Virginia Democrats ask US Supreme Court to override state court’s striking down redistricting plan

(WASHINGTON) — Senator Andy Kim, D-N.J., is aiming to tackle the nation’s literacy crisis with a new bill focused on increasing children’s access to books.

Kim will introduce his “Open Books, Open Doors Act” on Monday, urging the Department of Education to authorize $100 million in annual grants to states and local communities to combat illiteracy and what he calls the country’s “book deserts,” which is an area that doesn’t have reliable access to books.

“Reading is a powerful tool that every child in America should have,” Kim said in a statement to ABC News. “We know literacy and reading unlocks life-long success in school and out, but right now millions of kids across our country are living in book deserts.”

He told ABC News in an exclusive interview that he feels it’s his responsibility to pass legislation that helps more kids develop their reading skills.

“This is not meant to be a messaging bill,” Kim said, adding, “This is not just meant to put the idea on the table, like, I want to get this done.”

“I want us to be able to immediately be able to benefit the kids in this country as they grow up,” he said.

His legislation aims to ensure every child is positioned for long-term success in school and in life. Kim noted that illiteracy is dire, not only for children, but also for adults. When adults have difficulty reading, it hurts the economy and American families, he said.

If passed, Kim’s bill would use the federal education department grant program to support states’ efforts to combat reading rates while prioritizing the locations that struggle most with access to books and “high quality” reading materials.

Actor and literacy advocate LeVar Burton, who for two decades helped young students get excited about literature as the host of PBS’ “Reading Rainbow,” endorsed Kim’s push to provide children with equitable access to books.

“We must ensure that books are easy to find and free to borrow in every neighborhood — because when a child can read, they possess the power to write their own future,” Burton told ABC News in a statement.

The reading crisis is widespread. Recent data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), otherwise known as “The Nation’s Report Card,” found about a third of fourth graders are unable to read above the basic level. Access to books and a decrease in students who read for enjoyment are major factors contributing to the country’s sliding reading scores, according to the legislation and education experts.

Education Department skeptics and government officials, however, believe the agency has too much spending power already — without achievement results.

After a vocal minority of House Democrats and education advocates decried public school funding for lagging national test scores, Education Secretary Linda McMahon noted that continuing to spend federal dollars on the literacy issue was the wrong solution.

“Instead of solutions to confront our nation’s literacy crisis, they [Congressional Democrats] defended the status quo,” McMahon wrote in a recent post on X.

“The solution: return education to the states and empower local leaders to focus on the basics,” she added.

The future of Kim’s legislation could ultimately rest with McMahon, who has been tasked with putting herself out of a job by shuttering the department. Kim, who sits on the Senate’s education committee, has been critical of McMahon since she was tapped to lead the agency.

Kim said he has “deep disagreements” with moves made under her leadership that he alleged harm kids and their opportunities in life.

The Department of Education has not responded to ABC News’ request for comment.

On the heels of Read Across America week, the bill supports science of reading programs — the phonics-based reading approach — and early screening and intervention for reading disabilities. The legislation also establishes a federal clearinghouse that would identify evidence-based “book access” strategies to help advance literacy in local communities.

More than 20 education organizations support Kim’s bill, from the American Library Association to Reach Out and Read, a nonprofit organization that encourages families to read aloud together and provides books to millions of households nationwide.

Reach Out and Read CEO Lynette Fraga told ABC News having early access to books at home not only fuels literacy outcomes but also helps students thrive in life.

“If we think about early childhood we think about return on investment,” Fraga said. “We know that if we invest in the earliest years through things like access, through things like meaningful programs and child centered practices and systems, the return on investment is huge.”

Kim suggested that books “open doors” for millions of children. His bill currently has no co-sponsors — and its fate is unclear at this time — but he’s optimistic about support for this issue across party lines.

“I hope that all of us can get on the same page about increasing literacy in America and can see the value of that,” Kim said. “We are stronger as a society if we have a more literate society. I think everyone can recognize that.”

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — In a case with potentially major ramifications for the 2026 midterm elections and all federal elections going forward, the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday is considering a Republican Party bid to prevent states from counting mail-in ballots received after Election Day even if they were postmarked on or before.

Thirty states plus D.C. and several U.S. territories have laws allowing tabulation of some late-arriving ballots provided that they were timely cast and received within a specified post-election timeframe, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

The case before the justices centers on Mississippi’s acceptance of absentee ballots up to five days after Election Day so long as they were received by the Postal Service on or before.

The Republican National Committee, which brought the lawsuit, alleges the policy violates federal law establishing the Tuesday after the first Monday in November as the day for election of members of the House, Senate, and presidential electors, in specified years.

Republicans argue that the term “election” means both “ballot submission and receipt” and that Congress intended that it be completed on a single day.

“Allowing states to count large numbers of mail-in ballots that are received after Election Day undermines trust and confidence in our elections,” said RNC chair Joe Gruters in a statement on the case. “Elections must end on Election Day.”

Mississippi and several voter advocacy groups defending the state law insist “election” has historically meant when voters make their “choice” by marking and submitting their ballots — not necessarily when they are received and counted.

“The weight of the law and the weight of the precedent is on our side,” said Marc Elias, a prominent Democratic election law attorney representing some of the parties defending the Mississippi law.

A Supreme Court decision in favor of the RNC could upend voting policies and procedures in dozens of states five months before voters head to the polls for the midterm elections.

Voting rights advocates also warn that an abrupt change in policy could lead to widespread rejection of ballots that were properly cast by well-intended voters but experienced unintended delivery delays by the Postal Service or other circumstances.

Hundreds of thousands of mail-in ballots in the 2024 general election arrived after Election Day but were still legally counted that year across 22 states and territories with a post-election grace period, according to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission.

Many states that accept late-arriving absentee ballots implemented their policies during the COVID-19 pandemic when vote by mail surged in popularity and Postal Service delays raised concerns about inadvertent disenfranchisement.

Extended ballot receipt deadlines have also been aimed at helping active duty military service members and other Americans living overseas who cast their ballots from afar.

Elias said he believes the RNC suit — against a Republican-led state with minimal absentee voting — was part of a broader effort on the part of President Donald Trump and his allies to make it more difficult to vote by mail under the belief the practice favors Democrats.

“I don’t suspect that spending millions of dollars to affect the handful of ballots in the state of Mississippi that only allows excuse absentee voting anyway to be counted after Election Day is what the RNC is really after,” said Elias. “This is just a partisan effort to undermine mail-in voting.”

In March 2025, Trump signed an executive order that attempted to cut federal election funding to states that have mail ballot receipt grace periods, but it has largely been blocked by federal courts for now.

The president later said on social media that he is leading a “movement to get rid of MAIL-IN BALLOTS,” claiming, without providing evidence, that they lead to voter fraud.

Trump has also been pushing Republicans in Congress to approve the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE America) Act, which would — in part — outlaw voting by mail for anyone without a legitimate excuse, such as military service, illness, or disability, making it impossible to vote in person.

Data on which party would potentially benefit from changes to mail ballot rules is not clear.

Most Americans, 58%, support allowing any voter to cast a ballot by mail, according to a Pew Research Center survey late last year. But there is sharp division among parties, with 83% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters favoring mail-voting with 68% of Republicans and Republican-leaning voters opposed.

The Trump administration, which is not a party to the case, told the court in an amicus brief that it strongly supports a decision striking down Mississippi’s law and others like it.

“Ensuring all ballot boxes close on the same day eliminates incentives and opportunities for fraudulent abuse,” wrote Solicitor General John Sauer. “Leaving them open conflicts not only with the ordinary meaning of ‘election day,’ but also with the very integrity of the election.”

Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch, a Republican, dismissed that claim in a filing with the court, arguing that neither ballot receipt nor ballot counting is part of the “election” and that both have historically extended beyond Election Day.

“Counting votes is not part of the election,” Fitch told the court. “That is why counting votes lawfully can and does occur after Election Day. So, too, with ballot receipt: it is vital — but it is not part of the election itself. So, states may do what the Mississippi legislature has done: make a ‘policy choice’ to require only that absentee ballots be mailed by election day.”

A decision is expected in the case by the end of June.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — The Trump administration’s deportations to third countries last year are estimated to have cost taxpayers “upward of $40 million,” with some third-country migrants costing more than $1 million each, according to a Democratic congressional report released Friday.

The 30-page report is the result of a ten-month review by Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who examined third-country deportations undertaken by the administration.

In particular, the report found that over $32 million was sent directly to Equatorial Guinea, Rwanda, El Salvador, Eswatini, and Palau — with some funds sent before any third-country national arrived. 

“The total costs of the Trump Administration’s third country deportations through January 2026 are unknown but are likely upward of $40 million,” the report said.

Tommy Pigott, a spokesman for the State Department, did not comment directly on the figures used in the report.

“Contrary to what they might have hoped, this report only underlines much of the unprecedented work that the Trump administration has done to enforce our immigration laws. Astonishingly, some in Congress still want to go back to a time just 14 months ago when cartels had free rein to poison Americans and our border was open,” he said in a statement.

The report analyzed the sums in comparison to the number of third country nationals actually received, and concluded that the administration “paid at least one country more than $1 million per third country national received.”

For example, the report found that the administration paid the Rwandan government $7.5 million “in exchange for agreeing to accept third-country nationals.” As of Jan. 2026, Rwanda received seven third-country nationals, with each migrant costing approximately $1.1 million, the report said. 

El Salvador was found to have received the most migrants, with approximately 250 third country nationals costing $20,755 per migrant. The majority of those people deported to El Salvador were Venezuelan nationals who were then sent onward to Venezuela several months later, according to administration officials.

The findings also show that Palau had not received any third-country nationals as of January, yet they have already received $7.5 million from the U.S. 

According to a U.S. official quoted in the report, deportation deals with some countries were intended to communicate a “threat” to migrants. 

“With countries like Palau or Eswatini, the point is that the Administration can threaten people that they will literally be dropped in the middle of nowhere,” the U.S. official allegedly said.

“The point is to scare people,” he allegedly added. 

The Democrats’ report also homes in on the high sums of money dedicated to transporting migrants from the U.S. to third countries, with the administration “frequently using military aircraft that can cost more than $32,000 per hour.”

At times, the administration paid “twice” for migrants’ travel — “once to remove them to a third country and then again to fly them to their home country,” the report said.

This occurred due to a lack of sufficient notice provided to migrants’ home countries, the report said, arguing that this is “needlessly wasting taxpayer funds.”

Despite these significant costs, the report found that a “relatively small number of migrants” were ultimately removed to third countries, therefore leaving “little measurable impact on [the administration’s] deportation agenda.”

The report also highlights an apparent lack of oversight in terms of monitoring foreign governments’ compliance, especially with countries that have historically high records of human rights violations and corrupt governments.

“Without oversight, it is unknown whether U.S. funds are facilitating corruption or other abuses,” the report said.

It is also “challenging” for the State Department to track such funds, the report said, alleging that the administration sends such money directly to foreign governments rather than utilizing “trusted third-party implementing partners.”

“In at least one country, U.S. officials told [Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee] that Trump Administration officials instructed them not to follow up on how deportees were being treated,” the report alleged, adding that many of the agreements rely on “blanket language” for assurances. 

The report criticizes the administration for making “secret deals” with foreign countries in order to establish agreements about accepting third-country nationals.

“Dozens” of other countries are currently being pursued to agree to deals, the report said. 

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, slammed the administration for engaging in policy that she calls the “epitome” of “fraud, waste and abuse.”  

“This report outlines the troubling practice by the Trump Administration of deporting individuals to third countries — places where these people have no connection — at great expense to the American taxpayer and raises serious questions,” she said in a statement.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.