Monday, February 23, 2026

Supreme Court Considers Striking Down Campaign Finance Limits in Republican-Led Case.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: The Supreme Court heard arguments on the legality of federal limits on coordinated political spending by parties in the case NRSC v. FEC.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: The National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC), National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC), Vice President J.D. Vance, former Congressman Steve Chabot (R-OH), the Federal Election Commission (FEC), and court-appointed lawyer Roman Martinez.

📍WHEN & WHERE: Arguments took place on Tuesday at the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C.

đź’¬KEY QUOTE: “The parties have been weakened overall, and this case… starts to restore the strength of parties,” said Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

🎯IMPACT: A decision could reshape campaign finance laws and is expected by mid-2026.

IN FULL

The Supreme Court on Tuesday examined the legality of federal caps on coordinated political spending by parties, a case that could further alter campaign finance restrictions. The dispute, NRSC v. FEC, challenges limits imposed by the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, which regulates financing for federal campaigns.

For the current election cycle, coordinated spending limits range from $61,800 to $123,000 for House races and up to $3.7 million for Senate races. The plaintiffs, including Vice President J.D. Vance, former Congressman Steve Chabot (R-OH), the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC), and the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC), argue that these limits violate the First Amendment. A federal appeals court previously upheld the caps, relying on a 2001 Supreme Court ruling.

During oral arguments, Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Brett Kavanaugh seemed inclined to strike down the limits. Kavanaugh expressed concerns about the weakening of political parties compared to outside groups like super PACs, stating, “The parties have been weakened overall, and this case… starts to restore the strength of parties.”

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett questioned lawyers sparingly, while Justice Neil Gorsuch remained silent. Liberal justices, including Sonia Sotomayor, warned that removing the caps could lead to corruption. Sotomayor criticized the court’s past rulings on campaign finance, saying, “Every time we interfere with the congressional design, we make matters worse.”

Roman Martinez, the court-appointed lawyer defending the restrictions, argued that overturning the caps could unravel decades of campaign finance law. He cautioned, “You’re going to be deluged with petitions, the dominoes are going to fall, and you’re going to have to reconstruct campaign finance law from the ground up.” The court is expected to issue its decision by mid-2026, ahead of next year’s congressional midterm elections.

Image by Billy Wilson.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more

Virginia House Speaker Proposes Redistricting for 10-1 Democratic Majority.

PULSE POINTS

âť“WHAT HAPPENED: Virginia’s House Speaker has suggested redrawing Congressional maps to favor Democrats with a 10-1 advantage.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Virginia House Speaker Don Scott (D) and President Donald J. Trump.

📍WHEN & WHERE: Wednesday, December 3, 2025, at the UVA Center for Politics.

đź’¬KEY QUOTE: “He’s bullying folks in these states to change the rules, and we have an obligation to stand up and do something different.” – Don Scott

🎯IMPACT: The proposed maps could shift the balance of Virginia’s Congressional delegation, though given the state’s population distribution and close partisan party registration, a 10-1 congressional map is unlikely to be realized.

IN FULL

Virginia House Speaker Don Scott says he’s considering a plan to redraw the state’s Congressional maps in a way that could give Democrats a significant advantage, potentially shifting the current 6-5 delegation in favor of Republicans to a 10-1 Democratic majority.

Speaking at the UVA Center for Politics on Wednesday, December 3, Scott outlined the proposal as a response to what he described as “bullying” by President Donald J. Trump in states like Texas. “He’s bullying folks in these states to change the rules, and we have an obligation to stand up and do something different,” Scott said.

The suggestion comes amidst ongoing efforts by both major political parties to redraw state maps ahead of upcoming elections, including the midterms next year. Scott indicated that such a dramatic shift in the delegation’s composition “was not out of the realm” of possibility under the new maps.

However, given that Democrats only enjoyed a slight advantage in state-wide elections, and Virginia‘s population distribution—with a bulk of Democrat voters living in the suburbs of Washington, D.C. in the north of the state—Scott’s idea of a 10-1 map appears more of an exaggerated threat than a possible reality. Redrawing congressional lines in a manner that gives Democrats such an advantage would likely draw considerable legal challenges, as the districts would likely lack compactness, contiguity, and equal population.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more

Supreme Court Upholds Texas Congressional Redistricting.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: The U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) allowed Texas to redraw its electoral map, adding up to five likely Republican-controlled House districts.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: The Supreme Court, Texas state officials, and the Democratic and Republican parties.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The decision was handed down on Thursday, impacting electoral districts in Texas.

🎯IMPACT: The ruling boosts the GOP’s chances of preserving its Congressional majority while highlighting the ongoing partisan battles over redistricting.

IN FULL

The U.S. Supreme Court has sided with Texas, permitting the state to implement a new congressional map that creates as many as five additional Republican-leaning House districts. The ruling reverses a lower-court decision that had found the map illegally dismantled majority-minority districts through racial gerrymandering.

The decision markedly improves Republicans’ odds of holding their House majority in future cycles. However, the Democrats are pursuing parallel tactics: a new California map is projected to net them multiple seats. This decision is being challenged in the courts by the California GOP and the Trump Department of Justice (DOJ), which contend that the Golden State is racially gerrymandering the new districts in favor of Democrat-leaning Hispanic voters. “Race cannot be used as a proxy to advance political interests, but that is precisely what the California General Assembly did,” the DOJ argues.

The recurring redistricting fights highlight how deeply partisan the process has become. Although some advocate for independent, nonpartisan map-drawing commissions, those reforms have struggled to gain traction. As one attorney with the American Constitution Society observed, a party that unilaterally disarmed from redistricting would be “bringing a knife to a gun fight.”

Image by Joe Ravi.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more

Mike Lindell Files Paperwork to Enter Minnesota Governor Race Against Tim Walz.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell has filed paperwork to run for Governor of Minnesota, registering a campaign committee to begin raising funds.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Mike Lindell, incumbent Governor Tim Walz (D), President Donald J. Trump, and the MAGA movement.

📍WHEN & WHERE: Lindell plans to announce his final decision at a December 11 news conference in Minnesota.

đź’¬KEY QUOTE: Lindell stated his candidacy is “not yet certain” but has begun preparations for a potential run.

🎯IMPACT: Lindell’s entry would reshape an already crowded Republican field.

IN FULL

Mike Lindell, the CEO of MyPillow and a prominent figure in the MAGA movement, has filed paperwork to run for Governor of Minnesota against the Democrat incumbent, failed 2024 vice presidential candidate Tim Walz. The filing allows him to establish a campaign committee and begin raising funds.

Lindell has stated that his candidacy is not yet finalized. However, he plans to announce his decision during a news conference on December 11. His potential entry into the race could significantly impact the Republican primary field, which already includes several candidates.

Lindell’s involvement could bring heightened attention to the race, given his close ties to President Donald J. Trump and his active role in the MAGA movement.

Image by Gage Skidmore.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more

GOP Holds Off Democrat Surge in Tennessee Special Election.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: Republicans secured victory in a closely contested congressional election in Tennessee, maintaining their majority in the House of Representatives.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Republican Matt Van Epps and Democrat Aftyn Behn, with involvement from prominent national figures like President Donald J. Trump and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA).

📍WHEN & WHERE: The election took place in Tennessee’s 7th Congressional District, with results projected on December 3, 2025.

đź’¬KEY QUOTE: “Running from Trump is how you lose, running with Trump is how you win.” – Matt Van Epps

🎯IMPACT: The election result signals potential challenges for Republicans in the upcoming midterms, despite retaining the seat.

IN FULL

Republican Matt Van Epps has won a tight race for Tennessee’s 7th Congressional District seat. Viewed as a test of Democratic prospects for the next national contest in 2026, the election saw Van Epps beat Democrat Aftyn Behn by an estimated nine points.

Though the GOP was triumphant, the gap was much tighter than in past races, sparking unease among Republicans. “It was dangerous,” Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) observed about the unexpectedly slim margin.

The contest attracted intense national focus and hefty spending from both sides. President Donald J. Trump, with considerable sway in Tennessee, backed Van Epps through a virtual rally. Van Epps tied his bid tightly to Trump, warning the GOP, “Running from Trump is how you lose, running with Trump is how you win.”

Democrat Aftyn Behn, who campaigned on local concerns such as cost of living, called the narrow result a promising signal for Democrats ahead of the 2026 midterms. “The margin was close, and that can only be attributed to the thousands of volunteers who showed out,” she said.

The result has fueled talk about midterm tactics for 2026, as Republicans recognize the need for robust turnout efforts. “In a year, it’s going to be a turnout election, and the left will show up. Hate is a powerful motivator,” Cruz stressed.

Image by Sixflashphoto.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more

Federal Court to Review California’s New Congressional Maps by This Date.

PULSE POINTS

âť“WHAT HAPPENED: A federal court in California has set December 15 as the date to hear arguments about the state’s new congressional maps, which have been redrawn to favor the Democrats.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: California Republicans, voters, members of the Trump administration, Democrat Governor Gavin Newsom, Secretary of State Shirley Weber, and Attorney General Rob Bonta.

📍WHEN & WHERE: December 15, 2023, at a Los Angeles court, overseen by a three-judge panel.

đź’¬KEY QUOTE: Democrats have called the allegations “meritless.”

🎯IMPACT: The case could determine the legality of congressional maps, potentially impacting the makeup of the House of Representatives after the 2026 midterms.

IN FULL

A federal court in California has set oral arguments for December 15 on the state’s newly approved congressional maps, which were passed via Proposition 50 earlier this month and are widely seen as boosting Democrats’ chances of winning the House in the 2026 midterms.

The California Republican Party, joined by voters and Trump administration officials, has filed suit against Democrat Governor Gavin Newsom and Secretary of State Shirley Weber, claiming the maps unconstitutionally prioritize Democrat-leaning Latino voters at the expense of other racial groups. Democrats have called the lawsuit “meritless.”

The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California had originally scheduled a hearing for next week, but agreed to Attorney General Rob Bonta’s request to push it to December 15. Bonta, defending Newsom and Weber, had first asked to delay until January 2026, per court filings.

A three-judge panel in Los Angeles will hear the case, and the ruling could shape how far California can go in drawing maps that appear to favor particular demographic groups in future elections.

Image by Gage Skidmore.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more

D.C. Mayor Bowser Won’t Run for Fourth Term.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: Washington D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser announced she will not seek re-election in 2026, citing the challenges of federal intervention in the city under President Donald J. Trump.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Muriel Bowser, President Donald J. Trump, D.C. Council members, and federal agencies, including the National Guard.

📍WHEN & WHERE: Bowser made her announcement via social media on Tuesday, as federal involvement in D.C. remains a contentious issue.

🎯IMPACT: Bowser’s decision not to run opens the door for new candidates.

IN FULL

Muriel Bowser, the three-term Democrat mayor of Washington, D.C., announced on Tuesday that she will not seek re-election next year. The decision comes as Bowser has found herself increasingly at odds with both the far-left Washington, D.C. City Council and President Donald J. Trump, the latter having federalized law enforcement and deployed National Guard troops in the capital city to address rampant violent crime.

Bowser made the announcement in a video posted to X (formerly Twitter), where she reflected on her tenure and urged residents to “summon our collective strength to stand tall against bullies who threaten our very autonomy while preserving Home Rule.” She did not directly mention Trump in her address but highlighted the supposed importance of local governance.

During her leadership, Bowser often cooperated with federal initiatives, such as clearing homeless encampments and working with federal immigration agents, while also criticizing the deployment of National Guard troops. She acknowledged that federal intervention had contributed to a significant reduction in crime, raising the ire of the progressive-dominated D.C. City Council.

The federal government’s involvement in D.C. escalated in August when President J. Trump issued an emergency order federalizing the city’s police force. This move, which included National Guard deployments, sparked legal challenges from the district. A federal judge recently ruled in favor of the city, ordering an end to the deployment, though the decision is expected to be appealed.

Bowser’s decision not to run has already prompted speculation about potential candidates. D.C. Council members Robert White Jr. and Brooke Pinto have declared their candidacies for the district’s U.S. House delegate seat, while Janesse Lewis George is considered a possible contender.

Image by APK.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more

Democrat Lawfare Orgs Are Challenging Justice Alito’s Order Restoring Texas Congressional Map.

PULSE POINTS

âť“WHAT HAPPENED: Democrat Party-aligned electioneering groups have filed a challenge to Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito’s order allowing Texas to use its newly drawn congressional map, citing racial gerrymandering concerns.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Justice Samuel Alito, Texas state officials, and so-called voting rights groups opposing the map.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The emergency order was issued on Friday, November 21, 2025, with the challenge filed on Monday; the case is before the U.S. Supreme Court.

đź’¬KEY QUOTE: Texas argued that altering district lines before the March primary would “disrupt election preparations and confuse voters.”

🎯IMPACT: The Supreme Court’s decision will determine whether Texas’s 2026 map remains in place while litigation continues.

IN FULL

Democrat Party-aligned electioneering groups are challenging Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito’s Friday order allowing Texas to use its newly drawn congressional map. In their filing, made on Monday, the far-left election lawfare organizations contend the state’s redistricting plan is an “extraordinary” case of racial gerrymandering.

The complaint argues the lower court was correct in finding that black and Hispanic voters were likely to prevail on claims that the new congressional map is an illegal gerrymander that is intended to dilute the minority vote in several districts. Alito issued the emergency order on November 21, ruling the Texas map could remain in place while the full court considers the legal challenge.

Texas urged the high court to settle the matter swiftly, warning that any change to district lines months before the March primary would cause logistical chaos for voters and likely disrupt the primary election. In addition, the state is pointing to the Purcell rule, which generally advises federal courts not to intervene in district map challenges and ballot rules close to an election.

“The district court’s injunction comes far too late in the day under Purcell. Campaigns have begun in the 2025 districts. The candidate filing period ends on December 8. Ballots will then soon be printed, checked and re-checked, and sent overseas. In the middle of all of that, the district court has ordered the State to stop,” Texas Solicitor General William R. Peterson wrote in the state’s emergency appeal filed late last week. He continued: “Worse, because there is no time for remedial proceedings by the district court’s own admission, the district court has ordered the State to replace the 2025 districts in medias res with repealed redistricting legislation—reviving the 2021 map that changes all but one of Texas’s 38 congressional districts, in many cases changing them dramatically.”

A three-judge federal panel in El Paso ruled two-to-one last week that Texas’s latest redistricting plan was likely drawn with discriminatory intent. However, the majority’s ruling was blasted by U.S. Circuit Court Judge Jerry Smith in his dissent, with the jurist alleging his colleague, Judge Jeffrey Brown, had engaged in judicial misconduct.

Image by Joe Ravi.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more

Kassam Issues Urgent War Room Warning for Trump Team.

PULSE POINTS

âť“WHAT HAPPENED: Raheem Kassam, Editor-in-Chief of The National Pulse, issued a stark warning about the current state of the populist-nationalist movement and its leadership on Stephen K. Bannon’s WarRoom show.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Raheem Kassam and Stephen K. Bannon.

📍WHEN & WHERE: November 14, 2025, during a WarRoom broadcast.

đź’¬KEY QUOTE: “As goes America next year, as goes the MAGA movement, as goes the Republican party’s successes or failures in the midterms, so goes Europe.” – Raheem Kassam

🎯IMPACT: The movement’s direction and leadership could negatively influence the upcoming U.S. midterm elections, with a knock-on impact on populist movements worldwide.

IN FULL

Raheem Kassam, Editor-in-Chief of The National Pulse, expressed serious concerns about the current state of the populist-nationalist movement and its leadership to former White House Chief Strategist Stephen K. Bannon on the WarRoom show on Friday, particularly in relation to the upcoming U.S. midterm elections. “That leadership is coming from a corporate class that have managed to capture so much of what I call MAGA Inc.,” Kassam warned.

“They sell out the people who started this movement… They have almost taken over the whole thing, and it is upon us to grasp it back, to wrestle it back; otherwise, we’re going to get killed next year,” he emphasized.

Kassam noted that the populist-nationalist movement, which began over a decade ago, was built on understanding and addressing the struggles of regular people. “[W]e went around to the little town halls and the little seaside towns all across the United Kingdom and we looked at what people were going through… people whose families and whose grandparents and great-grandparents and great-great-grandparents and whose entire family lineages have been sacrificed day upon day, whether it’s in the mines, whether it’s in the wars… that have created the world that we live in today and that we take for granted every day,” he said of the movement’s beginnings a decade ago.

“And what happened was we saw that they had been shunned, disparaged, spat upon by an establishment who said, ‘Yeah, thanks. We’ll take it from here. You know, thanks for all the hard work of your bloodline, but we’ll take it from here… We don’t need you,” Kassam explained.

The National Pulse chief stated that a similar process is now unfolding in America, with establishment figures who are “just in it for the big bucks” attempting to sideline the authentic populist-nationalists who built the movement “from the ground up,” with potentially disastrous consequences.

Kassam emphasized the importance of genuine engagement with the movement’s grassroots base, warning that the movement’s current trajectory could lead to significant setbacks in the upcoming U.S. midterm elections if these issues are not addressed. “The problem with it is that whether it’s the 50-year mortgages or the $2,000 checks or the bank bosses or the big farmer bosses hanging out in the Oval Office, people just don’t feel like we’re walking into next year in a position of strength. And I happen to agree with them,” he said. “We need to smarten up. We need to sharpen up on these things. And that’s where we are now.”

Kassam also discussed the international implications of the MAGA movement’s success or failure, warning, “As goes America next year, as goes the MAGA movement, as goes the Republican party’s successes or failures in the midterms, so goes Europe.”

IN FULL

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more