly the federal government can do more.”
The complete list of Trump’s statements on abortion
Here is a list of Mr. Trump’s statements on abortion since 2015, organized by topic.
Oct. 2016 Breitbart News interview
May 2018
Susan B. Anthony Campaign for Life Gala speech Jan. 2019
March for Life speech
June 2020
Christian Broadcasting Network interview
Oct. 2020
Rally, Pensacola, Fla.
Oct. 2020 Rally, Lititz, Pa.
Sept. 2023
Rally, Dubuque, Iowa Sept. 2024
Rally in Indiana, Pa.
Methodology Transcriptions and related metadata were provided by Roll Call FactBa.se.
The analysis included transcripts from every public appearance by Mr. Trump, including every speech, interview, rally and debate, during his campaigns in 2016, 2020 and 2024 (through Oct. 23) and during his presidency. It includes appearances after he left office and before he started his campaign in late 2023, but some small appearances in this period may have been missed.
Also included in the data set is every public appearance that ran on C-SPAN or was posted on Rumble or YouTube, and every tweet and Truth Social post on Mr. Trump’s accounts, including over 300 deleted posts.
The authors searched this database for mentions of keywords related to abortion, then manually categorized individual quotations. Some statements were included in more than one category.
Abortion is an important issue
Politics
Trump blasts Spanberger ahead of Virginia meetings, says state faces tax base exodus like New York, California
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
President Donald Trump slammed Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger ahead of meetings in the state Saturday, warning her policies are triggering a tax base exodus similar to New York and California.
Trump, in an early morning Truth Social post, said the Democratic governor had imposed a wave of taxes he argued were draining the state’s economic strength.
“She is adding so many Taxes, a Food and Beverage Tax, Digital Services Tax, Utilities Tax, and more,” Trump wrote. “It has lost its Energy, Vitality, and Strength. People are leaving that would never have even thought of doing so!”
Trump’s comments come as Republicans have criticized Democrats in the state legislature over a slate of tax and revenue proposals, warning the measures could hurt Virginia’s business climate, though the governor has not publicly supported or signed the measures referenced by Trump.
GLENN YOUNGKIN ACCUSES GOV SPANBERGER OF ‘ILLEGAL AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL’ GERRYMANDERING IN VIRGINIA MAP FIGHT
Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger and President Donald Trump (Marvin Joseph/Getty Images; Brendan Smilowski/AFP)
“New companies that signed to come into the Commonwealth under Governor Youngkin are now looking for ways to get out — Break their Deal,” he said.
The president, who said he was heading to Virginia for meetings at Trump National Golf Club, drew comparisons to high-tax states like New York and California, which he has frequently criticized.
“We have a similar situation in New York and, most of all, in California, where Rich, Job Producing people and companies are being forced to FLEE at levels never seen before,” Trump wrote.
He added that California’s tax base was “literally disappearing” as wealthy individuals and corporations relocate, warning Virginia could face a similar trajectory.
VA DEM REJECTS ‘POWER GRAB’ CLAIMS ON SPANBERGER REDISTRICTING AS GOP WARNS 10–1 MAP WOULD SPLIT RURAL VOTE
The Virginia State Capitol during the inauguration ceremony of Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger in Richmond Jan. 17, 2026. (Kendall Warner/The Virginian-Pilot/Getty Images)
“Remember, once people and companies leave, they are never coming back!” Trump said.
Spanberger pushed back on the criticism in a post on X, arguing Trump and his allies were mischaracterizing her policies.
“The president and his allies are talking about taxes that our state legislature never even voted on and I certainly didn’t sign,” she wrote. “Why? Because if they don’t flood the zone with fake news about fake taxes, people might hear about the bills I am signing to lower energy costs, strengthen our schools, make housing more affordable, and bring billions of dollars of business investment to Virginia.”
Spanberger has supported a broader set of revenue measures since taking office, including proposals targeting digital services and business activity, as part of an effort to fund priorities such as education and health care.
A spokesperson for Spanberger’s office also issued a statement criticizing Trump’s claims.
“Virginians are tired of Donald Trump’s lies,” the spokesperson told Fox News Digital. “Governor Spanberger has signed dozens of bipartisan bills to contend with high housing, healthcare and energy costs for Virginians — and not any of the taxes President Trump and his allies are lying about.”
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The spokesperson added that businesses have announced “more than $500 million in new investment in the commonwealth since Governor Spanberger took office in January,” while accusing Trump of focusing on politics instead of economic stability.
On Saturday, House Speaker Mike Johnson and former Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin also took aim at Spanberger as a state vote on redistricting approaches during a rally in Rockingham County opposing Democrats’ proposed 10-1 gerrymander ahead of the April 21 referendum election.
“She talks like a moderate, and she governs like a Marxist,” Johnson said. “I mean, this is serious stuff.”
Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger delivers the Democratic response to U.S. President Donald Trump’s State of the Union address on Feb. 24, 2026, in Williamsburg, Va. (Mike Kropf/Getty Images)
Johnson also warned that the outcome in Virginia could have national implications, citing the GOP’s narrow House majority.
Youngkin, meanwhile, accused Spanberger of weakening public safety policies in the state.
“She says she’s going to stand for public safety, and she makes Virginia a sanctuary state after one of the most successful federal-state collaborations in the entire country,” Youngkin said. “We arrested thousands of violent criminals who are here illegally, and she put a stop to it.”
Spanberger defeated Republican Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears in the 2025 gubernatorial race, securing a Democratic win. Youngkin was not eligible for re-election under state law.
Spanberger campaigned on issues including health care and abortion rights, while positioning herself as a more moderate alternative despite GOP criticism of her voting record.
Fox News Digital’s Preston Mizell contributed to this report.
Politics
Pressure grows for Swalwell to exit governor’s race, criminal inquiry launched
SACRAMENTO — The fallout over allegations against Rep. Eric Swalwell grew Saturday as his fellow gubernatorial candidates faced a new race and Democrats were forced into a rapid test of how they respond to accusations of sexual misconduct.
Within hours of the accusations against Swalwell being made public, the Northern California congressman’s campaign began to unravel and a chorus of top Democrats urged him to drop out. Staff members resigned, his fundraising website went offline and allies moved quickly to distance themselves from a candidate who had been gaining momentum as a front-runner in the race to lead the Golden State.
The repercussions extended beyond Swalwell’s campaign for governor. The Manhattan district attorney’s office opened an investigation into sexual assault allegations against Swalwell by a former staffer and issued a statement Saturday that urged “survivors and anyone with knowledge of these allegations to contact our Special Victims Division.” Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) posted a video on X saying that she plans to force a House vote next week to expel Swalwell.
Swalwell has denied the allegations, calling them “flat [out] false.”
The upheaval has created an opening for lesser-known contenders to gain traction just as voters are beginning to turn their attention to the race — a spotlight now intensified by the controversy.
The speed and severity of the response underscores how quickly political support can erode — and reflects a broader shift in how such allegations are handled in the post-#MeToo era, which has been intensified by the scrutiny surrounding the late financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
“Ask any woman staffer over the age of 45 what her experience was like, and this was a fairly prevalent sort of situation,” said Elizabeth Ashford, a veteran Democratic strategist. “It was allowed. I really think it shows a lot of growth on the part of political professionalism, that these things are taken seriously.”
As of Saturday afternoon, Swalwell ignored calls to drop out of the race and resign from Congress, even as outrage and criticism swelled. A Bay Area fundraiser was canceled and major institutional backers abandoned the campaign. The California Labor Federation withdrew its endorsement, SEIU California rescinded its backing and urged Swalwell to exit the race, and the California Police Chiefs Assn. suspended its support.
Speculation swirled Saturday about Swalwell’s whereabouts after the congressman announced that he intended to spend time with his wife.
A man who opened the door of Swalwell’s rental home in Livermore early Saturday refused to talk to a Times reporter. Swalwell has claimed that he rents space in the one-story house, located on a quiet cul-de-sac. He also owns a home in Washington, D.C., but no one inside responded when a reporter rang Saturday.
Livermore residents couldn’t escape news of the scandal. “Swalwell faces assault claims,” read the front page of the East Bay Times, stacked up at the Lucky grocery story around the corner from Swalwell’s rental home.
The most serious allegation against Swalwell is from a woman who worked for the congressman who said their relationship was at times consensual, but that he sexually assaulted her twice when she was too intoxicated to consent, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. Three other women have also accused Swalwell of sexual misconduct, including sending unsolicited nude photos, according to CNN.
The allegations prompted several members of his campaign to abruptly walk away from their jobs. One senior campaign staffer said they resigned after hearing the seriousness of the allegations, adding that they didn’t want to be put in a position where they were using their own credibility to defend Swalwell.
Former staffers in Swalwell’s congressional office traded messages in group texts after the news reports, with many expressing shock and horror at the allegations, according to two former employees.
A group of senior staff in Swalwell’s congressional office and campaign said in a statement Saturday that they “stand with our former colleague and the other women who have come forward” and that others “should stand with them, too.”
Kyle Alagood, an attorney who worked for Swalwell’s congressional office and his short-lived presidential campaign, told The Times he was “disgusted and pissed off.”
“I pray he has the decency to resign for the sake of his wife and kids,” said Alagood, adding that Swalwell must also “face the full legal consequences of his actions.”
Rob Stutzman, a longtime GOP strategist, said the impact of Swalwell’s political advisers quitting and his endorsements being yanked has sunk his chances in the governor’s race whether he stays in or not.
Stutzman advised former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger during the 2003 recall when The Times reported allegations of inappropriate behavior with women during his bodybuilding and film career. Stutzman said the severity of the allegations against Swalwell makes the situation very different from that involving Schwarzenegger, who didn’t lose endorsements.
“If this had been the circumstances … I would have quit,” Stutzman said. “They’re just not the same.”
While Swalwell’s political future hangs in the balance, political insiders are closely watching who will be the beneficiary of the chaos. There are eight Democrats running: billionaire Tom Steyer, former Orange County Rep. Katie Porter, state schools Supt. Tony Thurmond, former U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, San José Mayor Matt Mahan, former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, former state Controller Betty Yee and Swalwell. There are two GOP candidates: Steve Hilton, a former Fox News commentator, and Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco.
Loyola Marymount University law professor Jessica Levinson said that with key endorsements, such as labor, now back up for grabs, anyone can jump to the front of the pack. She said the safest bet on who will gain an advantage is Porter and Steyer, who with Swalwell have been the top candidates in recent opinion polls.
“But, I think this is a race where there is no heir apparent,” Levinson said. “You can’t rule out surprises anymore in this race.”
Paul Mitchell, a veteran Democratic strategist, agreed that the upheaval benefits Porter and Steyer, adding that Swalwell’s chances have been reduced to zero.
“First off, I think that staying in the race is not tenable,” Mitchell said. “And so if he does drop out of the race, what it means is that you’re going to have a lot of progressive voters looking for somebody else to go to and the primary beneficiaries should be Porter and Steyer right now, because they’re the other two that are in that kind of first tier of Democratic candidates that have been splitting up that progressive base.”
Allegations of inappropriate behavior by Swalwell had circulated for weeks on social media and in political circles. Once the San Francisco Chronicle and CNN posted stories with details from women accusing Swalwell of sexual misconduct, including rape, the swift rebuke was likened by one political strategist to a bomb detonating.
Those media outlets reported that the staff member accusing Swalwell of rape was 21 when she began working for him in 2019 in his Castro Valley district office. She said Swalwell, who is nearly two decades older, quickly began sending her messages and then nude pictures on Snapchat, a platform in which messages and images disappear after being viewed.
She said that in September 2019 she had drinks with the congressman, blacked out and could tell she had had intercourse when she woke up naked in Swalwell’s hotel bed, according to the report. In a separate encounter years later, she said he forced himself on her while she was too intoxicated to consent and despite her protests.
She said she did not report the incidents to police, citing fears she would not be believed and concerns about professional repercussions.
Another woman who began messaging with Swalwell about her interest in Democratic politics last year said she met him for drinks and that she was attempting to fend off his advances without hurting potential job opportunities when she began feeling “really fuzzy” and intoxicated, according to CNN. She told the outlet that she ended up in Swalwell’s hotel room without a memory of how she got there.
Social media creator Ally Sammarco said Swalwell sent her unsolicited nude pictures in 2021, when she was 24 years old. Another woman in her 20s, who works in marketing, said the congressman sent her unsolicited videos of his penis.
Swalwell, who is married with three young children, posted a video on Instagram on Friday in which he called the accusations of inappropriate behavior “flat [out] false,” while also acknowledging unspecified poor behavior.
“I don’t suggest to you in any way that I am perfect or that I am a saint,” he said in the video. “I’ve certainly made mistakes in judgment in my past. But those mistakes are between me and my wife. And to her I apologize deeply for putting her in this position.”
Elias Dabaie, an attorney representing Swalwell, sent cease-and-desist letters to at least two people demanding that they stop accusing the congressman of sexual assault, according to CNN. Dabaie was asked by CNN whether the congressman’s comments can be construed as acknowledging that he cheated on his wife, while denying doing anything illegal.
“I’m not going to get into the details of that,” Dabaie said.
Times staff writers Melody Peterson and Gavin Quinton contributed to this report.
Politics
8 Weeks of Failed D.H.S. Shutdown Negotiations in 1 Chart
Senate
Democrats
Senate
DAY
White House
House
Senate
White House
House
1
1
4
11
32
39
42
48
47
57
20
The White House proposed narrow restrictions on ICE that Senate Democrats said were not enough.
House Republicans, backed by Trump, rejected it. Then Congress began a two-week recess.
Senate Democrats blocked another vote on the bill without new ICE restrictions. Then they proposed funding D.H.S. minus ICE, Customs and Border Protection and the Office of the Secretary, which Republicans rejected.
The House passed a separate bill to fund D.H.S. without ICE restrictions. Without Democratic support in the Senate, the bill could not progress.
Senate Democrats sent the White House a proposal to fund D.H.S., with new restrictions on ICE.
The White House
rejected it.
Senate Republicans put up for a vote a bill to fund D.H.S. without new restrictions on ICE. Democrats blocked it.
Senate Republicans and Democrats agreed to fund D.H.S., minus parts of ICE and C.B.P., through Sept. 30.
Senate Republicans proposed funding D.H.S., minus parts of ICE, through Sept. 30. Democrats rejected this.
On Day 47, Trump changed his mind and agreed to the deal to fund the D.H.S., minus parts of ICE and C.B.P. Republican leadership
in both houses, with support from Democrats, announced the deal.
On Day 48, after the Senate passed the bill, hard-right House Republicans revolted and the bill was not put up for a vote.
The stalemate continues.
DAY
DAY
Senate
DAY
White House
House
1
1
4
11
32
39
42
48
47
57
20
The White House proposed narrow restrictions on ICE that Senate Democrats said were not enough.
House Republicans, backed by Trump, rejected it. Then Congress began a two-week recess.
Senate Democrats blocked another vote on the bill without new ICE restrictions. Then they proposed funding D.H.S. minus ICE, Customs and Border Protection and the Office of the Secretary, which Republicans rejected.
The House passed a separate bill to fund D.H.S. without ICE restrictions. Without Democratic support in the Senate, the bill could not progress.
Senate Democrats sent the White House a proposal to fund D.H.S., with new restrictions on ICE.
The White House rejected it.
Senate Republicans put up for a vote a bill to fund D.H.S. without restrictions on ICE. Democrats blocked it.
Senate Republicans and Democrats agreed to fund D.H.S., minus parts of ICE and C.B.P., through Sept. 30.
Senate Republicans proposed funding D.H.S., minus parts of ICE, through Sept. 30. Democrats rejected this.
The stalemate continues.
DAY
Senate
White House
House
DAY
On Day 47, Trump changed his mind and agreed to the deal to fund the D.H.S., minus parts of ICE and C.B.P. Republican leadership in both houses, with support from Democrats, announced the deal.
On Day 48, after the Senate passed the bill, hard-right House Republicans revolted and the bill was not put up for a vote.
-
Atlanta, GA1 week ago1 teenage girl killed, another injured in shooting at Piedmont Park, police say
-
Movie Reviews1 week agoVaazha 2 first half review: Hashir anchors a lively, chaos-filled teen tale
-
Georgia5 days agoGeorgia House Special Runoff Election 2026 Live Results
-
Pennsylvania5 days agoParents charged after toddler injured by wolf at Pennsylvania zoo
-
Arkansas2 days agoArkansas TV meteorologist Melinda Mayo retires after nearly four decades on air
-
Milwaukee, WI6 days agoPotawatomi Casino Hotel evacuated after fire breaks out in rooftop HVAC system
-
Entertainment1 week agoInside Ye’s first comeback show at SoFi Stadium
-
Indianapolis, IN1 week agoFighting Illini begin Final Four preparations in Indianapolis