Nationalist Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz party faced off against Péter Magyar’s centre-right opposition Tisza party on Sunday in the Hungary election.
The Fidesz party has been in power for 16 years in Hungary, according to Reuters.
The Tisza party was leading in most polls heading into Election Day.
Reuters reported a record turnout at the polls.
Orbán has conceded defeat.
Recently the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in one of the most consequential election integrity cases in years – Watson v. Republican National Committee. The core question: Does federal law require that mail-in ballots be received by Election Day, or can states extend that deadline by days – or longer – after the election has concluded?
This is a case the ACLJ has been fighting. As we reported earlier this year, we filed an amicus brief at the Supreme Court on behalf of 29 Members of Congress – urging the Court to hold that Election Day means exactly what it says: one day. The arguments we put before the Court echoed throughout the chamber.
Mississippi passed a law allowing absentee ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted if received up to five business days after the election. Mississippi is one of 14 states with such a grace period. The Republican National Committee sued, arguing the practice is preempted by the federal statutes that Congress enacted in 1845 and 1872 establishing a single, uniform Election Day for federal elections.
Take action with the ACLJ. Add your name to our petition: Defend Election Integrity.
The ACLJ’s Arguments Took Center Stage
Election Day means a single day. The central pillar of our brief was that Congress exercised its explicit constitutional authority to establish Election Day as one specific day – not a window, not a period. Justice Alito made this exact argument from the bench, noting that Labor Day, Memorial Day, and Independence Day are all particular days, not extended periods – and Election Day should be no different. That is the ACLJ’s argument, made on behalf of 29 Members of Congress, now voiced by Justice Alito.
Voters in a Missouri town ousted four city council members Tuesday for supporting an AI data center in the area.
Voters in the town of Festus, Missouri, voted against four members of the town’s eight-member city council who voted to greenlight a $6 billion data center project a week prior, according to St. Louis Public Radio. Anger has been brewing in several localities across the U.S. against data center projects, with voters in a Wisconsin town overwhelmingly opting Tuesday to crack down on a proposed development.
Tuesday’s vote followed months of at times raucous opposition against CRG Clayco’s plan to build a hyperscale data center on 360 acres in the town. The four city council members who lost their reelection bids were defeated by candidates who ran against the data centers and supported more transparency in the data center approval process.
“This data center fight has struck this community to the core and really, honestly ignited a community-driven effort here,” Dan Moore, who defeated pro-data center incumbent Bobby Benz, told St. Louis Public Radio. “People are awake now, and we’re not going to let this continue on anymore.”
Residents opposed to the AI data center flooded a local gymnasium to voice their frustrations during a March 31 city council meeting where the council voted to approve a framework of requirements for CRG’s planned construction, St. Louis Public Radio reported.
“I am not against growth,” Festus resident Lauren Albers said during the raucous city council meeting. “I’m against putting data centers between homes. I am against rushing into development before residents get real information, real answers and a real voice.”
Obama-appointed U.S. District Judge Leo T. Sorokin has dismissed the Trump DOJ’s lawsuit demanding the Commonwealth’s full, unredacted statewide voter registration list.
The case, United States v. William Francis Galvin, was part of the Department of Justice’s aggressive nationwide crackdown to force states to turn over their voter rolls under Title III of the Civil Rights Act of 1960 to root out dead voters, non-citizens illegally registered, duplicates, and other irregularities that threaten the integrity of our elections.
But in Massachusetts, Democrat Secretary of State William Francis Galvin refused to hand over the data. The DOJ sued. And now, an Obama judge has let him off the hook on a technicality.
According to the 13-page order issued Thursday, Judge Sorokin ruled that the DOJ’s demand letter failed to include a proper “statement of the basis” for requesting the records, as required by the 1960 law.
The judge wrote that the Attorney General’s August 14, 2025, letter stated the purpose (to check compliance with NVRA and HAVA list maintenance rules) but offered zero factual basis, no specific concerns, no anomalies, no complaints, just a blanket demand for Massachusetts’ entire computerized voter list.
The court slammed the demand as “facially deficient” and tossed the entire complaint and motion to compel. Motions to dismiss from Galvin and intervenors were declared moot.
This marks the fourth loss for the DOJ, with zero wins, out of 30 active cases.
Democrat Suzanna Karatassos, who is running for the Georgia House of Representatives, has floated an idea to ‘punish’ MAGA.
Karatassos shared a video suggesting banning internet access for those who voted for Donald Trump.
“When this is all over, and Trump’s gone and Democrats are back in charge, and we’re rebuilding everything,” she said in the now-deleted TikTok video posted in January.
“The punishment for MAGA for voting for Trump three times needs to be that they remove their internet access for four years.”
“That they cannot post videos or comments on social media for four straight years, so that none of us are subjected to their lies and misinformation while we are rebuilding the chaos that they caused the whole world and America gets to be without their B.S. online for 4 straight years.”
“Can we all agree to this?”
I’m Tobey MacCachran – a senior journalism and English student at Denison University– and an intern with NORML since December. I came to cannabis advocacy the way most people arrive at anything that matters: it stopped being abstract.
I’ve had a birthmark on my right wrist my whole life. Other kids would notice it, point at it, and make jokes, but I never minded. It was a part of me that was as ordinary as my hands or my name. I was born with it, and I was comfortable.
Eczema was different.
It showed up in my early teens, uninvited and impossible to ignore. Red, cracking patches spread across my skin during dry winters, causing my hands, wrists, and neck to resemble the surface of Mars. The birthmark was mine. The eczema felt like an invasion. And somewhere in the space between those two things, my relationship with my own body quietly changed.
By high school, my life was dictated by small adjustments. Long sleeves on some days. Certain seats. Situations I’d remove myself from before anyone noticed. Shirt always on at the beach. And then at 17, I tried a cannabis topical for the first time.
Something actually worked. And last Friday, Ohio made it a crime to access the product that helped me most.
SB56 was sold as consumer protection. For people who depend on cannabis topicals for chronic pain and skin conditions, it landed like a punishment.
A cannabis topical isn’t recreational. It’s a cream or balm infused with cannabinoids applied directly to the skin. No high. No altered state. For millions of people managing chronic pain, inflammation, and skin conditions, it’s simply the thing that works when nothing else does. It was that for me – the first treatment in years that gave back some ordinary comfort in my own body. The kind of comfort I hadn’t realized I’d lost until I had it again.
Ohio Senate Bill 56 went into effect on March 20th. Governor DeWine signed it in December, framing it as consumer protection – a crackdown on unregulated intoxicating hemp products that flooded gas stations and corner stores. And there’s a real conversation to be had there. But buried inside the bill are provisions that go far beyond protecting anyone.
Yesterday, four Washington County Sheriffs sued the State of WA, the State Legislature, and Governor Bob Ferguson, asking the court to block a blatantly unconstitutional new law that gives a newly formed, unelected state commission the power to end their careers without a vote, a recall, or a court order.
Of all the terrible bills the (other than their unconstitutional income tax) that Democrats passed in the 2026 legislative session. 2SSB 5974 may be the worst. Duly elected County Sheriffs, Police Chiefs, and Town Marshals are now subject to a state-appointed, unelected bureaucratic board and can be “decertified” and removed from office.
This is another blatantly unconstitutional and sinister Democrat bill, where over 50 Republican Amendments were not adopted! Under the law, its 21 commissioners are appointed by the Governor (who appoints them to six-year terms, with some staggered).
Spokane County Sheriff John Nowels, Pend Oreille County Sheriff Glenn Blakeslee, Stevens County Sheriff Brad Manke, and Ferry County Sheriff Ray Maycumber filed the complaint in the Superior Court of the State of Washington, in Pend Oreille County. A hearing on their motion for a preliminary injunction is scheduled for April 16.
The legal action comes with the consent and support of Spokane County Prosecuting Attorney Preston McCollam, Pend Oreille County Prosecuting Attorney Dolly Hunt, Stevens County Prosecuting Attorney Erika George, and Ferry County Prosecuting Attorney Michael Golden.
The sheriffs’ motion argues the governor and legislature “adopted a modern-day McCarthy loyalty oath in the form of 2SSB 5974,” calling it “not a close constitutional call but rather a flatly prohibited practice from a dark period of our country’s history that must never be resurrected.”
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on Wednesday signed a new election integrity bill into law, requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote and tightening voter ID standards across the state.
The measure, widely seen as Florida’s version of the federal SAVE America Act Republicans have so far failed to pass through Congress, will ensure only American citizens will be able to vote.
Most provisions will take effect after the upcoming midterm elections.
“This bill protects and expands integrity in our voter registration process,” DeSantis said upon signing the legislation.
“Our Constitution in the state of Florida says only American citizens are allowed to vote in our elections, so we need to make sure that is the law.”
Under the new law, election officials will verify a voter’s citizenship status after registration.
President Donald Trump on Tuesday signed an executive order to create a nationwide list of verified eligible voters and to restrict mail-in voting, a move that swiftly drew legal threats from state Democratic officials ahead of this year’s midterm elections.
The order, which voting law experts say violates the Constitution by attempting to seize states’ power to run elections, is the latest in a torrent of efforts from Trump to interfere with the way Americans vote based on his false allegations of fraud. The president has repeatedly lied about the outcome of the 2020 presidential campaign and the integrity of state-run elections, asserting again Tuesday that he won “three times” and citing accusations of voter fraud that numerous audits, investigations and courts have debunked.
The order signed Tuesday calls on the Department of Homeland Security, working in conjunction with the Social Security Administration, to make the list of eligible voters in each state. It also seeks to bar the U.S. Postal Service from sending absentee ballots to those not on each state’s approved list.
Trump is also calling for ballots to have secure envelopes with unique barcodes for tracking, according to the executive order, which was first reported by the Daily Caller. Federal funding could be withheld from states and localities that don’t comply.
Pregnant Chinese women have turned a tropical paradise into a maternity ward — pumping out babies who automatically become US citizens daily.
The Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), a US territory northeast of Guam in the Pacific Ocean, has been flooded with so-called “birth tourists” since 2009 when then-president Barack Obama introduced a visa-waiver program for Chinese nationals.
China-watchers estimate about 1,000 companies offer birth tourism to the Northern Mariana Islands, other US overseas territories and even the US mainland. They claim a gob-smacking 1.5 million American babies are being raised in China by Chinese parents who’ve participated in birth tourism.
In a March 9 letter to three Trump Cabinet secretaries, Republican lawmakers demanded an accounting on Chinese birth tourism.
“The concern is about these children born to Chinese parents — do the parents have connections to the Chinese Communist Party, which is an adversarial government to the US?” Chris Chmielenski, president of the nonprofit Immigration Accountability Project, told The Post regarding the letter.
Hellbound and Down 
You must be logged in to post a comment.