分类： politics

In a landmark electoral upheaval that delivered a stinging public rebuke of sitting President Donald Trump’s policy agenda, Democratic candidates have wrested full control of the U.S. Senate and are on track to claim a comfortable majority in the House of Representatives, flipping long-held Republican strongholds and shattering decades of partisan voting patterns across the country. As vote tallies continued to roll in after polling stations closed, Democratic leaders confirmed the party had secured a minimum of six flipped Senate seats to lock in a 52-seat majority, with additional projected gains poised to expand that margin as remaining ballots are counted. The chamber’s new Democratic majority will carry sweeping legislative and oversight power, granting the party authority to block Trump’s judicial nominees and cut off federal funding for the U.S.-backed Israeli military campaign against Iran, a policy that has driven steep spikes in domestic fuel prices and widespread public frustration over the administration’s foreign policy priorities. In the House, Democrats have already notched a minimum of seven flipped seats, putting them on a clear path to hand the gavel of House Speaker to New York Congressman Hakeem Jeffries, the first Black lawmaker in U.S. history to hold the top House post. In a victory address framed as a unifying national milestone, Jeffries hailed the night’s results as a “red, white and blue moment” rather than a narrow partisan win, emphasizing that Democrats would prioritize urgent action on household affordability, rising living costs, and public corruption allegations targeting Trump’s inner circle and family members, though he notably omitted any direct reference to the ongoing U.S.-Israeli conflict with Iran in his public remarks. The historic midterm cycle stands as the most expensive U.S. congressional election in history, with total campaign spending surging to $11.6 billion according to campaign finance tracker Ad Impact. Pro-Israel lobbying groups alone poured an estimated $40 million into primary and general election efforts to unseat progressive Democratic candidate Abdul El-Sayed, who ultimately held a narrow lead too close to call late on election night even as other Democratic upsets locked in the party’s Senate control earlier than projected. A string of unprecedented, high-profile upsets underscored the scale of the Democratic sweep: in South Carolina, Democrat Annie Andrews defeated Darline Graham – the Trump-endorsed sister of the late longtime Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, who was a vocal champion of military support for both the Iran conflict and U.S. aid to Ukraine – to flip the Senate seat once held by Graham. In Kansas, Democrat Adam Hamilton ousted incumbent Republican Roger Marshall to claim the state’s Senate seat, marking the first time a Democrat has won that Kansas Senate post in nearly 100 years. In deep-red Texas, a state long considered an unassailable Republican bastion, scandal-plagued Trump-backed incumbent Attorney General Ken Paxton – who previously faced fraud indictments and a corruption impeachment, and led efforts to criminalize the nation’s largest Muslim civil rights organization – lost his seat to Democrat James Talarico, flipping a district Republicans have held for more than 30 years. Talarico built broad cross-partisan support by centering his Christian faith, voicing qualified support for U.S. aid to Israel with conditions on weapons use, and prioritizing working-class economic issues. The Democratic wave also swept in a historic cohort of young, first-time progressive candidates who ran on platforms focused on working-class affordability and Palestinian human rights, and refused all corporate campaign donations – a high-stakes choice in a U.S. electoral system where fundraising totals often determine race outcomes. This incoming progressive bloc includes Egyptian-American surgeon Adam Hamawy, who rose to national prominence for his 2024 volunteer medical mission to Gaza, winning New Jersey’s 12th district; a trio of New York progressive candidates including Democratic Socialist Darializa Avila Chevalier, state legislator Claire Valdez, and former New York City Comptroller Brad Lander, all set to represent New York districts in Congress; 29-year-old Ethiopian immigrant Melat Kiros, who won Colorado’s 1st District; and Pennsylvania state legislator Chris Rabb, who claimed Pennsylvania’s 3rd District. The size of the progressive contingent is large enough to potentially delay or derail centrist Democratic leadership priorities in the new House, creating internal policy tensions within the caucus. Even in districts that were considered safe toss-ups going into election night, Democrats delivered decisive upsets: New York Republican Congressman Mike Lawler, who represented a district former Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris won in 2024, conceded his race after Trump made an unusual last-minute push to court anti-Zionist Jewish leaders in the district to rally support for Lawler. In Colorado’s 8th District, Democrat Manny Rutinel defeated incumbent Republican Gabe Evans, per CBS election projections. The most shocking upset of the night came in Texas, where Democrat Gina Hinojosa ousted three-term incumbent Republican Governor Greg Abbott to claim the top office of the nation’s most populous GOP stronghold. In Ohio, Democrat Amy Acton defeated Republican contender Vivek Ramaswamy to win the governorship, marking the first time a Democrat has held that Ohio statehouse seat since 2006. As the scope of his party’s losses became clear, Trump took to social media platform X to distance himself from underperforming Republican candidates, writing, “I wasn’t on the Ballot and if I was, we would have won IN A LANDSLIDE! Thank you for your attention to this matter.” In a subsequent Wall Street Journal interview, Trump acknowledged the unpopular Iran conflict was a contributing factor to the sweeping Democratic victories, noting “Iran was a piece of it.” Voter turnout data painted a clear picture of the electoral dynamic: per Politico, turnout rose 15% in counties that Harris won by 70% or more in 2024, compared to just 7% in counties that Trump won by a 70% margin, reflecting deep disappointment within the traditional Republican base and unprecedented enthusiasm among Democratic and independent voters. Pew Research data released the month before the election showed only 30% of U.S. voters approved of Trump’s performance during his first two years in office. For Arab, Muslim, and immigrant communities across the country, the election carried uniquely high stakes, as the Trump administration had implemented sweeping crackdowns on non-citizens, targeted pro-Palestine and anti-war speech, and deployed openly anti-Muslim rhetoric that reshaped daily life for millions of minority residents. Even as powerful pro-Israel lobbying group AIPAC poured unprecedented resources into competitive races, their electoral influence appeared diminished: early exit polling in Michigan showed El-Sayed captured 60% of votes cast by Jewish American voters during early voting periods. The newly elected 120th Congress will be formally sworn into office on January 3, 2027.

In a landmark electoral milestone that reshapes the trajectory of U.S. congressional representation, Egyptian-American progressive Democrat Abdulrahman Mohammed El-Sayed secured a decisive win in Michigan’s high-stakes U.S. Senate race on Wednesday, cementing his status as the first Muslim lawmaker to join the U.S. Senate when the 119th Congress convenes in January. As 80% of precincts reported results, the Associated Press formally projected El-Sayed’s victory at 2:27 a.m. EST (7:27 GMT), with the 42-year-old holding a commanding 51.8% share of the vote compared to his Republican rival, former Congressman Mike Rogers, who trailed at 46.2%.

Addressing a jubilant crowd of supporters in his victory speech, a visibly energized El-Sayed framed his win as a rebuke of months of targeted Islamophobic attacks launched directly by sitting U.S. President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance. “I am so proud and honored to stand here as your senator-elect,” he told roaring attendees, before directing a pointed, good-humored jab at the two top Republican officials who had spent months demonizing his identity. “JD, habibi, there is this delicious irony in the fact that you’re constitutionally obligated to swear me in in January,” he said, drawing thunderous cheers. Turning his attention to Trump, who had repeatedly refused to use El-Sayed’s full name and instead referred to him exclusively as “Mohammed” as a deliberate slur, he added: “Donald, I know you struggle with my name, so after JD swears me in in January, you can just go on and call me Senator.”

El-Sayed dedicated a portion of his address to marginalized families across the country who had watched the presidential administration mock his Arab and Muslim identity for months. “To all the parents who struggled to explain to their kids why the president openly mocked someone for their name or how they pray, let them know tomorrow that the bad guys lost,” he said. “They want an America that is too small for some of us. We know that America is big enough for all of us.”

The historic general election victory capped a grueling primary fight that defied every expectation set by Democratic Party insiders and deep-pocketed special interest groups. Back in August, El-Sayed pulled off a narrow upset over Haley Stevens, a centrist incumbent backed by the powerful American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), which poured tens of millions of dollars into efforts to defeat him across both the primary and general election cycles. El-Sayed, who earned an early endorsement from progressive Senate leader Bernie Sanders, later secured the backing of former President Barack Obama to shore up support among the Democratic Party’s centrist base in the critical swing state. He openly called out AIPAC for its unprecedented $42 million spending spree against his campaign during his victory address, telling the pro-Israel lobbying group: “Thank you for giving me the opportunity to beat you twice.”

A core pillar of El-Sayed’s campaign platform centered on reorienting U.S. foreign policy away from unconditioned military aid to Israel, framing that funding as enabling apartheid and what he described as a genocidal campaign against Palestinian civilians. “They try to call you hateful if you believe that Palestinian kids should get to grow up in the land of their forefathers without being murdered by our tax dollars,” he told supporters. “If you believe in equal rights for peace, dignity and self-determination that’s not hate, it’s love. We want our taxes spent here…we don’t want our money sent to do apartheid or genocidal war.” Michigan Democratic Party Chair Curtis Hertel noted that the unprecedented intensity of the primary race drove a 500,000-vote surge in Democratic turnout compared to typical low-participation midterm primaries, a wave of energy that carried through to the general election.

A Michigan native with a long track record in public service, El-Sayed graduated from the University of Michigan, where he delivered the 2007 commencement address and drew public praise for his oratory skills from then-keynote speaker former President Bill Clinton. He went on to earn a medical degree from Columbia University, and previously led public health departments for Detroit and Wayne County. His 2018 long-shot bid for Michigan’s governorship laid the groundwork for his signature Medicare-for-All policy proposal, a national single-payer health insurance plan that has grown increasingly popular across both partisan lines as private U.S. insurance premiums have skyrocketed in recent years. Unlike his fellow progressive New York politician Zohran Mamdani, El-Sayed did not seek an endorsement from the Democratic Socialists of America, a strategic choice to court centrist Democratic voters in Michigan’s politically volatile swing electorate. He rejected all corporate campaign donations, raising every dollar of his campaign war chest from individual grassroots supporters, and made a deliberate push to appear across every major television network, podcast and social media platform to reach voters across the full political spectrum.

His Republican opponent Rogers, by contrast, ran a far lower-profile campaign and received a last-minute endorsement from Trump at a point when the sitting president’s approval ratings were hovering at historic lows. For months, Trump and national Republican surrogates launched a relentless series of smear attacks against El-Sayed, labeling him “a Communist loser who hates Jews and Israel” and pushing unsubstantiated claims that he had secret ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, a group for which no verifiable evidence linking El-Sayed has ever been produced. The Muslim Brotherhood was only designated a terrorist organization by the U.S. after Trump sanctioned three of its political branches the prior year. El-Sayed repeatedly dismissed those identity-focused attacks as a sign of Republican political bankruptcy, noting: “My name is not raising your gas prices. My name is not taking us to war. My name is not the reason you can’t afford your groceries.”

El-Sayed, who is married to an Indian-American physician and shares two young daughters with her, will make history when he takes his Senate seat in January, breaking decades of precedent for Muslim representation in the U.S. upper legislative chamber.

In a surprise announcement made during a Tuesday appearance on Fox News, former U.S. President Donald Trump confirmed that his administration will halt the decades-long annual direct military aid package to Israel starting at the end of the current calendar year, a move he framed as the outcome of a months-prior bilateral understanding struck with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. As outlined by Trump, the existing $4 billion annual aid disbursement will cease entirely, but core U.S.-Israel military collaboration will remain fully intact, including unrestricted access for Israel to purchase U.S.-manufactured advanced weaponry, alongside ongoing joint defense initiatives.

Trump emphasized that the policy shift was rooted in a mutual assessment that Israel no longer requires direct monetary military assistance, noting that the Jewish state retains full authorization to procure any U.S. defense system it deems necessary, on par with allied European nations. He added that the U.S. would step in with targeted emergency support should Israel face unforeseen security threats, clarifying that the adjustment alters the structure of bilateral security ties rather than severing longstanding defense partnerships.

The remarks arrive against a backdrop of mounting electoral pressure on U.S. policymakers regarding Washington’s unwavering support for Israel in the lead-up to key national elections. A June Quinnipiac University public opinion survey revealed a dramatic shift in voter sentiment: 48% of all U.S. registered voters and 66% of Democratic respondents now believe the U.S. government is excessively supportive of Israel, a sharp jump from the 16% of total voters and 20% of Democrats who held that view when the same question was first fielded in 2017.

Under the current 10-year bilateral memorandum of understanding running from 2019 through 2028, the U.S. disburses $3.8 billion annually to Israel, comprising $3.3 billion in foreign military financing and $500 million earmarked for collaborative missile defense programs. The Israeli Ministry of Defense confirmed that formal negotiations between U.S. and Israeli representatives are already underway to draft a new long-term security cooperation framework, first launched in May, with core priorities centered on joint investment in defense research, development, and domestic weapons production capacity on both sides. The proposed new model is designed to reframe the U.S.-Israel security relationship from a dynamic of one-sided aid to a mutually beneficial, reciprocal strategic partnership.

A non-partisan July report from the Congressional Research Service, the independent policy advisory body serving the U.S. Congress, corroborated that senior officials from both nations have been exploring a post-2028 transition away from direct cash military aid toward collaborative joint defense programs for months prior to Trump’s public announcement.

The UK government is set to mount a full defence of its controversial proscription of pro-Palestinian direct action network Palestine Action at a landmark two-day Supreme Court hearing kicking off Wednesday, a high-stakes legal showdown that is redefining the intersection of Britain’s counterterror legislation, fundamental free expression guarantees, and the statutory right to public protest.

A segment of the proceedings will be held behind closed doors, court administrators confirmed, to accommodate classified evidence tied to national security considerations that cannot be disclosed in open court. The appeal unfolds against a backdrop of escalating civil unrest across the nation, as law enforcement has ramped up crackdowns on demonstrators voicing solidarity with the group. Over the most recent weekend alone, hundreds of peaceful protesters were taken into custody outside the US Embassy in central London and in the Scottish capital of Edinburgh, simply for carrying placards bearing the six-word slogan: “I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action.”

Since the UK government formally banned Palestine Action under the Terrorism Act in July 2025, that very six-word phrase has evolved into a widespread rallying cry for pro-Palestine campaigners, resulting in more than 4,000 people being targeted for arrest under counterterror statutes. The affected groups include human rights legal practitioners, elderly long-time peace activists, and even Holocaust survivors, sparking widespread public outcry over the scope of the legislation. The proscription also ignited high-profile cultural controversy earlier this year, when celebrated Irish novelist Sally Rooney saw her works pulled from UK retail shelves after she publicly voiced her backing for Palestine Action, amplifying global concerns that the ban represents a sweeping overreach that violates core free speech protections.

The legal battle that has landed the case before the UK’s highest judicial body was initiated by Palestine Action co-founder Huda Ammori, who has navigated a winding, back-and-forth path through the British court system over the past 13 months. Shortly after the 2025 proscription, which criminalised both formal membership in Palestine Action and any public expression of support for the organisation, campaigners mounted an immediate legal challenge. In February 2026, the High Court handed Palestine Action a resounding victory, ruling that the government’s proscription was unlawful and constituted a disproportionate, unjustified infringement on basic human rights. That ruling was later overturned by the Court of Appeal in June 2026, which reinstated the group’s official terrorist designation. The Supreme Court formally granted Ammori permission to file a final, binding appeal in August 2026.

Representing Ammori in the upcoming hearing, leading human rights barrister Raza Husain KC will argue that classifying a grassroots direct action group that primarily targets arms manufacturing and supply firms under counterterror laws sets an extraordinarily dangerous precedent that opens the door to criminalising legitimate political dissent across the UK. In pre-filed written submissions to the Supreme Court, Ammori’s legal team highlighted internal Home Office assessments that found less than 1% of Palestine Action’s documented direct action protest activities over a five-year period met the legal definition of terrorism. Husain further clarified that of 385 total actions staged by the group across that five-year span, only three were ever assessed to fall under the Terrorism Act’s terrorism classification. He emphasised that the proscription had resulted in “the total destruction of a protest group which enjoyed widespread support from across civil society.”

Dozens of independent human rights organisations and international oversight bodies, including multiple United Nations special rapporteurs, have filed amicus curiae statements with the court, warning that upholding the ban will trigger a severe chilling effect across the entire UK civil society sector, discouraging legitimate grassroots advocacy on a wide range of social and foreign policy issues.

For its part, the UK government will argue that the Court of Appeal’s ruling that restored the proscription was fully consistent with long-standing, established legal principles, and contained no errors of law. Leading government counsel James Eadie KC noted in his written submissions that the lower appellate court’s factual conclusions were fully justified by the evidence presented to it. Two major UK Jewish representative bodies, the Community Security Trust and the Jewish Leadership Council, have also submitted supporting evidence to the court, arguing that maintaining Palestine Action’s proscription is necessary to protect the safety and security of Britain’s Jewish community.

The highly charged public debate around the ban has even drawn public comment from senior cabinet officials, including UK Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband, who acknowledged earlier this year that the proscription had produced unforeseen, absurd outcomes that saw “grannies and vicars” arrested on terror-related charges. “I don’t think anyone’s intent was to have those people criminalised,” Miliband told LBC News in a public interview, adding that the Supreme Court’s deliberations would be critical to resolving the dispute, and that the government would keep the policy under active ongoing review.