Thousands of Louisiana voters have already cast early ballots for congressional candidates in what soon could be the wrong districts. Alabama's primaries are a week away, but the state could force a do-over for voting on U.S. House races. A new congressional map in Tennessee upended races that had been underway for months.

Republicans' rush to gerrymander congressional districts across several Southern states after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling hollowed out the Voting Rights Act is confusing voters and creating logistical headaches for local election officials. The changes are hitting while primary season is in progress.

The chaotic upheaval to an election season that could determine which party controls the U.S. House is the latest fallout from an intensely partisan gerrymandering battle initiated by President Donald Trump last year to protect Republicans' slim majority.

The Supreme Court's decision last month severely weakening the Voting Rights Act required Louisiana to reconsider a map drawn in 2024 with two majority minority congressional districts that elected Black representatives. The GOP-controlled Legislature could eliminate one or both in a state where roughly 30% of the population is Black.

The ruling also encouraged Republicans in Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina and Tennessee to consider eliminating four Democratic districts among them, three represented by Black lawmakers. Florida has a new map meant to cost Democrats four of their eight seats, out of 28.

In Louisiana, 66-year-old New Orleans resident Sallie Davis voted early last week. Her ballot allowed her to vote for Democratic U.S. Rep. Troy Carter, but a sign at her polling booth showed his race crossed off with a ballpoint pen. She was confused and frustrated — especially when a poll worker told her to go with what the sign seemed to convey. She's now worried that her entire ballot will not be counted.

"I was supposed to believe a piece of paper with an X on it marking out the person I wanted to vote for,” she said, her voice breaking as she recounted her experience later. “I think I have been disenfranchised. I think my vote, that I just voted on, it's not going to count or something. I think it's illegal.”

Primaries postponed, deadlines compressed

Louisiana's primary is Saturday, and a week of early voting there began May 2, two days after Republican Gov. Jeff Landry declared an emergency and suspended congressional primaries to give lawmakers a chance to draw a new map.

The Louisiana secretary of state's office said nearly 179,000 primary ballots had been cast as of Friday, including about 53,000 absentee ballots returned by mail. The ballots included U.S. House races, but votes in those contests won't be counted.

In a “60 Minutes” interview that CBS aired Sunday, the governor started to say, “It's not a big deal,” but didn't complete the word “deal.”

“If anyone has a grievance, take it to the United States Supreme Court,” he said.

In Alabama, South Carolina and Tennessee, Republicans said new maps for increasing GOP seats would better reflect their states' conservative values. Alabama lawmakers passed legislation Friday allowing a do-over of congressional primaries.

Alabama’s primary is May 19, and voting in congressional races will occur then as planned, but with the old districts. Those votes would end up not counting if a court allows the switch to different districts.

Mississippi held its primaries in March, but a federal court has ordered it to redraw its state Supreme Court districts, and Trump is pushing Republicans to redraw the state's four congressional districts.

A special session of its Legislature is set for May 20. Renovations of the House chamber will force members to meet at the Old State Capitol, where, decades ago, Mississippi lawmakers passed Jim Crow laws suppressing Black voting.

“Modern-day voter suppression relies on election administration errors and chaos, and that’s what we’re going to see play out in all of these states,” said Amir Badat, a Jackson, Mississippi, voting rights attorney and activist.

Tennessee continues yearlong fight

Tennessee was the first state to enact a new map since the U.S. Supreme Court decision, but Trump's push for redistricting started in Texas last year. Democrats countered in California and tried but ran afoul of the courts in Virginia.

Tennessee’s new map divided Memphis among three congressional districts. Before its enactment last week, the state’s elections coordinator told county officials in a memo that it would mean reprogramming election systems, retraining poll workers and possibly adjusting precinct boundaries, meaning some voters’ polling places could change.

Tennessee's congressional primaries will go forward Aug. 6 as planned, with candidates required to qualify by Friday.

In South Carolina, lawmakers could move all the state's June 9 primaries to August, or just the congressional races. While mail balloting is limited because the state requires an excuse, more than 6,800 mail ballots already had been sent to voters — with 260 returned — as of Friday, the state Elections Commission said.

A separate election for congressional primaries would cost $3 million and the time for preparations would be compressed, Conway Belangia, the commission's executive director, told lawmakers Friday.

“It will be difficult, but it will be possible,” he said.

Activists see problems ahead for voters

Michael McClanahan, the NAACP's Louisiana State Conference president, is hearing “total confusion” as voters call him and ask, "Is there an election?”

“People say, ’I ain’t going to vote because the governor’s suspended the election,’” he said. “But he didn’t, he only suspended one aspect of it.”

In Alabama, Senate Democratic leader Bobby Singleton said he has been fielding calls from confused public officials.

“These are the people who are the head of elections,” he said. “They don’t know what to do.“

Voting rights activists see a harbinger for Memphis voters in problems that arose in Nashville, Tennessee, in 2022, when Republican legislators divided the state's capital city into three congressional districts to take a seat from Democrats. A state report said more than 3,000 Nashville-area voters were assigned to incorrect districts and more than 430 cast ballots in the wrong races in the November 2022 election.

“It’s going to be really hard for the election commissions to be able to keep up with this short timeline,” Matia Powell, executive director of the voting rights nonprofit Civic TN, said during a conference call Friday with other voting rights activists in the South.

Some fear confusion will lead to distrust and apathy

Anneshia Hardy, executive director of Alabama Values, which provides support to voting and civil rights groups, said people will lose trust in elections if they believe the rules can change every two years.

“Once people stop believing that the process is stable and fair, disengagement is going to increase, and that's one of the biggest dangers here,” she said. “Democracy doesn’t just depend on voting systems existing but really on people believing that their participation matters.”

At least a few Democratic voters who went to the Louisiana Capitol on Friday to protest the gerrymandering expressed doubt about whether they still have a political voice.

Davis came to the State Capitol in Baton Rouge and had a bullhorn with her for a protest in which she yelled, “Whose vote? Our vote!”

David Victorian, a 79-year-old Vietnam veteran from Baton Rouge, said: “I’m concerned for the survival of the democracy that we’re supposed to be living in.”

Minnesota lawmakers are lined up for the final sprint of the legislative session with several priority issues left unresolved.

By next Monday, it’ll all be over.

Legislative leaders have yet to make a big-picture agreement that will usher the session to a tidy close. Some priorities from fraud to infrastructure financing to school safety remain top of mind. Lawmakers are also racing to ink a deal to keep a critical safety-net hospital — HCMC — afloat.

Despite that, some of the details and political dynamics in the narrowly split Legislature have made compromise hard to come by.

Local projects around the state, funds for schools and recourse for people adversely affected by the federal government’s immigration surge in Minnesota are in the balance with just days left.

Here’s a rundown of where key items stand with one week left.

Fraud

A new investigative unit is one step closer to being established.

The bill for an independent watchdog office finally won approval from the House with broad support last week. On Monday, the Senate approved the bill unanimously, sending it on to the governor’s desk.

The office would have power to probe public and private entities that receive state and federal funds in Minnesota. If potential fraud or misuse of money is suspected, the office could refer cases to the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension.

GOP Sen. Michael Kreun, R-Blaine, said the bill is a big step forward in gaining back trust.

"This independent agency will be the watchdog for the taxpayers. And state government here in Minnesota needs to regain the trust of Minnesotans. And this bill will hopefully go a long way to do that,” he said before the vote Monday. “Mr. President this bill is a seismic change in state government."

DFL Sen. Heather Gustafson, of Vadnais Heights, described it as a giant step in addressing vulnerabilities.

“This is not a message bill. We did not pass it to have something to say about a problem. We passed it to have something to solve the problem,” she said.

Gov. Tim Walz advocated for the bill’s passage and is expected to sign it. The process to select an inspector general would start this summer.

Several other proposals related to reining in fraud and misuse are also in the works. They include heightened penalties for defrauding state programs, authority for agencies to withhold payments if they suspect fraud and an expansion of the Attorney General’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit.

School safety

Following the August shooting at Annunciation Catholic Church and School, lawmakers have been united in a desire to adopt additional school safety measures.

But they’ve split politically on the best path forward.

The Senate voted along party lines to ban the sale and transfer of assault style weapons and high capacity magazines, along with ghost guns. That measure would also fund school safety and mental health grants and prod schools to adopt anonymous threat reporting mechanisms.

The House is more stuck. Republicans are big on mental health and school safety funding measures, but they don't want new firearms restrictions.

“These bipartisan solutions can move forward without gun control when Democrats are conditioning things we should be able to agree on about keeping our kids safe in school, because Republicans won't agree to ban guns,” House Republican Leader Harry Niska, R-Ramsey, said last week.

House Democrats insist firearms restrictions would also contribute to ensuring schools are safer.

“This isn't about just addressing the issue in our classrooms. This is about our communities. This is about firearms everywhere,” Rep. Cheryl Youakim, DFL-Hopkins said. “Kids deserve to feel safe everywhere. There is an entire generation that is living in fear of gun violence.”

Democrats say they'll keep pressing for an up-or-down vote.

“We'll continue to push our colleagues in the house to take some action,” DFL Senate Majority Leader Erin Murphy said. “I think for those who choose not to take it up and take a vote, that will send a really clear signal to the people of Minnesota that they're putting their politics ahead of the well being and safety of people across the state, including our children”

It could all get wrapped into an ongoing push to strengthen Capitol and state official security. The House approved a proposal to keep weapons screening in place and allow for police security services for lawmakers who face credible threats to their lives or safety, which have been more frequent in recent months. The Senate has advanced a similar plan.

Bonding bill

Lawmakers are working to assemble a public construction projects bill, although time to wrap it up is drawing short.

Legislative leaders and heads of the capital investment committees in both chambers have emphasized a need for money toward wastewater treatment, roads and bridges and building repairs.

Requests from state agencies and local communities exceeded $7 billion. Lawmakers are likely to stick to a package closer to $1 billion, even though the maximum the state could borrow and still maintain its credit rating is more than that.

The state takes on debt to fund larger projects that can benefit multiple generations of people. The bill requires a higher threshold of support, 60 percent, to pass each chamber. That gives the minority party in the Senate — Republicans — rare leverage.

Given the outstanding needs around the state, House Capital Investment Committee Co-Chair Mary Franson has proposed a separate funding mechanism for water treatment around the state.

“Communities come to us with their millions and millions of dollars in requests,” Franson, R-Alexandria said. “We just don't have that capacity anymore to do that. And so these communities are getting little chunks here and there.”

Without more, she warns, “We aren't getting ahead. We're just continually falling behind.”

She is part of a push to get more money toward lead water line replacement efforts.

An estimated 90,000 or more lead water lines remain in the ground. Replacing all of them could cost $1 billion. The Legislature has been trying to pick off a chunk at a time as well as tap into federal dollars.

"The need is too great. It is too urgent, and it is too important to drop the ball and let up now,” Franson said.

Committee leaders are waiting for guidance from legislative leaders about how much they can spend on a broader bill.

"I have to say, I'm a really Nervous Nelly about the whole thing,” said Sen. Sandy Pappas, the DFL chair of the Senate Capital Investment Committee. “It's really important to all of Minnesota that we get this infrastructure bill passed."

Leaders said they were less enthusiastic about bonding to fund upgrades to the Minnesota Wild stadium in St. Paul.

HCMC

The rescue plan for a vital Minnesota hospital is still being hashed out.

Lawmakers say they’re confident they can reach a deal.

The hospital has a high level of uncompensated care, which has led to staff cuts and a reduction in open hospital beds. Without help, HCMC officials say they'll have to take drastic actions, including possible closure.

Proposals are at play that would expand on an existing sales tax in Hennepin County, repurpose local transportation funds or tap into general fund dollars to fill the hospital’s budget hole.

There has been bipartisan support for taking steps to keep the hospital system afloat, but there is still no clear agreement on a funding mechanism. Other hospitals are also under strain so this could turn into a broader health system stabilization plan.

Immigration enforcement

The DFL-led Senate and tied House have split on a response to the weekslong federal immigration enforcement surge this winter.

The Senate voted Monday in favor of a package of bills restricting the power of immigration agents in Minnesota. Among other provisions, it blocks agents from sensitive spaces like courthouses, schools, daycare centers and healthcare facilities without a judicial warrant.

It also allows people to sue if their constitutional rights are violated or someone fails to render aid after someone else is shot.

The bill 34-33 passed along party lines without Republican support.

“We should not be playing to people who simply don't want immigration law enforced,” said Sen. Michael Kreun, R-Blaine. “And we should not be pushing a bill that has no chance of becoming law and has serious constitutional issues.”

Sen. Matt Klein, DFL-Mendota Heights, said the need for this kind of legislation is unprecedented. He said in his career as a physician, he never had a difficult interaction with law enforcement.

That changed during the immigration agent surge.

“Federal law enforcement agents invaded our patient spaces and disrupted our ability to do our work,” Klein said to his colleagues on the Senate floor. “Patients, terrified of this disruption, refused or avoided care and the health of Minnesotans suffered

“It is a signal of the poison of our time and the poison of our federal leadership that we are required to see a law like this and vote on it today, but I will do it,” Klein added. “It is the right thing to do.”

The Senate also voted to repurpose housing funds to help those adversely impacted — namely rental assistance. But a companion bill is stuck in the House.

Odds are also against business loans related to the surge. We'll see if Republicans give ground in negotiations. But GOP House Speaker Lisa Demuth is running for governor, so immigration proposals could be a red line she and her caucus won't cross.

With a little more than a week left in the 2026 Minnesota legislative session, the to-do list is getting shorter with fraud, construction projects borrowing and lawmaker safety measures touted as priorities.

All Things Considered host Clay Masters and the MPR News politics team recap a week in state politics and offer a look ahead on what to expect from the final days of the session.

Use the audio player above to listen to the full conversation or subscribe to the Politics Friday podcast on: Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or RSS, for a deeper dive into state politics.

Guests:

• Brian Bakst is politics editor for MPR News and host of Politics Friday.

• Cait Kelley is the politics fellow with MPR News.

No matter what, Minnesota will have a new governor next year.

That person will bring a new agenda, a new team and likely a new governing philosophy to the state’s top office. How dramatic the shift depends on who wins and which party they’re from.

MPR News politics editor Brian Bakst speaks with DFL candidate Amy Klobuchar about her campaign, including an initial rundown of proposals she says she’ll pursue if elected. It’s the latest of our opening conversations with the leading candidates.

Then, a pair of exit interviews with state lawmakers, Sen. Sandy Pappas and Sen. Warren Limmer, who have a combined eight decades of service at the Capitol.

A full list of upcoming retirements is kept by the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library.

Fullscreen SlideshowPrevious Slide

1 of 2

2 of 2

Next Slide

The Legislature is barreling toward its conclusion, so we’ll check in with our state Capitol team as well.

Guests:

• Amy Klobuchar is a four-term U.S. senator and Democratic candidate for governor.

• Sen. Sandy Pappas is a DFL lawmaker who is retiring after 42 years in office.

• Sen. Warren Limmer is a Republican lawmaker who is retiring after 38 years.

• Dana Ferguson is a political correspondent for MPR News.

• Peter Cox is a politics reporter for MPR News.

Use the audio player above to listen to the full conversation or subscribe to the Politics Friday podcast on: Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or RSS.

With its two towers and large, rounded glass windows, Owatonna’s 120-year-old fire station looms over the city’s downtown. Murals depicting fire trucks of the past decorate the building’s brick walls.

“I love how it looks,” said interim fire chief Jacob Dashiell. “The downside is we're pretty landlocked, so we can't add on to it any farther.”

The facility is so old that when it opened, the fire department still used horses. And it’s so small that the fire department can’t even keep all their vehicles on site. Some are out at the airport.

“We just don't have room for them,” he said. “Depending on what the call is, we could actually end up having to send a firefighter out to a different location, pick up something, come back here. If it was like a big fire situation, it increases the time it takes for us to get to you. And that is a problem.”

And there are other problems, said Dashiell. There’s nowhere for firefighters to change and shower after a fire call. Training space is limited. Water sometimes leaks from the ceiling.

Dashiell said his department needs a new, modern and fully equipped fire station to serve this growing community of nearly 30,000 residents, and the Owatonna’s police department sorely needs a new home too, as the city's 60-year-old police station is similarly out of date and in need of repair.

The building is a former bank, built in the 1960s. There are only two rooms to question suspects and witnesses, and one of them is a retrofitted closet. Victims coming into the station need to wait in an open lobby without privacy. They have water leaks, too.

City officials say fixing and repairing the two aging structures would essentially be throwing money away, so instead of renovating these properties, the city council approved a plan earlier this year to issue $65 million in bonds to pay for new facilities. Those bonds would be paid off over two decades with tax dollars. That means the owner of a $300,000 home would be hit with a $420 annual property tax increase.

Projects that serve public safety are usually popular. But some Owatonna residents are fighting the plan to build new police and fire stations because they feel like the city made a decision without their input during the multi-year process.

Resident Melissa Zimmerman helped lead a successful effort to put the question of whether the city should move forward on the projects to the voters. She’s unhappy with how the process has played out at City Hall.

“It’s always been about transparency, accountability and public input,” Zimmerman said, “Where does the public have a voice in government? And at the end of four years here, I still don't know where our voice belongs.”

A new facility on a historic site

Cost and location are a primary concern for people who signed the petition.

Carl Wieman is one of them. While the new fire station would be built on the old police station site, the new police station would be moved to a large treelined greenspace right beyond his backyard.

It's owned by the city but listed on the National Register of Historic Places because it was once the site of a state school. That means the state historic preservation office will have to weigh in on the city’s plans, too.

As he looked out onto his backyard, Weiman said he worries the construction will damage the bucolic scene.

"There will be underground parking for the patrol cars with upstairs offices,” he said. “It's going to take all of these trees out. Ninety-eight of them."

A city official confirmed that they would need to cut down approximately 98 trees to build the facility.

Wieman said he first learned about the project from a neighbor - not the city. And he doesn’t trust that his elected officials and city staff are doing what’s in the best interest of his community.

Neither does 88-year-old Myrtle Schrader. She's lived in Owatonna her whole life and never been very politically active - until now. She says the cost to taxpayers is too much.

"This is not a democracy. This is not how democracy works,” she said. “[The city said], ‘This is what's going to happen, and you're going to pay for it,’ and that's not what we elected these people for."

A question of transparency

Melissa Zimmerman is a stay-at-home mom. But holding local officials accountable has become a full-time job for her. A few years ago, she and some concerned neighbors started asking county officials for more information about a road project near their homes.

But Zimmerman said county officials didn’t adequately address their concerns, so they filed data practices requests. Late last year, a judge ruled that Steele County officials violated Minnesota’s public data laws in dealing with requests from the group.

“Through that process, we have essentially been forced to learn the laws, and in doing so, we were able to then expand that into other areas to help the rest of the community,” including the police and fire station projects, said Zimmerman.

Their activism has become less about the actual projects, and more about making sure community members have a say in them.

“This has never once been about being against police and fire,” she said. “They are vital to our community, and we are pro police and fire. However, the public needs to have a voice.”

Mayor Matt Jessop pushed back on claims that the city has shut resident voices out of their decision making.

"I don't think it's necessarily an issue of transparency. It's more people getting information in the medium that they want to get it in,” he said. “We're on the radio, we're in the newspapers, we are on social media. We have information on our website."

Earlier this week, the city held a public meeting to show residents how they chose the project's locations - and why construction will cost as much as it does.

Jessop said those efforts will continue as voters weigh the merits.

"It's a lot of money, but it's also something that's very necessary,” he said. “You know, if the vote is no, these needs don't go away."

The city council will decide in coming weeks when to put the question to voters - either in August or in November during the general election.

Darrel Veldhouse has always been interested in alternative energy. It started when he was a farm kid growing up in western Minnesota and corn was beginning to be grown to make ethanol to help fuel cars and trucks.

The 63-year old Dilworth resident now drives a plug-in hybrid. He’s looked at installing solar panels to power his home. But his roof can’t support the panels. And the price tag would be prohibitive.

"It would cost a lot of money because we'd have to upgrade our entire electrical system, and we just can't afford to do that,” Veldouse said. Residential solar systems can cost $20-$30,000 or more.

But now there’s an attractive alternative for homeowners like Veldouse — whose properties aren’t good fits for a big solar panel installation — or for renters who don’t own their rooftops. It’s called “plug-in” or “balcony” solar.

The smaller systems consist of just a few solar panels that can be placed on a deck or balcony or mounted on the ground outside a home. The systems reverse the typical flow of electricity– instead of pulling power off the grid, plug in solar pushes power back into the outlet and into the home’s wires.

A typical plug-in solar system set-up costs around $1,000 to $2,000 and can power a few appliances such as a refrigerator and modem. They usually provide about 20 percent of the electricity used by a typical home.

The technology has taken off in Germany in recent years. There are over a million of the mini-solar systems installed there.

“The price of electricity is going up, and this could help alleviate that problem for people," Veldhouse reasoned. So he went to a town hall meeting hosted by Democratic State Sen. Rob Kupec of nearby Moorhead and gave him some information on the technology.

“I knew nothing about it,” Kupec recalled. But he was intrigued. And the more he learned about it, the more it seemed to make sense.

“For those people who live in apartments who can't put up a solar array, or if your house just doesn't take one, it's a great opportunity,” Kupec said.

But to install one of these mini-solar systems now in Minnesota, a homeowner would have to jump through all the same interconnection hoops with their power provider and pay the same fees as someone putting in a big rooftop system. That can be costly, time-consuming and complicated.

Kupec has introduced a bill in the Minnesota Senate to streamline that interconnection process for certified plug-in solar systems. It's the companion legislation to a proposal from state Rep. Larry Kraft, a Democrat from St. Louis Park. Kraft told MPR News he's never seen so much excitement around a clean energy bill.

"It's a great thing for energy affordability, and it's also just a great thing for individual freedom,” Kraft said, for people who want to tap into the power of the sun that’s shining on their property.

That notion of personal freedom and consumer choice broadened the appeal of plug-in solar. Clean energy policy has become deeply partisan. But deep-red Utah was the first state to adopt a plug-in solar law last year. It was introduced by a Republican legislator and passed unanimously. A handful of other states followed suit this spring. And about 20 additional states, including Minnesota, are considering similar laws to allow residents to install plug-in solar systems.

Still, some in the state legislature have expressed safety concerns, because the technology reverses the flow of electricity and sends it back into a home’s electric wiring.

"I just think this year is too early to adopt this,” said Jason Rarick, a GOP State Sen. from Pine City who is also an electrician. Rarick wants to make sure proper safety procedures are in place for installation “before we're actually promoting people to start using it here."

A new safety standard was recently developed to certify plug-in solar equipment. But Rarick said that hasn’t yet been incorporated into the National Electrical Code.

Rarick also thinks the technology needs to be rebranded. “Because it's not going to be plug-in solar,” he said. “There's just no way to make that work.” He said, in most cases, an electrician will need to hook up the systems. Still, Rarick says it’s a matter of when, not if, the legislation will pass.

“This is something that’s absolutely coming,” he said. “Once the proper procedures have been followed to get this right, I'll be 100 percent behind it. Because it's not a mandate, and it's just giving people options.”

Kraft agrees homeowners will likely need to hire an electrician to set it up. But eventually, consumers will likely be able to purchase a small-scale system at Menards or Home Depot, said John Goeke, a Duluth electrician who specializes in installing solar and battery systems and who advocated for the bill at the state legislature.

“When you start to conceptualize how much power the sun is producing on a daily basis, on every square inch of land, you start to realize every plot of land is its own fortress, or its own microgrid,” he said.

The proposal is still alive in the Minnesota Senate. But advocates concede it has a narrow path to approval in a closely divided legislature.

“If we aren't successful with passing it this year, we will absolutely be coming back next year, and we'll have a better shot, probably, of getting it done,” said Patty O'Keefe, Midwest Regional Director for Vote Solar.

Back In Dilworth, Darrel Veldhouse isn’t waiting around. He’s already bought plug-in solar panels. He's confident the law will eventually pass, whether it’s this year or next.

“It should not be a partisan issue” for legislators, Veldhouse said. “Their constituents are facing growing expenditures on electricity. I hope that they would understand that.”

A Ramsey County and St. Paul Police Department initiative to solve nonfatal shootings has doubled the clearance rate for those cases, according to city data. Now law enforcement agencies, city officials and a group of lawmakers want to expand the initiative statewide.

Most legislation aimed at reducing gun violence has stalled along party lines this legislative session. However, a push to fund nonfatal shooting investigations has united law enforcement, progressive public safety advocates and lawmakers.

Nonfatal shootings, which are often gang related, can lead to more violence if the shooter tries again or another shooter retaliates. Interrupting that cycle can prevent future violence, but doing that takes time and money. Traditionally, police departments have focused on homicides instead.

However, in 2020, police in Denver, Colorado started investigating all shootings like homicides because they believed clearing those cases could reduce violent crime. Their approach was so successful it inspired St. Paul and Ramsey County to do the same.

In 2023, the Minnesota Legislature funded a collaboration between the St. Paul Police Department, the Ramsey County Attorney’s Office and the Ramsey County Sheriff’s Office. The $1.7 million from the state funded a St. Paul Police Nonfatal Shooting Unit and a program to support intimidated victims and eyewitnesses concerned for their safety.

In 2025, St. Paul’s clearance rate for nonfatal shootings rose to 71 percent from 37 percent, according to city data. The data also show during the same period the number of nonfatal shootings and shots fired reports dropped by more than half and the homicide solve rate improved.

“If we did not get the money from the Legislature in 2023 to help pay for this program, we would not be here today,” said Paul Ford, assistant chief of the St. Paul Police Department, at the Minnesota Capitol on Thursday.

Ford said the money paid for overtime so investigators could work after hours just like a homicide investigator. “We didn't do that before,” Ford said.

He said it also pays for a forensics team to immediately process the crime scene “so we're not losing evidence, we're not losing witnesses, we're not losing victims in the 24 hours.”

Ramsey County Sheriff Bob Fletcher said funding for nonfatal shooting investigations is especially important because solving those types of cases is resource-intensive. Intervening before gang violence occurs or escalates requires building relationships with offenders, witnesses and victims.

"We monitor social media, left and right. We can predict a lot of times when these incidents are bubbling and going to occur, like a weatherman predicts a storm. But you need to have resources to intervene," Fletcher said.

Sen. Doron Clark, DFL-Minneapolis, and Rep. Cedrick Frazier, DFL-New Hope, have spearheaded an effort to capitalize on St. Paul’s success and fund nonfatal shooting units across the state.

“I grew up in a community where when these cases weren't solved, we saw the retaliation, and we saw the loop of violence continue,” said Frazier Thursday, who grew up on the South Side of Chicago.

On Monday, the House overwhelmingly passed a catch-all public safety package that includes $1 million to establish the clearance grant program. Grantees would collaborate with other law enforcement agencies, use advanced investigative techniques like forensic analysis and study the impact of their initiatives.

$1 million is significantly less than Frazier and Clark initially pushed for.

“We know that doesn't go a long way, but the point of the matter is to establish this as something that's important,” Frazier said, then legislators can return next session and push for more funding as they put together the state’s budget.

“We will find a way to stretch every dollar we get for this program to ensure that communities see successes,” said Assistant St. Paul Police Chief Ford.

Frazier said he expects the program to be part of final negotiations between the House and the Senate before the legislative session ends May 18.

A 12-person council of disaster experts appointed by President Donald Trump is recommending sweeping changes to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). If enacted, the changes would represent the most significant reimagining of disaster preparedness and response policy in the United States in a generation.

The council's report, approved at a public meeting today, is meant to advise President Trump's decisions about the agency, though some changes will likely need Congressional approval.

The changes include making it simpler for disaster survivors to get money, raising the threshold for the federal government to get involved in disaster recovery and shrinking the National Flood Insurance Program. Altogether, the recommendations would put more responsibility on states.

"Many in America do not believe FEMA was doing the job that it was intended to complete," said former Mississippi Governor and FEMA Review Council member Phil Bryant at today's meeting to approve the report.

Many of the council's recommendations are very broad, and it's unclear exactly how they would be implemented.

"The devil is in the details here," says Dominik Lett, who studies FEMA at the Cato Institute, a think tank in Washington, D.C. that promotes market-based policies. "I think that there's a lot of promising ideas that are being pitched by the review council, a lot of which could reduce disaster costs for the federal government."

Many of the recommendations are similar to those in a bipartisan bill that is currently being considered by Congress. "That bill could be a vehicle to implement some of these changes," says Michael Coen, who served as FEMA Chief of Staff under the Obama and Biden administrations.

Here are three major shifts for FEMA recommended in the report.

Recommendation 1. Raise the threshold for getting federal disaster aid

Under the proposed changes, states would have a harder time qualifying for federal funds after a disaster.

When a major disaster hits, state governors can ask for a federal disaster declaration, the key step for receiving federal aid. Those declarations are made by the president, after getting advice from FEMA.

FEMA determines whether the disaster is more than a state government can handle on its own. The agency uses a formula based on the estimated damage, as well as consideration of the local impacts and other factors. Even if a disaster doesn't pass this threshold, the president can still choose to declare one.

The FEMA Review Council is recommending raising that threshold by more than 50 percent and also changing how it is calculated, which means states would only qualify with higher levels of damage. During Trump's first term, his administration made a similar proposal just before leaving office in 2020. The report finds that if this threshold had already been adjusted, "29 percent of disasters declared between 2012 and 2025 would not have met the indicator, representing $1.5 billion."

"If the federal government raises the threshold for disasters, that means there are fewer scenarios where the federal government is going to spend money. Which will reduce disaster costs and incentivize states to take a more proactive role," Lett says.

That could leave states on the hook for millions of dollars to rebuild roads, schools and other infrastructure after tornadoes, floods and other disasters that do not cause enough widespread damage to meet the new criteria for federal assistance. Such local weather events have devastated rural communities in recent years.

Many state emergency officials warn they lack the capacity and financial resources to prepare for and respond to floods, storms and wildfires that are getting more extreme as the climate warms.

Recommendation 2. Give states more control over federal disaster funds

Rebuilding infrastructure after a disaster is a lengthy process and under the current system, it can take years or even decades for states to be reimbursed by FEMA.

To fix this, the new recommendations include paying states a lump-sum immediately after a disaster strikes, instead of reimbursing them later for disaster costs.

Some states have advocated for such a system, where FEMA provides the funding upfront, cutting down on the administrative reporting that states must do. Disaster experts say those vetting requirements help cut down on misuse of public funding.

To speed up funding, the council is recommending a change which is controversial among disaster experts. The council recommends that federal disaster assistance to local and state governments be determined by the conditions of the disaster itself.

For example, whether a hurricane was a Category 1 storm versus a Category 4 storm, the magnitude of an earthquake or how much rain fell.

Using such information to automatically trigger assistance is called a "parametric" trigger, because it's based on the objective parameters, such as wind speed or temperature, rather than an estimate of the cost of the damage.

When this proposal first became public earlier this year, emergency experts told NPR that it's unclear how FEMA could set triggers that would be fair and would cover every type of disaster and every part of the country. If a state's infrastructure repair projects come in under budget, the council recommends that states use the extra federal money for preparing for future disasters. If the damage costs more to repair than a state gets, the state would have to request more from the president.

"I would think something like that would take years to implement, and there would have to be pilot programs," Coen says.

And disparities between a storm's classification, for example, and the actual damage on the ground could lead to unfair situations, disaster experts warn. Some communities could get just a fraction of the money they need to recover after disasters, or could receive no assistance at all, despite large amounts of damage because the event itself had less severe classification. Poor and rural areas that have historically seen less infrastructure investment could suffer, says Michael Méndez, a former member of FEMA's National Advisory Council and professor at University of California, Irvine.

Recommendation 3: Change how average people interact with FEMA

The council is suggesting two major changes to how FEMA interacts with the millions of people who rely on the agency every year.

One recommendation calls for the agency to make it easier for disaster survivors to apply for help. For example, if your home is destroyed in a wildfire, FEMA often pays for temporary housing. But the process of applying for that help can be onerous, and often requires disaster survivors to spend days filing paperwork.

Similar changes have been in the works at FEMA for years, and the agency took steps under the Biden administration to get money into the hands of disaster survivors more quickly, so they could use it to buy basic items such as baby formula and clothing.

The other major recommendation is to shrink the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which provides the majority of residential flood insurance in the United States. The program has struggled financially since it was created in the 1960s, and in the last few decades it has been on the verge of collapse multiple times.

"There's been needed reform for the flood insurance program for years," says Coen.

Flood damage is skyrocketing in the U.S. because of climate change, which is driving more intense rain, hurricanes and sea level rise, and because the number of people living in flood-prone parts of the country has increased. That has driven up flood insurance prices, making it unaffordable for many people.

The council recommends shifting some flood insurance policies to private insurance companies, and moving faster to map flood risk accurately across the country, so that fewer homes are in harm's way.

These recommendations are late, and it's been a long and bumpy road

The recommendations are similar to those in a draft version of the report NPR obtained earlier this year.

However, the earlier draft called for FEMA's workforce to be cut in half, a recommendation that is not included in the final report. An earlier draft also recommended changing FEMA's name. The final draft makes no such recommendation.

That 89-page draft dates from December, when the FEMA Review Council was originally scheduled to adopt final recommendations. The December meeting was abruptly canceled.

In the intervening months, the President fired the head of the Department of Homeland Security. Former DHS Secretary Kristi Noem was ousted following scrutiny over her handling of the country's top disaster agency, which she repeatedly said should be eliminated. Under Noem, lawmakers from both parties expressed frustration with long waits for assistance for disaster survivors, and for federal grant money to protect people across the country from floods, fires and storms.

Noem was replaced last month by former Oklahoma senator Markwayne Mullin, who said during his Senate confirmation hearing that the agency should be restructured, not eliminated. He also committed to nominating a permanent leader for FEMA, which has been overseen by a succession of temporary administrators since President Trump took office. So far, no nominee has been announced.

Copyright 2026, NPR

The Minnesota House of Representatives voted 127-5 on Thursday to pass a proposal to create an independent watchdog office over all of state government — almost a year to the day after the Senate approved a companion bill.

The measure is aimed at rooting out fraud and mismanagement in state government and comes after a national spotlight was cast on Minnesota following news that many millions of dollars were siphoned from public programs by fraudsters.

Lawmakers in the tied House negotiated details for many months and eventually settled a disagreement over how law enforcement is involved in the unit.

Initially, cases from the office would be referred to the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension for additional investigation and possible criminal charging. Legislators could opt to place a law enforcement arm under the office later. The independent watchdog entity would operate outside of the executive branch decision tree for the most part.

Rep. Matt Norris, DFL-Blaine, said lawmakers agreed on the concept as a way of tackling fraud, but that it took longer to cement the logistics of a new state agency.

“While the issue of fraud is an urgent one, the vast, unprecedented power of this office is the very reason why it was important for us to move in a thoughtful, diligent manner in crafting this legislation,” Norris said. “The bill has gotten better because of it, and this process has led us to a truly bipartisan, bicameral bill before us today. It had to cook a bit. We had to tweak the recipe, but the OIG turned out better than ever.”

The office would be able to probe public or private entities that administer state dollars. It would also set program integrity standards for state agencies and allow for more communication between agencies about potential bad actors trying to go between various state departments for funding, even after they’ve been flagged.

“I hope that this is the beginning of the light at the end of the tunnel, this and some of the other things because Minnesotans are mad, and they deserve more,” said Republican Rep. Patti Anderson, R-Dellwood. “We need as a state to get our reputation back, or at least to get back to neutral, frankly, and it's going to be an uphill battle.”

Senate sponsors said they hope to adopt the changes implemented by the House soon, teeing the bill up for Gov. Tim Walz’s signature. Walz has said he would sign the bill into law if it reaches his desk.

A group of lawmakers from both parties and both chambers has worked to pass the policy for nearly two years. They said it is one of the most important changes to come out of this legislative session.

“An independent oversight authority, I think is the solution that really meets the level of the problem that we had,” Sen. Heather Gustafson, DFL-Vadnais Heights, said. She sponsored the bill in the Senate. “This isn't the end-all-be-all solution, but it is the most significant anti-fraud piece of legislation to pass in our generation.”

Some Democratic members tried unsuccessfully to put up additional funding to allow for more data sharing and information technology buildout and to maintain that the office would refer cases to the BCA into the future.

Republicans said it’s important that the office be allowed to operate separately from the governor’s office to ensure full independence. It had been a point of friction between House Republicans and Democrats during months of negotiations.

Several lawmakers celebrated the bipartisan nature of the bill and the potential for the office to prevent future fraud in the state.

“We have all felt that frustration, every story that we hear, every report that we see that things are not being done correctly, and turning that into a bill that's before us here today,” said Rep. Pete Johnson, DFL-Duluth. “Fraud isn't just one part. It's making sure they don't have access to our systems. It's making sure that they can't come in one door and keep finding and trying other areas to exploit and take dollars, it's catching them quickly, if somehow they do get access, and then it's holding them accountable in the long run.”

Republicans raised frustrations about the slow roll to reach an agreement on the bill and in the Walz administration’s response to fraud.

“The national news media has talked about fraud again and again and again, and almost every single sentence leads with our great state of Minnesota,” Rep. Jim Nash, R-Waconia, said, noting the headlines about rampant fraud had been allowed to persist for too long. “Let’s make Minnesota great again and put fraud on hold with the Office of the Inspector General.”

If approved, the selection process for an inspector general would begin this summer and that person could be put in place early next year and confirmed by the Senate. The office would have around 40 fulltime employees initially. That could grow if lawmakers later approve a law enforcement division within that office.

The proposal is one of several anti-fraud measures moving through the Legislature this session. Other bills would toughen penalties for defrauding state programs, add more investigators to the Attorney General’s Office’s Medicaid fraud division and make it easier for the state to pause payments when misuse is suspected.

Minneapolis is the latest Minnesota city to take a symbolic move towards gun violence prevention.

The Minneapolis City Council on Thursday unanimously passed a ban on assault weapons, large-capacity magazines, binary triggers and ghost guns that would go into effect if state law ever changes.

Minnesota is among 42 states that have preemption laws preventing local governments from regulating firearms, according to Everytown. Though state lawmakers introduced a bill to repeal the law this session, it failed to advance out of committee. Advocates anticipate the bill will be discussed again next year.

Ghost guns are guns that don't have a serial number, making them harder for law enforcement to trace. The city defined large-capacity magazines as those containing more than 10 rounds and an assault weapon as a “semiautomatic military-style assault weapon” as defined in state statute.

If state law were to change, the ordinance would also require safe storage of firearms and prohibit carrying firearms in “sensitive places,” which includes Minneapolis-owned schools and government buildings.

Cities pressure state leaders to take action

St. Paul passed a similar ordinance last fall, with leaders from more than a dozen cities pledging to do the same following the Aug. 27 mass shooting at Annunciation Catholic Church and School. A shooter had fired 116 rifle rounds in about two minutes into the church during Mass, killing two children and injuring 28 other people.

That took place just a day after another mass shooting outside Cristo Rey Jesuit High School in Minneapolis that left one person dead and six injured.

With the vote, Minneapolis council members leaders urged state lawmakers to take action as efforts to restrict firearms stall on the state level.

“This is not a partisan issue. It's a moral one and Minnesota is watching,” Minneapolis council member Aurin Chowdhury said at a press conference Thursday afternoon.

The Minnesota Senate on Monday approved firearm restrictions and school safety funding on a 34-33 party-line vote, but the state House, divided 67-67, has yet to advance companion bills. Less than two weeks remain of this legislative session.

Representatives from the Annunciation Light Alliance and other gun violence prevention advocates also spoke at the press conference.

“In a perfect world, there would be a federal approach to this national issue. Failing that, it would be nice if our state legislature would pass laws to keep our kids safe, but if they can't or won't, the very least they can do is give cities the ability to reduce gun violence,” said Leah Kondes, Minneapolis lead of Moms Demand Action.

Mayor ‘proud’ of ordinance

The ordinance passed with no discussion, but on Tuesday Annunciation parents and community members had cheered it on.

“It is a wonderful feeling to know that our city is on our side and that they are not going to sit idly by while children in all parts of Minneapolis die senselessly,” said Tess Rada, whose 3rd-grade daughter was present during the Annunciation shooting, speaking at the Thursday press conference.

Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey shared his support for the city ordinance.

“I believe every person in Minneapolis deserves to feel safe in their home, their neighborhood, and their community. That’s why I’m proud to work alongside the Minneapolis City Council to advance common-sense gun reforms that help prevent violence, protect families, and make our city safer for everyone,” Frey said in an emailed statement. Next, Frey needs to sign the bill.

The city said it does have authority to enact certain parts of the ordinance, including banning people from owning any weapons if they're already banned from owning guns under state or federal law, and limiting where people can shoot guns.

Gun Owners Caucus threatens to sue

The Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus said it intends to “evaluate every available legal option to challenge” the ordinance including suing.

“The City of Minneapolis is attempting to make a political statement with an ordinance it has no legal authority to enact. Minnesota law clearly preempts the entire field of firearms regulation, and local governments cannot simply ignore state statute because they dislike the policy outcome,” chair Bryan Strawser said in a statement.

In addition to being challenged at the state level, the ordinance could face federal scrutiny. Tuesday, the Trump administration sued Denver over its assault weapons ban which has been in place since 1989, alleging the ban violates the Constitution’s Second Amendment right to bear arms.

The Minnesota House votes Thursday on a bill that would establish an independent Office of Inspector General that will focus on fraud, a response to the widespread and ongoing instances of fraud discovered in state human services programs.

The concept of an Office of Inspector General, or OIG, failed to the pass the House last session, but it was approved by the state Senate. Rep. Patti Anderson, R-Dellwood, co-sponsors the current bill and said she believes it’ll finally pass.

“We have a bureaucratic mess for sure. This is a very much needed watchdog agency that actually has teeth,” she said.

The bill provides the OIG with full investigative and, eventually, full law enforcement authority within a year. While the bill was created in response to Medicaid fraud, it also allows investigation into other areas of mismanagement in state services.

Listen to the full conversation by clicking the player above.

It was a tight race, so a campaign staffer doubted the results of an unreleased poll showing their candidate up — by a lot.

The tip about the outside poll didn't match up with the campaign's internal numbers. But accuracy aside, the staffer knew the poll would shake up the prediction markets. One market had their candidate down by double digits.

"Myself and others started placing bets before that poll came out," the staffer, who was working on a statewide campaign in the South, told NPR on the condition of anonymity over fear for their future employment. "And then, sure enough as soon as that poll came out, the stock went up and everybody made money."

This is one of the first publicly reported instances of a campaign staffer betting and winning thousands on their own candidate on prediction markets — emerging financial exchanges where billions are bet each week on future events like sports, culture and even elections.

The staffer's bet was verified by prediction market data reviewed by NPR.

"Because you have all this information and knowledge that isn't publicly available yet, it's almost foolish not to bet on it before it's made public," the staffer said.

The staffer said campaign bets by fellow staffers were commonplace in this particular campaign and the ones that followed.

In recent weeks, popular prediction market Kalshi has banned and fined a handful of political candidates for betting on themselves. Bets like these raise questions about how campaign operatives can also turn private information into a quick payday amid an unsettled legal landscape.

From private information to payday

For this campaign staffer, the method was simple. First, they'd receive a tip on an unreleased poll and compare it with the odds on a prediction market, like PredictIt or Polymarket. If the poll reported their candidate had a better chance of winning than the prediction markets, they'd use this edge to buy low-cost odds on their candidate — known as event contracts — before the poll was released.

On prediction markets, the price of an event contract often mirrors the market's estimation of the probability of a given outcome — in this case the chance a candidate will win. So a contract selling for 20 cents means the market is pricing a 20% chance of success.

Once the poll went public, the prediction market contracts shot up in value. The staffer would then sell their contracts at a higher price and make money.

"The most I've ever made is thousands," the staffer said.

This sort of election betting "could potentially be a violation" and be subject to a CFTC investigation, said Jeff Le Riche, who worked at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission for 20 years as a trial lawyer focused on insider trading and market manipulation. The agency oversees and regulates prediction markets and allows election betting in some, but not all, cases.

"It's illegal or a violation of the Commodity Exchange Act if you have material, non-public information and you have a duty not to use that," Le Riche said.

Le Riche said this sort of election betting by a campaign staffer potentially checks the boxes needed for a CFTC insider trading investigation: a breach of a duty to confidentiality, use of non-public material in a bet, and an understanding that the poll was insider information.

"There's probably a pretty good argument that they're using information that they're not supposed to use for their benefit," Le Riche said.

He said the key documents of the investigation would be the campaign staffer's employment agreement and the prediction market user agreement. Any breach of these documents could be grounds for possible investigation and prosecution.

‘Illusion of safety’

While there aren't clear examples of the CFTC investigating and prosecuting political insider trading, Le Riche said he expects to see more enforcement as prediction markets become more popular and regulated.

"This happens a lot in financial innovation, where something goes from a purely unregulated space, kind of a Wild West approach," Le Riche said. "And so you haven't seen many people get in trouble or prosecuted or investigated for activity, and so it creates an illusion of safety."

Another campaign staffer who worked on statewide races on the East Coast, who also spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of legal liability, said they saw colleagues betting on the outcome of the race they were involved in.

"They were placing bets because they had polling and the markets were so topsy turvy," the East Coast staffer said of their colleagues. "They were like, 'I'm going to go make a quick $5,000.'"

This second staffer said they personally don't "gamble" or use prediction markets, but that this sort of campaign betting was common — especially when election prediction markets were newer in the early 2020s. Back then, the odds were easier to beat when fewer people were participating, this staffer argued.

"People certainly were doing that," they said. "I know many people who did it."

They said their fellow staffers felt free to bet on their own candidates because there were so few rules and regulations on these new markets.

"Unless the federal government makes a change … it's kind of going to continue to be the Wild West, in all honesty," the staffer said.

An ill-prepared regulator

The CFTC regulates prediction markets and former CFTC commissioner Kristin Johnson said the commission is not fit to investigate or enforce election-related insider trading cases.

"I don't believe that the CFTC has developed experience and expertise in policing election positions," Johnson said. "The commission has not yet tried a series of cases testing the authority, and the courts have not indisputably concluded that insider trading laws apply in one of those contexts, or at least one that's relevant to the hypothetical you offered."

More broadly, Johnson questioned the staffing levels of CFTC's enforcement division and the commission's "ability to execute on its mandate" to protect against fraud and market manipulation.

"It will be important for Congress to lead and give the CFTC a clear direction of travel regarding the expectations with respect to the kinds of contracts we're describing … political event contracts," Johnson said.

In recent weeks, the White House warned staff against using prediction markets, and the Senate unanimously voted to prohibit senators and their staff from trading on these new markets.

Sen. Todd Young, R-Ind., called the Senate rule change a "good first step" and said Congress should go further — prohibiting "all federally elected officials and government employees from using insider information to bet on a prediction market contract." Neither the Senate rule change nor the proposed legislation would prohibit campaign staffers from placing election bets on prediction markets.

In March, Rep. Seth Moulton, D-Mass., banned prediction markets from his House office and campaign.

"When people are in positions of public trust and they use insider information to make, you know, insider bets, that's completely unethical," Moulton's campaign manager, Jeff Phaneuf, said. "And so, we banned it in our campaign and we're encouraging other offices, other campaigns to do the exact same thing."

Phaneuf said the campaign staff held a meeting and verbally agreed to the ban. He then added the prediction market ban to the campaign employee handbook.

Election betting has been legal for years, despite insider-trading concerns from lawmakers and regulators. CFTC first allowed a limited number of election bets in 2014 on PredictIt, a nonprofit research-based organization. But recently, for-profit prediction markets like Kalshi have jumped into the game, advertising and popularizing election betting. Kalshi now hosts billions of dollars in legal elections and political bets. Another prediction market platform, Polymarket, also hosts election bets, but this market largely operates offshore and outside of U.S. regulation and laws.

There have been a handful of bipartisan bills recently introduced seeking to ban or limit political and war betting by insiders, but none have come close to becoming law. Meanwhile, government ethics rules have been slow to keep up to date with the emergence of prediction markets, creating a transparency blind spot at the highest levels of the government.

The lack of regulation and unsettled law surrounding prediction markets have raised serious concern on Capitol Hill. In April, the House Agriculture Committee — which oversees the CFTC — questioned the commission's sole board member, Michael Selig, who has cleared the regulatory pathway for prediction markets and defended them from state lawsuits.

"Nothing is more important than protecting market integrity," Selig said at the hearing.

Still, Selig has been a big booster of the nascent industry. He is leading lawsuits against states suing prediction markets for violating local laws.

In February, the CFTC issued guidance to prediction market firms. The six-page advisory asserted the CFTC's control of prediction market regulation over that of states that have sued these markets over sports betting regulation. The notice also restated that the prediction markets themselves have an "obligation to list only contracts that are not readily susceptible to manipulation."

That same month, Kalshi revealed insider trading cases against an editor for MrBeast, a top YouTube creator, and a candidate in the California governor's race who, in an apparent publicity stunt, told supporters that he had bet on himself to win and encouraged others to do the same. And in April, Kalshi suspended and fined three users for "political insider trading" after an internal probe found that candidates bet on their own campaigns.

Meanwhile, reports of possible insider prediction market trades continue. In April, NPR analyzed data showing a Polymarket trader made around $300,000 correctly betting on President Biden's last-minute pardons. In March, NPR reported that a Polymarket trader bet $553,000 about Iran and its Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, just before an Israeli strike killed him.

As for the campaign staffer who bet on their own candidate, they sold their position soon after the poll was released and their shares went up. They then saw internal polling that convinced them their candidate would win, and bet again.

"I basically took the money that I won and just reinvested it to win more money," the staffer said.

Want to share more about prediction markets and campaigns? You can reach Luke Garrett via encrypted Signal chat at lukegarrett.60

Copyright 2026, NPR

The director of Minnesota’s Missing and Murdered Indigenous Relatives Office, Guadalupe Lopez, has been terminated less than a year after being appointed to the position.

Lopez told MPR News on Thursday morning that she was “shocked” by the move, which happened the previous day. Her departure from the state office on Wednesday came just one day after she took part in a ceremony marking National Missing and Murdered Indigenous Relatives Day.

State officials confirmed Lopez’s departure but said they could not comment on the reason for it.

Lopez said she was told she had “made some poor leadership decisions.” But she told MPR that she did not think her leadership style and advocacy worked well within state government.

“I think that it is hard for an Indigenous person to be in state systems. The cultural competency definitely wasn’t there,” she said.

“It doesn’t give leeway for humanness,” Lopez said of her experience within state government. “Not everything is going to be cookie-cutter.”

Lopez started in the role last summer after serving four years as the executive director of Violence Free Minnesota and with years of prior work in the field. She is an enrolled member of the Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe.

The MMIR office was established in 2021 to address disproportionate rates of violence and missing-persons cases affecting Minnesota’s Indigenous communities.

In a news release announcing her appointment, state officials had called Lopez a “nationally respected advocate and coalition-builder with deep ties to Minnesota’s Indigenous communities.”

“I have no doubt she will lead with the same clarity, compassion and strength that have defined her career,” state Department of Public Safety Commissioner Bob Jacobson said in that August 2025 news release.

“Director Lopez leads from the heart. She doesn’t just understand MMIR, she feels its impact deeply,” Department of Public Safety Tribal Relations Director Juliet Rudie said in the same news release. “This office was established to challenge the big picture and Guadalupe is exactly the leader we need right know to change outcomes for our relatives.”

But Lopez said Thursday that in the state role, she felt like she was being asked to navigate a rulebook she was never given.

“I know my work ... like the back of my hand, the understanding of missing and murdered, of sex trafficking, of domestic and sexual violence — but what I didn’t understand was how to do that in the state,” she told MPR. “And that’s, I think, what was my downfall, is not how to play nice within (the) state, or do it appropriately, or be the yes person. That’s my opinion.”

When asked if she thought — as the third person to helm the office since its 2021 inception —that the position was set up for success, Lopez said, “I can’t speak for the other people, but I will speak for myself. And no. No, it wasn’t.”

In a statement on Lopez’s departure, Jacobson — the DPS commissioner — said that “our dedication to the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Relatives Office continues, as does our commitment to the Indigenous community.”

Jacobson said Office of Justice Programs Executive Director Kim Babine will lead the MMIR Office on an interim basis, with support from Rudie, who is a former MMIR Office director.

Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey announced Thursday that he is nominating Police Chief Brian O’Hara to serve a second term.

Frey spoke alongside O’Hara during a news conference at City Hall. O’Hara is nearing the end of his term leading the city’s police department. To serve a second term, his nomination would need to be confirmed by a majority of the city council. It is unclear whether he has enough support for the confirmation vote.

The mayor touted a decrease in crime in most categories in the city, as well as an increase in the number of police officers and applications to become an officer in Minneapolis.

“This kind of progress — it’s fragile,” he said. “And if you remove our safety leadership at this moment, you don’t accelerate reform — you unravel it. You don’t build trust by starting over every single time things get hard. You build trust by staying the course, by holding people accountable, by learning and continuing to deliver.”

Frey said it was a stark change from the start of O’Hara’s tenure. He took the job in 2022, amid uncertainty and controversy around the police department. Public trust in MPD was low following former officer Derek Chauvin’s murder of George Floyd, and the police response to the protests that followed. Crime had gone up during the pandemic, and about 500 officers had resigned from the department.

But O’Hara has several critics on the city council. Some of the more progressive council members have said the police department is not making enough progress toward reforms.

Residents have also raised that concern. The advocacy organization Communities United Against Police Brutality said in a statement Thursday that they have "serious concerns” about O’Hara’s reappointment, citing the department’s handling of the cases of Allison Lussier and Davis Moturi and its response to the federal immigration enforcement operation.

Many council members also criticized the department for going more than $19 million over budget in 2025. The majority of that spending was on overtime costs.

Budget issues have drawn concern from council members who are generally supportive of the city’s police, including council member LaTrisha Vetaw.

“I've had questions. I haven't got answers to those questions,” Vetaw said. “And I'm hoping, before this comes before the council for a final vote, that I get answers to those questions so I can make the best decision for my ward.”

Vetaw also pointed to concerns over more than a dozen open complaints against O’Hara filed with the city’s police department. She said she has not seen the contents of those complaints, since they are not publicly accessible, and said she wants to learn more before voting on O’Hara’s nomination.

Frey said he’s not concerned about the complaints. He noted that those can come from anywhere — not necessarily from within the city or the police department. Frey said he believes many of them came in during the federal immigration enforcement operation, when O’Hara received national attention for his criticism of the federal government.

“We take every single complaint that comes forward seriously. That does not mean that every complaint is serious,” Frey said.

Frey praised O’Hara’s leadership through Operation Metro Surge, and during other crises, including the mass shooting at Annunciation Catholic Church and School.

Addressing the potential that there may not be enough votes for O’Hara to be confirmed to another term, Frey said he’s optimistic that the nomination will be approved. And he said that “if the council chooses not to support this nomination, they need to be very clear-eyed about the consequences. It means perhaps more than a year of uncertainty and transition. It also means losing critical momentum at a time when consistency matters most.”

Frey said he’s asking the City Council to consider the nomination within the next month.

O’Hara said he is “fully committed to continuing to do this work.”

“The MPD today is not where we were a few years ago. Neither is this city,” he said. “The progress we have made is real — reducing serious street crime while earning community trust, rebuilding this police department — but our mission continues.”

O’Hara said he’s proud of support from community members and city officials that he’s received during his term, and wants to continue growing the department in his next term if he is confirmed.

Prior to Thursday’s announcement, the mayor and the council were already at odds over the renomination of another public safety official — Commissioner of Community Safety Todd Barnette.

Last month the council voted against confirming Barnette to another term. Frey vetoed that rejection, and the council has lacked the votes to override that veto. But the city attorney has said Barnette can’t serve another term without council approval.

Minnesota lawmakers could receive police security for a limited time under a plan that passed the House of Representatives on Wednesday.

Following the fatal shooting of House DFL Leader Melissa Hortman and her husband, Mark, and the shootings of Sen. John Hoffman and his wife, Yvette, in June, lawmakers sought to expand security measures at the Capitol and beyond.

Public officials in the state have tracked an uptick in threats in recent years. Lawmakers broadly agreed that more needs to be done to ensure their safety, including taking individual steps to cool rhetoric that can spark violence.

“If judges and elected officials are not safe from violence then our democracy ceases to exist,” Rep. Kelly Moller, DFL-Shoreview, said. “Political violence is real. It happened here in unimaginable ways. It continues to happen. Our democracy cannot tolerate this violence and neither can we.”

The bill, which passed with a 92-42 vote, would give legislative leaders the authority to call on State Patrol officers to provide personal security to a lawmaker if there is a credible threat to their life or safety.

It would also:

• Keep in place weapons screening and enhanced security staffing at the Capitol beyond the end of the legislative session.

• Require lawmakers, constitutional officers, Supreme Court justices and Minnesota’s congressional delegation to provide their contact information to the Department of Public Safety so that they could be contacted by law enforcement in the event of an emergency.

• Create a clearer chain of command for which state law enforcement authority has responsibility over the Capitol complex and over elected officials when they’re off campus.

• Set up a task force to determine best practices for lawmaker safety and security and offer recommendations.

• Set up mandatory reporting requirements about Capitol security measures, threats to officials and protocols in place to protect them while in St. Paul and while away.

Republicans raised concerns about isolating themselves from members of the public with the changes and encouraged Democrats to also implement additional school safety measures this year. Two children were killed and dozens injured in August at Annunciation Catholic Church and School. Lawmakers in the narrowly split Capitol have disagreed about the best way to ensure safety in the classroom.

“I struggle with voting to protect us as politicians before we can agree to vote to find things that we can come together on to protect our kids in school,” said Rep. Ben Bakeberg, R-Jordan.

There were also concerns among Republican lawmakers about the expense to the state to retain Capitol security measures and to implement new off-campus security in certain cases.

Democrats agreed that the issue of school safety is important but said it should be resolved separately from the Capitol security plan. They also noted that without strong safety measures in place for public officials, fewer people could step up to run for office.

“While we serve in public office, we're also human beings with families, staff and communities who are impacted by the increasing volume, volume and seriousness of threats directed at elected officials,” said Rep. Julie Greene, DFL-Edina. “This body understands these heartbreaking consequences intimately. Consequences are not feelings or theater or make believe.”

Some GOP members also agreed that the state should take additional actions to ensure the safety of lawmakers and other public officials, like constitutional officers and judges.

“This is an important topic, and it's an important bill,” said House GOP Leader Harry Niska, of Ramsey. “There are good provisions and reforms in this bill. We recognize the need for this, especially on June 14, as we saw, definitely a need for a more coordinated response at the state level, at the very least.”

Lawmakers expressed concerns after the June 14 assassination of the Hortmans and shooting of the Hoffmans since there wasn’t a clear communication chain to get information about the potential threat to officials.

The state Senate has approved a similar measure, setting up a potential conference committee where members from both bodies would come together to reach a deal. Each chamber would then have to approve a compromise bill before it could reach Gov. Tim Walz.

After federal immigration agents fatally shot Alex Pretti on Jan. 24 in Minneapolis, Department of Veteran Affairs around the country attended vigils to pay respects to their colleague. On Tuesday, CNN reported that several department employees were investigated for talking to reporters at these vigils.

MPR News host Clay Masters spoke with CNN correspondent Brian Todd about the state of the investigations and their possible ramifications.

Use the audio player above to listen to the full conversation.

The largest payment ever from the state of Minnesota for wrongful imprisonment is one step closer to being a reality.

Under a proposed claims bill, Marvin Haynes would receive $4.5 million from the state, after spending nearly two decades in prison for a murder conviction that was later overturned.

In 2023, Marvin Haynes was released from the Minnesota Correctional Facility in Stillwater, after a judge found that an “unnecessarily suggestive” identification procedure used by police and a lack of any physical evidence was enough to vacate his conviction.

The claims bill working its way through the Legislature would pay Haynes $4.5 million under the state’s Imprisonment and Exoneration Remedies Act.

On Wednesday, the Minnesota Senate Finance Committee and the House Ways and Means Committee both approved the claims bill. It will need approval of both bodies and the governor to be paid out.

“I hope that Mr. Haynes has a good rest of his life,” Sen. John Marty, DFL-Roseville, said during Wednesday’s Senate Finance Committee hearing.

Rep. Luke Frederick, DFL-Mankato, noted in the House committee hearing that it is the biggest sum — and the longest sentence before exoneration — that the claims subcommittee has seen.

“The person was in their late teens when they were incarcerated, and then they were almost 40 when they were let out,” Frederick said. “And I cannot imagine having those formative years of a person’s life being taken from them, which is why the number is so large this year.”

Rep. Paul Torkelson, R-Hanska, noted the specific circumstances of Haynes’ case in supporting the payment.

“This one is a bit higher than normal because of the unusual circumstances of that very lengthy, inappropriate incarceration,” he said. “I recommend members vote yes.”

Haynes was convicted in the killing of Harry “Randy” Sherer in Minneapolis, a crime that happened when Haynes was 16.

Years later, the Great North Innocence Project filed post-conviction petitions, calling into question the police identification procedure, finding two eyewitnesses who recanted on their testimony and an overall lack of any physical evidence tying Haynes to the crime. A judge agreed and vacated the conviction, writing in the order to vacate “the interests of justice would be served by dismissing with prejudice all charges.”

When Haynes was finally released, he’d spent 19 years, six months and 23 days in prison.

After his release, Haynes wrote in a statement that “it is devastating that it took so long for the truth to come out. My life was destroyed by the officers who wrongly chose to fabricate a case against me, and I have a long road in front of me to heal.”

Nearly a year after a gunman fatally shot former Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman and state Sen. John Hoffman, the Minnesota House is expected to vote Wednesday on new measures intended to better protect state lawmakers.

The legislation would create an emergency contact database for elected officials and provide greater security for state lawmakers. It would also set aside funds for a “security services task force.”

The $1.2 million earmarked specifically for lawmaker safety would mostly include personnel and technology used to help identify threats and add protection on the state Capitol campus, state Rep. Brion Curran, DFL-White Bear Lake, told MPR News.

“We want to make sure that the position that's held is protected. And we know now, in a very real and devastating way, how our democracy can be put at risk,” said Curran, who co-authored the bill.

No money is intended be used to specifically reimburse or add security to the personal homes or lives of officials in the state Curran added.

Listen to the full conversation by clicking the player above.

With gas prices continuing to surge, more than 8 in 10 Americans said pain at the pump is putting a strain on their household budgets — and a strong majority blames President Trump, according to the latest NPR/PBS News/Marist poll.

The poll also found that Trump is more unpopular than he ever has been and he faces major declines with key groups since being sworn in for a second term. Most Americans said the economy isn't working for them, and the war in Iran — which has directly led to those higher gas prices — continues to grow more unpopular.

Those challenges have given Democrats a distinct advantage in the midterm elections. Six months from when votes will be counted this November, Democrats lead by 10 points on the congressional ballot test. The ballot test asks which party's candidate they would vote for if congressional elections took place today.

Democrats also have the edge on enthusiasm to vote, which is critical in midterm years when turnout is expected to be lower than presidential-election years. Who shows up is a wild card because independents and some groups critical to both parties are not fired up.

The survey of 1,322 respondents was conducted April 27-30 and has a margin of error of +/- 3.1 percentage points, meaning results could be about 3 points higher or lower. Respondents were reached by live caller, text and online.

Trump’s approval is the worst ever in the poll

Just 37 percent of respondents approve of the job Trump is doing overall, while 59% disapprove. That's the highest level of disapproval ever in the Marist poll for Trump between both of his terms.

What's more, 51 percent strongly disapprove, which is tied for worst ever for Trump in the poll. The number shows the intensity of opposition that he's facing.

Digging inside the numbers reveals some huge declines with various key voter groups, including with many who were supportive of Trump just after he was sworn into office for a second term.

That includes voters in the South, those who make less than $50,000 a year, white men and women without college degrees, Millennials, men, parents of children under 18, rural voters and men in small cities and the suburbs.

Trump has seen declines with other key base voting groups, like white evangelical Christians and rural voters. The slides have been even more pronounced with crossover voters, who helped him over the finish line in 2024, like younger people and many Black and Latino voters.

Even Republicans are not as strongly in support of the president. In February 2025, 88 percent approved of the job he was doing, while 10 percent disapproved. That's a net rating of +78 points. Now, 81 percent approve and 18 percent disapprove. That's still relatively high, but the +63 represents a 15-point net drop in a little over a year.

It’s still the economy ...

Trump's approval ratings have nosedived because of all that's happened in the past year, including Trump's tariffs, continued higher-than-pre-Covid-pandemic prices and now rising gas prices because of the Iran war.

Just 35 percent approve of Trump's handling of the economy, which is also tied for worst mark in the poll. That record was set in March.

Several factors are piling on voters:

Gas prices have surged to an average of $4.48 cents a gallon nationally, as of May 5, according to AAA. Before the war, prices were below $3 a gallon on average.

As a result, 81 percent of respondents said current gas prices are a strain on their household budget, including 79 percent of Republicans.

By a 63 percent-37 percent margin, respondents said they blame Trump for the current increase in gas prices. That includes a third of Republicans.

The same split said the economy is not working well for them personally, the worst recorded in the survey.

A majority (56 percent) said their area is not very affordable or not affordable at all. Critically, among those saying the economy is not working well for them were white non-college women (72 percent), those making less than $50,000 a year (71 percent), Millennials (69 percent) and those 18-29 (65 percent).

The Trump administration had taken a largely deregulatory approach to artificial intelligence, something that has accounted for major investment and a major share of stock portfolios. But concerns are growing over AI and the future.

The survey found that 8 in 10 believe AI will eliminate more jobs than it creates. That's up 12 points since last year.

The Iran war continues to be unpopular

Trump's approval for his handling of Iran has sunk to just 33 percent. That's down from 36 percent in March.

Seventy-two percent of Republicans approve of Trump's Iran handling, which is down 7 points from March.

By a 61 percent-38 percent margin, respondents said the military action in Iran has done more harm than good, including a quarter of Republicans.

More broadly, 62 percent said Trump's decisions have weakened the United States on the world stage.

Democrats hold the midterm advantage

By a 52 percent-42 percent margin, respondents said they would vote for a Democratic candidate in their district if congressional elections were held today.

That's a significant gap, and one that in past years has indicated a potential wave election. But there are fewer competitive seats up than ever before because of gerrymandering and other factors.

The election is still six months away, but at this point, Democrats have the edge. That shows up in enthusiasm as well. Democrats are 8 points more likely than Republicans to say they're "very enthusiastic" to vote — 61 percent-53 percent.

There's also a 14-point enthusiasm gap between people who voted for Democrat Kamala Harris and those who voted for Trump in 2024 (61 percent vs. 47 percent).

Just 38 percent of independents say they're very enthusiastic, indicating a likely drop-off in turnout this year from the presidential election. Turnout in midterms averages a roughly 30 percent drop compared to presidential elections. And some key groups for both sides said they're not very enthusiastic.

The most likely to say they're very enthusiastic: 60+ (68 percent), white college men (68 percent), white college grads (64 percent), white college women (61 percent), those 45 and older (61 percent), college graduates (59 percent), whites (56 percent), white men without degrees (56 percent), those who make more than $50,000 a year (55 percent) and parents without children under 18 (55 percent).

White, college-educated voters traditionally vote at higher rates, and they have trended toward Democrats in the age of Trump.

The least likely to say they're very enthusiastic are those 18-29 years old (34 percent), Gen Z (35 percent), Millennials (37 percent), those who make less than $50,000 a year (37 percent), those younger than 45 (37 percent), Black voters (39 percent), parents with children under 18 (40 percent), Latinos (42 percent), white women without degrees (45 percent), Trump voters (47 percent), those who live in big cities (47 percent).

From that list, young voters and non-whites are key for Democrats, while parents with young children, white women without degrees and obviously Trump voters are key for Republicans to turn out this fall.

Other findings on voter ID, age in politics and automatic registration for the draft

• 74 percent are in favor of requiring government-issued photo ID in order to be allowed to vote, including 51 percent of Democrats.

• 65 percent support requiring people to show a passport or birth certificate in order to register to vote.

• 80 percent support a maximum age limit for members of Congress (there is currently only a minimum age limit).

• 83 percent support term limits for members of Congress (putting limits on the number of times they can run for office).

• A slim majority (53 percent) opposes automatic registration into the military's Selective Service. There's a big partisan divide on the question — 68 percent of Republicans are in favor, but just 30 percent of Democrats are. (The current process requires self-registration.)

Copyright 2026, NPR

The Minneapolis City Council is expected to ban assault weapons in the city during its Thursday meeting.

The bill is part of an effort by 17 Minnesota cities that pledged to adopt gun violence ordinances following the mass shooting at Annunciation Catholic Church and School, in which a gunman killed two children and injured 28 others.

The bill approved by the council would ban certain semi-automatic weapons defined in state law that are commonly known as assault weapons. It includes AK- and AR- variants.

The bill would also ban large capacity magazines, binary triggers and ghost guns.

Cheers erupted during the council’s Tuesday meeting as they unanimously voted to move the bill on to a final vote. Supporters in attendance included Annunciation parents and community members.

“My son is always on alert, scanning for danger,” said Nicole Farrell, whose seventh-grader was attending Mass when a gunman shot through the stained glass windows of the church. “Unexpected noises, as simple as opening a can of crescent rolls for dinner, can send him spiraling.”

A spokesperson said Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey supports the bill.

Despite the unanimous support from the city council and Frey, the bill would largely be symbolic. According to Everytown for Gun Safety, Minnesota is one of 42 states that have preemption laws, which prevent city governments from regulating firearms.

The gun safety nonprofit says the laws became commonplace in the 1980s after backlash to an Illinois city’s decision to ban handguns.

Mayors of several Minnesota cities have urged the state to drop its preemption laws. In November, St. Paul passed a similar assault weapons ban that would not take effect until state preemption laws are lifted.

“It’s something that has touched all our wards and all of our constituents,” said Council Member Aurin Chowdhury at the bill hearing Tuesday. “We are just extremely united as a city to do everything we can to reduce the harm of gun violence.”

In a letter sent to Frey and members of the city council on Tuesday, the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus said it would pursue legal action if the assault weapons ban is adopted.

“This ordinance is facially invalid under state law and represents an unlawful assertion of municipal power,” Rob Doar, general counsel for the group, wrote in the letter.

Earlier this week, Minnesota Senate Democrats voted to pass new restrictions on assault-style weapons and high capacity magazines. The bill’s fate in the House, which is tied 67-67, remains uncertain.

With the timing of a sudden leadership shakeup already in question, the Minnesota Department of Human Services disclosed Tuesday that its newly named leader will be out on medical leave for the next month.

On Monday, Gov. Tim Walz appointed John Connolly as temporary commissioner. He replaced Shireen Gandhi, who was shifted back to a deputy commissioner assignment just before she was to take part in a Senate confirmation hearing.

The agency has been contending with cases of fraud in public benefit programs and freezes of federal Medicaid funding by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

In a memo Monday that went out upon his selection, Connolly told agency staff that he is undergoing treatment for colon cancer. While he’s out, his leadership role will be filled by Gandhi and another deputy commissioner, Andrew Johnson.

“Shireen and Andrew will be leading the agency day-to-day until I return,” Connolly wrote.

DHS shared the memo and a statement when MPR News inquired about an interview with Connolly about his new role. He is expected to return to the office in early June.

"John is grateful for detection following a routine colonoscopy and urges everyone, where eligible, to be screened regularly and not wait – recommended, regular screening saves lives," an agency statement on Tuesday read.

Connolly, who previously was a deputy commissioner, is keeping his title as state Medicaid director.

“I accept this position as a committed public servant, with continuity of operations at the forefront, to ensure our Medicaid programs are of the highest quality and public funding is aggressively protected and effectively overseen,” Connolly said in his internal memo. “My priority is to continue transforming a human services system Minnesotans can trust, where program integrity and service impact goes hand in hand.”

Republicans criticized the timing of the change at the top when it was announced Monday afternoon.

“Minnesotans were told Shireen Gandhi’s leadership would bring reform to DHS, yet now she is being shuffled to a different position so that Senate Democrats can avoid a confirmation hearing,” Sen. Jordan Rasmusson, R-Fergus Falls, said in a statement shortly after the leadership change.

A spokesperson for Walz defended Gandhi.

“Shireen has been instrumental to the administration’s work to root out fraud. We’re grateful that she will continue to be a critical member of our team as we work to protect taxpayers from fraudsters — as well as a federal government set on harming Minnesotans,” a statement from the governor’s office said.

Walz’s office didn’t address Connolly’s health status and how it factored into the recent moves.

The confirmation hearing that Gandhi was supposed to be part of was canceled after Connolly’s appointment was announced.

Democrats, who have the Senate majority, said they would continue to press DHS for answers on how many millions of dollars have been misused by providers and other beneficiaries. Several of those providers have been charged, and some convicted, for fraud.

“Our members have had tough questions for DHS leadership about fighting fraud and protecting the people who need services, and that will continue,” Senate Majority Leader Erin Murphy, DFL-St. Paul, said in a statement Monday.

MPR News producer Benjamin Revier contributed to this story

Following a packed meeting featuring hours of public testimony Monday night, the Hermantown City Council agreed to take more time to consider a plan to grant Google a property tax break that could reach $80 million, in exchange for building a nearly $2 billion data center complex in the northeastern Minnesota city.

Supporters, many of them representing business and labor groups, wore green T-shirts with the slogan “Yes MN!” They called the project a “generational” investment for Hermantown, and argued that the city near Duluth would see the cost of the subsidy repaid many times over with increased tax revenue and cash payments for the city and local schools.

Opponents, many with the grassroots group Stop the Hermantown Data Center and wearing bright red T-shirts, said the tech giant did not need a tax giveaway, and argued that the proposed site — surrounded by homes and forest and near designated trout streams — is an inappropriate location for a data center with computer warehouses the size of five football fields.

After about three hours of public comment, councilors voted unanimously to table the vote until a later date. Some had legal concerns about whether the city could approve the agreements while an environmental review and two lawsuits are still pending.

“I think if we take the time and do things intentionally, we will come to a better product,” said Mayor Wayne Boucher. “I don’t think there’s anything hurt by taking a little extra time.”

Responding to criticism from several in the audience, council member Andy Hjelle said councilors are listening to constituent concerns. “We don’t take this lightly. We’re getting all the information we can and trying to make the best educated decision that we can,” he said.

Under the terms of the proposed agreements, Google is expected to spend $650 million on the project’s first phase. The city expects three total phases would be built out over a period of eight to 10 years, with a total investment in the ballpark of $2 billion.

Liz Schwab of Google delivered a presentation to the council during which she described the company’s “ambitious moon shot” — a goal of powering all its data centers with carbon-free energy 24 hours a day, every day.

“I want to underline that this is a huge part of what makes Minnesota so attractive to Google,” she said. “The state should be proud of its ambitious” law that requires utilities to procure all their electricity from carbon-free sources by 2040, she added. “It attracted our potential investment in the state.”

In return for the property tax relief — estimated at about $70 million, but which could be as high as $80 million — Google is offering to pay about $130 million to extend utilities and infrastructure to the project site.

The deal calls for Hermantown schools to receive about $70 million in funding from new property taxes and cash payments from Google over 28 years.

The city would also receive about $12 million in new property tax revenue over a 20-year period, in addition to $4.5 million from Google.

Schwab said the project would create about 100 long-term jobs at full buildout, and up to 2,000 construction jobs.

“Projects like this data center do not always come along that often,” said Jack Carlson, a Hermantown resident and president of the Duluth Building and Construction Trades Council. Carlson said many of the 3,000 union members he represents are forced to travel for work.

“The ability for the Duluth building trades to stay home and eat dinners with their family and attend the events they potentially would miss is an amazing opportunity,” he said.

Other supporters focused on the potential benefits to the area. “I see this as a generational opportunity,” said Hermantown resident Joe Pike, with undeniable benefits to the school system, infrastructure, and the overall economy.

“Let’s not drive that away because of fear of change,” Pike said.

Many opponents stressed that they are not opposed to economic development, or even a data center. But they feel the proposed location, surrounded by several nearby homes, is the wrong place for such a massive development.

“Find a more appropriate location, not a residential wooded area surrounded by families, animals, wildlife and protected rivers and streams,” said Jackie Dolentz, who lives near the proposed location.

“This is not NIMBY. It’s upsetting to hear that money is more important than my family and my neighbors and my home,” Dolentz said.

Others expressed frustration that community members had fewer than two weeks to review the agreements, which the city has worked on with Google for months. Opponents argued Google, with a market capitalization of more than $4.5 trillion, does not need an $80 million tax abatement.

“That’s pocket lint to them,” said Hermantown resident Allison Hafften. “It’s not necessary to attract them here.”

Tax incentives are a common tool cities around the country have used to attract data centers, including in Minnesota. Pine Island, for example, recently agreed to a tax abatement with Google to bring a data center there.

Hermantown officials have argued that if they don’t offer tax incentives, other communities will.

Google and other data center developers already receive a state sales tax exemption on their equipment purchases. Minnesota is one of 38 states that offer data center tax incentives.

The proposed data center in Hermantown is one of about a dozen mega-scale projects proposed around the state. Only one, a Meta data center in Rosemount, is currently under construction.

Several steps still need to be cleared before the Hermantown project could move forward, including environmental review and additional permits. Two lawsuits have also been filed to block it.

It’s difficult to claw funds back when tax dollars are lost to fraud, so a bipartisan group of legislators is determined to get creative.

The “Take It Back Act” would impose a 100 percent tax on individuals or organizations convicted of defrauding state programs. The bill also aims to collect from people who have committed fraud but haven’t been charged or convicted.

As the 2026 Legislature heads toward its finish, fraud response measures remain an area of focus. Aside from putting up new defenses to stop fraud, lawmakers are working to show the public they’re not letting past schemes go unanswered.

The tax-on-fraud bill allows the Department of Revenue to impose a penalty “equal to 100 percent of the amounts received attributable to the fraud” on a person who received money due to fraud of a public program. It would also increase cooperation between the Department of Revenue and law enforcement on fraud investigations. Any recovered money would go in a tax relief fund.

For the Republicans spearheading the legislation, the idea is to both claw back stolen funds and deter future fraudsters.

“We need to create a much stronger deterrent for the thievery of taxpayers’ money in our state,” Sen. Steve Drazkowski, R-Mazeppa, said as he promoted the bill last month. Drazkowski is the chief sponsor in the Senate.

“The people in Minnesota, they want their money back, and it's our job as legislators to do everything we can to make that happen,” Rep. Patti Anderson, R-Dellwood, added. Anderson is the chief sponsor in the House.

“This is not a messaging bill. This is very serious,” Anderson said.

The bill is gaining traction in both chambers and with both parties. It was added to the Senate omnibus tax bill Thursday and the House will consider doing the same. Democrats in both chambers are signed on, though some have questioned if recovered funds should go back to the programs they were taken from instead of into a tax relief fund.

A tax on fraud is a novel idea. Anderson, a former state auditor, said she’s not aware of any other states that have tried it.

Joanna Bayers, legislative director of the Minnesota Department of Revenue, told the House Taxes Committee last week that the bill would provide “another tool in our toolbox” to help identify fraud.

However, in a report prepared for the committee, the department wasn’t able to estimate the impact of the tax and penalty.

“The amount of future program fraud is unknown,” the report reads. Those convicted of fraud may have “large restitution or penalty amounts that would be paid before the tax, making collection of the imposed tax even more difficult.”

Another complicating factor is that collection of the tax revenues “may be further slowed down as court cases, legal challenges, or appeals can take several years to be completed.”

Rep. Steve Elkins, DFL-Bloomington, serves with Anderson on the House Fraud Prevention and State Agency Oversight Policy Committee. He was one of the first Democrats to sign on to the bill.

“Who knows if it'll ever get enforced, but it can't hurt anything. And I thought it was a really clever idea,” Elkins said.

New taxes are nonstarters for many Minnesota Republicans, but for Drazkowski, this is one he can get behind.

“In 19 years I’ve never put my name on a tax increase bill,” Drazkowski said. “This is the first one.”

The state agency that has struggled to contain fraud is undergoing a shakeup at the top.

Gov. Tim Walz announced Monday that Shireen Gandhi is out as the state’s interim commissioner of the Department of Human Services

The news came just one day before the Minnesota Senate Health and Human Services Committee was scheduled to hold a confirmation hearing for her position as commissioner.

Gandhi will remain with the department as the deputy commissioner, overseeing the state's Medicaid programming. John Connolly, who currently serves as deputy commissioner and state Medicaid director, will step in as interim commissioner.

Connolly also appointed the department’s general counsel, Andrew Johnson, as deputy commissioner.

Walz formally appointed Gandhi as commissioner in February, but said in a news release the leadership changes were to enhance oversight and protect Medicaid services for Minnesotans.

“We’ve made significant progress to strengthen programs and root out fraud,” Walz said.

The leadership changes follow a period of significant scrutiny of the agency’s handling of alleged fraud in state social services programs.

Republican House Speaker Lisa Demuth of Cold Spring — who is running for governor — and Floor Leader Harry Niska, R-Ramsey, said in a statement Walz was not taking fraud seriously by keeping Ghandi.

“Recycling the same failed staff will not root out fraud — only wholescale change will,” they said in the statement.

Senate Majority Leader Erin Murphy, DFL-St. Paul, said in a statement the state is less vulnerable to fraud now than in the past.

Sen. Melissa H. Wiklund, DFL-Bloomington, said Minnesota made progress under Gandhi’s leadership and expressed hope that Connolly will continue to drive the state forward.

The U.S. Justice Department announced Monday that it’s suing the state of Minnesota to stop a lawsuit the state filed against the oil industry over climate change.

At issue is a 2020 lawsuit filed by Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison alleging ExxonMobil, Koch Industries and the American Petroleum Institute deceived and defrauded Minnesotans about climate change — leaving the state to bear the costs of that climate change. It seeks unspecified restitution.

Nearly six years later, that lawsuit is still making its way through the courts.

In its new lawsuit to block the 2020 case, the DOJ says Minnesota is overstepping its authority — and that only the federal government has oversight on greenhouse gas emissions. The department said Minnesota’s lawsuit “usurps exclusive federal authority and unreasonably burdens domestic energy development.”

“The case we filed against Minnesota today is an attempt to rein in another unconstitutional state effort to invade an area of exclusive federal control,” Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Adam Gustafson said in a news release Monday. “It is in America’s interest to have independent and secure sources of energy. Minnesota’s attempted overreach would undermine our economic and national security to advance the climate agenda of politicians and activists.”

In a statement Monday, Ellison said he will move to have the federal lawsuit dismissed.

“We are still waiting to go to trial because Big Oil has pulled every procedural trick in the book to delay facing the consequences of their unlawful actions. This frivolous and meritless lawsuit is just their latest attempt to hide from accountability,” Ellison said in a statement.

"I think HCMC is an agreement all of us understand: that important hospital needs to be protected,” said Gov. Tim Walz. “I think safety of the Capitol, safety of legislature, safety of our children, is a piece of this. And then, hopefully, a bonding bill."

Walz says as the finish line nears, priorities will shrink. He said he's hopeful for something on guns and school safety.

The Minnesota Board of Pardons held an emergency meeting Monday to grant clemency to a man facing deportation to Laos because of a past conviction.

At "Ricky" Chandee was convicted of second-degree assault more than 30 years ago. He received a deportation order after serving his sentence.

Chandee is among several immigrants who have asked the state to pardon convictions that disrupted their status in the U.S.

Also Monday, a federal judge heard arguments in a lawsuit over federal agents’ treatment of protesters and observers during increased federal immigration enforcement in Minnesota.

The federal government is asking a judge to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing that it’s moot now that the surge has ended. Attorneys for the plaintiffs argued that the case is still relevant, because the federal government hasn’t committed to not repeat a surge in the future.

Go deeper with the latest edition of the Minnesota Today newsletter.

Minnesota Senate approves firearm restrictions, school safety funding; fate is murkier in House

Minnesota grants pardon to man facing imminent deportation after ICE arrest

Federal government asks court to dismiss lawsuit alleging agent misconduct during ICE surge

Subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or RSS.

President Trump is looking to make his mark on the White House and Washington, D.C., and not just politically.

The longtime real estate developer has either announced or embarked on a number of construction and renovation projects across the nation's capital.

"I have two jobs," Trump said in late 2025, the presidency being just one of them. "I have a construction job, which is really like relaxation for me because I have been doing it my entire life."

Some of those changes are seemingly temporary, like the huge banners of Trump's face hanging from the Justice Department, Department of Agriculture and other federal buildings. Several concern the decor and aesthetics of the White House, like the paved-over Rose Garden and gilded Oval Office. Others are matters of nomenclature, like the addition of Trump's name to the signs on the Kennedy Center and U.S. Institute of Peace buildings.

But many of the efforts in progress could reshape D.C.'s architectural landscape for decades to come.

Neil Flanagan, an architect and public historian in D.C., says while Trump had aesthetic ambitions during his first term, his "insistence on making it so much about his own style and his own brand and wearing this glory of America's past is distinct to this term." Many of his initiatives are connected to the country's upcoming 250th anniversary in July.

"They all sort of declare the glory of America rather than actually building any kind of growth or future for America," Flanagan says. "If you're trying to slash the science budget … at the same [as you're] building these grand monuments, you're not building a creative America, you're wearing a great American past as a costume."

Flanagan says that compared to previous presidents, Trump is displaying less "deference to producing an outcome that matched with … previous plans and then also some level of subjective expertise."

Many of Trump's proposals have sparked backlash and legal challenges, even as federal planning agencies packed with administration allies move them forward. Congress could intervene, Flanagan says, but is unlikely to do so as long as both chambers are controlled by Republicans.

Scroll or click on an item below to see Trump's wide range of D.C. projects.

Reflecting pool | Golf courses | Sculpture garden | Statues | Arch | Ballroom | Kennedy Center | Executive Office Building| Lafayette Square | Federal architecture | Beautification

Reflecting pool

Trump is resurfacing the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, coating its gray bottom with a shade he described to reporters as "American flag blue."

The 2,030-foot-long reflecting pool has been the backdrop of marches, speeches and inaugurations for a century.

It last underwent a major renovation from 2010 to 2012, both for structural fixes (to address decades of leaking and sinking) and aesthetic improvements (it was intentionally made shallower). But the Department of Interior says the wrong-size pipes were installed, resulting in the continued need for expensive refills (71 million additional gallons, exceeding $1 million, in 2019 alone).

Trump has been talking publicly about fixing the pool since at least November 2025, but ramped up his efforts in April after what he described as complaints about the state of the landmark. He told reporters that he is working with one of his best "pool builders" from his real estate days, who talked him out of a turquoise shade "like in the Bahamas."

Flanagan says Trump is treating the pool, and the city itself, "like it's his personal country club."

"You get some pool guys and then they refinish it in a way that is more suitable to, basically, a swimming pool at Mar-a-Lago," he adds.

Trump said the project would cost less than $2 million — a fraction of what he said he had been quoted previously — and take one to two weeks. But the Department of the Interior told NPR it expects work to be completed "by the end of May."

Golf courses

The Trump administration is also fighting to take control of the district's three public golf courses, with a particular focus on the busiest one: East Potomac Golf Links in East Potomac Park.

Trump has floated the idea of redoing the courses to bring them up to championship level, telling the Wall Street Journal in December that "if we do them, we'll do it really beautifully." That's worrying local golfers, some of whom sued the administration in February. The Interior Department has told NPR that Trump is committed to keeping the course accessible, and affordability remains a priority.

All three municipal courses had been managed by the nonprofit National Links Trust. The Department of the Interior terminated the trust's 50-year lease in December, accusing the nonprofit of failing to fulfill all the terms of its lease, which it denies.

"Our commitment remains unchanged and we will continue to pursue our mission with the support of our community for as long as we are allowed," National Links Trust said at the time. "While the golf courses will remain open for now, unfortunately our long-term renovation projects will cease."

In the months since, White House ballroom crews have proceeded to dump dirt at the nearby century-old East Potomac Park course, piled high enough that it now obstructs views of the Washington Monument.

Over the weekend, the political publication NOTUS reported, citing unnamed sources, that the Trump administration planned to officially take over the East Potomac course on Sunday and begin renovations — including tree-clearing and landscaping — that could potentially shut it down.

National Links Trust said in a statement that the report "was a complete surprise to us," adding that it hadn't heard from the Department of the Interior or the National Park Service to that effect.

A fundraising brochure from an entity called the "National Garden of American Heroes Foundation," obtained by the Washington Post and Democracy Forward over the weekend, says the foundation will lead "the comprehensive redevelopment and restoration" of East Potomac, "reimagining it as a world-class public asset."

Citing that document and NOTUS' reporting, the nonprofit legal organization Democracy Forward filed an emergency request on Sunday for a court to block the administration from closing East Potomac or "undertaking any steps toward implementing the plan other than routine maintenance, and from dumping any additional fill from the East Wing project within East Potomac Park."

At a Monday hearing, a federal judge said the Trump administration must get court approval if it intends to cut down more than 10 trees. The National Links Trust told NPR over email that the golf course remains open for now, adding "we have made all of our short-term improvements while the facility has remained open for the last five years."

NPR has reached out to the Department of the Interior and White House for more information, but has not heard back.

National Garden of American Heroes

Trump first proposed the idea of a sculpture garden to "depict historically significant Americans" during a campaign rally at Mount Rushmore in July 2020, during the height of the widespread protests against racial injustice.

Those protests ushered in the removal of Confederate monuments across the country, something Trump pushed back against from the White House.

"When the forces of anti-Americanism have sought to burn, tear down, and destroy, patriots have built, rebuilt, and lifted up," read Trump's original executive order, which targeted a public opening date of July 4, 2026.

Just two days before leaving office in 2021, Trump released a list of nearly 250 names for inclusion, spanning a wide range of politicians, philosophers, musicians, artists, astronauts, movie stars, athletes and other historical figures. Among them: Kobe Bryant, Andrew Carnegie, Julia Child, Walt Disney, Frederick Douglass, Amelia Earhart, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Whitney Houston, Ronald Reagan, Paul Revere, and Alex Trebek.

But Trump's first term ended without any congressional funding for the garden, and President Joe Biden quickly rescinded his orders.

Trump resurrected the project when he returned to office, though his January 2025 executive order changes its deadline from the U.S. semiquincentennial to "as expeditiously as possible." It's not clear when or where the garden will be erected, though signs point to the National Mall. The White House and Department of the Interior did not respond to a request for comment about its status.

South Dakota Republican Gov. Larry Rhoden offered Trump a plot of land last March within sight of Mount Rushmore. But Trump told the New York Times earlier this year that he was eyeing a spot in D.C., "right on the Potomac River … touching the golf course."

And the National Garden of American Heroes Foundation document obtained in early May says the garden will be located at West Potomac Park. It connects the golf course renovation and sculpture garden, calling them a pair of "landmark initiatives that embody its mission to honor America's 250th anniversary through lasting national investment."

The status of the statues themselves is also unclear. In April 2025, the National Endowment for the Humanities announced a grant program for sculptors totaling $30 million for some 150 recipients.

"Recipients will create lifelike statues in marble, granite, bronze, copper, or brass depicting specific historical figures tied to the accomplishments of the United States," the application reads. It says statues must be delivered by June 1, 2026, giving artists less than a year to finish.

Controversial statues

Trump has already added some new statues to D.C., honoring historical figures with controversial legacies.

A renovated statue of the Confederate Gen. Albert Pike was reinstalled in D.C.'s Judiciary Square in October, years after it was toppled during 2020 Black Lives Matter protests. His statue — the only outdoor monument honoring a Confederate general in D.C. — debuted in 1901 and has been contentious for years: D.C. Council members have called for its removal since 1992.

The National Park Service had previously announced plans to bring back the statue in line with Trump's 2025 executive order on "Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History." Among other things, it tasked the Department of the Interior with reinstating monuments that it found had been improperly removed since 2020 and making sure their descriptions do not "inappropriately disparage Americans past or living."

Pike, who was pardoned by President Andrew Johnson, has been identified by historians as possibly having been involved with the development of the Ku Klux Klan in the period after the Civil War. The plaque on the new statue doesn't mention that or even his military history, instead calling him an "author, poet, scholar, soldier, jurist, orator, philanthropist and philosopher."

In March, the Trump administration added a statue of Christopher Columbus to White House grounds, just outside the Eisenhower Executive Office Building. It's Trump's latest effort to honor the 15th-century explorer, whose legacy has tarnished due to the colonization, enslavement and violence against Indigenous people associated with his arrival in the Americas.

"In this White House, Christopher Columbus is a hero, and President Trump will ensure he's honored as such for generations to come," White House spokesperson Davis Ingle told NPR at the time. The statue is on loan to the White House through the end of Trump's term.

In late April, a statue of a man riding a horse, which had sat in storage in Delaware for years, appeared near the White House in Freedom Plaza.

That man is Caesar Rodney, a Delaware statesman best known for riding nearly 80 miles overnight, through thunderstorms, from Dover to Philadelphia on July 1, 1776, to cast a tie-breaking vote in favor of signing the Declaration of Independence. He did so despite being "gravely ill with a long-standing cancerous condition affecting his face and jaw that caused him chronic pain," according to the National Park Service.

"Rodney's journey has long stood as a symbol of personal sacrifice in service to the ideals of liberty," it says.

But Rodney's legacy is sullied by the fact that he enslaved more than 200 people on his family's plantation (though the National Park Service said he took "public action to abolish slave trading" within Delaware and freed some in his will). That's why his century-old statue was removed from downtown Wilmington, Del., in 2020.

The Washington Post reports his statue will remain on display for up to six months as part of the country's 250th birthday celebrations. When asked to confirm that timeline, a spokesperson for the Department of the Interior told NPR that "as we approach America's 250th anniversary, the Trump administration has been committed to celebrating and acknowledging the full breadth of our nation's history, including the story of Caesar Rodney and his pivotal ride in July 1776."

Triumphal arch

Trump is also moving ahead with plans for a 250-foot "victory arch" — in honor of the nation's 250th birthday — directly across the Potomac River from the Lincoln Memorial (of which it is more than double the height).

Renderings of the white-and-gold structure bear a striking resemblance to the Arc de Triomphe in Paris, if it were 100 feet taller and topped with two golden eagles and a winged, crowned figure.

Flanagan says the arch would be equivalent to 19 stories tall, whereas the typical building in D.C. is about 13 stories (federal law limits the height of buildings in the city in part to maintain the prominence of national monuments).

"And when you add the big statue on top, I think it's actually very difficult to understand just how enormous that thing will be, and very heavy," he says.

The Commission of Fine Arts, the federal agency packed with Trump allies, approved the plan earlier this month. Construction costs and timelines have not been publicized. But Flanagan says the enormity of the arch requires "very complex foundations" that alone will take significant time.

The arch has been met with opposition from some corners, including nearly all of the 1,000 public comments submitted prior to the commission's vote. The structure, which would be near the entrance to Arlington National Cemetery, is also the subject of a lawsuit by a group of Vietnam War veterans who argue it disrespects those buried there and requires congressional approval to proceed.

The White House says the towering arch will "enhance the visitor experience" at the cemetery, "serving as a visual reminder of the noble sacrifices borne by so many American heroes throughout our 250-year history so we can enjoy our freedoms today."

White House ballroom

Trump demolished the entire East Wing of the White House in October to make way for the ballroom he has dreamt of for over a decade.

The administration says the new 90,000-square-foot structure will increase capacity for guests at state dinners and other events, to the tune of at least $300 million. It has said that construction will be completed in 2028, but legal challenges have proven a roadblock so far.

The project drew ire from architecture and historical preservation groups, one of which sued the administration to prevent construction. That sparked an escalating legal battle, which has seen a federal judge twice order construction to stop unless authorized by Congress.

The judge did make an exception for infrastructure related to national security. That's a nod to the mysterious bunker beneath the East Wing that the Trump administration says is getting an upgrade, one of its main arguments in favor of continuing construction.

"The military is building a big complex under the ballroom, which has come out recently because of a stupid lawsuit that was filed," Trump told reporters in late March, adding that the ballroom "essentially becomes a shed for what's being built under."

The National Capitol Planning Commission approved Trump's ballroom plans even amidst the legal battle. As part of that process, it solicited feedback from members of the public — and got more than 30,000 written comments, largely in opposition.

"It's pretty rare that the National [Capitol] Planning Commission receives ten comments on a project," Flanagan said. "So to get that number and to get them almost overwhelmingly negative, I think, is a sign that at the very least, these things no longer represent Americans."

Kennedy Center renovations

Trump has swiftly and systematically asserted control of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts since taking office.

Last February he replaced its board members with his own allies, who promptly elected him board chair — prompting scores of artists to cancel planned performances in protest. Trump has been critical of the center, lamenting its physical disrepair, deriding its programming choices as "woke" and suggesting "maybe we close up some of the work that's been done … because it was done terribly."

In March, the Kennedy Center announced it would close in July for approximately two years to undergo a "comprehensive revitalization project." It said Trump had secured $257 million from Congress "to address decades of deferred maintenance."

A group of eight architecture and cultural organizations then sued the center, hoping to force it to comply with historic preservation laws and get congressional approval first. (The White House said in response it looks forward "to ultimate victory on the issue".)

Architectural plans have not yet been released. Trump has posted about turning the Kennedy Center into a "new and spectacular Entertainment Complex" and "World Class Bastion of Arts, Music, and Entertainment."

But others involved have described the renovation as a matter of infrastructure repairs. Kennedy Center officials led members of Congress and reporters on tours of the building in April to show water damage, outdated electrical equipment and other issues that they say justify the prolonged closure.

Eisenhower Executive Office Building

The Eisenhower Executive Office Building (EEOB) is the iconic French Second Empire-style building next door to the White House, containing office spaces for various parts of the president's team.

It was constructed in the 1870s and 1880s to house the growing staffs of the State, War, and Navy Departments. Its distinctive mansard roof, cast-iron details and granite columns reflected the optimism of the post-Civil War era, and stand out next to its neighboring neoclassical buildings.

That Maine granite has always been grey. Architecture groups say that was a deliberate design choice to highlight the stark white of the White House, which first got its lime-based whitewash in 1798 to protect its sandstone exterior during winter.

The Trump administration wants to paint the EEOB white, too.

"The color, design, and massing of the existing structure does not align visually with the surrounding architecture and lacks any symbolic cohesion with the White House," the Executive Office of the President wrote in a proposal to the National Capital Planning Commission for consideration at its May 7 meeting.

The Trump administration says the building's exterior has been stained by soot and grime, and has undergone only minor repairs, most recently in the early 2000s. Painting the facade, it says, will help with maintenance because it is "repeatable."

"The inability to bring the stone facade back to a baseline color has plagued the maintenance of the EEOB in the past, and will continue to plague it if not addressed," the proposal reads.

Preservation groups disagree — one of them, Cultural Heritage Partners, filed a lawsuit in November to try to halt the project. Nevertheless, the Trump administration presented its plan to the Commission of Fine Arts in April.

Around that time, the National Trust for Historic Preservation said in a letter to the Commission of Fine Arts that painting the building would irreversibly harm the landmark — by trapping moisture within the masonry — and likely require continued reapplication and cleaning, possibly on taxpayers' dime. It also says that, as a National Historic Landmark, the building's defining characteristics should be protected.

"The historic EEOB has been preserved, un-painted, since its completion in 1888," it said. "Painting the exterior now would obscure the EEOB's historic appearance, undermine its character-defining features, and accelerate the building's deterioration."

The Trump administration has said the specific kind of mineral silicate-based masonry paint it hopes to use — which Trump has called "magic paint" — would strengthen the stone and be easy to reapply, which dozens of preservation experts have disputed. Flanagan said that type of paint, which is really more of a stain, actually doesn't stick well on granite — "it would just come off."

"So they have to use some kind of epoxy or acrylic binder on it and they're going to have to sand or sandblast … the surface," he said. "I think that could honestly be one of those devastating cultural hits that this administration could do."

Lafayette Square

Lafayette Square, a 7-acre public park directly north of the White House, has been fenced off since January. The park is normally a high-traffic area for tourists snapping White House pictures, and a popular site for local protests — including the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests after the murder of George Floyd.

But much of the area is closed off for what the National Park Service calls "construction and turf renovation related to a major rehabilitation of Lafayette Park for America's semiquincentennial."

The park service says the project is slated to end on May 31 and involves installing irrigation lines, repairing historic fountains, installing new pumping systems and fountain vaults, replacing trees and turf, replacing benches and installing hardscape (like walkways) in some areas.

Trump told the New York Times earlier this year that he planned to replace Lafayette Square's brick walkways with granite, in part because of concerns that bricks could be thrown during demonstrations. He estimated the project would cost about $10 million, which he said would come from his own pocket.

The park service stresses that the closures are temporary, but necessary due to "concerns about security for construction equipment and prior vandalism associated with public protests in recent years."

Federal architecture

Trump has repeatedly signed orders promoting neoclassical architecture as the official style for federal buildings, during his first term and, after Biden revoked them, again in 2025.

On the very first day of his second term, Trump issued a memorandum directing the General Services Administration to "advance policies that ensure federal public buildings "respect regional, traditional, and classical architectural heritage in order to uplift and beautify public spaces and ennoble the United States and our system of self-government."

A few months later, he signed the "Making Federal Architecture Beautiful Again" executive order mandating that in D.C., "classical architecture shall be the preferred and default architecture for Federal public buildings absent exceptional factors necessitating another kind of architecture."

It defines classical architecture as encompassing the styles of neoclassical, Georgian, federal, Greek revival, beaux arts and art deco.

That's a shift from the brutalist and modernist designs of the mid-20th century, seen in federal buildings like the '70s-era FBI headquarters, which in 2023 topped a survey of ugliest buildings in the U.S. (FBI Director Kash Patel announced in December that the J. Edgar Hoover building will close permanently and the bureau will move to a more modern facility in D.C.)

Trump's architectural preferences are evident in the designs his administration has submitted for new projects like the triumphal arch and White House ballroom. But how his executive order will translate into renovations of existing federal buildings remains to be seen.

Flanagan says that such orders can easily be reversed by a future president, as they have been already: "The question is, will this discredit classical architecture for a generation?"

Flanagan says that within the architecture community, Trump's actions seem to have "reaffirmed the sense that classical architecture is associated with right-wing individuals," but he believes that everyday Americans have their own thoughts on D.C.'s aesthetics.

"It's some place that they were figuring themselves out in eighth grade [when] they came on a school trip, and it struck them and gave them certain thoughts about America or the sense … that this was connected to something," he adds. "People may have different views about what it is that is so offensive about Trump's changes."

D.C. beautification projects

A March 2025 executive order called "Making the District of Columbia Safe and Beautiful" aims to do so by creating a task force of federal agency officials aimed at "preventing crime, punishing criminals, preserving order, protecting our revered American monuments, and promoting beautification and the preservation of our history and heritage."

The order was the basis for Trump's federal law enforcement surge, including the ongoing deployment of National Guard troops to D.C. Other priorities include increased collaboration with immigration officials, restoring memorials, clearing homeless encampments and cleaning up parks.

Trump's proposed 2027 fiscal year budget, unveiled this month, includes a $10 billion "Presidential Capital Stewardship Program" for beautification and construction projects around the city, led by the National Park Service.

The federal government has already tackled some such projects, closing parts of some green spaces for things like grass restoration and fountain repairs. While some of those projects have been welcomed by residents, some have gotten pushback for making beloved city parks inaccessible for much of the spring and summer.

Copyright 2026, NPR

A federal judge heard arguments Monday in a lawsuit over ICE and border patrol agents’ treatment of protesters during the immigration enforcement surge in Minnesota.

The lawsuit, brought by the ACLU of Minnesota and several law firms, alleges that plaintiffs were illegally detained and threatened during the operation.

Attorneys for the federal government asked the court to dismiss the suit. In federal court in Minneapolis, they argued that it’s moot, now that the surge that began last December has ended.

“There has been such a significant drawdown of surged agents and officers,” Department of Justice attorney Kathleen Jacobs said. “There is no likelihood of subsequent harm.”

But Judge Kate Menendez questioned if the federal government had met the legal standard to eliminate the possibility of harm. She asked attorneys for the federal government about statements from federal officials, including White House Border Czar Tom Homan, who said when the surge ended that the government could hypothetically bring more agents in again.

“The government is robustly defending the legality,” Menendez said to Jacobs during the hearing. “You don’t point to a single official saying, ‘we won’t come back’ or ‘we won’t do this again.’”

Attorneys for the federal government said that was purely hypothetical. Jacobs said there are currently fewer than 300 ICE and border patrol agents on the ground in Minnesota.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs also argued that people are still facing possible repercussions, even after the surge’s end. They said allowing the lawsuit to continue could address that.

Attorney Caitlinrose Fisher pointed to some plaintiffs’ claims that federal agents took photos of them, saved their license plate numbers and told them they were entered into a database of domestic terrorists.

In January, Menendez issued a preliminary injunction stemming from this case, which barred federal agents from using chemical irritants against peaceful observers and protesters. But an appeals court overturned that order weeks later.

Menendez said she plans to rule soon on whether to dismiss the case or allow it to continue.

Minnesota’s Senate narrowly approved new restrictions on assault-style weapons and high capacity magazines Monday, a response to tragic shootings in schools and other settings. The proposal remains stuck in the tied House.

There were tears and tense exchanges ahead of the 34-33 party-line vote, with all DFLers in favor and all Republicans opposed.

The measure contains other school safety initiatives and comes months after a fatal shooting at Annunciation Catholic Church and School in Minneapolis. Lawmakers in the divided Legislature have said school safety is a top priority this session but have disagreed about the best path forward.

Family members of children shot during the Annunciation shooting looked down on the senators from the Senate gallery and lawmakers frequently mentioned them in their speeches. They applauded after the vote.

Parents said they were glad to see the Senate move the bill and hopeful about its prospects moving forward.

“This conversation is an important one, and we have to keep having it,” Kristen Neville said. “It's got to be an ongoing one, and we understand that this is a long road, and we're going to keep up with that. And our hope is that the rest of Minnesota also sees that too.”

DFL lawmakers say its important to tackle many things that contribute to gun violence.

“This legislation is comprehensive and doesn't compromise on our values. Students and parents do not want us to choose between banning weapons of war and investing in schools. This isn't either, or. We need both,” said Sen. Zaynab Mohamed, DFL-Minneapolis, who sponsored the bill.

The House, where there is a 67-67 split, has not advanced companion bills.

Families affected by gun violence, physicians who treat patients with gun-related injuries and advocates for more restrictions on firearms spoke in support of the proposal Monday morning.

“Every year, I’ve been pounding pavements trying to stop gun violence, start trying to stop other kids from losing their lives, because I don't want no other parent to feel the pain that I feel on a daily basis," said Kiwanis Vilella, whose 13-year-old son was killed in an act of gun violence.

The proposal would prohibit firearms dealers from selling assault-style weapons and large-capacity magazines, though non dealers could continue selling them as long as they follow existing firearm sale and transfer laws. Owners would have to certify the assault-style weapons and large-capacity magazines they already have with the state. The bill would also make it a felony to sell or transfer ghost guns — those without a serial number.

Dr. Rachel Weigert, a pediatric emergency room physician at Children’s Minnesota who treated children injured during the shooting at Annunciation, said the changes are needed.

“As a doctor, I'm supposed to train and prepare for the worst, not kids, not educators and not parents,” Weigert said. “Since that day, a chorus of kids, educators, parents and medical professionals have been begging the legislature to take a vote on policy changes like the Senate will do today. I'm glad we're finally here, and yet there is still so much to do.”

It includes provisions dealing with school safety provisions including more funding for mental health services and school safety grants, and to anonymous threat reporting systems. The House has deadlocked over provisions of a school safety proposal. Republicans have said they won’t support firearm restrictions as part of a compromise bill.

Democrats from swing districts said they were conflicted about the proposal but ultimately supported it saying lawmakers need to take some action.

Sen. Grant Hauschild, DFL-Hermantown, said he realized he couldn’t vote against the bill because he had cousins at Annunciation. And he says he didn’t want to have another conversation with his kids explaining another shooting in Minnesota.

“I refuse to have another conversation with my kids if I don't do something more,” Hauschild said, fighting back tears. “I refuse it because I can't look them in the eye and not do something.”

DFLers in the Senate had already taken votes on gun laws — background checks, revocation orders and trigger devices — since their last election so some in competitive districts will face campaign pushback regardless of how they vote on these.

Gun rights organizations have said the bill would unfairly infringe on gun owners’ rights.

“These firearms and these magazines, are owned by hundreds of thousands of Minnesotans for a multitude of reasons, whether it's self defense or hunting or sports shooting, and they're clearly protected by the Second Amendment and the Minnesota Constitution,” Anna Leamy, director of government relations and advocacy at the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus, said on MPR’s Minnesota Now.

“This is not going to do anything to stop the criminals who are already ignoring Minnesota's gun laws and so many of their other laws,” Leamy continued.

On the Senate floor, Republicans attempted to strip provisions dealing with firearm restrictions but those efforts failed.

Republicans in swing districts voted against the measure and said partisanship was getting in the way of real solutions.

“It is with every fiber of my being that I wish what we are doing here today was the answer,” Coleman said. “I wish that this bill could wave a magic wand and keep our students safe the moment it passed, but it won't.”

Republicans also openly doubted the actions would prevent more gun violence.

“We need to pursue truth, truth is that guns don't kill people,” said Sen. Steve Drazkowski, R-Mazeppa. “Bad people kill people, whether they use guns or knives or cars or poisons or any other method that they wanted to use, the sinister and evil that come from people who are sometimes possessed.”

Others spoke about the bill taking away "God-given rights" to access to firearms.

Mike Moyski, whose 10-year-old daughter Harper was killed at the Annunciation shooting, responded after the vote.

“It’s also a God-given right for a nine year old and a 10 year old to live beyond that age, right?” Moyski said. “So let's get serious when we're talking about God-given rights, especially in this topic.”

Democrats said if Republicans block the measure from advancing this year, it will be a key campaign focus. All 201 legislative seats are on the ballot in November.

“People are wondering where people stand,” said Rep. Emma Greenman, DFL-Minneapolis. “I hope that that pressure works, and if the pressure does not work under the dome in the next two weeks, it certainly will be there as we all face our voters and they ask us what we've done on this issue.”

Minnesota Now host Nina Moini spoke to two people on both sides of the issue. Listen to the conversation using the audio player above.

The Supreme Court on Monday restored broad access to the abortion pill mifepristone, blocking a ruling that had threatened to upend one of the main ways abortion is provided across the nation.

The order signed by Justice Samuel Alito temporarily allows women seeking abortions to obtain the pill at pharmacies or through the mail, without an in-person visit to a doctor.

Those rules had been in effect for several years until a federal appeals court imposed new restrictions last week.

The majority of abortions in the U.S. are obtained through medications, usually a combination of mifepristone and a second drug, misoprostol. Their availability has blunted the impact of abortion bans that most Republican-led states have started enforcing since a 2022 Supreme Court ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade and allowed for state bans.

Louisiana sued to restrict access to mifepristone, asserting that its availability undermined the ban there.

Some Democratic-led states have laws that seek to give legal protection to those who prescribe the drugs via telehealth to patients in states with bans.

Alito's order will remain in effect for another week while both sides respond and the court more fully considers the issue.

Manufacturers of mifepristone filed emergency appeals asking the Supreme Court to step in.