ATLANTA-On Wednesday morning, Rep. Mike Collins welcomed a campaign appearance by Vice President J.D. Vance, noting that Vance’s appearance, along with President Donald Trump’s upcoming appearance on Friday show that Georgia is “in play.”

Vance’s visit comes at a crucial point leading up to the midterm election, where Collins is battling Sen. Jon Ossoff in an attempt to unseat the incumbent senator.

A reporter asked Collins about Vance’s arrival in Atlanta, as well as President Donald Trump’s scheduled appearance at his rally in Dalton, Georgia, this Friday.

Collins noted its significance, saying, “I think it just shows that the state of Georgia is so in play. This has been the number one scene in this country to flip.”

After Vance arrived, he greeted excited supporters, telling those gathered the importance of supporting Collins in his Senate battle.

Collins spoke about the momentum of the race, saying, “We hit 2,000 miles a week. On average, we’ll hit around 1,500 people showing up to talk to us about this. They know how important it is, because right now they understand just how bad our representation is over in that U.S. Senate with Jon Ossoff.”

Collins continued to speak about the unpopularity of Ossoff’s voting record, saying, “The people of the state of Georgia don’t like his voting record. He wouldn’t talk about his voting record.”

“Because when you vote almost 100% of the time with [Senator] Bernie Sanders, that doesn’t reflect this state; it sure doesn’t reflect our values.”

He also added that when it comes to midterm elections, “It’s all about turnout.”

Atlanta resident Robert McNeily agreed with Collins, telling the Daily Signal in an interview that he thinks “Mike Collins is going to pull this out because [it’s] all about turnout in these races.”

He emphasized the importance of going out to vote early, saying, “Your last chance will be Election Day itself, Nov. 3.”

McNeily noted that “all the constitutional offices, almost all of them don’t have incumbents.”

He added that for him, as a Georgia voter, one issue that matters to him is the economy. “It is about more money in people’s wallets,” he said, “It’s about rebuilding this economy.”

The Georgian also commented on Trump’s brand, saying, “The Donald Trump brand of Make America Great Again, mixed with Secretary Kennedy’s Make America Healthy Again is re-establishing an America for everyone.”

All that to say, he was thankful for the “Trump tax credits, the no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, and… no tax on social security, with that being that the Trump accounts for the kids.”

Early voting started on Tuesday, with general Election Day closely approaching on Tuesday, Nov. 3.

A source with knowledge of the federal investigation into Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., told the Daily Signal that investigators are examining alleged false statements on immigration-related documents in a years-long criminal investigation that resulted in a judicially-authorized search of her residence Monday.

Speaking to the Daily Signal in an interview Wednesday, the source disputed reports that Omar’s sister received a subpoena, saying that multiple family members had received subpoenas but Omar’s sister was not among them.

The investigation involves “fraudulent immigration documents,” the source said. “It’s related to fraud, lying on federal forms, related to immigration fraud.”

On Monday, Omar posted on X, “I’m ok. Make no mistake: this is an attempt to target political enemies and weaponize federal law enforcement.”

“For ten years, Trump has targeted me with baseless lies and smear campaigns,” she wrote. “This is just the latest escalation in his campaign of political intimidation.”

While critics have characterized the search as an election-season escalation, the source described the matter as “a years long criminal investigation involving whistleblowers.”

A Justice Department spokesperson confirmed that the search was “part of an ongoing federal criminal investigation.”

The spokesperson also explained the DOJ’s policy when it comes to prosecutions in the lead-up to an election.

“There is no Department rule or policy that bars investigative or prosecutorial activity within 60 days of an election,” the spokesperson said.

The “60-day rule” is an “informal practice,” rather than a written policy. Justice Manual § 9-85.500 “prohibits prosecutors and agents from choosing the timing of any action for the purpose of affecting an election or advantaging or disadvantaging a candidate or party.”

“Department policy does not require the Department to stop ongoing work during an election season,” the Justice Department representative added. “Additionally, any action likely to raise that issue requires consultation with the Public Integrity Section.”

Omar, who was born in Somalia, came to the United States in March 1995. She became a U.S. citizen via derivative naturalization by her father in 2000. Critics have questioned aspects of that process, though Omar has denied wrongdoing.

Omar’s office did not respond to a request for comment by publication time.

As he seeks a political comeback, former Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, is going viral for answering a question of what he’ll do to help people if elected by saying he’d block judges nominated by President Donald Trump.

“We’re not obviously confirming judges that are Trump judges,” Brown told MS Now’s Ali Velshi on Tuesday night as part of a larger answer of what he plans to do to help people if elected once more. Brown lost to now-Sen. Bernie Moreno in 2024.

As Velshi pointed out, “the road to control for the Senate … most of them go through Ohio.”

Brown’s comment in question came towards the end of the conversation. The interview focused on how Brown believes he can listen to and ultimately help Ohioans. Velshi asked how Brown can “start to help righting this ship” while Trump is still in office. Velshi responded, “You can’t do all of it while Donald Trump is still president.”

“Our number one priority is to make sure that we fight, that we work to shrink that gap, to lower those rates, and to give people hope for the future. Of course we hold them accountable,” Brown said. “We’re not going to, you know, we’re not obviously confirming judges that are Trump judges, but there’s much we can do to help people in their daily lives.”

A clip of that line, “We’re not obviously confirming Trump judges,” gained considerable attention over social media, becoming a trending topic on X.

Law professor Jonathan Turley shared a thread with his thoughts, including how “not only would the Democrats pack the Court, but they will block any new judges to purge the courts through attrition.” He also called it “a curious pitch for a job in saying that you have no intention of considering the President’s nominees.”

Among those who lashed out against Brown on X was Moreno, who has spoken out plenty on X and on the campaign trail against the man he beat two years ago and could end up serving with.

“This isn’t ‘advice and consent,’ Moreno’s post insisted in a quoted repost of Turley, who had also addressed that role of the Senate in his thread.

Moreno then called Brown, whom he tagged, “a washed-up career politician” and accused him of “openly promising to sabotage the courts.” He later in his post reminded followers that “Ohio already threw this guy out once. This is exactly why we can’t let him back.”

Brown’s other responses during the interview to Velshi’s question included not going “on a revenge tour,” as he touted his role with the child tax credit. His comments overall focused on the cost of living.

In what is regarded as a “toss-up” race that could indeed determine control of the Senate, Brown is facing Sen. Jon Husted, the Republican who was appointed by Gov. Mike DeWine to replace now-Vice President JD Vance.

The Daily Signal reached out to the Brown campaign about his comments but did not hear back in time for publication.

When voters go to the polls in five states in November, they can weigh in on whether men who claim to be transgender can compete in women’s sports and whether minors should be able to undergo controversial transgender medical treatments.

Organizers in Arizona, Colorado, Missouri, Nebraska, and Washington succeeded in putting measures on the ballot to reverse pro-transgender policies or establish clear rules prioritizing biological sex in sports.

Transgender advocates say that men who identify as women should be allowed to compete in women’s sports and that minors should be able to receive so-called puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones.

Supporters of the ballot initiatives, however, argue that men enjoy inherent biological advantages in most sports, giving them an unfair advantage regardless of how they might identify. Supporters also argue that minors cannot provide meaningful consent to potentially irreversible medical interventions and point to reviews in Europe and the United States questioning the evidence supporting such interventions.

Women’s Sports

Arizona Proposition 138 requires all schools and athletic associations to designate athletic teams as male, female, or coed based on the biological sex of the athletes as recorded at birth and prohibits them from authorizing use of private spaces not designated for a person’s sex. The proposal would also establish a private right of action by which a female student athlete may sue for discrimination.

Colorado Proposition 109 states that school-sponsored interscholastic or intramural athletic teams shall be “expressly designated” by biological sex, either for men, women, or coed, and that any sport designated for women “shall not be open to a male student or participant.” The proposition allows men’s sports to admit women athletes if there is no women’s team available.

Nebraska Initiative 442 similarly designates school sports as male, female, or coed, and states that girls’ sports will not be open to males.

Washington state law already requires students to undergo a physical examination before taking part in sports, but Washington Initiative 638 would use that examination process to verify biological sex, to ensure “equity, safety, and competitive balance in sports intended exclusively for female students.”

Gender Medicine

Colorado Proposition 110 states that “a health care professional or other person shall not knowingly perform, prescribe, administer, or provide any surgery to a minor for the purpose of altering biological sex characteristics.”

Missouri Amendment 3 would reverse a previous ballot initiative that passed in 2024, also designated Amendment 3. The 2024 amendment added a fundamental right to reproductive freedom to the Show-Me State’s constitution.

This year’s Amendment 3 allows the Legislature to restrict abortions, except in cases of emergency, fetal anomaly, rape, or incest.

The amendment also states that “no gender transition surgeries shall be knowingly performed on children under eighteen years of age, and no cross-sex hormones or puberty-blocking drugs shall be knowingly prescribed or administered for the purpose of gender transition to children under eighteen years of age.” These restrictions will not apply to children “born with a medically verifiable disorder of sex development” or to treat any disease unrelated to gender transition.

A Close Call

Women’s sports advocates in Maine gathered signatures for a ballot initiative titled “An Act to Designate School Sports Participation and Facilities by Sex.” While Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows announced in March that her office found the initiative valid with more than the required number of signatures, she reversed course after the Maine Women’s Lobby and EqualityMaine helped launch a legal effort against the measure.

Had the measure qualified, Maine would have become the sixth state asking voters to weigh in directly on transgender participation in sports.

While many consider these issues to break down as conservative or liberal, the Maine organizer behind the ballot initiative previously told the Daily Signal that Maine is too “progressive” to allow men to compete in women’s sports. He claimed the group has “tons of Democrats and independents alongside Republicans in our midst.”

FIRST ON THE DAILY SIGNAL—The U.S. ambassador to Panama detailed America’s swift response in Panama after a series of high-magnitude earthquakes struck the country in early October.

“When times get tough, America shows up, and whether it’s Jamaica, Venezuela, Colombia, or Panama, the United States government stands with its friends in the most difficult of times,” Ambassador Kevin Marino Cabrera told the Daily Signal.

“Under President Trump, America stands with its friends, and we respond immediately.”

Cabrera detailed that within 24 hours of Panama’s request, after the magnitude 7.7 earthquake shook the Central American country, the United States was able to provide a “substantial” disaster relief effort, which included a search and rescue team, $5 million in relief through trusted local partners, logistical supplies, over 2,500 blankets, 2,900 mosquito nets, 750 tarps, 200 family tents, 1,200 kitchen sets, and 500 sleeping mats for an estimated 12,000 people affected by the earthquake.

The ambassador then explained how the rescue operations were led by the U.S. Southern Command, or SOUTHCOM, which was originally created to focus on national security, not humanitarian relief.

“Our response was immediate, substantial, and built on years of security cooperation with Panama,” the ambassador continued. “The fact that we were able to turn security cooperation into humanitarian assistance, use those assets, use those personnel, and within hours, I think that shows the value of partnering with America.”

According to the ambassador, the humanitarian response to the earthquake also included regional cooperation, with the United States working “hand in hand” with humanitarian volunteers, the local government, and citizens from neighboring countries such as Costa Rica, who wished to help.

“Anyone who wants to help, or has been affected by the earthquake, should contact the embassy [U.S. Embassy in Panama], either over the phone or social media, for immediate assistance,” Cabrera continued.

Cabrera added that any American citizen wanting to visit Panama, whether now or in the future, is highly encouraged to enroll in the embassy’s Smart Traveler Enrollment Program to allow the embassy to be aware of where the citizen might be in the foreign country in case of an emergency.

“Our priority as an embassy is the safety and security of U.S. citizens,” Cabrera concluded.

FIRST ON DAILY SIGNAL — A report from a coalition of election integrity groups in Florida asserts that noncitizens cast more than 7,000 ballots in the state between 2020 and the second quarter of 2026.

The analysis by the Joint Task Force of election integrity groups, which reviewed voting records from all 67 counties, found that the counties removed 5,612 noncitizens from Florida’s voter rolls over the five-year period studied. Of those, 1,827 noncitizens cast a total of 7,035 ballots over those years, according to the report.

Those were “enough ballots to have impacted election outcomes in small and large county races that had a narrow margin of victory,” the report notes.

For example, in a November 2021 special election for the state’s 20th Congressional District, held after the death of Rep. Alcee Hastings, the Democrat primary was decided by just five votes cast in Palm Beach and Broward counties. The report also references a 2018 Baker County School Board race decided by three votes.

Despite removing more than 5,600 noncitizens from voter rolls, counties referred only about 600 removed noncitizens to the state’s Office of Election Crimes and Security.

“Therefore, the study team estimates that over 70% of non-U.S. citizens who were removed from Florida’s voter roll were not subjected to even a preliminary investigation,” the report asserts.

In preparing the report, volunteers from groups across Florida assembled the data through public records requests and examined the registration and voting histories of the individuals removed from the rolls. They analyzed records from Florida election officials, the state Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, the Office of Election Crimes and Security and other government sources.

Members of the coalition say the report was provided to the office of Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier.

Uthmeier’s office has made noncitizen voting a focus of its election-crime enforcement efforts. In September, the attorney general announced that 20 people were being prosecuted for illegal voting in Florida. Since Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed Senate Bill 524 in 2022, establishing the Office of Election Crimes and Security, there have been more than 100 election-fraud-related prosecutions, with more than half beginning since Uthmeier took office.

County election offices declined to address the report’s findings directly without the underlying data.

Baker County Supervisor of Elections Chris Milton, who assumed office in 2021, said he was not aware of noncitizens voting in the county.

“Since I took office, our office has worked to identify and remove ineligible individuals from the voter rolls,” Milton told the Daily Signal.

“We review information from governmental sources and referrals that may indicate a voter’s citizenship status needs to be checked,” Milton continued. “When information suggests a voter may be ineligible, we follow Florida’s verification and notice procedures. A potential match alone does not result in removal; the voter is given an opportunity to respond and, if they dispute the information, request a hearing. We remove a voter only after the required review and a determination that the person is ineligible.”

Similarly, Alison Novoa, director of strategic initiatives for the Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections office, said the office could not comment on the numbers.

“We are unable to validate, contest, or provide context regarding information, analyses, or conclusions generated by independent organizations based on information they may or may not have obtained through official public records or accurate sources,” Novoa told the Daily Signal.

The new report focuses more broadly on voter-registration records rather than solely on criminal prosecutions.

A spokesman for the Florida attorney general’s office did not respond to inquiries for this story.

Notably, Florida has made sweeping election reforms since it was known for the 2000 presidential recount. In 2026, Florida ranked at the top of the Heritage Foundation’s Election Integrity Scorecard for strongest protections, such as voter ID and clean voter registration rolls.

Former special counsel Jack Smith and the Biden administration Justice Department obtained information on at least 639,000 Republican donors, voters and supporters, the Senate Judiciary Committee revealed Wednesday.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, has led an investigation into Arctic Frost, which began as Smith’s probe of then-former President Donald Trump’s challenge to the 2020 election outcome and expanded to collect data from dozens of Republican members of Congress, as well as Trump supporters.

Smith’s office and the Biden Justice Department obtained names of Trump campaign personnel, a catalogue of Trump campaign products and information on the sale of red MAGA hats, including individual buyers, their purchases and their shipping addresses, according to Grassley’s memo. The earliest Republican donor information goes back to 2005, well before Trump ran for office.

Grassley said Smith’s team “aimed to map out the entire Republican Party apparatus.”

“This update shows that Jack Smith and the Biden Justice Department collected incredibly invasive donor data – and voter data – beyond what could conceivably be necessary for Smith or his team to fulfill the Special Counsel’s mandate,” Grassley said in a public statement.

“I again call on my Democratic colleagues to join my oversight work instead of trying to defend Smith and sweep his abuse of authority under the rug,” Grassley said.

“Jack Smith’s SCO and Biden’s Justice Department obtained donor, potential voter, and supporter data ranging from 2005 to 2021, well outside Smith’s scope of purported review and further corroborating that the Special Counsel operation was designed to map out the Republican Party,” the memo says.

The Daily Signal reached out to the lawfirm of Heaphy, Smith, Harbach & Windom, where Smith is a partner. No one from the firm responded to inquiries for a comment by publication time. 

Editor’s note: This is a lightly edited transcript of today’s video from Daily Signal senior contributor Victor Davis Hanson. Subscribe to our YouTube channel to see more of his videos.

Hello, this is Victor Davis Hanson for the Daily Signal. 

We’re at the third anniversary week, just last week, of the Oct. 7, 2023 massacres. Remember what happened? About 4,000 terrorists from Gaza, Hamas terrorists, accompanied by 2,000 opportunistic Gazan civilians, swarmed into Israel in a pre-planned assault. They penetrated 17 miles. They would have gone a lot further had the IDF and armed civilians not beaten them back. They killed almost 1,000 of the terrorists and their accompaniment. 

But the question I have is: Why is Gaza now in rubble? We hear about genocide, we hear about settler colonialism, we hear about apartheid, but why is Gaza in rubble? And I think I can answer that in two ways. What happened before Oct. 7, and what happened after. 

Let’s go first to what happened after. The Israeli government on Oct. 8, and subsequently for the next 20 days, asked Hamas, such as it is, to do two things: turn over the 251 hostages and turn over the architects and those who participated in the murder. They waited 20 days before invading Gaza. In those 20 days, the Gazans sent about 8,500 rockets into Israel’s civilian centers. These were not aimed at military targets or even dual-use targets. They were aimed at civilian targets. 

So for 20 days, while Israel waited for them to give back the hostages before they invaded, give back the architects of this terror, they refused both counts, and they sent about 8,500 rockets. They would altogether send 13,000 rockets, we forget that, at Israel. So that’s number one and two. 

And next, they exposed civilians at the entries and exits into the tunnels below Gaza. There was almost 500 miles in this labyrinth, and to get in and out, you had to go through a hospital, a mosque, or a school, or in some cases private homes. The Hamas terrorists, the people responsible for killing everybody, were hiding in this labyrinth quite safe while they were exposing their own civilians to retaliation for the crimes that they had committed. 

Can you imagine during the Blitz, for example, if British civil defense people who were manning the barricades and were afraid of bombing went down into the subway and they denied the use of the subway to British civilians? That would be unheard of. But that’s exactly what Hamas did. 

So number three, there were about 2,000 to 3,000 civilians that either planned all along to go into Israel to be opportunistic killers, looters, thieves, and rapists. And they participated in the mutilation and the desecration and the hostage taking. We know that. We had about a couple of hundred people who were captured. We had their GoPro cameras. We had security cameras in the kibbutzes. 

And by the way, of the 6,000 who participated, the Israeli government has taken out about 4,000. The next 2,000 must know that they are marked people, and they will not be here very long. 

Another reason. Why, when they brought back hostages and corpses and they paraded them in the streets of Gaza, were they not only met by a mob that was cheering, but the mob actually tried to spit, hit, club those hostages who were alive and mutilate the bodies of those who were dead and brought back as trophies? 

In other words, the civilians, think of this, the civilians of Gaza that we say were innocent had to be stopped from further atrocities by the people who created the atrocities, the Hamas terrorists. 

Let’s ask another reason why Gaza is in rubble, and in the context of before Oct. 7.

In September 2005, all Israelis were out of Gaza. There was not one Jew, there was not one Israeli inside Gaza. American philanthropic organizations and donors bought key infrastructure, especially greenhouses, and the Israelis turned them over to the Gazans, who immediately looted them and destroyed them against their own self-interest. They were very lucrative businesses, and they could have been using them. 

So my point is, there were no Jews in Gaza. This is 22 years ago, or 18 years ago by the time of the October massacres. So Gazans and Hamas terrorists wanted to kill Israelis even though no Israelis were in Gaza. And they had not been there for about 18 years on Oct. 7. 

And the West, mainly the United States and Europe and the U.N., had given Gaza in that period from 2005 to the date of the massacres about $40 billion. Did they build a Dubai-like resort? Did Hamas have regular elections? Did they have a constitution that encouraged the equality of the sexes, that allowed religious freedom, that called for protection of individual civil liberties? No. 

Did they take their 25 miles or so of pristine Mediterranean beaches and turn it into a Dubai? No. What did they do? First thing they did is they murdered any contestant to the election. They held the election in 2006. They got elected, and then they canceled the election. And then for the next 18 years, they killed anybody who questioned this Hamas theocratic terrorist clique that ruled Gaza. 

Let me emphasize again, they diverted $40 billion and built a tunnel labyrinth for one reason, to protect the terrorists and to expose their own civilians to retaliation when they committed their next planned atrocity. 

Think of the argument. They are essentially telling the world we expect the Israelis to be more humane about our own civilians than we are. Therefore, we are putting our entries and exits in places where civilians will be there, in schools, mosques, and hospitals, because we think the Israelis are so humanitarian they won’t bomb those places and we will be safe. 

In other words, We don’t care if they get killed, but we want to save ourselves and we think the Israelis will treat our civilians better than we do who are exposing them. 

Let me just sum up. 

After Oct. 7, they had 20 days to come to an agreement and turn over the perpetrators and give back the hostages. They refused. Instead, they answered that with rockets aimed at Israeli civilians. When the Israelis went in there to get the perpetrators, they hid in tunnels, committed terrorist acts, sent thousands more rockets into Israel, deliberately at civilian areas, and put their civilians as human shields to ensure there would be civilian casualties even as the Israelis were dropping leaflets and texting individual apartment dwellers to get out and not be collateral damage. 

Before Oct. 7, Israel had completely evacuated Gaza for 18 years. They had allowed an election. They were supplying, I should say, about 20% to 50% of the food, water, sewage treatment, chemicals, fuel, and power to Gaza. 

Gaza had a border with Egypt. Did Egypt want to let Gazans in there, and did they want to help? No. They wanted nothing to do with them. Nothing to do with them. 

They had an election, then they canceled all elections, and they tormented and terrorized their own people. And we are supposed to believe now that Israel created a genocide when the population of Gaza, when they left in 2005, was what? It’s about 1.3 million. And what was it on Oct. 7? About 2.4 million. 

Nations or countries that want to commit genocide do not pull all of their military and civilians out of the area that is targeted and then see it increase by one million people in a mere 20 years. 

The charge is absurd. The whole situation is absurd. And what’s most absurd, Westerners still parrot this word genocide, which applies to a lot of places in the world that they omit, but it surely doesn’t apply to what Israel did after Oct. 7. 

We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal.

An appeals court Wednesday rejected California’s mandate that federal immigration agents wear identification, asserting it violates the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution.

California’s No Vigilantes Act, signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom last year, requires nonuniformed law enforcement officers to display their agency and name or badge number during arrests, detentions, and crowd control enforcement. The law, aimed at regulating Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, established misdemeanor penalties for noncompliant agents.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a district court ruling upholding the law.

“The Supremacy Clause prohibits States from directly regulating federal operations even when regulating state operations in the same manner,” 9th Circuit Judge Mark Bennett, a Donald Trump appointee, wrote for the majority.

California contends the law was permissible under the Supremacy Clause since it didn’t exclusively interfere with federal operations.

However, the 9th Circuit determined even minimal interference is a state directly regulating federal activity.

“In sum, if a state law directly regulates the governmental conduct of the United States without congressional authorization, it is void irrespective of whether the regulated activities are essential to federal functions or operations, and irrespective of the degree to which the state law interferes with such functions or operations,” Bennett wrote.

In February, U.S. District Judge Christina Snyder, appointed by President Bill Clinton, upheld the No Vigilantes Act.

The 9th Circuit ruling put a preliminary injunction on the California law, saying the Trump administration is “certain” to prevail in its case.

“So as applied to federal agencies and federal officers carrying out their duties under federal authority, the statute is invalid in all applications,” the ruling says. “The United States is therefore likely— indeed, certain—to succeed on the merits of its facial challenge to constitutionality.”

Incumbent Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and City Councilmember Nithya Raman faced off Tuesday night in their only televised head-to-head debate before the November election, hoping to convince the city’s more than 3.8 million residents that they’re the right person for the job.

From homelessness to personal attacks and the devastating Palisades Fire, the two Democrats traded blows over who is responsible for the city’s troubles.

Since Spencer Pratt lost in the Los Angeles mayoral primary, many Angelenos have been left to choose between bad and worse. But which is which?

Here are the biggest moments from the hourlong showdown.

Homelessness: Bass Defends Her Record Despite Rising Numbers

Homelessness dominated Tuesday night’s debate, with Bass repeatedly defending her administration’s handling of one of the city’s most persistent crises despite making the issue the central promise of her mayoral campaign.

When asked why voters should trust her, Bass touted her record on the issue, saying she’s reduced homelessness by 11%. The latest numbers paint a different picture.

New data released by the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA), the agency responsible for coordinating homeless services across Los Angeles, found homelessness increased 3.3% in Los Angeles County and 7.9% in the city.

Bass Takes Personal Shots at Raman Over Her Committee Removal

Nithya Raman was removed as chair of the Los Angeles City Council’s Housing and Homelessness Committee earlier this year.

The controversy resurfaced during Tuesday’s debate when Bass questioned Raman’s leadership, alleging that Raman’s colleagues have a “very difficult time” working with her.

“They were relieved when you were removed because they don’t find you to be basically honest,” Bass said.

The mayor’s comments turned what began as a debate over city policy into a jab at Raman’s credibility and ability to lead.

Palisades Fire: Raman Confronts Bass Over Her Absence

Perhaps the greatest failure of Bass’s time in office was her administration’s response to the devastating January 2025 Palisades Fire.

Raman brought the sore subject back to the debate stage, criticizing Bass for being out of the country when the fire erupted.

“If there is another emergency, you will not have to ask, if I am mayor, where our mayor is. I will be on the front lines,” Raman said.

ICE Enforcement: Raman Wants LA’s Police Chief Gone

Raman said she would seek to remove Los Angeles Police Department Chief Jim McDonnell, whom Bass appointed in 2024, arguing that he has failed to “meet the moment.”

“I believe he’s lost the trust of Angelenos, especially in response to the [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] raids,” Raman said, criticizing the LAPD’s response to federal immigration enforcement operations in the city.

Bass hit back, saying, “You have no idea what it takes to identify a police chief,” warning that replacing McDonnell could destabilize the department as Los Angeles prepares to host the 2028 Olympic Games in less than two years.

Bass raised concerns about the potential terrorist threats surrounding the Olympics, arguing that the city needs experienced law enforcement leadership ahead of the international event.

Michigan Democrat Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed should be disqualified from holding office if he is tied to the Muslim Brotherhood, a designated foreign terrorist organization, a Republican congresswoman said.

“Any congressional candidate with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood should be immediately disqualified,” Rep. Mary Miller, R-Ill., told the Daily Signal. “Public office is a public trust, and it must never be entrusted to those who hate everything our country stands for.”

Miller’s remarks come after El-Sayed denied having any direct or family ties to the radical terrorist organization during an interview with “Meet the Press” in October.

However, now-deleted tweets from El-Sayed’s family members appear to contradict the claim.

“My family has long been MB,” Eman Abdelhadi, El-Sayed’s half-sister, wrote shortly after Egypt elected Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohamed Morsi as president.

“I have had family jailed for being a part of it,” his half-sister wrote in 2013. “Praying for all my family that supports the #MB in Egypt. Lie low, stay safe.”

In another tweet, the sister, who shares El-Sayed’s mother, boasted about how her mother was an activist for the Muslim Brotherhood while in college in the 1970s.

As reported by the Washington Free Beacon, El-Sayed wrote a Substack article in 2021, which he has now deleted, that called a senior Muslim Brotherhood official, imprisoned in Egypt for supporting the organization, “my friend.”

“The now-deleted Substack post comes almost a decade after El-Sayed, an adjunct professor at Columbia University at the time, wrote an op-ed that urged former President Barack Obama to aid the Muslim Brotherhood militants who later overthrew the secular Egyptian government.

“It is in America’s interest to support Egyptian protesters’ efforts to achieve the ability to speak their minds and have a say in how they are governed,” he continued in his op-ed.

“If the U.S. truly wants to be the beacon of justice and liberty that it claims it does, it would behoove the Obama administration to fall decisively behind the protesters in Egypt,” El-Sayed concluded.

El-Sayed did not respond to the Daily Signal’s request for comment.

Today’s digital marketplaces are omnipresent, promising competitive prices and fast delivery. More consumers have turned to these platforms in recent years, driving up online sales and helping e-commerce companies, particularly Chinese ones, rake in massive profits. China now captures a substantial share of global e-commerce.

But its dominance of digital markets is not merely the result of offering consumers more affordable and accessible goods. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) unfairly subsidizes domestic e-commerce companies, overlooks safety regulations, and is the most aggressive in the world at conducting industrial-scale espionage.

Chinese e-commerce companies, for their part, feverishly gamify the shopping experience by algorithmizing sensitive user data—employing deceptive practices that raise significant ethical and national security concerns.

In 2021, China’s Ministry of Commerce outlined e-commerce development goals in line with the nation’s 14th Five-Year Plan. With aims to top the “commanding heights of international competition,” China now views e-commerce as a key driver of technological influence. Public-private partnerships are one way the CCP has played a role, handing out tax exemptions and injecting capital to help Chinese businesses scale digital trade. The goal seems to be providing domestic companies a structural advantage in global markets.

State-backed industrial policies have blurred the line between private and public domains. Beginning with an e-commerce law in 2018, the first comprehensive regulations on online business and trade, China increased state assistance to support both the production and sale of online transactions.

At least 10 government agencies incorporated plans to expand e-commerce warehouse construction in 2024, seemingly at President Xi’s direction, and the United Front Work Department has provided lucrative government-supplied data to help domestic companies refine targeting strategies and enhance their logistical operations overseas. Former CCP officials have also served as executives for some of these companies.

Additionally, China has launched e-commerce pilot zones, cross-border areas where Chinese businesses stand to benefit from reduced tax burdens and receive legal protections. In Yancheng and Qingyuan, two cities that also run pilot zones, Chinese companies received reimbursements for fees related to warehouse leasing and operations. China plans to develop more pilot zones, adding to the 165 currently in place.

Chinese e-commerce companies are subject to China’s domestic laws, which can require them, if called upon, to hand over sensitive business and personal data to the CCP. In recent years, the CCP has expanded its legal grounds for accessing proprietary data. Since American consumers divulge personal information when making purchases, this raises serious national security risks.

Several questionable examples of Chinese companies managing private data have made those concerns palpable. Chinese e-commerce giant Temu, for instance, has forced users to navigate through confusing permission settings, potentially leading them to unintentionally opt in to personal data collection. A report by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute determined that much of the data Temu collects is “likely to be shared with [China’s] propaganda system.”

Chinese e-commerce companies also have an abhorrent record of labor and product safety violations. The U.S. House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist party has linked several Temu products to forced labor programs in Xinjiang, demonstrating a direct violation of the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act, which expressly prohibits companies from relying on compulsory labor. Meanwhile, AliExpress and Shein have been accused of selling both counterfeit and hazardous products, including children’s pajamas made with flammable materials.

Technology is transforming the way American consumers shop. Foreign e-commerce companies now have a greater impact on consumer behavior and greater control over consumer data, opening up new possibilities for abusive behavior.

U.S. policymakers need to ensure that regulations keep pace with the changes. Foreign companies must be held to high standards of transparency and fair competition that protect American consumers and their data while ensuring U.S. businesses an equal playing field.

After former President Joe Biden opened the southern border for four years, voters already proved they are ready to move on. It seems Texas state Rep. Gina Hinojosa never got the memo—but that didn’t stop her from vying for governor.

Hinojosa is a Democrat, challenging three-term Republican Gov. Greg Abbott for office. An October poll suggested the governor’s race could be tighter than in the past, with Abbott leading by just 1%.

That could explain why, in a late-September interview with Politico, Hinojosa apparently tried to appeal to moderates by criticizing Biden’s border policy.

“Biden’s problem is he didn’t lead on immigration,” she said. “He was silent mostly. He hid from it. And that did hurt us last election cycle. We need leaders who will do the hard work, roll up their sleeves to figure out solutions.”

This is a stark contrast from 2021, when Hinojosa actually praised the Biden administration’s management of the border.

“Trump created chaos at border,” Hinojosa posted at the time. “Joe Biden is restoring order & humanity.”

Under Biden’s administration, Customs and Border Protection recorded 11 million total border encounters, and at least 2 million “known gotaways.” Texas had to stand down federal authorities from opening its southern border. 

Hinojosa’s legislative record reveals an agenda that is perhaps even more extreme. 

As recently as 2025, Hinojosa voted against creating a Homeland Security Division in the Texas Department of Public Safety. And in 2023, she voted against a bill to build the Texas border wall and pay law enforcement. The same year, she opposed a bill making it a criminal offense in state law to illegally enter Texas from another country, and she opposed a bill to raise criminal penalties for human smuggling and running a stash house. As far back as 2017, Hinojosa voted against banning sanctuary cities in Texas. 

“Gina has shown Texans exactly where she stands. Plain and simple, she is lying to get elected,” Eduardo Leal, Abbott’s campaign press secretary, told the Daily Signal. “Texans cannot trust her to keep their communities safe.” 

The Daily Signal asked Hinojosa’s campaign if she supports enforcing federal immigration law and deporting illegal aliens, but did not hear back in time for publication.

When asked in the recent interview if she thinks Immigration and Customs Enforcement should be abolished, as many Democrats support, Hinojosa refused to answer directly.

“That is not something that a governor has any say over,” she said. “It’s not something I have considered. What I will say is what is happening is unacceptable.”

Hinojosa also villainized ICE for the case of Wilber Rafael Garcés Pérez, an illegal alien who was shot while resisting arrest.

“We don’t treat murderers that way,” she said. “I have never seen in America, in modern-day America, a man be treated this way where he’s shot by law enforcement and left to squirm in pain on the floor of a detention cell.”

She failed to mention the inconvenient details. According to prosecutors, ICE agents found Garcés Pérez had a final removal order, tried to stop him, and told him to exit his vehicle. This is when he struck an officer with his vehicle’s side mirror, tried to flee, then started driving toward an ICE officer who shot him.

Garcés Pérez is now charged with assaulting and resisting a federal officer. And, according to the Department of Homeland Security, Garcés Pérez did in fact receive medical care, including pain medicine, and slept on a bed in the detention center.

The facts didn’t stop Hinojosa from fear-mongering about ICE.

“I got asked yesterday: Are you afraid as a Latina driving around Texas that you could be stopped by these agents and taken?” she said. “I’ve thought about that. And really, we should all be afraid.”

Texas will always face border-state challenges: from cartels and gangs, to drug and human trafficking. This does not mean its leaders should acquiesce. Instead, it underscores the importance of strong leaders who can shield Texas communities—including in Hinojosa’s own Rio Grande Valley—from violent crime.

We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal.

A Texas state representative is urging Attorney General Ken Paxton to launch an investigation into an organization sending out mass texts across Texas that encourage parents and students to circumvent state laws that expanded parental rights in public schools.

Republican state Rep. Jeff Leach sent a letter to Paxton asking his office to investigate an organization called the Transgender Education Network of Texas, which sent out a mass text messaging campaign providing Texans with a “Back to School Toolkit.”

The message reads, “New school year? Here’s your complete guide on bathrooms and beyond for trans kids at school,” and has been sent to thousands of Texas residents in the past week, causing many to bring their concerns to lawmakers.

The resource guide is dedicated to students, school employees, and families, instructing them on how to not only navigate but circumvent and violate Senate Bill 12 and Senate Bill 8—two laws that expanded parental rights in public education and protected women’s privacy in bathrooms and locker room facilities.

According to the guide, if a school does not allow a “Gay-Straight Alliance” club, students should think “outside of the box” and create a club. It says that if their friends have a shared hobby, they can create a club around that hobby, skirting the language in SB 12.

Senate Bill 12, which became law in September 2025, expanded parental rights and also places restrictions on how schools address DEI, sexual orientation, gender identity, social transitioning, sex education, and student clubs.

One of the most significant portions of the law includes prohibiting a school district, charter school, or school employees from providing or allowing a third party to provide instruction, guidance, activities, or programming regarding sexual orientation or gender identity.

The guide also says that provisions giving parents access to any change in services provided can be problematic for LGBTQ+ students, as it could create the “potential for school employees to interpret this to require them to out students to their parents, even though it does not.”

For educators, the guide provides a link to the ACLU website, giving guidance to school employees of how to “support transgender students.” The ACLU’s guide also states that because the language is vague in the law, “school employees who learn that a student is LGBTQIA+ but do not know if that student’s parents are supportive should not disclose that information, since it could result in the student suffering abuse or neglect.”

With regard to Senate Bill 8, which took effect December 2025 and deals with bathrooms, locker rooms, and other multiple-occupancy private spaces, the guide shares that privacy is a student’s right and that students should not be “forced to use the restroom or changing facility based on your sex assigned at birth.”

The organization also states that making a student use a restroom or changing facility based on the student’s biological sex “can constitute a violation of your privacy rights under FERPA.”

“Using incongruent facilities can draw increased attention, invite invasive questions and speculation, and result in being ‘outed’ to peers and school faculty,” the guide reads. “Forcing students to use facilities based on sex assigned at birth, or separate facilities altogether, can also lead to or worsen bullying and harassment.”

The text messaging campaign and toolkit have brought increased attention to the issue by concerned parents, taxpayers, and lawmakers alike, with Leach leading the effort and requesting that Paxton’s office look into the nature of the materials and how the organization received the names, email addresses, telephone numbers, and other personal information of thousands of Texans.

No organization—regardless of its political agenda, ideological commitments, or preferred social policies—is above the law. Advocacy groups are free and encouraged to express their opinions, challenge legislation, and pursue lawful changes to public policy. They are not entitled, however, to disregard duly enacted statutes or facilitate unlawful conduct simply because they disagree with the laws enacted,” Leach’s letter reads.

Leach added that he, too, received the unsolicited text message with the link to the toolkit over the weekend, as did many of his constituents.

“To be clear: the content, purpose, distribution methods and any instructions that clearly encourage and facilitate violations of SB 12 warrant careful scrutiny by your office,” he added in his letter to Paxton. “To that end, I am formally requesting that your investigators independently examine these materials and determine whether any statements, recommendations, or instructions encourage or facilitate conduct prohibited by Texas law.”

Paxton’s office did not respond to a request for comment by the time of publication.

The Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday on how a video rentals privacy law from the 1980s applies to the digital age.

Justices on both sides expressed skepticism about how the 1988 Video Privacy Protection Act, enacted in the days of VHS rentals at stores such as Blockbuster Video, applies today. The federal law, at the center of the case of Salazar v. Paramount Global, prohibits the disclosure of customers’ rentals and personally identifiable information but specifically refers to “tapes.”

Justice Samuel Alito noted that Congress “enacted a law that is based on the technology of the 1980s, and you can see this in every provision of this, in the title, ‘wrongful disclosure of videotape rental, for sale, or sale records.’”

“I’m just wondering whether we have sort of limitations in the facts that we need to think about a little bit in trying to assess what Congress’ intent was here,” Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said.

The dispute goes back to 2022, when plaintiff Michael Salazar subscribed to an email newsletter distributed by 247Sports.com, a subsidiary of Paramount, that included videos.

Without Salazar’s consent, Paramount disclosed his Facebook ID and video-watching history to Facebook, according to the question presented to the Supreme Court.

“Is Paramount a videotape service provider in the literal sense of the term?” Alito asked on Wednesday. “In the literal sense of the term, are they selling videotapes, VHS tapes.”

Some of the same justices expressed concern about privacy under an overly narrow reading of the law that says, “A video tape service provider who knowingly discloses, to any person, personally identifiable information concerning any consumer of such provider shall be liable to the aggrieved person for the relief provided in subsection.”

Justice Elena Kagan shared a hypothetical scenario involving a judge who subscribes to 247Sports.

“And then it turns out that the judge watches some pretty funky sports videos, like a lot of women wrestling or something,” Kagan said. “That’s embarrassing. That’s exactly why Congress thought it was passing the statute to prevent disclosure of that information.”

Paramount’s lawyer, Paul Clement, replied, “It’s hard to watch a lot of embarrassing videos on 247 Sports based on my perusal of it, but, maybe watching Chicago Bears films is embarrassing in certain parts of the country.”

The privacy concerns over video rentals first gained steam in 1987 when the Washington City Paper published the leaked video rentals of President Ronald Reagan’s nominee to the Supreme Court, Robert Bork. The video preferences were not sensational—largely mysteries and British films—SCOTUSBlog recently noted. However, it was enough to spark bipartisan support in Congress to protect privacy. 

Joshua Hammack, attorney for Salazar, said that Congress revisited the statute in 2013 and determined the core of the law did not require updating.

“I’m not sure it’s true that in 1988, it was inconceivable that someone might watch a video on a computer,” Hammack said.

“I think Congress was very concerned with the changing technological advances and computer technology. But even more, in 2013, when Congress stepped back into this statute, and it revised just the consent provision. It was intimately aware with the fact that people were streaming all sorts of videos to their phones, and to their computers all the time.”

Clement noted that the 247Sports.com subscription is free and that the newsletter includes videos and thus should not be covered by the law. Clement argued that Chick-fil-A or other businesses with short videos on their websites could be included under the plaintiff’s definition of a video business.

“We would take the position that Netflix, when you go online, Netflix, that might still be covered. So I think the core of the statute is still covered under our view,” Clement said. “What we would say is that this notion that you can just mix and match what makes you a consumer, and what gives you the personally identifiable information that the statute protects for consumers, that mismatch doesn’t make any sense.”

Salazar first filed a federal lawsuit in Nashville and sought a class action, alleging that Paramount’s disclosure of his video-viewing history without his consent violated the 1988 law.

U.S. District Judge Eli Richardson dismissed the case and determined that Salazar was not a “consumer,” because he wasn’t a “‘a subscriber of goods and services in the nature of audio-visual content.’” A divided panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the district court ruling.

Muslims in America want to transform the country into an Islamic state governed by Sharia law, according to Daily Signal contributor Steve Cortes’ latest documentary, “Muslims and Michigan: Opposites Don’t Attract.” 

In his 20-minute YouTube film, Cortes takes to the mosque-lined streets of Dearborn, Michigan to warn audiences about how Muslim politicians use their power to subvert Americans’ constitutional rights and promote anti-Western ideologies across the country.

The First Amendment vs. Dearborn

In 2023, U.S. Census Bureau data showed Dearborn had become America’s first majority-Arab city with 54.5% of the population claiming Middle Eastern or North African ancestry. 

The city had already made headlines in the early 2010s for violating the First Amendment rights of Christian evangelical groups that attended Dearborn’s annual Arab International Festival events to evangelize. 

The Christians were removed from the events or arrested on at least three separate occasions, each leading to lawsuits that ended in rulings or settlements favorable to the groups. 

This year marks another lawsuit, this time brought by Dearborn resident, Margot Cleveland, who alleges the city council and its mayor, Abdullah Hammoud, violated the Constitution by using taxpayer money to make special meals and erect signs in celebration of the Islamic holy month of Ramadan while refusing the same recognition for Christian and Jewish holidays. 

“Under our U.S. Constitution, the clearest command under the Establishment Clause is that the government can’t support one religion over the other,” Robert Muise, the lawyer representing Cleveland said, “all our client was asking for was equal treatment for Christians and Jews … She made this request multiple times for well over a year, they fell on deaf ears.” 

“There’s nothing bigoted about defending the First Amendment,” Muise continued. “What’s going on here in Dearborn is contrary to American principles. It’s all about defending the Constitution, defending our American values.” 

Socialism Is a “Trojan Horse”

Cortes pointed to politicians like Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., and New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, as examples of Muslims who run on openly liberal and socialist policies. 

Larry Alex Taunton, host of “Ideas Have Consequences,” said he believes socialism is just a “Trojan horse” for their real agenda. 

“I don’t believe, at the end of the day, that Ilhan Omar, Sadiq Khan, that Mamdani are ultimately socialists or communists,” Taunton said. “The goal is not ultimately for Mamdani or Ilhan Omar to create a society where ‘everyone shares and shares alike,’ it is to create an Islamic state.” 

Taunton asserted that the reason for the success of America and the West is Christianity, which he claims is both superior to and incompatible with other cultures which have not been “gentled by the influence of Christianity.” 

Muslims in the Midterm Elections 

This November, several Muslims will be running for Congress as incumbents or challengers.  

In Michigan, Democrat Abdul El-Sayed will face Republican Mike Rogers in a bid to become the first Muslim to serve in the U.S. Senate. 

Reps. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn.; Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich.; and André Carson, D-Ind., are Muslim Democratic incumbents seeking reelection to the House.  

Cortes ends the documentary by posing this question to Americans: “Is tolerating those who are not at all tolerant themselves, is that somehow noble?” He asks, “Shouldn’t it worry us to hand power to candidates and to voting blocs that telegraph to us every intention of destroying our country and our culture as we know it?” 

The Trump administration is cracking down on waste by stopping duplicate Medicaid and Obamacare enrollments.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services uncovered 189,000 individuals on Obamacare rolls who are either deceased or improperly receiving “double coverage” subsidized by taxpayers through Medicaid, Medicare, or Children’s Health Insurance Program. The agency said it acted promptly to remove double enrollees.

“On records showing enrollees had died, CMS acted to remove improper subsidies in all of these cases,” Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said. “CMS estimates that this work will prevent $738 million in improper subsidy payments this year alone. At an annualized rate, this savings exceeds $1.5 billion.”

No American will lose coverage in the process, Kennedy said. Every individual has been contacted to confirm duplicate enrollment before stopping any Obamacare subsidies.

“We’re not cutting people from Medicaid or Medicare or Obamacare or medical coverage,” he said. “People who are double enrolled or people who are deceased, for that matter, are not gaining anything from that double enrollment, and they don’t even know it in most cases, that they’re double enrolled, there’s no advantage to them of being double enrolled.”

If any individual responds within 30 days that they do not have duplicate coverage, CMS will not end their Obamacare subsidies. If individuals respond after that time, they may still appeal the determination or show that their Medicaid coverage is about to lapse.

“No patient was benefitting from this,” Federal Trade Commission Chairman Andrew Ferguson said. “Rich insurance companies and unscrupulous brokers were the only beneficiaries of this. That is fixed today.”

The announcement builds on last year’s review that exposed 551,000 Americans enrolled in both Medicaid and ACA exchange plans, an administration official said.

“In 2025, the Biden Administration left a backlog of nearly 550,000 duplicate Medicaid and Obamacare enrollments,” Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz said at a Wednesday press conference. “By clearing this backlog, the Trump administration saved nearly $4.4 billion.”

“This move guarantees no American loses coverage, while eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse,” White House spokeswoman Allison Schuster said. “On top of the $500 Obamacare Refund checks and the $90 Medicare checks sent out over the last two weeks, President Trump continues to deliver on the mandate to stop fraud and put money back in the pockets of hardworking Americans.”

The White House announced in September it would mail refunds of $500 per person to nearly 1 million Americans in 30 states for Obamacare overcharges. Trump also offered one-time payments of $90 per person to help about 20 million seniors pay for their Medicare Part B premiums.

Bishop Michael Burbidge met with Catholic priests throughout the Diocese of Arlington last Thursday to reinforce the importance of defeating two constitutional amendments on the Virginia ballot.

The proposed amendments have prompted an unprecedented effort by Burbidge to raise awareness among Virginia Catholics. Question 1 would expand abortion access throughout pregnancy while undermining parental consent for minors. Question 2 would redefine marriage and enshrine transgender ideology in the state constitution.

“These are tough and challenging days, and these are very unsettling questions we’re voting on,” Burbidge said on the latest episode of his “Walk Humbly” podcast. “But we have the truth, and we have prayer, we have fasting.”

Catholics Called to Prayer and Fasting

Burbidge has asked Catholics to spend October fasting and praying for the defeat of the two proposed amendments. On Fridays, he asked Catholics to pray the Stations of the Cross and to fast, eating only one full meal and no meat. On Sundays, he asked Catholics to pray the Rosary and fast from social media for at least a few hours, ideally before and after Mass.

On his podcast, Burbidge recalled advice he received as a young seminarian from a priest who encouraged him to pray the Stations of the Cross every Friday.

>>> CATHOLIC BISHOP CALLS FOR MONTH OF FASTING AND PRAYER TO DEFEAT VIRGINIA BALLOT MEASURES

“Every Friday is a Good Friday, a day that we should step back and remember that the Lord took up his cross, that he suffered and he died for us, and to be united with him in fasting, if that’s possible, but certainly in prayer,” Burbidge said.

An Unprecedented Campaign

Information about the diocese’s Catholics Vote No campaign is present in churches across Northern Virginia. More than 433,000 Catholics live in the Diocese of Arlington, which includes 70 parishes and spans 21 counties.

The campaign represents an unusually intervention by Burbidge in an election. In September, he took the unprecedented step of asking priests throughout the diocese to read a letter at Mass urging Catholics to oppose the amendments. Burbidge previously said it was the first time in his decade as bishop that he had made such a request.

>>> A RARE MOVE BY A VIRGINIA BISHOP AHEAD OF ELECTION DAY

Early voting in Virginia opened Sept. 18. Election Day is Nov. 3.

Burbidge praised priests for embracing the campaign and said Catholics he has encountered while traveling throughout the diocese have responded to his call to action.

“I want to just thank all of our priests who are leading this initiative with such faithfulness, such passion, such dedication,” Burbidge said. “I’m so grateful to the faithful who are telling me they’re embracing this cause to vote, to get others to vote, to pray and to fast.”

‘We Did Everything We Possibly Could’

The bishop said he delivered a similar message when he gathered with priests last Thursday, telling them their responsibility was to make every possible effort regardless of the eventual outcome on Election Day.

“If we’re able to say that throughout this initiative, this campaign, we gave the Lord our very best, we did everything we possibly could to defeat these amendments, then the Lord will be pleased that we gave him our best,” Burbidge said.

>>> 2 VIRGINIA BALLOT MEASURES THREATEN PARENTAL RIGHTS

“The truth never changes,” he added. “And prayer and fasting are always weapons, armor that we have to confront the evil in our world.”

A ‘Generational Vote’

Burbidge’s latest remarks come a week after Catholics gathered at the Basilica of St. Mary in Alexandria, Virginia, to hear from church leaders about the potential consequences of the two amendments.

“This is a generational vote because of the two amendments that are in front of voters,” said Amy McInerny, director of the diocese’s Respect Life Office. “We do have a moment here where we can rise up and proclaim the gospel of life with our vote.”

>>> 2 VIRGINIA AMENDMENTS SPARK A FIGHT OVER LIFE AND MARRIAGE

At the Alexandria forum, church leaders argued that the amendments could have consequences beyond abortion and marriage, raising concerns involving parental rights, conscience protections, religious institutions, and Virginia’s longstanding tradition of religious freedom.

With less than three weeks remaining before Election Day, Burbidge is urging Catholics to pair political participation with prayer and sacrifice.

“We have the truth, and we have prayer, we have fasting,” Burbidge said. “They’re powerful forces, and we have the grace of God who continues to work miracles.”