By BILL BARROW, TRAN NGUYEN, FERNANDA FIGUEROA and JOHN HANNA, Associated Press

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — Texas Democrats who ended a walkout found themselves shadowed by law enforcement officers to keep them from repeating the protest that stalled Republican efforts to redraw congressional districts and fulfill President Donald Trump’s desire to reshape U.S. House maps.

Republicans in the Texas House forced returning Democrats to sign what the Democrats called “permission slips,” agreeing to around-the-clock surveillance by state Department of Public Safety officers to leave the floor. However, Democratic Rep. Nicole Collier, of Fort Worth, refused and remained on the House floor Monday night.

Texas Troopers gather in the gallery of the House Chamber at the Texas Capitol after a second special session was gaveled in, Monday, Aug. 18, 2025, in Austin, Texas. (AP Photo/Eric Gay)

The Democrats’ return to Texas puts the Republican-run Legislature in position to satisfy Trump’s demands, possibly later this week, as California Democrats advance new congressional boundaries in retaliation.

Lawmakers had officers posted outside their Capitol offices, and suburban Dallas Rep. Mihaela Plesa said one tailed her on her Monday evening drive back to her apartment in Austin after spending much of the day on a couch in her office. She said he went with her for a staff lunch and even down the hallway with her for restroom breaks.

“We were kind of laughing about it, to be honest, but this is really serious stuff,” Plesa said in a telephone interview. “This is a waste of taxpayer dollars and really performative theater.”

Collier, who represents a minority-majority district, said she would not “sign away my dignity” and allow Republicans to “control my movements and monitor me.”

“I know these maps will harm my constituents,” she said in a statement. “I won’t just go along quietly with their intimidation or their discrimination.”

2 states at the center of an expanding fight

The tit-for-tat puts the nation’s two most populous states at the center of an expanding fight over control of Congress ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. The battle has rallied Democrats nationally following infighting and frustrations among the party’s voters since Republicans took total control of the federal government in January.

Related Articles

Gabbard says UK scraps demand for Apple to give backdoor access to data

Appeals court overturns order that stripped some protections from pregnant Texas state workers

Maine police officer arrested by ICE agrees to voluntarily leave the country

Judge issues injunction preventing Trump’s FTC from investigating watchdog Media Matters

Trump vows to change how elections are run. The US Constitution doesn’t give him that power

Dozens of Texas Democratic lawmakers left for Illinois and elsewhere on Aug. 3, denying their Republican colleagues the attendance necessary to vote on redrawn maps intended to send five more Texas Republicans to Washington. Republicans now hold 25 of Texas’ 38 U.S. House seats.

They declared victory Friday, pointing to California’s proposal intended to increase Democrats’ U.S. House advantage by five seats. Many absent Democrats left Chicago early Monday and landed hours later at a private airfield in Austin, where several boarded a charter bus to the Capitol. Cheering supporters greeted them inside.

Republican House Speaker Dustin Burrows did not mention redistricting on the floor but promised swift action on the Legislature’s agenda.

“We aren’t playing around,” Republican state Rep. Matt Shaheen, whose district includes part of the Dallas area, said in a post on the X social media platform.

Democrats promise to keep fighting

Even as they declared victory, Democrats acknowledged Republicans can now approve redrawn districts. Texas House Minority Leader Gene Wu said Democrats would challenge the new designs in court.

Texas Democratic lawmakers return to Texas after leaving two weeks ago to block a vote on a redrawn redistricting map, Monday, Aug. 18, 2025, in Austin, Texas. (AP Photo/Eric Gay)

Lawmakers did not take up any bills Monday and were not scheduled to return until Wednesday.

Trump has pressured other Republican-run states to consider redistricting, as well, while Democratic governors in multiple statehouses have indicated they would follow California’s lead in response. Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom has said his state will hold a Nov. 4 special referendum on the redrawn districts.

The president wants to shore up Republicans’ narrow House majority and avoid a repeat of the midterms during his first presidency. After gaining House control in 2018, Democrats used their majority to stymie his agenda and twice impeach him.

Nationally, the partisan makeup of existing district lines puts Democrats within three seats of a majority. Of the 435 total House seats, only several dozen districts are competitive. So even slight changes in a few states could affect which party wins control.

Redistricting typically occurs once at the beginning of each decade after the census. Many states, including Texas, give legislators the power to draw maps. California is among those that empower independent commissions, giving Newsom an additional hurdle.

California Democrats start redrawing process

Democratic legislators introduced new California maps Monday. It was the first official move toward the fall referendum asking voters to override the independent commission’s work after the 2020 census. The proposed boundaries would replace current ones through 2030. Democrats said they will return the mapmaking power to the commission after that.

California Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas announces a legislative package to advance a partisan effort to redraw California congressional map at a press conference on Monday, Aug. 18, 2025, in Sacramento, Calif. (AP Photo/Tran Nguyen)

State Republicans promised lawsuits.

Democrats hold 43 out of California’s 52 U.S. House seats. The proposal would try to expand that advantage by targeting battleground districts in Northern California, San Diego and Orange counties, and the Central Valley. Some Democratic incumbents also get more left-leaning voters in their districts.

“We don’t want this fight, but with our democracy on the line, we cannot run away from this fight,” said Democrat Marc Berman, a California Assembly member who previously chaired the elections committee.

Republicans expressed opposition in terms that echoed Democrats in Austin, accusing the majority of abusing power. Sacramento Republicans said they will introduce legislation advocating independent redistricting commissions in all states.

Texas’ governor jumped to the president’s aid

Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott launched the expanding battle when he heeded Trump’s wishes and added redistricting to an initial special session agenda that included multiple issues, including a package responding to devastating floods that killed more than 130 people last month.

Abbott has blamed Democrats’ absence for delaying action on those measures. Democrats have answered that Abbott is responsible because he effectively linked the hyper-partisan matter to nonpartisan flood relief.

Abbott, Burrows and other Republicans tried various threats and legal maneuvers to pressure Democrats’ return, including the governor arguing that Texas judges should remove absent lawmakers from office.

As long as they were out of state, lawmakers were beyond the reach of the civil arrest warrants that Burrows issued. The Democrats who returned Monday did so without being detained by law enforcement.

The lawmakers who left face fines of up to $500 for each legislative day they missed. Burrows has insisted Democratic lawmakers also will pay pick up the tab for law enforcement who attempted to corral them during the walkout.

Barrow reported from Atlanta. Nguyen reported from Sacramento, California. Hanna reported from Topeka, Kansas.

By DAVID FISCHER, MIKE SCHNEIDER and FREIDA FRISARO, Associated Press

MIAMI (AP) — A federal judge in Miami issued a split decision in a lawsuit over the legal rights of detainees at the “Alligator Alcatraz” immigration detention center in the Florida Everglades, dismissing part of the suit and also moving the case to a different jurisdiction.

U.S. District Judge Rodolfo Ruiz issued the decision late Monday, writing in a 47-page ruling that claims the detainees at the facility don’t have confidential access to their lawyers or to hearings in immigration court were rendered moot when the Trump administration recently designated the Krome North Processing Center near Miami as a site for their cases to be heard.

The judge heard arguments from both sides in a hearing earlier Monday in Miami. Civil rights attorneys were seeking a preliminary injunction to ensure detainees at the facility have access to their lawyers and can get a hearing.

The state and federal government had argued that even though the isolated airstrip where the facility is located is owned by Miami-Dade County, Florida’s southern district was the wrong venue since the detention center is located in neighboring Collier County, which is in the state’s middle district.

Judge Ruiz had hinted during a hearing last week that he had some concerns over which jurisdiction was appropriate.

The state and federal government defendants made an identical argument last week about jurisdiction for a second lawsuit in which environmental groups and the Miccosukee Tribe sued to stop further construction and operations at the Everglades detention center until it’s in compliance with federal environmental laws.

U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams in Miami on Aug. 7 ordered a 14-day halt on additional construction at the site while witnesses testified at a hearing that wrapped up last week. She has said she plans to issue a ruling before the order expires later this week. She had yet to rule on the venue question.

Frisaro reported from Fort Lauderdale, Florida, and Schneider reported from Orlando, Florida.

By ROB GILLIES, Associated Press

TORONTO (AP) — Air Canada said Tuesday it will gradually restart operations after reaching an agreement with the union for 10,000 flight attendants to end a strike that disrupted the travel plans of hundreds of thousands of travelers.

The union first announced the agreement early Tuesday after Air Canada and the union resumed talks late Monday for the first time since the strike began over the weekend. The strike is affecting about 130,000 travelers a day at the peak of the summer travel season.

Related Articles

Union says Air Canada flight attendants won’t return to work despite strike being declared illegal

Maryland tax on digital ads violated Big Tech’s free speech, judges say

Google to pay $36M fine for anticompetitive deals with Australia’s largest telcos

Swiss watchmaker Swatch apologies for ad showing gesture seen as racist

Cable’s MSNBC will change its name later this year as part of corporate divorce from NBC

Canada’s largest airline said flights will start resuming Tuesday evening. Flight attendants walked off the job early Saturday after turning down the airline’s request to enter into government-directed arbitration, which allows a third-party mediator to decide the terms of a new contract.

The union said the agreement will guarantee members pay for work performed while planes are on the ground, resolving one of the major issues that drove the strike.

“Unpaid work is over. We have reclaimed our voice and our power,” the union said in a statement. “When our rights were taken away, we stood strong, we fought back — and we secured a tentative agreement that our members can vote on.”

Chief executive Michael Rousseau said restarting a major carrier is a complex undertaking and said regular service may require seven to 10 days. Some flights will be canceled until the schedule is stabilized.

“Full restoration may require a week or more, so we ask for our customers’ patience and understanding over the coming days,” Rousseau said in a statement.

The two sides reached the deal with the help of a mediator early Tuesday morning. The airline said mediation discussions “were begun on the basis that the union commit to have the airline’s 10,000 flight attendants immediately return to work.” Air Canada declined to comment further on the agreement until the ratification process is complete. It noted a strike or lockout is not possible during this time.

Earlier, Air Canada said rolling cancellations would now extend through Tuesday afternoon after the union defied a second return-to-work order.

The Canada Industrial Relations Board had declared the strike illegal Monday and ordered the flight attendants back on the job. But the union said it would defy the directive. Union leaders also ignored a weekend order to submit to binding arbitration and end the strike by Sunday afternoon.

The board is an independent administrative tribunal that interprets and applies Canada’s labor laws. The government ordered the board to intervene.

Labor leaders objected to the Canadian government’s repeated use of a law that cuts off workers’ right to strike and forces them into arbitration, a step the government took in recent years with workers at ports, railways and elsewhere.

“Your right to vote on your wages was preserved,” the union said in a post on its website.

Air Canada operates around 700 flights per day. The airline estimated Monday that 500,000 customers would be affected by flight cancellations.

Aviation analytics firm Cirium said that as of Monday afternoon, Air Canada had called off at least 1,219 domestic flights and 1,339 international flights since last Thursday, when the carrier began gradually suspending its operations ahead of the strike and lockout that began early Saturday.

Toronto’s Pearson International Airport, Canada’s largest, said it will deploy additional staff to assist passengers and support startup operations.

Passengers whose flights are impacted will be eligible to request a full refund on the airline’s website or mobile app, according to Air Canada.

One of my life’s greatest regrets is that I didn’t join the Army sooner. I was commissioned at age 37, late for the military, and I didn’t exactly impress my officer basic course instructors with my physical prowess. But I made it through, and I spent eight years in the reserves, with active-duty deployments to Iraq and South Korea.

I love this country, I believed in our missions, and I felt great purpose playing my very small part as an Army judge advocate. But what makes me miss my service — and what makes me regret that I didn’t join when I was younger — is the people.

No one will call the Army perfect. Part of my role was military justice, and I saw many soldiers at their worst. Until you encounter an Army unit up close and under fire, though, you don’t truly appreciate the default character, courage and discipline of the average American soldier.

But the military I love is under threat — from its own commander in chief.

Much of the commentary surrounding President Donald Trump’s decision to deploy National Guard troops to Los Angeles and now Washington, D.C., has centered on its impact on American democracy. Do we want to live in a republic that puts military boots on city streets at the whim of a politician, rather than in response to an extraordinary need?

Yet I’m just as concerned about the effect of Trump’s deployments on the military itself. He isn’t just deploying America’s military into the streets; he’s deploying it into the American culture war. And he’s threatening to expand his campaign into blue cities in blue states where homicide rates are actually far lower than in many cities in red states — such as my beloved Memphis, Tennessee, where I spent countless hours as a kid. In fact, a large number of the most dangerous cities in the nation are in red states.

The military is America’s most-trusted government institution, and its tradition of nonpartisan service is indispensable to maintaining that trust. If the president uses the military against his domestic foes, he risks fracturing its bond with the American public and diminishing its ability to recruit young Americans from all of our political factions.

That’s reason enough for presidential restraint, but the problem with Trump’s deployments runs far deeper — to the point where they raise grave risks for one of America’s most indispensable institutions.

Let us count the ways.

Cohesion

First, he risks military cohesion and morale.

The U.S. military is not MAGA. Sure, there are MAGA members of the military, and the best available data indicates that it’s right-leaning, but it’s still a remarkably politically diverse institution. You simply cannot assume the political beliefs of a man or woman in uniform.

Turning parts of the military into Trump’s domestic security force would dragoon Democrats, independents and Republicans into a MAGA campaign that many would find grotesque.

Part of the obligation of military service is that you agree to deploy where your commanders lawfully tell you to deploy — even if their orders are misguided, dangerous or foolish.

But that obligation creates a moral imperative for our nation’s leadership. If soldiers are willing to leave their homes and families, then it’s the obligation of the commander in chief to make sure that the deployment is in service of our national interests, not his own campaign of repression and revenge.

Beyond its training

Second, Trump is pushing the military beyond its training.

National Guard units (much less active-duty troops) are not trained to police American streets. Even members of the military police are ill-suited for the task. They’re certainly trained in basic policing tactics, but they’re trained to enforce the Uniform Code of Military Justice in a unique military environment, not to police civilian streets to enforce state and local laws.

The military can be indispensable in restoring order in the face of large-scale riots, the kinds that completely overwhelm local authorities. But in the absence of a total breakdown in public order, they’re simply not trained to be effective civilian police officers.

At present, the National Guard troops deployed to Washington appear to be destined to perform relatively small tasks, providing logistical and administrative support and simply standing around as a show of force to deter crime.

As a result, I’m less concerned that a terrible violent incident will ensue (in my experience, soldiers are remarkably disciplined with their weapons, even in locations far more dangerous than the worst neighborhoods in our most violent cities) than I am with the anger and exasperation that come with fruitless and frustrating service.

National security

Third, Trump could endanger national security.

If he expands these operations and thousands (or tens of thousands) of soldiers are diverted to New York, Chicago, Washington and Los Angeles, he’ll start to degrade readiness for the military’s true mission: deterring our nation’s formidable foreign enemies and defeating them in combat if deterrence fails.

Internal security operations are poor preparation for combat with advanced militaries. And when a military is pulled into politics, it can create paths to promotion that put a premium on personal loyalty, not combat effectiveness.

That’s a lesson that authoritarian nations have learned on the battlefield time and again. The Russian military faced a rude surprise on Ukrainian battlefields in part because in Vladimir Putin’s Russia, professionalism is secondary to politics.

It’s alarming to see hints of Putinism in America. At the beginning of Trump’s second term, he fired a number of top generals (including the chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) for transparently ideological reasons. And now he is reportedly personally interviewing candidates for top military positions — a departure from past practice.

‘Hold the line’

In 2017, Gen. Jim Mattis, Trump’s first secretary of defense, delivered an impromptu speech to a collection of American service members in Afghanistan. It has gone down in military history as the “hold the line” speech.

“You’re a great example for our country right now,” Mattis said. “It’s got some problems. You know it, and I know it. It’s got problems that we don’t have in the military. You just hold the line, my fine young soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines. You just hold the line until our country gets back to understanding and respecting each other, being friendly to one another — what Americans owe to one another.”

I used to think that this speech was solely focused on holding the line against our foreign enemies, protecting our nation from external threats while we struggle through mounting polarization and division at home.

But now I think it meant more than that. Our all-volunteer military is a reflection of our country, and I think Mattis was asking U.S. service members to demonstrate that there are Americans who can live and sometimes even die for one another across immense differences. He was asking the military to lead by example. “Hold the line” also meant “Show the way.”

I don’t doubt that members of the military deployed in Washington will still try to show the way. A vast majority have far too much integrity, far too much discipline and far too much affection for their fellow Americans to become the kind of jackbooted oppressors you see in the worst militaries abroad. They’ll perform a misguided mission with honor.

When that mission is a vengeful, partisan deployment to American streets, however, it risks straining the social compact that binds a democracy to its military. The Army may want to hold the line, but Donald Trump does not, and few people can do more damage to our nation’s armed forces than a commander in chief who is consumed with rage and drunk with power.

David French writes a column for the New York Times.

Related Articles

Matt K. Lewis: AI will be more disruptive than COVID. Which party can seize the moment?

Other voices: Good for Nvidia shareholders, maybe. But bad for America

Steven R. Furlanetto: Defunding science? Penny wise and pound stupid

Michelle Goldberg: Echoes from Poland as Trump tries to make museums submit

Andreas Kluth: Expiring deals, rising China, rising tech, rogue dictators = rising nuke risk