Mayors and states sue Trump over new green card restrictions

(NEW YORK) — On prediction markets like Kalshi and Polymarket, bettors can put money on dozens of election-related bets in Maryland, from the winner of the upcoming gubernatorial race to the margin of victory in the state’s 6th Congressional District. 

For most Americans, the Maryland elections are fair game — races in the state are already generating hundreds of thousands of dollars in trading volume on the major prediction markets. But not for residents of Maryland, which is one of a handful of states that ban election betting. And Jared DeMaranis, the state’s election administrator, plans to enforce it. 

“If we have credible information about illegalities and it’s not within our civil citation authorities, we will of course refer those matters to the office of the state prosecutor for enforcement,” DeMaranis told ABC News. “This is going to be a growing issue and something that we need to stop in its infancy.” 

Federal regulators and the courts have given Americans the green light to wager on elections, prompting a frenzy of wagering on the outcomes of races, the likelihood of candidates dropping out, the amount of voter turnout, and more. But more than half of U.S. states have existing laws on the books that limit or restrict the practice, according to research from the Pew Research Center — and now state leaders are sorting out how exactly to enforce those rules. 

Maryland, Texas and Arizona are among those states with laws explicitly banning election betting. And in Wisconsin, residents cannot cast ballots in elections in which they have placed a “bet or wager depending upon the result of the election,” according to state law. 

Ann Jacobs, the chair of the Wisconsin Election Commission, said Wisconsinites who bet on an election and then vote in it could have their vote challenged or face voter fraud charges. Jacobs acknowledged that it would be a difficult rule to enforce, but stood by the spirit of the law. 

“The policy behind saying, ‘You can bet or you can vote, but you can’t do both,’ is 100% a sound policy,” Jacobs said. “We want people to vote based on their belief that the person they are voting for is going to be the best for their community … it just makes sense.” 

Arizona officials have focused their efforts on the platforms themselves. The state’s attorney general filed criminal charges against Kalshi earlier this year claiming the platform operated an illegal, unlicensed gambling business and accepted unlawful wagers from Arizona residents.

In April, a federal judge blocked Arizona from continuing its criminal case. The injunction followed a lawsuit against the state by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission — the federal regulator overseeing prediction markets — which argued that prediction markets fall under federal oversight rather than state gambling regulations.

The Arizona attorney general’s office declined to comment on the active case or how it will address potential election betting this season. 

Officials in Texas, another state with a law banning election betting, did not respond to inquiries from ABC News. But Christopher McGinn, the executive director of the Texas Association of County Election Officials, said he and other administrators are engaged in early discussions about how to handle prediction markets, particularly the likelihood that individuals with a financial stake in the outcome of an election may have “more incentive to attempt to manipulate [elections], or spread misinformation.”

Prediction market advocates believe election-related event contracts strengthen political forecasting and can predict outcomes with greater accuracy than traditional polls. But many election experts warn that election wagering could threaten to compromise the integrity of elections or incentivize offenders to profit from insider information. 

“I can’t think of all of the ways that people might try to make money off of election outcomes, but I’m sure there are enterprising people who will come up with all kinds of things,” said Rick Hasen, an expert in election law at the University of California-Los Angeles. “We don’t want to start thinking of elections as a financial incentive. The potential for manipulation is too great.” 

Legalized election betting in the U.S. is a new phenomenon. In 2024, Kalshi prevailed in a lawsuit that allowed it to offer event contracts for politics and elections. More recently, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission proposed new rules that classified elections “as contests, not gaming,” further clearing the way for platforms to offer election-related wagers. 

Those developments present state officials with a challenge: How can they enforce state-level bans on election betting without support from federal regulators or the platforms themselves? The answer for some, including Maryland, is to pursue the individuals. 

“Right now, it’s on the person. The person that places the wager on the platform is doing the illegality,” said DeMaranis, the Maryland elections chief, adding that lawmakers will eventually “need to clarify the role of those platforms to make sure they’re liable for offering monetary incentives on elections.” 

Matthew Wein, a former Homeland Security official, said a similar dynamic emerged with social media giants over the past decade. In the absence of a crackdown on platforms, authorities were left to pursue users “for doing things they shouldn’t have been doing on the platforms, but not against the platforms themselves.” 

“And this seems to be heading in the same direction with prediction markets,” said Wein, who now authors a gambling newsletter called “Secure Stakes.” 

A Polymarket spokesperson said states with election betting bans “run counter to the established framework for regulating prediction markets.”

“We look forward to addressing these claims through the appropriate legal process,” the spokesperson said.

A Kalshi spokesperson said the company’s services are “federally regulated and have stock-market-grade systems for identifying and addressing market manipulation.” 

Meanwhile, in Washington, D.C., lawmakers continue to scrutinize prediction market platforms. Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., and Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., have introduced legislation that would prohibit event contracts on election outcomes, which they said “spreads civic cynicism and distrust in our democratic institutions.” 

DeMaranis said he has struggled to instill a sense of urgency among the nation’s election officials, many of whom he said have never heard of prediction markets.

The effort, he said, has left him feeling like the “canary in the coal mine.” 

“It’s about the integrity and public trust of the electoral process,” DeMaranis said. “When you have people that are engaging in election-related wagering, the integrity of the entire process now comes into question.” 

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(TAMPA, Fla.) — The Detroit Lions announced Monday that they have released cornerback Terrion Arnold from the team, hours after a hearing to address his arrest last week on charges alleging he orchestrated a kidnapping in which three men were robbed and beaten at gunpoint.

The 23-year-old NFL player is one of seven people arrested in connection with the “targeted armed robbery” last February in Tampa, police said. 

The Lions announced in a brief statement on social media Monday that they have released him. ABC News has reached out to Arnold’s sports management team for comment.

Arnold is accused of “coordinating and directing” the codefendants in an alleged conspiracy to “lure” the three men to an apartment, where prosecutors say they were beaten in retaliation for the alleged theft of more than $200,000 worth of Arnold’s personal property from an Airbnb in which he had stayed with friends days earlier in Largo, Florida, according to the Hillsborough County State Attorney’s Office.

Arnold surrendered to authorities on Wednesday and was initially denied bond following his arrest on multiple armed robbery and kidnapping charges. He faces a potential sentence of up to life in prison if convicted on the charges, prosecutors said.

During a pretrial detention hearing in Tampa on Monday held prior to the Lions’ announcement, a judge set his bond at $1 million, denying the prosecutors’ request that he remain held without bond.

He posted bond on Tuesday and is no longer in custody.

A county prosecutor alleged during Monday’s hearing that Arnold was “the reason why this gets set in motion.”

“There’s three individuals that had guns pointed in their faces because of this defendant,” Kevin Riley, an attorney with the Hillsborough County State Attorney’s Office, said.

Defense attorney Harvey Steinberg asked the judge not to find probable cause. He argued that the evidence presented so far only shows that Arnold was “suspicious” that his phone was taken and wanted to confront someone, but that there is “zero evidence” that he was aware that there was going to be a beating or guns involved.

“Did my client direct them? Nope,” Steinberg said.

Judge Christopher Sabella found there was probable cause, calling the case “serious,” but denied the state’s motion to detain Arnold ahead of trial. He set bond at $1 million, saying the amount was “consistent with the serious nature of the charges.”

Among the bond conditions, Arnold must surrender his passport and is only allowed to leave his residence for work or legal purposes. 

The state had asked that Arnold be required to wear an ankle monitor, which the judge denied after Arnold’s defense argued that the monitor would make him unable to work due to strict NFL requirements regarding attire.

“I don’t want to interfere with his ability to make a living,” Sabella said, adding that he suspects Arnold will have a “paparazzi monitor” that will make his whereabouts known.

“If he shows up on a beach in Tahiti, he’ll be on social media,” Sabella said. “If he violates the conditions of his bond, he will be found.”

Arnold, who was in handcuffs during the court appearance, could be seen smiling with his attorneys following the hearing.

The incident occurred on Feb. 4, three days after multiple items belonging to Arnold and others were stolen from an Airbnb he had rented, according to police. On Feb. 3, Arnold and others reported a loss totaling more than $250,000 to the Largo Police Department, police said. 

The men, all in their late teens, were allegedly beaten and pistol-whipped by two of the co-defendants, while a third streamed the assault to Arnold and other suspects who were traveling to the apartment, police said. Investigators uncovered a group chat in which Arnold and another suspect allegedly gave directions during the assault, police said.

After arriving at the apartment, Arnold allegedly directed the other suspects to go inside, at which point the victims were robbed during the ongoing assault, police said. Their wallets, phones, jackets, cash and jewelry totaling more than $6,200 were stolen, according to the criminal report.

Nearly two hours after arriving at the apartment, the victims were escorted out by armed suspects and left in their vehicle, police said. Arnold never entered the apartment or interacted with the victims, based on the police statement.

The victims reported the incident to Tampa police and “positively identified the suspects,” police said. The three victims had “visible injuries from being battered,” police said.

Arnold allegedly suspected that two of the three victims were responsible for the theft, though investigators ultimately determined that none of them were involved, Tampa police said.

Cell phone evidence and “corroborating testimony” from the co-defendants also “helped establish Arnold’s role in planning and directing the crimes,” the Hillsborough County State Attorney’s Office said.

Among the six codefendants arrested in connection with the case, four men are being held without bond, while two women pleaded guilty on Wednesday to robbery and kidnapping charges, according to the state attorney’s office. As part of their plea agreements, they are required to testify truthfully in proceedings related to the case, the office said. 

Arnold’s sports management team said he “categorically denies any involvement in the matters underlying the allegations made against him and maintains his innocence.”

“There is no credible evidence linking Mr. Arnold to these allegations,” Denise White, CEO of EAG Sports and Entertainment Agency, said in a statement to ABC News. “Instead, the government appears to be relying on testimony from multiple convicted felons who have admitted their own involvement and may have substantial incentives to shift blame in an effort to lessen their sentences.”

Following Monday’s detention hearing, White said the the judge’s ruling “confirms that there is very little evidence to even suggest any criminal involvement by Mr. Arnold.”

Arnold, a native of Tallahassee, Florida, played at the University of Alabama and was a first-round pick in the 2024 draft.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(CHICAGO) — For former President Barack Obama and former first Lady Michelle Obama, the opening of the Obama Presidential Center Friday is the culmination of their shared journey from Chicago’s South Side to the White House.

In their first joint network TV interview since leaving office in 2017, the couple reflected on their accomplishments in their eight years in the White House and the hope they have for the country ahead.

“People are a little discouraged right now,” Barack Obama told ABC News’ Robin Roberts in an interview that aired Wednesday on “Good Morning America.” “But, again, I believe that we go through these cycles, and there’s going to be a younger generation that pops up and there are going to be leaders who pop up.”

The former president said since leaving office, he has largely refrained from inserting himself too much into public policy debates as he sees himself these days as less of a “player” and more of a “coach” for the new generation of leaders.

“You pick and choose your spots. I’m not suggesting I’ve done it perfectly,” he said, going on to cite the example of how George Washington stepped away from politics after his time in office.

“He kind of said, ‘All right, I’ve done my stint. And now I’m going, you know, back home,'” Barack Obama said of the nation’s first president. “I think Michelle, you know, very much would prefer a quieter life for us. And on the other hand, there’ve been some folks who would like to see me out every day, right, banging the drum.”

With the Obama Presidential Center, part of the hope, he said, is to “encourage the next generation of leadership.”

The center’s campus encompasses 19 acres in Chicago’s Jackson Park, just steps from the University of Chicago. At a cost of $850 million, it includes 3.7 acres of parkland, offices for the Obama Foundation, an auditorium for public events, public art and athletic facilities, and a new branch of the Chicago Public Library.

In collaboration with the National Archives and Records Administration, the Obama presidential archives are fully digital.

The center’s centerpiece is a four-story museum that places the Obama years within a greater context of social change, starting with the Declaration of Independence and spanning the civil rights and labor movements, as well as the grassroots political movement in Chicago that led to Barack Obama’s political ascent.

Obama on his greatest accomplishment in office
When asked by Roberts what he considers the greatest accomplishment of his two terms in office, Barack Obama cited the passage of the Affordable Care Act in March 2010, which expanded Medicaid, provided greater consumer protections, and lowered health insurance costs, especially for households at or below the federal poverty level.

He said the legislation continues to show that his administration represented all of America.

“For all the resistance from our political opposition, the Affordable Care Act has now helped 50, 60 million people, and continues to help people even though the current Congress has tried to weaken it and taken away some of the subsidies that were really helping a lot of working people,” the former president said. “I’m very proud of the message we sent to the country that we’re representing everybody.”

In addition to his legislative accomplishments, museum also tells the story of Barack Obama’s political ascendancy and how the core messages of “hope” and “change” were critical to his campaign for his first term.

Despite the harsh partisanship of today’s political culture, Michelle Obama said those messages are still possible.

“People just have to be fed up enough. They have to want more,” she said. “And I think the presidential center hopefully will remind people of just how close we are to moving this country in the direction that we want to move it in.”

Michelle Obama said an exhibit in the center that reflects on the Obamas’ position as the first Black first family in the history of America reflects that.

“You have one exhibit where people thought that it could never happen, that a Black man, a Black family would never live in the White House. That America would never accept that,” she said. “And lo and behold, the whole country, you know, the vast majority of the country believe differently.”

Amid the museum’s focus on the promise of democracy, Barack Obama said Americans, in times of disagreement, can focus on making their voice heard with their vote.

“The premise of this country is everybody gets a right to say, ‘No, I don’t agree with that. I challenge that. No, Obama, I think you’re making a mistake,’ you know?” he said. “And then we have a conversation about it, and then it gets settled in an election. And if enough people decide I didn’t know what I was doing, then you move on to the next person.”

Tune into the ABC News special “The Obama Legacy: First Joint Interview Post-White House,” streaming Thursday, June 18, on Disney+ and Hulu.

The Walt Disney Co. is the parent company of ABC News.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.