Louisiana’s congressional primaries delayed in light of SCOTUS map decision
Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry speaks in the Roosevelt Room of the White House March 24, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Win McNamee/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry and Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill on Thursday said that the Supreme Court’s ruling on Wednesday against the state’s congressional map means that the planned May 16 congressional primaries won’t proceed as scheduled as lawmakers consider drawing a new map.
“The Supreme Court previously stayed an injunction against the State’s enforcement of the current Congressional map. By the Court’s order, however, that stay automatically terminated with yesterday’s decision. Accordingly, the State is currently enjoined from carrying out congressional elections under the current map. We are working together with the Legislature and the Secretary of State’s office to develop a path forward,” they wrote in the statement.
Landry told at least some Republican House candidates in Louisiana that he plans on Friday to suspend the state’s primaries, according to multiple Republican sources.
A Republican source told ABC News that the governor called one candidate on Wednesday and said he is making calls to all of the candidates that he plans on Friday to suspend the election using executive power. The Washington Post was first to report about the governor’s calls.
The source said it was unclear if this will apply to all of the planned primaries, which include a closely watched Senate primary, or just the primaries for the House that would be impacted by a new congressional map.
ABC News has reached out to Landry’s office and the office of the Louisiana secretary of state.
The Supreme Court’s ruling on Wednesday reverses lower court decisions that said Louisiana’s map, drawn after the 2020 census, violated the Voting Rights Act because only one of six districts was majority Black. More than a third of the state’s voting age population is Black.
Those courts had ordered Louisiana to add a second majority-Black district, a process which in turn explicitly relied on race. In his opinion, Justice Samuel Alito said that move infringed on the rights of white voters under the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause.
Absentee ballots in Louisiana have already been sent out, and votes have likely been cast, although early voting in person does not start until Saturday, May 2. Absentee voting is relatively limited in Louisiana and requires a valid excuse.
Democratic Rep. Troy Carter from Louisiana said on Wednesday at the Congressional Black Caucus press conference that elections are too close at this point for congressional maps to change.
“We are in the 2026 election cycle now. The Supreme Court has set precedent just four years ago in a case in Louisiana, they ruled the district to be unconstitutional, said it’s too close to the election now, therefore we will do it in the next cycle,” Carter said, later adding that “if precedent matters, then clearly this is something that will have to be taken up in 2028 cycle, not the 2026.”
But the Louisiana’s existing map cannot be used, according to the Supreme Court’s ruling. Technically the state could revert back to its original 2022 map with one majority-Black district or redraw a new map entirely. Some legal experts have argued Louisiana could still keep its current map for the May primaries.
On Thursday, Murrill put in a filing with the Supreme Court saying, “Louisiana currently ‘is prohibited from using SB8’s map of congressional districts for any election’. The Governor and Attorney General are thus working with the Legislature– which is in session until June 1 — to immediately produce a constitutional map and electoral process for Louisiana.”
On Wednesday, Landry praised the ruling, but declined to say if it would have an impact on those primaries or not.
“Look, I think that anyone who jumps to conclusions right now — I think it’s going to take us at least 24 hours to really pore through the opinion to understand what exactly that opinion is telling us,” he told reporters. But he left the option open to a map redraw: “I mean, look, the Supreme Court picked an interesting time to be able to drop that on us… the court decides to give it to us on the eve of the election. What are they telling us? Are they telling us we have to draw? Telling us we don’t have to draw?”
ABC News’ Devin Dwyer and Hannah Demissie contributed to this report.
Former Special Counsel Jack Smith (C) arrives to testify during a closed-door deposition before the House Judiciary Committee in the Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill on December 17, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Alex Wong/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — Former special counsel Jack Smith, who charged President Donald Trump with crimes in Florida and Washington, D.C., is set to testify in public before the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday.
Smith was tasked with investigating Trump’s alleged interference in the 2020 election and alleged mishandling of classified documents — and his alleged refusal to turn them back over to the government.
Smith asked the judge overseeing the election interference case to dismiss it after Trump’s election in 2024 due to a long-standing Justice Department policy that bars the prosecution of a sitting president. And he filed a motion to dismiss the appeal of the classified documents case for the same reason.
Trump has denied wrongdoing in both cases.
This will mark Smith’s second time before the committee — he appeared behind closed doors last month. It is customary for former special counsels to appear before Congress publicly to discuss their findings.
Chairman Jim Jordan told ABC News that the committee always intended to have Smith appear in public.
“He’ll be there in a public setting so the country can see that this was no different than all the other lawfare weaponization of government going after President Trump,” Jordan said. “Jack Smith is sort of the culmination of that whole effort to stop President Trump from getting to the White House. But thank goodness it didn’t work and the American people saw through it.”
Smith, according to his team, is voluntarily appearing before the committee and will utilize his experience as a nonpartisan prosecutor.
He will also say that the facts of Trump’s cases would lead to a prosecution of anyone, whether they were a Democrat or Republican, his team said.
In his closed-door testimony, Smith defended his decision to twice bring charges against Trump — telling lawmakers his team “had proof beyond reasonable doubt in both cases” that Trump was guilty of the charges in the 2020 election interference and classified documents cases, according to a transcript of the hearing.
And Smith fervently denied that there was any political influence behind his decision — contrary to allegations of Republicans on the Judiciary Committee, who requested the testimony — such as pressure from then-President Joe Biden or then-Attorney General Merrick Garland, the transcripts shows.
“No,” Smith responded continuously to those allegations, according to the transcript.
Just over an hour before his testimony on Dec. 17, the Department of Justice sent an email to Smith’s lawyers preventing him from discussing the classified documents case, according to the 255-page transcript of the deposition, released last year by the Judiciary Committee along with a video of the hearing.
This meant Smith was unable to answer most questions on that case and the deposition — intended to ask questions about the alleged weaponization of the DOJ against Trump and his allies — mainly focused on the 2020 election case instead.
His team also said Smith will comply with Judge Aileen Cannon’s order that blocked the release of the second volume of his report.
Smith’s counsel said the DOJ also refused to send a lawyer to advise Smith on whether his statements were in line with their determination of what he could or could not say regarding the cases, according to the deposition. Smith did say, however, that Trump “tried to obstruct justice” in the classified documents investigation “to conceal his continued retention of those documents.
Three minutes and two seconds before the first shot is fired, Alex Pretti holds a phone before a federal officer on Nicollet Ave in Minnesota. Obtained by (ABC News)
(MINNEAPOLIS) — The interaction that ended in the death of Alex Pretti in Minneapolis on Saturday morning began at least three minutes earlier when Pretti appeared to be using his phone to record CBP officers, according to videos reviewed and verified by ABC News.
Minutes later, Pretti was pinned on the street by multiple federal agents — visibly being hit by one of them — when one of the officers can be seen leaving the struggle with what appears to be a gun.
Those videos appear to contradict, at least in part, claims by federal officials that Pretti “approached U.S. Border Patrol officers with a 9mm semi-automatic handgun” and “attacked” officers carrying out immigration duties.
During a news conference Saturday, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem said Pretti “arrived at the scene to inflict maximum damage on individuals and to kill law enforcement.”
Videos verified by ABC News show that Pretti appeared to be using his phone to record the agents before he was shoved by a federal officer. Seconds later, a federal officer repeatedly pepper-sprayed Pretti and then appeared to pull him into the street.
While Pretti seems to have been pinned on the street by officers, one of the agents is seen in multiple verified videos emerging from the scrum with a handgun that appears to match the weapon federal officials say Pretti was carrying. Before the first shot is fired, another agent can be seen drawing his own handgun, while another repeatedly hits Pretti.
In total, 10 shots were fired in less than five seconds, according to a forensic audio analysis of the videos. Pretti was declared dead on the scene.
“What the videos depict is that this guy did not walk up to anybody from CBP in a threatening manner,” said former acting DHS undersecretary for intelligence John Cohen, a police trainer and ABC News contributor. “For [DHS] to construe that he arrived at that location with the intent to shoot those border patrol officers, there’s nothing in the video evidence that we’ve seen thus far that would support that.”
This is a timeline based on five different verified videos of the incident.
8:58:11 a.m. — Three minutes and two seconds before the first shot is fired, Alex Pretti holds a phone before a federal officer on Nicollet Ave. in Minnesota, in what appears to be an apparent attempt to record a nearby detention by immigration authorities.
8:58:22 a.m.— A second federal officer carrying a canister of pepper spray approaches Pretti, who continues to hold up his phone.
8:58:29 a.m. — One federal officer appears to push Pretti towards the sidewalk.
8:59:08 a.m. — Another eyewitness begins recording the incident, showing Pretti continuing to lift his phone towards officers, as they appear to detain someone in the street.
8:59:24 a.m.— Pretti is seen lifting a phone towards the officers as they move a detainee into a nearby vehicle.
9:00:12 a.m. — Pretti continues to lift his phone towards nearby federal officers as they interact with two unidentified individuals, one with an orange backpack and another in a parka.
9:00:21 a.m. — The two individuals, who were later pepper-sprayed alongside Pretti, speak with a federal agent. Several people honk and whistle. “Watch out for that car,” the officer says as a car passes the group.
9:00:41 a.m. — Three different cameras capture the next interaction. The officer shouts at one of the civilians, “Do not push them into traffic,” and pushes them towards Pretti. Pretti continues to raise his phone towards the officers.
9:00:44 a.m. — The individual who was pushed appears to hold onto Pretti as the federal officer approaches them.
9:00:45 a.m. — The federal officer appears to push Pretti.
9:00:47 a.m. — The officer is seen pushing the individual with the orange backpack.
9:00:50 a.m. — The officer uses pepper spray on Pretti, and Pretti appears to raise his hand towards the officer to get between the officer and the person with the backpack, but the officer immediately pepper-sprays him. According to ABC News contributor and former acting DHS undersecretary Cohen, it appears Pretti used his hand in an attempt to signal that he was not a threat to officers.
9:00:53 a.m. — The officer pepper-sprays the other two civilians again.
9:00:54 a.m.— After being sprayed, Pretti appears to fall into the person with the backpack and possibly grab that person to stabilize himself.
9:00:56 a.m. — The federal officer appears to pull Pretti into the street, appearing to tug him by the hood of his coat.
9:01:02 a.m.— Three officers hold down Pretti, while another group of officers surrounds Pretti. According to ABC News contributor and former acting DHS undersecretary Cohen, the officers do not appear to be following the tactical steps to control and arrest Pretti. “This just seemed to be a free-for-all, and they didn’t seem to have any understanding from a tactical perspective on how to gain control of that individual,” he said.
9:01:05 a.m. — A nearby woman can be heard screaming, “That is police brutality. They are hitting an observer. They’re kicking them in the face.” At one point, at least five officers are on top of Pretti, pinning him down.
9:04:11 a.m. — One of the agents appears to hit Pretti, swinging his hand to repeatedly punch Pretti.
9:01:12 a.m. — One of the officers appears to draw a handgun.
9:01:13 a.m.— One of the federal officers appears to remove a gun from Pretti’s waist that seems to match the handgun federal officials said he was carrying.
9:01:14 a.m. — Another video shows the officer in the grey jacket emerging from the scrum, holding a firearm that appears to match Pretti’s weapon. The video of the officer entering the scrum did not show the agent carrying a weapon. Three cameras capture the moment.
9:01:14 a.m. — First shot is fired. At least one officer immediately steps away from Pretti.
9:01:16 a.m. — One second after the first shot, three additional shots are fired. Pretti appears to go limp and fall to the ground.
9:01:19 a.m.— Within three seconds, six more shots are fired. The six agents have stepped back from Pretti’s body.
9:01:45 a.m. — Twenty-nine seconds after the first shot, an officer approaches Pretti. According to a sworn affidavit from a doctor who says they treated Pretti at the scene, Pretti had at least three bullet wounds in his back, an additional wound on his upper chest, and another possible wound on his neck.
09:02:28 a.m. — Seventy-four seconds after the first shot is fired, the officer in a grey jacket is heard saying, “I got the gun. I got the gun,” and walks towards the officers surrounding Pretti.
An analysis conducted by Robert Maher, a professor at Montana State University specializing in audio forensics, concluded that 10 shots were fired in less than 5 seconds.
Rep. Eric Swalwell, candidate for California governor, takes part in a forum at the Skirball Cultural Center on Thursday, February 26, 2026. (Photo by David Crane/MediaNews Group/Los Angeles Daily News via Getty Images)
(SAN FRANCISCO) — Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell announced he is suspending his California governor’s race campaign after accusations made by a former staffer to the San Francisco Chronicle that he sexually assaulted her, which the congressman has denied.
It comes amid a growing push from his party to not only get out of the race, but to resign from Congress.
“I am suspending my campaign for Governor. To my family, staff, friends, and supporters, I am deeply sorry for mistakes in judgment I’ve made in my past,” Swalwell wrote in a post to X Sunday night.
“I will fight the serious, false allegations that have been made — but that’s my fight, not a campaign’s,” he wrote.
The San Francisco Chronicle published the account of a woman, who it did not identify, who says she was hired at the age of 21 to work as an intern in Swalwell’s district office.
She claims Swalwell began pursuing her and sent her a nude photo. In 2019, she went out for drinks with Swalwell and woke up naked the next morning in Swalwell’s hotel bed and “felt the effect of vaginal intercourse,” according to the article.
The woman alleges that five years later, at a gala in New York, when she was no longer working for him, Swalwell pursued her while she was inebriated and forced himself on her, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.
In the wake of the accusations, at least four other women have detailed allegations that range from sexual assault to inappropriate conduct by Swalwell. ABC News has not been able to corroborate all of the alleged accounts, including those reported by The San Francisco Chronicle and CNN.
ABC News spoke with Ally Sammarco, who accused the lawmaker of sending her inappropriate messages and an unsolicited nude picture of himself in 2021.
Sammarco, a social media content creator who said she was 24 at the time she met Swalwell, told ABC News that she was working on Terry McAuliffe’s race, as he was running to be governor of Virginia, and was looking for a job on Capitol Hill.
She says she sent the congressman a direct message on Twitter in August of 2021, asking about his upbringing growing up in a Republican family.
She says they spoke about the race in Virginia, and then Swalwell gave Sammarco his personal cell number, where she says he started to ask her “more personal questions.”
In September 2021, she says they began messaging on Snapchat, where she said he offered to help send her resume and find a job. He invited her to his office on Capitol Hill, according to text messages reviewed by ABC News.
She says he initially said she could meet his staff, but when she arrived, she said he escorted her in his office, and she “didn’t meet anybody but him.”
Sammarco told ABC News that sometime in October of 2021, Swalwell allegedly sent her an unsolicited picture of his penis.
She said the alleged photo made her feel “gross” and that he was “pushing a sexual agenda.”
In a video posted to social media late Friday evening, Swalwell called allegations made against him “flat false. They’re absolutely false.”
“They did not happen. They have never happened, and I will fight them with everything that I have,” he said.
Swalwell did not address the allegations in detail in the video statement.
Fellow Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna, also from California, called the allegations against Swalwell “sick and disgusting.”
Rep. Eugene Vindman, D-Va., told CNN’s “State of the Union,” “The accusations are absolutely heinous, and his admissions betraying his family are deplorable. So Eric Swalwell needs to resign. He needs to drop out of the race.”
Vindman emphasized the need to hold leaders accountable, regardless of party or stature.
“And we have grown far too accustomed to having our senior leaders, our elected officials, uh, fall far below what we expect their behavior to be morally, ethically … And Representative Swalwell needs to go,” Vindman said.
The top three House Democrats, including Leader Hakeem Jeffries, have called on Swalwell to end his bid for governor.
“Following the incredibly disturbing sexual assault accusations against Congressman Eric Swalwell, we call for a swift investigation into these incidents and for the Congressman to immediately end his campaign to be California’s next Governor,” Jeffries, Whip Katherine Clark and Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar said in a joint statement released Friday.
Pressed Sunday on whether Swalwell should resign, Jeffries told CNN’s Jeff Zeleny, “Our statement for the moment speaks for itself. We’ll reconvene in Washington early next week and we’ll have more to say.”
In his Friday video, Swalwell said the allegations “come on the eve of an election where I have been the frontrunner candidate” and cited his career as a public servant and prosecutor who went to court for sexual assault victims, he said.
“I do not suggest to you in any way that I am perfect or that I am a saint,” he said. “I have certainly made mistakes in judgment in my past. But those mistakes are between me and my wife and to her I apologize deeply for putting her in this position.”
Fellow Democrats started calling for Swalwell to drop his gubernatorial campaign shortly after news of the allegations broke.
In a statement, former Speaker Nancy Pelosi said: “This extremely sensitive matter must be appropriately investigated with full transparency and accountability. As I discussed with Congressman Swalwell, it is clear that is best done outside of a gubernatorial campaign.”
Rep. Jimmy Gomez, D-Calif., who chaired Swalwell’s campaign for governor, announced that he was stepping down from the campaign and referred to the accusations as “the ugliest and most serious accusations imaginable.”
“I cannot in good conscience remain in any role with this campaign, and I am stepping down from it effective immediately,” Gomez said. “The congressman should leave the race now so there can be full accountability without doubt, distraction, or delay.”
Democratic Sen. Ruben Gallego of Arizona, who had in recent days defended Swalwell from online rumors of misconduct, posted Friday that he was withdrawing his endorsement and said that he “regret[s] having come to his defense on social media.”
Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., also said he is pulling his endorsement “immediately” and called on Swalwell to withdraw.
Republican Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of Florida said Saturday that she plans to force a vote next week to expel Swalwell if he does not resign.
“Eric has an option. I am going to bring this vote next week. If Democrats want to protect this type of garbage, I wouldn’t recommend it, but they are going to put on the board for that. I am tired of this,” Luna said on Fox News.
Swalwell added that he is willing to pursue legal action to combat the accusations.
“I will defend myself with the facts and where necessary bring legal action. My focus in the coming days is to be with my wife and children and defend our decades of service against these lies,” Swalwell said.
In the wake of the Chronicle’s reporting, several of Swalwell’s Democratic opponents in the governor’s race, including San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan, State Superintendent Tony Thurmond, and former State Controller Betty Yee have also called on Swalwell to drop out of the race.
The two frontrunners in the race, billionaire businessman Tom Steyer and former Congresswoman Katie Porter, expressed support for the alleged victim but stopped short of calling on Swalwell to drop out of the race.
Earlier this week, Swalwell’s campaign told ABC News that Swalwell has not received any complaints and has not asked anyone to sign non-disclosure agreements.
“This false, outrageous rumor is being spread 27 days before an election begins by flailing opponents who have sadly teamed up with MAGA conspiracy theorists because they know Eric Swalwell is the frontrunner in this race,” campaign spokesperson Micah Beasley said in a statement provided to ABC News on Tuesday.
“In 13 years, no one in Eric Swalwell’s Congressional office has ever been asked to sign an NDA. Ever,” Beasley said. “In 13 years, not a single ethics complaint by any staff in his office or any other office has ever been lodged. Ever.”
The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office is investigating allegations against Swalwell, a source familiar with the investigation said Saturday.
“We urge survivors and anyone with knowledge of these allegations to contact our Special Victims Division at 212-335-9373,” the Manhattan DA’s office said. “Our specially trained prosecutors, investigators, and counselors are well-equipped to help you in a trauma-informed, survivor-centered manner.”
Swalwell’s campaign has not responded to a request for comment. An attorney representing Swalwell said “no comment” on Saturday.
House ethics rules prohibit sexual relationships between members and interns or staffers but the House cannot investigate an incident occurring more than three terms of Congress ago.
