Mitch McConnell falls during Senate Republican lunch
Allison Pecorin/ABC News
(WASHINGTON) — Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell fell during the Senate Republican lunch on Tuesday.
It was initially unclear if McConnell, 82, was injured or what the severity of the fall was. Two medical responders were seen briefly entering his office and then departed.
Shortly afterward, McConnell’s office put out a statement that he had sustained a “minor cut” to the face and a “sprained wrist” from the incident.
“Leader McConnell tripped following lunch. He sustained a minor cut to the face and sprained his wrist. He has been cleared to resume his schedule,” his spokesperson said.
Newly-elected Senate Republican Leader John Thune, who will take the mantle from McConnell in January, was asked about McConnell’s fall during the Republican press conference after the lunch.
“He’s fine, he’s in his office,” Thune said, deferring further questions to McConnell’s staff.
McConnell, who has walked with a limp after overcoming polio at a young age, has taken previous falls.
One fall in March 2023 at a hotel in Washington resulted in a prolonged absence from the Senate. McConnell suffered a concussion and fractured rib from the incident, requiring hospitalization and outpatient rehabilitation that forced him to miss six weeks on Capitol Hill.
McConnell also sparked concern after two episodes last year during which he appeared to freeze in front of television cameras, though he was later cleared to work by the Capitol physician.
The longtime Kentucky senator announced in February he was stepping down from the leadership role he’s held for two decades.
McConnell later Tuesday afternoon exited his office to cast a vote on the Senate floor.
McConnell wore a brace on his left hand and had a visible bandage under his left eye.
He said “good” when asked by ABC News how he was feeling.
(WASHINGTON) — As Election Day arrives, polling still shows razor-thin margins between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump in battleground states.
If the actual vote margin remains that thin in some states, it is possible that automatic recounts could be triggered or that a campaign could request a recount, depending on that state’s rules.
A recent analysis of statewide recounts in general elections from 2000-2023 by the advocacy group FairVote found that statewide recounts in general elections are very rare and usually have not changed much of the vote count. Recounts have almost never changed the state’s winner of a presidential election, although in 1960, a recount in Hawaii changed the winner of the state’s Electoral College votes from Richard Nixon to John F. Kennedy.
More recent presidential recounts have not impacted the winner in the states they were held in, including the attempted 2000 recount in Florida meant to deal with a razor-thin margin between George W. Bush and Al Gore, which the Supreme Court halted. (If Florida’s results had flipped, Al Gore would have won that election.)
In 2020, Donald Trump’s campaign requested recounts in Georgia (after the secretary of state had already undertaken a recount) and some Wisconsin counties. In 2016, the campaign of Green Party candidate Jill Stein requested a recount that was fully undertaken in Wisconsin, and requested one in Michigan (which was halted) and Pennsylvania (which was denied).
Here’s what to know about the rules that govern if and how presidential race recounts are conducted in each of the seven battleground states.
The “canvass of the vote” discussed below refers to the county and/or state procedures that compile, confirm, and validate every vote cast. Recount rules may vary for other races, such as congressional or mayoral races. An “automatic recount” means a recount that is mandated by state law because of the results; the term does not reflect how votes are recounted.
Arizona
A recount is automatically triggered in Arizona if the margin between the two candidates who received the most votes is equal or less than half a percent of the total votes cast, according to Arizona law. The recount must be completed five days after the canvass of the vote is completed, which is Nov. 30.
It is not possible for a candidate, party or voters to request a recount in Arizona. (A Republican-aligned review of election results in Arizona’s Maricopa County in 2021 was not a state-run recount and found no evidence that changed the results in the county.)
Georgia
According to Georgia law, a candidate can ask for a recount within two days of results being certified if the margin between the candidates is less than half a percentage point of the vote. Election officials can also request recounts if they think there is an issue with the results, while the secretary of state can ask for a recount if a candidate petitions them about a suspected issue. There is no explicit deadline for a recount to be completed.
There are no automatic recounts in Georgia.
Michigan
According to Michigan law, an automatic recount is triggered in statewide races if the margin between the top two candidates is 2,000 votes or less.
A candidate can petition for a recount if a few requirements are met, including “a good-faith belief that but for fraud or mistake, the candidate would have had a reasonable chance of winning the election,” according to Michigan law. The petition needs to be filed within 48 hours of the canvass of votes being completed.
Recounts must be completed within 30 days of the end of the period that candidates are allowed to file petitions challenging results, or within 30 days of when recounts are allowed to begin.
(New laws changing how recounts can be done in Michigan were signed into law this year, but will not be in effect for the 2024 election.)
Nevada
A candidate for presidential elector — specifically an Electoral College elector, not the candidate — can request a recount in Nevada up to the 13th day following the election, according to Nevada statutes. The requester needs to deposit the estimated cost of the recount with the secretary of state, but gets the deposit refunded if the recount results in a change in the winner.
The recount needs to be started within a day after being requested and finished within 5 days.
There is a more general statute in Nevada law that allows statewide candidates to request recounts, but this does not apply to presidential races, according to Nevada-based attorney and election law expert Bradley Schrager. Rather, the specific and more recent statute overrides the more general one, so the recount request would have to come from the presidential elector.
“In practice, that’s not really significant, however, because any elector candidate would follow the direction of his or her presidential candidate,” Schrager said.
There are no automatic recounts in Nevada.
North Carolina
A presidential candidate can request a recount in North Carolina if the margin between the candidates is less than half a percentage point or 10,000 votes, whichever is less, according to state law. (The North Carolina State Board of Elections told ABC News that the threshold this year will likely be 10,000 votes.)
The candidate needs to ask for a recount by noon on the second day after the county canvassing of the vote. (In 2024, that day is Tuesday, Nov. 19.)
There are cases where a requested recount would trigger an automatic recount as well, but the election results themselves do not trigger automatic recounts in North Carolina.
Pennsylvania
An automatic recount is triggered in Pennsylvania if the margin between the candidates is within half a percentage of the vote.
The recount must begin “no later than” the third Wednesday after Election Day and be done by noon on the next Tuesday, according to guidance published by the Pennsylvania Department of State.
Candidates themselves cannot request recounts in Pennsylvania.
Wisconsin
In a presidential race, any presidential candidate can request a recount if the margin between the candidates that got the most votes is one percent or less of the total votes cast, according to Wisconsin state statutes. The candidate must request it within the first day after the canvass of the vote is completed.
The state itself pays if the margin is 0.25% of the vote or less; if it is larger, then the candidate who requested the recount must pay. (They receive a refund if the election result changes due to the recount.)
The recount must be completed within 13 days of being ordered.
There are no automatic recounts in Wisconsin.
ABC News’ Quinn Scanlan and Mitch Alva contributed to this report.
(WASHINGTON) — Former President Donald Trump has vowed, if he’s elected, to conduct a large-scale deportation operation that some immigration and military experts agree is theoretically possible but also problematic, and could cost tens — even hundreds — of billions a year.
In FY 2023, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers conducted 170,590 administrative arrests, representing a 19.5% increase over the previous year, and more than any year of the Trump presidency.
Should he win a second term, Trump has promised to exponentially increase this work and suggested deporting all of the estimated 11 million people living in this country without legal immigration status.
His team, at various points, has suggested starting with “criminals,” though they have provided few specifics about who would be prioritized.
One cost estimate: $88B – $315B a year
A new report from the American Immigration Council, an immigration rights research and policy firm, estimates that to deport even one million undocumented immigrants a year would cost over $88 billion dollars annually, for a total of $967.9 billion over more than ten years.
The report acknowledges there are significant cost variables depending on how such an operation would be conducted and says its estimate does not take into account the loss of tax revenue from workers nor the bigger economic loss if people self-deport and American businesses lose labor.
A one-time effort to deport even more people in one year annually could cost around $315 billion, the report estimates, including about $167 billion to detain immigrants en masse.
The two largest costs, according to the group, would be hiring additional personal to carry out deportation raids and constructing and staffing mass detention centers. “There would be no way to accomplish this mission without mass detention as an interim step,” the report reads.
Trump campaign official agree one of the biggest logistical hurdles in any mass deportation effort would be constructing and staffing new detention centers as an interim solution.
Stephen Miller, a senior adviser to Trump, has repeatedly said that should Trump win the White House, his team plans to construct facilities to hold between 50,000 – 70,000 people. By comparison, the entire U.S. prison and jail population in 2022, comprising every person held in local, county, state, and federal prisons and jails, is currently 1.9 million people.
The American Immigration Council report estimates that to deport one million immigrants a year would require the United States to “build and maintain 24 times more ICE detention capacity than currently exists.”
There are currently an estimated 1.1 million undocumented immigrants in the country who have received “final orders of removal.” Those individuals, in theory, could be removed immediately by ICE agents, but because of limited resources ICE agents have instead focused lately on those people who have recently arrived or who have dangerous crimes
“I think it is possible that they could execute on this. The human resources would be the hardest for them to overcome. They would have to pull ICE agents from the border if they want to go into cities,” Katie Tobin, a scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace who served as President Joe Biden’s top migration adviser in the National Security Council, told ABC News.
ICE agents currently help Customs and Border Patrol agents on the border, carrying out expedited deportations of new arrivals who have recently crossed into the country illegally and provide logistical support to the Department of Homeland Security.
A new mandate to round up and deport individuals who have been living in the country for some time could mark a significant change for the law enforcement agency.
The American Immigration Council report estimates that to carry out even one million deportations a year, ICE would need to hire around 30,000 new officers, “instantly making it the largest law enforcement agency in the federal government,” the report reads.
Trump campaign: Deportation cost less than migrant costs
The Trump campaign has argued the cost of deportation “pales in comparison” to other costs associated housing and providing social services to recent migrants. “Kamala’s border invasion is unsustainable and is already tearing apart the fabric of our society. Mass deportations of illegal immigrant criminals, and restoring an orderly immigration system, are the only way to solve this crisis,” Karoline Leavitt, national press secretary for Trump’s campaign, told ABC News in a statement.
Trump has promised to mobilize and federalize National Guard units to help with the deportation effort, which would likely be a first for the military.
Under U.S. law, military units are barred from engaging in domestic law enforcement, although Trump has proposed invoking the Insurrection Act, a sweeping law, that could give him broader powers to direct National Guard units as he sees fit.
“We don’t like uniform military in our domestic affairs at all,” William Banks, professor at Syracuse University and Founding Director of the Institute on National Security and Counter Terrorism, told ABC News in a phone interview. “The default is always have the civilians do it. The cops, the state police, the city police, the sheriffs,” he went on.
Using the military for domestic law enforcement would be a fundamental shift, one which Banks argues too few Americans have considered or grappled with.
“It would turn out whole society upside down … all these arguments about him being an autocrat or dictator, it is not a stretch,” he said. For example, uniformed military officers are not trained in law enforcement and if they were asked to conduct civilian arrests there could be significant civil liberties conflicts and violations.
In order to, target and deport immigrants whose have not received “final orders of removal” but whose cases are still pending, Trump has discussed using another rare legal maneuver to himself broad authority to target and detain immigrants without a hearing, specifically invoking the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, a wartime law last used during World War II to detain Japanese Americans.
Trump would also need other nations to accept deported individuals and allow deportation flights to land back on their soil.
Katie Tobin, a scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace who served as President Joe Biden’s top migration adviser on the National Security Council, told ABC News, “Last time the Trump administration did not hesitate to threaten punitive action to countries that didn’t cooperate with them on immigration, but there are some practical issues there in terms of just how many flights a country like Guatemala or Colombia can accept per week.”
There would likely be less tangible and more indirect costs of a mass deportation effort as well. Inevitably there would be ripple effects throughout the economy. In 2022 alone, undocumented immigrant households paid $46.8 billion in federal taxes and $29.3 billion in state and local taxes, according to the report, and “undocumented immigrants also contributed $22.6 billion to Social Security and $5.7 billion to Medicare.”
The human toll
Experts also predict that if a future Trump administration were to follow through with some large, initial and highly visible deportation operation, a significant number of individuals and families would likely choose to self-deport in order to avoid family separations or having to spend time in a military-style detention center.
The authors of the American Immigration Council report argue that the effect of a mass deportation program, as described by Trump and his advisers, would “almost certainly threaten the well-being” of even those immigrants with lawful status in the United States and “even, potentially, naturalized U.S. citizens and their communities.”
“They would live under the shadow of weaponized enforcement as the U.S. went after their neighbors, and, as social scientists found under the Trump administration, would be prone to worry they and their children might be next,” the report says.
In recent interviews and conversations with reporters, Trump’s running mate Ohio Sen. JD Vance has dodged the question of whether a future Trump administration would separate families during a new deportation effort or in detention centers along the border.
“If a guy commits gun violence and is taken to prison, that’s family separation, which, of course, is tragic for the children, but you’ve got to prosecute criminals, and you have to enforce the law,” Vance told reporters in September when visiting the border.
(NEW YORK) — After months of legal wrangling, Rudy Giuliani on Friday turned over his luxury sports car, several watches, a ring and financial assets to two Georgia election workers he defamed in the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election, his lawyer wrote Friday.
A federal jury ordered Giuliani last year to pay Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss nearly $150 million for defaming them with false accusations that the mother and daughter committed election fraud while the two were counting ballots in Georgia’s Fulton County on Election Day in 2020.
The attorneys for both sides waged a back in forth in court for months over the delivery of those assets and, last week, attorneys representing Freeman and Moss said Giuliani’s apartment was virtually empty when their receivership entered the property.
The poll workers’ representatives accused Giuliani of “secreting away” his property.
The former New York City mayor was given a Nov. 14 deadline to turn over the shares in his Upper East Side co-op apartment, valuable sports memorabilia, a blue Mercedes-Benz convertible that once belonged to Lauren Bacall, and luxury watches — including one that belonged to Giuliani’s grandfather.
Joseph Cammarata, Giuliani’s attorney, said in a four-page letter to U.S. Judge Lewis Liman, that “watches and a ring were delivered via FedEx” to an address in Atlanta on Friday morning, and that “the Mercedes Benz automobile was delivered as requested” to an address in Florida.
Giuliani’s bank was “advised to turn over all non-exempt funds” to the plaintiffs, as well, according to the filing.
Liman issued a warning that he would file a motion of contempt if Giuliani didn’t comply with the order to transfer the assets to Freeman and Moss.
Earlier on Friday, Ted Goodman, a spokesman for Giuliani, posted a video on X with several watches arrayed on a table.
“This right here, folks, this is the accumulation of 60 years of hard work,” Goodman said.
Despite giving up those assets, Cammarata argued that his client should not give up other assets.
He wrote a lengthy list of items they deemed “exempt,” including some jewelry of lower value, a refrigerator, a radio receiver and other household furniture. He also said a Joe DiMaggio jersey was part of the “overbroad” turnover list and will fight to keep it.
The attorney argued that the court “should never have allowed the turnover” of the Mercedes Benz, arguing that the car should be appraised and returned to Giuliani if the value does not exceed $5,500.
Cammarata also requested that the court reschedule a trial in this matter currently scheduled for Jan. 16, 2025, until after the inauguration, as Giuliani “plans to be present” at events in Washington that week.
Representatives for Freeman and Moss didn’t immediately comment on the delivery of the assets.
