WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday set the stage for Alabama to get rid of one of two largely Black congressional districts before this year’s midterm elections, creating an opening for Republicans to gain an additional U.S. House seat in a partisan battle for control of the closely divided chamber.

The decision follows a Supreme Court ruling in April that struck down a majority-Black U.S. House district in Louisiana as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander, significantly weakening a provision of the federal Voting Rights Act.

Alabama officials had pointed to the Louisiana case as reason for the Supreme Court to end a judicial order to use a court-imposed House map until after the 2030 census. The high court overturned that order and directed a lower court to reconsider the case in light of the Louisiana decision. That could free the state to instead use a map approved in 2023 by the Republican-led legislature that includes only one district where Black residents comprise a majority.

Anticipating a court reversal, Alabama officials recently enacted a law allowing it to void the results of a May 19 primary for some congressional districts and instead hold a new primary under the revised district boundaries. It’s up to Republican Gov. Kay Ivey to set a date for a special primary election, though it must occur by August.

In a dissent to Monday’s brief ruling, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said the Louisiana case had reversed only one of the grounds upon which the Alabama case had been decided. Although the Voting Rights Act violation is gone, Sotomayor said a lower court could still find that Alabama had intentionally discriminated against Black voters in violation of the 14th Amendment.

Alabama is one of several states trying to change their congressional district boundaries before the November elections as part of a nationwide redistricting battle being won, so far, by Republicans.

Voting districts typically are redrawn once a decade, immediately after a census, to account for population changes. But President Donald Trump urged Texas Republicans last year to redraw congressional districts to their advantage in a bid to hold onto a narrow House majority in the midterm elections.

Democrats in California countered with their own redistricting. And numerous Republican-led states have followed. The high court’s Louisiana ruling provided fuel for Republicans to intensify their redistricting efforts.

So far, Republicans think they could win as many as 14 additional seats in the November elections from new districts enacted in Texas, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Florida and Tennessee. Democrats think they could win up to six additional seats from new districts in California and Utah. But Democrats suffered a major setback when the Virginia Supreme Cour t overturned a voter-approved redistricting amendment that could have yielded four more seats for the party.

___

Lieb reported from Jefferson City, Missouri.

WASHINGTON, May 11 (Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way on Monday for Alabama Republicans to pursue a congressional voting map more favorable to their party ahead of November’s midterm elections, the latest fallout from the court’s seismic voting rights ruling.

The justices lifted a lower court’s decision that had blocked state Republicans’ preferred map as racially discriminatory and for illegally diluting the voting power of Black Alabamians.

The politically conservative Southern state is expected to seek to revert to this previous map, which would drop the number of districts where Black voters comprise a majority, or near-majority, from two to one out of the state’s seven U.S. House districts.

(Reporting by John Kruzel; Editing by Nia Williams)

WASHINGTON (AP) — Democrats on Monday filed an emergency appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court seeking to halt a Virginia ruling invalidating a ballot measure that would have given their party an additional four winnable U.S. House seats.

The move came after the Virginia Supreme Court on Friday struck down a constitutional amendment that voters narrowly passed just last month. The 4-3 state court decision found that the Democratic-controlled legislature improperly began the process of placing the amendment on the ballot after early voting had begun in the Virginia’s general election last fall.

Democrats argued unsuccessfully that the U.S. Supreme Court has held that, even if early voting is underway, an election does not happen until Election Day itself.

The appeal is the latest twist in the nation’s mid-decade redistricting competition. It was kicked off last year by President Donald Trump urging Republican-controlled states to redraw their lines and was supercharged by a recent Supreme Court ruling severely weakening the Voting Rights Act.

“The Court overrode the will of the people who ratified the amendment by ordering the Commonwealth to conduct its election with the congressional districts that the people rejected,” wrote lawyers for Virginia Democrats and the state’s Democratic Attorney General, Jay Jones. They added, “The irreparable harm resulting from the Supreme Court of Virginia’s decision is profound and immediate.”

The filing is a sign of Democratic desperation after the Virginia decision deprived them of four winnable House seats in the mid-decade redistricting race that President Donald Trump kicked off last year. Democrats are still favorites to recapture the House of Representatives, but their GOP rivals have claimed to have gained more than a dozen seats through redistricting. The voter-approved Virginia map would have partly offset that.

Democrats are taking a legal long shot in asking the justices to reverse the Virginia court’s ruling. The Supreme Court tries to avoid second-guessing state courts’ interpretations of their own constitutions. In 2023, it turned down a request by North Carolina Republicans to overrule a state Supreme Court decision that blocked the GOP’s congressional map.

Politically, the appeal could help a party struggling to compete with Republicans in the unusual mid-decade redrawing of congressional boundaries by providing fodder for election-year messaging about a partisan Supreme Court. The court recently allowed Louisiana Republicans to proceed with redistricting after the justices struck down a majority Black district as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.

Democrats have been set on their heels because, days after the Virginia ballot measure passed, the Supreme Court’s conservatives reversed decades of rulings and effectively neutered the Voting Rights Act, paving the way for Southern states to eliminate some majority Black districts and further pad Republican margins in Congress.

The Virginia amendment had been launched long before that ruling. It was intended as a response to Republican gains in Texas, Missouri, North Carolina and Ohio, and to blunt a new map in Florida that just became law. Once the Virginia amendment passed, it briefly turned the nationwide redistricting scramble into a draw between the two parties.

That was unraveled by the Virginia Supreme Court’s decision. The justices are appointed by the legislature, which has flipped between the two parties in recent decades, and the body is generally not seen as having a clear ideological bent.

__

Riccardi reported from Denver.

By John Kruzel

WASHINGTON, May 11 (Reuters) – Virginia Democrats asked the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday to revive a congressional map designed to boost their party’s chances in November’s midterm elections, turning to the court as Republicans — including allies of President Donald Trump — seek to preserve narrow control of Congress.

The case thrusts Virginia into an unusual, mid‑decade redistricting showdown, as courts weigh whether lawmakers can remake House districts outside the normal post‑census cycle — with control of a narrowly divided Congress potentially hanging in the balance.

Virginia’s top court on May 8 threw out a new electoral map that had been crafted to flip four Republican-held U.S. congressional seats to Democrats, dealing a setback to Democratic hopes of retaking the U.S. House. Republicans also hold a majority in the U.S. Senate.

In a 4-3 decision, the Virginia Supreme Court rejected a Democratic-backed ballot measure approved by voters in April that reconfigured the state’s U.S. House map for partisan advantage.

Ruling in favor of a Republican challenge, the court’s majority found that Democratic lawmakers had not followed proper procedure last year when they rushed to approve the referendum in time to reach the ballot ahead of the November vote.

The Virginia Democrats, led by Don Scott, the Democratic speaker of the Virginia House of Delegates, told the justices in a filing that the state court’s ruling has “deprived voters, candidates, and the Commonwealth of their right to the lawfully enacted congressional districts.”

The lawmakers cited a 2023 Supreme Court ruling that warned that state courts “may not transgress the ordinary bounds of judicial review such that they arrogate to themselves the power vested in state legislatures to regulate federal elections.”

In a process called redistricting, the boundaries of legislative districts across the United States are reconfigured to reflect population changes as measured by the national U.S. Census every 10 years. Redistricting traditionally has been carried out by state legislatures at the start of each new decade.

In the unusual mid-decade redistricting fight, Republicans now hold a clear advantage. The tit-for-tat battle began last year when Trump pushed Texas Republicans to rip up their electoral map and draw new district lines that aim to flip up to five Democratic-held seats to Republicans.

Democrats suffered a major blow when the U.S. Supreme Court’s conservative 6-3 majority gutted a key provision of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, opening the door for Republican-led Southern states to dismantle Democratic-held majority-Black and majority-Latino districts. Black and Latino voters tend to support Democratic candidates.

(Reporting by John Kruzel; Editing by Howard Goller)

By Andrew Chung

May 11 (Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday extended a pause on a ruling that would curb the abortion pill mifepristone from being prescribed through telemedicine and dispensed through the mail in a challenge by a Republican-led Louisiana lawsuit to a federal rule that had eased access.

Justice Samuel Alito kept the matter on hold until May 14, meaning the pill can continue to be dispensed by mail pending a further order by the court.

The nine justices are considering a request by two manufacturers of the medication to lift a decision by the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to block a 2023 rule issued by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration during Democratic former President Joe Biden’s administration.

The appeals court ruling on May 1 reinstated an older requirement that patients receive mifepristone only after an in‑person visit with a clinician.

Drugmakers Danco Laboratories and GenBioPro appealed the 5th Circuit action restricting access to mifepristone. The Supreme Court in an interim decision on May 4 put the 5th Circuit action on hold to give the justices more time to decide how to proceed.

Medication abortion, typically a two-drug regimen consisting of mifepristone followed by misoprostol, accounts for about two-thirds of U.S. abortions, and any restriction on how the pill is dispensed could significantly reduce access nationwide.

The case has put the contentious issue of abortion back in front of the justices, with the November midterm congressional elections looming and President Donald Trump’s fellow Republicans fighting to retain control of Congress.

The Supreme Court in 2024 unanimously rejected a previous attempt by anti-abortion groups and doctors to roll back FDA regulations that had eased access to the drug.

Battles over abortion rights follow the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling that overturned its 1973 Roe v. Wade precedent that legalized abortion nationwide, prompting 13 states to enact near-total bans on the procedure, while several others sharply restrict access.

Louisiana sued the Food and Drug Administration in 2025 claiming that the 2023 rule that eliminated the in-person dispensing requirement was illegal and has allowed medication abortions to skyrocket despite the state’s near-total ban on abortion.

(Reporting by Andrew Chung; Editing by Howard Goller)

By David Lawder and Tom Polansek

CHICAGO, May 11 (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump is set to sign executive orders on Monday to allow increased beef imports into the U.S. and to support renewal of the U.S. cattle herd in an effort to address high beef prices, a White House official said.

The official did not provide details on the two executive orders, which come at a time when the U.S. cattle herd has shrunk to its lowest level in 75 years and beef prices continue to climb.

Earlier, the Wall Street Journal reported that Trump would temporarily suspend tariff-rate quotas on beef, which would allow more of the meat to enter the U.S. at lower tariff rates. The newspaper said Trump would direct the Small Business Administration to increase lending to ranchers and to reduce protections under the Endangered Species Act for gray and Mexican wolves that prey on herds.

Expectations for increased beef imports from Brazil weighed on U.S. cattle futures after Trump met Brazilian President Inacio Lula da Silva last week. On Monday, Chicago Mercantile Exchange June live cattle futures shook off early losses to end slightly higher, while August feeder cattle dropped 0.5%.

Although prices for eggs, milk, and other grocery staples have fallen since Trump took office in January 2025, beef prices continue to climb, a symbol of persistent inflation for American consumers as the summer backyard grilling season gets underway.

Last October, Trump ordered a quadrupling of beef imports from Argentina, and a month later removed his 40% punitive tariff on Brazilian beef and coffee.

The moves did little to reverse beef prices, which were up 12.1% year-over-year in April, according to the Labor Department’s Consumer Price Index. Beef is more than 16% more expensive than when Trump returned to office in January 2025.

HAMBURGER HELPER

The U.S. cattle herd has dwindled to a 75-year low after ranchers slashed their herds because of a persistent drought that burned up grazing lands and raised feeding costs. High cattle prices have also encouraged ranchers to sell livestock to be slaughtered, instead of keeping them for breeding.

    The U.S. Department of Agriculture has projected that the country will import a record 5.8 billion pounds of beef this year, up about 6% from 2025 and 25% from 2024.

Most imports are lean beef trimmings that are mixed with U.S. supplies to make ground beef, said David Anderson, agricultural economist at Texas A&M University. He said more imports could help hamburger restaurants reduce their ingredient costs, but he did not expect prices to fall significantly for consumers.

“We were already importing a record amount. How much more does this get on top of what we were already importing?” Anderson said. “I’m hard-pressed to see this is going to be a huge effect on prices. It would be tough to have this be a huge influx of supply.”

Bill Bullard, CEO of cattle producers’ group R-CALF USA, said increased imports also could discourage American ranchers from expanding their herds. Smaller cattle feeders could even exit the industry if prices drop far enough, he said.

Consumers may not see benefits as ranchers come under pressure, Bullard said.

“We’ve had record imports for the past three years and at the same time consumers continue to pay record prices for beef,” he added.

(Reporting by David Lawder and Tom Polansek, writing by David Lawder Editing by Mark Porter and David Gregorio)

By Jason Lange

WASHINGTON, May 11 (Reuters) – Two out of three Americans think President Donald Trump has not clearly explained why the country went to war with Iran, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll completed on Monday that also showed his approval rating ticking up from the lowest level of his term.

The four-day poll revealed deep concerns about surging gasoline prices, and also suggested many voters are casting blame for their troubles on Trump’s Republican allies who will be defending their congressional majorities in the November midterm elections.

More than two months into a conflict that began February 28 with a U.S.-Israeli bombing campaign, some 66% of poll respondents – including one in three Republicans and almost all Democrats – said Trump has not “clearly explained the goals of U.S. military involvement in Iran.”

The war, which cooled in recent weeks as both sides floated peace proposals, has driven a roughly 50% increase in gasoline prices across the country. Iran shut down a fifth of the global oil trade by effectively closing the Strait of Hormuz – despite efforts by U.S. warships to re-open the waterway for oil tankers.

HOUSEHOLD FINANCES TAKE HIT

Some 63% of the country say their household’s personal financial situation has taken a hit from recent gas price increases, up from 55% in a Reuters/Ipsos poll conducted March 17-19. 

Some 36% of Americans approve of Trump’s performance, up two percentage points since a late April Reuters/Ipsos poll showed his approval rating at 34%, which was the lowest level of Trump’s current term in office.

The Reuters/Ipsos poll had a 3-percentage-point margin of error in either direction based on the number of people surveyed.

Trump’s popularity remains below the 40% approval rate he had just before the war started. He started his term in January 2025 with 47% approval after winning the 2024 presidential election on promises to lower costs for Americans.

WORRIES ABOUT GAS PRICES

Three-quarters of the public – including half of Republicans – think his administration bears at least a fair amount of responsibility for the gas price surge, the latest Reuters/Ipsos poll showed. Asked which political party is more responsible, 65% of poll respondents said Republicans were to blame compared to 27% who said Democrats. 

Four out of five Americans said they expect gas prices to rise further.

Republicans are defending narrow majorities in the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate in the midterms. Their hopes of keeping control of the House have been bolstered by recent court rulings that could lead to voting district boundaries that are more favorable to Republicans. Republican strategists say the party’s chances would further improve if gasoline prices came down.

But with no agreement in sight between Washington and Tehran, about three in 10 Americans already expect to cut back on summer vacation plans if gas prices hold firm, the poll found. Many expect to cancel their trips or travel shorter distances.  

Trump has repeatedly promised gas prices will fall when the war ends, though analysts warn that is unlikely to happen quickly.  The public isn’t sure who has the upper hand in the conflict. Only one in three say America has the advantage, while about one in seven say Iran has it, the Reuters/Ipsos poll showed. The rest said they weren’t sure or that neither side has an advantage.

The latest Reuters/Ipsos poll was conducted online and gathered responses from 1,254 U.S. adults nationwide.

(Reporting by Jason Lange in Washington; editing by Scott Malone and Alistair Bell)

May 11 (Reuters) – Two members of the U.S. House of Representatives on Monday will introduce legislation ‌to toughen a U.S. government ban on Chinese automakers from ‌entering ​the American ⁠market just ⁠before President Donald Trump heads to China for talks.

The legislation would codify a ‌regulation imposed by the Biden administration that effectively ⁠bans all Chinese automakers from selling passenger vehicles ⁠in ‌the U.S. ⁠and take other ​steps ‌to prevent ​China from ⁠entering the U.S. light-duty market.

Representatives John Moolenaar, a Republican, and Debbie Dingell, a Democrat, are introducing the legislation after a version was introduced in the Senate last month by Republican ​Bernie Moreno ⁠and Democrat Elissa Slotkin.

(Reporting by David Shepardson; Editing by Mark Porter)

By Nolan D. McCaskill

WASHINGTON, May 11 (Reuters) – Democrats will win control of the U.S. House of Representatives in November, Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries vowed in a letter to colleagues on Monday that also pledged to “bury” Republicans “with a massive Democratic redistricting counteroffensive” ahead of the 2028 presidential election.

The defiant letter to members of the House Democratic Caucus asserts that the party is well positioned to net the three seats required to win a House majority in the midterms despite recent setbacks by the U.S. Supreme Court and Virginia’s highest state court, which have, respectively, allowed Republican-led states across the South to redraw their maps without majority-minority districts and nullified a voter-approved map in Virginia that could have given Democrats four new seats previously held by Republicans.

Republicans hold a narrow 217-212 majority in the House, where one independent caucuses with Republicans. Five seats are vacant due to deaths and resignations. President Donald Trump launched a national mid-decade redistricting war last year when he urged Texas to draw a new map in an effort to buck historical trends that suggest Democrats would win back the House for the final two years of his presidency.

A Democratic House majority would stall the president’s agenda, and Democrats would have the power to investigate the president and his administration through congressional committees.

Democrats are campaigning on affordability, citing the high cost of living and soaring gas prices. A Reuters/Ipsos poll last month found the president’s approval had dropped to 34%, the lowest of his current term. 

“Donald Trump is deeply unpopular and Republicans have failed to make life better for the American people,” Jeffries wrote. “Instead of changing direction, GOP extremists are scheming to change the electoral composition of districts throughout the country.” 

Republicans are winning the redistricting battle against Democrats this cycle, but that’s no guarantee they will retain control of the chamber this fall. 

REPUBLICANS LEAD REDISTRICTING BATTLE

Jeffries said Democrats in the Congressional Black Caucus and national civil rights groups are pushing back against racial gerrymanders in the Deep South, while there’s ongoing litigation in four states and “several others are taking steps to decisively respond to what the U.S. Supreme Court has unleashed.”

The Democratic leader – who has previously indicated Republicans went too far in redrawing new Republican districts, making others more competitive in the process – said Republicans won’t “meaningfully benefit” from their new maps.

“Quite the opposite. Democratic enthusiasm and resolve have grown more intense,” Jeffries said. “Even after being aided and abetted by blatantly undemocratic court decisions, the failed GOP majority will not be able to gerrymander themselves back into power.”

Richard Hudson, a North Carolina Republican who chairs House Republicans’ campaign arm, told Fox News on Sunday that things are looking “fantastic” for his party.

“We have a battlefield, a map that favors Republicans,” he said, adding that Republicans have better candidates and more money at the committee level. “On all the metrics that matter, we’re winning.”

(Reporting by Nolan D. McCaskill; Editing by Alistair Bell)

By Andrea Shalal

WASHINGTON, May 11 (Reuters) – A bipartisan group of U.S. senators on Monday urged President Donald Trump to hold fast to trade remedies proposed by his administration to rebuild U.S. shipbuilding and not offer concessions when he meets with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

Democratic Senators Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin and Mark Kelly of Arizona as well as Republicans Tim Scott of South Carolina and Todd Young of Indiana told Trump in a letter sent on Monday that China’s decades-long effort to “decimate American shipbuilding” demanded the use of U.S. trade measures to their fullest extent.

When they met in South Korea in October, Trump and Xi agreed to pause tit-for-tat fees on each other’s ships for a year, staving off an estimated $3.2 billion annually in fees for large Chinese-built vessels sailing to U.S. ports. The U.S. fees will resume on November 10, unless a further pause is agreed.

The U.S. first announced its port fees in April 2025 to help loosen China’s grip on the global maritime industry after a U.S. probe concluded that China’s domination of the maritime, logistics and shipbuilding sectors was driven by unfair practices.

Trump will meet Xi in China May 14-15 for a summit that will be dominated by the Iran war, which has further strained U.S.-Chinese ties. China remains the biggest buyer of Iranian oil despite pressure from the Trump administration.

“The United States is at an inflection point and cannot cede additional ground to the People’s Republic of China,” the senators wrote in the letter, first reported by Reuters. “We urge you to stand strong during these negotiations as we work together to enact trade remedies and advance the SHIPS for America Act to level the playing field.”

No comment was immediately available from the White House.

The legislation, introduced in both the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives last year, would provide tax credits for investments in domestic shipyards and production, and authorize $2.5 billion in funding over a decade for domestic shipbuilding projects, among other measures.

China’s share of the $150 billion global shipbuilding industry soared to over 50% in 2023 from around 5% in 2000, largely aided by government subsidies, while once dominant U.S. shipbuilders have seen their share dwindle below 1%. South Korea and Japan are the next biggest shipbuilders.

The threat of U.S. fees briefly led to a 25% drop in Chinese shipyard orders last spring, although orders rebounded later in the year after the fees were postponed, the senators wrote.

“The sudden decrease in Chinese shipping orders shows that when your Administration acts on this issue, the global maritime industry pays attention,” the senators wrote, calling the port fees “an urgent, critical step needed to grow the U.S. industrial base, expand the economy and protect national security.”

(Reporting by Andrea Shalal; Editing by David Gregorio)