Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., has drawn fire for his questioning of the first Muslim American judicial nominee.

Hawley, along with Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., and Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, posed what the Council on American Islamic Relations called "irrelevant" and "hostile" questions to the Democratic nominee about Israel, Palestinians and the Middle East.

Edward Mitchell, national deputy director of the council, denounced the three senators for their treatment of President Joe Biden's historic judicial nominee, Adeel Mangi, during his confirmation hearing.

"Singling out a Muslim judicial nominee and forcing him to answer 'gotcha questions' about the Middle East simply because of faith or because of his tangential connections to Muslims who comment on the Middle East is un-American and Islamophobic," Mitchell stated.

Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., presided at the hearing and said Republican senators have "reached a new low, hurling unfounded accusations of antisemitism at an historic Muslim American judicial nominee today." He read out a letter from The National Council of Jewish Women noting their endorsement of Mangi's nomination.

Hawley was the last of the three GOP senators to question Mangi and pressed him multiple times on whether he believed Israel is a colonial state, an occupying force in Palestinian territory. Mangi reiterated he is not an expert on the Middle East, and such policy questions weren't relevant to why he was there.

"Senator, I have no basis as a judicial nominee to cast a view on the Middle East," Mangi said.

The questioning became so hostile Durbin banged his gavel several times to tell Cruz to stop and to tell Hawley his time was up. Hawley said he asked the same question in four different ways and Mangi did not give a clear "yes" or "no" answer.


get more stories like this via email

North Carolina lacks laws mandating time off for employees to vote, making it hard for workers who juggle demanding schedules and civic responsibilities but some businesses are filling the gap to ensure their teams can participate in the election without losing pay.

Jennifer Curtis, co-founder and CEO of Firsthand Foods, is one of them. She shared her company's commitment to paid voting leave is not just practical, it is part of fostering a workplace that values civic engagement.

"Our employees greatly value flexibility and so we have a very generous flex time policy for them to work whatever their needs are around what works with the job," Curtis explained. "For voting, we explicitly give them paid time off to go vote."

Only 28 states and the District of Columbia have laws requiring employers to give employees time off to vote.

Seth Gross, owner of Bull City Burger and Brewery in Durham, also encourages his employees to vote. Gross believes ensuring every employee has the opportunity to vote supports a healthier democracy and encourages a sense of empowerment among his team.

In the hospitality industry, where many employees work nontraditional hours and may feel disconnected from the political process, Gross sees voting as a crucial way for workers to have a voice.

"We have a lot of folks who maybe feel marginalized or when you're working for tips, it's not exactly the kind of job where people think the highest regards of all the time and these folks may feel like, you know, what I have to say doesn't matter and that's simply not true," Gross asserted. "I want all of our employees to go out and vote. I want the entire hospitality industry to go out and vote."

For Gross, the hospitality industry's role in supporting local communities through everything from disaster response to organizing support for those in need only reinforces the importance of engaged, community-focused leadership. He believes voting can help shape it.


get more stories like this via email

Early voter turnout in Wyoming has been high leading up to Election Day, and a survey shows most think local vote counting will be reliable.

However, many feel differently about vote counting nationally.

A new election year survey from the University of Wyoming shows that nearly 90% of people in Wyoming think the vote counting process is very or somewhat reliable in their county, and data is similar at the state level.

But confidence drops with country-wide vote counting, which just under 60% of those surveyed think is reliable.

Libby Skarin, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Wyoming, said that hasn't stopped Wyomingites from participating.

"Overall what we've seen from the majority of people is that people are feeling good about the election," said Skarin. "They know that our elections are safe and secure, and we've seen a lot of folks already turning out to vote early."

According to Wyoming Secretary of State Chuck Gray, absentee turnout by mail and in person hit over 100,000 by midday Friday, November 1. That's more than 30% of registered voters in the state.

Wyoming voter information is available at letsvotewyo.org.

Polls are open Tuesday from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Anyone in line to vote at the evening cutoff has the right to remain in line and cast a ballot after that time.

Skarin said voters shouldn't expect any hiccups on Election Day. But if issues come up or a voter has questions, a national election protection hotline is available.

"That hotline is for use for anyone who might be experiencing issues or having questions at the polls," said Skarin. "It will connect you with people, live, who can help walk you through your rights and answer questions for you."

To reach the hotline, voters can dial 866-OUR-VOTE.

Support for this reporting was provided by The Carnegie Corporation of New York.




get more stories like this via email

Researchers at the University of Washington are watching closely as rumors and false claims swirl ahead of Election Day.

The University of Washington's Center for an Informed Public has been following and analyzing misleading rumors popping up online.

Many false claims about election interference have focused on Pennsylvania, the largest swing state in the 2024 presidential race.

Kate Starbird - professor of Human Centered Design and Engineering, who co-founded the Center - said many rumors start with a kernel of truth, such as an isolated case where a voting machine didn't record a vote correctly.

"When people are saying machines aren't working, this is true," said Starbird. "It starts as a rumor but eventually becomes just fact. But it gets twisted into the this narrative that it's an intentional effort to disenfranchise certain voters, and that's false. So we can see that sort of intentionality is one place it gets twisted."

Starbird said when incidents become misleading rumors, they can obscure the remedies.

She also noted that isolated events are sometimes extrapolated to make it seem as if they're widespread when that's not the case.

She said the twisting of evidence is part of an attempt to undermine the results of the election.

Last week, fires were set at ballot drop boxes in Vancouver and Portland.

Stephen Prochaska, a graduate research assistant at the Center for an Informed Public, said people on the right and left already had a frame in place for interpreting events like these that involve blaming the other side.

"Oftentimes, they're improvising based off of these events that no one really knows to predict," said Prochaska. "Like, we don't know that that's going to happen. But they have these frames set and are able to cue audiences on how to interpret that. And this is bipartisan."

Starbird said a diverse group of actors, including influencers on social media, content creators and organizations, are loosely collaborating to define what the narrative of the 2024 election will be.

"We don't know what it is," said Starbird. "We'll have to wait for the election results, but the improvisation has been going on all along and they're certainly very active right now and they've got a very participatory audience."

Support for this reporting was provided by the Carnegie Corporation of New York.




get more stories like this via email