US Commerce Secretary signals possible action on Chinese robots after review, Politico reports

June 23, 2026 8:06 PM UTC / Updated 46 mins ago / By Reuters

U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick speaks in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., June 11, 2026. REUTERS/Daniel Heuer

June 23 (Reuters) – U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told executives at a closed-door meeting Monday that his department is studying Chinese state-subsidized robotics imports and signaled the administration could take action once the review is complete, Politico reported on Tuesday, citing sources.

“We don’t want state subsidized robotics attacking us in America, this is the arms race that is coming — robotic arms are coming,” the Politico quoted Lutnick as saying. “We need to make sure they’re produced in America so we’re going to study those right now.”

Get weekly news and analysis on U.S. politics and how it matters to the world with the Reuters Politics U.S. newsletter. Sign up here.

Reuters could not immediately verify the report.

Reporting by Preetika Parashuraman in Bengaluru, Editing by Franklin Paul

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

阿里巴巴起诉美国防部 寻求从涉军名单中移除

2026年6月24日 07:11 / 联合早报

阿里巴巴起诉美国国防部，要求将公司名字从涉军名单移除。 （路透社档案照）

中国科技巨头阿里巴巴起诉美国国防部，要求将公司名字从涉军名单移除。

据彭博社报道，阿里巴巴在星期二（6月23日）提交的诉状中称，美国国防部将阿里巴巴列入涉嫌支持中国人民解放军的企业名单时既未提供充分证据，也未作出合理解释。

阿里在向加州圣何塞联邦法院提交的诉状中表示，这一决定违反了美国宪法规定的正当程序原则，也侵犯了公司的言论自由权。

本月早些时候，美国国防部指控包括阿里巴巴、百度、比亚迪在内的多家中国大型企业为解放军提供支持。其他被列入1260H名单的中国企业还包括长鑫存储、长江存储以及机器人开发商宇树科技。

中国互联网巨头腾讯控股去年已被列入该名单。

五角大楼更新涉军中企名单 分析称美国视技术栈为战略竞争领域

阿里巴巴表示，围绕这一认定问题，公司数月来一直与美国国防部沟通。至少从今年2月开始，双方就已展开接触，当时国防部曾短暂公布过一版名单，但数分钟后又在未作解释的情况下撤回。

阿里巴巴称，公司曾提交详细证据证明自身并非解放军支持者，当时回答了相关问题并递交书面回应，但美国防部从未作出回复。

尽管被列入名单不会立即带来重大法律后果，但美国防部正越来越多地利用该名单限制相关企业与美军签订合同或获得科研资金。列入1260H名单也被视为向美国投资者发出的警示信号，通常被认为可能是未来将面临更严厉贸易限制的前兆。

2025财年《国防授权法案》规定，自6月30日起，美国国防部不得与任何为1260H名单上的中国企业进行游说或辩护的机构签订合同。

阿里巴巴在诉状中表示，被列入1260H名单后，公司无法继续聘请多年来长期合作的游说机构，包括帮助其挑战“支持军方”标签所需的律师和政策顾问。

阿里巴巴还指出，美国政府缺乏基本的正当程序保障，该公司是通过阅读《联邦公报》才得知自己被认定为中国军方支持者。

It’s a 6-3 Supreme Court: Ideological splits mount ahead of major end-of-term rulings

2026-06-23T21:24:41.463Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/23/politics/6-3-supreme-court

The Supreme Court hit an inauspicious milestone Tuesday as it raced to finish its most divisive pending cases by the end of the month: It has already handed down more 6-3 decisions along ideological lines than it did for the entire term that ended last year.

As it navigates a charged political atmosphere during President Donald Trump’s second term and endures sharp criticism from the left and right, the court has already split into conservative and liberal camps in seven decisions this year — one more than last year — before it even gets to major cases on presidential power and transgender rights.

Some of those decisions, including on whether Trump may fire officials at independent federal agencies like the Federal Trade Commission, may also divide the court along ideological lines. The justices are scheduled to drop their next batch of opinions on Thursday.

Four of the five decisions the court released Tuesday were 6-3.Those included a ruling that barred a Rastafarian man from suing prison officials who violated a federal law when they cut his dreadlocks and a decision that permitted Exxon to sue over property confiscated by the Cuban government in 1960.

The most significant 6-3 decision so far this term was the court’s April ruling that gutted the Voting Rights Act’s power over redistricting disputes. The decision, and several that followed from it, helped Republicans quickly redraw congressional district in Southern states like Louisiana and Alabama to give the GOP an advantage in this year’s midterm elections.

And those numbers do not take into account rulings on the court’s emergency docket, where the liberal and conservative wings have split more frequently.

“The court’s tendency to decide important cases along 6-3 partisan lines is a serious problem for the court’s legitimacy,” said David Cole, a Georgetown Law professor who frequently argued before the court as the legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union. “The justices are supposed to be guided by law, not politics.”

“Even if many divides reflect differences in legal worldview, not politics, the more they divide along party lines, the less credibility the court has as an institution,” Cole said.

To be sure, some of the most important cases this term have brought liberal and conservative justices together. The court’s decision in February to invalidate Trump’s sweeping global tariffs counted three conservatives and three liberals in the majority. Last week, the court unanimously decided that the Second Amendment barred the government from disarming a Texas man just because he frequently smokes pot.

But the number of 6-3 ideological decisions is often trotted out by the court’s critics and its supporters as both attempt to frame the court’s direction as they lodge and parry criticism of how the court is resolving politically fraught issues.The justices themselves will often brush aside the 6-3 outcomes and point out the large share of cases that are decided unanimously, even though those usually involve more technical questions with far less reach.

“It bothers me because it’s not accurate,” Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a conservative, said last month at the George W. Bush Presidential Center of the focus on 6-3 decisions. The far higher share of opinions that are decided unanimously, Barrett said, “is not the narrative that’s portrayed in the media.”

https://www.cnn.com/

An explosive appeal from Trump over E. Jean Carroll sexual abuse verdict stalls at the Supreme Court

1:22

Speaking at the Reagan Library last month, Justice Neil Gorsuch made a similar point.

“Nine old people appointed by five different presidents over the course of 30 years from all around the country, and we are able to resolve cases lower courts disagreed on unanimously 40% of the time,” said Gorsuch, who was Trump’s first nominee to the high court. “I think that’s something.”

The high court has decided more than half of its 46 decisions so far this term unanimously, a slightly higher share than last year by the end of June. But the biggest and most complicated decisions delivered in the final days of a term are rarely unanimous. With a dozen cases still waiting for a ruling this year, the share of unanimous cases will likely plummet.

From 2020 to 2024, nearly 14% of the court’s merits decisions were split along ideological lines, according to data compiled by SCOTUSblog.

Even before the court turned toward its final month, the justices increasingly were sniping at one another — in written opinions and in public — over their role in the redistricting cases.

“Courts are apolitical,” liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the court’s most junior justice, said last month. “We have to be scrupulous about sticking to the principles and the rules that we apply in every case and not look as though we’re doing something different in this kind of context.”

Jackson’s point echoed a dissent she wrote in an emergency docket case days earlier involving Louisiana’s ability to quickly redraw its congressional districts. Justice Samuel Alito, a member of the court’s conservative wing, responded in a brief concurring opinion by describing Jackson’s points as “trivial at best” and “baseless and insulting.”

“What principle has the court violated?” Alito wrote. “The principle that we should never take any action that might unjustifiably be criticized as partisan?”

In addition to the decisions Tuesday on religion and Exxon’s ability to sue Cuban entities, the court split 6-3 in a decision that will make it easier for the government to deport green card holders who are convicted of certain crimes. It also split along ideological lines on the most substantial holding of a decision that blocks members of the Falun Gong religious movement from suing Cisco for selling equipment to the Chinese government they said aided and abetted the group’s torture.

Over the next week, the court is expected to rule on Trump’s effort to end birthright citizenship as it has been understood for more than a century as well as the president’s attempt to fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook. Based on the oral arguments, those decisions may well wind up with some conservatives and liberals together in the majority.

But also pending are cases dealing with the president’s power to fire the leaders of other independent agencies, turn away asylum seekers at the border and cancel temporary deportation protections for Haitian and Syrian nationals. The court is considering an important Second Amendment case over a Hawaii law that makes it harder to carry guns into private property open to the public, like retail stores.

And it is weighing two cases dealing with laws enacted by West Virginia and Idaho that ban transgender girls from competing on girls’ sports teams.

All of those are candidates for splitting the court 6-3.

ODNI under Pulte fires 6 staff, sends 45 back to home agencies

2026-06-23T18:24:00-0400 / CBS News

By

Updated on: June 23, 2026 / 6:54 PM EDT / CBS News

Just over 50 career and political intelligence staff at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence have been removed from their roles since Bill Pulte became the agency’s acting director, Friday.

Six career and political intelligence staff were terminated and 45 were sent back to their home agencies, according to three sources familiar with the personnel moves.

Pulte has been asking deputies and other directors for suggestions about cuts. Some of the ODNI deputies pushed for more cuts, but Pulte said that the 51 was enough for now, one of the sources said.

One source characterized the cuts as thoughtful and methodical. No staffers have been removed from the counterterrorism group.

No further firings are planned for now, two of the sources said.

The cuts follow hundreds of staff reductions last year by former Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who stepped down last week. Last year’s planned downsizing sought to bring the office’s headcount from 2,000 to around 1,300.

President Trump has pushed for further cuts, directing Pulte to “execute the immediate and needed downsizing of the office” in a Truth Social post earlier this month.

The office is charged with overseeing the country’s intelligence agencies and helping them coordinate with each other. It was created in response to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, which investigators widely believe was preceded by a failure of intelligence agencies to share information.

Since then, Gabbard and some lawmakers have argued the ODNI has become bloated and has added more bureaucracy to the intelligence community — worsening a problem it was created in part to resolve.

Republican Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, who chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee, said earlier this month the office has “grown far beyond its original mandate.” Many of the office’s staff hail from other intelligence agencies but have been detailed to ODNI, and Cotton argued large numbers of them should be returned to their “home agencies.”

Sen. Mark Warner and Rep. Jim Himes, the top Democrats on the Senate and House intelligence panels, warned Pulte against making large-scale staff cuts, calling it an inappropriate course of action for an acting official without national security experience.

“While there is room to consider responsible reductions to ODNI’s workforce, any large cuts would follow on a substantial downsizing that has already occurred in 2025 and risk jeopardizing the mission of an organization explicitly created after 9/11 to prevent any future such terrorist attack,” the two Democrats wrote in a joint statement.

After Gabbard announced in May that she would resign from the post, Mr. Trump said he would install Pulte, a housing finance official, as acting director of national intelligence. He later nominated Jay Clayton, the top federal prosecutor in Manhattan, to serve as Senate-confirmed director.

Mr. Trump’s pick for acting director of national intelligence, who assumed the role on Friday, has sparked intense pushback in Congress. Democrats, and some Republicans, questioned the selection due to his lack of national security experience.

Democratic Rep. Jason Crow of Colorado said Sunday he’s worried that “Americans are at risk” with Pulte serving as DNI “because we have someone who’s incompetent at the head of this agency,” in an interview on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan.”

In addition to Pulte’s lack of national security experience, Democrats have railed against the pick for his role in investigations into Mr. Trump’s political foes. Crow, who serves on the House Intelligence Committee, said he’s “obviously concerned that this is somebody who’s a political attack dog, and his single biggest qualification is that he’s loyal to Donald Trump and is willing to go after Donald Trump’s enemies.” But he said more immediately, he’s concerned about Americans’ safety.

“This is a really important position. This sits atop our intelligence agencies, and by law, Congress mandated that this person have significant intelligence experience because they have to make sure that we’re keeping Americans safe, which is not what Bill Pulte is capable of doing,” Crow said.

Since Pulte’s selection, Democrats have declined to extend Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which grants intelligence agencies broad authority to spy on overseas targets, causing the legal provision to expire earlier this month.

And as Senate GOP leaders tried to bring an end to the impasse by moving to quickly confirm Clayton as permanent director of national intelligence, the president abruptly called for Clayton’s confirmation hearing to be canceled last week.

Talks on extending FISA Section 702 were already strained, with some members of both parties pushing for stricter guardrails and arguing the program can scoop up Americans’ communications without a warrant. Intelligence officials say the program is essential to national security.

Asked whether Democrats have miscalculated, Crow said “not at all.”

“I know how important it is, but I’m unwilling to trade Americans’ constitutional rights, privacy and essential civil liberties for temporary extension to this program,” Crow said.

Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said on “Face the Nation” that “any Democrat that shuts down FISA at a time of great peril for the United States is making a huge mistake.”

“We’re playing with fire here, no matter what side does it,” Graham said. “America needs FISA up and running.”

Margaret Brennan, Kaia Hubbard and Joe Walsh contributed to this report.

中国深化涉麻精药品等成瘾性物质打击整治

2026年6月24日 07:45 / 联合早报

中国国务委员、国家禁毒委员会主任王小洪要求，深化涉麻精药品等成瘾性物质打击整治，持续向毒品犯罪发起凌厉攻势。

据中新社报道，在第39个国际禁毒日到来之际，王小洪星期二（6月23日）到北京市少年宫、北京市禁毒科技中心和国药物流有限责任公司调研禁毒工作，看望慰问一线禁毒工作者。

他说，要深入学习贯彻中共总书记习近平关于禁毒工作的重要指示精神，坚定拥护“两个确立”、坚决做到“两个维护”，树立和践行正确政绩观，坚持综合施策、系统治理，进一步健全毒品治理体系，纵深推进新时代禁毒人民战争。

在北京市少年宫，王小洪实地调研“护航青少年健康成长”禁毒宣传主题活动开展情况，观摩禁毒文化作品展、禁毒戏剧社、“禁毒卫士”体验营等活动，并与现场开展活动的青少年互动交流。他指出，要创新开展全民禁毒宣传教育，以防范药物滥用为重点，突出抓好青少年毒品预防教育，筑牢青少年识毒拒毒防线，共同呵护青少年特别是未成年人健康成长。

在北京市禁毒科技中心，王小洪深入了解缴获麻精药品检验鉴定和禁毒科技应用等工作。他强调，要紧密结合推进公安机关新质战斗力提升工程，加强禁毒基础技术研究，健全毒情监测预警网络，强化科技赋能禁毒实战，深化涉麻精药品等成瘾性物质打击整治，持续向毒品犯罪发起凌厉攻势。

王小洪还到国药物流有限责任公司，仔细听取麻精药品经营和流通管理等情况介绍。他要求，围绕麻精药品生产、储存、运输、销售、使用等各环节，坚持全链条追溯制度，推进落实信息化管理措施，建立完善更加积极主动的行刑衔接机制，严防出现流弊、形成滥用。

Biden judge overruled on key Trump immigration policy

June 23, 2026 7:24pm EDT / Fox News

The 2-1 ruling vacates a lower court order that had blocked the policy on due process grounds

By Elaine Mallon, Fox News

Fox News Justice correspondent David Spunt has the details on Abraham Hermosillo Alvarez, the alleged ringleader of a plot to attack the White House UFC event, on ‘America Reports.’

The Trump administration scored a major immigration win Monday after a federal appeals court revived its nationwide expedited removal policy, clearing the way for the Department of Homeland Security to resume fast-track deportations of eligible illegal immigrants.

The ruling allows federal immigration authorities to quickly remove certain migrants found anywhere in the country if they were not lawfully admitted or paroled into the U.S. and cannot show they have continuously lived in the country for at least two years.

In a 2-1 ruling, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated a lower court order that had blocked the policy, concluding that challengers were unlikely to succeed on their claims that the expansion violates constitutional due process protections.

“DHS thereby exercised its discretion to apply its expedited-removal authority to the maximum extent allowed by law,” Judge Justin Walker wrote for the court.

TRUMP’S ICE LAUNCHES BOLD COURTHOUSE MIGRANT ARREST STRATEGY TO FAST-TRACK DEPORTATIONS BIDEN AVOIDED

Federal law enforcement officers with Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Enforcement and Removal Operations conducted a traffic stop and detained people in Washington on Nov. 17, 2025.(Alex Brandon/AP Photo)

DHS praised the ruling.

“For years, DHS has arbitrarily limited expedited removal to 14 days even though it applies to illegal aliens who entered the country illegally within the last two years,” DHS General Counsel James Percival said in a statement to Fox News Digital. “Today, the D.C. Circuit vindicated our decision to apply the law as written. It’s not too late to take a $2,600 check and a free flight home!”

The ruling reverses a nationwide stay issued by U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb, a Biden appointee, who found the policy created a significant risk that individuals could be wrongly deported before having a meaningful opportunity to prove they were exempt from expedited removal.

The Trump administration first expanded expedited removal nationwide during Trump’s first term in 2019. The Biden administration later rescinded the policy before DHS reinstated it shortly after Trump returned to office in January 2025.

The majority concluded that the Constitution requires the government to notify illegal immigrants when they are facing deportation and give them an opportunity to respond, but does not require immigration officials to explain every potential legal defense that could prevent their removal.

APPEALS COURT GRANTS TRUMP SHORT-TERM WIN OVER BOASBERG IN IMMIGRATION RULING

“The constitutional requirement is notice of the action the government is taking and the grounds for it, plus an opportunity to respond,” Walker wrote. “It is not a requirement that the government explain how the individual might prevail.”

The court rejected arguments that DHS must proactively inform individuals they can avoid expedited removal by proving they have continuously lived in the United States for at least two years.

U.S. President Donald J. Trump watches the UFC lightweight championship fight during the UFC Freedom 250 event on the South Lawn at the White House on June 14, 2026 in Washington, DC(Jeff Bottari/Zuffa LLC)

“If due process requires the government to inform individuals of the two-year continuous-presence rule, it presumably also requires informing them of every other basis for contesting expedited removal,” Walker wrote. “Make the Road offers no limiting principle and identifies no authority for so expansive a requirement.”

The majority also dismissed claims that examples of wrongful deportations demonstrated the policy itself was unconstitutional.

“To be sure, the record contains evidence that some aliens have been erroneously subjected to expedited removal despite having been present for more than two years,” the opinion stated. “If so, that’s illegal. But the cause there would be individual officers’ failure to follow the law — not defects in the written directives under review.”

Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin testifies before the House Committee on Homeland Security during a hearing on the Fiscal 2027 budget request for the Department of Homeland Security, in Washington, Wednesday, June 3, 2026.(Cliff Owen)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Judge Robert Wilkins dissented, arguing that DHS’s procedures do not give migrants a meaningful chance to prove they have lived in the United States for at least two years and therefore may not qualify for expedited removal.

“DHS is using procedures that do not allow a meaningful opportunity for noncitizens to demonstrate that they have been continuously present in the United States for two years,” Wilkins wrote.

Elaine Mallon is a writer for Fox News Digital and Fox Business covering national politics.

House approves major housing affordability bill, sending bipartisan measure to Trump

June 23, 2026 7:32 PM EDT / CBS News

By

Caitlin Yilek Politics Reporter
Caitlin Yilek is a politics reporter at CBSNews.com, based in Washington, D.C. She previously worked for the Washington Examiner and The Hill, and was a member of the 2022 Paul Miller Washington Reporting Fellowship with the National Press Foundation.

Read Full Bio

Washington — The House on Tuesday passed a landmark housing affordability bill, marking a rare bipartisan legislative accomplishment as lawmakers seek to address rising costs ahead of the midterm elections.

House GOP leaders fast-tracked the legislation after the Senate approved it with overwhelming bipartisan support Monday. It passed the House in a 358 to 32 vote and now heads to President Trump to sign into law.

The legislation, known as the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, is the product of months of negotiations and aims to increase housing supply and lower prices. It places limits on corporate investors buying single-family homes, streamlines environmental reviews and removes regulatory barriers to speed up the construction process.

After months of back-and-forth, the four lawmakers spearheading the legislation announced an agreement to move forward. The push was led by GOP Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina, the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee; Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, the top Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee; GOP Rep. French Hill of Arkansas, the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee; and Rep. Maxine Waters of California, the top Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee.

“This final product advances practical, bipartisan and bicameral solutions to modernize federal housing programs, reduce regulatory burdens, streamline the development process and help build more homes to meet that growing demand and keep the American dream within reach,” Hill said Tuesday on the House floor. “This bicameral bipartisan bill before us today reflects the ideas from both chambers and demonstrates what can be accomplished when Congress focuses on solving problems for the American people.”

Earlier this month, the White House called on Congress to pass the bill, noting the provision setting restrictions on corporate investors owning single-family properties. A presidential proclamation called it “the most comprehensive and consequential housing legislation in the history of our country.”

But how big of an impact the provision will have on affordability is up for debate. Large institutional investors account for just 3% of single-family rentals, or less than half a percent of the total single-family housing stock, according to the think tank Urban Institute.

“A lot of people think that if we get rid of private equity, there will be all these houses available for sale for first-time homebuyers,” said Daryl Fairweather, chief economist at the real estate firm Redfin. “But that’s not going to happen.”

Lawmakers acknowledged there’s still more work to do to address the housing crisis, but touted the legislation as a promising first step.

“Today’s vote proves that it is possible to find bipartisan, common ground on legislation that actually helps the American people. And, importantly, it proves that bipartisan legislation doesn’t have to be the weakest, most milquetoast agreement that doesn’t offend anyone or do too much to help anyone either,” Warren said in a floor speech ahead of Monday’s vote.

Mary Cunningham contributed to this report.

US House passes affordable housing bill, sending it to Trump for enactment

2026-06-23T23:14:41.508Z / Reuters

By Richard Cowan

June 23, 2026 11:14 PM UTC Updated 2 mins ago

A view of the dome of the U.S. Capitol building on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. U.S., September 19, 2025. REUTERS/Kent Nishimura/File Photo Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab

WASHINGTON, June 23 (Reuters) – The U.S. House of Representatives passed bipartisan legislation on Tuesday that aims to speed the construction and availability ​of more affordable housing, sending it to President Donald Trump to ‌be signed into law.

The measure passed the Senate on Monday by a vote of 85-5.

The Reuters Daily Briefing newsletter provides all the news you need to start your day. Sign up here.

“America is facing a housing supply shortage that’s been years in the making,” House Financial Services Committee Chairman ​French Hill of Arkansas, a Republican, said during House debate on the ​bill.

A majority of American consumers have said, for the first time since ⁠2023, that they would prefer to buy a home rather than rent ​or move in with family members, according to a survey released on Tuesday.

Hill said ​the measure would “cut unnecessary barriers to new home construction” and modernize what he said were outdated banking regulations, to facilitate more home loans to lower-income people.

The House voted 358-32 to pass ​the bill.

Passage of such major legislation in the deeply divided Congress has been ​rare. Democratic Representative Jim Himes of Connecticut called the bill “a remarkable thing.”

There is an estimated shortage ‌of ⁠millions of affordable homes in the United States, according to housing industry groups.

The combination of high mortgage rates, rising home prices and supply chain problems over the past several years has contributed to consumers’ difficulties.

The bill, which has been written and ​rewritten several times ​by House and ⁠Senate negotiators over the past year, gives Republicans and Democrats an accomplishment to tout on the campaign trail in the ​run-up to November congressional elections.

The high cost of living in the ​U.S., ⁠with the inflation rate rising significantly during Trump’s second term in office, is ranked as a top worry by voters in public opinion polls.

Among other main provisions of the ⁠bill ​are waiving or speeding up environmental reviews for home ​construction projects and placing a cap on the number of already constructed single-family homes that big Wall ​Street investors can own.

Reporting by Richard Cowan; Editing by Muralikumar Anantharaman and Edmund Klamann

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab

CNN Projection: SC Attorney General wins in governor race; Trump backed both candidates

2026-06-23T23:49:15.909Z / CNN Politics

https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/23/politics/video/ebof-south-carolina-governor-gop-primary

Erin Burnett Out Front

CNN projects Alan Wilson will be the Republican nominee for governor in South Carolina, beating out Lieutenant Governor Pamela Evitt in the GOP primary runoff. Erin Burnett and John King report.

1:25 • Source: CNN

Trump’s midterm liabilities on display in visit to toss-up district

June 23, 2026 at 5:47 p.m. EDT / The Washington Post

A campaign-style appearance in Pennsylvania revealed the delicate position of Republicans facing tough reelection fights. They still need Trump’s voters, but are increasingly cautious about embracing him too closely.

President Donald Trump greets attendees at the Mack Trucks Lehigh Valley Operations facility in Macungie, Pennsylvania, on Tuesday. (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

By Isaac Arnsdorf and Natalie Allison

MACUNGIE, Pa. — President Donald Trump traveled on Tuesday to one of the tightest congressional battlegrounds in this year’s midterms, but he showed about as much interest in boosting the Republican candidate as the candidate showed in him.