Michigan state and local officials are ready for a showdown with the Justice Department over election data, expressing concern that election offices in the state could be targets of FBI search warrants. The Justice Department has sought ballots and election records related to the 2024 election from Wayne County, which includes Detroit, Fox News reported. The Justice Department’s request didn’t specify how many records, but Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, a Democrat, said in a letter to the department that 864,767 ballots were cast in the 2024 election. She referred several times to the recent FBI raid seeking election documents in Georgia. However, the Fulton County, Georgia, raid—and the FBI subsequently obtaining election records from Maricopa County, Arizona—pertained to the 2020 election. “I am dismayed that it appears you have decided to move forward on theories similar to those deployed in Fulton County, in Michigan,” Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, a Democrat, said in a letter Friday to U.S. Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon. Nessel later added, “Much like Fulton County, the city of Detroit became the target of efforts to overturn the 2020 election.” While Nessel is raising the Fulton County comparison, the Justice Department is seeking information from the 2024 election. On April 14, Dhillon wrote to Wayne County Clerk Cathy Garrett and asked for “all ballots (including absentee and provisional), ballot receipts, and ballot envelopes” from the November 2024 federal election. Dhillon’s letter said the request was based on a “history of fraud convictions and other allegations” in Wayne County and warned that failure to comply “may result in the United States seeking a court order for production of such records.” The Justice Department is suing 29 states and the District of Columbia for not providing requested election records, while 16 states have voluntarily provided the information. When the FBI obtained election records from Maricopa County, Arizona, those were provided by the state Senate, which already had the information after conducting a 2021 audit. The post Dem AG Fears Michigan Could Face FBI Raid on Election Data appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Michigan Rep. Haley Stevens was met with apparent boos at her state’s Democrat convention on Sunday, in the heat of a three-way fight for the party’s nomination in a crucial Senate race. “Some very audible and prolonged booing for US Rep. Haley Stevens, who is running for U.S. Senate, at the Michigan Democratic Party convention,” observed a reporter for The Detroit News in attendance. Stevens is facing attacks from her left flank from two primary opponents. Some very audible and prolonged booing for US Rep. Haley Stevens, who is running for U.S. Senate, at the Michigan Democratic Party convention. pic.twitter.com/ykVbgVVzny— Beth LeBlanc (@DNBethLeBlanc) April 19, 2026 Stevens is seeking the Democrat nomination to face off against Republican former Rep. Mike Rogers, who lost to now-Sen. Elissa Slotkin by fewer than 20,000 votes in 2024. The race is to fill the seat of incumbent Sen. Gary Peters, D-Mich., who is not seeking reelection. Democrats need to net four additional seats in order to win the Senate, so holding on to Michigan is critical for their path to a majority. Stevens trails her two Democrat rivals, state Sen. Mallory McMorrow and former Wayne County health commissioner Abdul El-Sayed, by 11 points in a new Emerson College poll of the race. The polling shows McMorrow and El-Sayed tied at 24% each. The Democrat primary will be held on Aug. 4, 2026. New — Dive into tense #MIsen D primary and what Stevens, McMorrow, El-Sayed told me about Israel, ICE, Piker, Schumer — and electabilityEl-Sayed said on electability being “the least offensive” candidate: “If that were true, why would Donald Trump have won the presidency twice?” pic.twitter.com/CX20HwRiTz— Manu Raju (@mkraju) April 19, 2026 McMorrow and El-Sayed have both set themselves apart from Stevens by harshly criticizing Israel and the current Senate Democrat leadership. Stevens, on the other hand, is a staunch supporter of Israel, and has the support of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). The sole federal officeholder in the race, Stevens has been in Congress since 2019 and represents the Detroit-area 11th Congressional District. Stevens is a member of the House “Problem Solvers Caucus,” a bipartisan group whose website describes it as “committed to advancing common-sense solutions to key issues facing our nation.” She has called El-Sayed’s recent campaign event with controversial online commentator Hasan Piker “unamerican.” Piker has made controversial remarks on his livestream, such as that the United States “deserved” the Sept. 11 attacks.  Stevens also filed articles of impeachment against Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr., alleging “abuse of authority and undermining of the public health.” Although no Republican has won a Senate race in the state in the 21st century, the Cook Political Report currently lists the race as a “TOSS UP,” the only Democrat-held seat with that status. Haley Stevens is booed as she takes the stage at the MDP Convention in Detroit. She spoke over people screaming "shame" and other comments, many about Palestine, through most of her remarks."Democrats, I love you, even when we disagree," Stevens said. pic.twitter.com/dIHKC8EOW9— Andrew Roth (@RothTheReporter) April 19, 2026 Rogers secured President Donald Trump’s endorsement, as well as that of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, shortly after entering the race. Trump has won twice in Michigan—in 2016 and 2020—running on promises to restore the state’s industries. In 2024, Trump made major inroads among the state’s large Arab population with promises of peace in the Middle East. The issue of Israel has been divisive for Michigan’s left. Former President Joe Biden’s stance on Israel was the subject of fierce debate among Democrats in the state in 2024, leading Dearborn Mayor Abdullah Hammoud and Rep. Rashida Tlaib to ultimately withhold their endorsements of party nominee Vice President Kamala Harris. U.S. Senate candidate @MalloryMcMorrow is traversing the MDP Endorsement Convention caucus meetings with a band this afternoon. pic.twitter.com/fn4HMwgAS9— Andrew Roth (@RothTheReporter) April 19, 2026 The Democrat campaigns did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The post Michigan Senate Candidate Stevens Booed at Convention appeared first on The Daily Signal.

FIRST ON THE DAILY SIGNAL—Indiana Sen. Jim Banks urged the Federal Trade Commission on Monday to investigate abortion drug manufacturers and distributors for potentially false or misleading medical and safety claims. In a letter to the FTC, Banks called on the commission to uphold federal prohibitions against deceptive trade practices by holding abortion drug companies to the same standards as other companies. “Mifepristone manufacturers and dispensers continue to mislead pregnant women into thinking that abortion drugs are much safer than they really are, and that even if something bad does happen, they can receive appropriate treatment without disclosing their abortion,” the letter stated. “Companies that profit from abortion drugs should be honest about their risks,” the letter added. “The FTC has the tools in its toolbox to hold abortion drug companies to their obligations under consumer protection law.” Banks said that medication abortion, involving the drugs mifepristone and misoprostol, accounts for nearly two-thirds of all abortions in the United States. He noted that these drugs are often prescribed online, without in-person screening for dangerous complications such as ectopic pregnancy. They are then shipped nationwide, including into states that have restricted abortion. Banks took issue with marketing claims that mifepristone is “safer than Tylenol” or other common over-the-counter medications. “There is no scientific basis for the claim that mifepristone is ‘safer than Tylenol,’” Banks wrote, arguing that such claims lack the standards of controlled studies and could thus constitute deceptive trade practices under FTC precedent. Banks’ letter cites a report by the Ethics and Public Policy Center that, according to insurance claims data, more than 10% of women who take the abortion pill experience serious adverse events, including hemorrhaging and sepsis. The letter references the death of Amber Thurman, a 28-year-old Georgia mother who died after suffering septic shock “due to complications from mifepristone.” Some clinics advise women to tell emergency room staff they are experiencing a miscarriage rather than disclose an abortion, while asserting—without proper evidence, the letter says—that the treatments are the same for both. “According to various clinics, women who receive emergency treatment following a chemical abortion can get the care they need without mentioning the abortion,” Banks stated. “Some clinics even claim that the treatment for chemical abortion complications is the same as treatment for miscarriage.” The senator emphasizes that federal law, as interpreted by the Federal Trade Commission, prohibits claims “that are likely to reasonably mislead consumers to their detriment.” The post EXCLUSIVE: Banks Asks FTC to Investigate Abortion Drug Manufacturers  appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Like cornered cobras, Senate Democrats are spitting venom. They hope to kill the GOP House’s SAVE America Act. Proof of US citizenship for voter registration, photo ID at the polls, absentee-ballot limits, and clean voter rolls are the last things Democrats want in federal elections. Meanwhile, Democrats’ comrades in Great Britain, Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s Labour Party, hope to sink their collective fangs into election integrity and poison the SAVE-like reforms that the Conservative Party enacted while in power. Legendary Tory Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli reputedly remarked: “A man who is not a Liberal at 16 has no heart; a man who is not a Conservative at 60 has no head.” Ironically, Disraeli’s 21st-Century philosophical opponents apparently excavated his 19th-Century observation as they drafted the Representation of the People Bill. Its very first proposal is the “Extension of right to vote etc to 16 and 17 year olds.” This provision does not ease vote fraud, per se. However, it confirms Labour’s belief that the U.K.’s most momentous decisions should be made by left-leaning children. Britain’s Electoral Commission warmly describes Labour’s opening fusillade against clean elections. “The bill includes provisions to enable automatic or direct registration. Electoral registration officers would have a duty to register eligible voters using Council and other accurate data, without waiting for them [voters] to submit an application form.” Rather than let citizens swim upstream if they choose to register, Labour wants to chase them around the English Channel with drift nets. California and other Democratic states automatically register people to vote when they apply for drivers’ licenses and other government benefits. That’s how foreign citizens occasionally become ensnared in the voter rolls. Some quickly demand removal to avoid any heat from ICE. Surely some foreign citizens have voted, naively reckoning that they should cast their unrequested mass mail-in ballots. Labour apparently observed such chaos and thought: Let’s try this at home! Labour also wants to use mailing-address databases to register voters. Given how often people change residences, this is absurd. Labour plans to abandon the requirement that Britons show photo ID to vote. Just as Washington’s Right tries to make this extremely popular ballot-security measure universal for federal elections, London’s Left sprints the other way. In January 2024, then-Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s Conservative government mandated photo ID at the polls. Consequently, the Electoral Commission found that “0.08% of people who tried to vote at a polling station in July 2024 were not able to because of the ID requirement.” So, literally 99.92% of voters presented photo IDs and voted. As for the helpless 0.08%, Labour could FedEx them photo IDs. Instead, Labour wants to hand ballots to people with non-photo ID, including bank cards, prepaid cards, and even cards with surnames and only first initials (e.g., S. Jones or A. Patel).  About this, the Election Commission warns: “As bank cards do not include a photo and sometimes do not include a full name, polling station staff may not be able to verify that the person is who they say they are.” Perfect! What could go wrong? Labour’s bill also would slap a £100,000 ($135,476) cap on political donations made by often right-leaning British subjects who reside overseas. One such Englishman is fighting back. Cryptocurrency billionaire Ben Delo soon will return from Hong Kong, so he generously can support Reform UK, the party that he has buoyed with £4 million ($5,419,040) in donations.  “It seems that Labour intends to change the law, to make it harder for the opposition to win elections,” Delo wrote April 8 in The Telegraph. “I will move back to Britain early so I can contribute more to Reform’s budget.” (President Donald J. Trump pardoned Delo in March 2025. He previously pleaded guilty to one count of keeping cryptocurrency customers’ records insufficient to satisfy U.S. regulations.)  While this idea lies outside Labour’s proposal, the Electoral Commission “previously recommended introducing ‘vouching’ or attestation at polling stations.” Thus, a registered voter could tell a poll worker: “Don’t worry, mate. Mustafa, Igor, Jorge, and Simon lack ID cards. But they’re splendid chaps. So, let’s get on with it and hand them their ballots.” At best, this fosters electoral slovenliness. At worst, it turbocharges illegal-alien ballot-box stuffing. “Labour are weakening protections brought in by the Conservatives to stop electoral fraud,” said Shadow Minister Paul Holmes MP, Tory spokesman for ballot integrity. “Law-abiding voters will rightly ask why, and wonder whether Labour are doing this to secure the votes of people with dubious legal status in our country.” “Labour’s bill is an industrial-scale scandal waiting to happen: removing the photo ID requirement will destroy one of the few perfunctory safeguards we have in Britain and open the floodgates to criminal impersonation at the polls,” Oxford-based legal scholar Dr. Patrick Nash tells me. He lambasted Labour’s legislation between bites of curried beef at Cinnamon Club, the repurposed Westminster Public Library, now a temple of modern Indian cuisine.  “Worse,” Nash added, “it beggars belief that the Electoral Commission—the official regulator of electoral integrity—still exists, given that it routinely denies the existence of serious fraud and has even launched its own far-left campaign to introduce ‘vouching’ at the polls. The Government must scrap its voter ID vandalism immediately and shutter the Electoral Commission for being an incompetent, politicized bureaucracy. Americans will doubtless recognize the direct parallels between Labour’s moves and the Democrats’ cynical opposition to the SAVE Act.” We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post Democrats’ British Comrades Hammer UK’s Election Integrity appeared first on The Daily Signal.

As both President of Princeton University and the immediate past Chair of the Association of American Universities Board of Directors, Chris Eisgruber has a powerful voice in the academic world. And at least thus far, Princeton has been only a minor target of government investigations of antisemitism. This has positioned Eisgruber to lead the pushback from university administrators and faculty against demands from the Trump administration and Congress that they do more to combat Jew-hatred if they wish further federal funding. And he is guiding America’s most elite educational institutions along a predictable path to failure. Princeton historically prided itself on excellence, and shaped my understanding of political movements, public policy, and technology in ways that influence my work every day. This is why I find Eisgruber’s monotonous drumbeat of cries for “academic freedom” so disappointing. Academic freedom is valuable when it enables pursuit of truth, not as cover for bigotry. The ability to spout hate does not obligate the American taxpayer to support it. Stripped of high-sounding verbiage, Eisgruber is advocating for the “right” of antisemites to inculcate hatred in America’s future leaders, free from the pesky burdens of America’s civil rights laws. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act prohibits an institution receiving federal funding from discriminating on the basis of race, color, or national origin. The Trump administration clarified that Jews do not lose this protection for also sharing religious practices. A university that supports denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, characterizing Zionism as a racist endeavor, or otherwise judging Israel by arbitrary standards applied nowhere else, is rightly ineligible for government funding. It is that simple. History provides a sobering precedent. Germany stood at the pinnacle of academia for nearly two centuries. But then, even before but especially after the First World War, ancient and pernicious hatred rebranded itself as a meritorious academic discipline: “Antisemitism.” This gave Hitler’s genocidal evil an intellectual veneer; half of the architects of his Final Solution held doctorates from Germany’s, and the world’s, finest schools. When the Nazis purged Jews from government positions and universities in 1933, they cast prejudice as beneficial, calling their edict the “Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service.” The truth was precisely the opposite: the brain drain of scholars like Albert Einstein, Max Born, and Lise Meitner permanently ended Germany’s status as the global leader in scientific research. German universities ruined their own reputation by prioritizing bigotry over scholarship. The parallel is obvious. Today America’s elite universities demand “academic freedom” to teach “Anti-Zionism” instead. And the brain drain is already happening, on Eisgruber’s watch and under his nose. When Princeton joins other leading schools putting antisemitic mythology on the curriculum, giving tenure to hateful professors, and supporting student organizations that back Hamas terrorism against Jews, Jewish students rightly choose to go elsewhere. American academia suffers the consequences. Today we are seeing hesitation in the face of harassment, equivocation where there should be enforcement. Formerly elite universities, in and beyond the Ivy League, now substitute antisemitic indoctrination for anthropology, archaeology, history, religion, sociology, and a host of other academic disciplines. To claim that this comports with the reputed priorities of the Ivy League is laughable. If academic freedom means tolerance for anti-Jewish discrimination, its schools will follow Germany’s in reputation and authority. Yet learned professors obfuscate, blaming government control rather than hatred for Germany’s lost academic prowess. They have it backwards. The Nazis put university-grown hatred into practice; President Donald Trump and Congress are fighting to save American academia from that same bigotry. Their demands are as simple as they are morally proper: enforce Title VI. Protect Jewish students as they would any other group. Draw the line between free expression and harassment. And ensure compliance with the law that is a core prerequisite of federal funding. As an alumnus, I am not condemning the university, but “speaking up,” in the words of its recent campaign, for what it is supposed to represent. The Ivy League should be leading the way in upholding civil rights, rather than fighting against what is both necessary and right. The post There’s No Academic Freedom to Incite Hatred appeared first on The Daily Signal.