Where do Trump and Harris stand on housing policy?
(WASHINGTON) — Housing costs are top of mind for voters across the country, as rising prices force many renters and potential home buyers to empty their pockets.
Nearly half of all renter households were cost-burdened by their rent in 2023 — meaning they spent more than 30% of their income on housing costs, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.
And housing costs? They’ve outpaced inflation since the 1960s, rising 2.4 times faster, according to an analysis of housing data published by property advice site Clever Real Estate in March.
The study found that if home prices only kept pace with inflation, the median home could cost about $177,000 instead of the roughly $431,000 it actually costs.
Housing policy was mentioned during Tuesday’s presidential debate between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump, as Harris touted her newly released policy proposals several times.
“We know that we have a shortage of homes and housing, and the cost of housing is too expensive for far too many people,” she said.
When it comes to housing and rent, here’s a look at the policies Harris and Trump have signaled support for if elected in November.
Harris’ proposals
Harris is calling for the construction of 3 million new housing units to address the supply shortage, she said, by proposing a tax incentive for companies who build units to be sold to first-time homebuyers.
The vice president’s proposal also includes a $40 billion fund to support local governments in “innovative methods” of building affordable housing that have proven to be successful, referencing the construction of housing units in Wake County, North Carolina.
She supports the Stop Predatory Investing Act, which is aimed at removing tax benefits for major corporate or Wall Street investors who acquire large numbers of single-family rental homes and mark up prices.
Harris also backs the passage of the Preventing the Algorithmic Facilitation of Rental Housing Cartels Act, which would prohibit the use of algorithmic systems to artificially inflate the price or reduce the supply of leased or rented residential dwelling units.
Additionally, Harris plans to provide $25,000 in down payment support for first-time home buyers, with expanded support for first-generation home owners.
Trump’s proposals
Trump has promised to eliminate certain regulations on the construction of new homes, which he says will help with the cost.
The former president did not say which specific regulations he hopes to eliminate. During his term as president, he signed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act in 2017, which lowered the corporate tax rate and created Opportunity Zones, in which people can invest in low-income areas and temporarily defer tax on eligible gains.
Trump also plans to open up portions of federal land for large-scale housing construction.
“These zones will be ultra-low tax and ultra-low regulation,” he said in a Q&A at The Economic Club of New York on Sept. 5.
Trump claimed that undocumented immigrants are behind the rise in housing costs in his policy proposals and speeches, adding that he would ban mortgages for undocumented people. Researchers and officials have attributed rising housing costs to high interest rates, the housing shortage, rent gouging and an increase in construction costs and supply chain constraints to the rising costs.
Trump’s Agenda47, which outlines his plans if he’s elected in November, also notes that he intends to “promote homeownership through Tax Incentives and support for first-time buyers.”
(MEMPHIS, Tenn.) — The federal trial of three former Memphis police officers charged in connection with the January 2023 beating death of Tyre Nichols continued Monday, with the cross-examination of a Memphis Police Department (MPD) lieutenant who trained the defendants.
Kevin Whitmore, who is representing ex-officer Tadarrius Bean, cross-examined Second Lt. Larnce Wright on training methods at the police academy, noting that Wright did not train Bean in several courses, so he could not speak to what Bean was taught, according to WATN-TV, the ABC affiliate in Memphis covering the case in the courtroom.
Wright did not teach the officers how to write reports, provide medical classes for them or teach them about the duty of an officer to intervene if another officer engages in misconduct, according to WATN.
Last Thursday, Wright testified that the scenario of the initial traffic stop involving Nichols should have been low-risk, according to WATN. Wright said during the initial stop, Nichols voicing that he was trying to do what was asked should have led officers to deescalate the situation. Wright claimed officers were not following training for several reasons and described Nichols’ behavior as human nature, according to WATN.
The former officers — Bean, Demetrius Haley and Justin Smith — were charged on Sept. 12, 2023, with violating Nichols’ civil rights through excessive use of force, unlawful assault, failing to intervene in the assault and failing to render medical aid — charges that carry a maximum penalty of life in prison, according to the U.S. Department of Justice. The officers have pleaded not guilty to all charges.
On Monday, Whitmore showed Wright several presentation slides he uses in training, which the attorney said denoted that there is no such thing as a routine traffic stop, which “could turn violent in an instant,” according to WATN.
The defense argued that training is only as good as the trainer.
Wright claimed that if a violent felony was not committed, pursuit is not allowed, according to WATN. Body-camera footage shows Nichols fled after police initially pulled him over for allegedly driving recklessly, then shocked him with a Taser and pepper-sprayed him. Officers allegedly then beat Nichols minutes later. Nichols, 29, died on Jan. 10, 2023 — three days later. Footage shows the officers walking around, talking to each other as Nichols was injured and sitting on the ground. The beating triggered protests and calls for police reform.
Memphis Police Chief Cerelyn Davis said she has been unable to substantiate Nichols was driving recklessly.
Whitmore asked Wright if an officer could have tunnel vision during an arrest, alluding to the possibility that Bean was focused on handcuffing Nichols and didn’t see what was happening to the suspect, according to WATN.
Desmond Mills Jr. and Emmitt Martin III, the two additional officers who were also charged in this case, have pleaded guilty to some of the federal charges.
Martin pleaded guilty to excessive force and failure to intervene, as well as conspiracy to witness tamper, according to court records. The other two charges will be dropped at sentencing, which has been scheduled for Dec. 5, according to the court records. Mills pleaded guilty to two of the four counts in the indictment — excessive force and failing to intervene, as well as conspiring to cover up his use of unlawful force, according to the DOJ. The government said it will recommend a maximum penalty of 15 years in prison, based on the terms of Mills’ plea agreement.
The prosecution told ABC News in a statement Thursday that they will not have any statements until after the trial. The defense attorneys did not immediately respond to ABC News’ request for comment.
After the police encounter, Nichols was transferred to the hospital in critical condition where he later died. The medical examiner’s official autopsy report for Nichols showed he “died of brain injuries from blunt force trauma,” the district attorney’s office told Nichols’ family in May 2023.
Michael Stengel, Haley’s attorney, officially asked for a mistrial on Friday due to the forms — known as response to resistance — that were submitted as evidence for the trial, according to WATN. The ex-officers were required to fill out these forms to explain their use of force against Nichols. Stengel argued the documents were protected by Garrity. Garrity rights protect public employees from being compelled to self-incrimination during investigative interviews conducted by their employers, according to a Tennessee attorney general legal document. Stengel argued that the response to resistance forms the ex-officers filled out could not be used as evidence to protect the ex-officers’ Garrity rights.
Judge Mark Norris decided the documentation forms do not violate the ex-officers’ Garrity rights and ruled in favor of keeping them as evidence, according to WATN. Norris said on Monday that there are 37 witness testimonies left in the trial, and that a juror has potentially been lost due to illness, according to WATN.
Martin, one of two ex-officers who plead guilty to charges connected to the death of Tyre Nichols, was called to the stand after Wright was finished with questioning. Martin began his testimony Monday, towards the end of day.
The five former officers charged in this case were all members of the Memphis Police Department SCORPION unit — a crime suppression unit that has since been disbanded after Nichols’ death. All the officers were fired for violating MPD policies.
(WASHINGTON) — On Wednesday, Attorney General Merrick Garland issued a stern warning to those who would seek to harm election officials.
“I will reiterate again today, these cases are a warning if you threaten to harm or kill an election worker or official or volunteer, the Justice Department will find you and we will hold you accountable,” Garland said at a press event.
But more than three years after the Department of Justice announced a task force to “promptly and vigorously prosecute” offenders who threaten election workers, lawmakers and election officials have raised concerns about the federal government’s ability to effectively prosecute cases and deter threats ahead of the November election.
Election officials and advocates have criticized the task force for what they call a lack of transparency regarding its investigations, saying there have been yearslong delays in providing accountability, and that the task force has brought far too few cases following an onslaught of threats related to the 2020 election.
Of the more than 2,000 threats referred to the FBI by election workers, the Justice Department has opened 100 investigations, according to figures released in April. In total, the task force has charged 20 people and landed 15 convictions.
The numbers are modest, in part, because many of the threats received by election workers are protected by the First Amendment. But that’s done little to reassure the community of election workers and officials who have been left disillusioned by threats and harassment.
“It makes it really difficult to want to do the job when it also feels like your community, your state and your nation have turned on you,” said Amy Cohen, executive director of the National Association of State Election Directors. “You never know really if what you’re submitting is being investigated. You never really have any understanding of why something isn’t investigated.”
When reached for comment, a DOJ spokesperson highlighted the task force’s work engaging with election workers through more than 100 meetings and trainings, as well as helping FBI field offices and U.S. attorneys’ offices expand their capacity to investigate threats to election workers.
And ahead of the November election, Garland said “task force representatives” will be on the ground meeting with election workers and hosting events with the FBI to address issues and potential crimes.
But as Election Day approaches and threats to election workers persist, calls for action from the Justice Department have grown louder. In July, Sen. Jon Ossoff, D-Georgia, launched an inquiry into the DOJ’s work protecting election workers, and a group of senators last month wrote to Attorney General Merrick Garland saying that “more must be done to counter these persistent threats and ensure that election workers can do their jobs.”
As part of their inquiry, the group of senators asked the DOJ to tell them how many threats have been identified by the task force and the number of ongoing investigations and prosecutions. As of this week, the Justice Department had not responded to their request for more information about the task force’s progress.
‘Help is on the way’
The DOJ’s task force was launched in 2021 as election officials faced a torrent of threats related to the 2020 election. Led by the DOJ’s Public Integrity Section, the group was tasked with reviewing individual reports of threats, then partnering with United States attorney’s offices and FBI field offices to investigate and prosecute those cases.
“A threat to any election official, worker, or volunteer is, at bottom, a threat to democracy,” Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco wrote in a memo to prosecutors in June 2021. “We will promptly and vigorously prosecute offenders to protect the rights of American voters, to punish those who engage in this criminal behavior, and to send the unmistakable message that such conduct will not be tolerated.”
Election officials rejoiced, hoping the highly publicized announcement might serve as a deterrent and stem the tide of threats that was flooding their offices. At the time, 17% of local election officials reported having being threatened due to their job, while 32% reported feeling unsafe, according to a survey of election officials conducted in April 2021 by the bipartisan Brennan Center for Justice.
“When the DOJ announced a task force, we were thrilled in a lot of ways, because it was like, ‘Oh, there’s going to be help. Help is on the way,'” said Cohen.
But in the three years since the announcement, election officials have continued to face heightened threats, including physical violence, fentanyl-laced letters, swatting incidents, threatening voicemails, and violent threats on social media.
According to a May 2024 survey conducted by the Brennan Center, nearly 40% of local election officials reported experiencing threats, harassment, or abuse — a marked uptick from earlier surveys.
“The pressures that my colleagues fall under nationwide — over things that are literally unfounded — has become hard to deal with every day for folks who didn’t sign up for that kind of pressure,” said Dag Robinson, the county clerk in Harney County, Oregon.
‘Justice is not swift’
Despite the fanfare it received in 2021, the task force got off to a sluggish start. A year after it was formed, the Justice Department had only charged four cases despite reviewing over 1,000 referrals involving hostile or harassing contact, then-Assistant Attorney General Kenneth Polite told a meeting of election officials in 2022. Only 5% of referrals resulted in actual investigations.
While the task force’s success rate improved slightly over three years — charging 20 individuals, achieving 15 convictions, and losing one case — multiple election officials told ABC News that the modest number of cases compared to the thousands of threat referrals is disheartening.
“I could certainly recognize that my friends and colleagues across this country don’t feel supported,” said Julie Wise, the director of elections for King County, Washington.
In Colorado, officials say Secretary of State Jena Griswold has been the subject of thousands of abusive, harassing, and threatening communications over the last two years, including frequent messages calling for violence against her.
“You have a family, Jena,” one user said on social media “Think about that before you continue.”
Of the 1,140 threats referred to the Department of Justice by Griswold’s office since January 2023, 13 have led to investigations, and one case has been prosecuted, according to her office.
Election officials across the country say that in some instances, charges have been announced two or three years from the time a threat was made.
“It seems as though justice moves slowly, and I have seen that some clerks who were assaulted or threatened from the 2020 election just were [only recently] able to give their victim impact statements for the sentencing of those individuals — so justice is not swift.” said Barb Byrum, county clerk in Ingham County, Michigan.
‘Legally off the hook’
In response to election officials’ concerns, Justice Department officials say that charging cases requires a high burden of proof — and many of the threats targeting election workers are protected speech under the First Amendment. To land a conviction in a threats case, prosecutors must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the statements are likely to be reasonably perceived as threatening — known as “true threats.”
“One of the biggest challenges in bringing these criminal cases is parsing what is a true threat from what is constitutionally protected speech,” according to Jared Davidson, counsel at nonprofit Protect Democracy.
Statements that are vague, hyperbolic, or figurative can be hard to prove as threats in a criminal setting, where defense attorneys can parse out the meaning of a statement to create reasonable doubt, said Davidson.
For example, the phrase “We’re going to take you out” could be perceived in multiple ways depending on the context of the statement, according to Eugene Volokh, a professor emeritus at UCLA School of Law.
“In context, that could mean ‘kill you,’ or it could mean ‘throw you out of office,'” Volokh said.
“A ‘vast majority’ of the communications directed at election officials, however offensive, are protected by the First Amendment and cannot be prosecuted,” then-Assistant Attorney General Polite said in 2022.
After prosecutors charged a Nevada man who, following the Jan. 6 assault on the Capitol, allegedly made multiple calls to the Nevada secretary of state’s office — including saying that they were “all going to … die” and wishing they would “all go to jail for treason” — a jury acquitted the defendant, illustrating the challenge of proving a true threat.
Adding to the challenge of bringing these cases is a 2023 Supreme Court decision that clarified the standard for true threats by finding that a defendant needs to have some awareness that their statement would be viewed as threatening.
“If you say something ambiguous and you don’t even realize that it might be perceived as a threat, you’re legally off the hook,” said Volokh.
Cohen, who said she has been publicly raising these concerns since early 2022, told ABC News that situation has led many election officials to believe that reporting threats can be “pointless,” which has led many of them to no longer refer threats to the task force. A 2024 Brennan Center survey showed that 45% of threats to election workers are unreported.
“It’s just hard not to feel, in some ways, like no one is taking this seriously,” Cohen said.
(NEW YORK) — A New York grand jury has indicted disgraced movie producer Harvey Weinstein on Thursday, prosecutors with the Manhattan district attorney’s office said in court.
Weinstein — who is recuperating after emergency heart surgery — was not present, and prosecutors asked the judge to set a date for his arraignment.
Judge Curtis Farber ordered the city corrections department to house Weinstein in the Bellevue Hospital prison ward, if medically necessary.
“Inattention at Rikers carries very real risks. He could find himself again in crisis,” Farber said.
The new indictment remains sealed until arraignment, so the charges are not yet known. As ABC News previously reported, prosecutors presented evidence of three alleged sex assaults from varying time periods that were not part of his previous case.
The Manhattan district attorney’s office previously presented evidence to the grand jury over an alleged sexual assault that occurred sometime in a four-month time period between late 2005 and mid-2006 in a lower Manhattan residential building, according to a transcript of a court hearing last week.
Prosecutors also indicated they were aware of two other potential offenses: a sexual assault in May 2016 in a hotel in Tribeca and a potential sexual assault that occurred at the Tribeca Grand hotel.
Thursday’s hearing was held days after Weinstein was rushed from Rikers Island, where he is being held, to Bellevue Hospital for emergency heart surgery after experiencing chest pains, his representatives told ABC News.
His trial is tentatively scheduled for this fall.
Weinstein has denied any wrongdoing and has said his sexual encounters were consensual.
The indictment comes months after the New York Court of Appeals overturned his 2020 rape conviction.
In a scathing 4-3 opinion in April, the court found the trial judge “erroneously admitted testimony of uncharged, alleged prior sexual acts against persons other than the complainants of the underlying crimes.”
The court said that testimony “served no material non-propensity purpose” and “portrayed defendant in a highly prejudicial light.”
Weinstein has also appealed a conviction on sex offenses in Los Angeles. He was sentenced to 16 years in prison there.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.