Medical watchdog urges Congress to protect children from transgender procedures

(The Center Square) – As Americans commemorate the 250th anniversary of American independence, presidential pets are being celebrated as well. 

“Dogs, cats, horses, cows – as well as far more unusual animals – have called the White House and its grounds home over the last two centuries,” the Library of Congress explains. It’s compiled photos highlighting “the menagerie of animals” that have had the privilege of being a presidential pet.

The White House has been home to more than 275 pets, the George W. Bush Library says, highlighting favorite pets. 

America’s first president, George Washington, loved dogs and was an avid fox hunter, which led him to develop the American foxhound breed. His war horse was named Nelson.

John Adams, the second president, was the first president to live in the White House. He built the White House stables and his dogs, Satan and Juno, were the first family pets to run on the White House lawn.

His son, John Quincy Adams, the sixth president, kept a pet alligator in the White House bathtub, a gift from the Marquis de Lafayette. 

Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence and third president, was sent two grizzly bear cubs from explorer Zebulon Pike. They were kept for a short time in a cage at the White House. He also loved mockingbirds and dogs, having many as pets. Grover Cleveland, the 22nd president, also had a pet mockingbird.

James Madison’s wife, Dolley, had a famous pet parrot, Polly. Dolley and Polly survived the War of 1812, both safely evacuating the White House as British troops advanced. Madison, the fourth president, authored the Bill of Rights. William McKinley, the 25th president, also had a pet parrot named Washington Post.

Martin Van Buren, the eighth president, was gifted a pair of tiger cubs from the Sultan of Oman, which were kept in a zoo, not the White House. 

President William Henry Harrison, the ninth president and grandfather of President Benjamin Harrison, had a pet cow, goat and dog at the White House. Benjamin Harrison, the 23rd president, had a famous pet goat, Old Whiskers, who pulled his grandchildren in a cart. He also had pet possums, Mr. Reciprocity and Mr. Protection, and a dog.

President Herbert Hoover, the 31st president, also had a pet possum, Billy Possum, which was kept in a pen that had been built for the Coolidge family’s pet raccoon, Rebecca. While President Calvin Coolidge, the 30th president, and his family lived in the White House, Rebecca was often featured in the news and made an appearance during a 1927 Easter Egg Roll. Coolidge also had pet canaries, a goose named Enoch, and his favorite dog, Rob Roy.

Teddy Roosevelt, the 26th president, effectively had a zoo at the White House and the most animals of any president. His family pets included a small bear named Jonathan Edwards, multiple dogs, multiple guinea pigs, a badger, pig, blue macaw, hen, one-legged rooster, hyena, barn owl, rabbit, lizard, pony and horses. Their pet snake was named Emily Spinach.

The Kennedy family also had many animals at the White House, including hamsters, a cat and canary, parakeets, several dogs and ponies. John F. Kennedy, the 35th president, was one of four U.S. presidents who have been assassinated.

The 16th president, Abraham Lincoln, who was also assassinated, is believed to have popularized the name Fido, now a common name for dogs. The Lincoln's beloved dog remained with neighbors in Illinois after Lincoln was elected president and the family moved to Washington, D.C. The Lincolns had many pets, including Lincoln's horse, "Old Bob," which he road long distances to circuit courts. Mrs. Lincoln referred to cats as his "hobby." Lincoln is considered one of the most popular presidents, according to multiple polls, for holding the country together during the tumultuous years of the Civil War. The leader of the new Republican Party, Lincoln played a major role in ending slavery and authored the Emancipation Proclamation. 

President William Howard Taft, the 27th president, had a famous pet, a 1,500-pound Holstien from Wisconsin, Pauline Wayne, whose milk and cream were used at the White House. She was the last cow to graze on the White House and other federal agency lawns. 

During World War I, President Woodrow Wilson, the 28th president, had a herd of several dozen sheep and a ram, named Old Ike. They maintained the lawn to save money and their wool was sold, including nearly $53,000 in 1919 to raise funds for the Red Cross. 

During the Great Depression, Franklin D. Roosevelt, the 32nd president, was known for having many pets at the White House, including his famous dog, King Tut.

During World War II, President Harry Truman, the 33rd president, had a pet goat, Dewey’s Goat, and famous dog, Feller. World War II hero Dwight Eisenhower, the 34th president, also had a pet parakeet and dog.

Most presidents and their families have had dogs, including the Fords, Nixons, Johnsons, Carters, Reagans, Bushes, Obamas and Bidens. 

President Warren Harding’s dog, Laddie Boy, was regularly featured by news reporters. Harding, the 29th president, was the first administration to have a cabinet member be imprisoned for crimes committed while in office during the Teapot Dome Scandal.

President George H.W. Bush’s dog had puppies at the White House, including Spot, the only dog to live at the White House during two administrations. Spot lived at the White House when his son, George W. Bush, was president. 

Only three presidents haven’t had pets at the White House: James Polk, Andrew Johnson and Donald Trump, according to White House records.

Most Americans (62%) own a pet; nearly one-third (35%) have more than one. Nearly all U.S. pet owners (97%) say their pets are part of their family, according to a Pew Research Center survey.

(The Center Square) – Several high profile cases on gun rights and immigration policy have yet to be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court as the court's current term is set to end by July.

The high court has more than 20 cases it has yet to issue rulings on before the end of the term.

Gun rights issues in state legislatures across the country have taken a front seat along with the Trump administration’s immigration policies. Here is a look into some of those cases.

Gun Rights

Hawaii Gun Restrictions

In January, the high court heard arguments in Wolford v. Lopez, a case to determine whether the Hawaii legislature can restrict concealed carry permit holders from bringing a firearm to restaurants, bars, gas stations and other private property without the owner’s permission.

The case challenges precedent set by the Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen, where the justices struck down a New York state law requiring conceal-carry holders to display the need to defend themselves.

“The Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual’s right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in the court’s 2022 decision.

Thomas further elaborated that gun restrictions should only be upheld if they are consistent with the “historical tradition” of the United States.

Lawyers for the state of Hawaii argued that the Second Amendment, at the time of the nation’s founding, did not include the right to enter private property with a weapon.

“The Founders recognized a property owner’s right to exclude,” the lawyers wrote. “Accordingly, at the Founding, a person had no right to enter private property with a gun unless he had the owner's express consent or an implied license based on local law or custom.”

Lawyers for conceal-carry gun owners in Hawaii argued Lopez relied on faulty evidence to assert other laws were similar to the state’s ban. They argued certain public spaces, like beaches and public parks, would not be considered in the original bans, which fundamentally alters the state’s argument.

“Under that approach, ‘the original understanding of the Second Amendment,’” the lawyers wrote, referencing a lower court judge’s opinion, “‘would not apply to any new types of public spaces that would develop in the future.’”

Drug User Gun Possession

Justices on the court also will decide whether regular drug users, including of marijuana, can possess firearms in U.S. v. Hemani.

The case focuses on Ali Hemani, a Texas man who was charged with a felony after FBI agents found a pistol, marijuana and cocaine in his home after obtaining a search warrant. Federal law bars a person who “is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance” from possessing a firearm.

“An individual’s Second Amendment rights are not restricted until a judge makes a finding of a credible safety threat to the safety of others,” lawyers for Hemani wrote in a brief to the court.

Justices on the high court appeared to favor Hemani’s arguments. Justice Amy Coney Barrett questioned how to determine whether a regular drug user is dangerous and could be barred from possessing a firearm. She asked whether a prescription drug like Ambien would be considered under the ban.

Lawyers for the Trump administration said the law could only temporarily disarm individuals who possess schedule I or schedule II drugs. This would include marijuana, heroin, fentanyl and morphine.

“By disqualifying only habitual users of illegal drugs from possessing firearms, the statute imposes a limited, inherently temporary restriction – one which the individual can remove at any time simply by ceasing his unlawful drug use,” Trump administration lawyers wrote.

Immigration

Temporary Protected Status

Justices on the high court also decided to hear two cases regarding temporary protected status for immigrants from Haiti and Syria living in the United States.

Trump v. Miot and Mullin v. Doe challenge temporary protected status for immigrants from Haiti and Syria, respectively. The special immigration status is provided for immigrants from countries that have experienced a war or natural disaster.

The Trump administration eliminated the protected status for both countries in 2025. However, lawyers for the Haitian and Syrian immigrants said the Trump administration did not properly consult other executive agencies or issue a notice before former Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem terminated the status.

Solicitor General John Sauer argued that ending temporary protected status for Syrian and Haitian immigrants would project messages of confidence in the political systems of both countries. He pointed to the end of the civil war in Syria in 2024 as an example.

“If we don’t terminate TPS, it will send a sense of doubt about that decision,” Sauer said before the high court in April.

Asylum Processes

The high court is also tackling the issue of at what point an individual arrives in the United States they can claim asylum protections.

The case, Mullin v. Al Otro Lado, focuses on a dispute between the Trump administration and an immigration advocacy group. The advocacy group argued that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security instituted a policy to prevent migrants from attempting to cross the U.S.-Mexico border.

In a brief to the court, lawyers for the immigration advocates said border patrol officers standing on the U.S. side of the border “identified asylum seekers, and prevented them from stepping onto U.S. soil.”

The 1990 Immigration and Nationality Act allows an individual who “arrives in the United States” to apply for asylum status and be inspected by an immigration officer.

The case hinges on the definition of the term “arrives.” Lawyers for the Trump administration argue standing on the Mexico side of the U.S.-Mexico border is not sufficient to determine arrival.

Kelsi Cockran, a lawyer representing Al Otro Lado, said the determination of arrival is made once an individual is “at the threshold” of a port of entry “about to step over.”

Vivek Suri, a lawyer representing the Trump administration, argued the administration’s “metering” policy is designed to control the flow of individuals at ports of entry.

“Metering is not saying you can never enter the U.S. and the only option is to enter illegally,” Suri said. “The U.S. has greater responsibilities to those in the U.S. than those in Mexico."

These cases and many more, including Trump's desired change to end granting birthright citizenship to individuals born in the U.S. to noncitizen parents who are in the country illegally, will be decided in the coming weeks as justices prepare to wrap up the term.

GREAT FALLS, Mont. - Sunny days in Great Falls mean more great things around Great Falls!

Downtown Summer Jam kicks off on Wednesday, June 17 with Matt Schuster.

An outdoor stage will take over the corner of 5th & Central in downtown Great to feature summer jams! Sons of Habit will perform on July 15, with Hayden Blount slated for August 12.

The 38th Annual Lewis & Clark Festival starts Friday, June 19 at 6 pm.

Check out the festival on Saturday as well for swivel gun, Grammy award winning Black Lodge Singers, hands-on displays, theater talks, food trucks, Native cultural performances and more.

Watch as historical Great Falls figures "come to life" with Waling the Dead on Sunday, June 21. 

Head to Highland Cemetery to hear from Charlie and Nancy Russell, Paris Gibson, George Montogemery, and more! Tickets available at Kaufman’s at 415 Central Ave in downtown Great Falls for $20 to ride or $15 to walk. 

(The Center Square) – Two years out from the 2028 presidential primary season, Vice President JD Vance remains the clear frontrunner for the 2028 Republican presidential primary, the top choice for 36% of Republicans and right-leaning Independents surveyed in the latest The Center Square Voters’ Voice Poll. 

The former U.S. senator from Ohio has maintained a substantial lead, securing roughly twice as much support as the next top contender in both this most recent poll and The Center Square's previous poll conduct in March. In this case, Marco Rubio was voters’ next choice among those presented with 17% of participants, followed by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis at a distant 7%. 

Seventeen percent of voters indicated they were unsure of who they would support in 2028.

Rubio and DeSantis both enjoyed an uptick this time, likely due at least in part to the absence of Donald Trump Jr.’s name from the list of possible candidates. The president’s eldest son had been listed on previous polls and was twice the second pick behind Vance. In October, he polled at 25% to Vance’s 38% – the closest anyone has come to challenging the vice president. In March, some of that enthusiasm transferred to Rubio, who went from just 5% in October to 9%. Trump Jr. secured 19% support to Vance’s 36% in March. 

The Center Square chose not to include Trump Jr. in its June poll because he recently said in a post on X that he had “zero interest” in running for office in 2028 “or any time soon” but that he’ll “never 100% rule it out down the line.”

“For this wave, we wanted the hypothetical Republican field to be more focused on candidates who seem more plausible as active contenders at this stage,” said Noble Predictive Insights founder Mike Noble.

Vance performed better among younger voters than any other single demographic. Forty-three percent of 18-29-year-olds polled rallied behind Vance. The only other demographics he reached the 40s in were people who voted for President Donald Trump in the last election and the Northeast region of the country.

He polled better than all of the other names provided with both surveyed partisan groups – Republicans, Independents that lean Republican – and saw strong support across groups with varying levels of education and income. He was also the favored candidate by each racial group, though he performed worst among Black respondents, capturing 21% support. Rubio received support from 14% of Black voters and DeSantis got 10%.

Rubio performed markedly better among male respondents than females, with 21% and 14%, respectively. Of the age groups, he polled best with those 65 and older at 26% and worst with the 18-29-year-old segment, supported by just 3% of the demographic. He also performed better with Independents with a right lean than he did with those identifying as Republican. He captured 17% of Republicans support but 20% of Independents', compared to Vance’s 26%.

Among those with differing levels of education, Rubio performed best among those with at least some college under their belt, particularly with those who had some post-graduate schooling, capturing 22% support. He won the most support from Hispanics and Latinos as a racial group with 24% to Vance’s 37%. 

Rubio also performed best among the Northeast at 20% compared to the West and South, at 16% and 18%, respectively. DeSantis captured 9% support among southern respondents compared to 6% in the West and 4% in the Northeast.

Other names polled included multiple former presidential candidates – Texas U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, South Carolina U.S. Sen. Tim Scott, former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, and GOP candidate for governor in Ohio Vivek Ramaswamy – and former and current state governors, members of Congress and administration officials.

The poll was conducted nationally by Noble Predictive Insights from June 1-4, 2026, using an opt-in online panel and text-to-web cell phone messages to survey registered voters. The sample consisted of 915 Republicans and 149 right-leaning Independents. It is among the most comprehensive polls in the country.

(The Center Square) – Multiple events are being held in the nation’s capital on July 4 celebrating the 250th anniversary of the United States. Not everyone will be able to travel there or view founding documents on display at the National Archives and national museums.  

In an effort to bring Independence celebrations nationwide, the National Archives is transporting founding documents to major museums nationwide through the Freedom Plane National Archives Tour.  

The traveling exhibit is transporting nine original founding documents to eight U.S. cities.  

“While America looks different than it did 250 years ago, the principles enshrined in these documents still guide our lives and continue to shape our country,” the National Archives states. “To preserve our American history for another 250 years,” it’s bringing the exhibition to the American people to celebrate the U.S. Semiquincentennial, it says.

Inspired by the Bicentennial Freedom Train, which brought historic documents to Americans in 48 states from 1975 to 1976, this year’s exhibit is being transported by a Boeing 737.

The first stop was Kansas City, Missouri, where Americans stood in lines for several hours waiting to see the documents. The second was Atlanta, where lines reached as long as six hours, staff at the Houston Museum of Natural Science told The Center Square. The third stop was Los Angeles; the fourth was Houston, where lines averaged roughly one hour. For weeks, 2,000 tickets were sold out at the HMNS every day. It was the only location in the southwest for Americans to view the documents. 

The exhibit is currently on display at the History Colorado Center in Denver through June 14. The next stop is the Museum of Miami, where the documents will be on display from June 20 through July 5. Floridians will have the opportunity to celebrate Independence Day observing key founding documents. 

The final stops will be at the Henry Ford Museum of American Innovation in Dearborn, Michigan, from July 9 through July 26, and the Museum of History and Industry in Seattle from July 30 through August 16. 

The nine original, historic documents from the National Archives – traveling together for the first time in history – include:

Articles of Association, 1774

In September 1774, the leaders of the 13 colonies met in Philadelphia to address their grievances with the British government. On Oct. 20, 1774, the First Continental Congress adopted the Articles of Association, “a nonimportation, nonexportation, and nonconsumption agreement between the colonies urging all colonists to boycott British goods,” the National Archives explains. It’s the first documented coordinated U.S. policy statement. On display is the document, which shows 53 signatures. 

Oaths of Allegiance signed by George Washington, Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr

During the harsh winter of 1777-1778 when troops led by George Washington were encamped at Valley Forge, Penn., and near death, the Continental Congress instructed all Continental Army officers to swear an Oath of Allegiance. They pledged allegiance to “the United States of America, to be Free, Independent and Sovereign States, and declare that the people thereof owe no allegiance or obedience to George the Third, King of Great Britain.” 

The oaths were signed and witnessed. Approximately 1,200 are preserved at the National Archives. On display are those signed by Washington, Hamilton and Burr.

Treaty of Paris, 1783

After eight years of war, the American colonists defeated the British Army and ended British rule in the United States forever. The leaders of the new United States of America and Great Britain signed the Treaty of Paris on Sept. 3, 1783, formally recognizing the United States as an independent nation. 

The treaty was negotiated by Americans John Adams, Benjamin Franklin and John Jay. The treaty also delineated U.S. land boundaries, allowing for U.S. westward expansion. 

The last page is on display, bearing the signatures of the American negotiators and the signature of David Hartley, representing Great Britain.

David Brearley’s Secret Printing of the U.S. Constitution, 1787

In 1787, a Constitutional Convention was called to address challenges the nation was facing. Delegates met at Independence Hall in Philadelphia and replaced the Articles of Confederation with a new system of government established by the U.S. Constitution. 

They were given two printings of a draft that would become the U.S. Constitution. The document on display belonged to New Jersey delegate David Brearley Jr., which bears his handwritten notes.  

Document of votes of state delegates approving the U.S. Constitution, 1787

For four months, convention delegates discussed what they thought their new government should look like. “Their debates, arguments, and resolutions are reflected in the convention’s voting records,” the National Archives explains. The page on display is the text of the final vote for the final text of the U.S. Constitution.  

The document was ratified because congress couldn’t reach a quorum. Only 11 of 13 states voted because Rhode Island didn’t send delegates and two of New York’s three delegates left by the time of the vote, the National Archives notes.  

The U.S. Constitution was ratified on June 21, 1788, and went into effect March 4, 1789.

U.S. Senate markup of the Bill of Rights, 1789

After the Constitution was ratified by the states, U.S. Rep. James Madison, who would later become the fourth president, proposed a series of amendments, which he authored. 

The document on display is the U.S. Senate’s “markup” of what became the Bill of Rights. On Sept. 25, 1789, Congress passed 12 amendments. They were sent to the states for approval. Two years later, only 10 were ratified: Articles 3 through 12.

William Stone engraving of the Declaration of Independence, 1823

Decades after the Declaration of Independence was signed, Secretary of State John Quincy Adams, who would later become the sixth president, commissioned engraver William J. Stone to make an exact replica of the document. Roughly 200 copies were produced by 1823. Less than 50 are known to still exist, including the one on exhibit on loan from David M. Rubenstein.

Former Mizzou men's basketball guard Jayden Stone signed a one-year contract with the Sydney Kings on Friday, per the team's X account.

Originally from Perth, Australia, Stone will return to his home country to begin his professional career in the National Basketball League.

Stone spent two years at Grand Canyon and two at Detroit Mercy before transferring to the Tigers for the 2025-26 season. The guard averaged 13.5 points, 5.1 rebounds and 1.9 assists per game on nearly 49% shooting from the field and 38.5% from 3-point range. 

In Mizzou's NCAA Tournament loss to Miami, Stone put up 21 points and six rebounds on 6-of-10 shooting.

The Kings are headlined by last season's MVP runner-up Kendric Davis, 2023 NBL MVP Xavier Cooks and former NBA champion Matthew Dellavedova. 

(The Center Square) – Five months out from the 2026 midterm elections, Republicans’ chances of maintaining control of Congress appear grim, new polling shows.

The Center Square’s newest Voters’ Voice Poll revealed that 47% of U.S. registered voters surveyed would vote for a Democratic candidate if elections were held today, while only 41% would vote for a Republican. Nine percent of voters haven’t made up their minds yet.

The poll was conducted by Noble Predictive Insights from June 1-4, 2026, surveying 2,585 registered U.S. voters. The sample was comprised of 915 Republicans, 1013 Democrats, and 297 True Independents, the latter of whom chose neither major party when asked about their political leanings.

Democrats’ lead has widened by five percentage points since the Voters’ Voice Poll in March, when support for Democratic versus Republican congressional candidates was split 44%-43%.

“Democrats are widening their lead on the congressional generic ballot because they're not the party in power – I’m not saying the Democrats are doing spectacular here, and they’re really not, it’s really that people are just so dissatisfied, and there's really not another option,” Mike Noble, founder and CEO of Noble Predictive Insights, told The Center Square.

While the leanings of members in either of the two major political parties remain relatively stable, swing voters’ choices pose a growing threat to Republicans. A dismal 19% of Independents chose a Republican candidate, while 39% chose a Democratic candidate.

Although nearly a third of total Independents remain undecided, True Independents have shifted toward Democrats since March, with 20% now supporting a Democratic candidate and 10% supporting a Republican.

A whopping 49% of Independents are currently undecided, raising the stakes for Republicans as midterms draw closer.

Critical bipartisan legislation funding farmers and road infrastructure has lagged in Congress, and Republicans in both chambers initially blocked War Powers Resolutions to halt military hostilities in Iran that are driving up gas and food prices.

“Republicans have a problem on their hands. If these economic pain points continue or get worse, the worse it's going to be for them for the midterms,” Noble said.

“What it's doing is just pushing voters towards the Democrats. People are not happy, they're feeling the economic pinch, and because of that, Republicans are hurting, and it's benefiting Democrats," he added. "So Republicans [will] want to get a handle on this sooner rather than later as we get closer to these November elections coming up.”

Notably, groups particularly sensitive to the rising costs of living are turning to Democrats, who have criticized recent price increases due to the Iran conflict, President Donald Trump’s tariff policies, and Republican infighting or inaction in Congress over cost-of-living issues like healthcare and housing.

The median annual household income in the U.S. was $83,730 in 2024, according to the United States Census Bureau.

The July Voters’ Voice Poll showed that Americans earning under $50,000 per year favored Democrats over Republicans, 49% to 39%.

The median income for Black households was about $32,000 less than that, while the median income for Hispanic voters was approximately $18,000 less than the overall median income.

Only 13% of Black voters and 38% of Hispanic voters said in the Voters’ Voice Poll that they would choose a Republican candidate.

Younger voters aged 18-29, who typically have the lowest salaries of any nonretired age group, also leaned left, with 55% supporting a Democrat and only 33% supporting a Republican. All age groups, however, favored Democrats at least slightly over Republicans.

Female voters, whose median income in 2024 was about $14,000 less than males’, supported a Democratic candidate by 52% and a Republican candidate by 35% in the poll, with 11% remaining unsure.

By contrast, 48% male voters surveyed supported Republicans, while 43% supported Democrats.

“What this tells us is that basically this cost of living [issue] is a dominant pressure point, and so until they can get this fixed, it's just going to be a problem,” Noble said. “This is top of mind for folks, it's impacting them, and again, it's likely going to impact voting. I think also it impacts mostly those toss-up congressional seats, because those are the battlegrounds, that's more where the persuadables outsize the partisans.”

Even without Republicans’ political woes, political parties in power generally perform poorly during midterm elections. In the current political climate, Noble added, Democrats’ best chance of regaining control of Congress is to focus on pocketbook issues rather than President Trump’s controversial actions.

“So I'm non-partisan, but if I was advising Democrats, they literally have the stupidest, simplest task ahead of them if they want to win,” Noble said. “It blows my mind, [because] Democrats still, to this day, haven't figured out that attacking Trump does nothing for them. Trump is defined – people have their opinion of them. Just focus on the economy and costs, affordability. That's all you’ve got to do.”

The poll’s margin of error is +/- 1.93%.

(The Center Square) – California is suing U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement and other federal agencies to stop construction of what plaintiffs say is an ICE holding facility near an agricultural city.

Blueprints show plans for some kind of federal facility, but the U.S. Department of Homeland Security said it isn't building a new detention center.

Santa Clara County, the rural Central California county that would be home to the alleged administrative and short-term detainment facility, joined California Attorney General Rob Bonta in the lawsuit, which also names DHS, the U.S. General Services Administration, three federal officials and the Beverly Hills-based company ECG 6 LLC as defendants. GSA is the agency that builds federal facilities.

“The action taking place in [the] county is unlawful, and spreads fear throughout our county,” Otto Lee, the chair of the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors, told The Center Square.

“This project was being developed secretly, and violates the National Environmental Policy Act, the Immigration and Nationality Act, the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act, the Administrative Procedure Act and California’s Williamson Act, to name a few," Lee said.

In the lawsuit, the county and the California Department of Justice challenged the development of what appears to be a facility for holding illegal immigrants in the 7200 block of Holsclaw Road in unincorporated Santa Clara County. According to the complaint, the federal agencies involved with the development violated numerous laws, including California’s Williamson Act, which has limited the site on Holsclaw Road to strictly agricultural uses since 1967.

The suspected holding facility is expected to be around 18,700 square feet, according to the lawsuit, and will hold up to 150 detainees. The complaint also alleges that the facility site is in an area that is home to endangered species and has limited and inadequate waste disposal capabilities. There is also hazardous waste present on site, notably a toxic fungicide called thiram, ethidium bromide, calcium hypochlorite and acid-based chemical wash water, the complaint states.

Construction started on May 4, the complaint further alleges. The lawsuit contends federal officials with knowledge of the project concealed its true nature.

“We have no new detention centers planned at this location,” a spokesperson from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security told The Center Square via email on Thursday. The department declined to identify the spokesperson by name.

“Every day, DHS is conducting law enforcement activities across the country to keep Americans safe," said the DHS spokesperson. "It should not come as news that ICE will be making arrests in states across the U.S. and is actively working to expand detention space.”

Public records from the General Services Administration show that a facility is indeed planned at the site, with blueprints showing that there are parts of building construction with labels like “man trap” and “ammunition/weapons suite.” There are also rooms in the blueprints labeled “visitor room” and “interview room.”

Big type on the blueprints say "Construction Documents. GSA. General Services Administration. Gilroy, California."

“What I understand this would be is a federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement processing center outside of Gilroy,” said Greg Bozzo, mayor of Gilroy.

“I understand it to be a facility that, in my opinion, and in the opinion of our city council, is located in the wrong place," Bozzo told The Center Square on Thursday. "The majority of our community is in alignment with our city council, which voted unanimously to pass a resolution opposing this facility in this location.”

Bozzo said Gilroy’s residents, many of whom are immigrants, have shared concerns with him about construction moving ahead on this facility.

“Gilroy is a community that is known for caring for one another,” Bozzo said. “We are a strong-knit community where people know each other, and we are concerned for everyone for the type of anxiety that this is bringing to our community.”

Santa Clara County officials have jurisdiction over the facility because it is being built on county land and in an unincorporated area. They said they share the same concerns as Gilroy officials. The federal government is leasing the land from the county.

“Our office has a long history of litigation around immigrant rights issues,” Tony Lopresti, county counsel for Santa Clara County, told The Center Square. “Our county has pretty much the largest ratio of foreign-born residents in the nation at 42%. Our board is a board that very much understands that immigrant community is at the core of our county’s identity.”

The Santa Clara County Counsel’s Office previously sued the Trump administration for its actions against immigrant communities, which affects many residents, Lopresti said. He and other county officials also said there was no communication or outreach from the federal government to the county in the plans to build a potential Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in Gilroy.

“At the very least, we would expect they would comply with the applicable laws,” Lopresti said. “It requires they seek out and consider the perspectives of local and state government, that they evaluate alternative locations, whether they could use existing locations.

"They did none of that," Lopresti said. "They just proceeded under full secrecy to ram through a project.”

The California Department of Justice, which is overseen by Bonta, and ICE did not respond to The Center Square's requests for comment.

The GSA responded via email on Thursday afternoon that it does not comment on active litigation.

Lawyers from the San Francisco-based law firm Shute, Mihaley and Weinberger, a law firm representing the plaintiffs in the case, did not respond to The Center Square.

(The Center Square) - Some of Nevada's biggest candidates, fresh off primary election victories, have already turned their attention to the general election in November.

The state's primary on Tuesday set up some major head-to-head battles between candidates who have gained significant endorsements and campaign donations. 

Out of a crowd of 15 candidates in the gubernatorial race, Gov. Joe Lombardo and Attorney General Aaron Ford won the Republican and Democratic slots respectively on the Nov. 3 ballot. The two candidates had been seen as favorites in the months leading up to the June primary, which ended in a landslide 90.87% win for Lombardo and 63.49% in favor of Ford.

“I am honored by the confidence Nevadans have placed in me, and I will continue working every day on behalf of every Nevadan - whether they voted for me or not,” Lombardo told The Center Square in a statement after the primary results. “Together, we will build on our progress, finish the job, and make Nevada the best place in America to live, work, and raise a family.”

The result sets up what is expected to be a neck-and-neck November general election. A March poll by Noble Predictive Insights found the two candidates nearly tied at Lombardo with 39% of respondents' support and Ford at 38%.

“Today, Nevada, is the beginning of the end of the failed Lombardo-Trump economy,” Ford told reporters after the primary results were released. “Today we say no more – no more to failed leadership in Carson City that lets jobs disappear while our prices are soaring … Today we say loud and clear that Carson City belongs to the people.”

Carson City is the capital of Nevada.

With Ford facing a term limit, it's the first time in eight years that no incumbent is running in the attorney general race.

Four candidates – two Democrats and two Republicans –  lined up in the attorney general's race. State Senate Majority Leader Nicole Cannizzaro, D-Clark County, beat Treasurer Zach Conine for the Democratic ticket with 60.68% of votes. Attorney Adriana Fralick won 60.17% of votes over Republican challenger Danny Tarkanian. Fralick (109,471) and Cannizzaro (110,600) won near-identical vote totals.

Fralick, having never been elected to political office, gained crucial endorsements from Lombardo and Trump ahead of the primary.

“I am proud to have the support and endorsement of both President Trump and Gov. Lombardo,” Fralick told The Center Square ahead of the primary election. “But my job as attorney general would be to represent the interests of Nevada and enforce Nevada law, regardless of who occupies the White House or the Governor’s Mansion.”

April campaign fund filings showed that Fralick had raised the least of the four candidates with $165,000, while Cannizzaro had over $986,000 cash on hand in what is likely to be a tight November election for the state’s top law enforcement position.

“I have never forgotten where I came from,” Cannizzaro told reporters on the primary results, noting how she was raised in Nevada. “I’m ready to take that fight to anyone who tries to take that opportunity and that dream from Nevada families just like mine, or who try to make it harder for everyday Nevadans. And that’s exactly what I’m going to do as your next attorney general.”

In the state’s 1st Congressional District, the partisan primaries were packed with a total of nine candidates. The results show the longtime incumbent, U.S. Rep. Dina Titus, D-Las Vegas, will take on state Sen. Carrie Ann Buck, R-Clark County. 

The two candidates won their primary elections on decisive tallies, with Titus obtaining 75.92% and Buck at 77.81%. 

Titus is seeking to win her eighth term in the district, which contains parts of the Las Vegas area, including the Las Vegas Strip, the nearby city of Henderson and rural areas of Clark County. She has focused on an economic agenda and her experience in Congress.

“There is no substitute for experience and hard work,” Titus told The Center Square, answering questions by email. “During this Congress, I have already passed multiple bills through the House with overwhelming bipartisan votes. And President Trump, even after he endorsed my opponent, signed my bill into law which would enhance water security, increase conservation, and prevent millions of dollars of economic loss to businesses in Henderson.”

Buck went against the odds to outraise Titus on campaign funds ahead of the primary election, positioning herself as a candidate who previously flipped a Democratic-held state senate seat. Her campaign did not respond to a request for comment by The Center Square after the primary results.

In a statement on her X social media account responding to a media outlet's post calling the election in her favor, Buck said, “Thank you so much to the voters of Nevada’s First Congressional District! It is an honor to be your Republican Nominee, and I look forward to serving you in Congress.”

Early voting for the Nov. 3 general election will take place from Oct. 17 to Oct. 30.

(The Center Square) - Two Republican candidates are projected to head off to a general election in a congressional district that was redrawn to favor Democrats.

California’s 40th Congressional District was redrawn after the passage of Proposition 50 in November 2025 to favor Democrats in election to the U.S. House of Representatives. However, Republicans have notched wins in several redrawn districts and have now locked out Democrats from securing a win in California’s 40th congressional district.

Under California law, the top two vote getters in each race in the June 2 primary advance to the Nov. 3 general election, regardless of party affiliation.

District 40

U.S. Reps. Ken Calvert and Young Kim, both Republicans, are projected to head to the Nov. 3 election in the 40th Congressional District. Kim and Calvert traded sharp barbs throughout the primary election process.

Kim celebrated the projected win in a statement posted to social media. She criticized Calvert’s record in the U.S. House and his funding mechanisms.

“After more than three decades in Washington, it is time for fresh conservative leadership,” Kim said in a statement. “I will continue fighting to root out fraud, secure borders, for safer, more affordable communities, and a stronger economy.”

Calvert, the longest serving Republican congressman from California and chair of the Defense Appropriations Committee, has been aided in the race from political action committees aligned with defense interests. The Americans 4 Security PAC launched a $2.9 million spending campaign against Kim during the primary election.

Kim’s campaign said Calvert used this money to attack her and prop up another Democrat in the race. Chris Pack, a spokesman for Kim’s campaign, said Calvert is not prepared to face Kim in November.

“They lit that money on fire and now have to face one of the most tested and proven Republicans in the nation,” Pack said. “The electorate is in our favor and the numbers don’t lie. We are ready and spoiling for a fight.”

Kim has received more than $6.6 million toward her campaign, according to the most recent Federal Elections Commission filings. She received contributions from the Goldman Sachs PAC, CitiGroup PAC and Bank of America Federal Corporation PAC.

Kim introduced the PACE Act, legislation that would allow banks and payments companies to get approved for federal registration without using other payment companies in between.

“This means we're going to build a faster, more efficient, more secure payment system that works better for everyday Americans,” Kim said.

District 22

Randy Villegas, a college professor, overcame California Assemblymember Jasmeet Bains, a fellow Democrat who is also a physician. He will face off against Incumbent Rep. David Valadao, R-Calif., in the November general election.

Villegas told The Center Square his campaign has resonated with voters in the central valley because he is not a career politician.

“We cannot win this election by trading one corrupt representative who sold out our communities for another,” Villegas said.

Villegas supported the implementation of what he called a “progressive tax structure” and a 0% interest rate structure for homebuyers.

“Over the long term, we've got to make sure that we are taxing billionaires and millionaires and making sure that they're paying their fair share,” Villegas said. “These are not questions of whether we have the money to do these things. It’s a question of whether we have the political will and the political courage to fight for these policies and that’s what our campaign is committed to do.”

In April, Valadao introduced legislation to reduce administrative barriers for farmers and ranchers to participate in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.

“By expanding access to fresh, locally-grown food for lower-income families and opening new markets for producers, we can both strengthen our agricultural economy and improve food access across the valley,” Valadao said.

Villegas has raised more than $1.7 million toward the campaign, according to most recent FEC filings. He has been endorsed by Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vermont, and U.S. Reps. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, D-New York, and Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, in the general election.

Valadao has a sizable fundraising lead over Villegas, with more than $2.8 million in contributions. He received contributions from Dominion Energy PAC, the American Israel Public Affairs PAC and California Dairies PAC.

Candidates in the redrawn districts will head to the Nov. 3 general election in races that could determine the success of Proposition 50 for California’s congressional Democrats. Republicans currently hold a razor-thin majority, and Democrats could take control of the House by flipping a few seats.