Virginia Supreme Court overturns Democrats’ redistricting measure
(WASHINGTON) — The Virginia Supreme Court on Friday overturned the state’s redistricting ballot measure, delivering a major setback to Democrats who hoped the new map would allow them to flip up to four congressional seats.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis attends the Boom Belt: A Return to First Principles in Public Markets conference on April 7, 2026, in Miami, Florida. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on Monday unveiled a proposed new congressional map for the Sunshine State that his office indicates could let Republicans flip up to four seats in the U.S. House of Representatives.
It’s a move that could help the party gain seats and counter Democrats’ recent redistricting victory in Virginia, if the map passes the Legislature and survives likely legal challenges. But some in the state are concerned about how a new map might backfire on the GOP. It is also another volley in mid-decade redistricting around the country, as another state starts the process usually only done once a decade in the wake of Texas, California and other states doing so.
The new map, provided to ABC News by the governor’s office, appears to aim to allow Republicans to flip up to four seats in the U.S. House, leaving just four Democratic-held districts in the state.
The office did not provide any details on how it conducted its analysis, and DeSantis said the redraw is about representation. “Florida got shortchanged in the 2020 Census, and we’ve been fighting for fair representation ever since. … Our new map for 2026 makes good on my promise to conduct mid-decade redistricting, and it more fairly represents the makeup of Florida today,” DeSantis told Fox News Digital, which was first to report on the new map being unveiled.
Dave Wasserman, senior editor and elections analyst for The Cook Political Report, wrote on Monday that the map appears to target Democratic Reps. Darren Soto, Kathy Castor, Jared Moskowitz and Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
Soto wrote on X, “Gerrymander or Dummymander? This map is an absolutely unlawful violation of the Florida Constitution. The Legislature should reject it. The courts should strike it down. That being said, there are 12+ seats that Democrats could still win under this map in this cycle.”
The speaker of the Florida House of Representatives, Daniel Perez, confirmed in a memo on Monday that the state House had received the new map and would begin considering it on Tuesday.
An aggressive approach
DeSantis has said Florida’s potential redistricting has nothing to do with Virginia’s efforts to redraw its congressional map, which passed last week and could net Democrats four congressional seats if it survives court challenges.
Some within the Republican Party have said Florida should aggressively redraw its map to counter Virginia, although others have hedged.
President Donald Trump, for instance, was asked by Fox News in an interview on Sunday about his reaction to Virginia’s redistricting and if Florida should ‘make a go at it.’ (Florida is Trump’s home state.) “I do, but that Virginia case is terrible,” Trump responded.
A Republican strategist in Florida told ABC News, “I think the people who are interested in taking the most aggressive, fighteresque approach … feel a bit emboldened” by what happened in Virginia. “The people taking a more strategic, long-term take on this whole process — I don’t think what happened in Virginia changes their opinion at all.”
Democrats ready to counter
DeSantis had called a special session that’s currently set to begin Tuesday that will include considering mid-decade redistricting, although he had previously delayed the initial date of the session by a week and expanded it to add other issues.
The Legislature also has a complex relationship with the governor, and legislators have been relatively tight-lipped over how it will vote.
The governor has spoken often about mid-decade redistricting in Florida in recent months, but framed his thoughts in terms of Florida needing to redraw its maps due to population reasons — not for political gain.
But Democrats, flush off of a victory in Virginia, say that they’re ready to counter GOP moves. The Virginia election’s certification is currently being litigated in courts.
Could it backfire?
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, during a press conference last Wednesday, called potential redistricting in Florida a “DeSantis dummymander” that would backfire on the GOP by weakening seats they currently hold.
“Our message to Florida Republicans is, ‘F around and find out’,” Jeffries said. “If they go down the road of a ‘DeSantis Dummymander’, the Florida Republicans are going to find themselves in the same situation as Texas Republicans who are on the run right now.”
DeSantis, responding to Jeffries on Wednesday without bringing up redistricting, taunted, “There’s nothing that could be better for Republicans in Florida than to see Hakeem Jeffries everywhere around this state … please, be my guest to come down in Florida. We would love to have you.”
Some Republicans, however, have openly expressed concerns that any new map in Florida would endanger GOP-held districts because it would weaken those districts politically as it tries to flip other ones, due to how voters could be moved around or respond to redistricting. It’s a key concern in Florida for the GOP, where Hispanic voters — a major bloc — who had moved towards the GOP in 2024’s elections now appear to be moving towards Democrats.
“Don’t do it. I’ve said it from the beginning. I’ve been around enough reapportionments to know it’s a slippery slope,” Florida Rep. Daniel Webster told Punchbowl News last week.
And Florida Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar told NBC News last week, “Look, I may be at a disadvantage, because my lines in district number 27 in the state of Florida may be moved, but there’s nothing I can do about it. And I always look at the bright side. This is American democracy. This is the American electoral system.”
The law and Florida’s Constitution
There are legal considerations at play as well that were not the case in other states such as Texas, California and Missouri that redistricted — as Florida’s state Constitution also has strict restrictions on redrawing constitutional maps for political gain, thanks to provisions known as the Fair Districts Amendments that voters approved in 2010.
The state’s Constitution says that “In establishing congressional district boundaries … No apportionment plan or individual district shall be drawn with the intent to favor or disfavor a political party or an incumbent.”
“It imposes an explicit prohibition on intentionally redrawing districts to favor or disfavor a political party or an incumbent,” Jonathan Marshfield, a state constitutional law expert at the University of Florida Levin College of Law, told ABC News.
“And so this is significant in Florida, because the United States Supreme Court hasheld … that these were sort of partisan gerrymandering claims are not justiciable in federal court; [there’s] essentially no recourse in the same way in federal court as there is in a state court. One of the challenges, I can imagine, is that these new congressional maps are going to be challenged as not complying with the Fair District Amendment of 2010.”
Marshfield added that “the law is structured such that challenges will, in fact, focus on their actual intent in drawing the lines where they draw them. And so that is a legally relevant inquiry that will be investigated in the course of the litigation.
DeSantis did not address the amendments in his comments to Fox News. But his general counsel, David Axelman, in a letter sent to the Florida Legislature along with the proposed map, argued that the amendments themselves may be unconstitutional.
“Florida’s representation in the U.S. House has also been distorted by considerations of race. Passed in 2010, the Fair Districts Amendments (FDA) to the Florida Constitution require the Legislature to account for race when drawing congressional districts … This requires the use of race in redistricting-something that the U.S. Supreme Court has signaled is unconstitutional.”
A strategist working with Florida House Democrats told ABC News that Democrats in the Legislature don’t have procedural mechanisms or leeway to slow down the process of passing a map, unlike in Texas in 2025 where Democrats were able to depart the state and break “quorum” in order to hold up legislation. But the strategist said that won’t matter, and that it doesn’t matter if the new map benefits Republicans or not.
A strategist working with Florida House Democrats told ABC News that Democrats in the Legislature don’t have the same procedural mechanism or leeway to slow down the process of passing a map, unlike in Texas in 2025 where Democrats were able to depart the state and break “quorum” in order to hold up legislation. But the strategist said that won’t matter, and that it doesn’t matter if the new map benefits Republicans or not.
“Regardless of if it backfires or not, it’s still illegal,” the strategist argued.
But Marshfield said that those drawing the map will likely have taken the amendment into account: “I’m sure in light of that, that the people drawing the lines, I would assume — I think the courts assume — that they have taken care to comply with the law, so that they are taking care to draw the lines in ways that comply with that amendment.”
White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles listens as President Donald Trump announces the creation of the U.S. strategic critical minerals reserve during an event in the Oval Office of the White House on February 02, 2026 in Washington, DC. (Alex Wong/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — White House chief of staff Susie Wiles said Monday that she has been diagnosed with breast cancer, which was detected early, and that she will continue to serve in her role while she undergoes treatment.
“I am grateful to have an outstanding team of doctors who detected the cancer early and are guiding my care, and I am encouraged by a strong prognosis,” Wiles said in a statement. “I am also deeply thankful for the support and encouragement of President Trump as I undergo treatment and continue serving in my role as White House Chief of Staff.”
President Donald Trump said in a social media post Monday that while Wiles undergoes treatment, “she will be spending virtually full time at the White House, which makes me, as President, very happy!”
During an event at the White House on Monday, Trump praised his top aide, saying that she is an “amazing fighter” and will “take care of it immediately,” referring to her treatment.
“She just started actually, and she’s going to be a great shape,” Trump said of her treatment. “The prognosis there is excellent, beyond excellent.”
Wiles has served as the White House chief of staff since the beginning of Trump’s second term.
She didn’t offer any additional details about her prognosis or treatment plan.
Breast cancer is the most common type of cancer in women in the United States (excluding skin cancers). About 1 in 8 women will develop breast cancer.
An estimated 321,910 females will be diagnosed with breast cancer this year, the American Cancer Society estimates. An estimated 42,140 women will die.
U.S. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth speaks during a news conference at the Pentagon on March 2, 2026 in Arlington, Virginia. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is on Capitol Hill Wednesday for what is formally billed as a routine hearing on the Pentagon’s budget request.
But the appearance — the first before Congress for Hegseth since the war in Iran began in February — lands just two days before a 60-day deadline to wind down hostilities.
It also comes amid intensifying questions on the Hill about how quickly the Pentagon is depleting weapons stockpiles, and as lawmakers continue to scrutinize Hegseth’s unusual spate of firings of senior defense officials without a public explanation.
Questions over civilian casualties in the Iran war, as well as whether the U.S. was properly prepared for retaliatory strikes, and broader questions over the strategic rationale for the conflict, are likely to be a key part of committee members on both sides of the aisle questioning of Hegseth, multiple congressional aides explained.
This week marks Hegseth’s first return to Capitol Hill in nearly a year — with testimony Wednesday before the House Armed Services Committee and Thursday on the Senate side — and his first exposure to sustained scrutiny since the war with Iran began. He is joined by Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff at both hearings.
While Hegseth has appeared before the press since the conflict began in late February, he has largely limited engagement to reporters viewed as sympathetic to the administration.
At the center of this week’s hearings is the administration’s request for $1.5 trillion in defense spending, the largest amount in the Pentagon’s history and a jump of 50% over current levels, which would mark the largest single-year increase in a generation.
The proposal would triple spending on drones and related technologies to more than $74 billion, while directing over $30 billion toward munitions procurement. But that budget request was developed months ago: not account for spending in the war with Iran.
“The overlap, you’ll see, is the request for munitions, which is something we always need,” Jules Hurst III, acting undersecretary of defense and the Pentagon’s comptroller, told reporters last week. “We always need to increase our magazine depth. But outside of that, there aren’t any operational costs in here from Iran.” Hurst is set to join Hegseth and Caine at the Senate hearing on Thursday.
That means the Pentagon may require additional funding to cover the cost of the vast quantities of munitions being expended as U.S. forces have struck more than 13,000 targets in Iran since February, along with other significant war-related expenses.
Defense experts have long raised concerns about stockpile constraints even before the war with Iran, with some estimates of a potential conflict with China suggesting the United States could exhaust long-range missile inventories within the first few weeks of fighting.
In less than two months of exchanging fire with Iran, the U.S. has used roughly half of certain missiles and other munitions, according to an analysis published last week by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).
Retired Col. Mark Cancian, a senior adviser at CSIS and an author of the report, said Operation Epic Fury “does create a window of vulnerability” for a period of as many as four years – the time it would take to replenish stocks.
“The United States has enough munitions to fight this war if it stubs up again,” Cancian said. “But the risk is in a future war with China, where inventory levels are far below where war planners would like them to be.”
Pentagon officials have maintained the U.S. has enough ammo to fight Iran. Though rearming the force with new munitions can take years, with some missiles requiring one to two years to build, reflecting an inherent limit on how many complex munitions the defense industry can produce each year, spurring much of the interest in huge investments in relatively cheap, easier-to-produce drones, which the Pentagon continues to surge into the Middle East.
Hegseth is also likely to face questions on his unprecedented firing or sidelining of two dozen senior military officials, particularly during a time of war, where he recently fired Gen. Randy George, who was the Army’s top officer and John Phelan, the Navy secretary.
Hegseth has also fired numerous lower-profile generals, without explanation, including Maj. Gen. William Green Jr., who was the chief of the Army Chaplain Corps, a collection of clergy from different faiths within the service. He has also blocked the promotion of four colonels to brigadier general, two of whom are women and two are Black, according to two U.S. officials, who both described a secretary of defense intervening in promotions as unprecedented.
Meanwhile, Democrats have failed in their multiple attempts to rein in President Donald Trump’s authority to wage war in Iran without Capitol Hill’s approval.
The 1973 War Powers Resolution gives the president latitude to conduct military strikes for a 60-day window, which closes Friday. The law allows for a one-time 30-day extension for the president to act without the consent of lawmakers, though it is unclear whether Trump intends to do so or whether Republicans will take into account the ceasefire in a way that relieves any deadline pressure.