Jackson, Miss. (AP) — More than 60 years after a white supremacist assassinated civil rights leader Medgar Evers, his daughter still sees the same strain of political violence at work in American society.

“It’s painful,” said Reena Evers-Everette. “It’s very painful.”

Evers-Everette was 8 years old when her father, a field secretary for the NAACP, was shot to death in the driveway of his home in Jackson, Mississippi.

A few months after Evers’ killing in 1963, President John F. Kennedy was gunned down. The deaths of civil rights leaders Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X, and U.S. Sen. Robert F. Kennedy followed later that decade.

Now, experts say the level of political violence in America over the past few years is likely the highest it’s been since the 1960s and 1970s. The past year alone has seen the assassination of a Minnesota state lawmaker and her husband, the killing of two Israeli Embassy staffers, and two assassination attempts on then-presidential candidate Donald Trump.

At a four-day conference celebrating Evers’ life just before what would have been his 100th birthday on July 2, his daughter was joined by the daughters of slain civil rights leaders: Kerry Kennedy, the daughter of Robert F. Kennedy, and Bettie Dahmer, the daughter of civil and voting rights activist Vernon Dahmer. The 2025 Democracy in Action Convening, “Medgar Evers at 100: a Legacy of Justice, a Future of Change,” was held in Jackson.

“I just was feeling so much pain, and I didn’t want anyone else to have to go through that,” Kennedy said, recalling that after her father died, she prayed for the man who killed him. “I was saying, ‘Please don’t — please don’t kill the guy that killed him.’”

Two-time Georgia gubernatorial candidate and voting rights activist Stacey Abrams spoke at the event, denouncing efforts by the Trump administration to strip the names of activists from Navy vessels, including possibly Evers.

“They want to take his name off a boat because they don’t want us to have a reminder of how far he sailed us forward,” Abrams told the conference crowd.

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has undertaken an effort to change the names of ships and military bases that were given by President Joe Biden’s Democratic administration, which often honored service members who were women, people of color, or from the LGBTQ+ community.

Abrams drew parallels between acts of radical political violence and the Trump administration’s use of military resources against protesters in Los Angeles who were demonstrating against immigration enforcement actions.

“Unfortunately, we cannot decry political violence and then sanction the sending of the Marines and the National Guard to stop protesters and not believe that that conflicting message doesn’t communicate itself,” Abrams told The Associated Press. “What I want us to remember is that whether it is Medgar Evers or Melissa Hortman, no one who is willing to speak for the people should have their lives cut short because of what they say.”

In addition to her father’s life and legacy, Evers-Everette wants people to remember the hatred that led to his assassination.

“We have to make sure we know what our history is,” she said. “So we don’t repeat the crazy, nasty, racist mess.”

Sophie Bates, The Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump keeps saying that Republicans’ mega tax and spending cut legislation will eliminate taxes on federal Social Security benefits.

It does not.

At best, Trump’s “no tax on Social Security” claim exaggerates the benefits to seniors if either the House or Senate-passed proposals is signed into law.

Here’s a look at Trump’s recent statements, and what the proposals would — or would not — do.

What Trump has said

Trump repeatedly told voters during his 2024 campaign that he would eliminate taxes on Social Security. As his massive legislative package has moved through Congress, the Republican president has claimed that’s what the bill would do.

Trump said on a recent appearance on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures” that the bill includes “no tax on tips, no tax on Social Security, no tax on overtime.”

A temporary tax deduction

But instead of eliminating the tax, the Senate and House have each passed their own versions of a temporary tax deduction for seniors aged 65 and over, which applies to all income — not just Social Security.

And it turns out not all Social Security beneficiaries will be able to claim the deduction. Those who won’t be able to do so include the lowest-income seniors who already don’t pay taxes on Social Security, those who choose to claim their benefits before they reach age 65 and those above a defined income threshold.

The Senate proposal includes a temporary $6,000 deduction for seniors over the age of 65, contrasted with the House proposal, which includes a temporary deduction of $4,000.

The Senate proposal approved Tuesday would eliminate Social Security tax liability for seniors with adjusted gross incomes of $75,000 or less or $150,000 if filing as a married couple.

If passed into law, the tax deduction would last four years, from 2025 to 2029.

The deductions phase out as income increases.

White House touts impact

Touting a new Council of Economic Advisers analysis, the White House said Tuesday that “88% of all seniors who receive Social Security — will pay NO TAX on their Social Security benefits,” going on to say that the Senate proposal’s $6,000 senior deduction “is estimated to benefit 33.9 million seniors, including seniors not claiming Social Security. The deduction yields an average increase in after-tax income of $670 per senior who benefits from it.”

Garrett Watson, director of policy analysis at the Tax Foundation think tank, said conflating the tax deduction with a claim that there will be no tax on Social Security could end up confusing and angering a lot of seniors who will expect to not pay taxes on their Social Security benefits.

“While the deduction does provide some relief for seniors, it’s far from completely repealing the tax on their benefits,” Watson said.

Economic effect

The cost of actually eliminating the tax on Social Security would have massive impacts on the economy.

University of Pennsylvania’s Penn Wharton Budget Model estimates that eliminating income taxes on Social Security benefits “would reduce revenues by $1.5 trillion over 10 years and increase federal debt by 7 percent by 2054″ and speed up the projected depletion date of the Social Security Trust Fund from 2034 to 2032.

Discussions over taxes on Social Security are just part of the overall bill, which is estimated in its Senate version to increase federal deficits over the next 10 years by nearly $3.3 trillion from 2025 to 2034, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

Administration officials have said the cost of the tax bill would be offset by tariff income.

Recently, the CBO separately estimated that Trump’s sweeping tariff plan would cut deficits by $2.8 trillion over a 10-year period while shrinking the economy, raising the inflation rate and reducing the purchasing power of households overall.

Fatima Hussein, The Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — Republican leaders in the House are sprinting toward a Wednesday vote on President Donald Trump’s tax and spending cuts package, determined to seize momentum from a hard-fought vote in the Senate while essentially daring members to defy their party’s leader and vote against it.

“The American people gave us a clear mandate, and after four years of Democrat failure, we intend to deliver without delay,” the top four House GOP leaders said Tuesday after the bill passed the Senate 51-50, thanks to Vice President JD Vance’s tiebreaking vote.

It’s a risky gambit, one designed to meet Trump’s demand for a July 4 finish — and there’s a steep climb ahead. Since launching early this year, Republicans have struggled mightily with the bill nearly everystepoftheway, often succeeding by only a single vote. Their House majority stands at only 220-212, leaving little room for defections.

Some Republicans are likely to balk at being asked to rubber stamp the Senate bill less than 24 hours after passage, having had little time to read or absorb the changes that were made, many at the last minute to win the vote of Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski.

House Republicans from competitive districts have bristled at the Senate bill’s cuts to Medicaid, while conservatives have lambasted the legislation as straying from their fiscal goals.

It falls to Speaker Mike Johnson and his team to convince them that the time for negotiations is over.

Trump pushes Republicans to do ‘the right thing’

The bill would extend and make permanent various individual and business tax breaks that Republicans passed in Trump’s first term, plus temporarily add new ones that Trump promised during the campaign, including allowing workers to deduct tips and overtime pay, and provide a new $6,000 deduction for most older adults. In all, the legislation contains about $4.5 trillion in tax cuts over 10 years.

The bill also provides some $350 billion for defense and Trump’s immigration crackdown. Republicans partially pay for it all through less spending on Medicaid and food assistance. The Congressional Budget Office projects that it will add about $3.3 trillion in federal deficits over the coming decade.

The House passed its version of the bill back in May, despite worries about spending cuts and the overall price tag. Now, they are being asked to give final passage to a version that, in many respects, exacerbates those concerns. The Senate bill’s projected impact on federal deficits, for example, is significantly higher.

Trump praised the bill profusely in a social media post, saying “We can have all of this right now, but only if the House GOP UNITES, ignores its occasional ‘GRANDSTANDERS’ (You know who you are!), and does the right thing, which is sending this Bill to my desk.”

The high price of opposing Trump’s bill

Speaker Johnson, R-La., is intent on meeting the president’s July 4 timeline. He’s also betting that hesitant Republicans won’t cross Trump because of the heavy political price they would have to pay.

They need only look to Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., who announced his intention to vote against the legislation over the weekend. Soon, the president was calling for a primary challenger to the senator and personally attacking him on social media. Tillis quickly announced he would not seek a third term.

Others could face a similar fate. One House Republican who has staked out opposition to the bill, Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, is already being targeted by Trump’s well-funded political operation.

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., said leadership was not entertaining the possibility of making changes to the bill before the final vote. He said the two chambers already agree on the vast majority of what’s in it.

“It’s not as easy as saying, ‘hey, I just want one more change,’ because one more change could end up being what collapses the entire thing,” Scalise said.

Democratic lawmakers, united against the bill as harmful to the country, condemned the process as rushed. Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., said there’s no real deadline for getting the bill passed by July 4th.

“We’re rushing not because the country demands it, but because he wants to throw himself another party,” McGovern said. “This isn’t policy. It’s ego management.”

Democrats warn health care, food aid are being ripped away

House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries described the bill in dire terms, saying that cuts in Medicaid spending would result in “Americans losing their lives because of their inability to access health care coverage.” He said Republicans are “literally ripping the food out of the mouths of children, veterans and seniors.”

“House Democrats are going to do everything we can for the next few hours, today, tomorrow, for the balance of this week and beyond to stop this bill from ever becoming law,” Jeffries said.

Republicans say they are trying to rightsize the safety net programs for the population they were initially designed to serve, mainly pregnant women, the disabled and children, and root out what they describe as waste, fraud and abuse.

The package includes new 80-hour-a-month work requirements for many adults receiving Medicaid and applies existing work requirements in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program to more beneficiaries. States will also pick up more of the cost for food benefits, with the amount based on their payment error rates, which include both underpayments and overpayments.

The driving force behind the bill, however, is the tax cuts. Many expire at the end of this year if Congress doesn’t act.

“Passing this bill means smaller tax bills and bigger paychecks for the American people — permanently,” said Senate Majority Leader John Thune. “It will also help get our economy firing on all cylinders again.”

The Tax Policy Center, which provides nonpartisan analysis of tax and budget policy, projected the bill would result next year in a $150 tax break for the lowest quintile of Americans, a $1,750 tax cut for the middle quintile, and a $10,950 tax cut for the top quintile. That’s compared to what they’d face if the 2017 tax cuts expired.

___

Associated Press writer Joey Cappelletti contributed to this report.

Kevin Freking And Lisa Mascaro, The Associated Press

CHAPIN, S.C. (AP) — Former South Carolina Lt. Gov. André Bauer is mounting a GOP primary challenge to Sen. Lindsey Graham, arguing the incumbent isn’t conservative enough to represent the state.

Bauer, a wealthy developer, is a longtime backer of President Donald Trump. His candidacy sets up a midterm grudge match with Graham, a four-term senator whose relationship with Trump has undulated through the years, but who has Trump’s endorsement for reelection.

Bauer has described himself as “a real, America First conservative” intent on representing what he sees as South Carolina conservatives’ true values.

“I think Graham’s been there too long, and he votes like it,” Bauer told The Associated Press Tuesday night. “I’m guaranteed, I’m conservative, and I don’t think he is.”

Republicans dominate South Carolina’s statewide-elected positions, meaning that the most intense political competition takes place in GOP primaries.

Graham has faced previous primary challenges from the right, with opponents accusing him of kowtowing to Democrats on issues from immigration to climate change. But he also hews to Republican priorities on national security; ahead of last month’s U.S. strike on Iranian facilities, Graham called for Trump to “go all-in” in backing Israel and destroying Iran’s nuclear program.

Graham kicked off his reelection campaign in February, and at least one other Republican has also announced a primary challenge.

He has already secured Trump’s endorsement. This week, Graham’s campaign announced that Chris LaCivita, a co-campaign manager of Trump’s 2024 bid, would serve as a senior adviser.

Bauer said he understood Trump’s need to use Capitol Hill relationships to advance his legislative priorities, like the tax cuts and spending bill that came before the Senate Budget Committee — which Graham chairs — before passing the chamber earlier Tuesday.

“Trump’s got to work and get his bills passed,” Bauer said. “Lindsey’s chairman of a major committee. … I get what you have to do.”

Bauer has backed Trump since before his win in South Carolina’s 2016 GOP primary. At his 2024 campaign’s South Carolina launch event, Trump called Bauer — who served on his state leadership committee — “a friend of mine, somebody that could I think run for almost any office and win.”

Bauer served in the South Carolina legislature before, at 33, he was elected the youngest lieutenant governor in the country in 2002. After two terms, he mounted an unsuccessful 2010 gubernatorial bid, finishing last in a four-way GOP primary ultimately won by Nikki Haley.

Two years later, Bauer ran for Congress, losing a GOP runoff to eventual Rep. Tom Rice in South Carolina’s newly created 7th District.

Asked how much of his own money he would commit, Bauer declined to give a figure, saying he would “put skin in the campaign” and looked forward to returning to the trail.

“I’m going to cover this state like the dew covers Dixie,” Bauer said. “I think you’re going to see a movement.”

___

Kinnard can be reached at http://x.com/MegKinnardAP

Meg Kinnard, The Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration violated federal privacy laws when it turned over Medicaid data on millions of enrollees to deportation officials last month, California Attorney General Rob Bonta alleged on Tuesday, saying he and 19 other states’ attorneys general have sued over the move.

Health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s advisers ordered the release of a dataset that includes the private health information of people living in California, Illinois, Washington state, and Washington, D.C., to the Department of Homeland Security last month, The Associated Press first reported last month. All of those states allow non-U.S. citizens to enroll in Medicaid programs that pay for their expenses using only state taxpayer dollars.

The unusual data sharing of private health information, including addresses, names, social security numbers, immigration status, and claims data for enrollees in those states, was released to deportation officials as they accelerated enforcement efforts across the country. The data could be used to help the Department of Homeland Security locate migrants in its mass deportation campaign, experts said.

Bonta said the Trump administration’s data release violates federal health privacy protection laws, including the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA).

“This is about flouting seven decades of federal law policy and practice that have made it clear that personal healthcare data is confidential and can only be shared in certain narrow circumstances that benefit the public’s health or the Medicaid program,” Bonta said during a news conference on Tuesday.

The Trump administration has sought to arm deportation officials with more data on immigrants. In May, for example, a federal judge refused to block the Internal Revenue Service from sharing immigrants’ tax data with Immigration and Customs Enforcement to help agents locate and detain people living without legal status in the U.S.

The move to shore up the federal government’s data on immigrant Medicaid enrollees appears to have been set in motion in May, when the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services announced it would be reviewing some states rolls to ensure federal funds have not been used to pay for coverage for people with “unsatisfactory immigration status.”

As part of the review, CMS asked California, Washington and Illinois to share details about non-U.S. citizens who have enrolled in their state’s Medicaid program, according to a June 6 memo signed by Medicaid Deputy Director Sara Vitolo that was obtained by the AP. The memo was written by several CMS officials under Vitolo’s supervision, according to sources familiar with the process.

CMS officials attempted to fight the data sharing request from Homeland Security, saying that to do so would violate federal laws, including the Social Security Act and the Privacy Act of 1974, according to the memo.

The legal arguments outlined in the memo were not persuasive to Trump appointees at HHS, which oversees the Medicaid agency.

Four days after the memo was sent, on June 10, HHS officials directed the transfer of “the data to DHS by 5:30 ET today,” according to email exchanges obtained by AP.

HHS is “aggressively cracking down on states that may be misusing federal Medicaid funds,” agency spokesman Andrew Nixon said in a statement. The agency has not provided details on DHS’ role in the effort. Nixon also defended the legality of releasing the data to DHS.

“HHS acted entirely within its legal authority – and in full compliance with all applicable laws – to ensure that Medicaid benefits are reserved for individuals who are lawfully entitled to receive them,” he said in the statement.

Dozens of Democratic members of Congress — in both the House and Senate — have sent letters to the involved agencies, demanding that data sharing cease and that Homeland Security destroy the information it has received so far. —

Associated Press writer Olga R. Rodriguez in San Francisco contributed.

Amanda Seitz And Kimberly Kindy, The Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — Just after midnight, Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski was pacing in a Senate hallway, alone and looking concerned.

It had suddenly become clear to all her Republican colleagues that her vote would be their best chance of passing President Donald Trump’s sweeping bill of tax and spending cuts. Had she decided whether she would support the bill? “No,” Murkowski said, shaking her head and putting her hand up to signal that she didn’t want to answer any questions.

Around 12 hours later, after she had convinced Senate leaders to change the bill to benefit her state and voted for the legislation, ensuring its passage, Murkowski said the last day had been “probably the most difficult and agonizing legislative 24-hour period that I have encountered.”

“And you all know,” she told reporters after the vote at midday Tuesday, “I’ve got a few battle scars underneath me.”

This isn’t Murkowski’s first tough vote

Murkowski has been in the Senate for nearly 23 years, and she has taken a lot of tough votes as a moderate Republican who often breaks with her party. So she knew what she was doing when she managed to leverage the pressure campaign against her into several new programs that benefit her very rural state, including special carveouts for Medicaid and food assistance.

“Lisa can withstand pressure,” said Maine Sen. Susan Collins, a fellow Republican moderate and longtime friend. Collins said she spoke to Murkowski on Monday when she was still undecided, and “I know it was a difficult decision for her, and I also know how much thought she put into it.”

Texas Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, who has also served with Murkowski for two decades, was more blunt: “She knows how to use her leverage,” he said.

The 887-page bill narrowly passed by the Senate on Tuesday — and now headed back to the House for possible passage — mentions California three times, Texas twice and New York not at all. But Alaska is in the bill 19 times, from new oil and gas lease sales in the state to tax breaks for Alaska fisheries and whalers to tribal exemptions for work requirements.

Even with all the provisions for Alaska, Murkowski was deeply torn up until the hours just before the vote, when the entire Senate was focused on what she would do — and as Republicans were pressuring her to support the bill and move the party one step closer to giving Trump a win.

She had always supported the bill’s tax cuts and extensions, but she had serious concerns about the repercussions of cutting Medicaid in her state and around the country.

She got much of what she wanted

Murkowski eventually decided to support the legislation in the hours after the Senate parliamentarian approved language to allow several states with the worst error rates in the food stamp program — including Alaska — to put off having to pay a greater portion of the cost of federal benefits, and after Republicans added a $50 billion fund proposed by Collins to help rural hospitals that might otherwise be hurt by Medicaid cuts.

Even with the fund included, Collins was one of three Republicans who voted no on the bill, arguing that the cuts to Medicaid and food stamps would hit her small rural state especially hard. But she said she understands why Murkowski would support it and negotiate special treatment for her state. “The fact is, Alaska is unique from every other state,” Collins said.

Nearly one-third of Alaska’s total population is covered by Medicaid, and the state has long struggled with high health care costs and limited health services in many communities. Most Alaska communities are not connected to the state’s main road system, meaning that many residents, particularly those in small, remote villages, need to fly to a larger city for certain kinds of care. Food security is also a longstanding concern, as the remote nature of many communities means food often is barged or flown in, and options can be limited and expensive.

“I had to look on balance, because the people in my state are the ones that I put first,” Murkowski said immediately after the vote. “We do not have a perfect bill by any stretch of the imagination.”

Some of her colleagues who voted against the bill were critical. “They chose to add more pork and subsidies for Alaska to secure that vote,” said Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky.

Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar, the top Democrat on the Senate Agriculture Committee, which oversees the food stamp benefits, said that the food stamp provision would incentivize states with the worst oversight, which was the opposite of what Republicans originally intended. The provision would “expand the graft,” Klobuchar said.

Lots of eyes have been on Murkowski

Murkowski, often accompanied by Collins, has been under a microscope for almost every major vote in the Senate in recent years. In February 2021, she joined six other Republicans and all Democrats in voting to convict Trump for inciting the Jan. 6, 2021, attack of his supporters on the Capitol after the House impeached him for a second time. In 2018, she opposed the confirmation of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh amid sexual misconduct claims, ultimately voting “present.”

So as Murkowski was wooed for days by Republican leaders and many of her colleagues to vote for the tax and spending cuts package, it was somewhat familiar territory — and an ideal environment for her to win some concessions in favor of her state.

On Monday evening and early Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming, the No. 2 Senate Republican, spent hours on the Senate floor talking to Murkowski — who was sometimes wrapped in a blanket to stay warm in the frigid chamber. Alaska Sen. Dan Sullivan, a Republican, would sometimes join the group, as did Senate Budget Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.

As she mulled her vote, Murkowski sorted through drafts of amendments and talked to aides. And despite longstanding criticism of Trump, she communicated with White House officials who made the case that the measure would ultimately be a positive for her state and constituents.

Thune had said for weeks that he would hold a vote as soon as he had 51 senators supporting the legislation. And after days of delays, it became clear Tuesday morning that Murkowski had decided to support it when Thune told senators to come to the floor and scheduled a vote within the hour.

Murkowski, still looking a bit worried, voted “aye.” After the vote, she said: “I haven’t slept in a long, long while now.”

___

Bohrer reported from Juneau, Alaska. Associated Press reporters Seung Min Kim and Josh Boak in Washington contributed to this report.

Mary Clare Jalonick And Becky Bohrer, The Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. is halting some shipments of air defense missiles and other munitions to Ukraine amid concerns that its own stockpiles of such supplies have declined too much, officials said Tuesday.

The munitions were previously promised to Ukraine for use during its ongoing war with Russia under the Biden administration. But the pause reflects a new set of priorities under President Donald Trump.

“This decision was made to put America’s interests first following a DOD review of our nation’s military support and assistance to other countries across the globe,” White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said in a statement. “The strength of the United States Armed Forces remains unquestioned — just ask Iran.”

The Pentagon review determined that stocks were too low on some items previously pledged, so pending shipments of some items won’t be sent, according to a U.S. official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to provide information that has not yet been made public.

To date, the U.S. has provided Ukraine more than $66 billion worth of weapons and military assistance since Russia invaded in February 2022.

Will Weissert And Matthew Lee, The Associated Press

PHOENIX (AP) — Top Arizona Democrats said Tuesday they will bypass the financially strained state party and its embattled new chairman in next year’s midterms, as they looked to assure donors and activists that party dysfunction won’t hamper their efforts to win in the battleground state.

Gov. Katie Hobbs, Secretary of State Adrian Fontes and Attorney General Kris Mayes — who all are seeking second terms next year — said grassroots organizing will be outsourced to a small county organization rather than the Arizona Democratic Party.

The workaround comes as party disarray threatens to complicate Democrats’ efforts to hold on to a decade of successes in a state long dominated by Republicans. Arizona has no Senate contest next year but will have at least two battleground U.S. House races, and the campaigns for governor, other top state offices and legislature could dictate how Arizona handles the 2028 presidential election.

National Democratic committees, including the Democratic Governors Association, signed on to the move.

Conflict with Arizona Democratic state party

Arizona Democrats unexpectedly ousted former Chair Yolanda Bejarano after the party’s disastrous showing in the 2024 election, when Donald Trump won the state after losing it to Joe Biden in 2020. New Chairman Robert Branscomb promptly fired most of the senior staff.

Behind-the-scenes tension exploded into public view in April. Branscromb sent a letter to members of the state Democratic committee blasting Sens. Mark Kelly and Ruben Gallego, a highly unusual move against the state’s top Democrats.

Kelly, Gallego, Hobbs, Fontes and Mayes responded with their own letter saying they’d lost trust in Branscomb.

Last month, the party’s treasurer warned that Branscomb was spending more money than he was raising and the party was on track to run out of money by the end of the year. Meanwhile, the party is operating without a budget approved by the executive committee.

Allies of Branscomb, the party’s first Black chair, have said the pressure on him is racially motivated. He faces a potential ouster later this month but has refused to step aside.

After Tuesday’s announcement, Branscomb projected a united front with the officials who spurned him, predicting the split would not hold back Democrats.

“I think the people are ready to solidify our democracy, and democrats are in a position to win up and down the ticket,” he said. “Because we’re focused on different areas doesn’t mean we’re not together.”

Navajo County Democrats to run get-out-the-vote

The Arizona Democratic Party has traditionally housed the coordinated get-out-the-vote campaign designed to turn out voters for Democratic candidates up and down the ballot. Hobbs, Fontes and Mayes said Tuesday they’ll run it instead through the Navajo County Democratic Party for 2026.

Democrats are well-organized in Navajo County, which is small by population but large geographically in rural northeastern Arizona. The party has long invested in organizing there among Native American voters.

The county party can do most everything the state party can do, with one major exception—only the state party can send mail at a discounted postal rate. Branscomb said that won’t be an issue.

“We’ll still cooperate and work together on this,” he said. “We all have the same vision, we all have the same goal to get them all re-elected.”

Running a statewide campaign through a county party is not without precedent. Former Sen. John McCain leaned on the Yuma County GOP in his 2010 re-election campaign after a faction hostile to him took control of the Arizona Republican Party. In Nevada, Sen. Catherine Cortez-Masto ran her 2022 coordinated campaign through the Washoe County Democratic Party after progressives took control of the state party.

In this case, the rupture between the officials and the party is not driven by ideology but by concerns of mismanagement and financial constraints.

___

Jonathan J. Cooper, The Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department is ramping up its plans to revoke the citizenship of immigrants who’ve committed crimes or pose a national security risk, according to a recent memo underscoring the Trump administration’s hardline immigration agenda.

Efforts to identity and go after those suspected of cheating to get their citizenship are not new to this administration.

But the public push is raising concerns from advocates, who have accused the administration of trying to use immigration enforcement for political purposes. It’s receiving increased scrutiny after a Republican member of Congress suggested that Zohran Mamdani, the New York City Democratic mayoral candidate, should be subject to denaturalization proceedings.

Here’s a look at the denaturalization process and what the Justice Department’s memo means:

___

Denaturalization cases are rare

The U.S. government can strip a naturalized immigrant of their citizenship if they are criminally convicted of naturalization fraud or if the government proves through civil proceedings that they illegally obtained their citizenship through fraud or misrepresented or concealed facts on their application.

For years, the government’s denaturalization efforts focused largely on suspected war criminals who lied on their immigration paperwork, most notably former Nazis. The Justice Department filed just more than 300 total cases between 1990 and 2017.

An initiative that began under the Obama administration called Operation Janus expanded those efforts by seeking to identify people who had used different identities to get green cards and citizenship after they were previously issued deportation orders.

In 2016, an internal watchdog reported that 315,000 old fingerprint records for immigrants who had been deported or had criminal convictions had not been uploaded to a Department of Homeland Security database that is used to check immigrants’ identities. The same report found more than 800 immigrants had been ordered deported under one identity but became U.S. citizens under another.

The first Trump administration made such investigations a bigger priority, creating a Justice Department section focused on denaturalization cases.

But even then, the number of denaturalization cases remained small, as the administration didn’t have the resources to bring many amid an onslaught of legal challenges to immigration policies it had to defend against, said Matthew Hoppock, an attorney in Kansas who represents people in denaturalization cases.

Justice Department says it will prioritize certain cases

The push was announced in a memo from the recently confirmed head of the Justice Department’s Civil Division, Assistant Attorney General Brett Shumate. Shumate said the cases the department will prioritize include people who “pose a potential danger to national security,” people who commit violent crimes, members of gangs and drug cartels and people who commit Medicaid fraud and other types of fraud.

The benefits of the denaturalization process, Shumate wrote, “include the government’s ability to revoke the citizenship of individuals who engaged in the commission of war crimes, extrajudicial killings, or other serious human rights abuses; to remove naturalized criminals, gang members, or, indeed, any individuals convicted of crimes who pose an ongoing threat to the United States; and to prevent convicted terrorists from returning to U.S. soil or traveling internationally on a U.S. passport.”

Hoppock said the memo sort of “blows the doors open” for the administration to file as many as many denaturalization cases as it has the resources to file.

Lawyers raise alarm about the potential impact

The broad language in the memo raises the prospect “that any offense, at any time, may be used to justify denaturalization,” said Christopher Wellborn, president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.

“It is not difficult to imagine a scenario where the government invokes unsubstantiated claims of gang affiliation or uses an individual’s criminal record to claim that citizenship was illegally procured,” Wellborn said in a statement.

Others worry the administration’s public push will stoke fear among naturalized immigrants.

“The more you talk about it, the more you frame it as ‘we’re coming after your naturalization, we’re coming after you,’ the more of a chilling effect we see on people applying for naturalization,” said Elizabeth Taufa, senior policy attorney and strategist at the Immigrant Legal Resource Center. “Even those folks that really are eligible for naturalization.”

Critics have accused the Trump administration using immigration enforcement to go after people because of their speech — most notably in the case of Columbia University activist Mahmoud Khalil, whom it has sought to deport over his role in pro-Palestinian protests.

“One of our ongoing concerns is will they target these politically, will they start combing through people’s immigration files if they don’t like you or if they think you don’t agree with the government,” Hoppock said.

“I think most Americans would support the idea of stripping someone of citizenship if they got it through fraud and they are also a dangerous person,” he said, but the concern is if they start going through “regular folks’ immigration files to find a T that is not crossed or an I that is not dotted so they can use it as a weapon.”

Justice Department recently secured denaturalization in one case

The department last month announced that it had successfully secured the denaturalization of a man who was convicted of possessing child sexual abuse material.

The British man had become a U.S. citizen after enlisting in the U.S. Army under a provision that provides a pathway to citizenship for U.S. service members, officials said. He only listed a speeding ticket when asked on his naturalization application if he had “ever committed a crime or offense for which you were not arrested,” and he became a U.S. citizen in 2013.

Months later, he was arrested in Louisiana on child sexual abuse material charges and convicted, according to the department.

“The laws intended to facilitate citizenship for brave men and women who join our nation’s armed forces will not shield individuals who have fraudulently obtained U.S. citizenship by concealing their crimes,” Shumate said in a statement at the time. “If you commit serious crimes before you become a U.S. citizen and then lie about them during your naturalization process, the Justice Department will discover the truth and come after you.”

Alanna Durkin Richer, The Associated Press

LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) — Republican businessman Nate Morris has declared that Kentucky Sen. Mitch McConnell doesn’t deserve a lifetime achievement award from their home state political party, as the first-time candidate ratchets up his attacks against the former Senate leader he hopes to succeed in next year’s election.

Morris, a tech entrepreneur, has turned McConnell into his own punching bag — a strategy seen as an attempt to reinforce his political outsider status and win over President Donald Trump’s MAGA base.

Morris launched his Senate campaign last week, joining U.S. Rep. Andy Barr and ex-state Attorney General Daniel Cameron as GOP heavyweights vying for their party’s nomination next spring. All three have ties to McConnell but have heaped praise on Trump in hopes of winning the president’s endorsement — seen as potentially decisive in the primary.

Going after Mitch

Doubling down on his anti-McConnell strategy, Morris called on the Kentucky Republican Party to rescind what he said is its plan to honor the senator with a lifetime achievement award at an event next month. Morris called on Cameron and Barr to join in declaring McConnell undeserving of the award.

Morris on Tuesday branded McConnell as “the face of the resistance inside the GOP to President Trump and the MAGA movement for the last five years.” The attack came as McConnell voted for Trump’s big tax breaks and spending cuts bill, while fellow Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul opposed the bill.

“The choice is simple: You either stand with Trump or you stand with Mitch,” Morris said in the statement.

Asked to respond to Morris’ remarks, state Republican Party spokesman Andy Westberry said: “It’s my knowledge no official decisions or announcements have been made regarding awards.”

McConnell’s office did not comment on Morris’ barrage. During Trump’s first term, McConnell worked with the president to cut taxes and put conservatives on the federal bench, including three justices on the nine-member Supreme Court. Their relationship ruptured after McConnell blamed Trump for “disgraceful” acts in the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack, but the senator still endorsed Trump’s presidential run in 2024.

McConnell helped Kentucky punch about its weight

McConnell, the longest-serving Senate party leader in U.S. history, is widely seen as a guiding force in the GOP’s rise to dominance in Kentucky. He announced in February, on his 83rd birthday, that he wouldn’t seek reelection in 2026 and will retire when his current term ends.

His influence in the Bluegrass State is reflected in Frankfort at the state GOP headquarters, which is named for McConnell. McConnell has frequently said his leadership position enabled Kentucky to “punch above its weight,” as he steered federal funds back home to fix roads, build bridges, support universities, improve airports, combat drug abuse and more.

Morris has blasted McConnell for not being in lock-step with Trump. He pointed to McConnell voting against a handful of Trump’s second-term cabinet picks, opposing the president’s tariffs and resisting Trump’s efforts to “end the gravy train to Ukraine” in its war against Russia.

Morris also mentioned McConnell’s criticism of Trump in a biography of the Senate Republican leader by Michael Tackett, deputy Washington bureau chief of The Associated Press.

“Why are we celebrating a man who called President Trump a ‘despicable human being’?” Morris said.

Longtime Kentucky political commentator Al Cross said the anti-McConnell attacks are meant to burnish Morris’ profile as an outsider.

“If you are not well known at all, then one way to get well known is to attack someone who is very well known — and that is Mitch McConnell,” Cross said.

Morris bristled at a request from the state GOP chairman that Senate candidates not “speak ill” of fellow Republicans not involved in the Senate race. Morris said the request was in an invitation for him to speak at the upcoming GOP event and said he thinks it was meant to deter criticism of McConnell.

Westberry said the request was “just a suggestion,” one that was sent to other GOP Senate candidates invited to speak at the GOP function.

All three leading GOP Senate contenders have ties to McConnell. Cameron is a former McConnell aide, Barr has referred to the senator as a mentor and Morris worked as an intern in McConnell’s office.

Barr and Cameron question Morris’ authenticity as a MAGA loyalist. Cameron’s campaign on Tuesday focused on two hot-button issues for MAGA supporters — diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives and consideration of environmental, social and governance factors when making investment decisions.

“If I told you there’s a candidate running in the Republican primary who built his company on ESG subsidies and supporting DEI initiatives, you’d think I was joking,” Cameron’s campaign said Tuesday. “That candidate is Nate Morris, and he should start answering for his record.”

Morris’ campaign responded by referring to Cameron as “Mitch McConnell’s puppet.”

Bruce Schreiner, The Associated Press