REMOVE THEM ALL' — House Dems Pull SICK Stunt as Lawmakers Honor Police
Washington, D.C. - May 17, 2026
House Passes Resolution Supporting Law Enforcement in 212-212 Tie Vote as Democrats Largely Oppose Measure
The U.S. House of Representatives on Thursday passed a resolution honoring law enforcement officers amid a reported spike in assaults on police last year. The measure, introduced by Rep. Zach Nunn, R-Iowa, praised the “extraordinary sacrifice” of officers and denounced the “defund the police” campaign for endangering public safety. The final vote ended in a 212-212 tie, with the resolution passing because a tie in the House means the measure fails to advance without further action.
Only 29 House Democrats voted in favor of the resolution, while 173 Democrats voted against it. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., led the opposition. Every Republican in attendance voted in favor.
“We want to take that best practice of respecting law enforcement in Iowa to the nation’s capital, and I was thrilled that we got bipartisan support,” Nunn said in an interview with Fox News. He expressed disappointment that the resolution did not receive unanimous backing, stating, “I think it unfortunately puts a real spotlight on a chasm we have between those who support law and order and those who are supporting those who undermine it.”
The vote occurred during National Police Week, a time set aside to recognize the service and sacrifice of law enforcement officers. House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., addressed a candlelight vigil for fallen officers earlier in the week, stating, “To the families of those fallen heroes and those who continue to stand guard in our communities: we have your back. We’ll continue to advance policies here that support law enforcement and bring justice to those who seek to harm officers.”
The resolution highlighted the Trump administration’s law-and-order policies, noting a record reduction in violent crime, including the lowest homicide rate in more than a century last year. “We are at a 125-year low for murder rates, 10-year low for drug overdoses,” Nunn told Fox News Digital. “These are things that good community policing, that our law enforcement officers are doing every day, have had a really positive impact.”
Most Democrats who supported the resolution are facing competitive re-election races in November. However, some vulnerable Democrats, including Rep. Gabe Vasquez, D-N.M., voted against it. Reps. Maggie Goodlander, D-N.H., Chrissy Houlahan, D-Pa., and Johnny Olszewski, D-Md., voted present.
The resolution faced resistance from Democrats who objected to language criticizing left-wing activists for supporting “defund the police” policies and sanctuary city measures. The text stated that such rhetoric and policies “undermine public safety and place both officers and the communities they serve at greater risk.”
The vote comes as Republicans in the House are introducing a package of anti-crime bills. One measure would require the attorney general to compile a list of state and local governments that have adopted cashless bail policies. Republicans have criticized these policies for allowing repeat offenders to remain free while awaiting trial.
The developments occur against the backdrop of a recent federal appeals court ruling in Mississippi that vacated a lower court order on state Supreme Court districts, leading Gov. Tate Reeves to cancel a special legislative session on redistricting. However, Reeves indicated that congressional map changes, including potential adjustments to the majority-Black 2nd District held by Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson, remain under consideration.
The House vote reflects ongoing partisan divisions over law enforcement policy and the role of Congress in addressing crime. Democrats have argued that broader systemic reforms are needed, while Republicans emphasize support for police and tougher enforcement measures.
As the 2026 midterm elections approach, the resolution and accompanying anti-crime legislation are expected to become central issues in campaign debates. The narrow tie vote underscores the slim Republican majority in the House and the potential for future procedural battles on similar measures.
Election Landslide — Hakeem Jeffries CRUSHED
Washington, D.C. - June 3, 2026
Virginia Supreme Court Strikes Down Democratic Congressional Map; Jeffries and Party Leaders Discuss Dramatic Responses
Washington, D.C. — The Virginia Supreme Court has overturned a voter-approved congressional redistricting plan backed by Democrats, dealing a significant setback to the party’s efforts to gain seats ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.
In a 4-3 ruling issued Friday, the court concluded that the Democratic-controlled legislature failed to follow required procedures when placing a constitutional amendment on the ballot authorizing mid-decade redistricting. Although voters narrowly approved the amendment on April 21, the decision effectively invalidated the result.
Writing for the majority, Justice D. Arthur Kelsey said lawmakers presented the constitutional amendment to voters “in an unprecedented manner.” He added, “This violation irreparably undermines the integrity of the resulting referendum vote and renders it null and void.”
The rejected map had been expected to give Democrats an advantage in 10 of the state’s 11 congressional districts. Democratic leaders, including House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, held a private meeting Saturday to discuss responses to the ruling. According to The New York Times, participants expressed frustration and considered several options, including what journalist Reid J. Epstein described as an “audacious and possibly far-fetched idea” to replace the entire state Supreme Court in order to reinstate the map.
“The most dramatic idea they discussed — which would involve an unusual gambit to replace the entire state Supreme Court, with a goal of reinstating their gerrymandered map — drew mixed reactions on the call,” Epstein reported.
Other ideas discussed included ways to flip two or three Republican-held seats under the current map and a “bank-shot proposal to redraw the congressional lines anyway.” Jeffries vowed that the ruling “will not stand,” and Democratic leaders in Virginia filed a motion late Friday seeking to pause the decision while pursuing an emergency appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The call reflected what Epstein described as the “desperation and fury” currently gripping the party. It was not clear that the proposal to replace the court would be viable or palatable to Gov. Abigail Spanberger or Democrats in the Virginia General Assembly. A number of Virginia House Democrats participated in the discussion.
The ruling comes amid a broader national redistricting battle. A recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Louisiana v. Callais significantly narrowed key provisions of the Voting Rights Act by ruling that racially drawn districts are unconstitutional, opening opportunities for Republicans in several Southern states. Combined with aggressive GOP-led redistricting in states such as Florida, the Virginia decision is expected to strengthen Republican advantages heading into the midterms.
Democratic leaders had hoped the Virginia map would help counter Republican gains elsewhere, but the court’s decision has reshaped the battle for House control. While some maps remain subject to legal challenges, the overall trajectory has shifted against Democrats in several key states.
JUST IN: Democrats Suffer CRUSHING BLOW Ruling Is A Disaster for the Party Supreme Court
Washington, D.C. - June 3, 2026
Alabama Asks Supreme Court to Restore 2023 Congressional Map; Redistricting Wars Shift Further Toward Republicans
Washington, D.C. — Alabama has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to allow the state to use a 2023 congressional map with one majority-Black district rather than a court-ordered map containing two such districts ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.
Alabama Solicitor General A. Barrett Bowdre told the justices that the state should not be forced to “hold elections under a map that was erroneously ordered at best and unconstitutional at worst.” He argued that Americans deserve “a republic free of racial sorting now,” and that state officials should have the opportunity to provide it.
The request comes after the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Louisiana v. Callais, which significantly narrowed the parameters of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and declared that districts drawn specifically to favor race or an ethnic group are unconstitutional. Republicans have used the ruling to advance maps in several Southern states.
At the latest count, Republicans could add as many as 14 additional congressional seats in the fall midterms through redistricting, while Democrats could add six, with fewer than 16 seats considered toss-ups or close. Specific projected gains include Ohio (R+2), Missouri (R+1), Tennessee (R+1), North Carolina (R+1), Florida (R+4), and Texas (R+5). Democrats project gains in California (D+5) and Utah (D+1).
Republicans could also pick up additional seats in South Carolina, Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi following the Court’s narrowing of the Voting Rights Act. In Tennessee, the Republican-led legislature recently approved a new map that removes the state’s only Democrat-held, majority-Black district, resulting in an all-Republican delegation.
In a separate development, the Virginia Supreme Court struck down a Democratic-inspired gerrymandered congressional map on Friday in a 4-3 ruling. The court concluded that the Democratic-controlled legislature failed to follow required procedures when placing a constitutional amendment on the ballot. The rejected map would have given Democrats nine of the state’s 11 House seats despite receiving only about 47 percent of the vote in the last congressional election.
Democratic leaders, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, are assessing the potential impact on the party’s chances of regaining control of Congress. The combined effect of court rulings and Republican-led redistricting has substantially altered the landscape heading into the midterms, with Republicans appearing to hold a clear advantage in the ongoing redistricting battles.
It Finally PASSED 390-9... OVERWHELMINGLY - Americans Cheering
Washington, D.C. - June 3, 2026
House Passes Housing for the 21st Century Act by 390-9 Vote, Advancing Bipartisan Supply-Side Reforms
Washington, D.C. — The U.S. House of Representatives passed the Housing for the 21st Century Act on Tuesday by a vote of 390-9, sending a bipartisan measure aimed at reducing regulatory barriers, modernizing federal housing programs, and expanding the nation’s housing supply to the Senate.
The legislation was co-sponsored by House Financial Services Committee Chairman French Hill (R-AR) and Ranking Member Maxine Waters (D-CA). It cleared the committee in December before receiving near-unanimous support on the House floor.
The bill directs the Government Accountability Office to identify gaps and inefficiencies in existing federal housing programs, updates the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s HOME Investment Partnerships Program, reduces regulatory obstacles that have slowed housing development, and provides banks with greater flexibility to deploy capital toward expanding housing supply.
House Speaker Mike Johnson described the measure as a necessary response to affordability challenges.
“Housing costs have soared beyond the reach of millions of American families thanks to Bidenflation, while outdated and burdensome red tape has constrained our nation’s affordable housing supply and limited our ability to expand it,” Johnson said.
“Today’s House passage of the Housing for the 21st Century Act is a critical step toward addressing this shortage by reducing unnecessary regulatory barriers, modernizing HUD programs, and giving banks flexibility to deploy capital to increase our housing supply,” he added.
Reps. Hill and Mike Flood (R-NE) outlined a similar argument in a recent opinion piece, writing that when there are not enough homes, prices rise. They described the bill as including real, bipartisan solutions to boost development by clearing out red tape and letting communities and local banks do their jobs.
Supporters argue that housing scarcity has been worsened by regulatory complexity, permitting delays, and compliance costs that increase development expenses and timelines. The legislation focuses on supply-side reforms rather than new subsidies, addressing structural issues within federal housing policy.
The overwhelming 390-9 vote margin reflects rare bipartisan agreement in a closely divided Congress. Nearly all members of both parties supported the bill, signaling broad recognition that housing affordability has become a pressing national concern.
The co-sponsorship by Hill and Waters — lawmakers who often diverge on financial policy — underscores the breadth of support. While their broader philosophies differ, both have emphasized the need to increase housing availability and streamline federal programs.
The bill now heads to the Senate, where housing reform has drawn interest from lawmakers on both sides. Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Scott (R-SC) has previously co-sponsored housing legislation with Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and has signaled openness to measures addressing supply constraints.
Whether the Senate takes up the measure in its current form or seeks modifications remains to be seen. The decisive House vote could increase pressure for action as housing affordability continues to feature prominently in economic debates.
If enacted, the legislation would mark one of the most sweeping bipartisan housing reform efforts in recent years, targeting regulatory structures rather than expanding federal spending.
