Yet another rich guy is fleeing their Democrat-controlled state over a new wealth tax. Former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz, a huge liberal himself, announced that he’s moving from Washington state to Miami, Florida – hours after state lawmakers advanced a tax bill targeting residents earning over $1 million per year. 

Schultz, 72, who bought the company in 1987 and built it into the globally recognized chain it is today, made the announcement in a Tuesday LinkedIn post – writing that he and his wife Sheri were moving to Florida “for our next adventure together.” 

“We have moved to Miami for our next adventure together. We are enjoying the sunshine of South Florida and its allure to our kids on the East Coast as they raise families of their own,” he wrote. 

Under the new wealth tax, SB 6346, people making over $1 million per year would pay a $9.9% tax on income above that threshold starting in 2029. A final vote could come as early as today in the state Senate, after which it would go to Gov. Bob Ferguson’s desk where he says he plans to sign it. 

Schultz’s announcement came hours after the Washington state House passed the so-called Millionaire’s tax after more than a day of debate. The new wealth tax, which will raise an estimated $4 billion per year, will be used to cut other taxes and expand the Working Families Tax Credit to an estimated 460,000 households (until of course a flood of high-earners leave the state). The measure passed in the Democrat-controlled house by 51-46 after a debate which exceeded 24 hours. 

Schultz, whose net worth is estimated by Forbes a $4.3 billion, went on to praise Pacific Northwesterners who helped build Starbucks into a worldwide brand – saying that it is their “hope that Washington will remain a place for business and entrepreneurship to thrive.” 

Of course, he didn’t mention that Seattle has become a cesspool, with open-air drug markets and soft-on-crime leadership that’s done virtually nothing to stem the homeless crisis and fentanyl epidemic. 

Starbucks headquarters will remain in Seattle, however the company announced earlier this month that it will be expanding its corporate footprint to Nashville, Tennessee as the company moves to expand its presence in the Southeast. Like Florida, Tennessee taxes are far more favorable for rich people, and in many cases, corporations. 

“The Millionaires’ Tax passed by the House represents historic progress in rebalancing our unfair system. It sends significant dollars back to Washington families and small businesses,” Gov. Ferguson said on X. 

The Millionaires’ Tax passed by the House represents historic progress in rebalancing our unfair system.

It sends significant dollars back to Washington families and small businesses.

It expands the Working Families Tax Credit to 460,000 additional households – that’s money…

— Governor Bob Ferguson (@GovBobFerguson) March 11, 2026

Authored by Ron Paul,

President Trump’s unconstitutional and unjust war against Iran is setting back his “affordability” agenda. The war has caused a big rise in gasoline prices. Among the related concerns is the hindering of the movement of oil through the Strait of Hormuz, the only available passage for ships to transport oil from the Persian Gulf.

The increased costs will do more than raise prices at the pump. An increase in gas prices brings increased transportation costs that will be passed along to consumers. Prices of a variety of goods, including food, will increase.

No wonder Energy Secretary Chris Wright, White House Chief of Staff Susan Wiles, and other Trump administration officials are frantically working to develop policies to lower gas prices. One possibility under consideration is deploying US troops to try to ensure ships can pass through the Strait of Hormuz. This could turn into a permanent deployment of US troops.

According to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, the US government is spending about 891.4 million dollars a day on the Iran War. These costs are likely to increase as the war drags on and the US increases its military presence, possibly even putting boots on the ground in Iran.

According to numerous media reports, the Trump administration is preparing a 50 billion dollars “supplemental” funding request for the Iran War. This request will soon be sent to Congress. This funding would be added on top of the defense budget.

The supplemental bill is likely to pass with overwhelming bipartisan support. The Trump administration’s 50 billion dollars price tag is a floor, not a ceiling. Senators and Representatives will seek to add their spending priorities to this “must pass” legislation, while corporate lobbyists are no doubt already preparing “wish lists” to present to lawmakers.

The costs of the Iran War will further increase the already over 38 trillion dollars and rising national debt.

The rate of increases will be greater as long as the government is spending almost a billion dollars a day, or more, on a regime change war in Iran.

The costs of this war will put added pressure on the Federal Reserve to keep interest rates low and increase its purchase of Treasury bonds in order to monetize the federal debt. The pressure on the Fed will also increase as other countries reduce their purchase of US debt. These reductions will be motivated by concerns over the economic instability caused by the US government’s out of control spending and by resentment over the US government’s hyperinterventionist foreign policy. These factors could also accelerate the increasing rejection of the dollar’s world reserve currency status. A loss of the reserve currency status will cause a dollar crisis, leading to an economic crash worse than the Great Depression.

This crash will likely result in the end of the welfare-warfare-fiat money system. Whether this system is replaced by an even more authoritarian one or by a system of limited government and much more freedom depends on whether those of us who know the truth do our best to spread the message that the key to peace and prosperity is a system of free markets, limited government, individual liberty, and peaceful relations and free trade with all nations.

Saudi Arabia is in discussions with a Ukrainian counter-drone firm to acquire low-cost interceptor drones designed to counter inexpensive IRGC kamikaze drones. The cost-exchange ratio remains highly unfavorable for the U.S. and its Gulf partners, who are using multimillion-dollar interceptor missiles against $20,000 drones. If the conflict drags on for months, the risk of depleting critical interceptor missile stockpiles will become a major problem, not just in the Gulf area but also on the Ukrainian battlefront.

The Wall Street Journal reports that Saudi Arabia is preparing to purchase a “large order” of interceptor drones and electronic warfare equipment from Ukraine. This report is based on sources and has yet to be confirmed.

The unfavorable kill-exchange ratio for the Saudis – eliminating a $20,000 IRGC drone with a +$2 million missile – is quickly straining defense budgets and supplies. A cheaper approach is to use Ukrainian interceptors that have been battle-tested in Eastern Europe for several years.

Other Gulf countries, including Qatar, are also examining the use of cheap Ukrainian drones. The U.S. has already deployed Ukraine-tested Merops interceptors to U.S. forces in the Gulf region.

Last week, a Financial Times report stated that U.S. officials were negotiating a purchase of interceptors to counter IRGC drones. This comes as supplies are dwindling and costs are soaring after nearly 12 days of conflict.

“They have missiles for the Patriots, but hundreds or thousands of Shaheds cannot be intercepted with Patriot missiles. It is too costly,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said in an interview last week.

Operation Epic Fury has heavily relied on Patriot PAC-3, SM-3 Block IIA, SM-6, and THAAD interceptors, with limited supplies. Lockheed Martin is the top manufacturer of PAC-3 and THAAD missiles, while RTX produces the SM series and Tomahawk cruise missiles.

Heads of U.S. defense firms recently met with President Trump at the White House. The CEOs agreed to quadruple bomb production.

One Ukrainian defense firm, SkyFall, said its P1-SUN interceptor drone has shot down 1,500 Shahed drones and an additional 1,000 unmanned aerial vehicles over the past four months in Eastern Europe. It stated it can produce up to 50,000 interceptor drones per month and export between 5,000 and 10,000 units to the Middle East.

Ukraine has spent the last four years in a hyperdevelopment phase of wartime tech that now appears ready to be exported to the highest bidder, as global conflict spreads to multiple fronts.

Our latest observations:

AI’ Kill Chains’ And Rise Of Skynet-Like Weapons Offer Glimpse Of 2030s Battlefield

The Russia-Ukraine war has offered an early look at what 2030s warfare will likely resemble: drones, war bots, AI kill chains, etc. That future has clearly been pulled forward. The more important point now is that this wartime tech is no longer confined to Eastern Europe and is set to spread to Middle Eastern battlefields, where it will be sold to the highest bidder.

Authored by Kenin M. Spivak via RealClearPolitics,

California’s elected Democrats can’t move beyond pandering. Gov. Gavin Newsom is fixated on reparations for African Americans, and the legislature’s Democratic Party majority is once again trying to divide Californians by race, sex, and gender orientation.

In 1996, California stunned the nation when 55% of voters approved Proposition 209, which amended the state’s constitution to prohibit public institutions from considering race, sex or ethnicity in employment, contracting, and education. Ten years later, the United States Supreme Court confirmed its right to do so.

As the state moved further left, in 2019, the Democratic controlled legislature placed Proposition 16 on the ballot to repeal Proposition 209. That effort failed in 2020 when more than 57% of voters rejected it, despite widespread support of elected officials and opponents being outspent nearly 20 to 1.

Undeterred, in 2020, the legislature enacted laws that required California-headquartered public companies to include up to three directors who “self-identify” as women and up to an additional three directors from “underrepresented communities.” In 2022, California state judges enjoined that social engineering for violating due process under California’s constitution. California lost its appeals.

Also in 2020, Newsom signed into law a requirement that the state develop reparations proposals for black Californians. In 2022, he issued an executive order directing all state agencies to reorder their missions and hiring practices “to advance equity” while also establishing a commission to develop policies based on the reparations proposals. Among dozens of preferences, it recommended payments exceeding $1 million for each descendant of slaves, as well as housing assistance, guaranteed wages, racially segregated education, and overturning Proposition 209. Earlier this year, Newsom established a bureau to develop programs to implement the commission’s report.

Inevitably, those programs will violate the California and U.S. constitutions. At a USC Dornsife event last week, a panel of recently retired top Democrat officials acknowledged that the state could not afford reparations and that it would be far more productive for it to focus on improving academic and vocational education.

In 2021, Newsom signed into law AB 101, making California the first state to require ethnic studies for all high school students. The California Department of Education issued a Mathematics Framework that rejected “natural gifts and talents,” called for de-emphasizing calculus, ended classes for gifted children to eliminate “inequity,” and directed teachers to move away from focusing on correct methods or answers. After pushback from parents, the state abandoned the most extreme aspects of the Framework. But AB 101 took effect this school year, requiring a curriculum based on Critical Race Theory, with an emphasis on “equity” and “people of color.”

Following the Newsom commission’s report on reparations in 2023, the California Assembly passed Assembly Constitutional Amendment 7 to indirectly repeal most of Proposition 209 and allocate state funds to so-called marginalized minorities. Last month, the Assembly passed a modified version of ACA-7 that preserves race-based funding, and may still repeal some of the other protections accorded by Proposition 209. The California Senate is now considering that legislation.

If ACA-7 is enacted by the legislature, it will be placed on the ballot in November.

Reparations based on race are unconstitutional. More insidious, compelling middle class and poor families to subsidize affluent students is contrary to the principles of most Americans of every race, gender identification, and economic strata. Countless polls over many years show that Americans overwhelmingly oppose using affirmative action and DEI in hiring, admissions, promotions, and contracting. Only progressive activists believe otherwise.

In a 2016 Gallup poll, a 2019 Pew survey, and a 2021 College Plus survey, about 70% opposed the use of race and ethnicity in admissions decisions, including about two-thirds of Latinos and a majority of blacks. In a January 2024 CRC survey of 1,600 registered voters, 66% disapproved of relying on race, sex, or gender identity for hiring or promotion. The results were similar among men, women, Republicans, Democrats, independents, conservatives, and moderates. Even liberals disapproved by a margin of 54% to 34%.

In a July 2024 survey of 2,100 likely voters by the Manhattan Institute, respondents across the partisan spectrum rejected race-conscious policies. Just 21% (including 36% of Democrats, 35% of Latinos, and 37% of blacks) agreed that “We should focus on creating a race-conscious society to repair the harms of the past by developing policies that benefit marginalized groups.” Majorities across all demographic groups agreed that “We should focus on creating a color-blind society where everyone is treated equally regardless of the color of their skin.”

A survey of 3,262 voters after the last presidential election conducted by Blueprint, a polling organization that helps Democrats, found that 67% of swing voters who chose Trump viewed Democrats as “too focused on identity politics.”

In 1860, there were 395,216 slave owners in the 15 states that permitted slavery and none in the other 18 states. In total, about 5% to 6% of all U.S. households owned slaves. Today, most blacks are at least middle class, live in diverse suburbs, and pursue the same careers as do people of other races.

When California was admitted in 1850, slavery was prohibited. No Californian has ever participated in America’s ugly legacy of slavery – whether as a slave, slave trader, or slave owner. None of their grandparents did. Very few of their great-great-great-grandparents did. More than a quarter of the state’s population is foreign-born. That means California’s elected Democrats are asking recent immigrants to subsidize the children of affluent, educated black Americans.

In a 2019 Associated Press-NORC poll, just 29% of Americans favored the payment of cash reparations to descendants of black slaves. In 2024, a Princeton University-Liberations poll found 36% approval for some form of reparations. A 2022 Rasmussen poll and a 2025 YouGov poll had similar results. Even a quarter of blacks oppose reparations. A search found no polls in which any meaningful percentage of Americans favor reparations to blacks who are not direct descendants of slaves.

Polls aside, the 14th Amendment prohibits governments from allocating benefits based on protected class, most notably race. Eliminating discrimination means eliminating all of it.

With a Republican leading the polls for the next governor of California, and many California Democrats opposed to reparations and racial pandering, more far-left virtue signaling is unlikely to benefit Democratic candidates. DEI and reparations deprive blacks of agency, penalize Americans with no connection to slavery, and represent racial politics at its worst.

Kenin M. Spivak is founder and chairman of SMI Group LLC, an international consulting firm and investment bank. He is the author of fiction and non-fiction books and a frequent speaker and contributor to media, including RealClearPolitics, The American Mind, National Review, television, radio, and podcasts.

One week after Trump announced that the US would cover insurance for ships transiting the Strait of Hormuz, and would provide them with US navy escorts, Reuters reports that the US Navy has refused near-daily requests from the shipping industry for military escorts through the Strait of Hormuz since ​the start of the war on Iran, saying the risk of attacks is too high for now.

The U.S. Navy has held regular ⁠briefings with shipping and oil industry counterparts and has said during those briefings it is unable to provide escorts for the time being, three unnamed shipping industry sources told Reuters. They added that the shipping industry has been making requests almost daily during the calls for naval ​escorts through the strait. One of the sources said the Navy’s assessment during Tuesday’s briefing had not changed and that escorts would only be possible once the risk of attack was reduced, which judging by images like the one below of a container ship in the Gulf today won’t happen any time soon.

Insane image from the bridge of a container ship arriving at the Port of Salalh in Oman earlier today, as flames engulf multiple port facilities and oil tanks at the MINA Petroleum Facility, resulting from several impacts by one-way attack drones launched by Iran. pic.twitter.com/ePFkxNpOEf

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) March 11, 2026

The ‌Navy’s assessments spell continued disruption to Middle East oil exports and reflect a stark divergence from President Donald Trump’s statements that the U.S. is prepared to provide naval escorts whenever needed to restart regular shipments along the key waterway.

Shipping along the narrow strait has all but halted since the start of the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran more than a week ago, preventing exports of around a fifth of the world’s oil supply ​and sending global oil prices surging to highs not seen since 2022. Some ships – mostly Iranian VLCCs and Chinese tankers carrying embargoed products – have resumed transits with Iran vowing it would only attack western-linked ships, we reported earlier.

The status quo may soon change, however: on Tuesday General Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that the US military has started looking at options to potentially escort ships through the strait, should it be ‌ordered to do ⁠so. “We’re looking at a range of options there,” Caine told reporters at the Pentagon.

A U.S. official told Reuters the U.S. military has not yet escorted any commercial ships through the strait. Earlier in the day, U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright deleted a post on X in which he said the Navy had successfully escorted one through.

While there have been some voyages through the waterway in recent days, the majority of shipping traffic remains on hold with hundreds of ships ​anchored.

Meanwhile, Trump has said repeatedly in recent days that the United States is prepared to escort tankers through the Strait of Hormuz when necessary.

“When the time comes, ​the U.S. Navy and its partners will escort tankers through the strait, if needed. I hope it’s not going to be needed, but if it’s needed, we’ll escort them ​right through,” he said on Monday during a press conference at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.

For its part, Iran remains adamant: a senior official with Iran’s Revolutionary Guards has said the strait is closed and Iran will ​fire on any ship trying to pass, Iranian media reported last week. Several ships have already been hit.

Indeed, earlier in the day, a Thai ship attempting to pass through the Strait of Hormuz, the bulk carrier Mayuree Naree, was struck by projectiles while travelling about 18km north of Oman.

Images released show black smoke coming from a Thai cargo ship near the Strait of Hormuz after it was reportedly struck by an Iranian projectile.

Authorities say it is one of three commercial vessels that were targeted on Wednesday, and several crew members are missing. pic.twitter.com/6yL9U2WOw2

— Al Jazeera Breaking News (@AJENews) March 11, 2026

Never afraid of wading neck-deep in irony, just a few hours after photos of the latest ship to be attacked in the SoH circled the globe, Trump said “you can see great safety in the Strait of Hormuz“, when asked how he’s going to ensure the safety of oil following through it. 

When asked by a reporter if Iran laid mines in the Strait of Hormuz, “we don’t think so,” President Trump replied, all signs to the contrary. 

Amid escalating U.S.-Israel military strikes against Iran, a separate battle is brewing on Capitol Hill over President Donald Trump’s nomination of Kevin Warsh to chair the Federal Reserve, according to CNBC.

The key obstacle is Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC), who announced last year that he would not seek re-election one day after voting against advancing the president’s signature legislation, the “Big Beautiful Bill.”

Tillis has pledged to withhold support for any Federal Reserve nominees, including Warsh, until a criminal investigation into Fed Chair Jerome Powell’s handling of the Federal Reserve’s $2.5 billion renovation is resolved. Powell has denied any wrongdoing.

“No, no,” Tillis reportedly said when asked if Warsh could say anything during their scheduled meeting later that day to shift the senator’s stance on blocking his nomination.

“This is not about people, it’s about process,” the North Carolina Republican added. “I think this is a foul.”

Following the meeting, Tillis told reporters he would vote against advancing Warsh’s nomination out of the Senate Banking Committee if the Powell investigation remains unresolved by then.

“This is about [the] bedrock principle of Fed independence,”Tillis said. “The reason why I came out so strong so early is I believe that we, I, have no earthly idea what the market reaction would have been if suddenly the perception is that the Fed chair serves at the pleasure of the President, right?”

Of course, Tillis is simply shielding Powell – the architect of the everything-bubble and dollar debasement – from a long over due probe into waste and potential perjury. In other words ‘you can’t fire this guy until you’ve fully investigated him’ – effectively delaying or preventing accountability for Powell in a practical sense while preserving the status quo at the fed. 

Despite Tillis’s opposition to advancing Warsh’s nomination, the senator said he was “impressed” with Warsh, signalling that he would support Trump’s Fed pick if the Powell probe went away.

“I’ve known of his work for quite some time, and that’s why I’m so frustrated that I’m not going to be able to cast a vote until we dispose of the other issues,” Tillis said.

Tillis also took aim at the firing of Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, calling it “sophomoric.”

“We had seven members of the Banking Committee who were witnesses at the alleged scene of the crime who said no crime was committed,” the retiring lawmaker said. “Why are we even still having this discussion and holding up a great nominee?” Tillis asked.

“I think it goes back to a young U.S. attorney with a dream, with a bogus basis for an investigation,” he added. “They need to acknowledge that and step away from it so we can get him confirmed.”

“Whoever came up with that idea should be fired, too,” the senator said.

Authored by Martin Young via CoinTelegraph.com,

Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin said the Ethereum Foundation used simplified distributed validator technology, or “DVT-lite,” to stake 72,000 Ether in February.

“My hope for this project is that in the process, we can make it maximally easy and one-click to do distributed staking for institutions,” said Buterin on X on Monday.

Buterin explained that with DVT-lite, users can “choose which computers run their nodes, make a config file where they all have the same key, and then from there everything gets set up automatically.”

DVT-lite is a simplified form of distributed validator technology tailored for easier deployment, especially in institutional or semi-professional Ethereum staking setups.

In regular solo staking, everything is run on one computer, which can result in “slashing” or penalties if it crashes, gets hacked, or loses internet. Full DVT splits the secret keys across many computers that constantly communicate, which is very secure, but complicated to set up.

DVT-lite uses the same validator key on several computers, so if one computer dies, another quickly takes over, resulting in almost no downtime and very low risk of penalties.

The Ethereum Foundation started its staking program using the technology in late February, and the assets are currently sitting in the validator entry queue waiting to be staked on March 19.

Basic representation of a full DVT setup. Source: Ethereum Foundation

“One-click” staking for institutions

Buterin said that the idea that running infrastructure is this “scary complicated thing” where each person participating must be a professional is “awful and anti-decentralization, and we must attack it directly.”

He added that there should be a “Docker container” or “Nix image” or similar, which has “one click” or command line per node that automates the process of staking.

Buterin said he plans to use DVT-lite soon and hopes more institutions holding ETH can stake in this way.

“We want the authority over staking nodes to be highly distributed, and the first step to doing this is to make it easy.”

In January, he suggested “native DVT” network integration, which would allow stakers to “stake without fully relying on one single node.”

Big demand for staking despite low prices

There is still a huge demand for Ether staking despite its bear market price action.

There are currently 3.2 million ETH in the validator entry queue, with a 55-day wait, and just 29,000 in the exit queue with a 12-hour wait, according to ValidatorQueue.

There are currently 37.5 million ETH staked, worth roughly around $76.5 billion at current prices and representing 31% of the total supply.

Up until today, establishment poster boy Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) was a chief obstacle to killing the filibuster so that Republicans could pass the SAVE Act, which would require photo ID to be able to vote in US elections. 

Now, Cornyn has suddenly abandoned his sacred cow – which he called the last bastion of “minority rights” and do “whatever changes to Senate rules that may prove necessary for us to get the SAVE America Act and homeland security funding past the Democrats’ obstruction,” which also happens to be Trump’s top priority. 

In a groveling op-ed in the NY Post, Cornyn declared that “process matters, but outcomes matter more: The Democrats’ assault on election integrity and national security must be stopped,” adding that the nation is at a “critical hour” where “old procedures no longer align with the core American principles we must defend.”

Translation: His political hide is on the line, and he’s willing to torch Senate traditions – which Democrats will shred as soon as they can anyway – to save it.

Cornyn vs. Paxton

Cornyn is also looking for an endorsement from Trump, which would go a long way towards staving off a bruising primary runoff election against Texas AG Ken Paxton set for May 26. That said, a new poll shows that wouldn’t matter much.

After Paxton and Cornyn advanced to a runoff last week, Trump finally weighed in on the race, saying he would make an endorsement “soon.”

According to the Texas Public Opinion Research poll, that endorsement doesn’t close the gap for Cornyn.

Based on those polled, if Trump endorsed Paxton, then 58% of voters said they would vote for Paxton, while just 32% would vote for Cornyn. –Fox4

This isn’t Cornyn’s first dance with filibuster hypocrisy. As ZeroHedge detailed last October, Senate Republicans, including Cornyn, were already mulling filibuster reforms to end a government shutdown, showing cracks in the so-called “institutionalist” facade. But now, with his back against the wall, the flip is complete as Cornyn faces the fight of his life in the Texas runoff. As we noted after their March 3 primary, Paxton edged out a polling lead, framing the race as a battle between “America First” populism and Cornyn’s establishment cronyism. RealClearPolitics averages had Paxton up by 3.8 points pre-primary, and with Trump yet to weigh in, Cornyn’s scrambling to prove his loyalty.

Saving the SAVE Act

As we noted yesterday, on Sunday, Trump issued a blunt legislative ultimatum, declaring on Truth Social that he would refuse to sign any bill until the Senate passed the SAVE America Act. “It must be done immediately. It supersedes everything else. MUST GO TO THE FRONT OF THE LINE,” Trump posted. The legislation would require physical proof of citizenship for federal voter registration, a photo ID to vote, and would restrict mail-in voting to military personnel and a narrow set of extenuating circumstances.

Democrats in Washington, DC, have blasted the legislation as voter suppression, but a Harvard/Harris poll found that 71% of Americans support the bill, including 69% of independents, and 50% of Democrats. 

Poll after poll shows overwhelming support for voter ID laws across the political spectrum. According to the Pew Research Center, 83% of Americans support voter ID requirements, including large majorities of Democrats, independents, whites, blacks, and Latinos. Gallup reports similar findings, with 84% backing voter ID—98% of Republicans, 84% of independents, and even 67% of Democrats. The same survey found that 83% support requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote. Rasmussen Reports puts support at 75%, noting that backing for voter ID has steadily increased over the past decade.

While support for the SAVE Act is bipartisan, Democrats in Congress are rabidly opposed to it. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has repeatedly called the SAVE Act “Jim Crow 2.0,” and made unsubstantiated claims that it would “disenfranchise tens of millions of people.”

Authored by Petr Svab via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The Trump administration is using all its legal levers to obtain complete voter rolls, pressing ahead with dozens of lawsuits and investigations in multiple states.

An FBI press office worker approaches the Fulton County Election Hub and Operation Center in Union City, Ga., on Jan. 28, 2026. Arvin Temka/Atlanta Journal-Constitution via AP

Although some of the lawsuits have been dismissed, criminal proceedings have yielded results. Also, about a dozen states have provided the data voluntarily.

The Department of Justice (DOJ), through its criminal and civil rights divisions, has been reaching out to states since May, requesting voter rolls with complete personal information, mainly driver’s license numbers or the last four digits of Social Security Numbers.

The department said the information is necessary to determine whether states are complying with federal voter roll maintenance laws.

Democratic states have almost uniformly refused to provide the data. Some Republican states also have been wary of submitting the information, usually referring the DOJ to the public version of their voter list with the sensitive information redacted.

The Constitution leaves it up to states to organize their elections, but also grants Congress authority to override state election laws. “The Times, Places, and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations,” reads the Elections Clause.

Congress has passed multiple landmark election bills, including the 1993 National Voter Registration Act and the 2002 Help America Vote Act. Both speak to rules for maintaining voter rolls by removing ineligible individuals, such as those who have moved, died, or do not qualify to vote for other reasons.

President Donald Trump has vowed to strengthen federal election oversight, maintaining that irregularities in the 2020 election cost him victory. His lawyers vigorously and unsuccessfully contested the results.

Trump has been pushing the SAVE America Act, which would require Americans to present proof of citizenship, such as a passport or a birth certificate, for voter registration.

The bill passed the GOP-controlled House in February, but stalled in the Senate, where Republicans lack the votes to overcome the filibuster.

Civil Suits

At least 22 states, plus the District of Columbia (D.C.), have refused to provide the unredacted voter data to the DOJ, usually citing state and federal privacy laws.

Some states have stalled, telling DOJ they needed more time to review the legal implications.

Since September, the department has filed lawsuits against state election officials, trying to compel production of the data. So far, at least 29 states, plus the District, have been sued.

The lawsuits argue that the DOJ has broad authority to request the data under Title III of the Civil Rights Act of 1960.

The law requires states to retain election documents and make them “available for inspection, reproduction, and copying” by the attorney general upon demand.

The department’s lawyers state that courts can’t question what the DOJ needs the data for, as long as the demand provides a reason, which, in this case, is that the department needs to check whether states comply with voter rolls maintenance rules outlined in federal laws.

States have argued that Title III was to prevent racial discrimination, rather than facilitate compliance with voter rolls maintenance. They state that the DOJ needs to provide not just a reason, but also “basis” for its demands—some “specific, articulable facts pointing to the violation of federal law.”

They further raise the issue of privacy laws, both state and federal, precluding them from sharing sensitive personal data.

The DOJ has argued that federal laws trump state laws and federal privacy laws are already satisfied because the department has provided states with the means of transmitting the data securely and will handle it in accordance with existing procedures.

So far, none of the suits have proceeded far enough to grant the department’s request.

Three of the earlier suits, in California, Oregon, and Michigan, have been dismissed by federal judges. The administration has appealed the cases.

Criminal Proceedings

On Jan. 28, the FBI executed a search warrant in the election offices of Fulton County, Georgia, which includes the broader Atlanta area.

Agents seize hundreds of boxes of documents, including physical ballots.

The affidavit supporting the warrant pointed to multiple issues with the 2020 elections in the county, including its two recounts, one by hand and one by machine.

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, who was responsible for overseeing the election, has dismissed the issues as administrative and human errors that didn’t affect the election outcome.

But the affidavit noted that even if the result wouldn’t change, the issues indicated that crimes may have been committed.

In early March, the FBI obtained a grand jury subpoena to collect election documents pertaining to the Arizona Senate’s 2020 audit of Maricopa County, where nearly two-thirds of Arizonians live.

The large volume of electronic data included ballots and voter records, The Epoch Times reported.

Voluntary Compliance

A dozen states have voluntarily provided the data or indicated they will do so: Alaska, Arkansas, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, Ohio, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and Wyoming.

Some states, including Florida, Missouri, Montana, Iowa, South Carolina, Alabama, and Idaho, have not provided the data, but have yet to be sued.

There’s no indication that data from North Dakota and North Carolina has been requested by the DOJ.

The department has been offering states a Memorandum of Understanding that outlines the conditions under which the demanded data should be provided. The memorandum would require states to remove ineligible voters within 45 days of being alerted by the DOJ.

Most states have refused to sign it, including some among those that have ultimately shared the data.

Federal laws require, in certain circumstances, that voters be notified before they are removed from the rolls, and for officials to wait two election cycles before removing them. At least 13 Republican states have mentioned the 45-day requirement as an issue of concern.

After yesterday’s mediocre 3Y auction, today we had the highlight of the week’s coupon issuance when the Treasury sold $39BN in benchmark 10Y paper. And amid a painful selloff that pushed 10Y yields above 4.20%, the auction wasn’t too bad all things considered. 

First the ugly: the auction priced at a high yield of 4.217%, up from 4.177% in February and the highest since last August. Why ugle? Because the auction tailed the When Issued 4.210% by 0.7bps, the second tail in a row and 4 of the past 6.

The rest of the auction was more solid, starting with the bid to cover, which jumped from 2.388 to 2.449, if still below the recent six-auction average of 2.51 which however was pulled higher by two outlier high BtCs in recent days.

The internals were also solid: Indirects jumped to 74.45% from 64.54%, which was the highest allotment to foreign buyers since September. And with Directs taking 12.83%, Dealers were left holding just 12.7%, which however was on the high side of the recent auction average of 8.63%.

Overall this was a solid auction, despite the large intraday selloff and despite the tail, and suggests that unlike other asset classes, the bond market is certainly not concerned about runaway cost-push inflation in the months to come.