JFK’s grandson, Jack Schlossberg, announces 2026 run for Nadler’s seat in Congress
Jack Schlossberg, grandson of former U.S. President John F. Kennedy, speaks on stage during the second day of the Democratic National Convention at the United Center on August 20, 2024 in Chicago, Illinois. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — Jack Schlossberg, the grandson of former President John F. Kennedy, announced late Tuesday that he would run for Congress in 2026.
Schlossberg, 32, said he would seek a seat representing New York’s 12th congressional district, which is held by Rep. Jerry Nadler, who announced in September that he wouldn’t run for reelection.
Schlossberg positioned his run as a response in part to the economic agenda put forth by Republicans and President Donald Trump, including Trump’s so-called “Big Beautiful Bill,” which Schlossberg said had led to a “cost of living crisis” with historic “cuts to social programs working families rely on. Health care, education, child care.”
“We deserve better, and we can do better, and it starts with the Democratic Party winning back control of the House of Representatives,” Schlossberg, whose full name is John Bouvier Kennedy Schlossberg, said on Instagram as he announced his run.
He added, “With control of Congress, there’s nothing we can’t do. Without it, we’re helpless to a third term.”
The president in late October appeared to acknowledge that he cannot run for a third term, after previously declining to rule out the possibility.
The political heir, a Yale and Harvard alumnus who is running as a Democrat, in a press release also sought to burnish his status as a member of that party.
The release noted that he had “has spoken across the country as a surrogate for President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris,” as well as speaking a the most recent Democratic National Convention.
Rep. Cory Mills, R-Fla., leaves the U.S. Capitol after the last votes before August recess, on Wednesday July 23, 2025. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
(FLORIDA) — A Florida judge issued a protective order against Republican Rep. Cory Mills after he was accused by a former girlfriend of threatening to release sexually explicit videos of her, according to court documents.
The judge ordered the congressman to refrain from contacting Lindsey Langston, who was named Miss United States in 2024 and is a Republican state committeewoman from Columbia County.
Langston alleged in July that Mills threatened to release videos of her after their breakup earlier this year and that he threatened to harm any future partners, according to a report obtained from the Columbia County Sheriff’s Office in Florida.
In the order, the judge wrote that Langston has “reasonable cause to believe she is in imminent danger of becoming the victim of another act of dating violence” and said the evidence supported Langston’s assertion that Mills had caused her “substantial emotional distress” and that Mills offered “no credible rebuttal” to her testimony.
The order, which remains in place until January 2026, prohibits Mills from contacting Langston in any way and from coming within 500 feet of her residence or place of employment.
In her first comments since the judge’s decision, Langston said she now “feels like I’m able to live my life again.”
“I do feel that justice was served, and I can’t even describe the relief that I felt once I got the phone call that I had been issued the injunction for protection. I felt like I’m able to live my life again,” Langston said on a Zoom call Wednesday with reporters, sitting next to her attorney.
Mills previously said in a statement to ABC News, “These claims are false and misrepresent the nature of my interactions,” and accused a former Florida primary opponent of “weaponizing the legal system to launch a political attack against the man who beat him.”
In the order, the judge said he did not find Mills’ testimony to be “truthful.”
“The court, considering the totality of the testimony and the circumstances, does not find the Respondent’s testimony concerning the intimate videos to be truthful,” the judge wrote.
Speaker Mike Johnson, on Wednesday, was asked about allegations against Mills and told reporters, “I have not heard or looked into details of that. I’ve been a little busy. We have a House Ethics Committee; if it warrants that, I am sure they’ll look into it.”
“You have to ask Rep. Mills about that,” the Speaker added when pressed. “I mean, he’s been a faithful colleague here. I know his work on the Hill. I mean, I don’t. I don’t know all the details of all the individual allegations and what he’s doing in his outside life. Let’s talk about things that are really serious.”
Langston’s attorney Bobi Frank said Wednesday that her client plans to cooperate with any future investigations, including with the House Ethics Committee, and said she had been in contact with “other individuals” involved the matter and alleged that “Miss Langston is not alone.”
Former Federal Bureau of Investigation Director James Comey speaks to members of the media at the Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill December 07, 2018 in Washington, DC. (Alex Wong/Getty Images)
(ALEXANDRIA, Va.) — Former FBI Director James Comey pleaded not guilty Wednesday to both counts in a federal indictment, and his attorneys said they will seek to have the case dismissed for vindictive and selective prosecution.
A federal grand jury indicted Comey on Sept. 25, just days after President Donald Trump publicly demanded Attorney General Pam Bondi and the Justice Department act “now” against Comey and other political opponents.
Comey is charged with one count of false statements and one count of obstruction of a congressional proceeding, related to his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2020.
The plea was entered by his attorney Patrick Fitzgerald, who asked for a jury trial.
The judge read the charges and said they carry a penalty of up to 5 years in prison with a $250,000 fine.
He asked if Comey understood the charges, and he replied, “I do, Your Honor.”
A trial date was set for Jan. 5.
The judge asked how long the government anticipated the trial lasting, and the government said 2-3 days.
The judge said that he was prepared to move forward with a speedy trial. The government said the case was “complicated,” but didn’t appear to object to the trial date in court.
“This doesn’t appear to be a complicated case,” the judge said.
Fitzgerald agreed, saying, “We see this as a simple case.”
Comey has been a longtime target of Trump’s criticism over his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. Trump on Monday, speaking to reporters in the Oval Office, called Comey a “dirty cop” and claimed it was a “simple case.”
But the Comey matter has thrown the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia into turmoil, according to sources. The previous U.S. attorney, Erik Siebert, resigned over pressure from the Trump administration to bring criminal charges against Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James. Trump said he fired Siebert.
Trump then handpicked Halligan, a White House aide and his former defense attorney, to replace Siebert and lead the office. Halligan presented the Comey case to the grand jury, despite prosecutors and investigators determining there was insufficient evidence to charge him, ABC News reported at the time.
Comey attorneys told the judge Wednesday they plan to file a motion challenging the lawfulness of Halligan’s appointment, but that will be heard by a different judge appointed by the chief judge of 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The judge on Wednesday instructed the government to respond to those motions by Nov. 3 and directed the defense to respond by Nov. 10. The judge said he wants the case to be fully briefed by Nov. 19 and said hearings will be planned for Nov. 19 and Dec. 9.
Oral arguments will be held Dec. 9 on the defense’s motion to dismiss because of grand jury abuse, “outrageous government conduct” and other motions Comey’s attorneys did not disclose.
Both the defense and the judge expressed some confusion as to why the government said there would be a substantial amount of classified information involved in the case.
At one point Fitzgerald said that he believed the government should have figured out the issue with classified information before bringing the case. It appears the “cart has been put before the horse,” Fitzgerald said.
The judge said there should be no reason the case gets off track because of classified information.
“We will go through the fastest CIPA process you have ever seen in your life,” he joked, referring to the litigation that occurs around cases involving classified information.
The judge also said, “I will not slow this case down” over the government’s obligations to produce discovery to the defense.
Comey was in court Wednesday for the first time since he was indicted last month, where he was joined inside the Alexandria, Virginia, courtroom by Fitzgerald and attorneys David Kelley and Jessica Carmichael.
The government was being represented by Halligan and Nathaniel “Tyler” Lemons, a prosecutor from the Eastern District of North Carolina.
Comey’s wife and his daughter, Maureen Comey, were seen arriving at the Alexandria courthouse ahead of the proceeding.
Comey has denied any wrongdoing and has said he looks forward to a trial.
Ahead of Wednesday’s arraignment, the Department of Justice added two assistant U.S. attorneys from out of state to work on the case.
ABC News’ Alexandra Hutzler, Alexander Mallin, Peter Charalambous and Ely Brown contributed to this report.
(WASHINGTON) — The Supreme Court on Monday denied a bid from former Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis to appeal her $100,000 damages suit and get the justices to revisit the landmark 2015 decision in Obergefell v Hodges.
The court did not explain its decision.
Davis gained international attention after she refused to issue a marriage license to a gay couple on religious grounds in open defiance of the high court’s ruling and was subsequently jailed for six days. A jury later awarded the couple $100,000 for emotional damages plus $260,000 for attorneys fees.
In a petition for writ of certiorari filed in August, Davis argued First Amendment protection for free exercise of religion immunizes her from personal liability for the denial of marriage licenses.
She also claimed the court’s decision in Obergefell v Hodges — which rooted marriage rights for LGBTQ couples in the 14th Amendment’s due process protections — was “legal fiction.”
Lower courts had dismissed Davis’ claims and most legal experts considered her bid a long shot.
Davis’ appeal to the Supreme Court comes as conservative opponents of marriage rights for same-sex couples pursue a renewed campaign to reverse legal precedent and allow each state to set its own policy.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
