President Trump has united the Latino vote … in its disdain for the policies of his second term.

A new study from the Pew Research Center found that a majority of U.S. Latino adults disapprove of the job Trump has done since returning to the White House earlier this year.

Ongoing Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids throughout the country and continued economic turmoil have led many Latinos to grow upset with the politician — whose 2024 campaign centered on carrying out the “largest deportation operation in American history” and fixing the nation’s fledgling economy.

Pew’s findings revealed that 70% of Latinos disapprove of the way Trump is handling his job as president. When it came to immigration, 65% disapproved of the current administration’s approach to the issue. Regarding the economy, 61% said Trump’s policies have made economic conditions worse.

However, party affiliation still played a significant role in how Latinos graded Trump’s performance. Overall, 81% of 2024 Latino Trump voters approved of his job so far — an impressive level of support, though it has notably dipped from 93% since the onset of his second term.

Among Latinos who voted for Kamala Harris, Trump had a 4% approval rating in February, which has since plummeted to 0%. His approval rating with 2024 Latino nonvoters moved from 42% down to 27%. As a whole, the president’s approval rating among all Latino groups has slumped from 42% at the beginning of the year to 27% this fall.

In the Pew study, Latino voters also expressed pessimism about their future in the U.S. Of those surveyed, 68% said the situation for U.S. Latinos is worse today than it was a year ago, 9% responded that it was better and 22% felt it was about the same. Harris voters overwhelming felt the situation is worsening for Latinos at 89%; 66% of nonvoters agreed with that assessment; and 31% of Trump voters felt Latinos were worse off now than last year.

A plurality of voters who went red in 2024 — 40% — felt the situation for Latinos in the U.S. was about the same year over year. Additionally, 28% of that voting bloc believed U.S. Latinos are better off now compared with 2024.

This data set lines up with a recent Axios/Ipsos poll conducted in partnership with Noticias Telemundo.

Of the more than 1,100 people surveyed, 65% said that it’s a “bad time” to be Latino or Hispanic in the U.S.; when the poll was conducted in March 2024, that figure stood at 40%. When broken down by party, 84% of Democrats said it was a bad time, compared with 68% of independents and 32% of Republicans.

At 78%, a majority of those polled by Pew felt that Trump’s policies have been more harmful than helpful to the Latino community. Harris voters were once again united against Trump with 97% agreeing that his policies have negatively affected their community. Nonvoters were in agreement with 78% feeling the Republican president’s policies have had adverse effects on Latinos.

Trump voters were split on the issue with 41% saying Trump’s policies have been helpful to Latinos, 34% believing they’ve been harmful and 22% responding that they’ve had no effect.

These findings seemingly muddle the narrative that Latinos nationwide have made a rightward turn politically in recent years.

In the 2024 presidential election, Trump garnered 48% of the Latino vote compared with Harris’ 51% share and significantly jumped past the 36% clip that he got in the 2020 presidential election. Initial 2024 exit polls actually underestimated Latinos’ Trump support, with the Republican candidate tracking at 46% of the Latino vote on election day.

Additionally, 47% of naturalized citizens of all ethnic backgrounds voted for Trump in 2024, compared with 38% in 2020. In that same voting bloc 51% voted for Harris in 2024, a notable drop from the 59% who voted for Joe Biden in 2020.

Latino naturalized citizens recorded a 12% bump in voting for Trump, jumping from 39% in 2020 to 51% in 2024.

A group of Muslim and interfaith leaders are urging Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, to reverse his proclamation designating the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) as a “foreign terrorist organization.”

Texas’s designation is state-level only. It does not carry the legal force of a federal Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) listing, which only the U.S. State Department can issue. Abbott’s proclamation, therefore, does not trigger federal terrorism penalties or authorities.

The leaders of several Muslim groups held a news conference on Tuesday to denounce the governor’s proclamation, which also labeled CAIR as a “a transnational criminal organization.”

The groups called on the governor to retract his labeling of the civil rights group, calling it defamatory, destructive and dangerous, according to Fox 4.

MUSLIM CIVIL RIGHTS GROUP CAIR SUES TEXAS OVER ABBOTT’S ‘TERRORIST’ DESIGNATION

This comes after CAIR filed a lawsuit against Texas over the governor’s declaration, arguing that it violates both the U.S. Constitution and state law.

CAIR argues the order violates its First Amendment rights and due-process protections, and that Texas overstepped its authority because terrorism designations fall under federal, not state, jurisdiction.

“The governor is attempting to punish the nation’s largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization simply because he disagrees with its protected First Amendment rights to criticize a foreign state that is conducting genocide. This is not only contrary to the United States Constitution, but finds no support in any Texas law,” Mustaffa Carroll, the executive director for CAIR Dallas Fort Worth, said at the news conference on Tuesday.

“You know that CAIR has condemned Hamas attacks. You know that CAIR has spent 31 years fighting terrorism and bigotry. You know that the terrorism boogeyman you invoke is nothing more than a tired, formulated playbook to stoke fear of Muslims,” Marium Uddin of the Muslim Legal Defense Fund said on Tuesday.

Leaders from other faiths, including Jewish voices, also spoke out against Abbott’s label.

“We stand steadfast in solidarity with our comrades in CAIR and in unwavering support in their lawsuit against Abbott’s false and unconstitutional proclamation,” Jewish Voice for Peace’s Deborah Armintor said.

State Rep. Terry Meza, a Democrat, added that the governor’s words “are not just wrong, they’re dangerous. Making comments like this is dangerous to our Muslim community.”

TEXAS GOV ABBOTT DECLARES CAIR, MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD AS TERRORIST GROUPS, PREVENTING LAND PURCHASES

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The lawsuit is ongoing, and it remains unclear whether a court will uphold Abbott’s order or strike it down as exceeding state authority.

The governor’s decree bars CAIR from buying land in the Lone Star State under a new statute aimed at curbing purchases tied to “foreign adversaries.”

Abbott’s order also extended the “terrorist” label to the Muslim Brotherhood, despite the federal government never classifying either group that way.

Sinclair Broadcast Group has made an unsolicited bid to buy rival station owner E.W. Scripps just a week after disclosing it had acquired shares of the company’s stock.

Sinclair filed a statement Monday with the Securities and Exchange Commission saying it will offer Scripps $7 per share, consisting of $2.72 in cash and $4.28 in combined company common stock. The price is a 200% premium over the 30-day average for Scripps shares as of Nov. 6.

Sinclair revealed on Nov. 17 that it gained a stake in Scripps through the acquisition of publicly traded shares. Scripps, which operates 61 TV stations and owns the ION network, is valued at around $393 million.

The Cincinnati-based Scripps said in a statement saying the company’s board of directors “will carefully review and evaluate any proposals, including the unsolicited Sinclair offer.”

The statement added that the board will “act in the business interest of the company, all of its shareholders as well as its employees and the many communities it serves across the United States.”

The company’s stock was up around 7.5% on the news of the Sinclair offer, closing at $4.43 a share Monday afternoon.

A takeover of Scripps would be culturally jarring for the local newsrooms at its stations. The company was founded in 1878 with a chain of daily newspapers that defined itself through journalistic independence. The company’s longtime motto is “Give light.”

The Baltimore-area Sinclair is known for the conservative politics of its owners, led by David D. Smith, who have had their views amplified through the company’s local TV news coverage over the years.

Sinclair most recently tried to flex its muscle when it pulled “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” off its ABC-affiliated stations in September after the late-night host made comments about the political affiliation of the man accused of killing right-wing political activist Charlie Kirk.

Sinclair demanded that Kimmel make “a meaningful donation” to Kirk’s organization Turning Point USA in addition to an apology. None was offered, and after a week, Sinclair put the program back on its air with zero concessions from ABC.

Regardless of political leanings, all major TV station ownership groups have urged the Federal Communications Commission to lift the limit on how much of the country their outlets can cover.

TV station owners are limited to reaching 39% of the country, which companies say puts them at a disadvantage in competing against tech giants that have no such restriction in their media endeavors.

While consumer advocates believe consolidation will reduce the diversity of voices in communities, TV executives have argued that it’s no longer economically viable to have multiple station owners in a single market, often covering the same major stories.

Consolidation would also give TV station owners more clout in their negotiations for carriage fees they receive from cable and satellite providers. Such fees are vital as TV stations have struggled to maintain ad revenues due to a decline in ratings and more consumers turning to streaming video platforms.

Sinclair’s attempt to buy Scripps comes after its failed effort to acquire Tegna Inc., which agreed to a $6.2-billion deal to merge with Nexstar Media Group. The deal will require regulatory approval as it would give Nexstar’s stations the ability to reach 80% of the U.S.

Station owners calling for consolidation have been hopeful they had an ally in Trump-appointed FCC Chairman Brendan Carr.

But a social media post suggested that President Trump may be wary of consolidation, saying it could give greater influence to broadcast networks NBC and ABC. The president has been highly critical of the news coverage of both networks, even threatening to go after their TV station licenses.