The Associated Press called Colorado's 4th Congressional District for Democrat Eileen Laubacher, a retired U.S. Navy rear admiral, defeating three-term Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert. Late counts showed Laubacher leading by about 3,237 votes, 48.8% to Boebert's 47.9%, with Libertarian Douglas Mangeris at 3.3%. Boebert's campaign argued the race was not over and discussed a recount, but the margin was too wide for an automatic recount under Colorado law.
Boebert was a nationally known, controversial Trump ally in a district Trump won by 18 points in 2024, but she was heavily outraised by Laubacher. Laubacher, a former Republican, ran on affordability and appealed to middle-ground voters, while broader midterm headwinds hurt Trump-aligned incumbents.
Democrat Eileen Laubacher has won the U.S. House seat in Colorado's 4th District, unseating Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert, according to the Associated Press.
Rep. Lauren Boebert lost her bid for re-election in Colorado's 4th District to Democrat Eileen Laubacher, the AP reports.
Al Jazeera reports that six-year-old Gaza burn victim Masa Yassin is outgrowing the specialized mask used for her healing, and may not get a replacement because of Israeli supply restrictions.
At least six people died and five were injured after the top floor of a building under construction collapsed near Nairobi, Kenya, authorities said. This is a vague social media teaser/headline with no specific factual assertion to check.
Sen. Chris Van Hollen is picking up endorsements in his challenge to Chuck Schumer for Senate Democratic leader, according to Axios's whip count.
BRick on X says one Obama judge shouldn't run the border from his courtroom.
BThat's a real argument. And it's a bad one.
BOh, here we go.
BNo, I mean it. Federal judges check the president when he's over the line.
BBut one judge in one courtroom shouldn't set immigration policy for the entire country. That's a veto, not a check.
BIt's a veto until the Supreme Court steps in. Now it has, and the system is working.
BAfter months of delay while the border stayed broken. That's not working, that's slow motion.
BYou keep saying the border was broken because of one judge. It's a whole system, not one judge.
BWhen one judge freezes a president's policy nationwide, we don't have a presidency. We have nine hundred presidents!
BOh, come on. The judge didn't write the law, Congress did.
BAnd who made him the national sheriff? That's exactly the problem.
BThe Constitution did. Courts exist to stop the executive when it goes too far.
BFine. But a nationwide injunction from one district judge is too much. It's used as a weapon now.
BThe bigger problem isn't the judge. It's a Congress that won't act.
BThen let's hold Congress accountable, not give judges a free pass.
BSo what's the fix? Tell a president he can ignore any judge he doesn't like?
BNo. But Congress needs to limit these universal injunctions.
BInteresting how it's only a crisis when your side is in power.
BThat's a fair hit. I'd say the same if the other side did it.
BI can meet you halfway: the universal injunction debate is real. But judges blocking presidents isn't the problem.
BThen we agree on the disease, just not the prescription.
BGood. Because your prescription worries me.
BDifferent world entirely. Al Jazeera reports on a six-year-old burns victim in Gaza, Masa Yassin.
BShe's outgrowing the special mask she wears to heal, and may not get another one.
BBecause of Israeli restrictions on supplies. That part is hard to hear.
BIt's a humanitarian crisis. A child's recovery depends on a piece of medical equipment.
BIsrael says those restrictions are about security, keeping materials from being used against them.
BBut a mask for a burn victim? That's clearly medical.
BAgreed. The question is whether the system can distinguish, and right now it's failing her.
BAnd that's what both sides should agree on: no child should lose recovery because of paperwork.
BSpeaking of who counts: M.A. Rothman posted on X about a census rule counting only citizens for House apportionment.
BCritics call it rigged.
BNo official confirmation this is an actual rule yet. But the idea is out there.
BAnd it's a big one. House seats would shift away from states with more noncitizens.
BMassive shift. The Constitution says count the whole number of persons, not citizens— persons.
BMaybe the framers meant people with a stake in the country. Citizens.
BNo, the text says persons. That's not a detail, it's the whole design.
BBut apportionment decides representation. Shouldn't representation follow citizens, not everyone physically here?
BSo a state with more noncitizens gets fewer seats, despite more people needing services. Not fair.
BIt's fair to citizens who actually have a say.
BYou can't just redefine 'persons' because you don't like the math.
BI'm not redefining anything. I'm asking whether citizenship should matter for political power.
BAnd I'm saying the Constitution answered that question. Persons, not citizens.
BAnd if this ever becomes an actual rule, the lawsuits will start the same day.
BNo doubt. The courts will have to settle it.
BMaybe citizenship should matter for political power. That's a real debate.
BFair enough, but the text still says persons, not citizens.