Category: Politics

(WASHINGTON) — Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard is resigning from her post, a source familiar confirmed to ABC News on Friday.

The news was first reported by Fox News.

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump attacked outgoing Republican Sen. Thom Tillis on Friday, calling him a “RINO” — an acronym for “Republican in Name Only” — and a “quitter” as he appeared to acknowledge the ongoing revolt among some in his own party.

“I called him a ‘Nitpicker,’ always fighting against the Republican Party, and ME, mostly on things that didn’t matter,” Trump wrote in a social media post.

“Now he can have all the fun he wants for a few months, with some of his RINO friends, screwing the Republican Party. In the end it will only get bigger, and better, and stronger, than ever before!!!” Trump said.

Tillis is among several Republican lawmakers to criticize aspects of Trump’s agenda, most recently the creation of a nearly $1.8 billion so-called “Anti-Weaponization Fund” to compensate those who allege they were wrongly targeted under the Biden administration. The fund was created as part of a settlement agreement in President Trump’s $10 billion lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service.

Tillis slammed the fund as the “payout pot for punks.” Critics have said that those who committed violence against police, including Jan. 6 rioters, might be eligible for compensation in addition to Trump’s political allies.

“These people don’t deserve restitution, they — many of them deserve to be in prison,” Tillis said on Thursday. “Some of them deserve the pardon because they were over prosecuted, but this is, I mean, this is just stupid on stilts.” 

Congressional Republicans on Thursday punted plans to advance a $70 billion immigration bill as Senate Republicans were poised to try to rein in spending for the so-called anti-weaponization fund, as well as Trump’s East Wing expansion and White House ballroom construction project.

Several Republicans who Trump has spurned have become the fund’s most outspoken critics, including Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy. Cassidy lost his primary race last week after Trump endorsed his opponent.

“People are concerned about paying their mortgage or rent, affording groceries and paying for gas, not about putting together a $1.8 billion fund for the President and his allies to pay whomever they wish with no legal precedent or accountability,” Cassidy wrote on X.

Trump on Friday suggested that Tillis’ choice to not run for reelection was in some part because Trump declined to give him an endorsement. 

“When I told him that I would not, under any circumstances, endorse him for another run, too much work and drama (he couldn’t have won, anyway!), he immediately quit the race and publicly announced that he was going to ‘retire.’ I said, ‘Wow, great news, that was easy!'” Trump wrote in the post. 

When Tillis announced last year that he wouldn’t run for reelection, he said is a statement that it was “not a hard choice” to rule out running for a third term as he was finished with “navigating the political theatre and partisan gridlock in Washington.”

Tillis was asked by reporters on Thursday what he thought of Trump going after some Republican incumbents in primary races. 

“Be careful what you ask for,” Tillis responded.

In defense of the fund, which has also drawn legal challenges, Trump on Friday claimed he “gave up a lot of money” by allowing it to move forward and that he could have made an “absolute fortune” if he hadn’t made the IRS settlement.  

“Instead, I am helping others, who were so badly abused by an evil, corrupt, and weaponized Biden Administration, receive, at long last, JUSTICE!,” Trump wrote in another social media post.

ABC News’ Isabella Murray and Allison Pecorin contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Republicans are punting on plans to advance a $70 billion immigration bill, retreating after meeting with Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche to address concerns about the administration’s anti-weaponization fund.

The move pushes the process until at least after their weeklong Memorial Day recess after the House and Senate were sent home Thursday afternoon.

Earlier, Senate Republicans were poised to try to rein in two of President Donald Trump’s controversial spending wishes: $1 billion for the East Wing expansion and nearly $1.8 billion for an “Anti-Weaponization Fund,” two people familiar with the matter confirmed to ABC News.

Blanche canceled pre-scheduled travel to go up to Capitol Hill to attempt to quell the growing Republican outrage over the “anti-weaponization fund,” which would be used to compensate allies who say they have suffered injustices at the hand of the Biden administration. But Blanche’s meeting seems to have completely backfired.

There was yelling in the room, multiple sources told ABC News, with some senators — even some vocal Trump supporters — telling Blanche they believed they’d lose the Senate majority over the fund.

Blanche even tried to placate Republican senators by releasing a fact sheet earlier Thursday that stated they themselves can apply to receive money from the fund.

Republicans are looking at ways to use the bill to impose guardrails on Trump’s “anti-weaponization” fund.

On Wednesday afternoon, some Republicans told reporters that the $1 billion for White House security — including funding for the ballroom — would likely be removed from the bill because there was a lack of GOP support.

Because the text of the new bill hasn’t been made public, it’s not yet clear exactly what restrictions Republicans may try to impose on the “Anti-Weaponization Fund,” the core of the settlement between the Department of Justice and Trump to resolve his $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS.

The taxpayer-funded pool of money will be administered by a five-person commission appointed by the acting attorney general with little oversight aside from the president, who could remove members. 

Senators were working on potential provisions to address their concerns on the fund, but by Thursday afternoon, those discussions still appeared to be very far apart.

Republican Sen. Susan Collins said “no,” Blanche did not change her mind about the weaponization fund.

Republican Sen. John Hoeven said the “consensus building process” on the matter is “going to require more work.”

“We just don’t have the right configuration where we know we have 50 votes,” he said. 

Republicans could try to embed guardrails for the fund in the actual bill, or they could instead try to offer an amendment addressing the fund once the bill is on the Senate floor.

However, if Republicans don’t do something, it is widely expected that Democrats will certainly try to.

Senate Republicans are aiming to muscle the $70 billion immigration enforcement package through using a budget tool called reconciliation, which will allow them to pass the bill with a simple majority of votes in the Senate instead of the usual 60 votes that it takes to approve most legislative matters.

But before the bill can pass, there will be a voting marathon known as a vote-a-rama, during which lawmakers are able to offer unlimited amendments to the bill.

Democrats are powerless to block this package from passing if Republicans stick together, but Democrats could put forward a number of amendments that force Republicans to take politically tricky votes.

If Republicans do not come up with a clear way to address the “anti-weaponization” fund in their underlying bill or in an amendment that is popular with Republicans who oppose the fund, Democratic-led amendments that look to restrict the fund could very well get the necessary GOP support to pass on the Senate floor.

Some Senate Republicans who Trump has publicly scorned in recent weeks have become the fund’s most outspoken critics, including Sen. Bill Cassidy, who lost his primary race in Louisiana after Trump endorsed his opponent.

Cassidy spoke out on Wednesday night, bashing the fund.

“People are concerned about paying their mortgage or rent, affording groceries and paying for gas, not about putting together a $1.8 billion fund for the President and his allies to pay whomever they wish with no legal precedent or accountability. This is adding to our national debt. If there needs to be a settlement, the administration should bring it to Congress to decide,” Cassidy wrote in a post on X.

Regardless of what Republicans do, Democrats are expected to use the vote-a-rama to force a number of votes that they hope will pin down Republicans on the fund.

Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal told ABC News on Wednesday that he intends to force votes on amendments to “stop this illegal abhorrent slush fund” during the vote-a-rama.

With enough GOP support, Democrats could have a real chance of putting restraints on — or even eliminating — this fund as part of the massive package. Depending on how Democrats craft their amendments surrounding the IRS fund, it could take as few as four Republican supporters to pass some of them.

What happened to the ballroom funding?

The $1 billion that was intended for White House security, including the security aspects of Trump’s ballroom, is being scrapped by Republicans, according to some GOP lawmakers. The Republican lawmakers are saying there isn’t enough support in their conference to move forward with the funding.

The Senate’s rule keeper said over the weekend that $1 billion could not be included in the bill under the Senate rules. Even though some Republicans initially said they’d redraft the measure, a number of GOP senators came out forcefully against the $1 billion allocation and threatened to tank the entire bill if it was not removed.

Democrats were expected to call up a number of amendment votes to try to strip the ballroom funding out of the bill. Those amendments only would have needed the support of four Republicans and likely would have passed.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — In a rare move on Thursday, the Supreme Court spared the life of an “intellectually disabled” death row inmate, dismissing an appeal by Alabama officials who claimed the man’s multiple IQ scores show he is competent and eligible for execution.

The justices were narrowly divided, 5-4, in allowing a lower court ruling to stand that determined death for Joseph Clifton Smith, a convicted first-degree murderer, would violate the Eighth Amendment prohibition of “cruel and unusual” punishment.

The high court did not formally explain its decision.

More than 20 years ago, the high court outlawed the execution of intellectually disabled people convicted of capital crimes.

The heart of the Smith case involved a dispute over who qualifies as intellectually disabled and how to analyze conflicting intelligence quotient – also known as IQ – test scores in making the determination.

The decision on Thursday left that question unanswered.

“The court is not equipped in this case to provide any meaningful guidance on how courts should assess multiple IQ scores,” wrote Justice Sonia Sotomayor in a concurring opinion joined by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.

While state officials had asked the court to set out a clear standard, Sotomayor suggested a case-by-case approach, considering legal precedent and “the views of medical experts,” should continue.

“If a conflict among the states or lower courts emerges and a case properly presents the issue, it may be appropriate for this court to weigh in with more specific guidance,” she wrote. “The court rightly decides it is inappropriate to do so in this case.”

Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Chief Justice John Roberts dissented.

“The court shies away from its obligation to provide workable rules for capital cases,” Justice Alito wrote in a dissent joined by Thomas, Gorsuch and Roberts. “In doing so, the court disserves its own death-penalty jurisprudence, states’ criminal justice systems, lower courts, and victims of horrific murders.”

Justice Thomas wrote separately to call for a reinstatement of the death penalty for intellectually disabled people.

Smith, who will now spend life behind bars, confessed to a 1997 murder during a robbery, but challenged his death sentence on ground he has had “substantially subaverage intellectual functioning” since a young age.

He has taken five separate IQ tests over nearly 40 years, scoring 75 in 1979, 74 in 1982, 72 in 1998, 78 in 2014, and 74 in 2017.

People below 70 are generally considered to have an intellectual disability, but major American medical groups urge a holistic assessment that also looks at social and practical skills.

The groups note that standardized test scores alone should not be conclusive. Smith’s score of 72, for example, could be 69 when factoring the 3-point margin of error.

Smith, who alleges he suffered physical and verbal abuse as a child, consistently functioned at two grade-levels below his placement in school, according to court documents. Smith’s school classified him as “Educable Mentally Retarded” in 7th grade before he eventually dropped out.

Two lower federal courts ruled that a holistic analysis of Smith’s IQ scores and other evidence, including his behavioral history and school records, proved he is intellectually disabled.

“Joseph Smith is not intellectually disabled, and the Eighth Amendment does not override the death sentence he earned for murdering Durk Van Dam,” Alabama argued in its brief to the court. “Whether and how to weigh multiple IQ scores is left to state discretion.”

The state argued intellectual disability can only be proven by an IQ score of 70 or less by a preponderance of the evidence.

By one estimate, as many as 20% of the 2,100 people on death row in the U.S. may have some degree of intellectual disability, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Senate Republicans are poised to block funding for two of President Donald Trump’s controversial spending wishes: $1 billion for the East Wing expansion and nearly $1.8 billion for an “Anti-Weaponization Fund,” two people familiar with the matter confirmed to ABC News.

Republicans are racing to put that package onto the Senate floor for votes as soon as Thursday evening, with hopes of sending it over to the House ahead of the Memorial Day recess and Trump’s June 1 deadline.

Republicans are looking at ways to use the bill to impose guardrails on Trump’s “anti-weaponization” fund — which would be used to compensate allies who say they have suffered injustices at the hand of the Biden administration and has sparked a wave of criticism, the sources said.

On Wednesday afternoon, some Republicans told reporters that the $1 billion for White House security — including funding for the ballroom — would likely be removed from the bill because there was a lack of GOP support.

Because the text of the new bill hasn’t been made public, it’s not yet clear exactly what restrictions Republicans may try to impose on the “Anti-Weaponization Fund,” the core of the settlement between the Department of Justice and President Trump to resolve his $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS.

The taxpayer-funded pool of money will be administered by a five-person commission appointed by the acting attorney general with little oversight aside from the president, who could remove members. 

Republicans could try to embed guardrails for the fund in the actual bill, or they could instead try to offer an amendment addressing the fund once the bill is on the Senate floor.

However, if Republicans don’t do something, it is widely expected that Democrats will certainly try to.

Senate Republicans are aiming to muscle the $70 billion immigration enforcement package through using a budget tool called reconciliation, which will allow them to pass the bill with a simple majority of votes in the Senate instead of the usual 60 votes that it takes to approve most legislative matters.

But before the bill can pass, there will be a voting marathon known as a vote-a-rama, during which lawmakers are able to offer unlimited amendments to the bill.

Democrats are powerless to block this package from passing if Republicans stick together, but Democrats could put forward a number of amendments that force Republicans to take politically tricky votes.

If Republicans do not come up with a clear way to address the “anti-weaponization” fund in their underlying bill or in an amendment that is popular with Republicans who oppose the fund, Democratic-led amendments that look to restrict the fund could very well get the necessary GOP support to pass on the Senate floor.

Some Senate Republicans who Trump has publicly scorned in recent weeks have become the fund’s most outspoken critics, including Sen. Bill Cassidy, who lost his primary race in Louisiana after Trump endorsed his opponent.

Cassidy spoke out on Wednesday night, bashing the fund.

“People are concerned about paying their mortgage or rent, affording groceries and paying for gas, not about putting together a $1.8 billion fund for the President and his allies to pay whomever they wish with no legal precedent or accountability. This is adding to our national debt. If there needs to be a settlement, the administration should bring it to Congress to decide,” Cassidy wrote in a post on X.

Regardless of what Republicans do, Democrats are expected to use the vote-a-rama to force a number of votes that they hope will pin down Republicans on the fund.

Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal told ABC News on Wednesday that he intends to force votes on amendments to “stop this illegal abhorrent slush fund” during the vote-a-rama.

With enough GOP support, Democrats could have a real chance of putting restraints on — or even eliminating — this fund as part of the massive package. Depending on how Democrats craft their amendments surrounding the IRS fund, it could take as few as four Republican supporters to pass some of them.

What happened to the ballroom funding?

The $1 billion that was intended for White House security, including the security aspects of Trump’s ballroom, is being scrapped by Republicans, according to some GOP lawmakers. The Republican lawmakers are saying there isn’t enough support in their conference to move forward with the funding.

The Senate’s rule keeper said over the weekend that $1 billion could not be included in the bill under the Senate rules. Even though some Republicans initially said they’d redraft the measure, a number of GOP senators came out forcefully against the $1 billion allocation and threatened to tank the entire bill if it was not removed.

Democrats were expected to call up a number of amendment votes to try to strip the ballroom funding out of the bill. Those amendments only would have needed the support of four Republicans and likely would have passed.

What will the moderates and those scorned by Trump do?

Most, if not all Republican senators, are generally supportive of the immigration enforcement provisions in the package. It is likely that the final bill will ultimately pass.

But this vote-a-rama, which is an exercise that typically requires party discipline, comes at a time when Trump has been increasingly attacking incumbent members of the Senate Republican conference and potentially splintering the conference’s voting bloc.

Trump’s attacks could embolden some of those Republicans to break ranks on crucial amendment votes, and there are enough Republicans in this camp that certain Democratic amendments have the ability to pass if GOP leadership doesn’t do enough to satisfy its own members’ concerns.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — A group of mostly Democratic strategists and power players are rebuilding a political action committee meant to fortify election-defense infrastructure ahead of 2028 by focusing on often overlooked state offices that control election administration, litigation and certification.

The group, Democracy Defenders, which previously worked to support legal efforts and help with post-election planning in partnership with the Harris presidential campaign, tells ABC News exclusively that they’re re-launching their political arm. It plans to spend upwards of $10 to 15 million by “protecting democracy and rule of law” in races for Attorneys General, Secretaries of State and state Supreme Court in presidential battleground states– places they see critical to safeguarding against escalating threats from Trump and his allies to subvert the 2028 election.

“The goal right now is to sabotage-proof the electoral system for 2028,” former Wisconsin Democratic Party Chair and Democracy Defenders operative Ben Wikler told ABC News.

In the aftermath of his attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, Trump and his administration have made moves since the start of his second term to retool future elections.

They seized boxes of 2020 election records from a Fulton County, Georgia, election site in January and Tump called Virginia’s special election on a new congressional map last month “rigged” without evidence.

They’ve also called for Republicans to “nationalize” and “take over” elections.

Focusing on down-ballot races

The down-ballot races the PAC will focus on could determine certification disputes, election litigation, voting rules and redistricting at a time when many voting-related laws are being actively challenged in the courts, Norm Eisen, a top Democratic attorney who was a co-counsel for the House Judiciary Committee during Trump’s first impeachment, told ABC News in an interview. Eisen is pro-bono, outside counsel for the group.

“If it once again, as it did in 2020, comes down to the integrity of a handful of AGs and secretaries standing up for the genuine results, you must have pro-democracy leaders as AGs and secretary of state,” Eisen said.

Jim Messina, who was campaign manager for President Barack Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign who will now chair the advisory board, told ABC that state office races targeted by the PAC are often “way underfunded,” even though they handle “the block and tackling” of running elections.

Also on the board is former Republican Rep. Barbara Comstock, former Secretary of Labor Tom Perez and Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers.

The day-to-day operations will be overseen by TJ Ducklo, who worked for Joe Biden in 2020 and 2024, along with Wikler and former Michigan Democratic Party Chair Lavora Barnes.

Ramping up fundraising

Democracy Defenders is ramping up its fundraising efforts, too, with planned events with former President Joe Biden and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, Harris’ 2024 running mate.

Their work is starting in Wisconsin, Michigan, Arizona, Nevada and North Carolina, according to the group, and likely expand to other states. They’re also focused on some off-year elections in 2027, including another Wisconsin Supreme Court race. They put “several hundred thousand dollars” into the Georgia Supreme Court race on Tuesday, though those candidates were unsuccessful, PAC organizers said.

Last year, Elon Musk dumped $20 million into the high-stakes Wisconsin Supreme Court race through his own PAC. Democracy Defenders is attempting similar work on a smaller scale. Ahead of the Georgia Supreme Court race on Tuesday, the group placed money behind former state Sen. Jen Jordan and attorney Miracle Rankin. Both lost their races, though Rankin came within 2 percentage points of beating the incumbent, according an Associated Press projection.

PAC organizers say election denialism in the Republican Party has become more sophisticated, highlighting that down-ballot candidates in key states are no longer always running on “Stop the Steal” messaging like in the aftermath of the 2020 election. But they still support voting restrictions and even law-enforcement involvement around voting.

‘Different shades of authoritarians’

“You’ve seen here Donald Trump and Burt Jones, who is running for governor [in Georgia], who is a fake elector and actually traveled to Washington, D.C., with a letter in his pocket for Mike Pence the night before the insurrection … he’s literally on the ballot today,” Georgia Democratic Party Chair Charlie Baker said in an interview with ABC News on Tuesday.

Baker continued: “Donald Trump will leave office at some point, but what he has left in his wake in the Republican Party are different shades of authoritarians, and so even when he leaves, we’re not like we can’t say we are safely done with those kinds of actions being perpetrated.”

Jones, who did not face charges in the alleged fake elector plot, did not win his primary outright on Tuesday — he is headed for a June runoff.

Messina said that despite the party soul-searching that came after Harris’ election loss, the PAC is not trying to become another presidential super PAC or rival Democratic power centers separate from bodies like the Democratic National Committee, which is largely focused on congressional and gubernatorial races. It is not coordinating directly with the DNC, however. Instead, the group said it’s working directly with state parties and candidates.

“I don’t think it’s at all a condemnation of anything,” Messina said about the re-launch of the PAC. “What we’re trying to do is bring a large checkbook and a bunch of federal money.”

Messina also said the group is still trying to “figure out” its donor base. Top Democratic donors are already in the mix, but Messina highlighted that additional — even Republican or non-partisan donors — are interested in its efforts.

“There are new donors that I’ve, some of these people I’ve never met, and I’ve been in national politics for 30 years, and people are kind of rising to the top,” Messina said. 

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The Justice Department on Wednesday charged former Cuban President Raul Castro with murder over his alleged role in shooting down two planes that were carrying humanitarian aid in 1996, according to a newly unsealed court docket. The shootdown resulted in the deaths of three Americans.

The indictment marks a major escalation in the United States’ ongoing pressure campaign to achieve regime change of the island nation’s Communist-led government, though it’s not immediately clear whether the 94-year-old Castro will ultimately see the inside of a U.S. courtroom.

The indictment charges Castro with seven counts including conspiracy to kill U.S. nationals, destruction of aircraft and murder for each of the four passengers aboard the planes being flown by Brothers to the Rescue, a group that conducted rescue missions for Cuban exiles who sought to flee the country.

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and other senior officials are expected to speak about the charges later in Miami.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Barney Frank, the former Massachusetts congressman who championed Wall Street reform and served as one of the first openly gay members of Congress, has died at 86, sources told ABC News.

The former U.S. representative served as chairman of the powerful House Financial Services Committee from 2007 to 2011 and was a leading co-sponsor of the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act, which was enacted in response to the 2008 financial crisis.

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The Justice Department is expected to announce charges against Raul Castro, sources familiar with the matter tell ABC News.

The charges are expected to include allegations of murder for shooting down two planes carrying humanitarian aid to desperate migrants in the 1990s that resulted in the deaths of three American pilots.

The charges will be announced in a press conference this afternoon.

This is a developing story. Please back for updates.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — A batch of closely watched primaries in six states on Tuesday both set up some key midterm election matchups and gestured to major forces shaping the Democratic and Republican parties — from the strength of President Donald Trump’s endorsement to the road to the White House in 2028.

Here are some of takeaways from Tuesday night’s results.

The strength of Trump’s endorsement, again?

President Donald Trump had turned his ire on Rep. Thomas Massie, the maverick Republican representing Kentucky’s 4th Congressional District, given Massie’s push to release the Jeffrey Epstein files, his vote against the president’s sweeping domestic tax policy legislation and his vocal opposition to the Iran war.

Trump constantly excoriated Massie and endorsed his primary opponent Ed Gallrein and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth even campaigned with Gallrein on Monday. The primary also became the most expensive House primary on record, with more than $32 million in ad spending.

Massie had held firm — adamant that his constituents would pull through for him. But the power of Trump’s endorsement was more firm, just as it had been in the Louisiana Senate primary last Saturday, where Trump-endorsed Rep. Julia Letlow and state Treasurer John Fleming advanced to a runoff after Trump had turned against incumbent Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy.

“We weren’t really running against Ed Gallrein, we weren’t running against Donald Trump. We were running for what we believe in,” Massie told supporters on Tuesday night.

Mixed results for Trump in Georgia

But it seems Trump’s endorsement could not carry his candidate of choice, Lt. Gov. Burt Jones, over the finish line outright in the Georgia Republican gubernatorial primary. Jones now heads towards a June 16 runoff against billionaire businessman Rick Jackson.

In remarks Tuesday evening, Jackson, who entered the race just three months before the primary, said his campaign sent an “earthquake” through the political establishment and called Jones a political insider.

“We have 28 days to finish it, and the choice could not be more clear or more important. Burt Jones is a political insider. I’m the opposite. I don’t owe the lobbyists anything. I don’t need the establishment’s permission. I cannot be bought, and I will not back down,” Jones said Tuesday evening.

What Tuesday meant for potential 2028 presidential candidates

Tuesday was a good night for Pennsylvania’s Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro, a rumored 2028 presidential candidate, as all four of the primary candidates he endorsed in Pennsylvania’s battleground U.S. House districts — where Democrats hope to flip seats held by GOP incumbents — were projected by ABC News to win, although one of the four, Paige Cognetti, was unopposed.

Shapiro’s success on Tuesday could bolster his standing among Democrats both in the state and nationally — possibly helpful if he does launch a bid for the presidency — although he still faces the general election campaign for governor against state Treasurer Stacy Garrity, and Democrats still face an uphill battle trying to flip all four seats they are targeting.

And down south in Georgia, Gov. Brian Kemp, who has not ruled out a presidential run in 2028, also played a hand in shaping the state’s GOP Senate primary. Kemp backed Derek Dooley, a former football coach who is projected by ABC News to face a runoff against Rep. Mike Collins in a race that Trump did not endorse in.

Kemp, who opted out of running for Georgia’s Senate seat after being recruited by Republicans, threw the full force of his political weight behind elevating Dooley from a political unknown to a candidate for one of the most-watched Senate races in the country.

Working behind the scenes, Kemp made calls to donors to build support for Dooley, and Kemp’s PAC, Hardworking Americans Inc., has also invested millions in the race to support Dooley, the son of legendary former University of Georgia football coach Vince Dooley.

Kemp also campaigned heavily with Dooley in the lead-up to Georgia’s primary.

Kemp has had a rocky relationship with Trump since refusing his pressure to overturn Georgia’s election results in 2020. But Kemp remains popular among Georgians, winning reelection against a Trump-endorsed primary challenger in 2022.

ABC News’ Emily Chang and Halle Troadec contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.